The CardBoard
Big 12 additions? - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Big 12 additions? (/thread-8430.html)


Big 12 additions? - TreeWeird - 12-07-2014

Today's snubbing (screwing IMO) of TCU and Baylor indicates the Big 12 must expand to at least 12 (!) teams and a revived playoff game. 

Who are the likely two added teams?  Seems to me the likely candidates are Boise, BYU, Cincy or UCF.  I would include Houston, but have to believe the current Texas teams in the conference would block them.  OTOH, TCU made it in, so maybe Houston does have a chance.

I'll root for UCF since we play them the next couple of years.


Re: Big 12 additions? - Canalejas - 12-07-2014

I hope they invite Boise State and BYU, just so people stop suggesting that those teams join the Pac-12.

Re: Big 12 additions? - rudruff - 12-07-2014

It won't matter who they add, unless the teams in the Big XII that get screwed over are Texas or Oklahoma no one is going to care.

The problem with the committee approach and 5 conferences with 4 slots was always going to be there. The B1G and the SEC champions will always make it if the records are close. The Pac-12 champ will usually get in as well. That leaves either the Big XII or ACC champ to get screwed each year. With an undefeated FSU and two private schools with small fan bases, sorry Big XII.



Re: Big 12 additions? - needle - 12-07-2014

I know Sagarin says TCU played a tougher sked than Ohio State.

But TCU played four really, really bad teams: Samford, SMU, Kansas, and Iowa State.
Same with Baylor playing SMU, Northwestern State, Iowa State, and Kansas.

Ohio State had only one truly crummy opponent, Kent State. I'm saying I think Indiana (which only won four games, but beat Mizzou on the road) is a cut above Iowa State (two wins, but beat Iowa) and Kansas (three wins).

But to answer the question, it all depends on ESPN. The Big12 is I think in the second year of a 13-year TV deal; not sure what it says in the fine print about expansion$$$--which is what the schools care about the most, no matter what Bowlsby is saying now.

Re: Big 12 additions? - Spiny_Norman - 12-07-2014

Expansion may not be needed.  I think the Big 12 has already asked the NCAA for a waiver from the 12 team minimum - http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/2013/01/writer-big-12-commissioner-bob-bowlsbys-request-from-ncaa-for-waiver-that-would-allow-for-conference-title-game-merely-a-precaution.html/



Re: Big 12 additions? - dabigv13 - 12-07-2014

I think this is all a big hullabaloo. Even if they had a champ game this year, Ohio State probably would've jumped them. As rudruff pointed out- there are 4 slots, and 5 major conferences. This was always going to be an issue.

8 teams was always the number that made sense for the playoffs to ensure no one had a legitimate gripe about missing out. And no, there isn't a slippery slope. TCU and Baylor have legitimate gripes. Ole Miss and Arizona do not.

I suspect we'll see that happen in a few years.

Re: Big 12 additions? - BostonCard - 12-07-2014

Well, it's not like Baylor (Kansas) or TCU (Baylor) couldn't have gotten in.  It's just that among one loss teams, the bar for being in the top-4 is going to be higher if you don't have one added win against a top opponent in a conference championship game.  But, the conference championship game is also risky.  FSU was trailing at the half.  Had they lost in the championship game, they would have been left out in the cold.

I would love to see an 11-1 Big12 team get beaten by a lower ranked team in their conference championship game and knocked out of the top-4.  Not because I don't like the Big twelve, but because I don't like how they have been trying to manipulate things (see, for example, our former AD) to get the playoffs.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11993892/big-12-commissioner-bob-bowlsby-says-conference-reconsider-how-declare-champion

Quote:The words of Football Playoff Committee chairman Jeff Long "will cause us to go back to the drawing board a little bit and think about if we need a different model," Bowlsby said, referring to tie-breakers and title-game discussions.

Maybe if he hadn't started with the bs about Baylor and TCU being co-champions, Baylor would have had a better case.

BC

Re: Big 12 additions? - fullmetal - 12-08-2014

If you've got two champions, you don't have a champion.

But I guess that tells us that the committee might, once in a while, start re-ranking teams each week tabula rasa.  Suddenly that TCU loss to Baylor (and perhaps that Baylor loss to WVU) matters...

Re: Big 12 additions? - CornFed - 12-08-2014

".  .  .  .  .  there isn't a slippery slope. TCU and Baylor have legitimate gripes. Ole Miss and Arizona do not."  - dabigv

It's true that all fan bases (I guess by definition) have some component of fanaticism.  But I know several Arizona fans and, if their reactions are more indicative of the reactions to the drubbing by Oregon, I don't think they would feel the least bit of resentment if they were hypothetically left out of an 8 team playoff this year.  They feel a LOT like Charlie Brown after Lucy pulls the football away.

Re: Big 12 additions? - CTcard - 12-08-2014

(12-07-2014, 09:56 PM)TreeWeird link Wrote:Today's snubbing (screwing IMO) of TCU and Baylor indicates the Big 12 must expand to at least 12 (!) teams and a revived playoff game. 

There are several problems with that.

It is not at all clear that there was any screwing of TCU (and certainly not more than Baylor that beat them), rather there was a difficult decision that didn't go their way.

It is not at all clear that a conference championship game would have made any difference.

If there were good candidates for expansion, the Big 12 would have done so already.


Of course none of the above means the Big 12 won't be announding expansion in two weeks.

Re: Big 12 additions? - CTcard - 12-08-2014

(12-07-2014, 10:47 PM)dabigv link Wrote:I suspect we'll see that happen in a few years.

Quite possible.

To be followed soon afterwards by 16, then 32, then 64, then 64 plus some "play in games". ...

Re: Big 12 additions? - stupac2 - 12-08-2014

(12-07-2014, 10:30 PM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:Expansion may not be needed.  I think the Big 12 has already asked the NCAA for a waiver from the 12 team minimum - http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/2013/01/writer-big-12-commissioner-bob-bowlsbys-request-from-ncaa-for-waiver-that-would-allow-for-conference-title-game-merely-a-precaution.html/

Note the date there, they asked for a waiver and were denied. To play a championship game you need to have 12 teams.

I think that the Big 12 will scramble to try to get 12, UCF is a decent possibility, as is BYU. But, really, there are a tons of possibilities when you're willing to travel from El Paso to Morgantown.



As for expansion, I doubt the playoff goes past 8 unless we see a complete reorganization of the way college football is structured. It's just too many extra games.

Re: Big 12 additions? - CTcard - 12-08-2014

(12-08-2014, 09:35 AM)stupac2 link Wrote:As for expansion, I doubt the playoff goes past 8 unless we see a complete reorganization of the way college football is structured. It's just too many extra games.

I really don't know.
But FCS and Div II have 24 team playoffs.

It is possible that an FCS team could play 17 games in a season.

Re: Big 12 additions? - Spiny_Norman - 12-08-2014

(12-08-2014, 09:35 AM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=Spiny_Norman link=topic=11304.msg107792#msg107792 date=1418016611]Expansion may not be needed.  I think the Big 12 has already asked the NCAA for a waiver from the 12 team minimum - http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/2013/01/writer-big-12-commissioner-bob-bowlsbys-request-from-ncaa-for-waiver-that-would-allow-for-conference-title-game-merely-a-precaution.html/

Note the date there, they asked for a waiver and were denied. To play a championship game you need to have 12 teams.
[/quote]

I could not find any reference to a denial.  It may be the case that the NCAA never made a decision.  The waiver request may still be pending.

Becoming a REAL Big 12: BYU and ...? - Redrum - 12-08-2014

That would be interesting because BYU went independent a few years ago because they thought they could get more national exposure on their own by scheduling more prestigious teams then the WAC yokels they were playing.    They've done OK filling in their schedule with a few respectable programs but  a lot of the foes don't look tougher than their old WAC (now Mountain West) buddies.  But also in play was BYU planning to have their own TV "network".  Have no idea how successful they've been with that.  Lots of ESPNU games listed.

So, although one can see a geographic fit for BYU in the Big 12, the only logic for BYU is if the money and route to national recognition is better through the Big 12 than alone.  And, although the Big 12 might not have the spine of the P12, the no-Sunday sports thingee, might be an impediment.  But, maybe to meet the conference championship play-in model, the Big 12 would bend. Trouble is, BYU only gets them to 11.  Who else?  Houston fits the demographic and geographics, but doesn't bring a lot else to the party.

Re: Big 12 additions? - BostonCard - 12-08-2014

Wilner has an interesting item on the TCU versus tOSU controversy:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2014/12/08/college-football-playoff-the-committee-the-process-ohio-state-and-winnerslosers-from-bowl-selection-day/#more-38350

I do agree with him that as far as the committee is concerned, less is more.  I agree that they should have periodic updates (maybe once a month) rather than weekly rankings.  In fact, I think that they should not rank the teams at all until the final ranking, but rather issue more subjective discussions and broad categories: Elite teams (5 to 8 teams that merit consideration for the playoff), Excellent teams (then next 10 - 12 teams that would be under consideration for the New Year's Six); Good teams (the next 10 or so teams that would make the rest of the top-25 and would have work to do to get into a New Year's Bowl.

I also agree with him that the committee made things worse by having tOSU jump TCU.  Had the top 6 teams (4 playoff teams plus Baylor and TCU) been in a single category without ranking, it wouldn't have generated nearly as much controversy.

While I do think a strong argument can be made for TCU over tOSU, I think Wilner (typically) overstates his case.  Sagarin ranks TCU's schedule strength at 42; tOSU's is 52.  That's not a brobdingnagian difference (but for what it is worth, Sagarin ranks TCU second and tOSU fifth).  OSU has a bad loss against Virginia Tech, but it does have a win over a top-10 MSU; TCU is 0-1 against the top 10.  On the other hand, TCU is 3-0 against teams ranked 10 - 30; OSU is 1-0 against those teams, but it was a dominant win at a neutral site (the demolishing of Wisconsin).  On the balance, I think I'd have picked TCU, but I didn't find the selection of tOSU egregious.

BC

Re: Big 12 additions? - stupac2 - 12-08-2014

(12-08-2014, 10:24 AM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:I could not find any reference to a denial.  It may be the case that the NCAA never made a decision.  The waiver request may still be pending.

I read recently that it was denied.

Re: Big 12 additions? - OutsiderFan - 12-08-2014

Though an 8-team playoff may still leave some people unhappy, it would allow a much better process, and more better games.

This:
Allows conferences to crown their champions and select them for the playoff as they wish.
Provides arguing about who the at-large teams should be, but does anyone really care after the Top 8, ever?
Let's schools host a national playoff game - how cool is that?
Gives two weeks between conference championship game weekend and Quarterfinals.
Gives almost two weeks between National Quarterfinals and Semifinals.
Finishes up the playoffs before Winter quarter/Spring semester classes start.

This year it might look like this on Dec. 20:

5 Baylor at 4 Ohio St. Noon ET
6 TCU at 3 Florida St. 3:30 ET
8 Mich St. at 1 Alabama 6pm ET
7 Miss St. at 2 Oregon 9pm ET

Last out:  Ole Miss, Arizona.  Honestly, can either of these teams really complain?  Arizona got blown out in their CG, Ole Miss didn't make it to theirs, and both teams had three losses. 

I think Stanford really needs an 8-team playoff if it wants to play for a national title in football, because Stanford will be hard-pressed to ever go 11-1 in a regular season and win the Pac-12, which is what it will take to get in the 4-team system most years.

Re: Big 12 additions? - stupac2 - 12-08-2014

(12-08-2014, 02:27 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Though an 8-team playoff may still leave some people unhappy, it would allow a much better process, and more better games.
  • Take the Power 5 conference champions
  • Committee chooses one non-power 5 conference team to participate if it has at least 11 wins
  • Committee selects two at-large teams, or three if there is no qualifying non-power 5 team, with no more than one at-large per conference (No, the SEC doesn't have 3-4 of the top 8 teams)
  • Committee seeds the teams
  • Play Quarterfinals at the home stadiums of the Top 4 seeds the week before Christmas
  • Play the Semifinals on New Year's day as they have mapped out this year
  • Play the Final a week later as they have mapped out this year

This:
Allows conferences to crown their champions and select them for the playoff as they wish.
Provides arguing about who the at-large teams should be, but does anyone really care after the Top 8, ever?
Let's schools host a national playoff game - how cool is that?
Gives two weeks between conference championship game weekend and Quarterfinals.
Gives almost two weeks between National Quarterfinals and Semifinals.
Finishes up the playoffs before Winter quarter/Spring semester classes start.

This year it might look like this on Dec. 20:

5 Baylor at 4 Ohio St. Noon ET
6 TCU at 3 Florida St. 3:30 ET
8 Mich St. at 1 Alabama 6pm ET
7 Miss St. at 2 Oregon 9pm ET

Last out:  Ole Miss, Arizona.  Honestly, can either of these teams really complain?  Arizona got blown out in their CG, Ole Miss didn't make it to theirs, and both teams had three losses. 

I think Stanford really needs an 8-team playoff if it wants to play for a national title in football, because Stanford will be hard-pressed to ever go 11-1 in a regular season and win the Pac-12, which is what it will take to get in the 4-team system most years.

Ever since they announced the 4-team playoff I've felt that 8 would be better. Hopefully Bowlsby is doing some serious lobbying to that effect at this point, and hopefully we don't need to wait for the contract to end before seeing it, because that'll be like 2027.