Conference title game deregulation expected to pass
Interesting news bit.
Deregulation of conference championship games is expected to be passed by the NCAA.
This means the rule of needing at least 12 conference members and two divisions to have a conference championship game will no longer be in place meaning the Big 12 will be able to have a conference title game at just 10 teams.
This could also mean that the B1G could scrap the division format and just have the top two teams overall in the conference play in a championship game.
For example, we wouldn't see the B1G East automatically winning the B1G by slaughtering their B1G West opponent. We could possibly get a rematch of a game already played between two current divisional teams.
The bad side to that is that it would bring back a possible Michigan-OSU game in consecutive weeks that was there with the Legends/Leaders divisions.
It was even brought up in the article.
Imagine a Big Ten championship game between Ohio State and Michigan, who currently share a division. Or an SEC championship game between Alabama and LSU or Auburn.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I disagree. It puts the conference in a position like the Big 12 last year where you could make the argument for two top teams but neither one makes it because their most recent game wasn't a neutral site game against a top conference opponent. TCU possibly should have made it last year over FSU, but that probably wouldn't happen since FSU was undefeated. However, even if FSU had one loss last year, the committee would have probably looked at the Big 12 vs the ACC and may have thought the ACC was stronger and still picked FSU, or if you took away the Pac 12 game, you could make the argument that Oregon was less deserving than both TCU and FSU.
With Michigan and maybe penn state* on the way back, getting rid of a B1G title game pitting the division champs will no doubt piss off Barry Alvarez and the Wiscy fans!
* As always, FUCK penn state.
I don't see how you could get this to work in the B1G. If divisions were kept as-is I suppose you could put in language that says the title game is between division winners unless the #2 team in one division (=East division) is X spots ahead of the other division winner in the polls, but this puts it back into the human error/opinion realm.
This also might not be best for the conference if we see the return of 2 dominant teams in the one (East) Division. In the current system, both OSU and M would have (most likely) made the playoff in 2006 regardless of the Conference title game result. IF there was a rematch with the same winner I doubt the loser would reach the playoff.
P.S. -- Warning Apparel pondering...... Anyone think that IF M has decided on Nike they would wait to do a big announcement at The Opening next week? Would big a splash for both parties given the TV coverage and recruits on-site. (My first and only apparel related comment on this blog.)
The problem right now is that you have the old Big 12 where one division is loaded with good teams and another division with less-than teams.
Coincidentally, Nebraska is in the weaker division of the B1G like they were in the Big 12.
I don't see the BIG being a two team race. I know HARBAUGH! but OSU, MSU, PSU aren't going anywhere. Any rematch has the chance to knock any one of the teams out of the playoff. Its a pick your poison though. If its a 9 game conference schedule I will take that at the risk of rematching any team in the BIG.
PSU isn't going anywhere from being a 6-6 Pinstripe Bowl team?
I'll wait and see with James Franklin. He did well at Vanderbilt for Vanderbilt, but they weren't challenging for division titles. He finished no higher than 4th.
Let's see if their OL is 2013 Michigan-like this year like it was last year.
I really don't understand this whole talk by people that aren't teams going anywhere.
Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan State will not all be good at the the same time.
History definitely favors Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State.
Its just reality.
2013 MSU, 2014 Wisconsin as well.
So does this mean we can get rid of Rutgers now.....?
If the NCAA loosens its restrictions, the Big 12 would have the freedom to host a title game in Year 3 of the College Football Playoff.
But is Bowlsby certain that this is not just another means to give Baylor opportunities to inexplicably choke when it matters? I mean, not that it isn't amusing to watch, but still, part of me wants to call it the "600 yards of offense and a meltdown later" in honor of the Big 12.
That may stop expansion in the short term. However, I think within 5 years or so they move to 12 teams.
If you scrap conference 'divisions' then you don't need a conference championchip game. What reward to you get for being best in conference....a chance to lose what you've accomplished all year to the second best team?
However unlikely it is to happen, I also think the chance of playing Ohio State twice a year would dilute how special the one game is each year, and especially because its last game of the year. Back-to-back....not so much.
If you want a TRUE conference championship game get the two BEST teams....duh
I'd rather have the two top teams in the conference then a division winner who may only be the 3rd or 4th best team playing in the championship game. I would not mind playing the buckeyes twice!
Oh thank god, because what college sports really needs is a whole bunch of money-grab but otherwise meaningless conference championship games. Can we add a couple dozen more football bowl games while we're at it, too? I mean, it's so unfair to those 3-8 teams that they don't get to go bowling!
I don't ever want to see a Michigan/osu rematch. It would take away the importance of the game which has made and broken the season of both teams so offen in the past.