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.
I think the top-2 makes a lot of sense.
Now can we get back to playing Wisconsin every year? And while we're at it, add Nebraska?
Hehehehe... jackoffs...
It isn't that big of an issue in today's college football climate. Remember last time everyone thought of a potential OSU-UofM rematch? It could happen but I doubt it would happen more than 1/2 times per decade.
With the coaching situations at both schools it could happen quite a few times a decade.
I'll take the odds that Wisconsin, MSU, PSU, Nebraska and every other BIG team finishes in the top 2 VS. M & OSU always the top 2 year after year.
Well I think recent history is a better indicator than 70s big ten football. Just me though...especially with the whole not letting African American players play at all schools across the country and no scholarship cap.
I would say that 4 is a lot and 2 is not a very big deal. 3 is a number that I can see being a lot to some and still not a big deal to others.
Serious questions fans would have to answer:
1. How pissed would you be losing twice or winning the first losing the BIG championship?
2. How excited would you be beating them twice or losing to them the first but beating them in the BIG championship?
Rematches in the 90s would have been in 1992 and 1998 and Michigan would have won both because John Cooper.
If Pete Elezovic didn't miss an extra point in 1992 causing the game to end in a tie, Michigan beats OSU and Cooper is probably fired after 1992.
They would have played in every championship game from 1968-1977 with Michigan playing sparty in 1978.
Oh yeah, I forgot about their ban which was also a TV ban which was such a stupid NCAA rule since it punished the opponents of that team.
Michigan would have played Northwestern. In 1971 OSU lost to Northwestern, MSU, and Michigan while MSU lost to Michigan, Northwestern, and Wisconsin.
Michigan playing Northwestern in a championship game would have been a rematch from the first game of the season. That year Northwestern lost to Michigan and also inexplicably lost to Purdue (3-7) and Illinois (5-6).
As long as The Game continues to be the last game of the regular season.
There were only two chances for it to happen.
Wasn't gonna with Luke Fickell as their coach in 2011 and 2013 is when Michigan didn't live up to their end of the bargain.
14: OSU/Wisco
13: OSU/MSU
12: OSU/NEB
11: MSU/Wisco
10: OSU/Wisco
09: OSU/Iowa
08: PSU/OSU
07: OSU/Illinois
06: OSU/Wisco
05: PSU/OSU
04: Iowa/Mich
03: Mich/OSU!!!!!!!
02: OSU/Iowa
Only 3 time matchup in 13 years would have been OSU/Wisco.
What?
Michigan owns wins over Wisconsin in 2006 and Illinois in 2007 so they'd play OSU via head-to-head wins.
That would be 3 Michigan-OSU title games in 13 years.
I just looked at the top 2 of the final standings. Must have lost my super guide.
Point remains: even with tie breakers...only 3 times in 13 years for M v. OSU isn't crazy to me.
If Michigan and OSU are the top two teams in the fourteen team conference, rematch ratings shouldn't be an issue and might actually increase.
I get the resistance about having another shot at beating the winner of The Game, but that's a paradigm shift that isn't going to go away and I think on the whole the positives outweigh the negatives.
except how do you determine the top two? With the expanding number of teams in the B1G you don't even play half the teams. Are we going back to voting? The same thing people (at least smart ones) want to do away with in the NCAA tourney. That is the same mindset that gave us Bama/LSU in the NCAA championship game.
9 game schedule and miss 4 teams.
The two teams with the best records will play a one-off game for the title. The conference determined a champion with win-loss for over a century, this just adds a game.
What happens if there's another 4-way tie like there was in 1990?
Tiebreakers have (presumably) been around for over a century as well. I think it'll be fine.
tiebreakers.
a century in which teams were playing most, if not all of the teams in the conference. What happens when a team next year doesn't have MSU or OSU on their schedule and they breeze through the lesser teams? And the B1G is likely to get even bigger in the near future, adding even more teams that won't play each other.
I prefer two division winners just like I prefer it to be a prereq to be a conference champ to be in the NCAA 4 team tourney.
Isnt' that how it is now, but by design? You have a group that by design play a weaker schedule and get into the conference championship. With strength of schedule playing a huge role in the way the CFP is being selected, you aren't going to see teams intentionally tank their strength of schedule so they can make it to the conference championship only to get smashed by a team who played quality opponents. At least with this model, the teams get to select to shoot themselves in the foot instead of Delany doing it for them.
I don't see a single mention of the Big Ten Title Game, or the blockquote you linked in that article.
I quoted the NBC article on accident. http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/26/report-deregulation-of-conference-titles-expected-to-pass-in-january/
......the end of the real season is always the late November win(hopefully) against OSU.
I would have no problem starting the "silly season" with another win(hopefully) against OSU.
Yeah, no.
Play in consecutive weeks if that's the case.
Conference title games are stupid. Just play 9 conference games and take the best overall record...then go to tiebreakers if there's a tie. The same two teams playing two weeks in a row is dumb.