UMxWolverines

January 13th, 2016 at 6:14 PM ^

Title games are stupid to begin with. Just add a 13th game then and take the team with the best record. Tie breakers come into play use head to heae first then poll ranking.

Joined: 03/01/2009

MGoPoints: 65436

ABOUBENADHEM

January 13th, 2016 at 6:20 PM ^

its an option, not a requirement, and that the option is at the discretion of the conference.  If the Big 12 gets this as a conference option then so should BIG, Pac 12, ACC, SEC, etc.  By making this an option it allows the Big 12 to potentially manipulate the conference's CFP positioning.  For example, take this past year.  Since Oklahoma was clearly in the final four the Big 12 conference could have elected to NOT have a championship game vs. risking Oklahoma losing that game and then the Big 12 not getting any team in the CFP.  Unfair decision to make this a conference option.  Either needs to be a requirement or make the Big 12 accept the risk of not having one, ala 2014, and maybe lose out on CFP.

Joined: 11/17/2015

MGoPoints: 2768

Carcajou

January 14th, 2016 at 7:49 AM ^

But isn't that what a playoff really is by definition?  It's a game played ONLY when standings and champions cannot be clearly determined otherwise.  What we call "playoffs" are really tournaments. The hated 1-game playoff games in MLB at the end of the season are the closest things to real playoffs.

The college conference championship games (in football, or conference tourneys in basketball, etc) were just an artificial construct to try to game the system, getting:
a) more TV money

b) boost the ratings of the team that wins

c) in the team with the poorer record wins, they claim the conference's (bowl or tournament) slot; and hopefully the team with the better record doesn't fall too much and grabs another spot (a two-for-one)

 

If the goal were truly to find the best team, each conference would use criterion and/or vote at the end of the season.  If they couldn't decide, then they would "play it off".

Joined: 02/26/2009

MGoPoints: 5792

drzoidburg

January 13th, 2016 at 6:33 PM ^

That is just ridiculous and in no way should save this conference. Every team plays each other an equal number of times so what possible legitimate reason is there? Yeah, 6-3 team beats 9-0 team they lost to during the season, conference champs + playoffs whooo!! At least Staee/Iowa, Florida/Alabama, Clemson/NC didn't play each other previously

Then again i think all non-football tourneys are a joke too, and it's why i don't watch. Really, 18 games isn't enough to fairly determine a champ?

Joined: 09/20/2015

MGoPoints: 2220

kevin holt

January 13th, 2016 at 6:40 PM ^

Reason this sucks: We have to have divisions because we have over 12 teams, but the trade-off was having the championship game. If you can suddenly ignore the 1st rule and have the benefit of the 2nd rule, that sucks.

Joined: 03/16/2010

MGoPoints: 17447