Conference Championships Still Meaningless

[Htown77]

Ohio State last year and Alabama this year made the playoffs without winning their conference. Conference championships have always been relatively meaningless and continue to be.

 

[Clean]

Who knows what the committee considers. I guess they didn't want any two loss teams. Ohio St did have that nasty 55 -24 loss to Iowa.

 

[horninchicago]

That's a relief! Now, I don't feel so bad about mobilehoma winning practically what seems to be every Big XII title since its inception.

 

[Htown77]

Now, I don't feel so bad about mobilehoma winning practically what seems to be every Big XII title since its inception

As long as you are not restless Baylor won one and was co-champs for another.

 

[horninchicago]

As long as you are not restless Baylor won one and was co-champs for another.

Just tired of basically being second fiddle to ou overall and being irrelevant really. Anyway, that's why I said "what seems to be" in my post. They seem to win the Big XII almost every year. Let's face it, our overall series lead against ou means nothing in the head to head over the last 30 years or so. They have more conference titles, NCs, and Heisman winners.

 

[LongChuckles]

Baylor has one less Big 12 championship than Texas.

 

[horninchicago]

I remember it was a big deal to win the SWC, 27 of them, and go to the Cotton Bowl. Whether it means anything to this ridiculous "Committee" is immaterial to me as fan of a program that can't win 8 ball games and even sniff a conference title.

Must suck to be an ou fan and be at a point where winning the conference means zilch when they don't win the "Playoff" and a NC.

 

[Htown77]

Conference titles have never mattered other than if you win all your conference games, you get a meaningless title and trophy from your conference.

The top 25 under every system has been determined by total wins for the most part.

That said, OU has beaten us in total wins for the most part and head to head the past 30 years which has gotten old.

Final ranking comes down to total wins and your bowl win. OU has beaten us there unfortunately.

 

[Chinstrap]

Does anything matter? This is a bunch of silly b.s.
Nowhere in college athletics, to include lower division football, is a “Selection Committee” formed to determine the best 4 teams with right of passage to play for a championship.

Fans suffer from this mental masturbation so that the football money guys can select teams based on brand, team fan support and T.V. ratings. There is absolutely no other reason for not expanding to at least an 8 team playoff with power 5 conference winners and 3 at large selections. What are they afraid of?

Oh, people might say that a team could win their conference and in the judgement of the cigars in the back room they are not as good as a say, Alabama, and should be overlooked? O.K., then let’s review all teams in the NFL and see if two teams in one division are better than the winner of another division and let that winner stay home.

Screw the cigars. What the hell qualifies them for supreme judgement. I am sick of this bulls- - - clogging up the airways for the entire season. And one other issue. Has anyone thought about the possibilty of a little dirty money, or political favors, finding it’s way into the pockets of a few Committee Boys? If you think that could not happen you are pretty naive. This process is about BIG money; it is not about finding the best team in the COUNTRY.

And, that’s how I really feel.

 

[Htown77]

This process is about BIG money; it is not about finding the best team in the COUTRY.

As far as the playoff committee goes, this is all true. It is actually a worse system of picking the top 4 than the BCS.

 

[Chinstrap]

As far as the playoff committee goes, this is all true. It is actually a worse system of picking the top 4 than the BCS.

Yes, maybe. And someone is going to come on here and tell us that is an improvement over the BCS which was an improvement, in their mind, over the prior ranking system. All is subjective and personal opinion. Therefore I consider (I too can have an opinion) all prior champioships as mythical (MNC).

It is a bit embarrassing to win by selection vs. winning on the field like the rest of college athletes. The big boys.

 

[Creek]

It works fine for me. You get blown out at Iowa then you can't lose again. Buckeyes have to deal with that. Going to 8 diminishes every Saturday, and makes college football more like like pro.
Do we really need to see Auburn, and Wisconsin and USC again in the playoffs?
No

 

[zuckercanyon]

Four is more better than dos.

 

[FWHORN]

In the last 30 years OU has won 15, Texas has won 14 and there was one tie. OU has 1 national title, Texas has 1 national title. The biggest difference is the conference championships.

 

[Htown77]

Four is more better than dos.

Which is why I carefully said “It is actually a worse system of picking the top 4 than the BCS.”

Picking 4 teams is better than 2. The BCS is a better system than the committee of selecting the top 4.

The biggest difference is the conferencechampionships.

They do not affect your final ranking or chances for a national title (as the committee made clear). They are meaningless to program prestige (Notre Dame has 0) and meaningless to any team outside your conference. This conference could cease to exist tomorrow. Texas could go independent. They dont matter. Total wins, bowl wins (preferably major bowl wins) and final rankings do. We have 20+ SWC titles. The conference is defunct and no one cares anymore. No one remembers us winning the Big 12 in 09 or 05, they remember the title games. The 04 Rose Bowl is more memorable than the 05 or 09 Big 12 title games.

Alabama won the national title in 2011 without a conference title. Alabama could win the national title this year without a conference title. OU player in the 2003 national title game without winning a conference title. So why do they matter?

The answer is they do not. The Big 12 needs to get rid of the dumb rematch championship game.

If Texas and OU finished a season “co-champions”, it would not hurt their playoff chances with the committee. If TCU finished a season as outright conference champs, it would not help them with the committee.

 

[Chinstrap]

Shades of everybody gets a troply.
Or, winners advance and losers stay home. That is life. Appealing to someone else to get a second chance is not the way to do it. If so, perhaps the Cowboys should appeal for a pass this year. And if they could, why bother showing up the early games. Rest your players on IR and petition that your are best at season end.

In college, no need for conferences. Just try out for the committee.

I am done. It’s time for golf. No Committee and play on the course is all you have. Nobody to lobby and hide behind. Those boys have stones.

 

[X Misn Tx]

3 of the 4 are conference champions.

I don't think anyone thinks Alabama is worse than Auburn.

Ohio State got buggered by Iowa. I mean shagged in the bumhole without consent. They were the only other reasonable 4th.

I hate the SEC, but being a 1-loss, 2nd best team in a conference doesn't automatically preclude you from the postseason.

But, I think conference championship losers should not be jumped by idol teams in the same conference. Those idiots should be able to figure that out without us.

 

[BevoJoe]

They should stop playing conference championships, just put in the usual programs and save time. It will always be the same old 5 or 6 teams that are considered anyway. It’s all about the $$$ guys.

I’m not watching on TV this year. The wife got tickets to the Rose Bowl for my birthday or I wouldn’t watch that either. Next to last item on my bucket list before shuffling off of this mortal coil. And oh my! I get to see OU and Georgia. Hate both! Hope the food’s good and beers cold.

 

[NRHorn]

You sir, will not regret attending the Rose Bowl. Great venue.

 

[Statalyzer]

In the last 30 years OU has won 15, Texas has won 14 and there was one tie. OU has 1 national title, Texas has 1 national title. The biggest difference is the conference championships.

The biggest differences are that 4 of those 15 wins were humiliating blowouts, and they haven't had nearly as many down years as we have.

Ohio State got buggered by Iowa. I mean shagged in the bumhole without consent. They were the only other reasonable 4th.

I would have considered UCF. Not only because an undefeated non-champion makes no sense, but also because their weak schedule is less a big deal when you look at Wisconsin and Alabama's schedules.

Going to 8 diminishes every Saturday

Same thing we heard about going to 2 and going to 4, and it wasn't true in either case.

The BCS is a better system than the committee of selecting the top 4.

Possibly. Some of the computer formulas were pretty dumb though - although maybe they balanced out some of the dumbness of humans?

O.K., then let’s review all teams in the NFL and see if two teams in one division are better than the winner of another division and let that winner stay home.

Honestly it's pretty dumb that in the NFL you go 8-8 and win your division and get a home game against a team that went 12-4 but lost their division to a 13-3 team. So, yeah, your team performed significantly worse, but that's compensated for by also achieving that worse record against crappier opposition? Heck, even dividing playoffs up by conference makes no sense. Especially look at the NBA where the West often has 6 of the best 8 teams in the league and where many times the Western Conference Finals was the real championship series.

 

[horninchicago]

The biggest differences are that 4 of those 15 wins were humiliating blowouts, and they haven't had nearly as many down years as we have.

Not to mention, they are more than likely about to have their 3rd Heisman winner since 2003. That makes 6 to our 2. Quick math says that's 3 times as many Heisman winners as Texas. We can argue all day that VY and Colt should have won them, but they didn't. That would be Aggie to argue that. OU has the hardware. It's finally sinking in with me after watching Texas football since about 1976. They have dominated Texas, not just head to head, overall. Thanks to DKR, we have the overall lead, but who cares?

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

Who knows what the committee considers. I guess they didn't want any two loss teams. Ohio St did have that nasty 55 -24 loss to Iowa.

A loss to Iowa is still better than a win over Mercer.

 

[LonghornCatholic]

They should stop playing conference championships, just put in the usual programs and save time. It will always be the same old 5 or 6 teams that are considered anyway.

Sorta agree. Bama is always the number one/two ranked preseason team, so they have that built in advantage. Plus, even if they lose to Auburn there are still people who say “Bama is still better”, so they have that advantage, too. The *** whopping they took from Auburn didn’t matter. Plus a couple of wins for Bama vs Mercer type teams is better than a loss to a D1 for all other teams. With the Bama bias, they might get left out twice every 25 yrars.

 

[Htown77]

Possibly. Some of the computer formulas were pretty dumb though - although maybe they balanced out some of the dumbness of humans?

Agree. The ultimate advantage is with so many voters and computer polls, it is hard to “fix” the rankings. With the small committee, they can easily screw over small schools (TCU) and favor certain programs (Bama). The BCS was not perfect and definitely had dumb qualities (some terrible computer polls), but it was nowhere near as dirty as this committee.

 

[Htown77]

hanks to DKR, we have the overall lead, but who cares?

I assume most Texas fans would enjoy walking out of the Cotton Bowl victors more times than not? I know I would rather have more celebratory beers at Hans Muellers than not. The rivalry is streaky and we need the right coach to turn it back around. Hopefully it is Herman. Anyway, I would say with the OU game, I do care about beating them more times than they beat us over the course of my life... especially more than a conference championship for a conference that probably will stop existing during my life.

 

[Statalyzer]

The *** whopping they took from Auburn didn’t matter.

I wouldn't call that an ***-whooping. And if it was, then OU ***-whooped Ohio State even more convincingly, and on the road at that.

I assume most Texas fans would enjoy walking out of the Cotton Bowl victors more times than not?

I agree, but this hasn't been the case in the lifetime of a lot of younger fans. I'm 32, started watching when I was 10, and Oklahoma is up 13-9-1 in that time. Mack and Charlie both had losing records to OU. The last Texas coach this was true of before them was Ed Price from 1951-1956.

 

[Htown77]

I agree, but this hasn't been the case in the lifetime of a lot of younger fans.

I am 28 so the series is tied 14-14-1 in my lifetime.... I guess I really really need to hope we win next year more than usual. Also, both schools have the same amount of national titles in my lifetime.

 

[horninchicago]

I'm 48. Not going to bother to go back and look at what the head to head is since I started watching in the 70s. I doubt we lead overall in that period, and like was mentioned, we have had humiliating defeats, lack of Heismans comparatively, and fewer NCs AND conference titles. Since the Big XII started, it's ou and then everyone else. Not even close.

Speaking of the humiliating defeats. It boggles my mind to this day that with one of the greatest teams of all time and one of the few times ou was down, we managed to ONLY tie for the greatest margin of victory against those ******** in 2005. We should have had a score in the 60s, but we managed 45. Coming off 5 years of frustration and twice being humiliated, VY and company could only muster 45. In the entire series, which we lead, we have only managed to twice beat them by 33 points. Since 2000, they have beaten us by 49, 52, 38, and 42. Since 2000. They have beaten us worse 4 times since 2000 then we have EVER beaten them.

I don't even want to think about how many weeks they resided at #1 in the polls through the years compared to us. I guarantee it isn't close.

I lived through a&m whipping our *** regularly in the 80s and 90s. I have lived with ou pretty much beating us most years. I am having a hard time coming to grips with following this program after 3 and please Lawd, not 4 consecutive losing seasons. It's not fun anymore.

So, again, who cares now about having an overall series lead when they have overall hardware and Heisman, etc. leads?

 

[I_Dont_Exist]

14/16 participants so far suggests they're far from meaningless.The two who didn't both passed the eyeball test at 11-1. And who the hell would you have put in over Alabama? The argument two of the best 4 can't be from the same conference is made by someone with a petty agenda.

 

[Statalyzer]

Coming off 5 years of frustration and twice being humiliated, VY and company could only muster 45. In the entire series, which we lead, we have only managed to twice beat them by 33 points. Since 2000, they have beaten us by 49, 52, 38, and 42.

Oh those were some nasty blowouts, but I don't think margin of victory in blowouts really matters, like "hahah we won by 38 and you only won by 33", the problem is 4 of them vs 1 of them. That 2005 OU team was all defense, no offense, and we still could have punched it across 50 had we wanted to. But even if we had won that one 65-12 instead of 45-12, it still wouldn't matter.