We werent talking about state of the conference, we were talking about when we won championships!!! and When Texas and OU won those titles, those were Big 12 national championships. PERIOD!
I have said CURRENT Big 12 teams. Sure yeah, two old Big 12 teams won national championships while in the Big 12. They are no longer here. It has NO bearing on the current state of the conference or the way we should look at posturing our moves into the future. Irrelevant point other than having it as a historical accolade to attempt to deceptively prop our conference for anyone that doesn’t realize they aren’t here anymore.
1 Like
I agree with WSNC here…
Current Big 12 cannot claim UT/OU titles as a prop up for the conference.
Those accolades are kinda stored in a dark basement somewhere seperate from everything else
1 Like
I agree the B1G and SEC have different reasoning.
I do not agree in the support of the 8 game SEC schedule. It can be harder yes, but none of those teams were forced into the conference. Any one there can also leave at any time to join the PAC or Big 12 if they think they will get an easier road to the playoffs. I imagine the Big 12 would not turn down Tennessee if they wanted to join (maybe Miss St is stuck).
Also the 8 game schedule helps force the perceived higher ranking of SEC teams. If they played 9 game schedule, then those extra games would be an 8-8 record for hte conference.
By playing that extra game vs a lower level team the conference goes about 14-2. That bumps the SOS and computer rankings for the conference as a whole, thus making the SEC look tougher by computer stats.
Those championships don’t count as having been won by B12 schools? Why not? Which conference gets to claim them?
I don’t think anyone will willingly leave the SEC, but I do think that your argument makes sense for schools like FSU or Clemson, who both want to be big dogs in football.
You have to look at it this way. Why has Clemson and FSU been able to be these large brands? Because the ACC is a schedule full of parasites. There’s no other competition unless you include Notre Dame.
If FSU and Clemson join the SEC, they are facing a giant upgrade in competition, and I highly doubt they will sustain the same amount of success. On the flipside, this same exact sentiment is why I think that SEC schools will NOT want to add football gauntlets like FSU & Clemson if it results in recruiting competition and tougher schedules.
So OU/UT only count towards SEC and not past conferences but for Big 12 evaluation teams, like Utah, do count towards their previous conference and not current ones…
Walking a thin line on consistency…
Yes it was in my data set. You are welcome to go back and find the post. I did include 23 and 24, but also 22, 21 and before.
Right now did a quick scan of teams currently in the big 12 (no UT/OU), going back to 2013 season, there were always at least 2 and up to 5 teams (2014,2021) in the top 16. None with only 1 team in the top 16 prior to your example/.
A one or two year sample is statistically irrelevant.
Truthfully, nobody.
I mean, technically (on paper) the Big 12 does have a claim to them I guess, but culturally it’s just not there. How can Big 12 schools claim championships from teams that are no longer in the conference? It makes no sense honestly
In the same regard, Texas & OU can’t claim their Big 12 championships in the SEC as a means of propping their program because the Big 12 was less competition.
Agree. I think more so that the CFP format is not really about competition and getting teams in as much as it is about making the most money for your conference. Same reason no school is leaving the SEC - the money is better.
I also am not sure that FSU and Clemson will leave the ACC as long as they keep getting a larger payout to stay close to SEC levels. If they move to SEC or B1G, I think it is because of a potential split in divisions or break away and they want to be in top division understandably.
Future is anyone’s guess, but contractually speaking, there’s going to be a boxing match closer to 2030 with the Big 12 & ACC.
The ACC is locked in a contract through 2036, while the Big 12 gets to negotiate a new deal almost an entire decade sooner. That means that if ESPN/FOX (and TNT I guess) can assure that the BIg 12 can get near SEC-Level payouts (on the premise that FSU/Clemson join), then I don’t see why FSU/Clemson stays in the ACC.
On the other hand, let’s say FSU/Clemson do want to stay in the ACC. How long can the tier-2 schools (Miami, Lousiville, G-Tech, etc.) put up with lopsided deals that clearly favor FSU/Clemson? They will have just as much reason to leave should the Big 12 continue increasing its value. I also don’t believe that ESPN wants to pay the entire ACC anything close to what SEC makes just for FSU/Clemson.
ESPN wanted Big 12 dead. They failed. To free up the books, they offered the PAC a deal that they knew would fall through. Next? They want to get rid of another conference to free up the sheets to pay the SEC more money. That likely means the ACC is a goner as a Power Conference.
Yep, all speculation which forums and the sports media exists for. I expect the next few years will help schools figure out what works best for them. Need to see how the CFP changes and gets filled, what teams maintain winning (or losing) ways, what do future numbers look like for different conferences, even does a sports bubble burst under strain of NIL, who knows.
My one guess is that something not accounted for in today’s speculations will happen and everyone (not just forums) will claim they would have been right had it not been for…
I do expect the uneven revenue in the ACC will cause stress.
100% serious, based on a deep dive instead of drinking the Kool-Aid
No teams in the current Big 12 members have won a title in the past 40 plus years. Cmon man!!!
OU is in the SEC.
This no titles in 40 years is meaningless.
2008 Utah could have won it all
2010 TCU could have won it all
2014 TCU could have won it all
Ok St maybe one year also but not as familiar with them without looking it up.
Not all teams are given a chance to win a title or are voted #1 by polls.
1 Like
Are you trying to rewrite history?
That is exactly what you are doing.
Like it or not whichever team/school became National champion while in a given conference means that conference is also entitled to that National Championship.
You know why?
BECAUSE okie and uta played their conference games against BIG12 teams.
Don’t like it?
TOO BAD FRIEND.
It looks to me like the B12 is the only hope for the tier 2 ACC schools. When Texas ran off Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado these three got invitations from power conferences.
I think it would make perfect sense for the B12 to do it and run the ACC into the ditch.
There is no telling what ASU could have done last season.
They had a great/balanced team.
What was not balanced were the referees mind.
3 Likes
Sure, Auburn could have won the year Texas and USC played.
Lots of teams could have won championships. But they didn’t which is why I made the statement originally. And my point was to highlight the ridiculous arrogance of our fans and others in this conference, a conference which gets no respect nationally, but has the nerve to hold our noses up at other programs.
Agree ASU could have done more. I think the ref influence is a completely different discussion though. More along a parallel line of influence but still different as it goes far beyond ability to get into a playoff.
Don’t disagree on the point of arrogance by some.That comes in various forms and interpretations.
Just not sure that proves anyone wrong after getting slighted as opposed to losing on a level field might.