Gary Pinkel isnt alone in thinking ND should join a league. That was a silly thing to say but it didnt bother me.
The argument often made recently from teams outside the Big 12 is they should have a title game? That's the argument, but my question is.....why?
Here's my counter argument. Let's say Oklahoma runs the table this year and the league winner of the other 4 leagues is undefeated. Why does Baylor get discounted. The argument is they dont play the 13th game. But that 13th game doesnt automatically improve the schedule of the league winners.
The team that plays in and wins the SEC, for example, plays 9 league games and lets say 1 tough non-conference game. And in most instances they'll play 3 soft games. How is that better than the 12 game Big 12 title winners schedule?
For my Oklahoma example, in order for Oklahoma to go 12-0 and win the league they have to win 9 league games. That's the same number of games the SEC, Pac 12, Big 10 and ACC title winners have to play in and win. Oklahoma doesnt have any chance at not having to play all the top teams in their league. They have to play Texas, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, West Virginia and every team in the league.
Look at Missouri. Yes, they play in the SEC. Let's say they win the East and play and beat Alabama in the title game. Great! But does that mean Missouri had a tougher road? Where is Auburn on the schedule? Where is LSU? Where is Texas A&M? Where is Ole Miss? The answer is Missouri doesnt play those teams.
Oklahoma has to play every top team in their league. Missouri does not. Oklahoma plays Tennessee out of league. They then play Akron and Tulsa.
So what's the difference between Missouri and Oklahoma? It's not league play, as Oklahoma doesnt benefit from a round-robin schedule.
Oklahoma needs to play 9 teams in their league to win a title.
Missouri has to play 9 teams in their league to win a title but gets to pass 4 teams from the SEC West.
So the difference is what? OU has Tennessee, Akron and Tulsa out of league. Mizzou has BYU, UConn, Arkansas State and SE Missouri.
So the real difference in schedule between Missouri, should they win the SEC, and Oklahoma is that Missouri plays SE Missouri and Oklahoma has no win over such an opponent.
So tell me again why the Big 12 needs a title game other than it would make a lot of money for the league, the network that would carry the game and the NCAA?
The argument often made recently from teams outside the Big 12 is they should have a title game? That's the argument, but my question is.....why?
Here's my counter argument. Let's say Oklahoma runs the table this year and the league winner of the other 4 leagues is undefeated. Why does Baylor get discounted. The argument is they dont play the 13th game. But that 13th game doesnt automatically improve the schedule of the league winners.
The team that plays in and wins the SEC, for example, plays 9 league games and lets say 1 tough non-conference game. And in most instances they'll play 3 soft games. How is that better than the 12 game Big 12 title winners schedule?
For my Oklahoma example, in order for Oklahoma to go 12-0 and win the league they have to win 9 league games. That's the same number of games the SEC, Pac 12, Big 10 and ACC title winners have to play in and win. Oklahoma doesnt have any chance at not having to play all the top teams in their league. They have to play Texas, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, West Virginia and every team in the league.
Look at Missouri. Yes, they play in the SEC. Let's say they win the East and play and beat Alabama in the title game. Great! But does that mean Missouri had a tougher road? Where is Auburn on the schedule? Where is LSU? Where is Texas A&M? Where is Ole Miss? The answer is Missouri doesnt play those teams.
Oklahoma has to play every top team in their league. Missouri does not. Oklahoma plays Tennessee out of league. They then play Akron and Tulsa.
So what's the difference between Missouri and Oklahoma? It's not league play, as Oklahoma doesnt benefit from a round-robin schedule.
Oklahoma needs to play 9 teams in their league to win a title.
Missouri has to play 9 teams in their league to win a title but gets to pass 4 teams from the SEC West.
So the difference is what? OU has Tennessee, Akron and Tulsa out of league. Mizzou has BYU, UConn, Arkansas State and SE Missouri.
So the real difference in schedule between Missouri, should they win the SEC, and Oklahoma is that Missouri plays SE Missouri and Oklahoma has no win over such an opponent.
So tell me again why the Big 12 needs a title game other than it would make a lot of money for the league, the network that would carry the game and the NCAA?
