Originally Posted by KC native (Post 11162799)

You are stupid.

They are co-champions because they have identical conference records (which is how the rules are written). The tiebreaker only applies to their automatic bowl tie-ins. The playoff is not an auto tie-in. If TCU and Baylor are left out of the playoff, then Baylor gets the auto-bid and TCU would get an at-large bid from whatever bowl.

What part of that isn't clear to you?

Originally Posted by Cunning Linguist (Post 11162810)

.

Originally Posted by Cunning Linguist (Post 11162827)

That was a direct quote from their website. I have absolutely no ties to Baylor, but I find the Big XII's neurosis incredibly odd in light of their "One True Champion" bullshit.

Originally Posted by KC native (Post 11162835)

I see you completely lack an ability to read and comprehend.

The Big 12 voted for no tiebreakers for conference champs (it helps coaches get paid more since they will be conference champs easier).

Nothing has changed about this since the Big 12 dropped to 10 teams.

The only neurosis, with regards to this, is yours.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 11162856)

The Big 12 is begging the conference to put Ohio State in if they win. The smallest conference is naming multiple teams champions.

Congrats to 20% of the Big (sic) 12 (sic). You're the one (sic) true (sic) champion (sic).

Originally Posted by Cunning Linguist (Post 11162849)

<iframe title="Embedded Tweet" style="display: block; max-width: 99%; min-width: 220px; padding: 0px; border-radius: 5px; margin: 10px 0px; border-width: 1px; border-style: solid; border-color: rgb(238, 238, 238) rgb(221, 221, 221) rgb(187, 187, 187); -moz-border-top-colors: none; -moz-border-right-colors: none; -moz-border-bottom-colors: none; -moz-border-left-colors: none; border-image: none; box-shadow: 0px 1px 3px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.15); position: static; visibility: visible; width: 500px;" allowfullscreen="" class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" allowtransparency="true" scrolling="no" id="twitter-widget-0" frameborder="0" height="212"></iframe>
<script async="" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

November 9

What changed?

This is what is being argued. Not that your conference recognizes co-champs, but its policies on tie-breakers and statements about the CFP prior to this week were different.

Originally Posted by mikeyis4dcats. (Post 11162858)

some lawyer figured out it is better to not name a sole champ
<iframe style="display: none;" allowtransparency="true" scrolling="no" id="rufous-sandbox" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 11162860)

It's not too late for the SEC to declare all 14 teams co-champions.

Originally Posted by Cunning Linguist (Post 11162849)

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Per Big 12, while league technically recognizes co-champs, winner of head-to-head would be submitted to playoff by Big 12 as champ</p>&mdash; Jake Trotter (@Jake_Trotter) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jake_Trotter/status/531575228410105856">November 9, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

November 9

What changed?

This is what is being argued. Not that your conference recognizes co-champs, but its policies on tie-breakers and statements about the CFP prior to this week were different.

Originally Posted by KC native (Post 11162868)

The conference clarified it.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Bowlsby clarifies “One True Champion” is about the round-robin schedule, not about having one champion at the end.</p>&mdash; Jake Trotter (@Jake_Trotter) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jake_Trotter/status/539474134213099520">December 1, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 11162860)

It's not too late for the SEC to declare all 14 teams co-champions.