So the B12 now has the right to set up a conference championship game without expansion. Here's my question, what does it buy them? In 2014, the discussion was around which, between TCU and Baylor was the one true champion? How does playing a second game between the two help settle that? In 2015, there was no tie for first, so how does a CCG "fix" that? If OU had won the CCG, they'd be B12 champs. If OSU won the rematch, then OSU is the champ, even though now they're 1-1 against each other? Not to mention who is #2, TCU or OSU. I'd guess OSU due to head-to-head, but that didn't settle the #1 debate in 2014. Further, the biggest problem with round-robin schedules when determining the champion, comes in with three-way ties where each team has only one loss, to each other. How does a CCG fix that? So instead of determining which one wins the tie-break, you now determine which one loses the tie-break, and the other two play for the championship even though they will have had a head-to-head result already? This seems to be (SHOCKER) a money-grab with a proposed solution to fix a problem that won't be fixed by the proposed solution. If you need a CCG that bad to make the books balance, add two more teams and be done with it. You've already replaced storied programs with TCU and WV, so what's wrong with adding BSU and Houston to add another million to the bottom line? B-1-2! B-1-2! B-1-2! (That doesn't have the same ring as the S-E-C chants, but it sounds about as ridiculous as the CCG idea so it fits the discussion.)
Yeah it's all about getting that 13th data point and not have expand and cut the pie 12 ways instead of 10.