What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

north co champions?

are you serious? the big 12 does not RECOGNIZE divisional co champions in football. it is no where in their language for a tiebreaker.

warning: link to raging tardfest: oh intelligence, where art thou?


the reality check: they don't say a word about co divisional champs, do they?

They want to claim the status of "Co-B12N Champs - non-representative team that get's nothing for the title"? Fine. As long as they are also willing to admit that they "backed into" that embarrassing non-Championship when a Mizzou team that whooped their asses like a 4 year old at Kmart stumbled and lost to someone they shouldn't have.

The complete dysfunction of that fan base is so clearly revealed in their desperation to claim football excellence.

Co B12N Champs...Congratulations Fusker Nation, you get to french kiss your sister! (Okay that's a bad choice in words due to the fact that in the NE culture that's not the shytty consolation prize it is everywhere else in the country). :puke:
 
It's erroneous. Mizzou won the North.

Might as well declare Texas, Oklahoma and Texas Tech "co-champions" of the Big 12 South. :rolleyes:
 
It's erroneous. Mizzou won the North.

Might as well declare Texas, Oklahoma and Texas Tech "co-champions" of the Big 12 South. :rolleyes:

it is a typical husker claim. i know y'all (as a fanbase) claimed a co-championship in 2001 after colorado waxed your furry butts. there was nothing "co" about it that year or this year.
 
Teams with identical win - loss conference division records are not "co-champions" unless they've not played one another. Even then how they each fared against their common opponents could negate the idea of "co-champions."
 
Teams with identical win - loss conference division records are not "co-champions" unless they've not played one another. Even then how they each fared against their common opponents could negate the idea of "co-champions."

bottom line, the big 12 does not recognize the idea of divisional cochampions in football.

it does not exist.
 
Neither does Santa Claus. But many well-meaning people like to pretend just for the fun and good will of it. :smile2:

good will? it shows nothing but disrespect to the team and fans who legitimately won to make that claim. how so is it good willed?

good will is accepting you got beat down (particularly like this year vs mizzou and 01 vs cu). applauding that they won the division and looking to the next year.
 
Neither does Santa Claus. But many well-meaning people like to pretend just for the fun and good will of it. :smile2:

WHAT?!? Santa was the only thing in Red I didn't hate and now you have to ruin that for me too? ****. YOU.
 
Iowa St and tOSU beg to differ.:smile2:

neither of which play for the big 12, assuming you know what you are talking about and mean iowa? not that iowa is a player this year. :rolleyes: the big 10 is free to make their rules as they see fit.

here in the big 12, there are NO divisional co-champions. there is ONE divisional leader. mizzou beat your ass. they won. deal with it.
 
Last edited:
i remember a few years back, OU and Texas finsihed tied, but OU won the tie breaker, Mack and company in their famous way of spin doctoring, almost as good as this past week and last night on ABC, had rings made for the UT team that said BIG XII South Division Co-Champions.
 
You get mad at weird things.

is anyone angry on this thread? :confused: if that is directed at me, i pointed out that the idea of co-champions is an invalid one without much emotion at all save for a smattering of disbelief.

for the emotionally challenged, anger and disbelief are not equal emotions.

Here's a link to the Big 12 rules on how conference championships are detirmined (no mention of "co-champions" at all):

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=1546006

Several ways of breaking a tie. Our tie with Mizzou was broken when they beat us, obviously.

I still don't know anybody who calls Nebraska and Missouri "co-champions of the Big 12 North."

Not sure why it came up; maybe a media person used the term erroneously.


i pointed out with a link earlier in the thread that provided the big 12 rules. it was brought up owing to a lengthy link, also provided, in which husker after husker attempt to "school" the few who point out that there is no such thing as a b12 north co-champion.
 
neither of which play for the big 12, assuming you know what you are talking about and mean iowa? not that iowa is a player this year. :rolleyes: the big 10 is free to make their rules as they see fit.

here in the big 12, there are NO divisional co-champions. there is ONE divisional leader. mizzou beat your ass. they won. deal with it.

Jebus I was talking about ISU several years ago when they tied you and had Co-Champ shirts made. tOSU has tied several times in the past few years and continues to put up the year they were champs in the Shoe. I've not claimed anything like a championship and won't. Save your bitch tirade for someone who deserves it.
 
i pointed out with a link earlier in the thread that provided the big 12 rules. it was brought up owing to a lengthy link, also provided, in which husker after husker attempt to "school" the few who point out that there is no such thing as a b12 north co-champion.

My bad; never saw the link or the Husker fans talking about "co-champions." I'd never have posted the link I found or bothered much to point out that it's obviously not a Big 12 sanctioned notion.
 
Doesn't the Big-10 and Pac-10 actually have co-champs? But in the end, this is Big 12 football! This ain't intramurals (in this case a weak ass Big10/Pac10), brother.
 
Iowa St and tOSU beg to differ.:smile2:

Jebus I was talking about ISU several years ago when they tied you and had Co-Champ shirts made. tOSU has tied several times in the past few years and continues to put up the year they were champs in the Shoe. I've not claimed anything like a championship and won't. Save your bitch tirade for someone who deserves it.

1. big ten recognizes co-championships. your percieved point?
2. did the big 12 recognize isu as a co-champion, being as you pointed out that they beg to differ?

or are you just blathering to blather? save your tirade for someone who wants to listen. if you wish to contribute something of substance, feel free.

My bad; never saw the link or the Husker fans talking about "co-champions." I'd never have posted the link I found or bothered much to point out that it's obviously not a Big 12 sanctioned notion.

bingo. it is not a big 12 notion at all.
 
1. big ten recognizes co-championships. your percieved point?
2. did the big 12 recognize isu as a co-champion, being as you pointed out that they beg to differ?

or are you just blathering to blather? save your tirade for someone who wants to listen. if you wish to contribute something of substance, feel free.



bingo. it is not a big 12 notion at all.


Let me type this very slowly so you might understand. I WAS NOT BEING SERIOUS. IT WAS A JOKE. Got it? ISU fans were thumping their chests at getting a piece of a conference title for the first time in 100 some odd years. The Big XII does not recognize co-champs, but they had shirts made up anyways.
 
many of the FB team were in attendance at last nights CU-NU hoops game. during the first time out they were introduced as B12N Co-Champions. the crowd cheered and laughed, not wanting to show disrespect to the players on the court but they were not buying the co-champ title either.
 
Let me type this very slowly so you might understand. I WAS NOT BEING SERIOUS. IT WAS A JOKE. Got it? ISU fans were thumping their chests at getting a piece of a conference title for the first time in 100 some odd years. The Big XII does not recognize co-champs, but they had shirts made up anyways.

:blah: stop before you give yourself a nosebleed. your fans can be ubertards. accept it and move on.

many of the FB team were in attendance at last nights CU-NU hoops game. during the first time out they were introduced as B12N Co-Champions. the crowd cheered and laughed, not wanting to show disrespect to the players on the court but they were not buying the co-champ title either.

okay, and the school is led by ubertards too... :lol:
 
Not surprising of those delusional phux...

Exactly why I was rooting for Mizzou in this game, because I knew those idots would claim they won the north.
 
Not surprising of those delusional phux...

Exactly why I was rooting for Mizzou in this game, because I knew those idots would claim they won the north.

:nod: UHF custom made this scene for them:

uhf17.jpg


YOO SO STUPID!!!!!
 
many of the FB team were in attendance at last nights CU-NU hoops game. during the first time out they were introduced as B12N Co-Champions. the crowd cheered and laughed, not wanting to show disrespect to the players on the court but they were not buying the co-champ title either.

I haven't found anybody who thinks Nebraska is "co-champions" of the North.

This is an amusing thread because any fans of a team who tied the division winner in conference division W - L would look at it as at most an irony that the other team and not them is the winner of that division. But to declare themselves "co-champions" would vanish upon recalling being beaten by that other team.

You can replace "Missouri - Nebraska" with "Kansas - Colorado," etc and you'd have exactly the same dynamics going on and exactly the same percentages of people feeling this way or that way about it.
 
Back
Top