To play, or not to play? That's the Big 12 championship game question

Tuesday, November 21st 2000, 12:00 am

By: News On 6

When UCLA lost to Miami in 1998 _ a game that ended while Kansas State led Texas A&M in the Big 12 championship game _ the undefeated but No. 3 ranked Wildcats got their shot at a national title.

One comeback, two overtimes and a 36-33 Aggie upset win later, Kansas State had lost the league's title game, and as a consequence, that chance to play for a national championship.

So it should follow that Oklahoma coach Bob Stoops, whose top-ranked Sooners figure to still be undefeated when they play in this year's title game, would join a chorus of Big 12 coaches who'd like to see the game scrapped.

Instead, he's one of the few who thinks playing the game is a good idea.

``I've said all along I think it's great,'' Stoops said Monday. ``I think it's special. We sort of embrace it and like being in it.''

That's about all Stoops would say about the title game, because Oklahoma still has a regular season game against rival Oklahoma State before the Dec. 2 title game in Kansas City against, ironically, Kansas State.

``If they end up losing the game, then they are not in the national championship bowl and neither is Kansas State, and we don't have a representative from our conference,'' said Nebraska coach Frank Solich. ``It can work that way.''

Several of the coaches speaking on the Big 12's weekly teleconference Monday didn't want to comment, many of them noting they've never been close enough to a berth.

But Solich said almost all the coaches don't like the game, a sentiment confirmed by Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg. The best chance to win a national title, Solich said, requires the right kind of schedule, convenient off weeks, and not playing in a title game.

``That's not easy either, but it's the easiest,'' Solich said.

In addition to losing a chance to play for the national title, Kansas State was also passed over by the Cotton and Holiday Bowls in 1998 after losing in the title game. The Wildcats went on to lose to unranked Purdue in the Alamo Bowl.

Weiberg said that shouldn't happen again. The league's current agreement with its bowl partners require the Cotton and Holiday _ the top non-BCS bowls _ to take the loser of the championship game. But that requirement ends if the loser falls out of the top 10 in the BCS standings.

The title game does have significant financial rewards for the conference's 12 member schools _ a share of what's expected to be $8 million this year. That's enough to offset the loss of sending two teams to a BCS bowl, since the second bowl's payout is worth between $4 million and $6 million.

The title game is part of the league's television contract with ABC, which runs through 2007. Weiberg said it's possible to rework that contract to removed a promise of a championship game _ but it would cost the league and its schools money they currently depend on.

``I understand concept of trying to make the most money that you can, but I think its hurt us in other ways,'' said Kansas State coach Bill Snyder.

Colorado coach Gary Barnett, when pressed, said he'd vote to keep the game. Formerly the coach at Northwestern in the Big 10, a conference without a title game, Barnett said confusion this season in his old league makes a pretty solid case for a league title game.

``We wanted a chance to declare a champion,'' Barnett said. ``As you sit there right now, you got three teams tied in the Big 10 _ Northwestern, Purdue, and Michigan. Who's the champion?

``There is no way to determine a champion in that league.''