Why is a four-way tie for the Big 12 No. 1 spot evidence that the conference isn't any good? Shouldn't it be just the opposite? That the Big 12 is not top heavy 1 or 2 good teams and a lot of other also-rans, like the B1G. I just heard that if the Utah had been the Big 12 champ, they would have believed it was a good league because they had been to two Rose Bowls and were a brand, but since it was a tie between BYU, ISU, ASU and Colorado it wasn't a good league.

That just makes no sense at all, but media, podcasters, and pundits are all saying the same thing. It's dumb. Basically, they want a blue-blood in the conference who can emerge and be a brand year in and year out, not a really good competitive league. They want 1 or 2 elite teams and everyone else to bow to them.