The problem with a conf title rule is that you could end up with a ridiculous national title game that no one thinks is the national title game. Say Missouri beats OU to win the B12 and Oregon State wins the Pac-10 by beating Oregon. Let's say Florida loses to FSU and then wins the SEC. Now you have these choices for the national title game: Missouri (2 losses) Florida (2 losses) Oregon State (3 losses) Penn State (1 loss) Some random Big East champ (2 or 3 losses) Some random ACC champ (3 or 4 losses) Meanwhile, Texas, USC, Tech & Alabama are all ranked in the top 5 in this scenario, and none are in the national title mix (Penn State would be the other one). So you're back to likely having a split title between the AP and the BCS, with the BCS champion potentially not even ranked in the top 5 in the AP. That would be totally messed up.
F the BCS. The fact that Texas is #2 is a complete joke and it loses complete credibility. Oklahoma should be #2 and Texas 4.
I suppose that you are suggesting that if it is Texas vs. USC that the other one loss, non conference champs wouldn't have reason to complain? You can still end up with a split. The point here is that the BCS has a superfluous "C" in it. The fair system would be a 16 team playoff with 12 conference champs and 4 at large bids. There are 4 weeks between semesters. 16 teams would yield 4 rounds...ironic, no? Even HS football has a 4 round playoff. Time to get it done so every team has a chance at the tourny if they have an excellent season. This won't happen, because it will cause the BCS conferences to share the wealth. What a crock.
But OU lost to the same team (Texas), by 10, that Tech just beat! Therefore, by your logic, OU can't be in the same league as Tech, right? If you want to compare OU and Texas, how about using the result when they played each other? What a crazy concept.
OK...that makes sense. Now you have Texas on top...and Tech beat Texas. So why would Tech not have a reason to complain? The logic utilized becomes very circular here.
You ignored his "if you want to compare OU and Texas" part. If you're comparing all three, then head to head doesn't come in. Voters weren't comparing all three. They're comparing OU and UT.
Pac 10 doesnt have a conference championship game, so USC being in the picture mean its not a definite requirement. Conference championships are an extra game to make more money and to give the underdogs a rooting interest and possible storyline... Which of course messes up the pretty little pre-designs on the whole ranking order. Why dont they just have a playoff for that? The the everyone goes home happy ranking and BCS system is stuff do away with for that reason.
Okay, I have no idea how any of this works. How do they determine who plays for the Big 12 Championship? The top 2 teams? If there's a three-way tie what happens? Would it be Texas vs. OU? Someone please explain. Thanks.
The Big 12 has two divisions, The North and the South. The winners of each of the divisions play eachother in the Big 12 Championship.
No kidding... Let him believe that though. I'm still laughing at all my Longhorn friends that guaranteed that Tech was going to kill the Sooners. Add this one to the list besides the friend part. lol
You're building a strawman, because I didn't say one word about Texas Tech. I was simply pointing out the fallacy of comparing Texas and OU by their respective results against Texas Tech. If you want to compare two teams, which Legend Killer did, it makes a lot more sense to compare them in games against each other.
Here's an interesting article that, once again, shows that UT is completely screwed on the NC. Oddly enough, UT is also the only one guaranteed of a BCS bid. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?page=roadtobcs/0806 Just as everything starts falling into place, a new BCS controversy is lurking right around the corner. Oklahoma's win over Texas Tech has created a three-way tie atop the Big 12 South that could ultimately be settled by the BCS standings on Nov. 30. This tiebreaker would knock a pair of highly ranked 11-1 teams out of the Big 12 championship game, and one of them would be left out of a BCS game entirely, thanks to the rule that prevents a conference from having more than two teams in the big five bowls. [+] EnlargeRonald Martinez/Getty Images Keep your head up, Graham. You still have an outside shot at the BCS title game. While that might sound like a mess, it's really more of an unfortunate situation. One deserving team (either Oklahoma or Texas) must be chosen as the division winner, and the other two must be left out. That would be the case whether the BCS standings were used as the tiebreaker or not, so it shouldn't be considered controversial. What would likely be much more disturbing to college football fans is the possibility that Texas Tech, fresh off a 65-21 loss to Oklahoma, could still play for the national championship. It's not as unlikely as you might think. On Saturday evening, Oklahoma will play at Oklahoma State in this season's sixth meeting among the Big 12 South's powerful quartet. One of the previous five games, Oklahoma vs. Texas, was on a neutral field. The other four were all won by the home team. If the Sooners can't break that trend, and lose to the Cowboys, the aforementioned three-way tie will be history (assuming Texas beats Texas A&M, and Texas Tech beats Baylor), and the Red Raiders will win a two-way tie for the division lead because of their head-to-head victory over the Longhorns. And if Tech goes on to beat Missouri in the Big 12 championship game ... then what? As bad as that one loss may have been, the Red Raiders would still be 12-1 and champions of the conference that has been the dominant story of this college football season. And Tech would hold the double trump card on Texas -- a head-to-head win to go along with the conference title -- which would make it very difficult for voters to keep the Longhorns above the Raiders on their ballots. And who else other than the SEC champion could justifiably be ranked ahead of Texas, assuming the Horns don't struggle with Texas A&M on Thursday? USC is significantly behind Mack Brown's bunch right now, and with nothing more than a couple of games against mediocre opponents (Notre Dame and UCLA) left on the schedule, there would be no justification for elevating the Trojans, unless it was purely an attempt by voters to manipulate the system and keep Texas Tech out of the BCS Championship Game. Plus, if Oregon State wins a home game against Oregon on Saturday, the Trojans won't even be champions of their own conference. It's hard to imagine a team being named a BCS title game participant just 15 days removed from a 44-point loss, but we might be a single upset away from that becoming a reality. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If the three-way tie comes to fruition late Saturday night, you have to like Oklahoma's chances of coming out on top. The Sooners passed Texas in both polls this week, and that advantage isn't likely to disappear. OU still trails the Longhorns in the overall BCS standings because of a decent-sized deficit in the computers, but that will be reduced significantly with a win over Oklahoma State in Stillwater. It seems that the only chance Texas has of holding off this charge by the Sooners, other than an Oklahoma loss, is for several voters who may have spontaneously reacted to OU's impressive victory over Texas Tech to decide this week that head-to-head should be a deciding factor between the teams. Of course, there's also the position that head-to-head is irrelevant within the three-way tie, and it's possible that many of the voters have already considered this. Advantage: Oklahoma. • For all practical purposes, Utah (12-0) has clinched the automatic at-large bid for the non-BCS conferences, although that won't be official until Dec. 7. With wins this week, Boise State and Ball State can also finish the regular season 12-0, but they are unlikely to be selected to the BCS as at-large teams. The Broncos will certainly have their share of sympathizers. If Oregon State beats Oregon on Saturday, Boise State will finish several spots ahead of half of the major-conference champions (Pac-10, Big East and ACC) but will not be able to join them in the Bowl Championship Series. While that might be just the way it goes with the BCS, you can be sure it will be added to the list of complaints about this system's treatment of teams from smaller conferences.
OU Slaughtered Tech in hostile territory. UT beat up OU in neutral territory. Tech needed a last minute drive in their own hostile territory to come up with a win against UT.
On the back end of an impossible four game stretch, on the road and with significant injuries. Football is not played in a vacuum. When and where the games are played matters just as much as who is playing (sometimes).
here's the problem with including tech in the equation at this point.... they have ZERO chance of making it to the national title game. nada, zip, zilch. that's what happens when you schedule div II OOC teams and get schnockered on national television in your only road test. had tech kept that game competitive, they would still have a decent gripe. but they played themselves completely out of the NC picture saturday night. so tech doesn't have much relevance in the grand scheme of things. the same way ole miss wont have a say in the grand scheme of things, even though they beat FLA at the swamp. as it stands, the only teams the really matter in regards to the BCS title game are Texas and Oklahoma... identical records, similar SOS (Texas beat mizzou, ou beat cincy and tcu), Texas' only loss was on the road to #6, ou loses to #5 on a neutral field.... and Texas beat ou. imo, that's they way it should be approached, but i have no faith that that's the way it will be approached.
