Just in, USC lost to Oregon State, 27-21 Just in, Florida lost to Ole Miss, 31-30, at home Just in, Penn State lost to Iowa, 24-23 Wait, what's that now? Maybe looking at one game pales in importance to looking at the entire season? No way, that's just crazy talk... (And yes, I know exactly what's coming. "So how, then, can you put so much emphasis on Texas beating OU?" And that's because one game, head-to-head, does work as a tiebreaker, if everything else is equal. With Texas and OU, the schedule strengths were basically equal, as was the domination of other opponents through the season. With Texas Tech, not so much -- and thus why the tiebreaker wasn't as appropriate. Not to mention double digits on a neutral field vs. last play of the game miracle at home.)
Not true at all. OU's schedule was practically identical to Texas', and that's with OU given the Missouri game in the Big XII championship that they shouldn't have gotten. http://www.andersonsports.com/football/ACF_frnk.html Schedule strength: OU - 1 Texas - 4 Tech - 31 So, um, the idea that Tech's schedule was as inferior to UT's schedule as OU's was superior is just silly.
You can't control your conference schedule. You can however control your non conference. Oklahoma's was clearly betters. Cincinnati and TCU, clearly give it to Oklahoma. Anyone that knows how college football works knows, if your gonna lose, lose early.
The point is they still lost. But horn logic says drop the lowest team. Don't get me wrong dude, I would be ****ing pissed if i was a horn. But how the BCS works, it was not surprising to me at all, that OU got the nod. Any logical horn fan, knew OU was gonna jump texas if they beat Poke State the last game of the regular season. If your gonna lose, lose early.
I think the problem most UT fans is that the BCS was used at all to determine a CONFERENCE tiebreaker. There are other ways to break the tie. You could eliminate wins against I-AA opponents, go with wins against the top two teams in the other division, point differential in the games played against each other, etc. It's insane that the Big 12 is letting people from other conferences who know absolutely nothing about the Big 12 decide who goes to its championship game.
Um, who cares what you can control? Heck, by that logic, out of conference teams that scheduled a Miami/Florida State a few years ago (when they were dominant) deserve more credit than teams that scheduled a Utah. I don't care what they could control scheduling-wise -- that has nothing to do with the team's performance on the field in a given season. I care about the actual results, and the actual results are that OU and UT's overall 2008 schedules were very comparable. Results >>> intent
Not really. UT stayed ahead of OU in the human polls. The OU/UT decision was made by the computers, which jumped OU mostly by virtue of a few other third-party games (Kansas-Missouri, for instance), which all broke OU's way in the last couple of weeks. By the way, it's not horn logic. It's the logic of every single conference in college football with a conference title game that uses divisions, except for the Big 12.
And 1-11 Chattanooga... that's 1-11 in the FBS. My point is, the non conference argument isn't as clear as some would think. Yes, OU played to good teams in Cincy and TCU. They also played 2 of the worst teams in college football who combined for a 1-23 record. They should be penalized for playing that crap as much as they should be rewarded for playing 2 good teams.
Technically, Mack didn't vote, he was off with his wife or sister who was having surgery, so horn brought someone to represent ole Mack. I however did not hear which coaches voted for which particular side, but obviously the majority voted in favor to keep the current system. I'm sure this thread would die immediately if it was discovered that horn ended up voting to keep current system, but I don't think they did judging by Mack's public crying and their infamous * that they were called out on. By the way, the coaches vote to keep the current system could be overruled when the Big 12 Ath. Directors meet later on. We'll see what happens, but my guess is that they still keep the same system since it was rare the way it played out. Then again, tech won't be in that situation again next year, but ig could be OSU...
TCU and Cincinnati trump anything texas had of offer this year, including Arkansas. Oklahoma also scheduled Washington, who suppose to be top 25 at the beginning of the season. Even horn fans are mad that the scheduling is not getting any better. Texas does not play a preseason BCS conference this upcoming season. Future Oklahoma non-conference schedules. 2010 Non-Conference: Air Force, Florida State, at Cincinnati, Utah State 2011 Non-Conference: at Florida State, Tulsa 2012 Non-Conference: Notre Dame 2013 Non-Conference: at Notre Dame 2014 Non-Conference: Tennessee 2015 Non-Conference: at Tennessee Just saying Texas has to get on the ball, and play better non conference teams, even horn fans agree with that.
Do you think the coaching polls should always be made public?? I would like them to start doing that. Instead of the last regular season poll. If mack wanted to, he could have voted Oklahoma off the ballet for 2nd to last coaches poll. Then he could have put them back on it at 3 or 4th during the last poll, the public poll. Mack had more class than i thought.
like every other t-sip t-shirt fan I know, she was probably mad at how her team didn't get special national treatment like they usually do.. Despite the fact that their team stunk it up and lost to tech, they couldn't quit b****ing and moaning about how they got "robbed" and how "it's 7:30, and OU still suckz lmfao lawlz!!" just let it go already.. I can't believe some of you are still moaning about it..
So if Florida hadn't made the national title game after defeating Alabama, would you have said they had themselves to blame for stinking it up and losing to Ole Miss at home? Would you accuse them of b****ing and moaning and insult them? Or would you say they were shafted. My guess is the latter. The reason things like this keep happening in sports is because people do let it go. The only way to get the change you need is to raise enough hell until the authority figures realize they have little choice due to public demand. Simple concept for thousands of years, and it generally works.
Does it really matter that much? If the two teams end up tied, we've basically already learned that head-to-head isn't an appropriate tiebreaker. I'd almost rather lose to OU, tie them in the standings and have the voters put UT in, just to make a mockery of this whole absurd system. (Please note that I said "almost.")
dude the entire system is broken, bowl game are freaking meaningless, and unless they institute a playoffs system where teams actually compete for something tangible, College "post season" will remain meaningless, and y'alls moaning will look dumber and dumber as time progresses.. Yes, one could make an argument that UT could've gotten in, but an equally strong argument could be made for the 2 other teams, and unfortunately for UT, it didn't go their way.. For any other normal college, they would've gotten pissed for a day or two then got over it.. but for spoiled UT fans who are used to getting EVERY DAMN "close call" in their advantage, it was quite a shock, and ridiculous b!tching and stupid slogans ensued.. Not only does it make UT fans look unbelievably foolish, but it's also completely pointless.. y'all did pretty well in the Doritos Fiesta bowl so it's all good . just teasing, but some of you really have a problem getting over mundane stuff like this.. maybe y'all should direct your efforts into lobbying for a playoffs system instead of pondering the "what ifs"..
Tech did not have an equally strong argument. I'm sorry, but their body of work -- encompassing factors from margin of victories to overall strength of schedule to margin of defeat -- just was not in the same league as Texas and OU. The debate was between UT and OU, and while both teams had comparable overall resumes, the tipping point was that UT won by double digits on a neutral field. OU's argument was not equally strong. No, my guess is that you're an Aggie and you're predispositioned to a bias against UT. Even if not, my guess is that you're a Texas resident, so you see more of UT reaction than other schools. No one would "get over" in a couple of days watching a team they beat by double digits on a neutral field that had the same overall record (with a comparable schedule) given chances to compete for the conference and national titles while you sat at home. Auburn fans still haven't gotten over 2004. Michigan fans still complain about 2006. By the way, I'm far from a Texas homer these days. My school is Missouri, and I was in Austin Oct. 18, giving the horns down and jokingly taunting everyone I could find (this was all before the game, of course ). Missouri fans are a fairly neutral group, and there were loud chants of 45-35 at Arrowhead for the Big 12 championship. They knew Oklahoma didn't belong. Are you saying they're biased? No, they're probably foolish too... I mean, how in the world could you look at two teams with comparable schedules and identical records, where one beat the other by double digits on a neutral field, and think the team that won is the superior team? What a bunch of spoiled, foolish homers. And of course, you appear completely objective and rational when it comes to your opinions of UT...
