Page 2 of 2
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 12:26 am
by War Wagon
Vito Corleone wrote:
No way tech or Oklahoma would agree to that since neither has a defense but in any other year moving forward I think that would be heck of a way to determine who goes in. I just don't want to see us toss sportsmanship out the window just to win a tie-breaker.
On the contrary, sportsmanship wouldn't be tossed out the window.
Under a points allowed tiebreaker system, what you should see instead of teams trying run up the score with a 23 point 3rd qtr lead... is teams trying to grind out one first down after another, ten yards at a time, taking as much time off the clock as possible, so the other offense stays on the sidelines with less chances to score.
I'd like to see one of the more industrious horn fans (s'up Harv?) crunch those numbers against this years common opponents and see where the cowchips fall.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:19 am
by Vito Corleone
War Wagon wrote:Vito Corleone wrote:
No way tech or Oklahoma would agree to that since neither has a defense but in any other year moving forward I think that would be heck of a way to determine who goes in. I just don't want to see us toss sportsmanship out the window just to win a tie-breaker.
On the contrary, sportsmanship wouldn't be tossed out the window.
Under a points allowed tiebreaker system, what you should see instead of teams trying run up the score with a 23 point 3rd qtr lead... is teams trying to grind out one first down after another, ten yards at a time, taking as much time off the clock as possible, so the other offense stays on the sidelines with less chances to score.
I'd like to see one of the more industrious horn fans (s'up Harv?) crunch those numbers against this years common opponents and see where the cowchips fall.
Well it sure would put an end to these hurry up offenses out there. I think Texas lead the conference in time of possession due to their grind it out offense. OU put up more points but that had a lot to do with the fact that they ran a hurry up offense and really short time of possession, they had lots more opportunities than Texas had. Missouri and Tech ran the same offense as well with very similar results.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:43 pm
by Harvdog
If you looked at the amount of points given up in the Big XII between Texas, OU and TT it would breakdown like this:
OU: 236 Points or and average of 29.5 per game. The high they gave up was 41 to OSU and the low was 17 to Baylor.
TT: 251 Points or an avaerage of 31.4 per game. The high they gave up was 65 to OU and the low was 21 to Kansas.
Texas: 180 points or and average of 22.5 per game. The hig they gave up was 39 to TT and the low was 7 to Kansas.
If you take the whole season in to account the top scoring defense is Texas. We are rated #21 in the nation.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:21 pm
by Harvdog
Baylor would beat the following Pac-10 teams:
Washington
Washington St.
Arizona State
Arizona
UCLA
Stanford
Anyone that has watched Baylor for 10 minutes realizes that Art Briles is bringing respect and creditability back to the Brazos valley. Robert Griffith will be a stud. They have an offense that is going to be run heavy until the QB matures. All you have to do is watch UH in the last few years to see what Briles will do at Baylor. They were competitive all year and lost some close games. Hell, they finished higher than aggy.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:31 pm
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
Why is that? So the Big 12 can resemble the Pac 10 more? To where they won't have to have a championship game like the Pac 10?
You say that like it's a bad thing. The Pac 10 doesn't need a "championship" game because the champion is easily decided by the round robin format. Only thing that needs fixing is the three way tie breaker rule which is monumentally stupid.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:12 pm
by SunCoastSooner
Almost half the points OU gave up in conference play with the exclusion of Texass were in trash time after the game was decided.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:25 pm
by Vito Corleone
King Crimson wrote:UT having beaten Missouri is entirely irrelevant to this discussion as long as divisional play crowns a north and south champion.
it really does no good to complain about style points and then *continue* to harp on "barely losing" at Tech. the *same thing* only reversed. same logic. So far we can deduce: 6 points=barely losing (at Tech); 10 points (RRS)=a decisive, statement game....there's a lot riding on those 4 points.
OU beat OSU in Stillwater by 20. UT beat OSU in Austin by 4. you can't pick and choose whichever scores/outcomes suit you and when head-to-head counts and when it doesn't (in a 3 way tie).
boughout thy the Horn logic i'm seeing presented thre week (not just here, including Mack on TV multiple times), if OU had beaten Tech by one touchdown that would somehow make OU's argument in the 3 way tie scenario *stronger* than winning by 40+....because Tech then *still* would be relevant in the 3 way tie scenario. that's not even circular logic or homer selectivity....it's just ridiculous.
the whole situation is a joke. but, losing late coming with a penalty is not without precedent in CFB, as skull notes.
Couple of things
Texas beating Missouri has two points of relivance. First any talk about strength of schedule makes them very relivant they are the one ranked conf team we played that Oklahoma and tech didn't a team that won the North Division. Second they represent the second half of the Big 12 championship, a game being played where both teams Texas beat head to head.
When talking about who won the Big 12 South Tech is very significant, but the Big 12 South was decided by the BCS voting, and the BCS they should not be relevant since they are ranked 7th. The BCS is about the championship game and that is between #2 and #3. The only relevance of those two are that #2 was passed by #3 who they beat head to head. Thus fans of #2 are pissed and rightly so.
I agree the whole situation is a joke, but I will take that bullet for college football if it brings about a playoff.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:58 pm
by the_ouskull
Vito Corleone wrote:I agree the whole situation is a joke, but I will take that bullet for college football if it brings about a playoff.
You're not a martyr. You lost to Tech. There's a difference.
I mean, not that I, in any way, disagree with you. I think that any of us would gladly jump in front of the playoff bullet.
the_ouskull
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 6:01 am
by Harvdog
the_ouskull wrote:Vito Corleone wrote:I agree the whole situation is a joke, but I will take that bullet for college football if it brings about a playoff.
You're not a martyr. You lost to Tech. There's a difference.
the_ouskull
And OU lost to Texas.....thus the situation we sit in.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:55 am
by Vito Corleone
the_ouskull wrote:Vito Corleone wrote:I agree the whole situation is a joke, but I will take that bullet for college football if it brings about a playoff.
You're not a martyr. You lost to Tech. There's a difference.
the_ouskull
Again, when talking about the Big 12 South Tech has relevance.
I'm not talking about the Big 12 south, I'm talking about the BCS on a national level. Tech doesn't count, the BCS is about 1 vs 2 there is nothing about a 3 way tie in conferece, this is about who should be #2. Between Texas and OU Texas won on the field thus they should be #2.
If you want to talk about who should be #1 in the Big 12 south well that has already been decided, I still will not get by the notion that we let a flawed system determine our conference but it is what it is and that can't be changed.
This however is about who plays for all the marbles and no way Oklahoma can use the tech argument because tech is sitting around 7th in the standing no 2, 3, or even 4.
Texas beat OU so Texas should be #2.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:06 pm
by Harvdog
Tech is #7 for a couple of reasons:
1. 65-21. You cannot get beat that bad and remain in the national title picture.....unless you are a cornfed stud.....66-36.
2. Eastern Washington (6-5 Div 1-2A), Nevada (7-5), SMU (1-11) and UMass (7-5 Div 1-2A).
3. They are Tech. They have no national respect. They did beat Texas and OSU but that is all they have done.
4. Texas and OU played tougher schedules.
5. Texas and OU are respected more.
The system looks at BCS ratings which brings the computers into the fray. This is where OU is ahead.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 1:28 pm
by the_ouskull
Exactly. OU is leading in all of the impartial formulas. Tejas is "leading" in all of the human element formulas; and, to hear Mack cry about it, in the hearts and minds of the American people.
You plug in info. Info comes out. It's not like a Sooner climbed into the computers and changed shit. Same rules. Impartial result. Does it suck? Sure. Change it. But, for this year, they're the rules that were in place. You want to play for championships? Beat Tech.
the_ouskull
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 5:21 pm
by Left Seater
Here's the thing. Everyone knew the system going in and it is what it is, flawed.
Further Stoops needs to shut his mouth and stop bringing it up. Just leave it alone, you are playing for the Big XII title. Stop talking about Tech and the computers. The more he opens his mouth the more this thing called karma keeps creaping into my head. Karma doesn't get Mizzou past OU though. But Mizzou being a 4 loss team could hurt OU in some of the computers.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:15 pm
by Left Seater
BTH,
I have heard it on two radio interviews and saw it once on Tuesday night on the late local sports cast.
I am not asking him not to answer questions about it, but he doesn't have to always go on for 30 seconds about it. In the two radio interviews he talks about Tech.
I would prefer that when he is asked about the Big XII title game or the BCS rankings he just say something along the lines of "the system in place has us playing in the title game and has us ranked number 2." That's all he needs to say. He doesn't need to justify the rankings or why his team is playing.
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:11 am
by SoCalTrjn
if the computer polls are unbiased and perfect, why dont they all spit out the same results?
Re: Here is how I see it...
Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:25 am
by Adelpiero
Does a Buffalo win over Ball st help tejas sos?
Mizzou beat Buffalo, who beat #12 Ball st. it doesnt really matter much now, but that would help their sos in computers, right