Big 12 South Is Still A Three Team Race

by ccmachine on Nov 24, 2008 1:38 PM CST in Football Comment 70 comments

Don’t buy into the propaganda coming out of the Texas Longhorns camp because that is all that it really is. The Big 12 South race is still a three horse race. Don’t believe me? Find me a Longhorn who is cheering for Oklahoma State this weekend. There isn’t one out there because Texas Tech is playing Baylor on Saturday and should the Sooners lose in Stillwater it would be the Red Raiders and not Texas who travels to Kansas City to take on Missouri.

I understand what the Longhorn fans are trying to do. I really do! By making the focus only on Texas and Oklahoma they are snubbing Texas Tech and thus getting a pass for their loss. The reality of the situation is that you just can’t do that. All three teams have a dog in this fight as they all stand currently at 10-1. Tech has a better claim for a trip to Kansas City than the Longhorns do. Texas has a better claim than Oklahoma and the Sooners have a better claim than Tech. It is a vicious cycle but it is a cycle and like it or not all three schools have an equal claim to the Big 12 South Championship.

From here on out it becomes a political game and if all three teams win this week then the head coach who is the best spin doctor may get the nudge. The Texas fans, however, seem to already be on the offensive by trying to quietly put Texas Tech away and pretend that for some reason the Red Raiders don’t exist and their loss never happened. However, the Longhorns are in a tough spot because they need a three way tie just as bad as Oklahoma does. That is why they’ll be cheering for a Tech loss or a Sooner win just like OU fans are cheering for a Longhorn loss or a Tech win. It is a crazy scenario in which these three teams actually need each other.

The more Texas fans try to paint the Red Raiders as a fraud the more they hurt their own case because that is the team that they lost to. My advice to the Longhorns is to take the high road and just let the powers that be settle it. The more you try to demoralize Tech the more you look like you’ve got something to hide. No amount of propaganda is going to make that mark in the loss column go away. It is there for the entire world to see and it can’t be covered up. After all it is the size of Texas!

0 recs | Comment 70 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Most

literate post on this topic on either DTN, BON or CaCM in two weeks. As a Tech alum, I do find it comical that UT is trying to downplay the Tech loss as a should-have won. Maybe they should have. But they didn’t. Whether the loss was in the last second, or an epic beatdown, or on a neutral field it still counts as one in the L column. We all have one 11 weeks in. The Big XII division rules don’t take into consideration anything beyond who beat who. When or by how much the loss was by doesn’t matter.

We can all play the woulda shoulda coulda (well, except Tech…we have no defense for our loss to y’all) card. Or who is “better” or more deserving. At the end of the day, this has turned out to be probably the most interesting Big XII south season since the conference was formed.

Now, the BCS is another story, but that’s not your original thesis and I’m not touching that one.

by Tech92 on Nov 24, 2008 2:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Uh

Find me a Longhorn who is cheering for Oklahoma State this weekend. There isn’t one out there…

I’m a Longhorn fan, and I’m cheering of Oklahoma State this weekend. That’s our best chance of going to the MNC. True, if you lose in Stillwater, we’ll be forced to sit out of the Big 12 title game. But even if Tech beats Mizzou in the Big 12 game, I don’t see Tech vaulting to the top of the BCS after nearly losing to two teams at home and suffering a humiliating loss on the road. Granted, nothing is guaranteed, but this scenario is our best shot of taking it all.

by mikey 4 on Nov 24, 2008 2:28 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

UT's best shot . . .

is Tech losing. A 12-1 Big XII champion Tech could (not saying would) jump Texas.

Tech losing to Baylor gives OU no out. The head-to-head becomes relevant again.

by DoubleB on Nov 24, 2008 4:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

Here’s how I evaluate each possibility.

1) Tech loses to Baylor.

I give Baylor a 5% chance of beating Tech. If that happens, I give us a 60% chance of beating Mizzou, and a 100% chance of going to the MNC if we beat Mizzou. So this option gives us a 3% chance of making it into the MNC.

2) OU loses to OSU.

I give OSU a 35% chance of beating OU. If that happens, we sit out of the conference title, but I still give us a 75% chance of going to the MNC, for a 26% chance of making it into the MNC going this route.

Obviously, I’ll hang my hopes on #2. (unless I’ve messed up the math, which is entirely possible given my current state of mind…)

by mikey 4 on Nov 24, 2008 4:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not one to question you logic and all

But the Longhorns best chance to make it to Miami is to win the Big 12 Championship. All hope for that goes out the window with an OU loss to O-State along with a Tech win against Baylor. I know it has happened before in the past with OU and Nebraska but I don’t think that we’ll ever see a team from the Big 12 play for the BCS Championship when they didn’t even play for their conference title. The system is different now then what it was then and it was changed for those reasons.

The BCS Championship goes through Kansas City and cheering for the Pokes is cheering for your own team’s doom. Instead I suggest that you cheer for Baylor to pull an upset and remove the thorn in your flesh from the equation. That way your team would own a legitimate tie breaker.

by ccmachine on Nov 24, 2008 5:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I just disagree

For the reasons stated in my reply to DoubleB. Our highest probability comes from OSU beating OU.

Your response is mainly conclusory statements: “the Longhorns best chance to make it to Miami is to win the Big 12 Championship”; “The BCS Championship goes through Kansas City”; “cheering for the Pokes is cheering for your own team’s doom”; etc. None of this comes from the BCS’s tie-breaking rules. I’m not sure what your basis is, but without any support, the bare conclusions are not compelling.

Finally, cheering for OSU and cheering for Baylor are not mutually exclusive options. The entire ’horn nation will be doing both on Saturday.

by mikey 4 on Nov 24, 2008 5:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Let me say it in a different way then.

I feel that you are losing sight of the forest because of the tree. The Coaches and the Harris Polls are the key factors in the BCS standings now, along with the computers. Neither one of those groups of people want to see a team in the BCS championship game that did not win their conference because all that will do is cause more criticism of an already flawed system. They will put Penn State or USC (should they luck into winning the Pac 10) in before a team that did not even play for their conference championship.

Now, that said. If OU loses Saturday night then there is no need for a BCS tie-breaker because Tech owns the head-to-head tie breaker. It will be the Red Raiders going to KC (barring a loss to Baylor). In that situation I do believe that Texas will go to a BCS bowl game but not the championship game a la Kansas of last year.

by ccmachine on Nov 24, 2008 5:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Texas does not have to win the Big 12 to get in.

I realize that Tech92 doesn’t want to face the fact that Tech is done, but Tech is done. OU’s 44 point romp made this a two horse race.

Tech is sitting at #7. Say OU does lose to OSU and Tech beats MiZZOU. Will the voters, whose last memory of Tech is a 44 point drubbing at Norman, really vote Texas Tech into the MNC over 1 loss Texas who was at #2 in the BCS just a week earlier and didn’t lose another game? Would Tech somehow leapfrog USC by beating Baylor on Versus? (yes the game is on VERSUS! Ha!).

Tech is finished. This is a 2 horse race that is incredibly interesting. OU has a good argument. Texas has a good argument. Texas will benefit by playing A&M on national TV on Thursday and OU will have another chance to get a quality win. If OU gets in it will be because of the “playing better now” perception beat out the “45-35 Neutral Field argument.”

by the1austin on Nov 24, 2008 6:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think Tech . .

is finished yet. I think that option is getting a lot more play than you or a lot of Texas partisans believe. A 12-1 conference champion Texas Tech with a head-to-head win over 11-1 Texas will sway a lot of voters. At worst, it puts a lot of doubt in the voters mind 2 weeks from now. Remember, 2 weeks is a long time and the last memory they MIGHT have is a torching of Mizzou in KC.

by DoubleB on Nov 24, 2008 8:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No team gets beat by over 40...

and plays in the MNC. Not happening. USC or Penn State or even Utah would get the nod.

by jw4425 on Nov 24, 2008 8:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

well let me put another way

Maybe Tech won’t go, but if voters put Tech over Texas, Texas won’t be going either.

by DoubleB on Nov 24, 2008 9:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

This is true...

But I don’t see that happening either. They’d have to make up a helluva lot of ground after that whipping.

by jw4425 on Nov 24, 2008 9:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think

you meant someone else?? I didn’t ever say Tech was still alive for anything more than a shot at the Big XII championship game.

by Tech92 on Nov 24, 2008 9:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree totally.

My point that everyone seems to be forgetting or just maybe not thinking of is that of all of the Big 12 South’s big 4 (OU,Tech,Texas,OSU), not one of those four have beaten one of the other four in a true road game. If OU can go into Stillwater, which is a tough place to play for OU, and get a win in a true road game, I feel that it would be the trump card that should put OU over the top when comparing OU, Texas, and Texas Tech.

Boomer Sooner!

Come check out FanIQ for your one stop spot for all sports

by Jubanator14 on Nov 24, 2008 2:30 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Let me ask you this...

More important tie-breaker between Team A and Team B?

Option A: Where and how Team A and B beat Team C?
Option B: Result of head to head game between Team A and Team B on a neutral field?

When you have the luxury of having a neutral site game to look at between two teams with near identical records, you have to look at that. I am confident that the voters, when all is said and done on Saturday night, will look at the head to head game as the deciding factor.

Now, Texas has to beat A&M or we can get ready for the Cotton Bowl.

by the1austin on Nov 24, 2008 6:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well in only looking at the one game

The Red River Shootout. You are in theory saying the rest of the season doesn’t matter. Ryan Reynolds goes doesn’t go down, we win by 10+ and would be getting ready for KC. I know Texas won the game but I think you have to take into consideration, when comparing teams in a season like, every single thing that happened during the season.

Another way to look at it is, the OU and Texas teams now aren’t the same teams that they were on October 11. Oklahoma had a rough patch after Reynolds went down but finally adjusted and had guys step up as shown last Saturday.

Personally I think the two best teams in College Football are OU and Texas with Florida a semi distance 3rd and Bama down with USC and Penn St.

I think Florida is getting overrated because of past SEC dominance and this season as they beat crappy SEC teams everyone (ESPEON) thinks that they are beating regular SEC competition. That is just my two cents on the SEC

I have to admit though that this is one of the most fun and crazy season I’ve ever seen. You literally could make a case for 4-6 teams as the best.

Boomer Sooner!

Come check out FanIQ for your one stop spot for all sports

by Jubanator14 on Nov 24, 2008 7:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Are you two also thinking

we probably shouldn’t assume that OU,Tech, or Texas would just stroll into Arrowhead and beat Missouri?

They will more than likely have a huge home field advantage plus the fact that it would be their second straight game at Arrowhead. We really shouldn’t sleep on Missouri.

Boomer Sooner!

Come check out FanIQ for your one stop spot for all sports

by Jubanator14 on Nov 24, 2008 2:34 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Now there, you have made a good point.

I had lost faith in you after you threw out the “But we play OSU on the road” card. Mizzou at Arrowhead in the cold will be a tough out for any of the South teams. I completely agree. Just remember what happened to OU in the Darren Sproles Bowl. The Big 12 Title game should be a good one, regardless of who goes.

by the1austin on Nov 24, 2008 6:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Wrong

Find me a Longhorn who is cheering for Oklahoma State this weekend. There isn’t one out there because Texas Tech is playing Baylor on Saturday and should the Sooners lose in Stillwater it would be the Red Raiders and not Texas who travels to Kansas City to take on Missouri.

You only need to show up on BON for this. Many Horns fans think it’s in our best interest (or because they simply dislike OU and refuse to cheer for them) to cheer for OSU. They’d rather Tech go to the Big 12 title game because they know Tech is now out of the national title race, and there’s a better chance Tech goes down against Missouri than Oklahoma. So I already found a few here at www.burntorangenation.com.

“The more Texas fans try to paint the Red Raiders as a fraud the more they hurt their own case because that is the team that they lost to.”

You are repeating the mistake that I already answered in a previous post. I’ll repeat it here for everyone:

I’m merely pointing to the logical conclusion of your statement. Texas Tech wasn’t a "fraud" in the sense that they’re a bad team, but I would not count them among the "elite" teams in the country. There’s nothing wrong with pointing that out. It doesn’t make OU a bad team because they lose to a bad team [Colorado in ’07] on the road, and it doesn’t make UT a "fraud" for losing to Texas Tech on the road either.

Which you did not answer and seemed to agree with. Furthermore, I already answered your claim that this is a “two-team race” and explained why this is not entirely true any longer. Texas Tech is out of the national title race. The Big 12 race is still between three, only if Oklahoma loses and Tech wins, but voters know that their vote has huge implications for the national title. Thus, Horns fans, and many others, are calling for people to focus their eyes on these two elite teams, who clearly have cases for the national title, and compare their resumes over the season. In that regard, the neutral win in Dallas sure helps Texas. Implying that Texas fans are “pretending” that Tech doesn’t exist is simply inaccurate. We lost to them and we know we should not have, and it hurts. But we also know that they are now eliminated from the national title discussion and Texas and Oklahoma are not.

Here’s what you wrote (in agreement) to me:

I agree with in this

If OU loses Saturday night and Tech goes on to KC then no Big 12 team is going to Miami. My comment about the three teams is towards the Big 12 and not the BCS and the conference champion must be settled first.

As long as Tech has a chance to go to KC, and at this point I would say that they have a better chance than any of the three because OU has the toughest game on the schedule this weekend, then there are three teams in the race.

Thus you agree with Horns fans that the Red Raiders are no longer national title contenders, assuming there’s not a gigantic catastrophe in college football. And as I said before, Horns fans know about the Big 12 title being in the air right now. Nonetheless, especially since Tech resides a full four spots behind Oklahoma with only Baylor left in their schedule, they CANNOT win this three-way tie break. In fact, this is exactly why the SEC uses the BCS to merely eliminate the lowest ranking team in case of a 3-way tie; more often, you’re not getting #1, #2, and #3. You’re getting two teams that are within a hair of each other and an “outlier” team, who would be eliminated. Then you go head to head.

Sorry, but your post simply misrepresents the case Horns fans are making. In a three way tie in the Big 12 South, Tech has zero chance; they can only hope for an OU loss. Tech also has zero chance at the national title (or 0.01% chance). Contrast both of those statements with the situations facing the Horns and Sooners. Therefore, as far as the BCS rankings are concerned in deciding both the tie-break and the MNC, it is down to two teams in the Big 12.

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 24, 2008 5:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

+1

by the1austin on Nov 24, 2008 6:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Texas v OU v Tech

I am a Texas fan, and I have been discussing why Texas deserves to wint the tie breaker with other Texas/netural fans. So, I wanted to engage in a discussion with OU fans to get opinions from both sides. Also I think we all need to agree that if there is a tie in the BIG 12 South, then there really is no 100% clear cut winner. So, every team will have legitimate views on why they got screwed.

Ok, OU beats Tech @ Home. Tech beats Texas @ Home. Texas beats OU on a Neutral field. I think Texas had the best win out of the 3. What do you all think?

I also read a mention if OU beats OSU, then thats a true road win out of the 3. That is true but Texas beat OSU 28-24 at home, Tech beat OSU 56-20 at home; Most probably, Tech will have the best win on OSU b/c they killed them, unless OU beats the crap out of them too on the road.

If we look at another common opponent, OU beat Kansas 45-31 at home, Tech beats Kansas 63-21 at Kansas, and Texas beats Kansas 35-7 at Kansas; Clearly, Tech and Texas have better wins than OU on Kansas. But I don’t think that should be a negative for OU b/c they couldn’t beat Kansas as much as Texas and Tech beat them by. Just like the OSU game shouldn’t really factor into the merits of the 3 teams.

Ok, when you have 3 teams that beat each other, someone will have to be eliminated out of the discussion if it is warranted. Texas has done nothing this year to be eliminated out of the discussion, OU has done nothing to be out of the discussion; however, Texas Tech lost by 44 to one of those teams and it was a pretty bad beating they took; We are not saying people should forget our loss to Tech, b/c we lost to them in Lubbock in a great game. However, I feel like people are saying everyone should forget OUs loss to Texas b/c it happened early in the year.

Now, I will agree with OU fans that this is not a Texas v. OU thing, but its a Texas v. OU v. Tech thing; So, if thats the case, then why does Tech not deserve to win the tiebreaker over Texas and OU?? Is it b/c everyone has eliminated them due to their 44pt beatdown to one of those teams, their poor non conference schedule, etc.

Now, OU fans I have a question for you.. Why doesn’t Tech deserve to win the tiebreaker between the 3 teams?? I mean they beat Texas who beat OU, they beat Kansas by 42, they beat OSU by 36, etc.

You guys are saying Texas fans are quick to eliminate Tech from the discussion, but I think you guys are indirectly eliminating Tech from the discussion too b/c you also agree that they are the least deserving to go among the 3.

My view is when you have a 3 team scenario, you have to eliminate one of those teams if they deserve to be eliminated; Tech non conference schedule, their 44pt loss, and they got to play a home game essentially eliminated them from the discussion. So, it becomes a Texas v. OU debate;

Like I said, the 2 teams that get left behind will feel like they got screwed and I agree that there is no clear cut winner in the matter.

by memphizbell on Nov 24, 2008 5:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I don't feel that any of the three teams deserve to be eliminated simply because of their wins...

…over each other. The whole point of my post is that Tech should not be eliminated from the equation but that is what Texas fans want because the result would be head-to-head which obviously favors the Longhorns. On the other hand OU needs Tech in the fight because unless the Aggies pull off another Thanksgiving stunner then it has to be a three way tie to keep the Sooners in the fight.

Look, Texas needs OU, OU needs Tech and Tech needs Texas. Otherwise one school needs the other two to lose. There really isn’t a fair way to resolve this issue and it certainly isn"t fair to toss Tech aside.

Of the three schools guess which one has an actual road win over a ranked team? It’s Texas Tech! Kansas State was ranked #19 when the Red Raiders beat them in Manhattan. They absolutely deserve to be mentioned in this conversation.

by ccmachine on Nov 24, 2008 5:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Tech should be in any discussion

and they are getting dismissed by the amount of the loss and WHEN it happened (the old saying is it’s better to lose early then to lose late), but they should be any discussion for a National Championship, especially if they end up in KC and winning the Big 12 championship. In fact, if Tech wins the Big 12 and Texas sits at home, I believe that Texas should not be allowed to go to any National Championship, when there is a quality one loss team that beat Texas head2head. (OU went to the NC a few years ago, after losing to K-state in the Big 12 championship game, but that was different as the other team was USC…which plays in a conference with no championship game, and to compare apples to apples, OU and USC both had one loss)

Why not Tech in a three way for the Big 12? Quality of wins and the over-all resume on the season goes to Oklahoma. They beat TCU and Cincinnati, both top 10 teams, and the Bear Cats look to be BCS bound as winners of the Big Least. In fact it’s these 2 wins that I think puts OU over Texas as well. (never thought I’d be talking about TCU and Cinn as big wins)

Want to talk screw jobs…ask Utah. They beat TCU, BYU and Michigan on the road (when people thought Michigan would be good). they are undefeated, and Conference champions and have no prayer of playing for it all.

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Nov 24, 2008 5:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Nice point about Utah!

by ccmachine on Nov 24, 2008 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think so

You misunderstand how the BCS works if you think Tech has a shot in a 3-way tie. They’re currently ranked 7th with only Baylor to go. If all three teams win to preserve the three way tie, the Red Raiders are by far the third team. If all three lose to preserve the tie, they’re still the third. Under no circumstances do the Red Raiders go to KC in a three way tie. They still have a decent shot to go to the Big 12 title game, but that can only happen if Oklahoma loses.

“Why not Tech in a three way for the Big 12? Quality of wins and the over-all resume on the season goes to Oklahoma. They beat TCU and Cincinnati, both top 10 teams, and the Bear Cats look to be BCS bound as winners of the Big Least. In fact it’s these 2 wins that I think puts OU over Texas as well. (never thought I’d be talking about TCU and Cinn as big wins)”

Why does it go to Oklahoma? Texas beat them in a neutral field, beat Missouri (a superior team to both TCU and Cincy), and had a brutal four game stretch nobody else had. TCU and Cincy are NOT top ten teams. I have absolutely no idea why you would think so. OU also played Chatanooga and Washington, two of the very worst teams in all of college football which has hurt their SOS. Texas has the SOS edge for the moment according to virtually every ranking, so tell me again, why do you think the over all resume of the season goes to Oklahoma?

And nobody thought Michigan would be good, unless, to be frank, you were ignorant of what was going on in Michigan. They simply did not have the personnel to transition cleanly to RR’s system. Their bad season is not a surprise; in fact, Utah was only like three point underdogs against Michigan, mostly because it was at the Big House. You think if people thought Michigan would be good that Utah would be only three point underdogs? Didn’t think so. And don’t pretend TCU and BYU are Florida and USC or something. Utah deserves a BCS berth, but not a shot at a national title.

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 24, 2008 7:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What do the WHORNS not get?

THEY LOST! Yes they have a loss. THEY LOST! Yes they have a loss. THEY LOST! Yes they have a loss.

I had to repeat it the effin times because the Whorns are very hard headed. They sound just like Les Crybaby Mies when he cried ‘we only lost in overtime’. Show class or I will consider you types to be just like OSU and LSU fans. People with no class at all.

Oh now we hear that UT’s loss was a ‘good loss’. Watch a video of the playback. Texass got it’s but handed to them all game long. UT led for just over a minute of the game. Texas LOST the game in Lubbock.

by scarab on Nov 24, 2008 6:51 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

You are just as hard headed by trying to forget that OU also "LOST"

On a neutral field by 10 to the Team that is closest to them in the standings.

by the1austin on Nov 24, 2008 6:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Mysef and no other Sooner fan that I know forget we lost

we don’t cry about ‘losing on the last play’, one guy dropped an interception blah blah blah. Man up, you did have a loss to very good TT team. They are in the discussion period, or do you forget the whining you guys did after 63-14 or the 65 -14. I read the boards those years and there was plenty of it.

by scarab on Nov 24, 2008 8:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Repeating a fact 15 times does not a reasoned arguement make.

by pleaseplaykindle on Nov 24, 2008 6:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

learn to count. 3 times. Say it three time while looking in a mirror "Learn to Count"

by scarab on Nov 24, 2008 11:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you should look up the definition of hyperbole.

by jw4425 on Nov 24, 2008 11:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hyperbole

Scarab was making the point he only wrote it three times. Just because pleaseplaykindle wants to exaggerate Scarab’s original post to mock him doesn’t mean he shouldn’t defend himself. People prefer sound logic when writing football, lets not make this an english class.

by Boarder on Nov 25, 2008 8:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Strictly speaking

pleaseplaykindle did not accuse scarab of repeating something fifteen times; he merely pointed out the fact that repeating anything fifteen times doesn’t make it true, which may apply to scarab in spirit (“I had to repeat it the effin times because the Whorns are very hard headed”) but not necessarily in exact number. Thus, scarab’s response is irrelevant and completely misses his point.

Sorry, but the readers at BON love to joke around about gramm"e"r… :)

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 25, 2008 9:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hardheaded?

I await a good answer for you about my posts, in which I never, ever pretend we didn’t lose.

And drop the “whorns” crap. It just makes you look like an aggie.

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 24, 2008 7:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm definitely not an aggie, and no comments are pointed directy at anyone.

However many in the UT crowd on many many boards on the net are presenting the same whining arguments, just ike the okie state aggies do, just like Les Miles and LSU fans. Do not ever go discounting the loss to TT because UT never ever had that game in control. Watch the video of the compete game. Don’t want to be called ‘whorns’, man up and give the credit due where it belongs. Look for my posts on this and other boards. I don’t remember playing the excuse game when UT did beat OU.

by scarab on Nov 24, 2008 8:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

give credit where credit is due...

and stop arguing against a team that beat you by 10 points on a neutral field.

and come on, how many times have we heard (even on this thread) that if Reynolds hadn’t gone down the game would have gone differently. of course, there is no way to back this up. but texas can legitimately claim that if Gideon hadn’t dropped the interception, that would have been game. so i think there’s a more solid case to be made for the Horns, and even if there weren’t, please don’t argue that OU hasn’t made excuses, cause that’s BS.

by jw4425 on Nov 24, 2008 8:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

for example...

“Ryan Reynolds goes doesn’t go down, we win by 10+ and would be getting ready for KC.” – Jubanator14

by jw4425 on Nov 24, 2008 8:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

In my original write up right after the game

I gave all the credit to Texas. You guys were better physically and mentally that day. You beat us down in the trenches from about right around the end of the 3rd until the final whistle blew.

I have been on the OU/Texas rematch for the National Title since that game. I think they are the two best teams.

Boomer Sooner!

Come check out FanIQ for your one stop spot for all sports

by Jubanator14 on Nov 24, 2008 9:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I was just using this quote...

To point out that it’s not like OU fans don’t make what if statements and excuses. Mostly scarab is full of it.

by jw4425 on Nov 24, 2008 9:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

iiIii you , you are the whorn type

Read my post ingnorant whorn I said “we don’t cry about ‘losing on the last play’, one guy dropped an interception blah blah blah. " and "I don’t remember playing the excuse game when UT did beat OU.”

jw4425 cannot read and comprehend. He is a reactionary and has most likely posted somewhere that “we only lost on the last play”. And if he graduated from UT I am going to ask for a refund of the money I have spent the last 4 years for my daughter degree.

by scarab on Nov 24, 2008 10:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

what?

you can’t complain about losing on the last play cause you got your ass whipped the entire last quarter. i simply pointed out a parallel example of a sooner saying “if Reynolds hadn’t gone down we would have won by 10+”. stop being a twat.

and don’t misspell ignorant, it kind of turns it back on you.

by jw4425 on Nov 24, 2008 11:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"Don’t want to be called ‘whorns’, man up and give the credit due where it belongs"

And I failed to give OU credit… where? OU crushed Tech. It was impressive. It is doubtful that alone discounts the result in Dallas.

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 24, 2008 9:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you really do not have a brain do you?

I was referring to TT beating UT. and don’t give the whiny last minute crap. UT had the lead for 1:28. TT lead the rest of the game and completely handle UT. MAN-UP to the real facts.

by scarab on Nov 26, 2008 7:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I love it

OU and Texas fans fighting over Tech. Who would have thought? And what an Aggie has to bring to the discussion is beyond me.

by Tech92 on Nov 24, 2008 9:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

One of the big issues . .

I have with this entire shitstorm (and yes that’s what it is) is this quality of win or loss debate. You have 3 teams that, should they win this week, would all be 11-1: 3-3 against each other and an amazing 30-0 against everyone else on their schedule.

The idea that we’re comparing final scores simply to determine who’s the “better” or “more deserving” team is incredibly superficial. The idea is to win the game whether than be 3-2 or 70-3. Both are wins. Both count exactly the same in the standings. I’m curious when we got to the point that if you don’t score 50 points a game or blow teams out by 6 TDs, you aren’t any good. If Tech had wanted to lose by less Saturday, they could have (maybe gotten it into the 20s). They went for it on 4th downs. They didn’t kill the clock at the end of the half. This “resume” stuff is so completely out of hand it’s really scary. Alabama wins games by literally beating the shit out of you, but because they can’t score 50 points a game, everyone thinks they suck.

Texas fans, STFU about the Kansas game and how close it was versus OU. KU got a garbage TD with less than a minute left to make it a 2 TD game. That game was NEVER in doubt.

OU fans, STFU about Reynolds and the Texas game and the refs and whatever other excuse you might have. What killed you was the special teams TD that gave Texas life early in the game.

Everybody, stop arguing about the schedules. The differences are so miniscule as to be unworthy of debate. All 3 teams played a major (BCS) conference schedule. We’re not comparing the schedules of Ball State and these 3 teams here. Hell they have 6 or 7 games of overlap.

I’ve posted this before, but the fairest way to do this is to simply draw lots. It’s unbelievably harsh, but it is FAIR.

by DoubleB on Nov 24, 2008 9:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I understand the spirit of your post

But what do you expect? The fact is, we’re NOT drawing lots. The fact is, there is no playoff. Thus, we have to fight and yell and scratch for every .0001 point we can get.

Shrug. Might as well have fun with it.

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 24, 2008 10:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Case for OU: Why Tech Does Matter

I’m going to begin this by saying that Texas Tech has to be part of the discussion. I know that’s not universally agreed upon but consider the following: OU loses to O-State, Texas Tech beats Baylor and Missouri wins Big 12 Championship, Texas beats Texas A&M. Putting the Longhorns into the MNC Game over Tech would be the greatest travesty in the ten plus years of the BCS. Despite their humiliation in Norman, Texas Tech would have the same record as Texas, and hold the tiebreaker. In this situation, there is no legitimate argument for Texas playing in the national championship.
However if everything falls into place with the three way tie, this argument becomes moot. One can not use head to head to determine who plays for the conference championship. It makes no sense, its circular logic.
Texas beat OU, UT deserves to go. Texas Tech beat UT, TT deserves to go. OU beat TT, OU deserves to go.
For further reading,
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/If-someone-in-the-Big-12-South-has-to-be-snubbed?urn=ncaaf,124133

by SoonerDutch on Nov 24, 2008 9:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Of course

I am an OU fan.

by SoonerDutch on Nov 24, 2008 9:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It is not Texas who would be likely to jump Tech

But the likes of Penn State and USC as well, who are now ahead of Tech in the BCS.

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 24, 2008 9:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And that can be justified.

but I have heard Texas fans saying that this is their best shot to play in the national championship.

by SoonerDutch on Nov 24, 2008 9:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I misunderstood you first

I thought you said that Tech beat Mizzou, in which case Tech would still not make the MNC but others like Penn State would.

In actuality, Texas has a good shot if Missouri beats Tech in the Big 12 title game (which, for them to make it there, requires an OU loss to OSU). Tech may still arguably be below Texas in the BCS rankings to begin the Big 12 title game anyway. Texas has a strong computer standing and thus, if human voters don’t try a lot of funny business, there’s a very small chance that either USC or Penn State jumps Texas in this situation. Texas is in Miami. You can go to Burnt Orange Nation for a more complete analysis on this issue.

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 24, 2008 10:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No, I am talking about Tech beating Missouri

Then Texas has no legitimate reason to jump the Red Raiders. I agree that Penn State and to a lesser extent SC would have a much better case than either Texas or Texas Tech in that situation.

by SoonerDutch on Nov 24, 2008 10:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Reason or not

It would probably happen. The voters don’t cast a ballot for who they think should play in the national championship game. They cast a ballot for who they think the top 25 teams are and the BCS formula takes care of who plays in the National Championship Game. Would it be a travesty if UT goes to Miami instead of Tech, even though Tech is the Big XII champ and beat UT head-to-head? That certainly would be a popular sentiment. Would it change the fact that such an occurance is quite likely? Absolutely not. We can shift this into a “BCS Sucks” discussion, but given the system, it is what it is.

by littlevisigoth on Nov 25, 2008 10:02 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"Then Texas has no legitimate reason to jump the Red Raiders."

I MIGHT agree with you here, but in strictly BCS terms, that is still possible even if the Red Raiders win the Big 12. It is doubtful the human voters would allow it, but if they voted Texas sufficiently high enough and Texas’ computer strength held, it might happen. But it’s unlikely.

If you meant that, then you simply misunderstood what these Texas fans were saying. Nobody thinks that’s our best shot at the MNC; we would want Mizzou to beat Tech (or Oklahoma).

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 24, 2008 10:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

oops

Response to SoonerDutch.

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 24, 2008 10:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Let's bring Tech back

Ok, lets bring Tech back into the discussion.

So, why doesn’t Tech deserve to win the tie-breaker? Like I said earlier, OU fans are quick to point out Texas fans want to discredit Tech but you guys are indirectly eliminating them too if there is a tie.

Actually now that I think about, the only way to be fair is to send Tech to the BIG 12 title game so Texas or OU isn’t screwed.

Are you guys willing to let a team you beat by 44 at home go to the BIG 12 title game? B/c that’s how we feel about a team we beat by 10 on a neutral field go to the BIG 12 title game.

by memphizbell on Nov 25, 2008 1:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Tech

Ok, I have a simple question for you guys>>

Does Tech have any chance to win a 3 way tie-breaker over Texas and OU if they all finish with 1 loss?
- Based on the current BCS rankings, I would say Tech has 0% of being ranked above Texas and OU in the BCS. Please let me know if you think otherwise

For there to be a 3 team discussion, all 3 teams should have some chance to win the tie-breaker scenario.. Tech has absolutely no chance to win the tie-breaker unless OSU beats OU:

So, why should a team that has no chance to win the tie-breaker scenario be included in determining the tie-breaker scenario?

by memphizbell on Nov 25, 2008 2:14 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

because...

it’s technically correct to do so and it helps the sooners case. doesn’t have anything to do with logic.

by jw4425 on Nov 25, 2008 8:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It is a 3 way tie

it’s not going to be neat and easy and clean. In the big 8 days in the case of a 3 way conference champ they let the Orange Bowl, (the destination of the Big 8 champ) pick which team they wanted.(actually they had a nice long list of tie breakers, but they were usually a mess)

But this is about 1) who represents the South in KC and 2) who because of that has the best shot of going to the National Championship game.

Going head to head with texas and Oklahoma as the only criteria favors Texas…and it why the Sooners need Tech to win against Baylor Saturday. If it was JUST head to head and a 2 way tie, it’s a different argument, which is why all the Texas fans want to dismiss Tech from any discussion. But it’s not…which sucks for ya’ll, but facts are facts…and it’s a 3 way messy tie.

But to answer your question…yes if they picked TECH to me it would be just as fair or unfair. No matter how it shakes out, there will be 2 teams that have a case as to why they should be in the Big 12 championship game representing the South.

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Nov 25, 2008 9:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

The only thing that would bother me as a Tech fan is if we somehow make the Big XII championship game, win it, but don’t move up beyond number 3 in the final BCS rankings. If Texas continues to win, it would be yet another BCS sham to have UT play for all the marbles since they would have a). lost head-to-head to Tech…b). didn’t win the Big XII.

Now, if OU wins Saturday, Tech is totally out and I’d have no issue with that at all. It would have been settled on the field as far as it relates to Tech. UT would have a semi-solid argument about going ahead of OU at that point, but I still firmly feel that to play for a national title, you need to win your conference.

I know that as the system is currently set up, there are a lot of goofy computer/voter combinations that render that argument weak. But the fact is, if you can’t win your conference, you shouldn’t have the privilege of playing for the crystal football – I don’t care how impressive your overall resume is. To me, it bastardizes the entire concept. The BCS suits state that the regular season and conference titles ARE the playoff…Fine. Then treat it logically as a playoff. You don’t win the conference, you don’t play in Miami.

by Tech92 on Nov 25, 2008 10:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Caveat

If OU and UT both win out, UT plays in the conference championship, so the above also applies to OU going ahead of whomever wins the conference.

by Tech92 on Nov 25, 2008 10:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with that

Then treat it logically as a playoff. You don’t win the conference, you don’t play in Miami.

Totally, except each conference either should have a championship game, or not have a championship game. This discrepancy is really not fair and is a caveat to your statement. A few years ago, OU lost to K-state in the big 12 championship game, OU had only that one loss, and still went to the BCS Championship game….USC screamed they won their conference, and OU did not. But that was apples to oranges…..apples to apples OU had one conference loss tied for their conference, as did USC.

I would also add in the so called “non-BSC” conferences. I think the real screw job is Utah. If they said the NC was Utah vs. Alabama, I couldn’t argue it. They did what they were suppose to do…win out. Do I think OU or Texas or Tech or USC could beat Utah 6 out of 10 times? sure….but that’s subjective. Objective..they are undefeated, conference champions, and have wins vs 2 other top 20 teams, as well as Michigan and Oregon St.

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Nov 25, 2008 11:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

This season has truly played out in the worst way possible for BCS supporters. There isn’t a playoff during the regular season because there aren’t conf championships across the board. Exactly, right.

Either OU or UT and less likely, Tech, are going to get the royal treatment in either a really good or a really bad way. If UT makes it to the conf championship and wins, I strongly feel they deserve the shot at the national title. Same for OU. But if it ends up being Tech who plays for the Big XII, I don’t think OU or UT have a good argument – in my book. Then we should be looking to PSU, USC, et al to fill the last slot against the Alabama/Florida winner.

by Tech92 on Nov 25, 2008 12:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Last thought

And my last thought is if Tech goes to the Big XII championship, that would mean neither UT or OU won a division, much less a conference.

by Tech92 on Nov 25, 2008 12:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

OU would obviously be out.

But Texas would be in the MNC. 11-1 with a far superior resume than the next best 1 loss team (USC). Tech would finish at about #4 in the BCS.

by the1austin on Nov 25, 2008 1:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

This whole thing is such a whip…it almost takes the fun out of it because there’s really not a clear cut way to win the national title. Even undefeated Utah has a good argument. When we get into the business of comparing losses, you know there’s something inherently wrong.

I would prefer the old system of just playing it out. Play the bowls and then leave it up to the AP and USA Today polls to decide things. Sure, people would get screwed, but they get screwed now – and the old way is much less complicated and shadowy to fans. Shoot, there’s a guy (Jerry Palm) who now makes what I imagine is a very good salary trying to unofficially sort this out every year for people like us. What a retarded system of crowning a “champion.” Why the NCAA doesn’t step in and do something about this is beyond me.

by Tech92 on Nov 25, 2008 2:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Again I agree

I found the old way FAR superior. Under the old system, we almost never got a conference champion or even a top 5 match-up as the top teams went their own bowls. And that was the complaint. We didn’t know if an undefeated Alabama team was better then a one loss UT or OU…and we argued afterwords, but the AP and UPI/Coaches figured out a champion.

But it made all the bowls interesting, and something to play for. Going to the Orange Bowl was huge and still a prize, even if OU was 9-2 and ranked #12. Same with the Cotton Bowl for the SWC. Now no one cares, the only game that matters is the NC, and the only 2 teams that matter are the 2 that happen to get in it.

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Nov 25, 2008 7:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

For Tech to go

that means OU lost on Saturday, and yes 2 loss team would be out.

But would you be ahead of USC? Probably, but I could see voters giving USC votes as they would be a conference champ.

Again, the screwed team would be Utah.

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Nov 25, 2008 7:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Could we see pollsters splitting as in 2003?

Alabama is tough. I think (and hope) they beat Florida. But let’s say Florida wins the SEC (with one loss).

If Texas is selected to play Florida for all the marbles and loses, then Florida is #1 in the coaches poll automatically and wins the BCS; if OU plays in the Fiesta and knocks out USC, would OU (or Texas for that matter, if a reversal occurred) still contend for the AP title? Perhaps not likely given AP love of Florida, but the gap between Florida and OU could narrow if OU delivers a strong victory in Stillwater.

Texas and OU would really benefit, I think, if Alabama is upset by Auburn, and then Alabama beats Florida! Could Texas and OU, under this scenario, finish 1,2 in the BCS rankings?

by inocybe on Nov 25, 2008 11:27 AM CST reply actions 0 recs