Discussion in 'College Football & the NFL Draft' started by gary, Dec 6, 2008.
OU loses to Mizzou would be the best chance.
I can't see OU losing to Missouri such that Texas backdoors its way into the title game.
All the teams with one loss have only themselves to blame. One or two of them will get lucky and be ranked high enough to play for the Title, but other teams that are on the outside looking in should just look back at the loss that caused them to be in that situation.
I can see how Texas has themselves to blame for beating the team ranked one spot higher than them.
Damn them beating them head to head.
(Not a UT fan for the record)
How convenient that everyone who makes that argument forgets about the loss to Texas Tech; the lowest ranked of Texas, OU & Tech.
Who is ranked close together? Texas (3) and OK (2). If it had been OK and TT then yeah OK should be on top due to head to head.
How convinent that when a team beats you it counts for nothing because you beat someone else who isn't in the discussion and is ranked 7th.
The NATIONAL picture isn't debating the three, it's debating TWO of them. One of which lost to the other head to head.
Only way to settle it is head to head. Let them play it out. Unless you lose to them then some other line can be used.
So what are they supposed to do? Keep Tech at #2 even thought it lost by 40 points? Just wanting to know how you would rank them.
The problem is that when you lose, you drop. Oklahoma did. Texas did. And Tech did. Tech just lost late.
Unfortunately for Tech it came down to Texas and Oklahoma. And unfortunately for Texas the voters dismissed their head to head win.
Who can go to the Azucar Bowl?
Agreed. Also how many times do you hear people say "I wish we could have them settle it on the field" when respond to "which team is better?" We got them to settle it on the field and now they don't care.
Another point would be that all teams lost on the road, but Texas won on the road at a neutral field. Tech and Oklahoma won at home.
It's not a head to head argument and it's only convenient for UT homers to make it so because of their loss to Tech. Tech has the same record as OU and UT and are thus in the discussion.
It's funny that by the very parameters UT homers think makes Tech irrelevant (rankings), UT is irrelevant.
Dude I'm not a UT homer. I went to U. of MD and the Air Force. I could give a rats arse about UT. It's the principal behind it.
There are only really 2 teams we're talking about here. They both lost early - too bad for TT that they lost late. We know it sucks but it is head to head.
Two teams, one ranked behind the other w/identical records, one beat the other. Hello? Does this not make comman sense? The better team was already decided between those two.
Tech is irrelevant because they lost by 40. UT lost in the last 30 seconds. There is a huge difference there. I promise you, if UT had lost to Tech by 40 points, they wouldn't be third in the country, and wouldn't have an argument for being in the Big XII Championship.
I'm not saying that Tech isn't getting robbed. They are IMO one of the 10 best teams in the country, and absolutely deserve a BCS spot. But you can't lose by 40, hobble past Baylor, and still be considered in the discussion.
I wasn't talking about you specifically being a UT homer, but UT homers in general who make the argument.
That being said, you can't sit here and say that TT is out of the discussion because they are ranked lower than UT and OU and then turn around and complain that OU is going to the Big XII Championship because they are ranked higher. That's simply ridiculous.
I'm not saying UT fans don't have a gripe; they do, and a legitimate one. But there's three teams with identical records and each have lost to one of the others. Two teams are going to get screwed and it happens to be TT and UT.
Get over it.
I just find it funny how fans of each team would happily endorse the others' argument if it made their case. To expand upon my earlier post that had UT lost by 40 in Lubbock they would be out of the picture, What if things had broken as such?
UT still beat OU by 10
Tech beat Texas by 40.
OU beat Tech on a last second dropped interception and went on to an uninspired victory over OSU.
In such a scenario, it is VERY likely that UT and Tech would have swapped spots in the rankings. As such, each team would be making these arguments:
Texas' hypothetical argument (Tech's argument today):
Tech's hypothetical argument (OU's argument today):
OU's hypothetical argument (Texas' argument today):
Oh, so you want to go down the "who finished off the season the strongest" road?
58-35, 62-28, 66-28, 65-21, 61-41
BTW - It was OU who put that 40 point beating on TT. I like how TT loses credit for the loss but OU doesn't gain any.
I agree and that's pretty much my point.
Of course OU gained credit, as I said, it is the crux of their argument:
Texas lost to Tech.
OU beat Tech by 40.
Look, I am not arguing that OU is undeserving. I think the one team with no business there is Mizzou, frankly. But it isn't as if Texas had an abominably bad finish to the season. Their one loss was to a top 5 team (#2 at the time IIRC) on the road. Other than that they played great down the stretch (and they didn't even need to pad their stats to do it).
Tech played their way out of contention IMO. Just as Texas would have had they finished so poorly. They clearly showed that they do not belong in the NC game. Neither Texas or OU has shown that so far.
And as I said, I do think Tech deserves a BCS bid. They are IMO a top 10 team and clearly better than BC/VTech or Cincinnati. They just aren't one of the best two. They showed that.
Separate names with a comma.