So.... I'm not that sympathetic to baylor's plight. But rules are rules. And the Big XII is backtracking on its rules. Assuming baylor and TCU win out... The tiebreaker clearly states that Baylor is the conference champion. The Link Now bowlsby is backtracking. please read: The Link So what the heck??? They are changing the rules midstream? Would the committee really put TCU ahead of Baylor if Baylor is proclaimed the Champion of the conference? I don't think so. But bowlsby is backtracking and saying they'll be co-champs. If i'm baylor i'd be pissed and threaten lawsuits. Rules are rules. Thoughts?
I for one can't "bear" it. Bowlsby acts like he just came out of "hibernation" with that statement. I think they should join the SEC where there is never any doubt about integrity.
The playoff system is designed to select the 4 best teams in the opinion of the committee members. "Championships won" is definitely a factor but not the only or overriding factor. Strength of schedule, common opponents and head-to-head competition are other factors. The Playoff Committee also determines final rankings that affect many of the bowl matchups. Regarding the BigXII, the rules are here: Playoff Representation The conference rules are set to determine the playoff representative for the conference NOT determine a conference champion in case of a tie. It appears to me that a tie is a tie, meaning co-champs. The conference representative(s) may be going to other bowls NOT the actual 4-team playoff games.
Hornswoggler. your OWN link states this... If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative. Its ONLY if three or more are tied that the rules in place mention the committee.
The Big XII Champion is not necessarily the best team in the conference when the season ends. Unless a Big XII team is undefeated, I don't have a problem with the College Football Playoff selection committee deciding who is in in the playoff from the Big XII.
The committee choses four teams for the playoff. Big 12 champ isn't guaranteed anything. So very sorry fArt Briles!! Baylor hasn't beaten ksu yet. And my crystal ball says they won't. Hey I'm not losing sleep over Baylor, ok.
IF baylor blows out KSU this weekend then they have an argument. If the don't then they need to STFU. If Baylor didn't lose to a very mediocre WVU they wouldn't have to worry. F Baylor and F Briles. I hope KSU shuts them up on saturday.
I hope TCU and KSU win this weekend. I dont think KSU will win, but maybe it will go into 36 OT's in a driving rain storm. That being said, I hope all the teams that are ranked higher than bailer win. What ever needs to be done to keep those peckerheads out is what needs to be done.
Orangechipper I agree with your comment but maybe I wasn't clear in the point I was trying to make. The conference has rules to determine its representative to the "playoff" pool which includes more than just the Top 4 two game playoff. It should be written that the representative is for playoff and bowl selection. The representation rules don't declare one of the tied teams as conference champion. I believe Bowlby is correct in using the term co-champs. Nowhere in the conference tiebreaker rules is champion even mentioned. Separately, the College Football Playoff Committee, which is not part of the BigXII conference, looks at the factors I mentioned along with others to determine the ranking of teams which determines the Top 4 playoff matchups and impacts other bowl selections, specifically the bowl/conference tie-ins. I was trying to provide specific information that impacted the Playoff Committee's decision and related to Bowlby's comment.
This is such a great thread. Most of us have been patiently waiting for this since 2008. Yes Karma is certainly a ***** and it is alive and well. Merry Christmas Art Briles and Baylor. Thank you for the nice gift to the Longhorn family. Wishing you the same or even worse Christmas that we had in 2008. Go K St
If as I expect Wisconsin beats Ohio State and Baylor wins against KSU the bears will be in the playoff. There's always next year.
Also, it seems that if FSU, Alabama, TCU, and Oregon winn, that should be enough to keep baylor out. tOSU winning would guarantee it.
No way the conference champ boasting overrides the 4 best teams mission. Scenario (hypothetical, but possible): 3-loss Mizzou team beats an undefeated Bama in the SEC champ game by a FG. Bama drops and the top 3 seeds become filled by deserving 1-loss teams. It's now between a 1-loss Bama and other 2-loss teams for the last seed. Would you exclude Bama in favor of a 2-loss team? Mizzou, the SEC champ is already excluded with 3 losses. No way you'd boot out a 1-loss (non-SEC champ) Bama team that lost by a FG in their champ game...in favor of a 2-loss ACC champ. It's not the same situation, but clearly conference championships don't always decide who the best 4 teams are. And Baylor is not better than TCU regardless of the title you give them. f**k Briles!
FYI, Briles on Mike and Mike this morning said his take is it's the American Way to settle things in the ring, man to man. Winner decides the best and gets the prize. Really ********? Was that your take in 2008? This only gets better and better watching his last chance at a title shot get ripped away before we take back our seat at the table. What a POS.
Alabama would be a 2 loss team if they lose to Missouri. They lost to Ole Miss. The most recent rankings were a setup to allow Ohio State in with a win. The committee will cite Baylor's win over a #9 KSU and their head-to-win against TCU as the reasons they make the playoff.
Wow, if any of these 'conspiracy' theories were true, this would be the biggest scandal in NCAA history. How does a Commissioner or the committee control the outcome of a game to allow the preferred teams in the playoffs?
The committee thinks TCU is better than Ohio State, which is a defensible position. The committee also thinks Ohio State is better than Baylor, which is defensible as well. What would you guys have the committee do? Promote Baylor past TCU, leapfrogging OSU as well? Demote TCU below Baylor, arbitrarily giving the nod to OSU over TCU? Head to head is a major factor when only two teams are in consideration. When there's a wedge team, head to head is less important. Not because it should be less important, nor because I want it to be less important, but because simple logic forces it to be less important. I don't see why so many people are hung up on that.
NFL wildcard tiebreaker rules only use head to head if it's between only 2 teams that played one another... OR...one of the multiple tied teams defeated or lost to ALL the other teams. In the last scenario they would either win the tiebreaker outright or be disqualified from it. The point is they don't even consider a head-to-head win unless it applies across the board. This very well may be the case this season in the NFL. Dallas beat Seattle, yet didn't play Detroit. Seattle didn't play Detroit either. However, if all 3 teams are tied at 10-6 when the season ends, Dallas will most likely be left out as they currently have 2 more conference losses than both. So the Cowboys win over the Seahawks doesn't mean dick in that scenario without playing Detroit also. Just saying, head to head does not apply to multi-team tiebreakers on either level if one or more teams didn't play the others.
For all the hatred of Briles, this thread shows that Texas fans are actually saying that Briles' logic was correct (after all, Florida was the "wedge" that year to many voters). All the arguments you guys are making for 2014 TCU work as arguments for 2008 OU, only even more so since there is no equivalent team of Tech this year. It'd be one thing if you were just saying "Briles was wrong in 2008, and he deserves to have those same incorrect standards applied to him now", but what you're saying instead is "those standards should be applied to Baylor-TCU now because they are the correct standards". If that's the case, then they were correct in 2008 too, and OU-Florida was the right choice for the MNC game. The funny thing is this board generally has believed in head-to-head enough that we don't even discard that position when it favors Texas, only when it disfavors Baylor. In 2002 hardly anybody was saying we should have won the South over OU (since our loss to OU was a good loss while OU's loss to 6-6 aTm was a bad loss). Hopefully KSU beats Baylor and renders this all moot.
How does Baylor jump OSU, when they are bombing Wisconsin with their third string quarterback 31-0 in the second quarter if that continues? Getting hosed from an unexpected direction.