If OU makes it and UT does not

[mathman]

I think UT deserves it because they proved it on a neutral field but there is a rational argument to be made for OU. ie that in a 3 way Big 12 tie they essentially played the same tough schedule as UT and Tech BUT ALSO scheduled and beat quality teams like TCU and Cinncinati both who are highly ranked and competitive for conference championships. (If you want quality scheduling you've got to give them credit for a quality win). Plus they were dominant in a Division Championship level game. But the way I see it-Tech disqualified itself from any consideration even though tied in the standings. So it comes down to a straight UT/OU comparison and UT won that argument on the field.

There is no doubt that UT deserves a BCS bowl. Not arguing that point at all. I merely said I hope they get screwed out of it. And I do. For some reason StallionT wanted me to give evidence of why I wanted that to happen.

[Stallion]

but see since the deciding tie breaker is likely to be BCS ranking then you can and SHOULD forsake the regional Big 12 perspective and simply apply a National Championship perspective. Which Big 12 South Team deserves a BCS bid from a national perspective? Tech disqualified itself from a national perspective. UT beat OU on a neutral field. UT gets the bid.

[HB Pony Dad]

I think UT deserves it because they proved it on a neutral field but there is a rational argument to be made for OU. ie that in a 3 way Big 12 tie they essentially played the same tough schedule as UT and Tech BUT ALSO scheduled and beat quality teams like TCU and Cinncinati both who are highly ranked and competitive for conference championships. Plus they were dominant in a Division Championship level game. But the way I see it-Tech disqualified itself from any consideration even though tied in the standings. So it comes down to a straight UT/OU comparison and UT won that argument on the field.

And Texas Tech beat Texas and all three have the same W-L so if you give UT a higher ranking than OU, logically you should rate TT higher than UT...

Thank the Dear Lord it is all a MYTH!

Anybody for a real playoff?

Don't want a playoff. Thanks

Why Not?

[StallionsModelT]

mathman,

I was just making sure you weren't using any kind of logic in keeping Texas out of the national championship. Clearly you are not. You wanting to keep them out b/c you hate them is your deal. Its people that are trying to justify Texas getting left out that I'm talking about.

[HB Pony Dad]

but see since the deciding tie breaker is likely to be BCS ranking then you can and SHOULD forsake the regional Big 12 perspective and simply apply a National Championship perspective. Which Big 12 South Team deserves a BCS bid from a national perspective? Tech disqualified itself from a national perspective. UT beat OU on a neutral field. UT gets the bid.

Still illogical because Texas lost to TT and OU pounded TT so TT has just a valid claim as either.

Besides SMU covered against TT so we look better Nationally

[mathman]

but see since the deciding tie breaker is likely to be BCS ranking then you can and SHOULD forsake the regional Big 12 perspective and simply apply a National Championship perspective. Which Big 12 South Team deserves a BCS bid from a national perspective? Tech disqualified itself from a national perspective. UT beat OU on a neutral field. UT gets the bid.

But you know that's not going to happen, don't you? I think OU and UT will both win big next week. But the ole computer is going to stick it to the longhorns on SOS.

[EastStang]

Everyone in Lubbock will be praying for an upset in Stillwater. If that happens then Tech is the Big XII South winner and will face Mizzou in the title game. What happens to the BCS after that who knows.? Would UT go despite not being conference champs? Or what happens if UT goes to the title game and loses to Mizzou? Then does OU jump up to the BCS despite not being conference champion? I love watching the drama of all this. You have Utah undefeated. You have USC with probably one loss sitting there. You will also have PSU with one loss. Florida and Alabama will have to face each other in the SEC title game and one of them will get to go to the National Title game. But in the Big XII if the South Champ loses to Missou, then it might open things up for OU, UT, TT, PSU and USC. Whatever happens, somebody is going to scream. And I love that.

[SmooBoy]

[George S. Patton]

I've gone back and forth on this, and I just don't see where a playoff really makes a difference.

Yes, I'll used the anit-playoff argument that it devalues the regular season. While everybody loves the NCAA BB tournament, few really pay attention to the regular season until the conference tournaments start. Me, PonyDoh, XTC and a few others do. But for the most part, people aren't watching the games.

From mid-October until the first week of December, USC fans care about what Texas does when they used to care less. Last Saturday, Texas fans were OU fans. All of the anti-Big 10 people were worried about Penn St. until three weeks ago.

Mid-October through early December IS your playoff. The conference champions are getting their bid. But won't touch the title game.

And the hype of the race of this team or that team getting into the playoffs would not hold its value like the BCS system does.

I've heard the Villanova 1985 argument. The reality is so many things would have to break right for 4 weeks for that to happen. The odds are longer in football than in basketball.

And the two teams that play for the title play 16 or 17 games? I don't think so. Whose to say the caliber of game is going to be top notch. It's likely not going be very good because that's an NFL schedule.

I know the money is big but we're talking about 18-22-year old kids whose bodies are not as developed as 25-30-year-olds and can handle this.

And if you do that, you have to change the recruiting schedule, where December is still an important month for on-campus visits, you'd also have to change the signing date and potentially the May evaluation period.
There's a trickle down issue here.

The only time where the computer system was potentially messed up was the year Auburn went undefeated and was denied. Essentially, we've had the game we've wanted and the national champion was appropriately crowned.

Yes, I know people were ticked about Ohio St. the last two years, but they didn't win the game, so the matter was settled.

In this era of the BCS, I have yet to hear the argument where the WRONG team won the national title.

And if it turns out OU goes to the title game, then so be it. But Texas also knows it better lay the wood to A&M because if it doesn't, it knows the door is wide open on Saturday in Stillwater.

Again, this is my opinion.

[mathman]

Everyone in Lubbock will be praying for an upset in Stillwater. If that happens then Tech is the Big XII South winner and will face Mizzou in the title game. What happens to the BCS after that who knows.? Would UT go despite not being conference champs? Or what happens if UT goes to the title game and loses to Mizzou? Then does OU jump up to the BCS despite not being conference champion? I love watching the drama of all this. You have Utah undefeated. You have USC with probably one loss sitting there. You will also have PSU with one loss. Florida and Alabama will have to face each other in the SEC title game and one of them will get to go to the National Title game. But in the Big XII if the South Champ loses to Missou, then it might open things up for OU, UT, TT, PSU and USC. Whatever happens, somebody is going to scream. And I love that.

I love it too. And whatever the worse possible outcome is, I hope it happens. Then all the double talk by the BCS bigwigs will start.

[EastStang]

Talk to the people at Auburn, at Oregon, at USC. They'll tell you the wrong teams were in the final and thus the wrong team won over the past 7 years. That's about 40%, And last year was such a wild ride with WVU one play away from going to the title game. That would have been a real joke.

[George S. Patton]

USC had no argument from a couple of years ago. Not the Texas game. But others. If they wanted to become a dynasty like they think they are, then they should have beaten Texas. Well, they didn't.

Oregon's is argument was completely manufactured. That's BS and they know it.

I don't want a playoff, and that's that.

[ponyfan84]

Patton:

I agree 100% with you. I am very anti-playoff for the reasons listed and the following two reasons:

1) These are college kids. Juggling classwork and a rigorous footballs schedule is unfair to them. If you can't decide the #1 and #2 teams in the regular season, something is wrong. Your team didn't make it? Tough sh-t. Better luck next year. Like PAtton said, it always works out for the best.

2) A playoff will kill the bowl system and all minor programs. Seriously, it's the same 10 teams every year out 119 playing for major BCS bowls. OU, USC, Texas, Florida, LSU, Ohio St., etc.. The BCS means a lot more to them than most of the other schools, ESPECIALLY the mid-majors like SMU. What happens if there is a playoff? Other bowls suffer. They drop bowls, attendance is low so money is lost, and nobody outside the school's fans care. So where is the incentive to play? Say SMU goes 8-4 during the year of a playoff, only to get shut out of a post season game because there aren't any. All that for nothing? Bowls may not mean a lot for most people, but for the schools, the host city and die hard fans like myself who watch most bowl games, it means the world. What I'm trying to say is that loss of bowls = meaningless seasons for the other 100+ teams who typically don't have a shot at a major bowl game each season. Bowls are a reward for a good season, even if it's the Emerald Nuts Bowl, it's still a sense of pride towards those schools playing.

[HB Pony Dad]

In this era of the BCS, I have yet to hear the argument where the WRONG team won the national title.

USC had no argument from a couple of years ago. Oregon's is argument was completely manufactured. That's BS and they know it.

In 2003 USC was No.1 in both polls at Seasons end, and gets effed by the computers which rank an OK team that lost it's conference championship to K State and a one loss SEC/Saban hyped LSU over them!

LSU allegedly won the 2003 BcS National Title after that 2004 Sugar Bowl farce.

So indeed the WRONG team was crowned NC!

[ponyfan84]

Also I want to add this:

There is a controversy now for who makes the top 2 for a NC appearance. But what about when your team misses the playoffs all together? There will just be controversy their too. Some 11-1 team will get shafted for a 10-2 team due to some lame excuse, and that that 11-1 team will be [deleted]. Or there are two 10-2 teams competing for the last spot. Which one gets it? why not the other one? That's just adding another argument right there.

And say your team DOES make the playoffs, only to lose in the first game. Will you be bitcihng then? Probably. Say UT goes 13-0, #1 seed, only to get upset by #8 Penn State in the opening round (it's college football, it could happen), then all we'll have is UT fans [deleted] about how their whole season was for nothing and there should be NO playoffs.

Don't you see why the current system makes it so exciting?! Lose 1 and you're more than likely done. Each game is a playoff, and if your team loses then man up and take it instead of making excuses. The NFL is so boring because 9-7 is good enough for a playoff spot, only to lose in the first round. Why bother? In college, you have to earn it. You have to be perfect for a shot at the NC.

Bottom Line: No playoffs.