PonyFans.com

Does anyone else think that part of the Baylor/TCU snub had to do with the fact that they are small privates without large national followings like ND, and are relative newcomers to the modern upper echelon?

I have trouble believing that the committee would have snubbed UT or OU.

If UT and OU both finished conference play with 1 loss and UT won the head-to-head with OU I promise you UT would be named conference champ. I've never heard of any league not using head-to-head as a tie-breaker.

LA_Mustang wrote:If UT and OU both finished conference play with 1 loss and UT won the head-to-head with OU I promise you UT would be named conference champ. I've never heard of any league not using head-to-head as a tie-breaker.

That exact situation happened in '08 and Ou was rewarded to the conf title game and natl championship

I thought they showed the rules on TV for the Big 12 last night and the #1 item of separation if two teams tied was head-to-head.

It would have been interesting. let's say Texas was TCU and owned a convincing win over Minnesota as a barometer game, but that OU had beaten Texas and like Baylor had no respectable non-conference wins. Under those circumstances, we might still have seen Ohio State trump the Big XII but it would have been a LOT more controversial than the decision to snub Baylor and TCU was. This committee knew whoever got left out was going to be angry, but Baylor and TCU together still have a fraction of the students/alumni/fans that Ohio State has so this, to me, was a no-brainer

Pony ^ wrote:

LA_Mustang wrote:If UT and OU both finished conference play with 1 loss and UT won the head-to-head with OU I promise you UT would be named conference champ. I've never heard of any league not using head-to-head as a tie-breaker.

That exact situation happened in '08 and Ou was rewarded to the conf title game and natl championship

That year was different. There was a 3-way tie between UT, OU, and Tech. They all beat each other so they used the BCS standings as a tiebreaker.

Topper wrote:Does anyone else think that part of the Baylor/TCU snub had to do with the fact that they are small privates without large national followings like ND, and are relative newcomers to the modern upper echelon?

Yes.

Sure.. but as i posted elsewhere, the B12 threw Baylor under the bus by their co-champions ruse. By rule, Baylor was the champion, and the B12 signaled lack of faith by the ruse. Baylor knew it yesterday (watch coaches'' interaction with commissioner)... TCU needed Baylor to lose, even though they were the "better" team.

"After Baylor grabbed a share of its second conference title in a row with a 38-27 victory over No. 9 Kansas State on Saturday night, Briles acknowledged having a somewhat brisk conversation with Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby on the podium in the middle of the field during the trophy presentation.

Despite the much-repeated ''One True Champion'' slogan for the only power-five conference with a round-robin schedule and no championship game, Bowlsby has publicly said that Baylor and TCU (both 11-1, 8-1 Big 12) will be presented as co-champions to the playoff selection committee even though the Bears beat the Horned Frogs 61-58 on Oct. 11.

''Don't say one thing and do another, that's my whole deal,'' Briles said. ''If they had said from the get-go, co-champs and head-to-head don't matter. I'm OK with it. ... I'm not obligated to him. I'm obligated to Baylor University and this football team.''"
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/petty-help ... ncaaf.html

You can't tell me that the playoff committee didn't consider tv ratings. And nationally, Ohio state gets more eyeballs than tcu.

obviously they did consider eyeballs. But if the B12 doesn't support their champion, why should someone else?

"Sometimes you have to differentiate between who you present as one and two," Briles said. "That was kind of the gist of the conversation. Don't go public and say we're going to presented as co-champs.

"I certainly [believe it hurts Baylor]," Briles continued. "There's no question about it. It makes it easy on the committee people in there [to choose someone else]."

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/tensions-b ... ncaaf.html

Big 12 obviously just tried to promote tcu and Baylor simultaneously to try to get either in the playoff at the expense of Baylor

SMU2007 wrote:You can't tell me that the playoff committee didn't consider tv ratings. And nationally, Ohio state gets more eyeballs than tcu.

Hell yes they did but they will never admit it. OSU "body of work" is no better than TCU