BCS Standings, Week 14: Longhorn fans, time to riot

[El Turco]

not sure how Oregon st gets to go to Rose Bowl if USC loses their last game if they break 3 way tie by highest BCS ranking. regardless, ACC and SEC uses that method(conferences that are set up in similar fashion as Big 12) and since you can only use that method between teams that are within 5 spots of each other, you know you are comparing teams that are in the same level. seems more efficient to me.

i am having a hard time blaming Texas for their schedule. Missouri game pretty much cancels out OU s TCU game since Missouri only has one fewer loss in a tougher conference. i dont think many people thought Cincinnati would be better than Arkansas at the time of scheduling, so that is just a bad luck on their part. also, Texas is the only team that did not play a home game when it comes to games between tied teams. imo, gap between two SoS is not large enough to override the Texas' head to head win over Oklahoma in a neutral field.

[GSWbandwagon]

i said the last tiebreaker, not the first or second or etc. if usc loses, there is a 3 way tie but it doesn't reach that last tiebreaker. the first tiebreaker is h2h, which is useless b/c they'd all be 1-1 against the rest of the tied teams. but they then start going down the rest of the conference standings seeing how each of the 3 did against the 4th place, 5th place, etc teams until one or two of the three are eliminated. once one is eliminated it reverts to a 2 team h2h tiebreaker. oregon's loss to cal would eliminate them, leaving osu and usc. osu's h2h win would take the conference for osu.

the big12 similarly has the bcs ranking very low (probably last) on their tiebreaker criteria list.

if they went to a bcs unless they're within 5 spots of each other then h2h thing, tt would still be alive as they're within 5 spots of the others.

no one controls their conference schedule. you do control your ooc schedule. texas couldn't change which b12 teams they played and where. they could control their crappy ooc schedule. oklahoma scheduled 3 solid or better opponents (one ended up being crap but oklahoma couldn't have forseen that when it was scheduled) and one cupcake. texas went for 1 team expected to have a pulse and 3 cupcakes. both teams also controlled what happened on the field and both managed to lose once, neither in embarrassing fashion.

[CJ_18]

can somebody please make the Bama-Florida thread?

[El Turco]

just because it is low in tiebreak list doesnt necessarily make it right. ACC&SEC s within 5 spots criteria applies to top two of the three tied teams, not the outlier third one. whole point of the method is eliminating the weakest link and comparing the two best teams to each other.

you cant control your conference schedule but it applies to your BCS chances which is probably the reason USC won t be playing in the title game instead of Florida.even in ooc, both Texas and Oklahoma scheduled one solid BCS conference teams with Cincinnati and Arkansas(didnt pan out obviously). i would put Washington in a cupcake category since they dont have a winning season since 2002 and went 8-26 between 04-06 which is-presumably-is the time period they decided on schedule. that is as big of a cupcake you can get in a BCS conference. Texas probably could ve done better to match the Oklahoma's TCU game but then again Rice wasnt really a bad team this season.

regardless, Oklahoma has the best and Texas has the 4th best SoS this season and you can even argue Texas' schedule has been tougher than SoS shows since they had to play four top-20 teams back to back. in my eyes Oklahoma s minor SoS advantage doesnt make up for their neutral field defeat against Texas and it would be unfair to punish Texas due to Philip Fulmer failures or Brian Kelly's success.

[GSWbandwagon]

the uw-oklahoma series started in 2006. these are usually scheduled at least a few years in advance. uw was arguably screwed out of a spot in the national title game in 2000 and 2004 was its first losing season since 1976. i don't know exactly when it was scheduled (cal and ohio state have a 2012/2013 series that was scheduled a couple years back, though ohio state has tried to back out of it, so i know that these can be scheduled several years in advance) but i'm guessing uw was expected to be at least a competitive bcs conference team. probably at least a 7-5 in a major conference type of team.

anyway, i think we're talking about different things. i was referring to texas complaining about what happened and that they are losing b/c of two things that were in their control so next time either win your games or schedule better. you're talking about who was actually more deserving, but basing it partially on something texas didn't control (their conference schedule).

personally, i think they're both about equally deserving. moreover, they both (along with tt) knew the rules and had no complaints before this. there was nothing shady done to alter the outcome. i wouldn't have had a problem with either texas or okla getting the nod, but forced to choose i'd go with okla because they tried to schedule 3 legitimate ooc games while texas only went for 1.