Wednesday, December 3, 2008

OU, Tech, & Texas

The recent Big XII controversy seems like smoke and mirrors to me. Why ESPN and Kirk Herbstreit especially would lobby so hard for Texas, makes no sense either. It is funny that those claiming that Texas was cheated by the system are failing to look at the whole story.

OU lost to Texas by 10. Texas lost to Tech by 6. Tech lost to OU by 44. Those are the 3 scores that are most important in this whole scenario. All 3 of them lost to each other. Just because Tech got blown out by OU does not eliminate them from consideration for the South title. Tech is the team that is getting hosed in the controversy. They beat Texas without controversy and should be considered for the BCS bowl based upon what Texas has been claiming is the most important factor in deciding such matters, head-to-head.

Neutral field has also been a hot topic, but why has no one mentioned that OU was dominating the game before their star defensive player left the game? If Ryan Reynolds would not have torn a knee ligament, the score would have been different. Texas’ loss to Tech can be blamed on a failure to execute by the true goat(s) of their season, Curtis Brown and/or Blake Gideon.

Concerning letting BCS rankings determine the division champion. It makes total sense and is the smartest way to handle a 3-way tie. Why? It puts the team with the best chance of winning a national championship in a position to win a national championship, which is the ultimate desire of every major conference. The only other fair way to determine a champion in a 3 team tie scenario is to look at the point differential between common opponents. In this scenario, OU would easily have won the South as well.

Now a special note to Texas fans and the rest of the whiners out there: Heed Mack Brown’s words (after they blew their season by choking at Tech,) “We need to be classy in defeat and give them credit for what they did.”

1 comment:

Robin said...

I don't have a dog in this hunt, so I can comment somewhat objectively. I don't have a problem with the BCS rank determining the rankings. I do have a minor beef with the way the BCS computers compute the rankings (and the same critique would apply to a point differential tiebreaker). I don't like systems that encourage teams to run up the score. This whole style points thing is stupid and needs to go. It rewards poor sportsmanship and gaming the system. The BCS should do more to minimize it. And if the Big 12 were going to use some other sort of tiebreaker, I'd suggest using some combination of Big 12 South record, record against common opponents, record against ranked opponents, etc, well before using point differential.