View Full Version : where would the big 12 be
OUHOMER
9/22/2007, 03:05 PM
without OU and texas... sad I tell ya. maybe one of the worst conferences in the country. :(
Boomer.....
9/22/2007, 03:16 PM
and UT is helping much this season.
Sooner98
9/22/2007, 03:16 PM
It would definitely be approaching Conference USA territory.
Mark_of_Tulsa
9/22/2007, 03:34 PM
Well who ever the 3rd best coach in the B12 is, probably isn't even in the top 30 in the nation.
Texas isn't impressing anyone this year.
The rest of the world is going to gripe about our patsy schedule pretty soon and, rightfully so I'm afraid.
Boomer.....
9/22/2007, 03:38 PM
We will win out and that is all we can do. Hopefully someone above us will lose.
CatfishSooner
9/22/2007, 04:04 PM
Go F'n Sooners!!!!
The rest of the world is going to gripe about our patsy schedule pretty soon and, rightfully so I'm afraid.
Where was the rest of the world when SC was by far the only thing the PAC 10 had to offer? Oh yeah, they were bitching about getting SOS taken out of the BCS.
Be careful what you ask for, you just may get it.
Texas Golfer
9/22/2007, 07:21 PM
Where would the Big 12 be without OU and UT? Probably the Little 10. They couldn't use the Big 10 because that's already been taken.
SoonerBOI
9/22/2007, 07:29 PM
without OU and texas... sad I tell ya. maybe one of the worst conferences in the country. :(
I agree:(
Where would any conference be if you took out their best two teams?
Nate Johnson
9/22/2007, 08:56 PM
Where was the rest of the world when SC was by far the only thing the PAC 10 had to offer? Oh yeah, they were bitching about getting SOS taken out of the BCS.
Be careful what you ask for, you just may get it.
As far as I can see there are only a few teams that seem to have their stuff together this season. OU is one of the few on that list. The rest of the teams are so flaky, it looks to me like there is no clear "order". So in that sense, strength of schedule for the top five is irrelevant because all the other teams are so inconsistent.
XingTheRubicon
9/22/2007, 08:58 PM
Where would any conference be if you took out their best two teams?
The SEC would be South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Georgia, Kentucky and Auburn.
OKC-SLC
9/22/2007, 09:01 PM
Where would any conference be if you took out their best two teams?
The SEC and Pac 10 (I just threw up in my mouth) without their top two teams would be better than the Big 12 less OU and UT.
The Big 11 would be horrible this season without its top two (?Wisc and PSU)
Nate Johnson
9/22/2007, 09:04 PM
Where would any conference be if you took out their best two teams?
As long as we're being hypothetical (philosophical?): What do you think of the possibility that the Big 10 champ may have a loss to Appalachian State?
Worse than the Big 2+Little 10?
meoveryouxinfinity
9/22/2007, 09:09 PM
As long as we're being hypothetical (philosophical?): What do you think of the possibility that the Big 10 champ may have a loss to Appalachian State?
Worse than the Big 2+Little 10?
Who lost to Wofford today.
Nate Johnson
9/22/2007, 09:13 PM
Who lost to Wofford today.
Where the hell is Wofford?!
But, yeah, that's my point!
meoveryouxinfinity
9/22/2007, 09:17 PM
Where the hell is Wofford?!
But, yeah, that's my point!
Spartanburg, South Carolina???? :confused:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wofford_College
Soonerus
9/22/2007, 09:22 PM
without OU and texas... sad I tell ya. maybe one of the worst conferences in the country. :(
I totally disagree, the Big Ten the Second (Big 12 without OU or Texas) would be just fine, all of the institutions are great schools and have also had their fair share of atheletic successes...while OU and Texas add a lot on multiple level the Conference would be just fine without them, let's just hope it never comes to that...I am extremely proud to be in relationship through congerence affiliation with every schoool in the Big XII...very proud !!!
StoopTroup
9/22/2007, 09:37 PM
Be not afraid...
Boldly go into the night...
The SEC and Pac 10 (I just threw up in my mouth) without their top two teams would be better than the Big 12 less OU and UT.
The Big 11 would be horrible this season without its top two (?Wisc and PSU)
My point is every conference would be at a substantial loss. Isn't this painfully obvious that it's not deserving of a thread? With or without their best teams those conferences are better than the Big 12.
As long as we're being hypothetical (philosophical?): What do you think of the possibility that the Big 10 champ may have a loss to Appalachian State?
Worse than the Big 2+Little 10?
I think that's a a big reach and go with it because this is bizzaro college football year.
Crucifax Autumn
9/23/2007, 12:32 AM
It's definitely a bizarro season, but I think it'll shake out soon.
I actually agree with a lot of the discussion that polls shouldn't occur until October. It's kinda stupid to be ranking teams based on imaginary perceptions before the season and after a game or 3.
That's the one thing the BCS really has going for it. No pre-determined BS rankings - unfortunately, that very same system is flawed due to its own reliance on previously mentioned BS polls.
We really need a better way, but one that leaves the "every game is a playoff" factor in place.
GreenSooner
9/23/2007, 12:50 AM
We really need a better way, but one that leaves the "every game is a playoff" factor in place.
Even "every game is a playoff" is a myth.
Only if, at the end of the season, two and only two teams remain undefeated is (was) every game a playoff. And even that only applies to certain conferences. Try telling Boise State that every game is a playoff. And even in the BCS conferences, if three or more teams are undefeated at the end of the season, all but two turn out not to have played a single "playoff" game. And if there are one or fewer undefeated teams, it turns out that some team's loss wasn't a playoff either.
The BCS system is totally arbitrary. It functions pretty well if there happen to be two teams that are clearly better than everyone else. Otherwise it's an annual cluster****. And every regular season game is not a playoff.
Crucifax Autumn
9/23/2007, 01:07 AM
Oh, I agree with that and I think we need at the very least a +1 system, though a +2 of some sort would be even better.
I do however agree with soem of what has been discussed i other threads about the "old" system being better so far as if team a beats team b and team c beats team d then team c is champion, etc.
I think if things don't go as I hope they will, this season could be the one that reveals exactly how much of a cluster**** the BCS system can be. It's entirely possible that there could be 4 highly deserving no loss teams, at which point the BCS crumbles.
OKC-SLC
9/23/2007, 09:25 AM
My point is every conference would be at a substantial loss. Isn't this painfully obvious that it's not deserving of a thread? With or without their best teams those conferences are better than the Big 12.
I completely agree with you, SNP. EVERY conference is 'top heavy' to a degree. Just like every team, every corporation, every classroom...
Indeed, to say the Big 12 is bad if you get rid of OU and Texas is akin to saying that nachos would be bad if you got rid of the chips and cheese.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.