"Eyes of BCS Are Upon Mack Brown"

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Im sure many of you have seen this but here we go anyway...


Coach Mack Brown, how are you gonna vote?

That's the 17 million dollar question that Texas coach Mack Brown might have to answer to. Brown just may end up casting the deciding vote on who gets to play in the Big 12 title game - and by extension, the BCS national championship game.

How? As this has been rehashed many times now: Brown has a vote in the coaches poll whereas Oklahoma coach Bob Stoops does not. The coaches do not have to reveal their ballots next week, but that's when the tiebreaker for the Big 12 South will be decided, via the BCS standings. (We're assuming that Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma are going to win as favorites, please stop flooding the Guru about all the other probabilities - I'm WELL AWARE of them.)

If Brown drops Oklahoma from where he had them last week (presumably in the top 5, but he's not telling) to 10th, 20th or even entirely off the ballot ("Oops, did I forget to put OU on the ballot? That must've been an oversight, darn!"), it will have a profound - if not deciding - impact on the BCS title picture.

Based on the Guru's projections - assuming the human voters stay mostly static with their ballots - this is how the BCS standings will look should Alabama defeat Auburn in the Iron Bowl:

1. Alabama, 2. Oklahoma (.940 computer, .9258 overall), 3. Texas (.960 computer, .9209 overall), 4. Florida (.840 computer, .8955 overall).

If Brown leaves Oklahoma off the ballot, OU will end up at .9208 - yep, you guessed it, 1/10,000th of a point behind Texas and voila! Hook 'em Horns to the Big 12 title game! Even if he just nudges the Sooners to 10th, a tiny bit of movement in Texas' favor elsewhere in the polls will do the trick just as well.

You know, like calling to ask a favor from a friend or something. Yes, we're just getting warmed up.

The coaches' poll is such a conflict of interest cesspool, it's amazing how the whole season just might come down to who puts whom where in their ballot. No fewer than seven Big 12 coaches have a vote in the coaches poll, including Brown:

Art Briles (Baylor), Gene Chizik (Iowa State), Dan Hawkins (Colorado), Mike Leach (Texas Tech), Bo Pelini (Nebraska) and Gary Pinkel (Missouri).

Four other coaches with teams in Texas or Oklahoma also vote:

Todd Dodge (North Texas), Todd Graham (Tulsa), Gary Patterson (TCU) and Mike Price (UTEP).

Here's where the intrigue begins. Brown undoubtedly has a few guys on his speed dial if it comes down to the nuclear option Saturday night: Chizik is a former assistant, Dodge is a former Texas quarterback and San Jose State's Dick Tomey was an assistant in between head jobs at Arizona and SJSU and helped Brown win a Rose Bowl in 2005.

But Stoops, who probably now regrets giving up his vote after last season, has a formidable coaching tree and allies himself. Both Leach and Pelini were his assistants, and he can probably count on Steve Spurrier, his former boss at Florida whose own son Steve Jr. tutored under Stoops.

Then there are a few with their own murky agendas: Urban Meyer, whose Florida team is no lock for a top 2 spot even if it wins its final two games, may want to make sure to keep BOTH Texas and OU down. Cal's Jeff Tedford, who no doubt remembers how Brown screwed his Golden Bears out of that 2005 Rose Bowl berth, might decide it's high time to exact a little sweet revenge.

And this is just scratching the surface. I'm sure there are other relationships that run beneath the obvious; and don't forget the Harris poll, whose 114 voters are full of former players, coaches and administrators, whose allegiances run the gamut.

That's why the secret ballot (for both coaches and Harris voters) is a terrible idea. Using the BCS standings to break conference ties is just icing on the crappy cake.

A lot of this intrigue, however, might melt away - at least for this week - if Auburn upsets Alabama. This is how the BCS standings should look if the Tigers take their seventh straight Iron Bowl (again, assuming the ballots stay static - slotting each team one spot higher):

1. Oklahoma (.970 computer, .9625 overall), 2. Texas (.980 computer, .9542 overall), 3. Florida (.890 computer, .9388 overall).

This way, the Sooners will have more of a security blanket against voter shenanigans. And Florida will creep a little closer to the top 2 spot. Of course, this sets up a potential all-Big 12 BCS championship game with a rematch between Oklahoma and Texas.

We'll have to leave that topic for next week. One controversy at a time, please.

My question: What are the qualifications needed to vote in the coaches poll? Why did Bob give up his vote?

[Blues1]

My Guess is Coach Stoops Got fed up with all the BS that goes on....!

[BoulderSooner79]

This is exactly why I hate the BCS ranking being a tie-breaker for a conference decision. I'm sure whatever criteria would be used would not be satisfying, but it should be completely in control of the conference. And this is not a knock on Brown - personally, I think he'll take the high road and rank OU (but below UT of course). The big12 has no one to blame but themselves for this.

The best line from above :

"That's why the secret ballot (for both coaches and Harris voters) is a terrible idea. Using the BCS standings to break conference ties is just icing on the crappy cake."

[Knippz]

We were still ranked behind Mizzou last year, after beating them twice. Reason enough?

[GHOB SOONER]

Why can't we tweek the BSC again. Take away all confernce guaranteed spots. If any conference doesn't fall out in the top 8 teams then they don't get to represent. Do not limit number of entrants by each conference. If one conference has any number of teams in the top 8 then all would be eligible. Then seat #1 against #3, #2 against #4 - Then have the winner of those games play for the BCS NC. #5, #6, #7, & #8 would not have a shot at the BCS NC.

[humblesooner]

Why can't we tweek the BSC again. Take away all confernce guaranteed spots. If any conference doesn't fall out in the top 8 teams then they don't get to represent. Do not limit number of entrants by each conference. If one conference has any number of teams in the top 8 then all would be eligible. Then seat #1 against #3, #2 against #4 - Then have the winner of those games play for the BCS NC. #5, #6, #7, & #8 would not have a shot at the BCS NC.

This is probably the one component that will not ever change. In order for all schools to buy in to the BCS initially, this was a must. The mid majors got an auto bid (for the cash infusion) and the minor conferences are given a guarantee of at least one in if they finish in the top 12. Again, it is all about the cash.

[JLEW1818]

Mack wont do it

[IronHorseSooner]

Mack wont do it

The more I think about it, and as much of a Mack basher that I am, after much thought, I don't think he would do it. He's already talking the talk of defeat this time of year- "we need a playoff." UTerus fans are critical of him as not being the type to back his team when he needs to do so. Yes, we know about the Cal scenario, but I think he learned his lesson over that. From those who know him, to include the King and Coach Stoops, they say he his good and honest. Now, some of his minions (Chizik, Dodge, Tomey, Robinson-if he still has a vote) would. Some of those other "State of Texas" coaches (Patterson, Price) are more likely to vote for OU, including Patterson who saw for himself just how good the Sooners were and said it himself. The only two Big XII coaches who would vote for Texas would be Brown and Chizik. Living down here in FLA, most FLA fans who I speak with will tell you that Meyer would more likely vote for OU, just because that a game against us would be a better showcase for his program. We also forgot about guys like Jim Leavitt at USF who coached with Bob at KSTATE and who is good personal friends with Leroy Selmon and Bob. Big Ten area coaches are more likely to vote for us because of Bob's ties there, and Pac-10 Coaches still don't like what Mack did to Cal (more than what Bob and Boren said about Pac-10 officials). The SEC coaches are more likely to rank both lower to set up an all-SEC championship, which favors neither team. Bottom line, the die has been cast by the human components of the poll. They would have to go against almost every tenet that out there to raise Texas and drop us. More likely is the scenario where we gain support. If all three Big XII South co-leaders (which is a term that Whorn fans don't understand right now) win, we go. Whorns need to be Baylor fans in a big way!

[colleyvillesooner]

I don't think he'd do it.

If he did, it would get out. Anonymous or not, that's a good story, and it would get leaked.

[stoopified]

I don't know the guy but I would like to think he is a man of integrity But I used tothink that about Bobby Blowden too.

[nytehorn]

No way ANY coach would do that! Like the above poster said, anything THAT obvious would leak out, and destroy that coaches/schools credibility. Like most of the posters on here, I am positive a little tweaking here and there does happen though. But just think about it.
I am for a playoff, as most everyone else is. But last night, I had a hell of a time staying connected to hornfans, and soonerfans, because of the talk about who should be ranked where. Because it matters SO MUCH! In a playoff format, neither of us would care that much to discuss the rankings; we would just be waiting for the seedings. JMO.

[meoveryouxinfinity]

Here was my breakdown on the coaches:

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125228



This is all just guessing and using wikipedia to make connections that might or might not be there. Feel free to add or tell me where I'm wrong. Of course if we lose to OSU I will feel really, and I mean REALLY stupid for wasting all my time trying to dissect this. So, BEAT OSU!

Texas:
Mack Brown, Texas
Bobby Bowden, Florida State (Bowden hate)
Tommy Bowden, Clemson (Bowden hate)
Gene Chizik, Iowa State (UT coach)
Howard that old drunk, Florida Atlantic (too drunk to vote)
Les Miles, LSU (Let 'er rip)
Urban Meyer, Florida (I'm betting they don't want to play OU)
Gary Pinkel, Missouri (Same)
Tommy Tuberville, Auburn (i'd hate OU if I were him)


Oklahoma:
Bret Bielema, Wisconsin (played at Iowa.. so maybe?)
Mike Leach, Texas Tech
Tyrone Willingham, Washington (he saw us first hand)
Mark Dantonio, Michigan State (grew up in Ohio, coached at Youngstown)
Butch Davis, North Carolina (born in Oklahoma, went to Bixby HS, was an Oklahoma HS football coach, coach for OSU)
Todd Graham, Tulsa (born in Texas but played at East Central and coaches in Tulsa)
Jim Leavitt, South Florida
Steve Spurrier, South Carolina
Jim Tressel, Ohio State (Youngstown coach.. Ohio connection..?)
Gary Patterson, TCU (will help them if we are higher, I presume)
Bo Pelini, Nebraska
Steve Kragthorpe, Louisville ('03-'06 hc at Tulsa...maybe..???)
Shane Montgomery, Miami (Ohio) (Ohio native... maybe?)


most of the rest were tossups or i was just too tired to look it up.

[StoopTroup]

You know....

The BCSGuru basically is calling Mack Brown a conniving piece of crap.

I understand that there is a possibility that what he's saying could go on....but I'd like to think that the Coaches in this Country had more scruples than the Sports Writers. I say this as should OU win at osu and the Guru's scenario play out...everyone will be suspect that many of the Coaches played games with their votes.

If I was a Head Coach in the NCAA and thought that selling my soul for a shot at cheating my way into playing for the MNC...would that win be as sweet?

I might be tempted...but I'd rather win it legit than have the thought that I treated another Colleague unfairly. I know these things can happen...I just think Mack Brown didn't get to where he is today by being dishonest. Lucky...yes. Dishonest...no way.

JMHO

[auto]

I am not a huge fan of Mack, but I don't think you could question his ethics.

[soonerhubs]

I personally think a fair litmus test is the looking into past coaches polls from the last couple years.

Here's last year's, and I have to say Mack Brown voted in a fair manner. (I know he knew it was going public.) It's interesting to see the conference loyalty though between coaches. Look at Brown's and Stoops' votes regarding other teams in the conference.

[cvsooner]

Well, it is a valid criticism. As the vote isn't public, until the last one, he or anybody could vote however they choose this week and change it completely for the next week.

I think the real point here is there's no good system, and if anything, the coaches poll shouldn't be included in the BCS standings. Heck, you'd be better off with the sportswriters or somebody else, than the coaches.

[bluedogok]

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2499748
BTW - if you do a Google search for "BCS sniff test" the Dodd article comes up first, the SoonerFans thread comes in third.

That link is to the thread about this article: which has this quote in it:

Dennis Dodd article: Keep coaches out of BCS process: It's fairest way (http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/11128258/rss)
Nov. 23, 2008
By Dennis Dodd
CBSSports.com Senior Writer

NORMAN, Okla. -- The most honest man in the stadium Saturday night was Mike Leach.

After a crushing defeat, the last thing Texas Tech's coach wanted was to discuss poll issues. But that was the obvious question for the only man in the building with a coaches poll vote.

Which team, he was asked, deserves to be ranked higher, Texas or Oklahoma? Either not knowing or not caring about the implications, Leach quickly said, "I would put Oklahoma ahead. They beat us and they deserve it."

Texas remained ahead of Oklahoma in the BCS standings released Sunday on the strength of having beaten the Sooners six weeks ago. That was despite the human polls which have it flipped -- Oklahoma over Texas.

You can see how this might be a problem to some folks. Two rivals, chasing a Big 12 and national championship. One separated from the other by .0084 of a point in the BCS (Texas .9209-Oklahoma .9125). One having beaten the other but both involved in a three-way tie in the Big 12 South. It is becoming obvious that tie could be broken less by play on the field and more by whoever shouts the loudest. Or worse. It could be decided by petty jealousies or long-held grudges.

We don't know for sure because the coaches poll is and has been largely a secret ballot. Maybe that's why Bob Stoops gave up his vote last season. Maybe not. He'll have to risk leaving the vote up to the six other Big 12 coaches in the coaches poll.

Leach risks incurring the wrath of every Longhorn with access to a keyboard or worse, the coach's cell phone number. Believe me, it's out there and someone industrious enough can get his number.

Leach truthfully answered the question that is going to rage at least until the end of this week. His colleagues won't be as forthcoming. As we face perhaps another BCS meltdown, Saturday's win by Oklahoma pointed up the biggest fallacy of the system.

The coaches should have nothing to do with the selection process. It stunk from the moment American Football Coaches executive director Grant Teaff unveiled the coaches' involvement in the BCS in the summer of 1998 at a downtown Chicago hotel.

We questioned then why the coaches would have a hand in awarding themselves and their schools millions in bowl money -- and the ancillary contract raises and bonuses that go with it. We should question it now.

Leach at least was up front Saturday, revealing a small part of his ballot. The 61 coaches who comprise the coaches poll that is overseen by the AFCA are only required to release their final ballots to the public after the regular season. That's a little bit like alerting an athlete that he is going to be drug tested.

That small step came about only after the Associated Press dropped out of the process a couple of years ago. The AP decided, nobly, it didn't want to make news, it wanted to report it.

AP still crowns a champion each year but doesn't have a direct hand in awarding schools millions in bowl booty. Led by the stubborn Teaff, the coaches consider their opinions sacrosanct -- and mostly secret.

There is a reason most fans trust a con man more than the BCS. At least one-third of the process is transparent as fog.

What was to keep, for example, a coaching friend of Mack Brown's from voting the Longhorns No. 1 and Oklahoma 10th on Sunday? That alone should be considered outrageous. What if a coaching buddy of Bob Stoops ranked Texas 25th?

Missouri's Gary Pinkel has a small hand in deciding who he wants to face in the Big 12 title game. The Tigers already have clinched the North Division. A three-way tie in the South would go to the highest-ranked BCS team.

"We don't have a hard and fast line (for flagging ballots)," said Craig Bennett, administrator of the coaches poll for USA Today. "Each ballot is subject to the sniff test."

The newspaper does its due diligence. If a ballot looks irregular, the paper contacts the voter. If a problem still exists, it will call the AFCA to intercede, Bennett said. Sorry, but that's kind of like allowing Enron to do a self-investigation. What would motivate the AFCA to make public a Stoops' coaching buddy voting Texas 25th?

Nothing. To be fair, USA Today does make available a "range" of votes each week. (For example, stating that Texas was ranked anywhere from second to 25th).

All that doesn't preclude a group of rogue voters from manipulating the final BCS standings. Think it couldn't happen? The AFCA already manipulates the poll, mandating that its voting members select the winner of the BCS title game No. 1.

That has always been an attempt to falsely legitimize the BCS and the coaches poll. Whatever happened to free will?

Do I think funny stuff is going on? I think the overwhelming majority of voting coaches are honest and upstanding. I also believe coaches aren't immune to being human. They can hold grudges and have petty jealousies.

A couple of weeks ago, the coaches poll was the only part of the BCS that had Oklahoma ahead of Texas despite the fact that the 'Horns had beaten the Sooners. After a week of outcry from the Texas camp, the coaches swapped the order.

There was speculation that some coaches, somewhere, had it out for coach Brown. Texas' head man, though, is one of the most liked coaches in the profession. More likely, a large portion of the 61 didn't pay attention to the Texas-Oklahoma score when filling out their ballot.

Questionable voting is a longstanding tradition in the coaches poll. Who can forget 1997 when the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift, awarding him a national championship a month after the coach announced his retirement?

Perhaps they felt guilty. A few weeks earlier, Nebraska had dropped from No. 1 to No. 3 after beating unranked Missouri.

With a wink, Steve Spurrier for years gave his No. 25 slot to Duke, the school that gave him his first head coaching job.

New Mexico State's Hal Mumme last year listed Hawaii No. 1 on his final regular-season ballot. The Warriors finished No. 10 overall. Penn State's Joe Paterno admitted years ago to having an aide cast his ballot. Ohio State coach Jim Tressel refused to vote two years ago after his team beat Michigan, basically removing himself from a highly-sensitive process. Actually, that wasn't such a bad thing. Like Leach, at least he was honest.

[nytehorn]

JMO, but I see it this way. The coaches aren't really going to concern themselves with the poll, until the last 2 or 3. I figure a grad assistant does it for them during the season, and they may or may not tweak it some. The last 3 weeks, ESPECIALLY if they are in the running, the coach does the poll. I don't believe coaches MEAN to lean, but most all will do so with lower ranking conference members. Mack may not vote Texas #1, but he MAY vote Mizzou, Tech, and OK ST higher than they should be.