Chip Brown Thread

[oudavid1]

Simple question, why did texas think they deserved to be ranked higher than OU in december 2008?

45-35 right?

Ok, now head to head dosnt mater orrrrrr Chip Brown has lost all credibility as a journalist.


Anyone disagree?

......Besides LeRoy

[Soonermagik]

This is an interesting argument. I think * had an argument that year, but they lost late in the season. It caused a 3 way tie and the rules forced them out. The thing is, they controlled their own destiny, so they shouldn't have cried like they did. Plus, they agreed prior to the season directly to the 3 way tie rule.

I'll say the same thing if OU happens to lose. OU controls their own destiny and if they slip up and fall it's on them. I hope this team realizes the opportunities that are in front of them.

[oudavid1]

Well i dont really care about 08, i just assume * likes the ehad to head argument except when we beat them head to head.

[Sooners78]

I could very well see a 3-way-tie happening again this year. * gets OSU in Austin, and we go to Stillwater. If the home team wins in both of those games, and we all win out otherwise, it will be a 3 way for the south. OSU would probably be ranked the highest in that situation because they will have beaten OU in the last game of the season. So, OSU would win the south. And, once again, * will be crying, "but we won the head-to-head with OSU."

Hopefully, we take care of business so this doesn't happen.

[TMcGee86]

I could very well see a 3-way-tie happening again this year. * gets OSU in Austin, and we go to Stillwater. If the home team wins in both of those games, and we all win out otherwise, it will be a 3 way for the south. OSU would probably be ranked the highest in that situation because they will have beaten OU in the last game of the season. So, OSU would win the south. And, once again, * will be crying, "but we won the head-to-head with OSU."

Hopefully, we take care of business so this doesn't happen.

Except that overall record is one of the tie breakers and UT would be out b/c of their loss to UCLA.

[rekamrettuB]

Except that overall record is one of the tie breakers and UT would be out b/c of their loss to UCLA.

That would then put Ok State in the Big XII title game...BUT the BCS rankings tiebreaker is number 4 in the pecking order and number 5 is overall record (winning %). Basically the only way overall records gets involved is if none of the 3 teams are ranked in the BCS.

[Sooners78]

This is an interesting argument. I think * had an argument that year, but they lost late in the season. It caused a 3 way tie and the rules forced them out. The thing is, they controlled their own destiny, so they shouldn't have cried like they did. Plus, they agreed prior to the season directly to the 3 way tie rule.



Yes, they had an argument, and Texas Tech and OU both had the exact same argument. I understand what you're saying, but because of the 3 way tie, a tie breaker had to be used. Once that tie breaker was used to crown a champion, the arguments should be over. Instead, :mack: politics and succeeds in getting ESPN to take his side. Disgusting! I'm so glad we don't have a coach that makes excuses!

* whining to change the rules after the fact was pathetic. In their argument, they tried to leave Texas Tech out of the equation and make it all about OU and Texas and their head to head matchup. While the SEC uses that rule (I think), the Big 12 doesn't.

Whorns schedule included 3 weak teams: Fla. Atlantic, UTEP, and Rice. OU only had 2 weak non conference opponents: Chattanooga and Washington. That made the difference in the BCS rankings, and gave OU the tie breaker.

Sorry about the rant, but that whole 2008 head to head bull@rap just sickens me. What a bunch of pansy wusses! "But, but we're Texas." :mad: Hook 'em

Magik, I'm not criticizing you're post because you did clarify your statement. I'm just saying Texas really didn't have an argument after the tie-breaker system did it's job. That system was agreed upon by all of the big 12 schools.