Is anyone in favor of changing the tie-breaker rules for next year? If so, how?
I'm not sure I like using total points scored, because that favors RUTS.
How about "fewest points allowed? Hard to pile it on when on defense.
Or, games played later in the year could count more. That would settle the issue in nearly every case.
BTW, choosing a plan for next year just because it would have favored OU this year is pretty stupid.
.
At least I'm not Jersey Sooner.
The only thing that would make whorn fans happy is if 3 teams tie, the whorns automatically go. As far as changing the rule, if both Tech and us win tomorrow, which is not a lock by any means, I think this is the 1st time this has happened in the 12 or so years of the Big 12. I really don't see any reason to change it. The )(**&-_( BCS has been changed so many times trying to account for everything, and it still sux worse than it did in the beginning, imo.
I heard / read some where that the SEC has a plan for this. They take the BCS at the end of the season, But they take the top 2 BCS schools and than use the head to head between them.
Posse Member hoping for middle manager, Yep , I dont know ****
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Quote:
Originally Posted by C&CDean
I'm a tolerant mother****er.
So, they're going to officially do what ABC/ESPN/Facebook is trying to do unofficially this year?
"If you don't become an actor you'll never be a factor" - Lupe Fiasco
yepOriginally Posted by bri
So, they're going to officially do what ABC/ESPN/Facebook is trying to do unofficially this year?
Posse Member hoping for middle manager, Yep , I dont know ****
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Quote:
Originally Posted by C&CDean
I'm a tolerant mother****er.
That's why they're the GREATEST CONFERENCE IN ALL OF COLLEGE SPORTS, EVAR.
"If you don't become an actor you'll never be a factor" - Lupe Fiasco
Here's a novel idea: why don't we put more teeth in the Academic Progress Report and make that the deciding factor?
I'd have no problem rewarding the team that graduates their players.
Are you crazy, that would be discriminatory.
Posse Member hoping for middle manager, Yep , I dont know ****
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Quote:
Originally Posted by C&CDean
I'm a tolerant mother****er.
I like this idea.
I'd like to see all tie breaker rules stay in control of the conference. But even there, you need to look at non-conference records. Maybe just use some set of pre-determined computer rankings. Computer formulas may favor 1 type of team over another, but as long as the formula is set in stone before the season starts and there are a few of them considered, I think that would be fair. I certainly don't favor the human BCS vote that includes conflicts of interests, coaching friends, coaching enemies, payback, etc. Remember, if this thing stays a 3-way tie, it is the *5th* tie breaker and has never been used before. If the goal is total fairness, I say roll a dice - that is the definition of fair. If the goal is to send the best team, I say use the computers and live with it.
The flaw in the SEC scheme of throwing out the lowest BCS ranking and then going head to head could be seen this year. The motivation for Stoops last week would have been to try to keep the game close to keep TT from falling in the rankings. Any scheme that doesn't motivate a team to play it's very best is bogus.
Thanks. I was just thinking that if we've gotten all the way to the fifth tiebreaker, then the teams are basically equal on the field.
At that point, we're letting some off-the-field stuff in anyhow-voter prejudices, etc. Why not just go ahead and throw in something that's off the field, that's objective, and shows that the school is actually fulfilling its mission?
That's why I like it. Reward those who are doing the right thing off the field as well.
You should e-mail the Big 12 conference. I doubt they'd ever do it, but it'd be worth a shot.
It is actually a good ideal, one that is hard to argue against.
Posse Member hoping for middle manager, Yep , I dont know ****
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Quote:
Originally Posted by C&CDean
I'm a tolerant mother****er.
I could live with that one too. Better than conniving, political, *secret* BCS vote.
Well, the 7th tie-breaker is a random drawing. Is that close enough?
"If you don't become an actor you'll never be a factor" - Lupe Fiasco
Here's my thought on the BCS as a tie-breaker....it makes sense. Why? Because as a CONFERENCE, you want the team with the greatest chance of making it to the BCS Championship. Yeah, it causes controversy and ticks people off. But from a conference perspective, it makes complete sense.
Let's do what they did on Friday Night Lights. Have the three coaches flip a coin. The coach that has their coin land on the opposite side from the other two coins advances to the Big 12 Title game
So what was the tie breaker before the BSC was formed??....which was after the BIG 12 was formed?? What was the original tie breaker before the BCS came along??
Mortal Kombat.
But that could go against higher priority tie-breakers like head-to-head. If OSU wins tomorrow TT goes (lower BCS). Even more dramatic in the PAC10 where Oregon St. can go even though they have no BCS chances. Or the Big East or ACC where no team has a BCS prayer and would make such a tie breaker seem silly. But we are talking 5th tie-breaker, so it may never happen again. In fact, we won't know until tomorrow night if it even happened this year.
Posting Permissions
