Dr. Saturday Explains Why He Thinks OU Wins 3-Way Tiebreak

by PB @ BON on Nov 21, 2008 10:08 AM CST Comment 48 comments

Matt shot me an email with a full response on why he's projecting OU the winner of a three-way tiebreak.

These are the scenarios and results as I see them, and none of them work for Texas:

If Texas Tech wins out, it will be ranked ahead of Texas. Obviously.

If Oklahoma wins out, it will be ranked ahead of Texas. I think this is just as obvious. Voters have been waffling on OU and Texas for a month even with UT's head-to-head advantage. If Oklahoma wins two in a row against 10-0 Texas Tech and 9-2 Oklahoma State, pretty much everything I know about human pollsters says the Sooners will move ahead of UT. Head-to-head won't save Texas here, nor should it. This is what frustrated me so much about Kirk Bohls' outrage against the polls last week: It completely ignored the fact that OU, Texas and Texas Tech can all be 1-1 against each other by this Sunday. By logical necessity, somebody has to be ranked ahead of a team it lost to. Oklahoma will have the dreaded "momentum" of two straight big wins and, for good measure, the two best non-conference wins (over TCU and Cincinnati), which more than makes up for the added value of Texas' win over Missouri. Almost all of OU's games, especially since losing to Texas, have been over in the first half, often the first quarter. And that's assuming voters even remember anything beyond the last flickers of light on ESPN's highlights of the week. If it beats Tech and OSU back-to-back, Oklahoma's going to get that vote.

If Oklahoma beats Texas Tech, then loses to Oklahoma State, Texas Tech will go to the Big 12 Championship. We're back to the two-way tie between the Horns and Raiders, and it doesn't matter what the polls think: Tech has the head-to-head advantage, and if it goes to the championship and beats Missouri, it's going to get the mythical championship bid. The only realistic scenario, mathematically speaking, under which Texas makes the Big 12 Championship is if Baylor beats Texas Tech, which is not realistic, realistically speaking. Texas A&M is just as likely to beat Texas again, anyway, if we're taking off to that magical, hypothetical planet.

So Texas is really down to rooting for Missouri in the Big 12 Championship, and that's not a wild hope, despite the Tigers' awful performance in Austin. But even then, there's the backlash that comes with being an at-large vagabond rather than a conference champion; if Texas Tech beats Oklahoma and goes to the championship at 12-0, only to lose to Missouri, voters will still have to square ranking an 11-1 Texas team ahead of a 12-1 Texas Tech team that beat the Horns. And there's still a potential groundswell for USC if the Big 12 gets convoluted enough (I would say Utah, too, if the Utes hammer BYU, but we're being realistic, not fair).

So it's not impossible for Texas, especially if Missouri beats OU or Tech for the conference championship. But I don't think the Horns can get there barring a miracle by Baylor, so the national championship is unlikely, and obviously out of their hands.

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

0 recs | Comment 48 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I agree with his assessment but only to a certain extent.

I think OU may pass Texas in the polls, however, the question is by how much? I beleive Texas will be ahead of OU in the computers, regrdless. So if Texas can stay close enough in the human, the computers could push Texas ahead. I am also hoping for the media to endlessly point out, discuss, and complain that since Texas played the toughest schedlue both in conference and out of conference, Texas is the only of the three that did not benefit from a home game, and Texas is the only that did not play a Div II team; then Texas deserves to go. I hope with the week between OU/Tech and the final vote for the big 12 championship, and considering the ramifications involved, the coaches and Harris poll voters will take a long look a all teams resumes and vote accordingly. Finally, I think that with a smaller schedule TDay weekend, many coaches and Harris voters will be able to take a good long look at everything.

Discussion and thought help Texas. I am putting my faith, my hopes and my dreams that voters will think before they vote. That is all I can ask.

by billb on Nov 21, 2008 10:31 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Sadly disagree

OU’s non-con is the best of the bunch. TCU and Cincinnati trump Arkansas and Rice for Texas as well as Nevada and SMU for Tech.

by Sweed4Heisman on Nov 21, 2008 10:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sadly agree nt whills

by Horncasting on Nov 21, 2008 11:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I keep posting this.

But OU has certainly play the two best OOC games, however, that is only a part of their schedule. The average rank of the teams they played in OOC according to Sagarin is 92, Texas is 81. Disagree all you want but the number say Texas’ is better.

by billb on Nov 21, 2008 10:47 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Its the entirety of the schedule vs the individual teams

This is where Tech fans get all riled up too.

As far as I know however, the computers all look at the entire schedule. Its not that Arkansas is weaker than TCU or Nevada, its that our 4 > their 4. Which could be our only saving grace in the computer polls.

I do agree the humans will tank us though, the question is by how much, and will it be close enough for the computers to help us overcome it, as I think the computers will still have us ahead of OU.

by BoddickerIsClutch on Nov 21, 2008 10:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

True...

… I think you’re right about the 4 vs. 4. Both OU and Tech played I-AA teams (OU played Chattanooga, Tech played UMass and Eastern Washington). That’s probably why Sagarin favors Texas, but the humans will see TCU and Cincy for OU vs. a bunch of nothing for Tech and Texas.

by Sweed4Heisman on Nov 21, 2008 11:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Right

Humans we will be boned against OU anyway, with recent wins of theirs against Tech and OU, and our recent wins over… no one and ~~no one~~ aTm.

We will drop in the human polls below OU, no doubt, hopefully it wont be too much though.

by BoddickerIsClutch on Nov 21, 2008 11:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, yes, that’s because Texas has played Oklahoma State and Texas Tech already and Oklahoma hasn’t. By the time the year is over, Oklahoma will have a better SOS with Cincy (possible Big East champ) and TCU (ranked team).

by Rishi on Nov 21, 2008 12:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No

That is based on OU OOC schedule only. Playing teams in conference will not help them there. Texas Schedule will still be stronger overall as Texas’ in conference schedule includes Missouri. OU’s does not. OU will not under any circumstance have a better strenght of schedule, either OOC, in conference or combined.

by billb on Nov 21, 2008 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Okay, fine, tell me – how is UTEP, Rice, Florida Atlantic, and Arkansas a better OOC schedule than TCU, Cincinatti, Chattanooga, and Washington? fine, Chattanooga is a D-1AA school and Washington is winless, but TCU and Cincy are both threats to win their conferences and are ranked – infact, they have two losses a piece, one of which is to the Sooners.

by Rishi on Nov 21, 2008 1:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Texas SOS is and most likely will be better than OU's SOS

because our opponents have more wins than their opponents. It is as simple as that. Not to mention the fact that some of the computer models completely disregard 1AA teams.

by Horncasting on Nov 21, 2008 1:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Because I have math on my side.

Using sagarins ratings as an example:
OU played Chatanooga (206)
Washington (138)
Cincinnati (21) and
TCU (15)
total 374
average 92.

Texas played FAU (115)
UTEP (97)
Arkansas (54) and
Rice (59)
total 325
average 81.

by billb on Nov 21, 2008 2:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Eh, averaging them out isn’t good enough. You’re ignoring the fact that TCU and Cincy are top-25 teams.

Or, in other terms, what’s more difficult – Chatanooga and Texas OOC (avg 103) or playing UMass (D-1AA) and Lousiana-Lafayette OOC? Clearly, it must be the second one because it’s a lower average.

by Rishi on Nov 21, 2008 2:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well in your example

Umass (139) and Lafayete (106) would average to 122, so the first? Texas and Chat?

not to be just an ass though, I understand your argument. But you cannot just say Cincy and TCU, without including the fact that Chat and Washington blow. the strength of your schedule is more than the good teams you beat, it also includes the cupcakes. Put it this way, Texas OOC schedule is a cheese sandwhich, nothing spectacular. OUs is a Roast beef, which sounds a lot better to me until you think about a sandwhich being more than its filling, it is a some of its parts. Texas sandwhich is served on white bread, still nothing spectacular. OU’s is served not on bread but between two cow patties. You propse to take OU’s sandwhich, throw away the cow patties and still call it a sandwhich, when it is now only roast beef.

by billb on Nov 21, 2008 2:25 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs

Haha

Put it this way, Texas OOC schedule is a cheese sandwhich, nothing spectacular. OUs is a Roast beef, which sounds a lot better to me until you think about a sandwhich being more than its filling, it is a some of its parts. Texas sandwhich is served on white bread, still nothing spectacular. OU’s is served not on bread but between two cow patties. You propse to take OU’s sandwhich, throw away the cow patties and still call it a sandwhich, when it is now only roast beef.

Something like that…

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 21, 2008 2:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

he is trying to use human logic in figuring out what a computer will "think."

the BCS computers can only see numbers. they cant look at a team and determine whether this team is better than another team based upon the teams skills or athleticism. thus the reason behind why the BCS even exists. the computers logic is in averages and numbers as billb has pointed out above. therefore Rishi, you cannot in this argument. but you might try and send bullets from your side to thehuman voter and choklahoma.

If You See Kay, Oh You

by texfan23 on Nov 21, 2008 2:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

I think you guys might be arguing about two different things. OU has a better OOC schedule. Texas may have a better OOC schedule per the computers when all is said and done, but even I find that dubious. Someone can acknowledge the mathematical fact that 91>82 without agreeing that beating UT’s OOC schedule is more difficult than beating OU’s OOC schedule. As the Doc points out, the human voters aren’t going to be more interested in the difference between TCU/Cincy and Arkansas/Rice than they the difference between FAU/UTEP and Chatanooga/Washington. A lot of people think beating two ranked teams is more impressive than beating 4 unranked teams. One could argue, quite reasonably, that OU’s OOC schedule is harder than Texas even if you ignore completely their wins against Chatanooga and Washington.

This is easy enough to see looking at UT’s own schedule. Going 2-0 against Missouri and Oklahoma is more impressive than going 4-0 against Rice/UTEP/Arkansas/Rice. (I know Missouri and Oklahoma are better than TCU and Cincy, but you get the point.)

Go register. Or else.

by Skin Patrol on Nov 21, 2008 6:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

But to some extent that is exactly my point.

I agree OU was more likely to lose to TCU or Cinn, than Texas was any of its OOC games; however, I also believe Texas was more likely to lose in any of its OOC games than OU was to Washington or Chat. You want to take the good parts and forget the bad. I want to take the whole.

Back to my sandwich analogy, you prefer the roast beef on Cow pattie sandwich, I prefer the cheese. I know you can simply remove the roast beef and throw the cow patties away, but the roast beef will always have some remains of those cow patties. If your OK with that, it is a personal preference of how to deal with the sandwich, me I’ll stick with the cheese.

by billb on Nov 22, 2008 11:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

You might be right regarding the computers, although I (perhaps mistakenly) believe that some of them might take into account arbitrary “vs. top Xth Teams” (maybe top 30? Maybe top 25?) since Sagarin at least lists those records on his site. If Billingsly takes into consideration shutouts, it wouldn’t shock me if one of the other computers emphasized how one did against some cut off that would include either or both Cincy and TCU. It’s hard to imagine a scenario where anyone on Texas’ non-con schedule ends up in the top 30.

But forgetting the computers for a moment… Humans aren’t going to care much about what you did against FAU and Rice vs. what OU did against Chatanooga and Washington. There’s nothing on either your four game OOC or OU’s two worst game OOC that would even enter a human voters’ mind at all. But beating two ranked teams is the kind of thing that gets play with human voters.

This isn’t about ignoring their two crappy games. I’m suggesting that if OU only played Cincy and TCU, they would STILL have a better OOC schedule than Texas. Beating TCU and Cincy strikes me as more impressive than beating FAU, Rice, Arkansas, and UTEP. If it is the case that beating TCU and Cincy is more difficult than beating FAU/Rice/Arkansas/UTEP (and one can dispute that, I suppose, but no one is here) then you can’t make OU’s schedule WORSE by adding teams they beat. It could be TCU/Cincy/Undisputed worst team in CFB/Undisputed 2nd worst tteam in football and their schedule is still tougher. Beating OU on neutral ground was more impressive than your four week OOC schedule. There are no three teams you could add to the end of your OU victory that would make your OOC schedule more difficult.

I’m getting repetetive, but… IF OU’s 2-0 stretch against TCU and Cincy is better than Texas’ 4-0 stretch of OOC games, you can’t make OU’s schedule worse by adding in games they won. If they’re better at 2-0 they’re certainly better at 4-0. You can’t make Team A’s schedule better than Team B’s schedule by adding victories to Team B’s schedule without otherwise doing anything to Team A’s schedule.

In my mind the issue is: Do you think UT’s 4-0 non-con is more impressive than OU’s 2-0 non-con? Forget the roast beef analogy, I’m just asking you to hypothesize that Chatanooga and Washington don’t exist. If you think UT’s 4-0 is better, than there’s an argument. If you don’t, then we’re just going to have to agree to disagree, because I find no appreciable logic that says OU is better at 2-0 but not at 4-0.

Go register. Or else.

by Skin Patrol on Nov 22, 2008 12:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Your asking me to assume that two games did not exist, but I am saying they did exist.

Yes, I think Texas non conference schedule in tougher than OUs. Yes I think Texas 4 games are tougher than OUs two games. I think there is really little difference between Arkansas, Cinn and TCU, except Arkansas Hates Texas and TCU and Cinn don’t have thiose same feelings about OU. I think UTEP is not that far behind in that it was the biggest game ever for thier school.

Under your method I am free to argue Tulane has a tougher schedule than OU based on current rankings since they played the team currently ranked #1 (Bama) and OU will not play anyone ranked higher than #2 (Tech), and the rest of the games I can’t remember who Tulane played.

As for the voters, again that is why I said I hope all the voters look at all the teams, rather than go on their memories. If they look at all the teams Texas comes out ahead.

by billb on Nov 22, 2008 2:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

Yes, I think Texas non conference schedule in tougher than OUs. Yes I think Texas 4 games are tougher than OUs two games.

Then let’s just agree to disagree.

I think there is really little difference between Arkansas, Cinn and TCU, except Arkansas Hates Texas and TCU and Cinn don’t have thiose same feelings about OU. I think UTEP is not that far behind in that it was the biggest game ever for thier school.

You can’t have it both ways, though. You can’t claim Jeff Sagarin as an authority on who has the higher SOS and then ignore the fact that he has both TCU and Cincy ranked something like 25 spots ahead of Arkansas.

Are you being sincere when you say there’s no difference between Arkansas, TCU, and Cincy? If that’s the case why don’t you just claim the slamdunk, since Texas would have an outright better OOC with a major win over Arkansas, heh. In any event, if you’re struggling for distinctions between those three teams, how about: Cincy and TCU have winning records? Aransas is losing ot Miss. State right now. Cincy is a 9-2 BCS team, by the way?

I don’t ask to be flippant, but do you really thinkg Arkansas is a tougher draw than Cincy or TCU this year? Again, if the answer is yes, we should just agree to disagree.

Under your method I am free to argue Tulane has a tougher schedule than OU based on current rankings since they played the team currently ranked #1 (Bama) and OU will not play anyone ranked higher than #2 (Tech), and the rest of the games I can’t remember who Tulane played.

Uhh, yea, that wouldn’t be too unreasonable. If Texas had played Alabama they’d have a stronger OOC schedule than Oklahoma. I don’t think there’s anything controversial about saying that playing the best team in the country, on the road, is more difficult than playing two fringe ranked teams. Just like I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that beating two fringe ranked teams is better than beating four just straight up scrubs. A lot of people agree with me, so I can’t be too unreasonable. Are 8 Chatanoogas better than one game against Texas? Which is more likely to produce a loss?

But UTEP and Arkansas really hated you, so…

As for the voters, again that is why I said I hope all the voters look at all the teams, rather than go on their memories. If they look at all the teams Texas comes out ahead.

I think that’s true if you include conference games. But, in my opinion, beating TCU and Cincy is better than beating FAU, Rice, UTEP, and Arkansas.

Go register. Or else.

by Skin Patrol on Nov 22, 2008 3:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

I agree that beating Cincy and TCU is more difficult than Rice, FAU, UTEP and Arkansas.

However, would you agree that beating Missouri is more difficult than beating Cincy and TCU?

I certainly do (and as I stated in another post, I think playing the tougher conference opponent and schedule should count more towards who goes to the conf. championship).

So where do you draw the line? We’ve got the head to head, overall tougher schedule (based on opponents wins), played the toughest noncommon opponent, and was the only team in the 3-way tie that didn’t get a home game.

by Horncasting on Nov 22, 2008 2:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

However, would you agree that beating Missouri is more difficult than beating Cincy and TCU?

Probably. I was speaking only to their OOC records

Go register. Or else.

by Skin Patrol on Nov 22, 2008 2:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

couple of points

1) For the OOC: Don’t forget arkansas. We blew them out. And although they are pretty bad, they have beaten 2 ranked teams and played some other sec teams really close. And nobody has blown them out as much as we did. If they can play close or even beat LSU we look even better.

2) I agree that in the 3 way tie somebody has to be ranked higher than a team that defeated them. HOWEVER, you are overlooking the natl respect factor. Texas tech has no national respect. They have never done anything in their long pirate history. If they lose, they will be forgotten about faster than a somali pirate getaway ship. If tech loses, the 3 way tie is really just a 2 way tie between OU and TX because we are the 2 programs that have clout. AND we have a better schedule and the benefit of winning the head to head on neutral ground.

by vyvyvy on Nov 21, 2008 10:57 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Let's just hope for two main things:

1) OU wins out.
2) The voters actually sit down and give long thought to their rankings come November 30th.

by TXinDC on Nov 21, 2008 11:01 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Assumptions

The OU wins out voting / computer debacle assessment seems based on the assumption that voter behavior will follow the same pattern that it does during the regular season.

Last year and the year before show that when voters know that their decisions have NC and BCS implications, they actually around and think about the exact order in which they rank teams. If we lay down an excellent beatdown on Aggy, I don’t think voters can look past:

1) A primetime 45-35 RRS victory
2) If OU wins with a decent margin, then UT will be the only team to have not been beaten soundly. Stats of the game aside, we lost on a last second perfect pass.

by Tackchevy on Nov 21, 2008 11:07 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Our best chance IMO

Is if the voters flat out disregard Tech and make it a head-to-head comparision of us vs. OU.

One other angle regarding this comment:

By logical necessity, somebody has to be ranked ahead of a team it lost to. Oklahoma will have the dreaded “momentum” of two straight big wins and, for good measure, the two best non-conference wins (over TCU and Cincinnati), which more than makes up for the added value of Texas’ win over Missouri.

This reasoning applies more to a vote that will decide who will play in the MNC. We are talking about a vote that will decide who will play in the Conference Championship game, in which case I’d argue that playing the stronger noncommon conference opponent and the tougher conference schedule should weigh more heavily any of the OOC stuff.

by Horncasting on Nov 21, 2008 11:36 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yes, but...

since the tie-breaker is BCS ranking and decided almost entirely by people who don’t care about the Big-12, the voters probably won’t order the three with added emphasis on their conference play. Voters aren’t trying to answer the question: “Which of these three teams deserves to play for the Big-12 Championship based on their conference play?”

Go register. Or else.

by Skin Patrol on Nov 21, 2008 6:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

This is an unprecendented event

(at least I think so).

This is going to get an unbelievable amount of press over the 8 days following the OU/Tech game until the vote that will decide it. I’m pretty sure that every voter in both polls will know that their vote in that week will count for the Big 12 champ. game.

History has shown that all of the voters, including the coaches, get more analytical for the final vote. In this case I’ll bet they do the same a week earlier as they know what is riding on it.

You may be completely right, but I think there is a chance they will consider and weigh the conference schedule more than the OOC schedule.

by Horncasting on Nov 21, 2008 8:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I dunno

Don’t forget, we have already seen Texas ranked behind OU in the human polls (week 3), ranked ahead/behind OU (week 4) and ranked ahead (week 5) and in all three situations Texas still had the better BCS ranking.

The only major differences between the rankings (and the percentages) between week 3 through week 5 is that Texas has increased it’s human poll votes by 100 points but dropped 0.01 points in the CPU while OU has remained pretty much the same (increased +11 and +15 human voter points) while increasing their CPU by 0.03.

If OU wins on Saturday, I could see where the human voters would be split, just like many posters, on who is ahead. The real question, imho, is how far will OU jump in the CPU. They are at 0.820 with Texas at 0.930. If OU wins the best Texas could do is 0.960 (2nd) or an increase of 0.03 while OU could gain a full tenth of a point (0.820 to 0.930) or better moving from 6th to 3rd. That might make the difference.

If OU wins close games and Texas wins big, I think we’re in.

by Forty on Nov 21, 2008 11:38 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

We’re all forgetting a major component: the media/Mack Brown. While I think the media certainly has dropped a bunch of coverage on Texas since the Tech loss, they’re already debating on what’s going to happen in the event of a three-way tie. That’s good news because it means voters have to be thinking about “what if.”

The second thing is Mack Brown. Now Cal can complain all it wants to about the 2004 Rose Bowl, but Mack Brown got his voice out there and followed through with a great game. The master politician will make sure the keep Texas in voters’ minds and all over the media if OU beats Tech this weekend.

by 4th generation fan on Nov 21, 2008 12:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

IIRC...

Texas actually dropped after that speech. I don’t remember all the details, but someone else can elabortate. Point, I don’t think Mack has much effect on anything when he speaks (ie holding calls).

by vy til i die on Nov 21, 2008 12:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Lost overall points in the human polls and gained in the computer polls

with a net effect of moving past Cal.

Most media and uninformed fans still believe that Brown lobbied his way to the Rose Bowl. Unless he can speak in binary, that simply was not the case.

by Horncasting on Nov 21, 2008 1:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think you are giving the voters too much credit.

But hopefully we won’t see :)

Go register. Or else.

by Skin Patrol on Nov 21, 2008 10:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

BUT...What happened?

PB -

What happened to change things since your post entitled, “Race for the BCS: A Texas Fan’s Rooting Guide?” I don’t necessarily disagree with your new stance, but it pains me to admit this. I think there are a lot of fans out there who, like me, got false hope from your earlier post. I’m interested in what changed your mind…

by lnghrnchad on Nov 21, 2008 1:58 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

This isn't my view

It’s Matt Hinton’s (Dr. Saturday).

--PB--

by PB @ BON on Nov 21, 2008 2:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think, objectively, our chances are lower than OU's

But that doesn’t mean we’re hopeless. I think most agree that in the case of a three-way tie, the most likely party in third place will be Texas Tech, fair or not. That leaves Texas and OU. The human voters will likely place OU ahead of us, but as billyzane keeps telling us, the rank itself doesn’t matter. It’s the points. If the margin isn’t too great and the right teams win for us to help our computer ranking, we can possibly sneak ahead.

This is why many believe our chances at the national title are greater than the conference title. If Missouri can do us a big favor and knock out the South division champions (if it’s not us, obviously), then we’ll have an excellent shot at going to Miami. Only one of Alabama or Florida will go (assuming they don’t screw up before they meet for the SEC championship), and only complete brain-farts from idiot voters would place the likes of USC or Penn State ahead of us. And really, if it’s a choice between a 12-1 Red Raider team and Texas, I think the fact that the loss is recent to a team we pummeled and the fact that we have a “bigger” name gives us the edge over Tech. I’m not saying that’s fair, but that will likely play a big part.

by TheElusiveShadow on Nov 21, 2008 2:20 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

If OU wins out

does it matter how they win? For instance, if they beat tech on some last second miracle in a game full of bad calls against the raiders and then beat okie lite in some horrible turnover-ridden 13-7 borefest would that still be impressive enough “momentum” to push them ahead of Texas, especially if we whip the stuffing out of aggie?

May Colt be with you. Yeah, that's right.

by bfaut86 on Nov 21, 2008 2:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

to coaches...

..i don’t think so. Apparantely, losing on a last second TD to the #7 team on the road means you suck and should drop below a team that you beat by 10 point on a neutral site.

I think they are just waiting for a legit reason to bump them ahead of us, and if they win out, no matter how close, I feel that OU will be in the CG b/c of the coaches poll.

by vy til i die on Nov 21, 2008 3:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Then why did they move us back in front 2 weeks ago

and then give us an even stronger lead last week?

by Horncasting on Nov 21, 2008 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

that's just...

..the way i FEEL. I never said it had any backing to it. Just my opinion. I’d rather not depend on human voters and get my hopes up.

by vy til i die on Nov 21, 2008 6:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

BFAUT86: You sum up

our best chances perfectly. Somebody’s gotta win, and that hurts us. But if they win ugly . . .

We can’t control what other teams do, but if they do it (1) sloppy or (2) with breaks from officials or (3) unimpressively or (4) with the weather hurting their performance, their LOOK, as it were — we have a better chance. Maybe even a real good chance.

by edsp on Nov 21, 2008 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No mention outside of Big 12

Are the pollsters going to put Oklahoma ahead of Florida in case of win? I think we want Alabama to win out because Oklahoma can steal alot of first place votes against Florida, but not Alabama will dominate the 1st place. This puts the rankings at Alabama, and then a mix of Texas, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma. I Think Texas Tech will drop a few because of how recent the loss is, probably behind Texas. Our SOS is stronger, so we will be ranked ahead of OU in computers. If Alabama wins, all we need is a mixed 2 and 3 voting. Oklahoma can be ahead in the 1,2,3, but if the actual points are close, we will be ahead. It’s definitely a possibility, but there’s no predicting this game or the pollsters, both are crazy.

by ryanlionrah on Nov 21, 2008 3:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Think of this picture

It’s just after the MNC game in Miami. The winning head coach is holding the crystal football, while confetti streams down. Ask yourself this question. Is an improvement of (insert your percentage here) in the chances that Mack Brown is in that picture worth the possibility that Bob Stoops is there, instead?
Personally, I would rather take somewhat reduced chances of Texas getting into the MNC game than take any chance whatsoever that Visor Bob gets another trophy. I could actually cheer for Tech in the championship game, but never for OU.
If you think I am abandoning enlightened self interest in favor of hatred of one team, remember that the recruiting edge is starting to go our way now. If the land thieves win another conference and possibly national championship, Stoops will be back on top.

by Longhorn in Canada on Nov 21, 2008 8:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

The here and now

I just don’t get this line of thinking. Getting to the Big 12 game is a HUGE, HUGE step in getting to the MNC game. Getting to the MNC game is an extremely rare event. Think about how many things had to go right for us in 2005 (and this year just to be in the position we are in now). When the opportunity comes you don’t just give up on it in the hope that you’ll get some other advantage in the future that may lead you to the same place. We went 30 some odd years between national titles. During that time we had plenty of periods where we outrecruited OU. This is a very special team. There are no guarantees, and in fact the odds are against us, that we’ll get to the MNC game again soon.

For me it comes down to whether I love the Horns more than I hate OU. If the odds were 1% for Texas and 99% for OU, I’d still be rooting for the situation that would give us that 1%.

by Horncasting on Nov 21, 2008 10:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

STUPID

I usually like his blog, but this is just stupid. I agree that if OU wins out, they may go to the CCG, but to say it’s “obvious” is laughable. It may be the most probable thing, but no way it’s a 100%. Mack will call each and every coach and plead his case, and I think it’s a good case. Let’s hope both TCU and Cincy fall tomorrow.

In Mack Brown We Trust!

by Cyrus on Nov 21, 2008 9:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I wonder who engineered the BCS system...

I have nothing but curses for those who did.

If there were a playoff system, we wouldn’t be this concerned right now… go ou.. tomorrow only :[

Excitedly nervous in 08.

by Ultra Horn on Nov 22, 2008 1:37 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Transparaency of the coaches' poll

One thing I cant recall having yet been discussed is the fact that the last coaches’ poll of the regular season (i.e. the poll released December 7) includes publicizing which coach voted for whom, but the polls leading up to that point are not publicly revealed.

The logic makes sense, since the last poll is almost always going to be the most relevant one in determining who plays for the crystal ball.

But this year, the next-to-last poll is shaping up to be more important, perhaps much more important if the Big XII and SEC championship games provide clear-cut conference champs. it’s quite possible that the last poll won’t really matter, at least in terms of being controversial.

Given this, has anyone heard of any moves to get the next-to-last polls released publicly as well? I sure want to make sure Leach doesn’t “forget” a team. I’m sure OU fans would like to make sure Brown doesn’t “forget” the Sooners, Etc…

by kjm017 on Nov 22, 2008 9:15 AM CST reply actions 0 recs