The Big 12 Conference clearly didn’t think this one through.
Perhaps the conference heads didn’t really think a fifth tie-breaker would be needed, and just tossed it in there to have one.
Perhaps it never occurred to them that the South division would have three teams, tied with each other, and each in the BCS top 10.
Perhaps it never occurred to them to see what other conferences use for tie-breakers.
Whatever the reason, the Big 12 hooked the Longhorns right out of the conference championship game, by allowing a conference tie-breaker to be decided by non-conference voters and eliminating on-the-field results.
So, what should the Big 12 have done to make it right? There is no easy answer with a three-way tie, but taking a gander at the Southeastern and Atlantic Coast Conference tie-breakers would have been a good start.
Both the SEC and ACC use the BCS rankings as a guide, but instead of allowing the rankings to be the deciding factor when the top two teams are ranked within five spots or less, as Texas and Oklahoma are, any head-to-head matchup between those teams determines who advances. This allows the tie-breaker to be decided on the field.
Sounds easy enough, right? Not so fast, my friend.
It turns out that Texas Tech is also within five spots of both Texas and Oklahoma in the BCS rankings. So, what now?
All of the other tie-breakers for the Big 12, as well as the ACC and SEC, include records against common opponents which precede using the BCS rankings. So, naturally the next tie-breaker is records against non-common opponents, starting with the highest-ranked opponents in conference and then outside of the conference.
If we used this tie-breaker for the three teams on top of the Big 12 South, here’s what it would look like:
Texas defeated No. 11 Missouri, a conference foe. Neither Oklahoma nor Texas Tech played Missouri.
The Sooners' only ranked non-common opponent was No. 24 TCU, who they defeated 35-10 in September. Neither Texas nor Texas Tech played the Horned Frogs.
Texas Tech did not play any ranked non-common opponents.
If we use this formula, Texas would advance to the Big 12 Championship because of their win over highly ranked Missouri. Texas Tech is eliminated because they did not play any ranked non-common opponents. Oklahoma is eliminated because their highest-ranked non-common opponent was TCU at No. 24.
Many people will say that such a tie-breaking system is not fair, because conference schedules are often outside of a team’s control. But non-conference opponents are solely within each team’s control, and a tie-breaker such as this would guarantee that the team that played the tougher schedule successfully would move on. It would also guarantee that on-the-field performances would be the final factor.
And taking care of business on the field is how ties should be broken every time.
5 comments Last one added 6 months ago — Leave a Comment
FG H 7 months ago
Excellent point but I would make one suggestion. Take the non common ooponents highest ranking at the end of the year not when they were played. Early in the seaon many teams get good rankings simply because of their name. The end of the year is the real rankings that count, ask any coach. If this were the case Oklahoma advances because TCU finished higher than Missouri. Also Oklahoma beat Cincinnati who wasnt rated at the time but are now headed to a BCS after winning the Big East.
PS-I'm not an Oklahoma fan, rather a TCU fan.
Edit Comment Cancel
BeachBum Chris 7 months ago
I see what you're saying but at least in this case, that doesn't apply since those non-common opponents were all played at least 4 games into the year. That's usually enough time to start seeing who really deserves a ranking and who doesn't.
The other issue I see with that is Missouri, playing in the Big 12, played a tougher schedule than TCU, with games against ranked teams like Texas, Illinois, and Ok St. and they won the Big 12 North division. That affected their ranking because they played tougher teams.
TCU did play ou, BYU and Utah, losing two of those 3 games but I don't think anyone would suggest that the Mountain West is as tough as the Big 12.
Edit Comment Cancel
RICHARD STILES 7 months ago
Why can't the powers that be create a playoff system that satisfies the fans and the sponsors?
Edit Comment Cancel
effay 6 months ago
"I see what you're saying but at least in this case, that doesn't apply since those non-common opponents were all played at least 4 games into the year. That's usually enough time to start seeing who really deserves a ranking and who doesn't."
You do realize that in the week you are using rankings from there were 10 teams in the top 25 that are no longer even ranked at all, including the #6 and #8 teams, right? Plus, if 4 games really does give you a good picture of who should be ranked, imagine what 12 does.
Edit Comment Cancel
effay 6 months ago
Also, what exactly is good about the ACC/SEC system? So it uses the BCS to determine the worst team (so why is the BCS not good enough to determine the best team them?), drops it, and then takes h2h between the top two. I love it! Just kidding, this system would be retarded.
Not only is it totally nonsensical, it would lead to even more awkward situations than the one we had. Just imagine if the SEC system were in place in the Big XII this year. OU would have had to try and beat TTU by enough that they would jump UT in the BCS, but by little enough that TTU would stay ahead of them. So this tie breaker that every talking-head in America thinks is ingenious is the one that forces OU to try to beat TTU by something like between 14 and 21 points? That's awesome! I love systems that encourage teams to not play their best football! That would make this sport so much fun!
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.