You’re kidding, right?
Tell me that this is a bad dream or a joke.
Tell me that Oklahoma didn’t just leapfrog past Texas for a chance to play for the national championship.
Now before I get angry emails from the greater Cleveland County, Oklahoma area, let me make this point:
I don’t really have a problem with Oklahoma heading up to Arrowhead Stadium this Saturday night to play Missouri.
The problem I have is with the methodology that places Oklahoma on the road to Kansas City.
The fault lies not with the Sooners, but with the Big 12 conference, because the conference made the indefensible decision to link one of their tiebreakers to the fraudulent BCS standings.
I know, I know. At some point, a line has to be drawn and a determination of a winner has to be made.
But to link a spot in a conference championship game based on the results of computer formulas and coaches/observers from around the country is ludicrous.
I am sure, in their infinite wisdom, that when the Big 12 presidents and athletic directors didn’t actually expect to use that part of the tiebreaker procedure.
Remember, this tiebreaker process is only for more than two teams. I guess it’s reasonable to expect that steps one through four of the process would be enough to weed one team out and force things to go back to head-to-head.
The thing is, though, why would you even leave yourself open to the possibility of this scenario occurring? Why not use something like point differential against divisional opponents? Or use point differential against common opponents (which would include conference and non-conference play)?
It’s not perfect either, because it would encourage “running up the score.” But at least it would keep the outcome of the tiebreaker tied to events that transpired on the field of play as opposed to putting it in the hands of allegedly neutral or outside observers.
Any thoughts on a new Big 12 divisional tiebreaker? E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org