Texas or Oklahoma?

[Sports Guy]

Who should be playing Mizzou in the Big 12 title game?

[YardBirds13]

Texas and it shouldn't even be a question IMO.

Texas handled Oklahoma on a neutral field, and their only loss was on a last second play, on the road, at night, to a team that only lost once all year.

Moot point if they just went the FCS route and actually let the teams decide things in a playoff. For anyone who follows FCS football like I do, they playoffs are a mini-March Madness of football. It's great. I went to the JMU-Wofford game last weekend and it was incredible. Just think how cool it would be to be getting ready for a Texas Tech/Boise State Round of 16 game in a few weeks? I realize FBS will never have a 16 team playoff, and probably never have one at all, but those who follow FCS will tell you how awesome it is. (JMU-Villanova this weekend, Go Dukes!)

[geschinger]

Who should be playing Mizzou in the Big 12 title game?

I believe Texas is a better team than OU... That was determined on a neutral field. Nothing has happened before or since to overcome that IMO. I keep seeing the talking heads in the media talking up 61 pts against OSU but conviently they forget to point out that defensively OU gave up 40+.

[YardBirds13]

I believe Texas is a better team than OU... That was determined on a neutral field. Nothing has happened before or since to overcome that IMO. I keep seeing the talking heads in the media talking up 61 pts against OSU but conviently they forget to point out that defensively OU gave up 40+.

I can't watch the "talking heads" about FBS football because a good percentage of them refuse to criticize the current system. There is no way to defend OU being ahead of Texas. None.

[Sports Guy]

I think Oklahoma is the right team.

The head to head stuff is obviously extremely important...But if you bring out the head to head card, then you have to bring up Texas Tech, who beat Texas.

So, if that is the case and Texas should be ahead of Ok, why then, when using the same logic, should TT not be ahead of Texas?

Texas Tech lost later in the season but it is still just one loss.

I think Oklahoma is the answer because not only did they get through the big 12 with the same record, they also beat 2 top 20 BCS OOC teams, including the team that is going to win the Big East...a supposed BCS conference.

[mweb]

It's a tough call, one I'm not really sure which side I'm on, the best solution other than a playoff would be to forget the divisions and just let Texas and Oklahoma play again in the for the Big 12 title. Obviously that won't happen though. I guess I would go with Texas because they beat Oklahoma on a neutral field, and their one loss was on the road on a last second play.

[KansasO'sFan]

I think Oklahoma is the right team.

The head to head stuff is obviously extremely important...But if you bring out the head to head card, then you have to bring up Texas Tech, who beat Texas.

So, if that is the case and Texas should be ahead of Ok, why then, when using the same logic, should TT not be ahead of Texas?

Texas Tech lost later in the season but it is still just one loss.

I think Oklahoma is the answer because not only did they get through the big 12 with the same record, they also beat 2 top 20 BCS OOC teams, including the team that is going to win the Big East...a supposed BCS conference.

Since it is just between Texas and OU, and Tech is out of the picture thanks to the BCS rankings, I think it should be Texas, due to the head-to-head.

However, I agree that Tech should have been more in the discussion. It sucks that losing later in the regular season to a top 10 team (see Texas and Texas Tech) is far more detrimental than losing to an unranked team (see Florida) or a team in the teens (USC) earlier in the year. A loss should be a loss no matter when it occurs (in the regular season). What should matter is who you lose to.

I'm also wondering why our tiebreaker for a three way tie is the BCS. IIRC, the Big 12 is the only major conference to use that as its tiebreaker. It just doesn't make sense to me. But neither does the whole BCS system......

[mweb]

The reason why Tech isn't as deserving is because they were destroyed by OU, while they beat Texas at home by the slimmest of margins.

If Texas gets Tech at home like OU did, they're most likley undefeated at this point.

[tennOsfan]

When I consider Texas beating Oklahoma, my brain just fries up trying to think of how you justify Oklahoma getting in. I just can't get past that.

The lack of a real playoff system is a continual disgrace.:cussing:

[Pedro Cerrano]

H2h needs to be thrown out the window because, regardless of the site of the games or the outcomes, there are three teams that are all 1-1 against each other.

So, after that you need to look at the rest of the resume, and Oklahoma's is better than Texas' IMO.

That being said, it looks like it will be Florida/Oklahoma in the BCS title game which will be a throttling. Oklahoma will give up 60 pts to Florida.

[Sports Guy]

The reason why Tech isn't as deserving is because they were destroyed by OU, while they beat Texas at home by the slimmest of margins.

If Texas gets Tech at home like OU did, they're most likley undefeated at this point.

But Texas still lost to TT...I don't care how it was done, it was still a loss.

You can't say Texas beat Ok, so Texas should be in while totally ignoring the idea that TT beat Texas.

It should the whole body of work and the edge there goes to Oklahoma.

[geschinger]

I think Oklahoma is the answer because not only did they get through the big 12 with the same record, they also beat 2 top 20 BCS OOC teams, including the team that is going to win the Big East...a supposed BCS conference.

Good point about the OOC stuff. That definately should help OU but it shouldn't be enough to overcome the fact that on a neutral field the two teams matched up and UT proved itself to be the better team.

However' date=' I agree that Tech should have been more in the discussion. It sucks that losing later in the regular season to a top 10 team (see Texas and Texas Tech) is far more detrimental than losing to an unranked team (see Florida) or a team in the teens (USC) earlier in the year. A loss should be a loss no matter when it occurs (in the regular season). What should matter is who you lose to.

[/quote']

Great point. Calendar being the deciding factor as it is in many cases is a terrible way to do things. Not to mention that the phenomenon makes conferences do idiotic things like when the ACC made UM/FSU the first game of the season. When they thought UM and FSU were going to be elite programs year in and year out they wanted to game the system so both would have a good shot at BCS bids.

So, after that you need to look at the rest of the resume, and Oklahoma's is better than Texas' IMO.

That being said, it looks like it will be Florida/Oklahoma in the BCS title game which will be a throttling. Oklahoma will give up 60 pts to Florida.

Texas schedule was brutal. OU had a tough schedule as well but at least they got some breathers inbetween their tougher games. In a 22 day time span they beat the teams the team that was ranked #1 on a neutral field, won at home against teams ranked #11 and #6 and then lost in the final seconds against a team that was ranked #7.

But Texas still lost to TT...I don't care how it was done, it was still a loss.

This makes no sense to me. I don't understand the thought process that treats every loss as equal. When evaluating teams whom they lost to and how they lost should be factors. UF losing to Ole Miss at home should hurt them a lot more than UT losing on the road to TT at the end of a four game stretch against top 11 teams. But unfortunately logic doesn't seem to be a factor in the decision making of the pollsters.

I am hopeful that if OU wins out and Texas wins out that the AP will award their National Championship to Texas.

[CrimsonTribe]

I believe Texas is a better team than OU... That was determined on a neutral field. Nothing has happened before or since to overcome that IMO. I keep seeing the talking heads in the media talking up 61 pts against OSU but conviently they forget to point out that defensively OU gave up 40+.

Great point. It's like defense isn't even part of the equation. I hate style points.

[Sports Guy]

This makes no sense to me. I don't understand the thought process that treats every loss as equal. When evaluating teams whom they lost to and how they lost should be factors. UF losing to Ole Miss at home should hurt them a lot more than UT losing on the road to TT at the end of a four game stretch against top 11 teams. But unfortunately logic doesn't seem to be a factor in the decision making of the pollsters.

I am hopeful that if OU wins out and Texas wins out that the AP will award their National Championship to Texas.

The Oklahoma win over TT is obviously more impressive than the TT win over Texas..>That being said, it is still a loss and if you are going to say that Texas beat Ok, then you need to say that Texas lost to TT. It is still a loss.

[ledzepp8]

I don't really care who should play in the B12 Championship Game. I just think that this perfectly illustrates why there needs to be a playoff and we need to do away with this mythical national championship.

Oklahoma could lose in the B12 Championship and Florida could lose in the SEC Championship. You would then have Bama vs Texas...when Texas didn't even win their conference. Whether or not one thinks they should be in it over OK is irrelevant, they aren't and they could possibly end up in the BCS Championship Game when they weren't even deemed "good" enough to play for their own conference championship. That's why the whole FBS system is ridiculous. You would think people would get tired of seeing the powers that be pick the same teams every year to be in the Championship Game (Texas, USC, Oklahoma, Florida, LSU, and Ohio State). I know I get bored with it, which is why I wish Texas Tech had beaten Oklahoma.