re: Mack Brown and Brett Murphy Say TCU Got Screwed Because of Their Name

quote:

---

Brown also admitted that Texas often benefitted from their name when he was coaching the Longhorns.

---

That sure worked out for them in 2008.

quote:

---

So you're telling me that a 1 loss Baylor/TCU (with that 1 loss being at home to a garbage Virginia Tech team) would have 100% jumped tOSU if they had a big win in a hypothetical Big 12 championship game?

Lol, I want some of what you're smoking.

---

o thats good

quote:

---

Again, to an extent. No way tOSU passes TCU had they not demolished a ranked team the way they did. And we probably don't pass TCU had they beaten up a ranked team on the final week of the season instead of a team with 2 wins.

Also, no way a lesser B1G school jumps TCU under similar circumstances in a reversed scenario.

---

Peaple keep talking about Ohio State, but my beef is more with FSU. They barely eeked out a two-point win over Georgia Tech. How does that justify them jumping TCU?

TCU didn't make the playoffs because of the stated criteria for selecting teams, to quote the rules:

quote:

---

Strength of schedule, head-to-head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie-breakers between teams that look similar;

---

TCU lost head to head against Baylor, and did not win the big 12 title. Or, if we believe the Big 12, then we'll credit them with a share of a the title, which is less than Ohio St's full title share. And the SOS was remarkably similar between the teams. TCU held a slight edge, but they had 9 opponents in common with Baylor plus their head to head. Playing the exact 10-game schedule means that TCU did not have a significantly harder schedule than Baylor (though it is harder, as Minnesota is better than Buffalo).

The rules actually reference head to head three separate times, especially in conjuntion with the invalidity of ranking formulae:

quote:

---

Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who “deserve” to be selected.

---

Basically, the Big 12 shot themselves in the foot by weakening Baylor's case. By the criteria set out in the preseason, Baylor was the obvious selection over TCU. By weakening Baylor's title claim, it gave the committee the opportunity to put in Ohio St.

I do agree this had a lot to do with brand names, but it is the Big 12 who opened the door to it by trying to change their own rules for crowning a champion midway though the season. The committee seized upon the opportunity to screw over the conference who was clumsily and transparently trying to rig the game.

Baylor is the team that got screwed, but it was the Big 12 who screwed them.

quote:

---

He was spot on about the state of Texas on Cowherd a minute ago. He just came flat out and said Texas thinks they're their own country and are separatist and should be able to do everything different and get away with it.

---

that really isn't what he said and on top of that it was tongue in cheek.

quote:

---

That sure worked out for them in 2008.

---

One of the issues related to the BCS was that Texas stole Cal's Rose Bowl Berth one year because they were Texas and Cal was Cal.

Michigan got in the BCS at least twice over teams that were better, such as non-brand-name Kansas State. Both those years I believe Michigan State was better and actually beat Michigan.

So why is it such a stretch to say that humans aren't still doing it? Sorry I have no "proof" except common sense and my own two eyes.

Humans need to excuse themselves completely if they want to prove that there is no bias or big-money pressure. But that will never happen.

quote:

---

GT is a better team than anyone TCU beat with the exception of maybe Kansas State.

---

But that's not the point. Regardless of who you play, historically, you only move up in the polls if you perform above expectations or the team in front of you performs below expectations. FSU didn't beat Georgia Tech 59-0 like Ohio State beat Wisconsin, they barely won. Clearly they performed below expectiations while TCU met their expectations. If #3 meets expectations and #4 performs below expectations, #4 is not supposed to jump #3. If anything, FSU should have moved down, because of the six tops teams, they were the only one that performed below expectations.

quote:

---

Poll inertia is not a good argument for ranking teams. The earlier poll is not binding in any way, and is not a basis for continuing to rank teams.

"Hey, we have this terrible precedent. Let's be sure to carry it over to our new system!"

---

I agree with this 100%, which is why I understood the Committee dropping FSU in previous weeks, despite the fact that they were the defending national champions and undefeated. If the Committee had done things the old way, FSU would have gone into the weekend ranked #1. However, teams should have to actually do something to overcome poll inertia, which Ohio State did and FSU didn't. The Committee basically reverted to the old way retroactively with FSU.

Releasing any polls before the final selection by the playoff committee is the stupidity here. If they simply didn't post a poll every Tuesday, people couldn't say crap about TCU being 3rd or tOSU being 4th. By publishing that poll 5 days earlier, the committee set themselves up to look like fools.

Wisconsin is an extremely overrated and one dimensional team that LSU beat with a horrid QB and a defense that was a sieve with Welter at MLB.

Them running through a horrid big 10 doesn't mean jack. Outside of Indiana beating Missouri, the Big 10 proved all season that they didn't belong in any discussion for the playoffs.

They pulled back up in the rankings by having little depth in their conference. They had bad teams and good teams, while looking at the SEC, they had a plethora of good teams that knocked each other down and same goes for the Pac 10.

There were three legit title contenders in the Big XII in Baylor, TCU and KSU, and the Big XII had a decent record in OOC unlike the Big Ten.

TCU beat Minnesota, West Virginia beat Maryland, Iowa State (worst team in the Big XII) beat Iowa (middle pack Big Ten). KSU kept up close with Auburn.

The Big Ten had 1 legitimate OOC win all season, yet somehow proved to be better than the Big XII that had 3 against them alone. There in lies the problem with giving the spot to tOSU.

quote:

---

Releasing any polls before the final selection by the playoff committee is the stupidity here. If they simply didn't post a poll every Tuesday, people couldn't say crap about TCU being 3rd or tOSU being 4th. By publishing that poll 5 days earlier, the committee set themselves up to look like fools.

---

Amen!

quote:

---

TCU beat Minnesota

---

TCU beat Minnesota 30-7, while Ohio State only beat them 31-24.

EDIT: I was glad to see Gary Patterson take it all in stride, and blame himself for losing to Baylor in the first place. He's spent enough time in the non-AQ conferences to know that when you're not a big name, you're going to always get screwed when you put your fate in the hands of closed-door selection committees.