- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why is it taking Texas so long to make a hire?
Posted on 12/20/13 at 2:21 pm to TK421
Posted on 12/20/13 at 2:21 pm to TK421
Ok, I won't argue with your evaluation of the B1G even if I don't agree with it (conference brand, money and power does matter I think).
But please explain to me why in weeks 12 and 13 this year the BCS standings had the undefeated eventual Big 12 champ ranked lower than any other major conference undefeated team at that time? Heck in week 12 a one-loss Stanford was still ranked ahead of the eventual Big 12 champion in the BCS standings.
But please explain to me why in weeks 12 and 13 this year the BCS standings had the undefeated eventual Big 12 champ ranked lower than any other major conference undefeated team at that time? Heck in week 12 a one-loss Stanford was still ranked ahead of the eventual Big 12 champion in the BCS standings.
2
Posted on 12/20/13 at 2:23 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
But please explain to me why in weeks 12 and 13 this year the BCS standings had the undefeated eventual Big 12 champ ranked lower than any other major conference undefeated team at that time? Heck in week 12 a one-loss Stanford was still ranked ahead of the eventual Big 12 champion in the BCS standings.
That's very simple. If you're not Texas or Oklahoma, you will NOT get the benefit of the doubt because of how weak the conference is. Furthermore, Texas and Oklahoma MUST be unbeaten to make the playoff as losses to any of the other 8 teams are weighted much more unfavorably because of the weakness of the conference.
Case in point:
Kansas State - 1998, 2012
Texas Tech - 2008
Oklahoma State - 2011
Baylor - 2013
This post was edited on 12/20/13 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 12/20/13 at 2:28 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
But please explain to me why in weeks 12 and 13 this year the BCS standings had the undefeated eventual Big 12 champ ranked lower than any other major conference undefeated team at that time?
This is where brand comes into play. Had that undefeated eventual Big 12 champ been either Oklahoma or Texas, they would have been ranked higher. In a similar manner, how long would take an undefeated Maryland team to rise to the top five? The perception is that the Big 12 is down because the perennial powers are down, when in reality the bottom tier of that conference has gotten much better recently.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News