- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: TCU was robbed blind
Posted on 12/8/14 at 11:16 am to nvasil1
Posted on 12/8/14 at 11:16 am to nvasil1
quote:Exactly......who was the "one true" conference champ in the Big 12. By naming them co-champs the Big 12 basically stated that head to head is meaningless. If the CFP committee accepted that premise they as well would have rendered head to head as meaningless.
You stated yourself that conference champs are a major consideration for the committee.
I don't care what the Big 12 calls it....Baylor is the Big 12 champion, based on head to head. They may both get co-champ banners but Baylor wins the tie-breaker.....fact.
1
Posted on 12/8/14 at 11:25 am to dante
quote:
By naming them co-champs the Big 12 basically stated that head to head is meaningless.
Not really. The head-to-head game was just as meaningful as the other conference games. At the end, they both finished with the same record.
quote:
I don't care what the Big 12 calls it....Baylor is the Big 12 champion, based on head to head
And so is TCU...fact
This post was edited on 12/8/14 at 11:26 am
Posted on 12/8/14 at 11:40 am to nvasil1
quote:Have you read the tie-breaker procedure for the Big 12?
At the end, they both finished with the same record.
quote:
The following procedure will determine the Big 12 Conference representative to the Sugar Bowl (or alternate College Football Playoff game when the Sugar Bowl is a semifinal) in the event of a first-place or alternate place tie (for the avoidance of doubt, only Conference records will be used throughout the process):If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 11:44 am to nvasil1
quote:
And so is TCU...fact
You are correct....Ole Miss has a 2003 West Division Championship banner in their stadium
LSU has 2003 SECC Banner and 2003 BCS Champion Banner.
Who was the "one true" champion of the SEC West in 2003?
Posted on 12/8/14 at 11:46 am to dante
I did last week. And Bowlsby said that would only apply for their Sugar Bowl rep. The playoff committee could choose who they wanted.
Bowlsby might be an idiot, but he was smart to not push Baylor as their sole playoff representative if the opportunity existed for both Baylor and TCU to get in as Big XII champs.
In the end, the committee got the top 6 right IMO.
Bowlsby might be an idiot, but he was smart to not push Baylor as their sole playoff representative if the opportunity existed for both Baylor and TCU to get in as Big XII champs.
In the end, the committee got the top 6 right IMO.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 11:47 am to nvasil1
Nice to know that you think Alabama was 2011 Western division champion
Posted on 12/8/14 at 11:51 am to nvasil1
quote:
In the end, the committee got the top 6 right IMO.
that comment would have been nice to know. So you agree Baylor should be ranked ahead of TCU. 
Posted on 12/8/14 at 11:52 am to dante
quote:
Who was the "one true" champion of the SEC West in 2003?
Technically we both were over the entire conference season. That's why Ole Miss got to hang a banner.
The head-to-head tiebreaker was needed by the SEC to send a team to the conference championship game. That didn't apply to the Big XII this year.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 12:00 pm to dante
Yeah I've been arguing against TCU getting in this entire thread. I'm just against the idea that Baylor and TCU can't share a title when they played the same conference schedule and finished with the same record.
TCU has no room for complaint since they blew a 3 TD lead in the 4th qtr in Waco. But Baylor has no room for complaint since they lost by 2 TDs against WVU.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 12:05 pm to nvasil1
quote:And it probably never will. Since the Big 12 refused name an outright champion they forced the CFP to do it for them. The CPF rightfully could not take TCU because, since the beginning of football time....head to head has always been the first tie-breaker.
The head-to-head tiebreaker was needed by the SEC to send a team to the conference championship game. That didn't apply to the Big XII this year.
The only scenario where this might come into play in the future was if Baylor had an out of conference loss and TCU did not. No doubt in that situation TCU would have remained ranked higher than Baylor but technically they still would not be conference champion. The CFP already said they would "heavily weigh" conference champions. Unless, one of the other conference champions had 2 losses TCU still gets left out of the play-off.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 12:42 pm to diat150
quote:
which one is not like the others?
TCU, they didn't win their conference outright. Also, if we use tiebreakers like other conferences do, TCU didn't win its conference period.
It's pretty simple really. There are 5 power conferences and 4 playoff spots. Someone must be left out. To include TCU as one of the 4 when it didn't win its conference is completely illogical.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 12:48 pm to MetArl15
quote:
TCU, they didn't win their conference outright
Neither did Baylor.
quote:
Also, if we use tiebreakers like other conferences do, TCU didn't win its conference period.
The Big XII disagrees.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 1:04 pm to nvasil1
quote:And guess which conference of the Big 5 was left out of the playoff.
The Big XII disagrees.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 1:13 pm to bayoujd
quote:
Baylor has the biggest gripe of all. They were ranked about OSU all year. And they beat TCU straight up.
This.
But OSU's win over Wisconsin was ridiculous. If FSU had one loss, they'd be left out, Baylor would be in, and no one would be pissed off outside of Tallahassee because everyone knows FSU isn't great.
But if my aunt had nuts...
Posted on 12/8/14 at 1:17 pm to MetArl15
quote:
And guess which conference of the Big 5 was left out of the playoff.
So...?
If Baylor wanted in, they should've beaten WVU or scheduled better OOC. If TCU wanted in, they shouldn't have blown a 3 TD lead to Baylor. And they both still had a chance to make it had a couple of the conference championship games gone differently.
How the Big XII determines their champion didn't screw them.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 1:58 pm to dante
quote:
Care to offer an explanation?
The commish did not "change" anything, the co-champs is stated in the bylaws - he had no control over that.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 2:00 pm to Baloo
quote:
The Big 12 wesbite states that they would submit as their representative, in case of a two-way tie, the team that won head to head. They did not do this. They went against their stated procedure in order to get two bites at the apple, and it backfired spectacularly. The Playoff's stated criteria for breaking a tie, and let's call these three in an essentially dead heat, are SOS, head to head, and conference titles. What the big 12 did is weakened Baylor's conference title claim so they are no longer the Big 12 champ, and are now just a co-champ. Ohio St, by virtue of an undisputed championship, wins that tiebreaker over BOTH Baylor and TCU. Baylor wins head to head over TCU, and SOS is a veritable dead heat. I think TCU had the toughest SOS, but not significantly. And it's worth pointing out that Baylor's "terrible loss" is TCU's third best win. If TCU's schedule is so tough, why is one of their best wins a disqualifying loss for Baylor? Really, the Big 12 gave the committee an excuse to screw their teams by the stated criteria, and the committee eagerly seized upon it, as they'd rather have Ohio St in the playoffs. By the rules, Ohio St. was the easy choice due to the Big 12's hamfisted behavior in crowning/not crowning a champion.
lol...
Y'all are a spot above us and STILL crying.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 2:36 pm to RummelTiger
That's not crying. I'm explaining why Ohio St. was the proper selection. I said the committee got it right. Looking at the committee's criteria, they pretty much had to take Ohio St, once the Big 12 refused to call Baylor its undisputed champion.
Crying is a thread entitled "TCU got robbed blind" when TCU had clearly the weakest claim based on the written criteria provided by the committee.
Crying is a thread entitled "TCU got robbed blind" when TCU had clearly the weakest claim based on the written criteria provided by the committee.
Posted on 12/8/14 at 2:47 pm to Baloo
OSU was, probably, the right selection...but I think y'all are better than them. As for the debate, y'all should have been given the distinction of going to the Sugar Bowl or playoff game - even though we're co-champs.
I guess, but it wasn't us doing it.
quote:
Crying is a thread entitled "TCU got robbed blind"
I guess, but it wasn't us doing it.
This post was edited on 12/8/14 at 2:49 pm
Page 8 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News