TCU taking it on the chin. I don't think Baylor survives the beef of their schedule without Seth Russell. Lastly, perception is everything and Okie State has a longer climb from their current ranking. That being said, I doubt OSU gets through unscathed as well.
Big XII likely to miss the playoff again at this rate ...
- Thread starter The Bell Tolls for Thee
- Start date
baby steps. If the the lack of a conference championship game continues to keep us out of the big picture, then we'll probably add teams to have one at some point.
Its fairly obvious from the way they ranked TCU and Baylor that the committee is not impressed. So outside of those two, Okie State is the only other team with a chance. However, it seems that ND with one loss and both Bama and LSU with one loss are more highly regarded undefeated Big XII teams. I just think TCU is about to lose to OSU and Baylor is unlikely to be undefeated without its QB. OSU could still stumble with its schedule including a surging Sooner team, but even if they are undefeated, they may get passed over by a committee with obvious bias (not personal bias, but NCAA dollar bias, as we all know cash is what's driving this bus)
I agree even though I don't want to. I think OSU has a chance to run the table now, and we can only hope the winner of OSU-Baylor does indeed run the table. If they do, I dont think they can keep them out. If they do indeed have a loss, I dont think any of our teams would get in over one-loss SEC B10 P10 champs, the only question would really be if one of those conferences get a 2nd team, does any of those conferences have upsets in their conference championship games, does the ACC beat themselves out of contention, or does a Notre Dame end up in.. it will be interesting, but i agree, doesn't look good.
So many things can still happen in the other conferences that might benefit the eventual Big 12 champion.
You guys also seem to be forgetting Oklahoma is exactly the type of old-money, blue-blood, name brand that the phony committee and their fat-cat TV-network employers want included in the invitational anyway. If the Sooners are our champ, remember they'll also have the best non-conference win of anyone in our league.
This thing is far from panic time yet.
You guys also seem to be forgetting Oklahoma is exactly the type of old-money, blue-blood, name brand that the phony committee and their fat-cat TV-network employers want included in the invitational anyway. If the Sooners are our champ, remember they'll also have the best non-conference win of anyone in our league.
This thing is far from panic time yet.
So we improve the conference by adding weaker teams. I believe it, actually. It's kind of a f&^ked up world. TCU and Baylor or OKSt need to run the table. If they don't, tough shit. It is what it is. But we won't be a better conference just because we add two teams and play a championship game and have divisions. There are STILL only 4 slots for 5 power conferences. All we can do is make the path to the NC easier by adding teams. It won't actually be better football.
I'm not for expansion just for the hell of it either. Adding poor quality programs does dilute the product. Just pointing out that the current committee rankings show circular logic. Clemson is the number one team in the country ... they are undefeated and beat Notre Dame. Notre Dame is number 5 because they are so good that they almost beat Clemson who is number one. No excuse for a 1 loss Bama who got beat handily by a then 2 loss Ole Miss team to be ahead of Baylor or TCU in the initial poll. I fear that this committee idea has done nothing other than make it a much more subjective situation that can allow them to rationalize any four teams from a list of about 6-8 contenders when its all said and done. I'm just pointing out that now the Big XII only has 2 chances. Baylor with a freshman starting QB that looked far less streamline against KSU and Oklahoma State, which even if they go undefeated, need 10 teams above them give the committee good reason to drop below the Cowboys crawling out of their current 14 spot. That is assuming they get past both Baylor and a surging Oklahoma, which is a quality team that somehow managed to take themselves out of the equation with that awful loss against Texas. Although, like tOSU last year, they could overlook that loss and find some reasoning to get them in if they really wanted to at 11-1.
You think that the committee, with TCU at 8-0 behind two other one loss teams, is going to put one loss TCU in above the teams they already have ranked ahead them with one loss as well?
Hell no. I think it's a travesty and is utter silliness and blatant favortism to the big name brands and schools of other conferences.
The committee will put 1-loss teams in though. Just none from the BXII.
The committee will put 1-loss teams in though. Just none from the BXII.
1 loss Oklahoma or Texas teams will get different treatment. Part of that is name, but when you choose to schedule the way Baylor and OSU have, you are making it easy for the committee to downgrade you.
If this conference is relying on Oklahoma State...then its in trouble.
We should have beaten the Cowboys at home....and we are hardly world beaters...
We should have beaten the Cowboys at home....and we are hardly world beaters...
I agree with you and I have a feeling we will find out, because Oklahoma might just run the table.
The main problem is , the big name that Oklahoma has that the others don't...could very likely be fighting with the one team with a bigger name for that 4th spot.
B1G and SEC champs are auto bids.
UNC beating clemson is unlikely. NC is playing well but Clemson really is very good.
So the 4th spot is either an undefeated b12 team or ND if ND runs the table IMO.
If ND loses to Stanford (who could be a 1 loss pac champ) and theres a 1 loss b12 champ, its going to be very interesting.
Id love for ND to run the table and somehow not get in though, just to stick it to them for not being in a conference.
Similar threads
