Jump to content

The Home Stretch - Big 12 Championship Scenarios

Js1

By Js1
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 700
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Hmbre97
Hmbre97
The Ace of Aces
The Ace of Aces

Beat the ever living fuck out of Texas Tech on principle. Make all scenarios irrelevant. 

Pato del Muerto
Pato del Muerto

Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no way to determine a champion

Posted Images

alphahydro

alphahydro 337

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

This is how it should be but the language of the tiebreaker rules does support the other interpretation. It says that once "one team gains an advantage and is seeded" then they go to the other teams. But then it says compare those to the "next highest" teams. The published tiebreaker rules are a complete and total mess. 

I agree that it says this - "'once "one team gains an advantage and is seeded' then they go to the [remaining] teams." 

But there is no applicable rule that would "seed" OU without putting TX in the championship game. 

After the ISU tiebreaker, OU didn't get seeded.  OU and TX are still tied after the ISU tiebreaker.   

So another way to put it is - after you apply the ISU tiebreaker, what tiebreaker do you apply next to TX and OU?  coin toss?  strength of schedule?  Next highest rated common opponent?

After the ISU tiebreaker, it looks like this:

Section 1 (2 way tiebreaker rules)

tiebreaker rule A 

tiebreaker rule B

tiebreaker rule C

Section 2 (3+ way tie tiebreaker rules)

tiebreaker rule i (only applies if all tied teams played each other)

tiebreaker rule ii **** ISU Tiebreaker/ YOU ARE HERE****

tiebreaker rule iii

After YOU ARE HERE - what tie breaker do you apply next?  do you go to Section 2 tiebreaker rule iii?  Do you repeat tiebreaker rule ii with the next highest ranked common opp of TX/OU?  Do you go to Section 3 tiebreaker rule i?  Where do you go next? 

There are two parts of the rules.  (1) A list of tiebreakers, and then (2) a set of rules about the order in which you apply the tiebreakers.  The orange and green sentences tell us about the order in which we apply the tiebreaker rules. 

The rules clearly say if you have a three way tie you start in Section 2 at rule i but if at any point you get to two teams, then you go immediately to Section 1.  "If at any point the multiple-team tie is reduced to two teams, the two-team tie-breaking procedure will be applied."  In other words, if you start in Section 2 and at any point you get down to two teams, you immediately go to the top of Section 1.   The very top of Section 1 says if you have two teams tied for first (as opposed to two teams tied for second), those two teams play in the championship.   The sentence reads "If two teams are tied for first place both teams will participate in the championship game and the winner of the head-to-head will be the #1 seed." 

This language "After one team has an advantage and is “seeded”, all remaining teams in the multiple-team tiebreaker will repeat the multiple-team tie-breaking procedure" doesn't apply after the ISU tiebreaker, because no team got seeded.  I think that's the mistake people are making.  They think the green language means once you eliminate OSU (via the ISU tiebreaker) you start at the top again with OU/TX and look at their head-to-head tiebreaker.  But that's just wrong.  It's a misreading of the green language and ignores the orange language.  It's a violation of the part of the rules that tells you which tiebreaker rule you apply in which circumstance. 

In fact, the green language serves a useful purpose, but it can only apply if you start with four+ teams tied for first and you run through section two and eliminate one team.  For example, say there were four teams tied for first at 11-1, and one of those four teams beat the other three head-to-head.  At that point, that team is seeded.  Then you have three teams left, and without the green language, it's not clear which tiebreaker you apply next, so you need a rule saying what you do with the remaining three teams.  The green sentence says after you seed the one team, those remaining three teams start over in the Section 2 rules.  That's how the green statement works.  And it makes sense that the Green language sends you back to the top of Section 2 when you have 3+ teams remaining and to Section 1 when you have two remaining.   We can think of it as green is the general rule and orange is the exception when you get down to two teams.  There's no other way to read the rules.  There's no ambiguity.  Someone at the Big XII just read it too quickly (imo).   There is no legitimate way to read the rules to say after **YOU ARE HERE** you apply head to head TX/OU, seed OU, then start again with TX/OSU.  There's nothing ambiguous about it.  The big xii just messed up.  First, because that reading ignores the orange language.  Second because there is nothing in the rules that would tell you to apply the head-to-head tiebreaker to resolve TX/OU (as opposed to next highest ranked opp or coin toss or whatever).  

You are correct that, even if the rules did say to seed OU and compare TX/OSU, there is a weird issue with the word next that makes it unclear which opp you would look at if you were comparing TX and OSU. 

 

anyway, fuck tech. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 34655

Posted
Posted

I agree that's what makes logical sense but my only issue is that I don't believe for a second that the Big 12 would not consider trying to find a way under the terribly written rules that the final CCG with them in the league is not Texas and Oklahoma. 

So again we end up with Texas just needing to beat Tech. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
89Horn

89Horn 1736

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, 6th Street said:

I think they'll end up flipping a coin at a Dairy Queen in some backwoods Texas town

Absolutely not.  The coin flip has to be done in Oklahoma, or Kansas, or Iowa, depending on the schools involved.  Texas, maybe.  
- Various other schools and Big 12 officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alphahydro

alphahydro 337

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I agree that's what makes logical sense but my only issue is that I don't believe for a second that the Big 12 would not consider trying to find a way under the terribly written rules that the final CCG with them in the league is not Texas and Oklahoma. 

So again we end up with Texas just needing to beat Tech. 

yeah.  i could be wrong but i suspect it's just incompetence on the part of the guy at the big 12 who looked at the rules and told the reporters to hold their horses.  hopefully it never becomes an issue.  and frankly if the team thinks they need to win, it's prolly a good thing. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87184

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, alphahydro said:

yeah.  i could be wrong but i suspect it's just incompetence on the part of the guy at the big 12 who looked at the rules and told the reporters to hold their horses.  hopefully it never becomes an issue.  and frankly if the team thinks they need to win, it's prolly a good thing. 

We’ll probably win on Friday and then the Big 12 will be like “you’ve clinched since you beat ISU, what do you mean there was confusion? Read the tiebreakers”

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87184

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, GTNY said:

The big 12 not publicly clarifying what happens for each outcome prior to any games starting this week is absurd. 

They already told you there’s 128 possibilities. Now you want them to explain them all to you?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87184

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

Only 32 of the 128 have any potential impact on the CCG.

But, the B12 office probably hasn't done that math yet. They exhausted themselves getting the 128 number figured out.

Big 12: we aren’t going to do the work for you. And if you do it, we won’t confirm it until Saturday 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Treefidy

Treefidy 1507

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Has anyone actually come up with a scenario where Texas can’t get in title game? I feel like that hasn’t been explained yet.
 

Texas loses, OU wins, OSU wins, KSU loses? 

B12 just making shit up at this point, per their rules and before you get to the more ambiguous rules they have this to say:

If at any point the multiple-team tie is reduced to two teams, the
two-team tie-breaking procedure will be applied.
 

if at ANY point…. So with the OU, OSU, UT tie scenario OSU get eliminated which means…. There’s 2 teams left, OU gets the #1 seed against UT.

you have to add a 4th tied team for it to make sense the way people are interpreting that UT/OSU start over.   After one team gets the first seed there’s still 3 teams left, you keep going until one is eliminated and them go to the H2H tie breaker for the 2 remaining.  The 4th team got eliminated so they are no longer in the discussion, H2H between 2 and 3.  
they further clarify the rule ny having the word NEXT highest placed common opponent, meaning next/subsequent/following.  In the case that OU gets the #1 seed how could they possibly be the “next” highest placed?  They would be the highest placed and part of why there is a 3 way tie to begin with.  
 

UT has punched its ticket per the rules as they are written, but we know from earlier that the B12 is not above changing the rules through “clarification”.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoctambulantBrobdingnagian

NoctambulantBrobdingnagian 570

Posted
Posted
On 11/20/2023 at 10:29 AM, oSuJeff97 said:

The proper OUsux nomenclature is "we're handling it internally."

E.G. "We watched a video of Joe Mixon punching out a co-ed. We will be handling his punishment internally."

...and, of course, the co-eds punishment will happen internally as well. - ou fan base, probably

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 47203

Posted
Posted
On 11/20/2023 at 6:27 PM, Huckleberry said:

So again we end up with Texas just needing to beat Tech. 

Apologies for not keeping up with all the machinations.  A question:

-- if Texas beats Tech, do any of the 3 teams with 2 losses control their own destiny (i.e., a win gets them in regardless of what the other two do)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oh_snap

oh_snap 694

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Apologies for not keeping up with all the machinations.  A question:

-- if Texas beats Tech, do any of the 3 teams with 2 losses control their own destiny (i.e., a win gets them in regardless of what the other two do)

Yes*, Okie lite owns h2h over both kstate and dirt burglars

 

*the big12 has reserved the right to do whatever the fuck they want by drafting this shit so poorly

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 34655

Posted
Posted

The above is fairly accurate. The Big 12 "clarified" (meaning they actually rewrote the rule but wanted to claim they weren't) the first tiebreaker to say that if one team had beaten all others it was tied in then head-to-head applied to put that team ahead of the rest. So Oklahoma State is actually rooting for us because that puts their destiny in their own hands instead of having to trust Big 12 tiebreaker decisions if we fall back and make it a bigger tie clusterfuck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texas Jeff

Texas Jeff 1999

Posted
Posted

It's over in Norman and OU's win means the Big XII championship will feature a 1 or 2 loss team vs a 2 loss team.

If Texas wins tonight, they clinch the #1 seed.  I think it's possible that this also eliminates K State, but the tiebreaker rules are hard to follow.

If Texas and Ok State both win, then it's Texas vs Ok State because Ok State has head to head vs both K-State and OU.  If Texas wins but Ok State loses, then there is a possible tie between K State and OU.  But OU beat top seed Texas, and Texas beat K State, giving the tiebreaker to OU.  I don't see a tiebreaker for K State should Texas win.

If my logic is correct, then a Texas win means it will be Texas vs OU or Ok State, depending on the outcome of the Ok State / BYU game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...