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

JBJ

JBJ 3827

Posted
Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, WBT said:

Yes, all of the P4 divisionless 16-team conferences going forward are always going to have ccg scenarios that are as clear as a bell

They need to do RPI in place of the common opponent step.  Easy to calculate, understood, been around for a while.  Rare chance of a next step.

Edited by JBJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87183

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

Yes. Which is why davis shouldn’t have been so adamant that they were easy to read and understand, and he had done so accurately. 

Agreed. You wait to get confirmation from the Big 12 first. Heck, just say Texas has the inside track or something. Don’t be so definitive without confirmation 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LOHorn

LOHorn 277

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, 'stache said:

It would make sense to go to record against OU as the highest ranked common opponent, but the rule says The “next highest” opponent meaning below OSU and Texas. That would be both ISU and KSU at 6-3 because the scenario requires ISU to beat KSU to knock them out of the tie. UT is 2-0, OSU is 1-1, so UT wins that two way tie breaker.

IMG_2605.jpeg

Good point. I assume the conference doesn’t see it that way,  but that’s the way it is worded. 

Edited by LOHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87183

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

Worse than his previous reporting and attitude is that this mea culpa didn't include the followup question to the Big 12 "why hasn't Texas clinched? Explain the terribly written tiebreaker rules."

That too. The follow up would have been “release all the possible scenarios then”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kwix

Kwix 2497

Posted
Posted

Ok, I know the conference is saying we haven't clinched but they can't read their own fucking rules.

 

So in a 3 way tie with Texas, OU, and OSU

Multiple team tiebreaker rules:

Step 1: get skipped because we did not all play each other.

Step 2: Record against the next highest placed common opponent in the standings.  (This is ISU, which Texas and OU beat, and OSU lost)

 

At this point, you read the intro to the multiple team tiebreaker rules:

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

Then you look at the first line of the 2 team tiebreaker rules:

"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."

 

Seams pretty clear that OU and Texas go in this scenario.

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87183

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, Kwix said:

Record against the next highest placed common opponent in the standings.

This seems to be where the confusion is, actually. Whether the intent is “highest placed common opponent” as in whoever ends up in first or NEXT highest placed (ie, below both teams)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grande Mart

Grande Mart 533

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Kwix said:

Ok, I know the conference is saying we haven't clinched but they can't read their own fucking rules.

 

So in a 3 way tie with Texas, OU, and OSU

Multiple team tiebreaker rules:

Step 1: get skipped because we did not all play each other.

Step 2: Record against the next highest placed common opponent in the standings.  (This is ISU, which Texas and OU beat, and OSU lost)

 

At this point, you read the intro to the multiple team tiebreaker rules:

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

Then you look at the first line of the 2 team tiebreaker rules:

"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."

 

Seams pretty clear that OU and Texas go in this scenario.

 

 

For the Big 12 Office, this is the concern, working overtime trying to find ways to reinterpret the rules to not allow this to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kwix

Kwix 2497

Posted
Posted

I really don't think the line "If at any point the multiple-team tie is reduced to two teams, the two-team tie-breaking procedure will be applied." means pick a #1 seed then start over.

The 2 team tiebreakers clearly states "If two teams are tied for first place both teams will participate in the championship game"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87183

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Alex says highest ranked common opponent, Big 12 says the “next” highest. Not THE highest. This is the confusion and is so poorly worded

Quote

2. Win percentage against the next highest placed common opponent in the standings (based on record in all games played within the Conference), proceeding through the standings

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mdmost

mdmost 44048

Posted
Posted

We're not losing to Texas F'ing Tech. You think Sark won't have the Yormark remarks about winning in Austin on repeat all week. Or the aftermath of the loss last year where our players were getting shoved by those STD carrying mouthbreathers? Or Joey McGuire's mouth running non-stop. The team will be highly motivated to stomp the shit out of Tech. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kwix

Kwix 2497

Posted
Posted

If you read this whole paragraph together:
 

"In the event of a tie between more than two teams, the following procedures will be used. 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. If at any point the multiple-team tie is reduced to two teams, the two-team tie-breaking procedure will be applied."

 

The logical interpretation is:  If 1 team has an advantage, they are in and then start over.  If 2 teams have an advantage, they are both in.

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

'stache 22143

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Alex says highest ranked common opponent, Big 12 says the “next” highest. Not THE highest. This is the confusion and is so poorly worded

 

I do t think it’s confusing. Next means next so below the tied teams in the standing. It won’t be record against OU but ISU/KSU. It makes more sense to go to the top of the standing but they’d have to rewrite it for next year. The earlier clarification didn’t change the rule, it was meaningless as written. Removing “next” would be rewriting the rule and won’t happen. Won’t matter anyway. No way you lose to tech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87183

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I do t think it’s confusing. Next means next so below the tied teams in the standing. It won’t be record against OU but ISU/KSU. It makes more sense to go to the top of the standing but they’d have to rewrite it for next year. The earlier clarification didn’t change the rule, it was meaningless as written. Removing “next” would be rewriting the rule and won’t happen. Won’t matter anyway. No way you lose to tech.

And yet no one seems to be able to interpret it the same 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paul Wesley

Paul Wesley 3313

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Redneck Mutha said:

*We will have to wait until next weekend, after which the B12 will release its tiebreaker rules that will determine how to fuck Texas out of a CCG berth.

Yormark and Weisner have been openly mocking us and cheering against us for YEARS. 

There is no motive at all for them to "clarify" anything this week, when their IDEAL SCENARIO is to have vaguely-written rules that allow them to take ANY teams except Texas. 

Edited by Paul Wesley
Link to comment
Share on other sites
idigTexas

idigTexas 2330

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, BlackCat said:

I want OU. These leftover fuckfaces wont even have a dog in the fight as we cropdust the conference on our way out. Plus I doubt it would matter, but if we were to obliterate the only team we lost to it could potentially make a difference in the playoff picture. 

I like this thought, and it comes with the added benefit of giving us the opportunity to avenge our one loss, which may be a small factor in whether we make it into the CFP.  On the other hand, not getting to play OkSt, means they would be the only left behind team with scoreboard over us, courtesy of their win last season.  

Ultimately, I care most about beating Tech.  If that happens, I won't really give a shit who we play.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
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...