Before Texas Tech and Oklahoma even played, talking heads were already discussing the potential calamities that could result from the BCS if Oklahoma were to beat Texas Tech.
Since then, the world has fallen apart at the potential outcomes that can result from the thrashing of Texas Tech. Typical examples of pundits doomsday rants are:
Pundit #1: Oh my god,the humanity! What is going to happen!?! Should Texas be ahead!?! Should Oklahoma!?! My mind is going to explode! The world is ending! What do we do!?!
Pundit #2: Well this is just a complete and absolute disaster and an example of why the BCS is a terrible system. We need a playoff now so we can decide who should really play for the championship. Texas beat this Oklahoma team and should play, and we know this ridiculous system is going to have Oklahoma jump Texas after next week. It's a done deal and it's wrong.
What most of these talking heads skip over, in order to sensationalize the present just a little bit more, is that THE SEASON IS NOT OVER.
While on your way to blasting the BCS for being some evil creation of the Illuminati, you forget that THERE ARE STILL GAMES TO BE PLAYED.
What has irked me so much in the past is when people jump to conclusions with outstanding factors still left to be determined.
Every year it is doom and gloom, the BCS is wrong, and something must be done to fix it. Every year people jump the gun, and then teams lose games they shouldn't and most of the time the problems that were going to cause the apocalypse are fixed.
While everyone is claiming that either Oklahoma should be in the Big 12 Championship or that they shouldn't, the fact remains that they still have to play Oklahoma State. Texas still plays Texas A&M.
There's still two more weeks in the season, and a multitude of possibilities to take place. Think about the situation in college football last year with two weeks left in the season, and what the end result was. A bunch of teams lost to even lead us to the end of the season debate over who should be in the championship.
So, before we even get into a debate over who should be in the Big 12 Championship and whether the BCS is valid, let's wait to see if Oklahoma beats Oklahoma State. I mean, with everyone saying how Texas or Oklahoma should be in their conference championship, Oklahoma could lose and Texas Tech would end up in the game (as long as they win out).
Now, if things remain constant and Texas and Oklahoma do win out, I personally think Texas should be in the game.
I think it is completely valid to consider that Texas lost to Texas Tech while Oklahoma destroyed them. However, I don't consider this point to outweigh the head to head matchup that took place between Texas and Oklahoma.
The reason I feel the Texas Tech situation takes a back seat is because no one is even considering Texas Tech as an option if Texas and Oklahoma win out.
If Texas Tech is not going to be ranked as high as them and are not even being talked about as an option, then the head to head matchup between Texas and Oklahoma should matter a lot more than who beat or lost to Texas Tech.
If you want to include Texas Tech as an option, fine. But, if you're going to lead them out of consideration for the conference championship, I don't see how you rank Oklahoma above Texas with everything being constant.
The most important thing to remember is that none of it matters until the rest of the games are played.
Hold off on the doom and gloom for another week or two.
3 comments:
Let us not overlook the SEC. I will say it now to be clear, IT IS NOT PROBABLE, but it is possible that Auburn could upset Alabama in the Iron Bowl. The "Flow of the Month" have not won in Tuscaloosa against Auburn...EVER! Or, IF (and again, possible NOT PROBABLE) FSU beats Florida?
What happens if you have a one loss Florida/Bama, or a two loss Florida vs. one loss Bama? It could be Bama loses to Florida, making both teams 2 loss teams at the end of the season. Then you have a real mess, with the one loss Big 12s, Pac 10s, Big 10s, non-BCS teams all screaming, not to mention the SEC seceding from NCAA.
I don't have a problem with their being controversy. In fact, I don't care if UGA isn't involved. But the fact is, there are some folks out there pushing for the idea that a Big 12 team that doesn't win its division should be considered for the Nat Title game in the right scenario. Of course, UGA was excluded last year under the premise of that very reason. That is absolute crap IMO.
I agree that a one loss Big 12 team who doesn't win their division should not be playing for the MNC, particularly given the precedent set last year by the pollsters.
I guess this year we get to see if they have any notion of consistency (begin laughing now).
Maverick-think about what happens is say Oklahoma loses, Texas loses to Mizzou, Oregon State wins out, and you have Penn State back in the title game (sub the SEC for the Big 12, and have the same scenario). You'd have several one loss non-conference champ teams, and a one loss conference champ Penn State
Post a Comment