You can make any argument against the Big 12 teams that you want, I still don't think the whole conference championship game thing should factor in. And if it does, the committee should say that they are penalizing the Big 12 for not playing an extra game.

 

Grilling the whole "One True Champion" phrasing as why the Big 12 might miss the playoff seems to make the argument that the committee is full of idiots.

 

"They said they have one true champion, but they gave out TWO trophies!!! How do we evaluate them?"

The Big 12 changed the rules two weeks ago to try and game the system for a team they though had the best chance to make it. It's their fault anyway.

Big 12 will inherently have more losses than conferences that only play 8 conference games.

 

+/- 500 marks are more important than total wins or losses.

Joe Rexrode ‏@joerexrode 3m3 minutes ago

 

So it's OSU vs. Bama in the Sugar and FSU vs. Oregon in the Rose.

Yeah, after the 59-0 win I think most people would have been shocked if OSU was left out. I don't think they would have made it if that game was close, but that's a moot point.

So glad mizzou left Big 12.

The Big 12 changed the rules two weeks ago to try and game the system for a team they though had the best chance to make it. It's their fault anyway.

 

What rule is that?

I think top 4 got in.

What rule is that?

They eliminated head to head as the determining factor.

What rule is that?

"One true cbampion"

Long DOES say that it was the title game. I don't agree with it, but he's telling the Big 12 to add a title game.

They eliminated head to head as the determining factor.

 

No they didn't. They would always hand out a trophy for any teams that had the same record at the top. Head to head was still going to be used as the tiebreaker if a game required a "Big 12 Champion" such as when the Sugar Bowl isn't a semifinal.

 

 

Tiebreaker Procedures

Effective June 2014

 

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.

Long DOES say that it was the title game. I don't agree with it, but he's telling the Big 12 to add a title game.

They've said it was a big factor all along

Bing bing bing

 

 

 

Playoff committee got it right.

 

 

No issue with the top 4. Really wouldnt had an issue with any result of the top 4. I have an issue with how they feel the need to have a weekly ranking, especially if theyre going to have a clean start every week.

 

 

This Long guy is an idiot. So OSU moves up based on performance, not because of something TCU did. Ok, that's fine but why moved TCU down to 6? What changed yesterday to drop TCU behind Baylor? We've known for weeks Baylor won the head to head yet they kept TCU ahead. Probably just moved Baylor ahead for consolation.

 

Like I was saying...

 

Nice guess, lol. Apparently everything I had read and heard from the committee was wrong or BS.

 

And the weekly TV rankings were nothing but made for TV bulls***. 92% of the season puts TCU 3 spots higher than Baylor, but add in the final 8% and suddenly Baylor jumps them? That seems crazy.

 

 

I mentioned multiple times your wins far outweigh any "bad losses". The selection committee made that clear over and over again yet people still bringing it up.

No issue with the top 4. Really wouldnt had an issue with any result of the top 4. I have an issue with how they feel the need to have a weekly ranking, especially if theyre going to have a clean start every week.

 

 

This Long guy is an idiot. So OSU moves up based on performance, not because of something TCU did. Ok, that's fine but why moved TCU down to 6? What changed yesterday to drop TCU behind Baylor? We've known for weeks Baylor won the head to head yet they kept TCU ahead. Probably just moved Baylor ahead for consolation.

Baylor beat a top ten ranked team yesterday.

Bama opens at -9.5 and Oregon -8.

Baylor beat a top ten ranked team yesterday.

 

 

 

TCU had already beaten that same team this year but 3 TDs.

 

 

The committee has kept saying all year they are ranking the best 4 teams. So what has changed in a week where TCU dropped 3 spots behind a team we've known for weeks had already beaten them?

 

 

 

Bama opens at -9.5 and Oregon -8.

 

 

 

an Alabama and FSU teaser sounds appealing.

Long DOES say that it was the title game. I don't agree with it, but he's telling the Big 12 to add a title game.

 

Yet had FSU or OSU lost yesterday, Baylor would have benefited from NOT having a title game.

Its about money, if it was Texas or OK Big 12 would have had a much better shot. No ones taking a risk that Baylor/TCU can sell their ticket allotment and bring in the ratings OSU can.

 

OSU deserved to be in it.

Last week Michigan State was ranked higher than Mississippi State, but after their idleness this weekend, Mississippi State somehow passed them.

 

What does that mean? The Fighting Beckmans are going bowling!

Last week Michigan State was ranked higher than Mississippi State, but after their idleness this weekend, Mississippi State somehow passed them.

 

What does that mean? The Fighting Beckmans are going bowling!

 

 

 

does anyone buy the credibility of this selection committee?

Nice guess, lol. Apparently everything I had read and heard from the committee was wrong or BS.

 

And the weekly TV rankings were nothing but made for TV bulls***. 92% of the season puts TCU 3 spots higher than Baylor, but add in the final 8% and suddenly Baylor jumps them? That seems crazy.

It wasn't a guess. I put all the facts out there for you but you wouldn't consider them.

It wasn't a guess. I put all the facts out there for you but you wouldn't consider them.

 

And I put all the facts I had out there too, yet the committee just seems to be making it up as they go.

 

 

Stewart Mandel @slmandel · 3h 3 hours ago

Long: "The fact there were co-champions in the Big 12 had no bearing on the decision."

 

Stewart Mandel @slmandel · 2h 2 hours ago

Long on Big 12: "We were presented with co champions. In the other situations, we had definitive champions for that conference."