Blogpoll Ballot Week 14 (Draft)

Your imagined scenario is missing a piece of information: Texas Tech, also 11-1, is the team that beat Texas.

In a two-way tie, head-to-head should rule. Obviously. In a three-way tie where the teams went rock-paper-scissors on each other, head-to-head can't rule by itself because it doesn't determine anything. And I don't see why it's any more legitimate to throw out one team and go back to head-to-head than it is to compare all three on the same scale and pick the top from that alone. That's not to say there isn't a case for Texas - I think there is if you factor in the increased degree of difficulty in having the OU-Mizzou-OkSt-TTU gauntlet all in a row. But there is a reasonable case for Oklahoma (which really wouldn't be there if Tech wasn't involved in the tie, because of head-to-head).

It's based on them beating absolutely no one of consequence. Doc Saturday goes into this in a bit more detail, but suffice to say Alabama's schedule thus far is virtually equivalent to Utah's. The only real difference between the two is that Alabama's opponents are big names with no game instead of no-names with no game.

Yeah, Texas got screwed -- but, who deserves it more!

(Let the flame wars begin!!!)

(Just kidding!!)

Texas Tech beat Texas (not on a neutral field, but you can't throw it out just because of that). Both are 11-1. Plenty of "subjective" factors are "outweighing the obvious" there.

This isn't a two-team tie, and I wish people would quit pretending it is. There is a case for Texas; "45-35" is not that case (unless you want to hear "39-33" and "65-21" in response).

Texas Tech and Texas played each other and have equal records.

you have to put Texas over Oklahoma, Texas Tech over Texas, and Oklahoma over Texas Tech. Good luck figuring out how to do that.

Brian. Brian. Brian. Have you lost all decency? Have you lost your marbles? I live in Philly, root for PSU, and even I can see idiocy in your "logic." You are only comparing two teams, not three.

You compare SOS between Tex and OK.
Tex - Mizzou, Kansas (not KState) and Ark; AND OKLAHOMA!
OU - Kansas, TCU, Cincy, AND TTECH.

There is no question who should get the nod in this scenario. If you were only comparing 2 teams, and they were Tech and Tex, then Tech should get the nod.

You must not be a proponent of playoffs. Because obviously you do not care about results on the field.

because they're playing Florida. It's simple. The win, they're in and should be in as #1 if they beat a damned fine Florida team.

The reason I feel like TT has to be moved down in the H2H discussion is they're the only team to have gotten embarrassed by one of the 3 teams in play. Also, their victory over Texas was a home night game and via a last second touchdown.

An OT win against Nebraska (in Lubbock) and a nail biter against 4-8 Baylor (also in Lubbock) in a statement game also should be considered.

Other factors that favor Texas for me personally are that Oklahoma's defense was terrible against Ok St, giving up 41 points. The game was much closer than the final score indicated and this was Oklahoma's chance to make a statement. The Texas D has done a much better job down the stretch. Oklahoma has been running up the score to compensate for the obvious, a glaring loss to a team that would finish with the same 11-1 record. Texas was not in the same position.

Also, should recent BCS failures count for absolutely nothing?

2003: LSU 21, Oklahoma 14
2004: USC 55, Oklahoma 19
2005: DNQ
2006: Boise 43, Oklahoma 42
2007: WVU 48, Oklahoma 28

All of this is really crappy logic, I admit. But the system requires the best crappy logic to pick the winner. To me that's Texas.

EDIT: Hypothetical here. If Texas and Oklahoma would have played their annual rivalry game this past weekend, instead of 10/11, and all results in the Big 12 were exactly the same including Texas beating Okla 45-35, would people still put Oklahoma ahead of Texas? Probably not. Sadly it's people with a poor memory, fascination with final scores (e.g. perceived style points) and empathy for outgoing legendary coaches (see Nebraska 1997) that decide the MNC.

in the 2nd paragraph. The head-to-head argument punishes OU for beating Texas Tech by too much.

It's not like Texas Tech is 8-4 and happened to be 7-1 in the conference standings. They won 11 games and had the best win over Oklahoma State (by far) and Kansas than the other two--looking at 2 of their 4 common opponents. I'd argue Nevada is better than any team on Texas' non-conference schedule as well.

I think Texas Tech is simply being punished for losing late (like most teams are in the polls). If they had lost by 44 to start the year, but finished with the defining win over Texas and then a torching of Oklahoma State, where do you think they'd be ranked? I bet it's higher than 7th. As you mentioned, they are still 4th in the computers.

And had Nebraska won the tiebreaker instead of Missouri in the North and Texas in the South, Texas Tech would be able to say the same thing. Would anyone think that was ludicrous then?

Ordinarily I'm sympathetic to the argument that with equal records, the winner should be ahead - but that's impossible here because three of them split the round-robin and beat everyone else. That Texas is the team that winds up watching the team they beat play in the title game does not make it any more unfair than if it were OU or TTU.

Rice is 9-3 for the first time in 55 years and deserves a lot of accolades for their season (Chase Clement is, bar none, the most underrated player in America). They wouldn't come within 3 TDs of TCU.