Geography lessens: Big 12, among others, needs major fix

[Draegerman]

Link: http://www.sportsline.com/columns/story/11147118


Dec. 2, 2008
By Gregg Doyel
CBSSports.com National Columnist
Tell Gregg your opinion!

Oklahoma will pursue a national championship instead of Texas despite having the same record as Texas and despite the inconvenient truth of having lost to Texas. And that makes lots of you spitting mad.

And you're right. Go ahead and spit.

But hock a loogie in the right direction.

We don't really need an Oklahoma-Missouri rematch in the Big 12 title game, do we? (Getty Images)
The problem isn't the BCS system that would rate the Sooners ahead of the Longhorns, even by a margin as slim as 45-35 the .0128 that separates them in the BCS rankings.

So don't spit on the BCS. And don't spit on the Big 12 tiebreaker system that allowed the BCS rankings to settle the three-way atom-split between Texas, Oklahoma and Texas Tech.

Where do you spit? I'll tell you where to spit. Spit on the most correctable flaw in this entire thing, a flaw so flagrant and so fixable that everyone has managed to look past it, as if it's not even there:

The Big 12's divisions.

Tell me, please, what Missouri has done to earn its place in the Big 12 Championship Game. Won the Big 12 North? Fabulous. Terrific. The Big 12 North is on par with the Big East. South Florida could win the Big 12 North.

But Big 12 rules say Missouri, by virtue of its latitudinal coordinate, deserves to play Oklahoma for the league title.

Ridiculous. In addition to being a blatant grab for money, which is fine, the Big 12 title game was presumably created to identify the best team in the Big 12. How Missouri factors into it this season, I'll never understand. Missouri isn't one of the best two teams in the Big 12. Missouri isn't one of the best four teams in the Big 12, and barely belongs in the top half.

Missouri played three teams from the Big 12 South, and went 1-2 -- and hasn't had to play Oklahoma (yet) or Texas Tech. The Tigers lost to Texas and Oklahoma State, and beat that Baylor juggernaut by a field goal.

Going forward, here's how we fix this thing. The Big 12 can keep its silly North and South divisions, since the goal apparently is to spread around as many crowns as possible. "Big 12 North champion" just has a ring to it, doesn't it? I think the Big 12 ought to dispense with the entire setup and just have a big banquet at the end of every season, regardless of the sport, and give everyone a big T-ball trophy. Pat Knight can bring the orange wedges.

Where was I? Oh, right. Fixing this thing. Here's how:

The Big 12 can keep its silly North and South setup, but at the end of the season, the top two teams -- whoever they are, wherever they're located -- play for the league championship. This season, it would be Texas vs. Oklahoma. Texas Tech would have a complaint, but I think 65-21 ends that complaint quite nicely.

It's not just the Big 12, by the way. Save some of your spit for the SEC and the ACC as well. They also have a conference title game whose No. 1 goal isn't to pit the league's best two teams -- just the best team from one half against the best from another. What if the best two teams are from the same half? Oh well.

This year, the SEC got lucky. The best two teams in the SEC happen to reside in different divisions, with No. 1 Alabama winning the West and No. 2 Florida winning the East.

Yeah, SEC, I said lucky. You were lucky. Or have you already forgotten last season? The second-best team in your conference was clearly Georgia -- yet Georgia didn't make it into the SEC title game, had no chance at playing for the national title, and had to take out its anger on Hawaii in the Sugar Bowl.

In the ACC, they split the league into Atlantic and Coastal, which is really stupid. The only "coast" in the region is the "Atlantic." Which means there is no rhyme or reason to how those schools are split up, beyond the fact that Florida State and Miami had to be separated to make sure no division was dragged down by both of them.

A "conference championship game" that doesn't pit the best two teams in the conference. Brilliant innovation. Right up there with the Internet, only Al Gore didn't invent this thing. Had to be Dan Quayle.

But rules are rules, right? So Missouri goes to the Big 12 title game while Texas, obviously one of the best three or four teams in the country, stays home. The only teams on par with the Longhorns nationally are Oklahoma and Florida, and maybe one other team. Who am I forgetting? No, not Alabama. Oh, right -- Southern California. Texas is clearly one of the best four teams in the country, along with Oklahoma, Florida and USC.

But Texas is out of the BCS title picture. Why? Because Texas has a major latitude problem.

 

[Route 66]

Link: http://www.sportsline.com/columns/story/11147118


Dec. 2, 2008
By Gregg Doyel
CBSSports.com National Columnist
Tell Gregg your opinion!

Oklahoma will pursue a national championship instead of Texas despite having the same record as Texas and despite the inconvenient truth of having lost to Texas. And that makes lots of you spitting mad.

And you're right. Go ahead and spit.

But hock a loogie in the right direction.

We don't really need an Oklahoma-Missouri rematch in the Big 12 title game, do we? (Getty Images)
The problem isn't the BCS system that would rate the Sooners ahead of the Longhorns, even by a margin as slim as 45-35 the .0128 that separates them in the BCS rankings.

So don't spit on the BCS. And don't spit on the Big 12 tiebreaker system that allowed the BCS rankings to settle the three-way atom-split between Texas, Oklahoma and Texas Tech.

Where do you spit? I'll tell you where to spit. Spit on the most correctable flaw in this entire thing, a flaw so flagrant and so fixable that everyone has managed to look past it, as if it's not even there:

The Big 12's divisions.

Tell me, please, what Missouri has done to earn its place in the Big 12 Championship Game. Won the Big 12 North? Fabulous. Terrific. The Big 12 North is on par with the Big East. South Florida could win the Big 12 North.

But Big 12 rules say Missouri, by virtue of its latitudinal coordinate, deserves to play Oklahoma for the league title.

Ridiculous. In addition to being a blatant grab for money, which is fine, the Big 12 title game was presumably created to identify the best team in the Big 12. How Missouri factors into it this season, I'll never understand. Missouri isn't one of the best two teams in the Big 12. Missouri isn't one of the best four teams in the Big 12, and barely belongs in the top half.

Missouri played three teams from the Big 12 South, and went 1-2 -- and hasn't had to play Oklahoma (yet) or Texas Tech. The Tigers lost to Texas and Oklahoma State, and beat that Baylor juggernaut by a field goal.

Going forward, here's how we fix this thing. The Big 12 can keep its silly North and South divisions, since the goal apparently is to spread around as many crowns as possible. "Big 12 North champion" just has a ring to it, doesn't it? I think the Big 12 ought to dispense with the entire setup and just have a big banquet at the end of every season, regardless of the sport, and give everyone a big T-ball trophy. Pat Knight can bring the orange wedges.

Where was I? Oh, right. Fixing this thing. Here's how:

The Big 12 can keep its silly North and South setup, but at the end of the season, the top two teams -- whoever they are, wherever they're located -- play for the league championship. This season, it would be Texas vs. Oklahoma. Texas Tech would have a complaint, but I think 65-21 ends that complaint quite nicely.

It's not just the Big 12, by the way. Save some of your spit for the SEC and the ACC as well. They also have a conference title game whose No. 1 goal isn't to pit the league's best two teams -- just the best team from one half against the best from another. What if the best two teams are from the same half? Oh well.

This year, the SEC got lucky. The best two teams in the SEC happen to reside in different divisions, with No. 1 Alabama winning the West and No. 2 Florida winning the East.

Yeah, SEC, I said lucky. You were lucky. Or have you already forgotten last season? The second-best team in your conference was clearly Georgia -- yet Georgia didn't make it into the SEC title game, had no chance at playing for the national title, and had to take out its anger on Hawaii in the Sugar Bowl.

In the ACC, they split the league into Atlantic and Coastal, which is really stupid. The only "coast" in the region is the "Atlantic." Which means there is no rhyme or reason to how those schools are split up, beyond the fact that Florida State and Miami had to be separated to make sure no division was dragged down by both of them.

A "conference championship game" that doesn't pit the best two teams in the conference. Brilliant innovation. Right up there with the Internet, only Al Gore didn't invent this thing. Had to be Dan Quayle.

But rules are rules, right? So Missouri goes to the Big 12 title game while Texas, obviously one of the best three or four teams in the country, stays home. The only teams on par with the Longhorns nationally are Oklahoma and Florida, and maybe one other team. Who am I forgetting? No, not Alabama. Oh, right -- Southern California. Texas is clearly one of the best four teams in the country, along with Oklahoma, Florida and USC.

But Texas is out of the BCS title picture. Why? Because Texas has a major latitude problem.

I like how a lot of Texas Longhorn fans whine about OU running up the score and then you read stuff like this that supposedly settles the reasoning on why Texas can discount TT from ever having a shot because they simply lost by that many points. So which is it? Run up the score and beat them so bad that it discredits them and helps you guys or call it classless? I think this article already proves why the score was run up.

 

[MC KAos]

I like how a lot of Texas Longhorn fans whine about OU running up the score and then you read stuff like this that supposedly settles the reasoning on why Texas can discount TT from ever having a shot because they simply lost by that many points. So which is it? Run up the score and beat them so bad that it discredits them and helps you guys or call it classless? I think this article already proves why the score was run up.

theres a huge difference between winning convincingly and being up by 4 touchdowns in the fourth quarter and having you star quarterback out there with the rest of the starters. i agree with you about the way the article states it. But when texas beat missouri they took out most of the starters by the third quarter, and it was just as much a domination, but they didnt keep going till the end of the game so the score wasnt as lopsided. fact of the matter is that oklahoma completely dominated tech in a way that no one has dominated either texas or oklahoma, derefore they were ranked well below and didnt really deserve to go to the championship game.

 

[Draegerman]

I like how a lot of Texas Longhorn fans whine about OU running up the score and then you read stuff like this that supposedly settles the reasoning on why Texas can discount TT from ever having a shot because they simply lost by that many points. So which is it? Run up the score and beat them so bad that it discredits them and helps you guys or call it classless? I think this article already proves why the score was run up.

Sheesh Rowdy, try not to read anything in this. I'm just providing articles that add to what we've been discussing over the last two weeks now.

No hidden agenda here, mate.

 

[Draegerman]

Link: http://www.sportsline.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6270202/12054192


Dodds and Ends


Expect a lot of Big 12-SEC sniping going forward because we're assured of a national championship game between the two best conferences. Here is a heck of a place to start ...

I understand who Gary Danielson works for and where his loyalties are but he dropped quite a bomb this week when the CBS analyst ripped the Big 12:

"This year there is a distortion about how good the Big 12 is," said CBS' color analyst on SEC games. "It's illogical that there are three teams in the Big 12 that are 1, 2 and 4 (actually 3, 4 and 8). To me it means a weakness in the rest of the league."

Three in the top 10 is a weakness? What kind of logic are we supposed to apply, then, to the SEC which has Nos. 1 and 2? The league must be really weak to have two teams ... in the top two.

"The (offensive) stats in the Big 12 are like pesos to me," Danielson continued, suggesting those numbers are devalued.

Pesos?

The criticism, obviously, is of the Big 12 defenses. That's a valid point but let's make these things clear. 1) These are major-college athletes, several of which will play in the NFL. We're not talking the WAC here. 2) This is the best the Big 12 has been in its 13-year existence. 3) We should all agree that the SEC and Big 12 are far and away the best leagues this season.

I've already make a case for the Big 12 being slightly ahead using the third-team tiebreaker. The third-best team in the Big 12 is 11-1 Texas Tech. The third-best team in the SEC might be 8-4 Ole Miss.

If Big 12 numbers are pesos, what's the exchange rate on all those Alabama sacks against inept SEC offenses?

My point all season has been that the excellence of the Big 12 and SEC should be embraced. Defense isn't necessarily better than offense. It's just the way the conferences have developed this season.

Me: Why are all those stats piled up in the Big 12 considered "pesos" and the fact they're playing 3-2 games in the SEC different? Why is one better than the other?

Danielson: "The SEC has better defensive players. It has better defensive linemen, more NFL linebackers. Go check out the draft the last 10-15 years and find out where the NFL players (are).

The NFL doesn't draft guys because they've got nice uniforms or come from a conference that's highly rated in the BCS. There are more NFL-ready bodies in this league than any other league in this frame of time. But right now there's a deficiency of quarterbacks in this league.

You might be a pretty good quarterback. You might be able to survive in another league. If you aren't really good in this league they'll chew you up."

More Danielson on the Big 12 tiebreaker controversy: "I know it can't happen, I'm just throwing it out there: They should just ask Missouri to step aside (to be replaced by Texas). This is a once in a lifetime thing ... I wish, the commissioner of the Big 12 would have said, for the good of the conference let's let them replay this thing in the Big 12 championship."

A glimpse into how CBS is going to promote Saturday's SEC title game: "This essentially is what amounts to a BCS semifinal," said Mike Aresco, CBS vice president, programming. "I racked my brain to see whether I could remember a previous situation like this. I can't remember when the winner would almost be assured a spot."

Good call. There have been seven 1 vs. 2 games (ranked in AP) since January 2005. This is the first 1-2 game in a conference championship contest. The last three consecutive 1 vs. 2 games have involved SEC teams. However, this is the first 1 vs. 2 game in AP poll history featuring two SEC teams.

Hmm, must signify a weakness in the rest of the league.



• Say goodbye to the Big 12 championship game in Kansas City this week.


One of the unintended consequences of Kansas' defeat of Missouri on Saturday was that it probably sealed Jerry Jones argument that the Big 12 championship game should be moved permanently to Dallas.


The footing was so bad for the annual Border War game at Arrowhead Stadium that the quality of play likely will be used as ammunition against Kansas City. The game was played in a combination of snow, sleet and rain. It looked like the field had never been covered prior to the precipitation.

Missouri plays at Arrowhead for the second consecutive week Saturday, this time against Oklahoma in the Big 12 title game. Looking at game tape this week, OU coach Bob Stoops called the conditions "horrible."

The Cowboys owner, building a state-of-the-art stadium in the Dallas suburbs, is on record as saying he wants to host the Big 12 game on a permanent basis. The Big 12 game will be played in the new indoor stadium in 2009 and 2010.

Moving the game permanently would be a shame. The tradition of the old Big Eight has been moved out of its Kansas City brick-by-brick over the years. First, the office was relocated to Dallas, then the Big 12 basketball tournament was taken away and shared around the region.

A fair trade-off would be Kansas City getting the basketball tournament in a permanent basis and Dallas getting football. We all know that what Jerry wants, Jerry gets.

• Here's what is wrong with the conference championship games: Missouri.



It is perhaps the most undeserving team in a league title game this weekend. The darlings of 2007 have limped to the finish line in 2008, eventually ended tied with Nebraska for the Big 12 North.

The Tigers played like a team that had clinched a division title Saturday in losing to rival Kansas 40-37. One of the best games in the oldest rivalry west of the Mississippi also pointed up how far the Tigers had fallen emotionally.

They mailed in an effort early on falling behind Kansas 26-10. By the time they woke up, the Jayhawks had confidence and a porous Missouri defense of which to take advantage.

The shame is that if Missouri somehow rallies and beats No. 4 Oklahoma in the Big 12 title game, a BCS bowl would be a false reward.

The Tigers, 9-3, have no signature wins, have beaten one, long-ago ranked team (Illinois) and are coming off perhaps their worst effort of the season . Kansas coach Mark Mangino stated afterward he had 10 players who couldn't walk at the beginning of the week. The Jayhawks willed themselves onto the field.

The Tigers mailed it in. But, they are in the Big 12 game and if by some miracle they are able to defeat the Sooners, they will be playing in the Fiesta Bowl.

Danielson might be right on that one. Missouri should step aside. Texas is waiting.

 

[Dallas]

theres a huge difference between winning convincingly and being up by 4 touchdowns in the fourth quarter and having you star quarterback out there with the rest of the starters. i agree with you about the way the article states it. But when texas beat missouri they took out most of the starters by the third quarter, and it was just as much a domination, but they didnt keep going till the end of the game so the score wasnt as lopsided. fact of the matter is that oklahoma completely dominated tech in a way that no one has dominated either texas or oklahoma, derefore they were ranked well below and didnt really deserve to go to the championship game.

Kinda like Colt was still playing late into the 4th quarter against A&M? Kinda like that? :

 

[Maikeru-sama]

Stupid article.

When the Big 12 was created, which was my first year in college at Texas Tech, the Big 12 North was head and shoulders better than the Big 12 South.

Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas St. and Missouri were the best teams in the Big 12.

Back in those early days, Texas was still getting beat 66-3 by the UCLAs of the world and John Blake was on the sidelines in Norman.

It's all cyclicle and one day, the Big 12 South may be down and the Big 12 North may be strong.

 

[MC KAos]

Kinda like Colt was still playing late into the 4th quarter against A&M? Kinda like that? :

ya ya except for the fact that didnt happen! did you watch the game? because chiles played most of the fourth including a late touchdown drive

 

[Route 66]

Sheesh Rowdy, try not to read anything in this. I'm just providing articles that add to what we've been discussing over the last two weeks now.

No hidden agenda here, mate.

All I did was read a post that was asking for input and I simply gave it.

 

[joseephuss]

Stupid article.

When the Big 12 was created, which was my first year in college at Texas Tech, the Big 12 North was head and shoulders better than the Big 12 South.

Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas St. and Missouri were the best teams in the Big 12.

Back in those early days, Texas was still getting beat 66-3 by the UCLAs of the world and John Blake was on the sidelines in Norman.

It's all cyclicle and one day, the Big 12 South may be down and the Big 12 North may be strong.

Colorado and Missouri were not the 3rd and 4th best teams in the Big 12 in the first few years. Nebraska was at the top of the Big 12 and Kansas City was second. A&M was probably the 3rd best team. Texas was on its way back up and they did beat Nebraska in the inaugural Big 12 championship game.

 

[jimmy40]

ya ya except for the fact that didnt happen! did you watch the game? because chiles played most of the fourth including a late touchdown drive

he was probably in a bar with no TV.

 

[MC KAos]

and to get back to the point of the article, i agree that we should have a conference game that pits the best two teams in the conference, regardless of division. they should just keep the divisions to determine who plays who but not as a "division champ" it would have given us a texas/ou championship game and it would have given us an LSU-Georgia game last year in the sec