• Contact
Posted by Huckleberry on November 10th, 2008 under Uncategorized
Ratings
I missed last week’s update, but the links are below for this week. The only good news about getting seriously ill before the Tech game is that I don’t have much recollection of what happened during the game. So that’s nice.
All Teams Ratings
D-1A Only Ratings
A few things to note about this year’s teams. The first and most impressive, IMO, is that this year’s Southern Cal defense is on pace to be rated the greatest defense of all time as measured by number of standard deviations from the mean. The other amazing part is that they will pass 2005 Ohio State by this measure. This is based on the D-1A only ratings which can be compared to any other season in major college football history. Some other items:
1.) Texas Tech, if the season ended today, would finish with the 18th highest rating of all time. Texas would be in 36th position despite the loss.
2.) Washington State’s defense is on pace to be the worst of the BCS era by any current BCS conference school, and the only team close is the 2000 Connecticut Huskie squad. And they’re not even that close. In fact, the only teams from BCS schools that have ever had worse defensive numbers were 1917 Mississippi, 1904 Florida, 1918 Arkansas, and 1901 Texas A&M. And those four schools’ numbers are affected by a lack of data points in early seasons for southern teams. This can easily be argued to be the worst big school defense in the history of college football.
3.) Oklahoma’s offense is scheduled to finish as the 10th greatest offense of all time. Their glaring weakness is that they have the worst defense of the Stoops era, and to date it is even worse than Blake’s final defense in 1998.
4.) It’s not surprising that this is Texas’ second best offense of the Mack Brown era. What may surprise many, though, is that it is also the second best defense by this method, behind only 2005 and ahead of 2002. This method, of course, doesn’t delineate between defensive and offensive points, so 2005’s powerful offense certainly helped the defense. But it’s important to note that Texas has played an amazingly difficult schedule in terms of offenses faced. And even overall, this is Texas’ most difficult schedule under Brown, passing the slate faced by the 1998 squad.
BCS Analysis
Obviously the human polls count for 2/3 and so those will be extremely important. But those polls are obviously hard to predict because they are left to the whims of individual voters from around the nation, some of whom have proven themselves to be abject morons in the past and will continue to prove themselves such well into the future. So let’s begin by analyzing the computer systems one at a time.
I’m not a big fan of this system, partially because I don’t know how it works. But moreso because this sytem was devised specifically because the authors wanted to prove that Washington was better than Miami in 1991. They’re probably correct, but starting out to prove a preconceived bias isn’t a good way to devise a fair computer ratings set. Either way, let’s look at their current standings as far as teams we’re concerned about:
| Anderson-Hester Ratings | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alabama | 0.819 |
| 2 | Texas Tech | 0.813 |
| 3 | Utah | 0.807 |
| 4 | Texas | 0.800 |
| 5 | Florida | 0.772 |
| 6 | Boise State | 0.770 |
| 7 | Oklahoma | 0.769 |
| 8 | Georgia | 0.745 |
| 9 | USC | 0.742 |
| 10 | Penn State | 0.738 |
There’s a lot of good news here, starting with the large gap between us and Florida. At this point it looks like even if Oklahoma were to beat both Tech and Oklahoma State, the scenario I’m looking at for this post because it’s the only shot we’ve got at the Big 12 title game, they still wouldn’t pass us. The bad news, though, is that for the purposes of determining the Championship Game representative from the South, a Florida win over Alabama wouldn’t be included so Oklahoma will likely pass both Boise State and Florida in this set, lowering their computer poll deficit from 3 to 1 in this system. So going into the championship game, assuming OU beats Tech and Oklahoma State and we’re not upset, call it 1 - Alabama, 2 - Utah, 3 - Texas, 4 - Oklahoma, 5 - Texas
Tech.
Blech. This system is terrible, there’s no rhyme or reason, and it’s hard to predict. Let’s take a look.
| Billingsley Ratings | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas Tech | 318.856 |
| 2 | Alabama | 316.736 |
| 3 | Texas | 305.988 |
| 4 | Southern Cal | 305.420 |
| 5 | Florida | 302.933 |
| 6 | Oklahoma | 302.251 |
| 7 | Utah | 294.495 |
| 8 | Georgia | 291.635 |
| 9 | Ohio State | 289.572 |
| 10 | Boise State | 285.699 |
There is potentially terrible news in this one because of the razor-thin margin we have over the three teams behind us right now. After watching this system for a few years, though, you start to get a feel for how things will shake out. Right now I see this system in our scenario looking like this heading into the Championship Game: 1 - Alabama, 2 - Oklahoma, 3 - Florida, 4 - Texas, 5 - Texas Tech. This is truly a worst-case scenario. We go from a 3-team lead over Oklahoma to a 2-team deficit. Very bad news.
More bad news as we move through the ratings.
| Colley Rankings | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas | 0.938 |
| 2 | Texas Tech | 0.918 |
| 3 | Alabama | 0.908 |
| 4 | Florida | 0.899 |
| 5 | Utah | 0.891 |
| 6 | Oklahoma | 0.861 |
| 7 | Southern Cal | 0.841 |
| 8 | Boise State | 0.841 |
| 9 | Georgia | 0.822 |
| 10 | Penn State | 0.8219 |
Colley’s system is reproducible, so I put in most of the important games for the rest of the year. 1 - Texas, 2 - Florida, 3 - Oklahoma, 4 - Utah, 5 - Alabama, 6 - Texas Tech. This is not as certain as the others as there’s a lot of volatility here, but I think the Top 3 is fairly solid, and that’s what matters. We go from a 5-team lead to a 2-team lead.
Ah, finally we’re into the three most mathematically and logically sound systems. However, these are also the most difficult to reproduce, so some guesswork
will be necessary here.
| Massey Ratings | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas Tech | 2.621 |
| 2 | Alabama | 2.508 |
| 3 | Texas | 2.493 |
| 4 | Utah | 2.382 |
| 5 | Oklahoma | 2.359 |
| 6 | Florida | 2.353 |
| 7 | Georgia | 2.266 |
| 8 | Southern Cal | 2.225 |
| 9 | Boise State | 2.188 |
| 10 | North Carolina | 2.149 |
Massey’s ratings take into account both game location as well as date of the game. More recent games are weighted more heavily. That means trouble for us. This is the one system where I am quite certain that Oklahoma would pass us in our scenario. However, the location factor should prevent Tech from being a wedge between us and the Sooners. In our scenario, I foresee a final ranking of 1 - Alabama, 2 - Oklahoma, 3 - Texas, 4 - Texas Tech, 5 - Utah. It’s important, of course, that Tech not end up wedged between us and Oklahoma. Our 2-team lead turns into a 1-team deficit here.
Sagarin guards his formula very well, so this is all just guesswork.
| Sagarin Ratings | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas Tech | 97.72 |
| 2 | Alabama | 95.73 |
| 3 | Texas | 94.02 |
| 4 | Utah | 91.08 |
| 5 | Oklahoma | 88.74 |
| 6 | Florida | 88.19 |
| 7 | Georgia | 87.44 |
| 8 | Oklahoma State | 86.54 |
| 9 | Boise State | 86.36 |
| 10 | Southern Cal | 85.47 |
There’s a fairly sizeable gap between us and Oklahoma at this point, but I don’t feel comfortable that the Utah-Oklahoma gap is large enough to hold on. A best guess here is a final ranking of 1 - Alabama, 2 - Texas, 3 - Oklahoma, 4 - Texas Tech, 5 - Utah. Sagarin takes into account game location but not recency of the game. At least he says he does in the schedule calculation, but I believe he takes it into account in the calculation as well.
Wolfe uses a pairwise comparison that I should in theory be able to reproduce but I haven’t taken the time to attempt it yet. I know, shame on me.
| Wolfe Ratings | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alabama | 10.199 |
| 2 | Texas Tech | 10.186 |
| 3 | Texas | 9.921 |
| 4 | Utah | 9.643 |
| 5 | Oklahoma | 9.201 |
| 6 | Florida | 9.015 |
| 7 | Georgia | 8.939 |
| 8 | Southern Cal | 8.872 |
| 9 | Penn State | 8.855 |
| 10 | Oklahoma State | 8.824 |
Wolfe, like Massey and Sagarin, uses game location in his calculations. With this considered, we would have to guess that the order of the Big 12 South teams in our scenario would be Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma. That wedge between us and Oklahoma could be useful, the question becomes whether Texas Tech’s weak schedule is too much to overcome by game location. But since we left Tech behind both of us in the Sagarin system, let’s say the final rankings in this system look like this: 1 - Alabama, 2 - Texas, 3 - Texas Tech, 4 - Oklahoma, 5- Utah.
With these ratings, the final computer scores for Texas, Oklahoma, and Tech, would be Alabama - 1.00, Texas - 0.94, Oklahoma - 0.92, Tech - 0.86, Utah - 0.85, Florida - 0.83. Our current 0.1 lead over Oklahoma in the computers would shrink all the way to 0.02 points.
What does this mean? It means that if we maintain our current lead in the human polls over OU, our lead in the overall BCS standings would shrink from 0.0354 points to 0.0088 points. The key, then, is that we have to stay ahead of Oklahoma in the human polls. Even if OU wins out like we need them to do to get to the Championship Game, there’s no guarantee we stay in front of them in the BCS. It honestly looks like a 50/50 shot at this point. It would be time to lobby voters, one of the many stupid effects of the system we have right now. And if any of my guesses above are wrong in Texas’ favor at this point, we might need to be significantly ahead of OU in the polls. Time to hammer home the game locations and the Texas/OU head-to-head with the voters.
Sailor Ripley commented on the blog post Thoughts on the Texas Longhorn Defense vs. Texas Tech 25 minutes ago
Well, wooo wooooooo!!!
Tim commented on the blog post Thoughts on the Texas Longhorn Defense vs. Texas Tech 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
Texas Tech chancellor Kent Hance said at a scholarship dinner last night that the Big 12 called and apologized to him for the helmet-to-helmet hit on Taylor Potts that wasn’t called. He said the Big 12 told him it was an obvious missed called and should have been called, and they are sorry, but
Bob in Houston commented on the blog post Sam Bradford gets a second opinion 7 hours, 24 minutes ago
OU board I looked at says Andrews has been involved from the beginning. So it could be bad news, or a routine check, or approval to play. Who knows?
HenryJames commented on the blog post Sam Bradford gets a second opinion 7 hours, 43 minutes ago
Why would the insurance company be involved? Has he filed a claim?
scagnetti commented on the blog post Sam Bradford gets a second opinion 8 hours ago
ponderos has to be right, those insurance policies designate a physician whose opinion is evaluates the claim
Gene Claude wrote a new blog post: Nevada Recap: Spreading the Love 8 hours, 2 minutes ago
If you clicked this link expecting some rain on the Tiger parade, I’m going to disappoint you. There’s certainly some clouds in the forecast, but there is plenty of time to look at those later. For now, let’s talk about two things…two things that are very, VERY good. For the first time in my life
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
Johnnymac commented on the blog post Sam Bradford gets a second opinion 10 hours, 15 minutes ago
As much as I hate OU, I feel terrible for Bradford, personally, if this thing is as serious as it’s starting to look. All those millions that he turned down just for an extra year of affection from a bunch of inbreds and cheaters are rapidly evaporating and, once the season is over, Bob won’t
HenryJames wrote a new blog post: Sam Bradford gets a second opinion 12 hours, 12 minutes ago
Or third. Or fourth. No idea at this point how many doctors he has seen, but Bradford is currently in Birmingham to see noted surgeon James Andrews.
Smart choice. Andrews is considered one of the preeminent sports orthopedists in the world, and his client list backs it up.
Seems odd that he would consult a another
Todd commented on the blog post Is it possible to hate the Miami Hurricanes but like Randy Shannon? 20 hours, 2 minutes ago
Tree,
If Jacory keeps playing this way no one will ever remember.
Triston27 commented on the blog post Looking back at years of AP Polls 20 hours, 11 minutes ago
To be fair, UConn has only been a full D1-A program since 2002, and USF didn’t even have a football program until 1997 and didn’t become full D1-A until 2003.
Fresno State always gets credit for being “giant” killers, but I think they’ve only won the WAC once.
yojimbox commented on the blog post A Longhorn’s Guide on Miner Fan 20 hours, 20 minutes ago
BTW Hilarious article. Props, guys.
yojimbox commented on the blog post A Longhorn’s Guide on Miner Fan 20 hours, 20 minutes ago
Stopped at a McDonalds once while driving through El Paso. Saw mostly tall piles of rock from the highway though, nothing that looked like a “Downtown”. Was in and out of the place fast, so must be a small city, right?
TaylorTRoom commented on the blog post Fun With GameDay Texting 20 hours, 43 minutes ago
South ‘06, you’re right as long as the Ags honor the dead by not starting up the bonfire again. If TAMU starts building a bonfire again, I think we can assume that TAMU has stopped respecting the incident, and the victims of it.
CallKevin wrote a new blog post: Looking back at years of AP Polls 21 hours, 7 minutes ago
I noticed some things I found interesting. Perhaps you will as well.
73 total polls, 1503 teams listed:
1936-61 (20 teams ranked)
1962-67 (10 teams ranked)
1968-88 (20 teams ranked)
1989-current (25 teams ranked)1) FBS Teams without a single final poll appearance: Akron, Ark St, Ball St, Buffalo, Central Florida, Central Michigan, UConn, Eastern Michigan, Florida Atlantic, Florida International,
yojimbox commented on the blog post College Football Matchup Analyzer 21 hours, 29 minutes ago
Eh, I prefer to do my football picks the old fashioned way. Betting on only teams I’ve seen play before. Call me crazy.
Huckleberry commented on the blog post College Football Matchup Analyzer 21 hours, 33 minutes ago
No, it will be only 2009 when it is released.
Cincinnatus commented on the blog post A Longhorn’s Guide on Miner Fan 21 hours, 33 minutes ago
DO talk Texas Longhorn football with Miner Fan. Miner fan is secretly, or sometimes not so secretly, a Longhorn fan. He roots for the University of Texas like he roots for the Dallas Cowboys. It’s ingrained. Hell, Miner fan has his own Aggies to make fun of.
Having traveled there frequently during football season and
dedfischer wrote a new blog post: College Football Around the Country 21 hours, 38 minutes ago
Alright, I’ve seen just enough football this season to jump to conclusions. Here are some thoughts:
- The Big 12 North, land of the forgotten. The athletes of the 90’s Husker and Buffalo teams now live in Stillwater or Lubbock. It will take Art Briles another couple of years to seal Kansas’ fate. A short 15
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
dick commented on the blog post College Football Matchup Analyzer 21 hours, 44 minutes ago
Huck,
Does your 2009 adjusted stats and ratings page take into account 2008 AND 2009?
CloseToJumping commented on the blog post A Longhorn’s Guide on Miner Fan 22 hours, 52 minutes ago
Well, they need that baby early. Those gardens don’t grow themselves.
Todd commented on the blog post A Longhorn’s Guide on Miner Fan 22 hours, 58 minutes ago
“And El Paso women put out.”
Whatever gave you that idea Bookman? I mean, it’s not like you see El Paso women jackin their boyfriends off on TV or anything. I think…wait…what’s that you say?
Blake Allen commented on the blog post Yet Another Reason to Appreciate Mack Brown & Rick Barnes 23 hours, 22 minutes ago
I think it is interesting to see a lot of these “this would never happen at (insert university here)” statements a lot of fans from other programs have been throwing out. Sure, Mangino and Self should have done a better job of nipping this in the bud but I also thing this well set
Magnus Bleuveigner commented on the blog post Fun With GameDay Texting 23 hours, 46 minutes ago
I think HJ just wanted to use that famous “too soon” line. I’m fairly certain he was just as upset as the rest of us on that November morning.
Also, that Whitman line was a good retort, and no that one wasn’t too soon.
Dario Landazuri updated the ”Base” information on their profile 23 hours, 54 minutes ago
Gene Claude commented on the blog post Nevada Preview 1 day ago
The line is whack on this. I see blowout, unless Ault smarts up and takes away the deep ball. Last year, he played like a MAN and pressed, putting 7 or 8 in the box. Hope he does that again.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
Todd commented on the blog post A Longhorn’s Guide on Miner Fan 1 day ago
“Pshaw! The East Bay Ain’t San Francisco.”
Exactly why I figured if there was a Wal Mart, it would be in the east bay.
Magnus Bleuveigner commented on the blog post A Longhorn’s Guide on Miner Fan 1 day ago
Dat be Oaktown.
Sailor Ripley commented on the blog post A Longhorn’s Guide on Miner Fan 1 day, 1 hour ago
Pshaw! The East Bay Ain’t San Francisco.
Todd commented on the blog post A Longhorn’s Guide on Miner Fan 1 day, 2 hours ago
“I bet t1climb1 is a whole lot of fun at parties.”
Hey, how come Huckleberry never gets these kind of shots? I get invited a lot because I’m in the booze business so I got that goin for me.
BTW Blackscholes, are you in the 415 or 510? I just moved back to TX from Marin
Triston27 commented on the blog post KU ATHLETES – MY NEW TEMPORARY FRIENDS? 1 day, 2 hours ago
/brainspolsion
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
© 2009 Barking Carnival. All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.
t1climb1 said:
November 10th, 2008 at 11:48 am
We also MUST whoop the tar out of our last 2 opponents. OU’s last 2 wins will be against Tech and OSU while we will play two unranked teams. Winning those games 28-21 aint gonna impress any human voters. If we win those games by an avg margin of say 40 points however, we might stay ahead of OU in enough voters’ minds. In my mind, that’s the only chance we have because as your post illustrates, the computers will have us even for all intents and purposes. It’s the peeps that will decide who goes and who gets the fuck put on them.
jc25 said:
November 10th, 2008 at 11:56 am
Wow, this post is depressing.
Should we be rooting for Tech in two weeks? Because honestly, seeing Tech in the MNC would be sad, but seeing OU in the MNC after we beat them by 10 would be downright terrifying.
TaylorTRoom said:
November 10th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
jc25, I have a theory…mind you, it’s just a theory…I have a theory that who we root for might have no bearing on the games’ outcomes.
However, I agree with the sentiment. I would much rather see Tech play for it all than OU.
Levander Williams said:
November 10th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
What happens if Tech wins out, Texas wins out and Florida beats Bama? Any chance of us staying ahead of the Gators and getting a rematch with TT?
At the end of the day, I guess I’m happy as long as we make it to the BCS, which should be covered as long as we take care of business.
dick said:
November 10th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
voters will sway to texas after they truly look at things at the end of the year and see that we beat them by double digits on a neutral field. I honestly think most of them don’t look at shit ever and might not realize that. The choice between Texas and OU is a tough one until you look at the results on the field. The coaches secretaries haven’t done that yet obviously
Huckleberry said:
November 10th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
What happens if Tech wins out, Texas wins out and Florida beats Bama? Any chance of us staying ahead of the Gators and getting a rematch with TT?
No way, it would be Florida and Texas Tech for the title in that scenario. We would be too far behind Florida in the polls to make it up in the computers considering their computer boost for beating ‘Bama. I think we would still be slightly ahead of Florida in the computers, but not enough.
NateHeupel said:
November 10th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
This whole discussion will be rendered moot by the end of the month. As a Sooner, I say this with utter certainty: OU will lose to OSU. It’s in Stillwater, and OSU plays possessed when they’re playing OU at home. Now take that, and apply it to a legit top 15 team playing their biggest rival at home.
DTomlinson said:
November 10th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
I fear the same thing NateHeupel does. If that happens, Tech is a shoe in for the Big 12 Champ game.
TaylorTRoom said:
November 11th, 2008 at 3:06 am
If the scenario were as described (Texas wins out, OU beats TT, OSU beats OU, TT goes to B12CG and wins), I’m not sure that TT would have a higher BCS rating than Texas. TT would be 12 - 1, with its loss on Nov. 22. Texas would be 11 - 1, with its loss on Nov. 1. I suspect the computers would have Texas rated higher. The human polls might have Tech higher after a B12CG win.
If Texas wins out in the regular season, we will have a very high BCS rating no matter what else happens in college football. I don’t see us finishing lower than #3 in any scenario where we win out.
LonghornScott said:
November 11th, 2008 at 5:27 am
TaylorTRoom,
I think the human voters would overwhelmingly rank Tech ahead in that scenario… I would.
Tim said:
November 11th, 2008 at 6:40 am
What makes all of this mute, and what no one has mentioned is that there is a very good chance Texas Tech could beat OU.
I know, I know BC bloggers know everything. They knew that UT would destroy Texas Tech, and they knew that Oklahoma State would beat Texas Tech also. Since the BC Bloggers are not giving Texas Tech a chance in Norman, I would say someone just wasted a lot of time trying to figure out the computer system.
If I was a UT fan I would be hoping that Texas Tech absolutely destroys OU and goes onto the National Championship, at least UT would get the Fiesta bowl. Why would anyone want to see OU in a BCS bowl again is beyond me.
jc25 said:
November 11th, 2008 at 6:45 am
Taylor, are you saying my lucky burnt orange boxers that haven’t been washed in 3 months don’t really work? Well hot damn!
In both Levander’s and Taylor’s scenarios, as a Texas fan I’d be thrilled to see them in the MNC. As a CFB fan, it’d be disastrous if Texas made it over a team (either Florida or Tech) that had actually won its conference championship.
LonghornScott said:
November 11th, 2008 at 6:51 am
Tim,
Obviously if Tech wins they go on to live in the palace and marry the prince. Your post is the rough equivalent of a preacher reminding folks that there’s a good chance they have die before their eternal damnation… kinda goes without saying. And why the hell would Texas pull for Tech this week when Tech losing gives us a legit shot to get back in the title game?
huge said:
November 11th, 2008 at 8:00 am
mute?
Marcel Marceau said:
November 11th, 2008 at 8:06 am
I would like to play for Tim’s Red Raiders.
Obviously, I can’t call signals.
But I would wave my hands a lot.
Tim's Bleeding Vagina said:
November 11th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Tim tries to mute me with maxipads, but as you can see, he is rarely successful.
Yosemite Sham said:
November 11th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Well I’m the rootinest tootinest roughinest toughinest prospector north south east and….west of the Pecos!
NateHeupel said:
November 11th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Here’s a question for all the Barkers. If Tech loses to OU by a razor thin margin in Norman, but wins their last game, why isn’t Tech more deserving than UT in the three way discussion?
If you use the “latest loss” rule, then UT is no longer more deserving than OU as OU will have the tougher schedule by year’s end. Tech also will have lost to a top 5 team at their house, just like UT. Tech won the head to head, and UT was losing for the VAST majority of the game. This wasn’t some sort of lucky come-from-behind win.
So, what’s the argument? Why would UT deserve to go over a team they lost to? I’m not being facetious or sarcastic, I really would like to hear that argument.
Cornbread Red said:
November 11th, 2008 at 8:33 am
I am semi crazy - about half nuts
Cornbread Red said:
November 11th, 2008 at 9:04 am
Higher ranked due to stronger schedule. Might not have been lucky but certainly they were fortunate and could have easily lost. If Gideon catches that interception - its game over. Either way a very close game. UT win over OU was more impressive and was on a nuetral field. UT would be the only one that did not have a home game in the three way so advantage UT. Whoever the computer like more is very important as well.
All in all I am not concerned with what OU and Tech do - If we can just beat Kansas and OU then we will have a good result.
I am just concerned that Greg Davis’ lack of aggression on the road will make us lose to Kansas or have a marginal victory.
Doperbo said:
November 11th, 2008 at 9:08 am
“What makes all of this mute”
Man I just laughed really loud. You made me startle several people, I mean they actually jumped a bit. You have that kind of power Tim. Be careful with it.
Orangechipper said:
November 11th, 2008 at 9:22 am
At years end we will have had the #1 toughest schedule. OU #6.
Basically, Chattannooga is so far off the map, that it kills OU’s SOS. (projected)
So the three way tie comes down to.
#1. Overall SOS - Advantage Texas
#2. Location location location - Texas played 0 home games. OU & Tech each played 1 home game. Advantage Texas
#3. Point differential - Texas over OU by 10. Tech over Texas last second play (by 6) Ou over Tech?? Remains to be seen. Currently Texas advantage.
So right now Texas advantage on 2 of 3 criteria.
Jeff said:
November 11th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Agree with Orangechipper.
I would add that I actually think it’s in OU’s best interests to win close vs Tech vs win in a blowout.
Hear me out before you scoff (then feel free to scoff ’til you drop).
If Tech gets woodshedded by OU, then I think many voters will remove Tech from the discussion entirely, leaving it psychologically as a comparison b/w Texas and OU. If Tech is out of the argument, then Texas won head-to-head vs OU and that’s all that matters. OU beating a team at home that Texas lost to on the road doesn’t hold as much weight as a head-to-head battle. And it helps if Rece Davis keeps saying that those who vote OU ahead of Texas should have their voting privileges revoked.
If Tech stays in the 3-way argument via a close loss at OU’s home, then Texas can’t use the head-to-head argument.
So I think it’s in Texas’ best interests that OU win by 21+ vs. Tech.
It’s a theory, anyway.
Show Horn said:
November 11th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Let me assure you….if OU wins it WILL be a close game, because their defense will not consistently stop Tech.
I suspect the game will be a 48-45 ending. I personally will be rooting for OU, because I just don’t see them jumping us even if they later beat OSU.
Minnesotahorn said:
November 11th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Nate that’s a good question and I’m going to post Pete Fiutak from FOX Sports’ thoughts:
“Let me settle this Big 12 South tie-breaker mess for everyone before it even happens, if it happens. Remember, this is all moot if Texas Tech beats Oklahoma and/or if Oklahoma State picks off the Sooners or the Red Raiders.
Assuming Oklahoma beats Texas Tech and the Sooners, Red Raiders and Longhorns finish with one loss, the tie-breaker will go to the BCS rankings. Super. So the Big 12 title will probably be chosen by voters who have seen each team play once or twice, if that. So to help the voters who decide two-thirds of the BCS, this is how you need to look at the tie-breaker: who won where?
Along with strength of schedule, home field advantage needs to be a part of the overall mix far more than it is. Winning a game on the road deserves more love than winning one at home, and close losses on the road should be viewed differently than losing at home or at a neutral site.
Therefore, if Texas Tech loses to Oklahoma, that will mean the Sooners’ part of the tie-breaker is based on a home win, while the loss (to Texas) will have happened at a neutral site. They didn’t play a true road game in the tie-breaker mix, so, theoretically, they had the easiest path of the three teams.
Texas Tech will have lost to OU on the road, and the win will have come to Texas in the final seconds at home.
And then there’s Texas. The loss in the equation came on the greatest play in the history of Texas Tech football on the road in Lubbock. The win came at a neutral site, beating Oklahoma in Dallas. Therefore, Texas, didn’t have a home game in the mix and ended up having the hardest path of the three in the three-game round-robin tournament.
I still think Oklahoma is off to play for the national title if it wins out, but by who deserves to be playing for the Big 12 title, go with 1. Texas, 2. Texas Tech, 3. Oklahoma. Or else just hold a rock-paper-scissors playoff and you’ll probably have the right answer.
— Pete Fiutak”
dusk till dawn said:
November 11th, 2008 at 11:33 am
please dont ever root for OU.
1. it doesn’t accomplish anything
2. it shows a complete lack of moral fiber
if Tech loses to OU and OU loses to OSU, Tech wins the tiebreaker with it’s win over UT. the BSC rankings would only matter in a 3 way tie.
btw, is a mute point a moot point because no one can hear it? i dont get your humor Tim
ponderos said:
November 11th, 2008 at 11:50 am
if Tech loses to OU and OU loses to OSU, Tech wins the tiebreaker with it’s win over UT. the BSC rankings would only matter in a 3 way tie.
Which is why you should be pulling for OU, amigo.
dedfischer said:
November 11th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Unless you feel threatened by Leach and Tech, the best thing to happen to Texas Longhorn football would be for Leach to pound the ever living shit out of Stoops. Don’t think that would happen, but for the big picture, it benefit UT the most. We’re not really competitive for the same recruits with Texas.
t1climb1 said:
November 11th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Fuck all this…I’m pullin for Baylor to stomp the shit out of the Red Raiders. Then after Alabama falls we slide right right into that #2 slot and play for the MNC regardless of the Big 12 title or not. Go BEARS!
Orangechipper said:
November 11th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Jeff. If Tech loses, it won’t matter by how much. They lose so late. They won’t recover in time. Heck, if we lost on a last second play and dropped to #7. How will Tech have a chance, no matter how close they lose?? They didn’t hesitate to drop us way below OU did they?
So losing big or close, in the voters minds its OU v Texas. If its an OU that just killed Tech vs a TX team that lost to Tech. Not good for the good guys. I’d rather be a close game.
My 2 cents.
Bobby Jack Akina said:
November 11th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
I wish somebody could mute Tim.
And, by the way, it took me longer to load this page than it took me to read it, including all the comments.
Been having trouble loading this site since Sunday. That sucks, b/c this site is the best UT “fan” site on the interwebs. Can we upgrade to some bigger tubes? I’m no Joe Jamail; hell, Joe Jamai’s pool boy (Eddie Reese?) probably does better than me, but I’d happily hit a tip jar if one were available.
Or is it just me having trouble (on three machines, two operating systems and four different browsers)?
t1climb1 said:
November 11th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
I’ve had the same issue since Sunday with the site taking forever to load pages.
NM99 said:
November 11th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Site’s been slow for me as well. Tortilla Retort also.
I agree with ded. And not just because I’m a Tech fan. OU loss basically guarantees Texas a BCS slot. Tech loss means there is one more 1-loss team to contend for a BCS slot. Mack Brown could give every pollster a blow job, but it doesn’t guarantee a slot for UT (PCs don’t have…well, you get the picture). OU loss is better for Texas in the long run.
And my God, how can any of you root for OU? All of you should feel dirty. Go shower.
Parlin Hall said:
November 11th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
I blame the slowness on Steven.
We need to adorn a golden calf, and go all Edgar G. Robinson until the gods of BC forgive us.
dedfischer said:
November 11th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
I’m convinced we’ve been infiltrated by a GP, after Leach’s win last week.
TaylorTRoom said:
November 11th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
There is no scenario where a 1-loss Texas team doesn’t get into a BCS bowl. 3-way tie, and Texas doesn’t make the B12CG? Texas will get the at-large bid over a 1-loss Tech.
Why? Simple. We’re Texas, and we put our pants on one leg at a time, just like everybody else. We just set TV ratings records while we do it. Now, can I have more cowbell?
T.R. said:
November 11th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
“If Texas wins out in the regular season, we will have a very high BCS rating no matter what else happens in college football. I don’t see us finishing lower than #3 in any scenario where we win out.”
Your team will not make it out of Lawrence…Mangino will eat it.
Soldier of Orange said:
November 11th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Parlin, (I may be missing some humor here), but I think it’s Edward G. Robinson in the role of Dathan that you refer to.
beowulf said:
November 12th, 2008 at 3:57 am
Actually, the human factor of the BCS Is trending quite nicely. Better than the computer numbers this past week vis a vis the Horns and Soooners.
And with OU idle this Saturday, and the fact that we’re getting good pimp from ESPN and some others, that human movement in the Harris and the Coaches poll will likely continue for a week.
Last week Harris had OU ahead of us by .0155. This week Texas is ahead by .0154, a gain of .0309.
Last week Coaches had OU up by .0413. This week OU is ahead by .0091, a Texas gain of .0322.
Last week’s computer average favored Texas by .150. This week it’s down to .100.
Over all the Horns led by .0311 last week, and extended it a bit to .0354, a gain of .0043.
FYI. Hadn’t seen these simple breakdowns anywhere. Sorry if repetitive.
ponderos said:
November 12th, 2008 at 6:16 am
There is no scenario where a 1-loss Texas team doesn’t get into a BCS bowl. 3-way tie, and Texas doesn’t make the B12CG? Texas will get the at-large bid over a 1-loss Tech.
OU beats tceh, then the pirates could still be ranked ahead of UT in the BCS by virtue of beating them in Lubbock. Think you won’t drop in the BCS after a win (against Kansas and the sisters of the poor)? OU put 62 on Nebraska and fell two spots afterwards.
beowulf said:
November 12th, 2008 at 6:23 am
You have no clue how the BCS works if you think a 1 loss Tech will be ranked over a 1 loss Texas when the season is over, regardless of whether or not Tech wins the Big 12. Tech would then go to the Fiesta and Texas to another BCS Bowl, possibly even the BCSCGB.
ponderos said:
November 12th, 2008 at 6:50 am
If Tech wins the Big 12, I’m pretty certain they’ll be ranked ahead of Texas. You know how this works, right?
My BCS knowledge is only from personal experience watching it play out every year to see what shitty mid-major team is going to blow up my team in the Fiesta Bowl. I’m sure you’re more of an expert of how to get to the Holiday Bowl than I am, too.
Black Scholes said:
November 12th, 2008 at 9:46 am
I think OU gets the benefit of the doubt from a lot of voters. Shitty, but that’s the way it hits me.
The BCS ranking as a conference/division tie breaker is retarded.
beowulf said:
November 12th, 2008 at 10:10 am
ponderosa, you’re wrong. If OU beats Tech the Raider’s drop will be profound and irrevocable. They’ll drop below Texas, OU, Fla., USC, Penn State, Utah, and possibly others. Beating Mizzou will not then elevate them over a 1 loss Texas. Tech’s OOS schedule with 2 lower division teams and other mullets will kill them in the computer pools.
You’ll be in the Fiesta, but you won’t have a prayer of being in the CG. Or ranked higher than a 1 loss Texas. Hold your breath till you turn red, but those are facts.
ponderos said:
November 12th, 2008 at 10:57 am
OU beats Tech and OSU (on the road), they will jump Texas. However, Texas lost to Tech and they didn’t fall past OU (ostensibly because they beat them head-to-head). You might be right that UT’s big road win over UTEP will probably keep them in BCS position, though.
Say hi to your mutha for me, beowulf.
Fat Manginard said:
November 12th, 2008 at 11:02 am
I’M GONNA EAT YAAAAAAAA!!
Colt McCoy - sounds like malt liqour
Jordan Shipley =dozen glazed donuts
Love me some fried fish and Orakpo.
GET IN MY BELLAAAAAAA!!!
flamingmonkeyass said:
November 12th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Man I’m glad we only have to put up with these Raider fans - post game - once every five or six years. I’m guessing by this time next year, following another 50 something to 20 something blowout we won’t have quite so many “Tim’s” hanging around.
Also good to see that ponderos has managed to come out of whatever cave he crawled into around 3:00 on the second Saturday in October.
If ou beats Tech and oSu, I have little to no doubt that they’ll pass us in the human polls. But I’m left wondering if they’ll be able to overtake us in the computers. Subsequently it will interesting to see if the difference between the two in the computers keeps UT ahead of ou in the BCS. I can see a scenario in which ou beats Tech, but Tech remains ahead of ou in some of the computers. In that scenario Texas’ lead in the computers would actually increase, perhaps even so much that their BCS lead over ou might rise, despite the human polls’ feelings.
Of course I don’t think any of that matters because I think Tech’s defense is better than ou’s and I think both offenses are about the same level of EPIC. It’s going to take a truly inspired effort from the sooners to beat Tech and frankly I don’t trust Stoops in big games anymore.
MTECH said:
November 12th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
39-33
Nordberg said:
November 12th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Thank you for elevating the discourse here, MTECH.
MTECH said:
November 12th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Your very welcome, Nord. But I think that Rylan Reed deserves most of the credit.
Mike Hinsley said:
November 13th, 2008 at 6:11 am
At what point does tech’s schedule, i.e. playing two Div II schools come into play? Surely there is some penalty for that or we would all be playing gimmes.
beowulf said:
November 13th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Mike. After OU beats them.
Nordberg said:
November 13th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Agreed. That’s a big reason why they’re fucked with one loss.
MTECH said:
November 13th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Our nonconference schedule includes one D1 school with a winning record just like yours. LOL
Colby said:
November 13th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
I have never once considered posting on another team’s blog after beating them. Not once. What type of brainless, dickless piece of shit would do such a thing? Could you enlighten us MTECH?
TaylorTRoom said:
November 13th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Last year, Arkansas beat LSU, and represented the SEC West in the SEC CG. Question- which SEC team went to the BCS CG? Does anybody remember sports media being outraged?
If Tech wins out, it’s a moot point. If they lose to OU or Mizzou, and Texas beats KU and BU, they’re done.
TaylorTRoom said:
November 13th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Oops. My mistake- the SEC CG last year was LSU over Tennessee.
MTECH said:
November 13th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
BU?
dasmithjones said:
November 13th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
The only time I would root for OU to win is … if they were … maybe if … check that, I would never root for OU to win.
Phenomenal Smith said:
November 13th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
AT has its new Predictatron up. Again, you enter your estimated lines and it’ll do the rest. You can also adjust some of our assumptions (like the Big 12 tiebreaker assumption). Good for your scenario discussion here.
http://www.atomicteeth.com/euclid-claude/predicatron-20/