Husker Runner

Yeah, it looks like this will be a moot point now. Happy to be going out with one final game against OU, but I would have liked to see the chaos caused by Texas A&M claiming the rule should put them in the CCG.

This is from the Oklahoman (newspaper):

 

Go back and look at this segment of the rule: “unless two of the tied teams are ranked within one spot of the other in the BCS poll. In this case, the head-to-head results of the top two ranked tied teams shall determine the representative in the Big 12 Championship Game.”

 

Now, read it again.

 

The letter of that law does not compute to what was intended. That rule states that if two of the tied teams are ranked within one spot of each other, the head-to-head result of the top two-ranked tied teams will determine the champion. That rule DOES NOT STATE that the two teams within one spot of each other have to be the top two-ranked teams.

 

Big 12 director of communications Bob Burda said the tiebreaker language is accurate but said “the reference to the teams being within one place of each other only applies to the highest and second-highest ranked (Big 12) teams in the final BCS Standings.”

 

Well, I think Burda is right. But that’s not what the rule says. And what is A&M supposed to do if this scenario comes to pass? Let it ride?

 

If I’m OU athletic director Joe Castiglione, I’m a little worried. This whole BCS tiebreaker thing has been one pain in the butt for three years, for no good reason. The BCS standings are a wonderful tiebreaker when results can’t pick a winner. So because of Texas animosity and a lack of attention to detail, we’ve got a potential mess on our hands.

The rule doesn't specifically state that it's only if the two highest ranked teams in the BCS are within one spot of each other.

Yes it does...

 

No, it doesn't.

No lie... The idea was to see how long we could get people to stare at that wording trying to figure out who was right. As in...it's just as useless as this thread, because we all know what will happen regardless of how poorly the rule is worded.

Ummm, I hate to break it to you, but pretty much all threads on a football message board are useless. LOL.

I hope the BCS has Texas A&M one spot ahead of OSU tomorrow. Maybe the Aggies would just roll over, but I'd love to see Beebe have to dance around it, and a full challenge by Texas A&M would be awesome.

Rule #5 is the "Texas Amendment" the Longhorns pushed through after the old tiebreaker rules went against them in 2008.

The rule doesn't specifically state that it's only if the two highest ranked teams in the BCS are within one spot of each other.

Yes it does...

No, it doesn't.

if OU is 9, TAM is 14, and OSU is 15, then OU is going to the CCG.

 

TAM needs to be ranked within one spot of OU, not OSU

 

Barring something strange happening in the polls, OU is going to the CCG

Re: bolded section

I'm sure this was the intent, but that's not how the wording actually reads.

OFFICIAL TIEBREAKER RULES ARE HERE

Divisional Tiebreakers: The following procedure will determine the representative from each division in the event of a tie:

 

If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative

 

If three or more teams are tied, steps 1 through 7 will be followed until a determination is made. If only two teams remain tied after any step, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.

 

1. The records of the three teams will be compared against each other

2. The records of the three teams will be compared within their division

3. The records of the three teams will be compared against the next highest placed teams in their division in order of finish (4, 5 and 6)

4. The records of the three teams will be compared against all common conference opponents.

5. The highest ranked team in the first Bowl Championship Series poll following the completion of Big 12 regular season conference play shall be the representative in the Big 12 Championship Game, unless two of the tied teams are ranked within one spot of the other in the BCS poll. In this case, the head-to-head results of the top two ranked tied teams shall determine the representative in the Big 12 Championship Game.

6. The team with the best overall winning percentage (excluding exempted games) shall be the representative.

7. The representative will be chosen by draw.

The South will go to tiebreaker rule #5 between OU, OSU, and Texas A&M.

If you read rule #5 literally, it seems to be different than what was probably intended. Consider this scenario:

Say that in the BCS rankings tomorrow, OU is #9, Texas A&M is #14, and OSU is #15.

I'm sure that the intent of the rule would put OU in the CCG.

However, taking the wording literally, since two of the tied teams (Texas A&M and OSU) finish within one spot of each other, then you would look at the head-to-head result of the top two teams (OU and Texas A&M). Texas A&M won that head-to-head, and would go to the CCG.

The rule doesn't specifically state that it's only if the two highest ranked teams in the BCS are within one spot of each other.

If Texas A&M is one spot ahead of OSU in tomorrow's BCS rankings (very possible), this could be very interesting.

On a side note, check out some of these new Facebook groups:

Kyle Brotzman sucks

RIP Kyle Brotzman

Kyle Brotzman sucks at life, and clutch kicks.

Kyle Brotzman is AN EPIC Fail

Kyle Brotzman Lost It All

Kyle Brotzman for Nevada MVP

Kyle Brotzman is the new Ray Finkle

I'm gonna kick the game winning field goal! JK i'm Kyle Brotzman

Poor kid.

TD!

LOL...this is from Shaggy Bevo:

LOL. Bo "Mellow" Pelini.

I think Bo should show up on the sideline today in a suit and tie and shout encouraging words to all the players the whole game with a big smile on his face.

According to the coaches, Lee is healthy and has been looking good in practice. Translation: Lee still has a heartbeat.

Or..."Lee is in a full body cast that fits him nicely, and he currently has no communicable diseases. But he's available today if we need him."

That statistic would be meaningless. Neither team scored a TD.

Aggy won't be happy until all of Husker Nation signs a decree stating that the roughing the passer call had absolutely no effect on the outcome of the game.

I hear Greg Davis may be looking for new employment

DDP.

Yeah, PI call was bogus, but I'm glad our guys just dealt with it and played football.

LOL. It helps a team "deal with it" when they are playing against a completely inept quarterback *cough* Gilbert *cough*.

LSUfreek's take on Pelini (LOL at Tressel in the background):

Jeez, another Aggie troll? What's up with these guys?

They bitched and moaned ENDLESSLY on TexAgs four years ago when they thought the refs screwed them in the game in College Station, now their board is all up and arms about Husker fans complaining about an obvious bad call that may have cost us the game.

Texas A&M is a great school and they have a (mostly) great fan base, but man, move on people! You all won.

This was posted in a comment on Bleacher Report:

Charting Penalties:

1st Half:

(NU) 1st quarter (9:20)-personal foul, late hit

-obvious late hit

(NU) 1st quarter (9:04)-false start, FG

-obvious movement before snap, kick good

(NU) 1st quarter(2:36)-personal foul and unsportsman like conduct

-look we've all seen the video, crap happens at the bottem of the pile,

why would Pelini have been so pissed at his player if didn't think it was

stupid.

(A&M) 1st quarter (14:01)-false starte, clear call

(NU) 2nd quarter (12:34)-false start, clear call

(NU) 2nd quarter (8:58)-personal foul, no replay is given and penalty is not seen in regular action

(NU) 2nd quarter (8:53)-illegal formation, left (and maybe right) guard(s) were basically in the backfield (for pulling purposes)

(NU) 2nd quarter (8:05)-holding, Lucas Patterson gets hauled to the ground on the play

(NU) 2nd quarter (2:26)-holding, 68 is beat and pulls down inside rusher

A&M: 1 for 5 yards

NU: 9 for 95

2nd Half:

(NU) 3rd quarter (12:22)-false start, right tackels cleary jumps

(NU) 3rd quarter (7:27)-illegal formation, no clear replay b/c of camera man checking out cheerleaders

(A&M) 3rd quarter (4:55)-personal foul, late action after interception

(NU) 3rd quarter (2:57)-pass interference, early contact before pass gets to Stephens

(NU) 3rd quarter (1:48)-pass interference, contact on the back shoulder to Fuller, both were hand checking but defenerder grabbed

(NU) 4th quarter (14:33)-personal foul, no clear replay (#46, had multiple personal fouls on him)

(NU) 4th quarter (14:33)-unsportsman like conduct, NU bench (Pelini)....refs had enough

(NU) 4th quarter (5:52)-personal foul roughing the passer, pretty much the only clear BS call of the game

(NU) 4th quarter (1:50)-intentional grounding, in the dirt and in the pocket and no one near the pass, clear call

A&M: 1 for 15 yards

NU: 8 for 95

Yeah, I think we feel the same way as Aggie fans did after the 2006 game. No reason to bag on a great school.

The league, on the other hand...