Week 11 Big 12 Power Rankings

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Jun 11, 2016
566
349
113
Oklahoma City
#29
But they only had one loss to Ohio State’s 2 losses and USC’s 3 losses. Now we are talking about a no loss or one loss conference champ against a 1 loss non-champ.
I mean I get it, but I won't be surprised if they still get in somehow. I can't honestly say I'd take a 1 loss conference champ in Oregon over a 1 loss non conference champ Bama. ND isn't even in a conference (I know their schedule has some big names on it) but they made it last year and look what happened.
 

ScooberJake

Territorial Marshal
Jul 13, 2004
5,505
1,148
1,743
Denver, CO
#31
Bama made the CFP before when they weren’t conference champs...
So did Ohio State.

It has become clear that the committee (like the BCS voters before it) view their job as to assemble the teams that they think are the best for the post-season games. I would prefer them to try to assemble teams that allow for the post-season games to definitively (or as closely as possible) establish who the best team is through what happens on the field. After all, the whole reason we got rid of the bowl system was to try to have a true national champion based on head-to-head match ups. The difference is maybe a bit subtle, but it has implications.

If you want games on the field to establish the national champion, you would never have a non-conference champion in the playoff. (If you are not even champion of your conference, how can you possibly be champion of the whole country?) And there would never be rematches. (Just like in 2011, LSU has already proven that they are better than Bama. But they haven't proven they are better than Oregon or OU.)
 
Sep 9, 2013
746
402
613
59
#32
from CFN this morning:
4. Baylor at 13 and Oklahoma at 10
Last week, the committee blew it by having an unbeaten Minnesota – who beat Illinois – behind a two-loss Wisconsin team that lost to Illinois.
It also, somehow, had the Kansas State team that beat Oklahoma behind Oklahoma. Okay, at the time, Kansas State had a few losses.
One of them was to Baylor.
It’s not like Baylor doesn’t have any real wins.
It beat Iowa State, just like Oklahoma just did.
It beat Oklahoma State, a ranked win.
It beat TCU, and it got past Kansas State 31-12.
That’s the same Kansas State that beat Oklahoma.
Is Oklahoma better than Baylor? I think so, and so does most of the world that made it a ten-point favorite in Waco. But the world also thought Penn State was almost a touchdown better than Minnesota, too.
The eye-test doesn’t work. Either we’re going by the results, or what’s the point? At the moment, like it or not, Baylor is 9-0, Oklahoma is 8-1, and Baylor passed a test that Oklahoma failed.
Based on resumés, swap 13 Baylor and 10 Oklahoma and you have it about right.
 
Nov 16, 2013
3,653
2,090
743
33
tractor
#35
I actually want OU to win this weekend. That's how much I dislike Baylor.
I don't like the rapists vs the he-man woman beaters club, how do you like either one? They both have a culture on their campuses that is disgusting. The bedpan on the brazos is an appropriate place to play this game in tarpoleum stadium
 
Jan 8, 2009
881
50
1,578
Plano
#36
I do not see OU being in the same league as LSU, Ohio State, and Alabama. bI feel confident these three teams would pound and embarrass them. Clemon too maybe but have not seen it consistently on the field from them this year.

Strange year for our Cowboys. Ranked 22 in BCS yet losing to TT and Texas and collapsed against Baylor which was not as bad a loss as it seemed at the time. We should have beaten them.

Ranked well above our recruiting class rankings, mid to high 30's, despite turning Sanders loose for two games where he turned it over again and again to get us beat by TT a not good team. Ups and Downs but still number 22 in the country? Im surprised by that.
 
Nov 23, 2010
1,179
604
743
#37
If you are not even champion of your conference, how can you possibly be champion of the whole country?
It happens reasonably often in other sports, why wouldn't it be true Football?

The sample size to determine the field is too uneven across the country, and the field is too small for it to ever be fully satisfactory, but looking at the results, it seems like they would have been better served not taking some conference champs, Michigan State for example in favor of other teams.
 

ScooberJake

Territorial Marshal
Jul 13, 2004
5,505
1,148
1,743
Denver, CO
#38
It happens reasonably often in other sports, why wouldn't it be true Football?

The sample size to determine the field is too uneven across the country, and the field is too small for it to ever be fully satisfactory, but looking at the results, it seems like they would have been better served not taking some conference champs, Michigan State for example in favor of other teams.
Yes, but in those sports more than one school from each conference has a chance to play in the tournament. So it gives you that larger sample size and "cross pollination" of on-field competition. Those sports also have a larger sample size for regular season competition, and many of them have different conference championships for regular season and conference tournament, so there may be multiple "champions" from each conference.

But in football the playoffs are so small, and even the regular season sample size is small. If you want to determine a true champion through competition you must use the conference season (or at least the conference championships) as part of the playoff. Otherwise, you are just using human judgement to pick a champion, and often you are ignoring what must matter most: results on the field.
 
Nov 23, 2010
1,179
604
743
#39
I guess I just don't find it all that compelling. Ohio State got in over Penn State because they had fewer losses. If you want in the CFP have fewer losses is a better rule than win your conference. Call me crazy, but I think even if LSU drops the SEC CCG, I think they should be in the CFP over a 4 loss UCLA who could still win their conference.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
71,497
50,713
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#40
Yes, but in those sports more than one school from each conference has a chance to play in the tournament. So it gives you that larger sample size and "cross pollination" of on-field competition. Those sports also have a larger sample size for regular season competition, and many of them have different conference championships for regular season and conference tournament, so there may be multiple "champions" from each conference.

But in football the playoffs are so small, and even the regular season sample size is small. If you want to determine a true champion through competition you must use the conference season (or at least the conference championships) as part of the playoff. Otherwise, you are just using human judgement to pick a champion, and often you are ignoring what must matter most: results on the field.
If there are 5 teams that are undefeated or 5 teams with 1-loss, someone is going to get left out. They are going to get left out because a committee left them out, for whatever reasons. There is no way to actually play into the tournament, unlike basketball and other sports where winning your conference/tournament gets you in and thus every team has a shot at being included.