John Rohde, sports columnist
Upon further review ... No review of Big 12 divisional tiebreaker necessary
College football
By John Rohde
Comments 
41
Published: May 6, 2009
After last year’s controversy surrounding the Big 12’s divisional three-way tiebreaker in football, commissioner Dan Beebe vowed the procedure would be reviewed.
Multimedia
More Info
Tiebreakers: Three-way divisional tiebreakers in football:
SOUTHEASTERN CONFERENCE
→7. The tied team with the highest ranking in the Bowl Championship Series standings following the last weekend of regular-season games shall be the divisional representative in the SEC Championship Game, unless the second of the tied teams is ranked within five-or-fewer places of the highest ranked tied team. In this case, the head-to-head results of the top two ranked tied teams shall determine the representative in the SEC Championship Game.
BIG 12 CONFERENCE
→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.
Sources: SEC and Big 12
Thumbs up & Thumbs down
THUMBS UP
→To jockey Calvin Borel, who rode Mine That Bird in the Kentucky Derby. After three-fourths of a mile, Borel was 19th out of 19 horses. With a quarter-mile left, he was 12th. At the finish, he won by 6 3/4 lengths on a 50-1 shot that should have been about 100-1. "Bo-rail” not only hugged the rail, he literally scrapped the rail. Arguably the greatest ride since Paul Revere.
THUMBS DOWN
→To Alex Rodriguez, but not for his steroid use. We don’t care that you used steroids, when you used steroids or why you used steroids. We don’t care if you supposedly tip only 15 percent at Hooters. However, if it’s true you tipped pitches to opposing hitters, you immediately should be banned from baseball and from Hall of Fame consideration.
That process happens today in
Phoenix, where Big 12 football coaches will huddle up for their annual meeting to discuss, among other things, the league’s tiebreaker.
If a change in procedure is necessary, the coaches will make a formal recommendation to the league’s athletic directors, who will act on the proposal at the league’s spring meetings later this month in
Colorado Springs, Colo.
Texas coach
Mack Brown will not be attendance today so he can be with wife, Sally, while she recovers from wrist surgery. Associate athletic director
Cleve Bryant will represent UT.
Brown previously has said he favors the SEC’s tiebreaking procedure.
OU coach
Bob Stoops previously has said he’ll accept whatever tiebreaker is agreed upon.
Three-way divisional tiebreakers used by the SEC and Big 12 essentially are the same until the
Bowl Championship Series standings are utilized.
The Big 12 ruling states the tied team ranked highest in the BCS standings following the conference’s last regular-season games will represent the division in the Big 12 championship game.
The same holds true in the SEC with the following stipulation: "Unless the second of the tied teams is ranked within five-or-fewer places of the highest-ranked tied team. In this case, the head-to-head results of the top two ranked tied teams shall determine the representative in the
SEC Championship Game.”
Had the SEC tiebreaker been used in the Big 12 last season, Texas would have advanced to play
Missouri in the Big 12 title game.
OU was ranked No. 2 in that week’s BCS standings and UT was No. 3, but the Longhorns would have advanced by virtue of their 45-35 victory over the
Sooners on Oct. 11 in
Dallas.
Here’s hoping the Big 12 keeps its current tiebreaker, because it advances the team with the best chance of winning the national title.
Let’s say Texas took a serious hit in the BCS standings last year after losing 39-33 at
Texas Tech and had fallen to No. 7.
Using the SEC’s tiebreaker, No. 7 Texas would have advanced to the Big 12 title game and No. 2 OU would have sat.
The No. 2 team clearly has a better shot at winning the national title than the No. 7 team.
Using this scenario, even if the Longhorns had beaten Missouri in the Big 12 title game, OU could have still advanced to the national title game despite not qualifying for its league title game.
Texas would be Big 12 champs, yet feasibly could have still been ranked behind the Sooners with no chance to win the national crown.
The Big 12’s current tiebreaker prevents this from happening.
Leave a Comment
Sports Photo Galleriesview all
Prev
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
Thank you for joining our conversations on newsok. We encourage your discussions but ask that you stay within the bounds of our terms and conditions. Please help us by reporting comments that violate these guidelines. To review our rules of engagement, go to Commenting and posting policy.
Log in below or sign up (it's free).
And John the team who beat both participants couldn't win its division outright. Beat Tech then no complaints. Only thing is OU lost, Texas lost, Tech got embarrassed. Texas deserves to go even though they didn't beat Tech. Texas deserves to go because OU embarrassed tech. riiight!
Just explain to me why you favor a system that kept a team who beat both participants in the Big XII Title game during the season from playing in the championship game?
That's right, a little joke and move on. There is no argument other than "I hope they keep it the same way"
Personally, I'm all for Leach's graduation rate tie breaker policy. I know you won't be as Texas' grad rate is 51 and OU's a breathtaking 46. TT's is 79, the highest grad rate for football at a public college in the BCS. Maybe that's why they are the only ones smart enough to make the argument.
Maybe with Chiasson coming, they will change it to most felonies on the roster.
Its a matter of personal perspective of who you "think" might have a better "chance" to win a game. It sounds like you think Texas "deserved" to play for the Big 12 and national championship. Based on what? Why didn't Texas Tech "deserve" the same chance? Don't use the head-to-head argument....it doesn't hold water. And to keep saying that OU couldn't win the game.....not true....they had every chance to but they didn't win this one. I, honestly, thought that OU should've been playing Texas for the national championship last year. But there is not a major problem with the tie-breaker system.
And the person who said that even if Texas had played for the Big 12 conference title and won but wouldn't have play in the NC game, check again. Texas was #3 in the BCS polls right? If they had won the Big 12, probably would've been #2.
Hook'em
Hey John - did you watch the same Championship game I watched?
I agree with you that it is impossible to predict how good a team will be 5 years from when the game is scheduled (Washinton). I also believe that a traditional power such as Alabama or Miami probably has a better chance of fielding a good team each year than someone such as UTEP or Lousiana-Monroe. That has been the difference between OU and UT's scheduling. OU has been willing to take the chance that they may have to play a top 10 non-conference team. I don't think the same can be said about Texas.
Texas would have had a better chance of winning the national title and proved that a few years ago in the Rose Bowl in USC's backyard.
The ou SWOONERS once again embarrassed the Big 12 with another LOSER poor showing on the national stage.
What I'd like to see is the Big 12 get rid of the patsies (Tenn-Chattanooga, for example) and make sure everyone in the conference plays each other (like the old Big 8 days). That should rid us of late season controversy. If there was a tie, then the top two teams (based on record, head-to-head competition, with a 3 point home/away differential factored in in comparison conference battles) play each other.
The conference isn't "sucking up to Texas", it's doing the right thing -- making sure a team doesn't represent the conference that doesn't deserve to be there OR doesn't know how to win once it gets there.