I’m rewatching on ESPN360. Forced 3 punts in the 1st quarter. Just seems like the d got tired out there. Maybe I’ll toss out some more thoughts later, but midway through the second quarter, Bradford is just doing a great job of hitting the open man, and a hell of a lotta lucky breaks are going OU’s way. But that’s the way the funny shaped ball bounces (Out at the one! :mad:)
And I saw myself on TV! 
I have no answer for the Big XII South mess.
I agree that Texas should be ahead of OU, since they have the same record and won the head-to-head.
HOWEVER,
I also think Tech should be ahead of Texas for that same reason.
But, by the same token, OU should be ahead of Tech.
Someone should try to photoshop the helmets into this picture.
When you have a three-way tie between teams with one loss, head to head stops being of any value. You simply cannot use it to resolve who goes where.
There are two ways of resolving the issue. The first is to have some rule for kicking one of the three out of the comparison. The SEC does this by kicking out the lowest ranked team, then resolving the tie between the remaining two on the basis of head to head. If applied, this would result in TT getting the boot, and Texas the nod.
The second is to resolve the tie using some measure of comparison that ignores head to head results, and instead tries to measure the overall results of the team. This is nominally what the Big-12 does by using the rankings from the BCS to decide who goes to the championship game. Conveniently, this also has the advantage of making certain that a team from the conference with the higher ranking isn’t left standing at the door, looking in and hoping for an upset. It would be damn foolish if OU was ranked #2, but couldn’t play in the championship game. It would be even MORE foolish if the result of this was that OU went to the National Championship game, having not played in the Big-12 Championship, which might very well happen if Texas went to the Big-12 championship game and managed a lackluster victory over Mizzou, thus keeping OU in 2d place in the BCS standings.
What upsets me at some level is the appearance that at least some of the computer rankings used to compile the BCS results place emphasis upon how badly a team manages to beat an opponent. The biggest argument for OU right now is the fact they are literally blowing teams off the field. Question: is it possible Texas has the same capability, but their coach is philosophically opposed to blowouts involving 60+ points when a game is already in the bag? Should the NCAA really sanction a system, computerized or otherwise, that emphasizes the value of running up scores any time you can?
And when oh when are they finally gonna wise up and turn this thing into a true playoff system? 
Well, I’m a Georgia fan, but…ROLL TIDE!
Margin of victory was removed from the computer polls in 2004. None of them can use it. Cite. They can however use points scored and points allowed. It’s a fine distinction but there it is.
It is also kind of ugly that Oklahoma has been getting 1st place votes (ahead of undefeated Alabama), even before beating OSU.
There is heavy bias, and we don’t get to see who voted what. There is nothing to keep them honest. For all we know, some coaches voted Oklahoma #1 and Texas #10.
Running up the score and having political connections with other coaches are requirements now.
ISTR that the final voting in the Coach’s poll is made public. Not so with the Harris poll.
A proposal that someone attributed to Leach over at Tech. Made me laugh, just cause it makes a tiny bit of sense, but would never get implemented.
In the case of a three way tie that isn’t resolvable by the other tiebreaks, the team that has the best student-athletes gets the nod. I think his was based on graduation rates, but I’d be fine with just figuring out a fair way to do the current GPAs across schools instead.
I know it has flaws, but I just like the idea in theory.
Maybe they could each nominate a champion (from the team) and then have a chess tournament. The player should have to be a starter or at least get regular minutes.
Or, having just watched the movie Jabberwocky, they could resolve it with a spirited game of hide-and-seek.
Can that player be the say, long snapper or the field goal holder? Is that regular enough?
I’d nominate one of the big uglies on offense. They’re usually the team geniuses. Seriously.
Myron Rolle of FSU just won a Rhodes scholarship and wants to be surgeon. He’s a DB and looks kind of “gangsta” (for lack of a better term). Sometimes even the 'Noles can surprise you.
He’s a distant cousin of Samari Rolle.
Definitely smart, but are they chess players? I remember an anecdote that said a study of football players said the the OLine had very neat, methodically organized lockers, when taken as a group, and the DLine were messy and did what just worked for them.
But this way, you get those crazy fans/chess players a way to get in on a scholarship.
Black?
I don’t mean to sound like I’m trying to call you out, but having seem numerous interviews with Myron Rolle recently I truly can not think of one thing about him that made him look “gangsta” beyond his skin color. He dresses nice, speaks eloquently, and often wears glasses off the field.
Edit: here is a photo of Myron Rolle: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2008/writers/the_bonus/07/17/rolle/t2.rolle.computer.jpg
I think that they may have shown the wrong guy (or I saw the wrong guy). I only saw a glimpse of him during the broadcast, or it may have been a local news piece.
See this picture: http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e360/howlie97/MyronRolle.jpg
In the clip I saw, the guy looked like the player wearing uniform #21, had long hair. The pictures I found just now he looks like a nerd. Unless he’s dramatically changed his look I either saw the wrong picture or was mistaken.
['Bama fan, back again]
You know? 4 months ago I would have been happy with 10 wins this season. 3 weeks ago I was prepared to be happy with 13-1. Even I didn’t give 'Bama much of a chance to win this game… until about 5 minutes into it. We hung in all the way until the end. In the 3rd quarter I thought that we had worn their defense down, and were on track to pull out a hard-fought victory. Alas, in the end, the one-man-yardage-machine called “Tebow” pulled it out for them.
I can’t help but think that if Tebow had been on our side, we would have won by 30. (But, then again, if that were the case, Shula would probably still be our coach, and we would be 8-4, and not in this game in the first place. So this kind of revisionist fantasy is a fool’s game.)
Considering where we were 1 and 2 (and 3 and 4…) years ago, I think you’d have to admit that Saban is worth every penny. Just wait until next year, when most of our starters, and all of our star youngsters, will be back.*
Roll Tide
Rucksinator
*… I say only slightly worried about the fact that this year’s 'Bama seems similar to last year’s Georgia.
2 things:
Aren’t you losing at least 3 crucial linemen?
If you don’t have 18 season-ending injuries (not counting the various other payers who missed multiple games), you’ll probably do better than UGA did this year.
Penn State vz USC
Texas Vs Ohio State
Alabama vs Utah
Tulsa vs Ball State
interesting games don’t you think?
Where are you getting this from?
BTW, my a-hole Ohio state fan fraternity brother called me in the 4th quarter to ridicule me.
I read this online: "The other BCS matchups seem likely to be Alabama against unbeaten Utah in the Sugar Bowl and Texas against Ohio State in the Fiesta Bowl. The Fiesta also could take Utah, but the Buckeyes seem the likely choice. "
So… if the Fiesta DOES pick Utah, then does that mean that the Sugar would/could pick Ohio State? (Oh please, oh please, oh please)
I would love to see Bama vs Ohio State. Utah is simply not exciting. At all.
