tie breakers

[Midnight Toker]

So you would prefer OSU just be put in the championship game if they are tied with OU and KSU.

No explanation needed.

It doesnt matter what i prefer. it only matters what the agreed upon established tie breaker rules are and how they dictate the two teams to play in the ccg.

 

[Duke Silver]

It doesnt matter what i prefer. it only matters what the agreed upon established tie breaker rules are and how they dictate the two teams to play in the ccg.

The way you post is psychotic

 

[orngblkzebra]

Ah so you acknowledge the rule was changed. That's good. I dont care who a rules change benefits, i care that it happened in november. this is an off-season type of activity. not an in-season change that is precipitated by the success of two teams the big 12 doesn't want to see in their ccg.

Nobody is crying. There's no need to exaggerate my response to this. I'm saying it's peculiar to change established rules in the middle of the season. It's a bush league tactic, just like when the big 10 did it to benefit the real osu a few years back.

Clarify: 1. make (a statement or situation) less confused and more clearly comprehensible

Change: 1. make (someone or something) different; alter or modify
2. replace (something) with something else, especially something of the same kind that is newer or better;

 

[Duke Silver]

Clarify: 1. make (a statement or situation) less confused and more clearly comprehensible

Change: 1. make (someone or something) different; alter or modify
2. replace (something) with something else, especially something of the same kind that is newer or better;

 

[PokeJ]

Ah so you acknowledge the rule was changed. That's good. I dont care who a rules change benefits, i care that it happened in november. this is an off-season type of activity. not an in-season change that is precipitated by the success of two teams the big 12 doesn't want to see in their ccg.

Nobody is crying. There's no need to exaggerate my response to this. I'm saying it's peculiar to change established rules in the middle of the season. It's a bush league tactic, just like when the big 10 did it to benefit the real osu a few years back.

Baloney. If OU had beat OSU, KU and KSU and lost a chance to go to the CCG because OSU hadn’t played one of the 3 you would be screaming bloody murder. That’s your nature. Don’t try taking the high road now. You have way too many years of posting here to change now


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Okstatekerr]

At the end of the day, even if they did change the rule, it's the right thing to do. You don't see a problem and say "Oh sorry. We can't do anything about that. We have to wait till 4 months from now then we can look into it." You fix it. It is clear to any rational human being that a team shouldn't lose a 3-way tiebreaker to two teams they have beaten. You don't like it? Too bad, so sad. Don't lose to OSU then.

 

[Stillwaterman]

The way the rule is written now does not mean anything. It literally follows no interpretation made to date. A clarification is required.

 

[PJ-OSU]

Now into page 4 of irrelevance if we don't win the next two games.

 

[jetman]

LMAO loving this "wahh....the big 12 up and changed the rules in November" coming from the sooner fanbase today. I see toker is one of the idiots eating that up.

I've seen so many people argue on social media that it's supposed to be the teams with the best records playing, meaning overall record. Like non conference games are supposed to factor in.

Sorry sooner fans can't handle reality. (Not really sorry though)

 

[Okstatekerr]

LMAO loving this "wahh....the big 12 up and changed the rules in November" coming from the sooner fanbase today. I see toker is one of the idiots eating that up.

I've seen so many people argue on social media that it's supposed to be the teams with the best records playing, meaning overall record. Like non conference games are supposed to factor in.

Sorry sooner fans can't handle reality. (Not really sorry though)

When, in any conference race, has a non conference record matter? What a bunch of whiny a holes.

 

[CptnQuirk]

The way the rule is written now does not mean anything. It literally follows no interpretation made to date. A clarification is required.

Yes, it does. As I have said before

This is what the first criteria says.
1. Head-to-head (best cumulative win percentage in games among the tied teams). If not, every tied team has played each other, go to step 2.

It does not say “If every tied team has not played each other, go to step 2.”

This is my thought. The second sentence of #1 is poorly worded. In my opinion it reads,
Head-to-head (best cumulative win percentage in games among the tied teams). If not, then every tied team has played each other and their percentages are the same, then go to step 2.

How would this be any different from previously?

 

[OrangeFanatic2]

That's not a theory, that's a clear and obvious distinction. the worst thing the big 12 would want to see is the two outgoing teams in the ccg.

I didnt say anything about a conspiracy.

Take it how you want, I get it. However, I’ve seen multiple people who viewed the “original rule” differently. That viewed it just as the clarification that was just announced. This was on Monday. Therefore, clarification was definitely needed on the criteria one way or the other.

 

[OrangeFanatic2]

At the end of the day, over the last couple decades we have all witnessed Ou and Texas receive the good side of things when it comes to everything football related. I do not feel bad for either of the universities whatsoever.

 

[Cowboyshoopspride]

I think all the whiney puss bags would like the big 12 to change the rule to “in the thick of it” that allows teams that almost won head to head competition to have a play in game.

Same group of aholes politicked hard core in 2008 had no problem sneaking in over Texas when they had lost head to head. Why would we think they’d act any differently now?

 

[Midnight Toker]

Take it how you want, I get it. However, I’ve seen multiple people who viewed the “original rule” differently. That viewed it just as the clarification that was just announced. This was on Monday. Therefore, clarification was definitely needed on the criteria one way or the other.

You've seen multiple people who viewed the rule differently...and for some reason teh big 12 didnt like that so they needed to correct it?

what business is it of the big 12s that someone cant read the rules correctly? not their problem. they determine who makes it to the ccg based on their own rules on the books. the fact that some random cant figure it out is irrelevant. they didnt clarify, they changed it because they saw that with the rules as as they were constituted would possibly have kept osu out of hte ccg despite beating two teams theyre tied with.

 

[Midnight Toker]

Same group of aholes politicked hard core in 2008 had no problem sneaking in over Texas when they had lost head to head. Why would we think they’d act any differently now?

The thing about 2008 is that the tie breaker rule was not changed in november.

 

[Midnight Toker]

At the end of the day, over the last couple decades we have all witnessed Ou and Texas receive the good side of things when it comes to everything football related. I do not feel bad for either of the universities whatsoever.

nothing wrong with that, but you at least recognize the fact that a rules change in november that doesn't personally bother you because it benefits you.

 

[Duke Silver]

What a loser

 

[MustangPokeFan]

nothing wrong with that, but you at least recognize the fact that a rules change in november that doesn't personally bother you because it benefits you.

It was a bad rule and needed to be changed. They had it wrong, recognized it and made it right. End of story!

 

[Cowboyshoopspride]

The thing about 2008 is that the tie breaker rule was not changed in november.

That is completely unrelated to what I posted Mr “I never do that.”