FanPost

My Response to Oklahoma State Cowboys Fans

I had originally begun typing this as a comment over at www.cowboysrideforfree.com in their thread responding to the BCS Selection, but under these circumstances it didn't feel right going over there and posting this on their site. So, I decided to come over here, speak my mind, and invite any Oklahoma State fans (I'm sure there are a few coming over here, just as several of us went over there) to come in and share some of their opinions.

CT4, just keep on moving. My posts aren't for you.

As an initial matter, I would just point out that some of the more ridiculous comments in that OSU thread are posted by a Cowboys fan who is also an Auburnite. He, too, is welcome to post here, but I'd ask us to all ensure that we follow RBR policy.

Cowboys, you have an outstanding football team, of whom you are justifiably very proud. The dismantling of the Oklahoma Sooners was thorough and impressive.

As has been expressed elsewhere, I regret that a very good Oklahoma State (as well as a very good Stanford team) got left out with our current system. However, only one 1-loss team was going to the National Championship Game, and three were going to get left out. 42/59 voters in the Coaches' Poll felt like OSU was #3 or lower. In fact, even among voters not in the SEC or Big 12, Oklahoma State got 13 second-place votes, 31 third-place votes, 3 fourth-place votes, and 1 fifth-place vote. These are coaches we're talking about, not sportswriters or ESPN talking heads. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/story/2011-final-coaches-ballots/51647436/1

Auburn went undefeated in 2004, but didn't get invited to the BCS National Championship Game. (This was actually the impetus behind Mike Slive pushing the plus-one, which only the ACC supported - the Big 12 opposed.) Penn State was undefeated and untied in 1994, but Nebraska was the National Champion. FSU and Notre Dame both had one loss in 1993 (pre-BCS), with Notre Dame winning the head-to-head, but losing to Boston College, yet FSU was the polls' as National Champions. Hell, Alabama was back-to-back defending National Champions in 1964 and 1965, and went undefeated and untied in 1966, but Notre Dame and Michigan State (who played each other to a tie) were co-champs.

Sometimes it's hard to know why people vote the way they do. Again, as has been pointed out elsewhere, Mike Slive (SEC Commissioner) has tried to implement a plus-one system that would have had LSU playing Stanford, and Alabama playing Oklahoma State, with the winner playing for all the marbles. The Big Ten, Big 12, and Pac-10 all opposed this plan. http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7317611/interim-big-12-commissioner-chuck-neinas-pushes-plus-one-playoff-model. http://espn.go.com/college-football/preview11/story/_/id/6842618/college-football-preview-jim-delany-mike-slive-form-one-great-rivalries.

“Even though we could construct barriers at this time, we felt like there could be easily an erosion of that, more pressure to add more teams with an ability to get to the national championship game as we went over time,” then-Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe explained at the time.

With regards to the fact that Alabama did not win our conference, but are still playing for the National Championship, we should remember that this has happened twice before, with both other teams coming from the Big 12. I'm sure you all remember, but the 2001 Cornhuskers were crushed 36-62 by then #14 Colorado in the last game of the regular season, didn't win their division, and then (much like Alabama this year) sat out the conference championship game on their way to the BCS National Championship Game. In 2003, Oklahoma lost 7-35 to then #12 Kansas State in the Big 12 Championship Game, on their way to the National Championship Game.

I wonder how the rolls would have been reversed had 2008 turned out slightly different. Remember when Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas Tech all ended in the three-way tie in the Big 12 South? That wasn't as close as this year, but had a couple of things gone differently, we would have had a Big 12 BCSNCG rematch: http://www.bcsguru.com/2008_bcs_standings.htm. Interestingly, right after this season the Mountain West Conference proposed an eight-team playoff.

Interesting Fact: The name of the conference is the "Big 12 Conference." One OSU fan made a snarky comment explaining that XII was a Roman numeral for twelve. I'm sure that fan would be interested to note that although their logo does, in fact, include the Roman numerals "XII," the banner on that logo bears "Big 12 Conference" and the registered trademark name of the conference is the "Big 12 Conference." Don't take my word for it - take theirs:

When referring to the Big 12 Conference, please remember the conference name (which is a registered trademark) should be listed as follows:

Big 12

The following should NOT be used in text when referencing the Big 12:

Big XII

Big Twelve

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&KEY=&ATCLID=1514841

FanPosts are just that; posts created by the fans. They are in no way indicative of the opinions of SBN and the authors of Roll Bama Roll.

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Roll 'Bama Roll

You must be a member of Roll 'Bama Roll to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Roll 'Bama Roll. You should read them.

Join Roll 'Bama Roll

You must be a member of Roll 'Bama Roll to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Roll 'Bama Roll. You should read them.

Spinner.vc97ec6e

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9341_tracker