Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Discussion on tie breakers.. it sucks..

Let's say ISU beats Texas and loses to KSU. How does a OU, OSU, UT and KSU tiebreak work?

Head to head doesn't work, so next step is record against Iowa State. OU and KSU are now tied. No head to head. They both played OSU and Texas. KSU lost to both so OU as the #1 seed.

2 seed comes down to KSU, UT and OSU. The next best common opponent is ISU, so KSU gets the #2.

If Texas wins out and KSU wins out, a three way tie between OU, OSU and KSU would go to a common opponent of ISU. OU and KSU would prevail. No head to head, so OU beating. UT and UT beating KSU means #2 is OU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: agentbear
AlaCyclone said:
I'm not worried about ISU in this mess.
Give me 7-2 and let it shake out like it shakes!
Might as well just go with last appearance clause.
Click to expand...
Agree. 7-2 would be incredible even without a CCG.

Let's say that OU beats OSU. OU gets an automatic NY6. Does Texas get an at-large? Probably. There would be a ton of 2 loss teams looking to fill 6 spots. Texas, Bama, Oregon, Penn State, Missouri, Louisville, Ole Miss, UNC. Then does the Alamo choose ISU or OSU? If it chooses OSU, then we are headed to Orlando.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlaCyclone
clone52 said:
I am rethinking the 4 way tie with OSU, OU, Texas and ISU.

oSU and UT beat Kansas, so I assumed the 2 of them would get in, but you still have to break their tie. The tie breaker for the #1 seed would come down to winning % against OU and OSU. OSU wins that battle as the one seed.
Now you have a 3 way tie for the #2 seed. OU gets in due to beating both Texas and ISU.
Click to expand...
Tiebreaker wouldn't be record vs OU and ISU.

"When arriving at another group of tied teams while comparing records, use each team’s win percentage against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to that group’s own tie-breaking procedure) rather than the performance against individual tied teams."
 
mred said:
Tiebreaker wouldn't be record vs OU and ISU.

"When arriving at another group of tied teams while comparing records, use each team’s win percentage against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to that group’s own tie-breaking procedure) rather than the performance against individual tied teams."
Click to expand...
I think it would. You'd take the win % against the collective tied teams (OU and ISU in this case) rather than saying OU is ahead of ISU and taking their record against OU only. Either way, though, OSU is the #1 seed.
 
clone52 said:
I think it would. You'd take the win % against the collective tied teams (OU and ISU in this case) rather than saying OU is ahead of ISU and taking their record against OU only. Either way, though, OSU is the #1 seed.
Click to expand...
But there are four tied teams, not two. You are separating OU and ISU from the other two when doing the common record down the standings step, and that's not how the tiebreaker works (due to the clause I quoted).
 
mred said:
But there are four tied teams, not two. You are separating OU and ISU from the other two when doing the common record down the standings step, and that's not how the tiebreaker works (due to the clause I quoted).
Click to expand...

The 4 tied teams goes to criteria 2. Record against the best common opponent, which would be Kansas. OSU and Texas both beat Kansas. The clause you quoted would apply if the 4 teams had 2 common opponents with the same W/L record. In this case, we don't hit that clause. Now you have a 2 way tie with because OU and ISU were eliminated on the first tiebreaker. When you break down OSU and Texas, OSU becomes the #1 seed.

Now you need to determine the #2 seed. You have a 3-way tie between OU, ISU and Texas for 2nd place (since OSU won the 1st place tiebreaker). Since OU beat ISU and Texas, OU would be the #2 seed.

Edit: I think I have the logic correct, but I may be entirely wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: agentbear
If ISU and OSU win out, ISU will deservedly surge way ahead of OSU in the CFP rankings. We beat them earlier and we will have played a tougher B12 schedule than them. I half wonder if Gundy would let ISU take its place in the B12 championship anyway.

This idea that it will come down to who had the best record against a common opponent is foolish. As this article points out, there is a chance that 8 teams could finish in a first place tie at 6-3. What if there is no common opponent among the teams in the tie? Are the ADs going to have another meeting... only this time after the season has ended?

The tiebreaker rules need to be rewritten, and they need to be rewritten NOW. Don't wait until the season is over.

 
None of this matters if ISU doesn't win both games left on their schedule, arguably the toughest two of the year. But it's a good thing for the program to be able to have this as a motivation on game day at the end of the season.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VeloClone and Yellow Snow
StLouisClone said:
If ISU and OSU win out, ISU will deservedly surge way ahead of OSU in the CFP rankings. We beat them earlier and we will have played a tougher B12 schedule than them. I half wonder if Gundy would let ISU take its place in the B12 championship anyway.

This idea that it will come down to who had the best record against a common opponent is foolish. As this article points out, there is a chance that 8 teams could finish in a first place tie at 6-3. What if there is no common opponent among the teams in the tie? Are the ADs going to have another meeting... only this time after the season has ended?

The tiebreaker rules need to be rewritten, and they need to be rewritten NOW. Don't wait until the season is over.

Click to expand...
If there is an 8 team tie, then they would go to step 3 or step 4 of the tiebreaker rule.

What criteria would you propose?
 
Dormeezy said:
If you're not on the team, you don't have control over anything.

As a fan, I'm interested in knowing what the possibilities (if any) are for ISU to reach the CCG.
Click to expand...
The fact that so few fans have this correct opinion is quite alarming. If you are a fan that wants to only think about the next game that's fine but don't chastise fans that look at future scenarios etc. I promise it has no bearing on how the team plays or the outcome of games
 
  • Like
Reactions: PickSix
clone52 said:
If there is an 8 team tie, then they would go to step 3 or step 4 of the tiebreaker rule.

What criteria would you propose?
Click to expand...
The team(s) with the most wins amongst the teams in the tie should win the tiebreaker. If that doesn't break it, then look at the team with the fewest losses as the 2nd tiebreaker. It's simple, and it potentially rewards the team that played the toughest schedule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: clone52
clone52 said:
If there is an 8 team tie, then they would go to step 3 or step 4 of the tiebreaker rule.

What criteria would you propose?
Click to expand...
Common opponent shouldn't be the 2nd tiebreaker. Why base such an important decision on such a fluky factor? What if the best common opponent was a team like Houston or Cincinnati that finished at the bottom of the standings?
 
  • Like
Reactions: clone52
Just win out and let itself sort its way out. The last thing I want to see though is a Texas v Oklahoma championship game. It certainly seems like at least 1 of them will be in it. I sure as hell hope not both
 
mred said:
We still need OU or OSU to lose once. In a four-way tie with OU, OSU, UT, ISU, or a three-way tie that drops Texas, OSU holds the tiebreaker for the #1 spot and OU holds the tiebreaker over ISU or ISU/UT combined for the #2 spot.
Click to expand...
So that McMurphy tweet is incorrect then, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back