College Football

846 readers

18 users here now

A community to discuss college football.

/c/CFB Poll Top 25
1. Oregon
2. Ohio State
3. Texas
4. Notre Dame
5. Penn State
6. Georgia
7. ~~Indiana~~
8. ~~Alabama~~
T-9. ~~Ole Miss~~
T-9. South Carolina
11. SMU
12. Tennessee
13. ~~Army~~
T-14. Miami
T-14. Boise State
16. ~~Texas A&M~~
17. Clemson
18. Tulane
19. ~~Colorado~~
20. ~~BYU~~
21. Iowa State
T-22. Kansas State
T-22. Arizona State
24. Missouri
25. USC

Check out our other sports communities!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Big 12 adds 'clarification' to tiebreaker rules (archive.ph)

submitted 1 year ago by anhydrous to c/[email protected]

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

“If all the tied teams are not common opponents, the tied team that defeated each of the other tied teams earns the Championship berth.”

As George Stoia of On3’s Sooner Scoop pointed out, the original tiebreaker rules did not have that sentence in there. The language has been added to Step 1.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] g0d0fm15ch13f 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is this clarification necessary this year? I haven't been following b12 that much honestly.

[–] anhydrous 2 points 1 year ago

There's a bunch of teams at the top vying for spots in the championship game, and there are possibilities for ties. Some combinations of W-L to close out the season had certain assumed tie-breakers to get to the championship game, but this "clarification" breaks some of the assumptions. The statement by the Big XII acts as if nothing has changed, but it looks like they added qualifying words that weren't there previously in order to make this clarification.

load more comments (1 replies)