2023 Dr pepper still in reach?

[MakeItRain]

They have already done it

As of 30 seconds ago they haven't announced anything, nor have they changed the procedure that's currently listed on the website.
https://big12sports.com/news/2008/7/31/1546006.aspx
I know this is hard for K-State fans and media but I'll actually wait to freakout until I'm given reason to. I still won't freak out though.

[wetwillie]

They have already done it

As of 30 seconds ago they haven't announced anything, nor have they changed the procedure that's currently listed on the website.
https://big12sports.com/news/2008/7/31/1546006.aspx
I know this is hard for K-State fans and media but I'll actually wait to freakout until I'm given reason to. I still won't freak out though.

They already had the meeting and the outcome is decided, it will be released today. 

[kim carnes]

You can’t change tiebreaker rules midseason, it’s in the Geneva convention

[MakeItRain]

They have already done it

As of 30 seconds ago they haven't announced anything, nor have they changed the procedure that's currently listed on the website.
https://big12sports.com/news/2008/7/31/1546006.aspx
I know this is hard for K-State fans and media but I'll actually wait to freakout until I'm given reason to. I still won't freak out though.

They already had the meeting and the outcome is decided, it will be released today.

Well, if this is the case and the ADs and/or the BOGs agreed to it, I'd hope that the meltdown would stop. Who the eff am I kidding though?

[bshea85]

They have to clarify now because schools & journalists are asking.

This is the biggest part I don't get about the whole story. The tiebreaker rule isn't vague at all. It clearly says if the tied teams haven't all played each other then you go to the next step. What would have prompted the questions in the first place?

Okie Lite getting screwed over because if it was the H2H format they are at the top.

I get that, but that has nothing to do with the clarity of the rule. The question would be more like “hey are you guys thinking of changing this cause it doesn’t seem very fair.”

The extra comma is weird but inconsequential. There isn’t a way to read the rule where the comma changes the meaning.

I did not go to law school to know how consequential a comma can be.

[Cats-aholic]

Considering OkState is probably not going 2-0 to end the season, this is all going to be moot and the 'ship will be OU vs. Texas.  They are going to be chanting S-E-C in Arlington...

[MakeItRain]

Considering OkState is probably not going 2-0 to end the season, this is all going to be moot and the 'ship will be OU vs. Texas.  They are going to be chanting S-E-C in Arlington...

Yes on the first part, but I also don't think that OU and UT will both win their last two games.

[steve dave]

I made this meme on twitter about it the other day. pound that like and subscribe button.

https://twitter.com/stevedaveKSU/status/1723782294475866411

[PurpleOil]

 

That's money

[PurpleOil]

Considering OkState is probably not going 2-0 to end the season, this is all going to be moot and the 'ship will be OU vs. Texas.  They are going to be chanting S-E-C in Arlington...

Yes on the first part, but I also don't think that OU and UT will both win their last two games.

Both the Oklahoma schools have very easy games to end the season. UT is really the only one on upset alert. Where do you see the red dirt teams failing?

[wetwillie]

OSU just got torched by 40 points against a team that was 1-5 in the league.  I think you can take your pick on which game they could definitely lose.

[cfbandyman]

Does OSU losing even gain us anything? I think we have to have OU lose too, and I really wouldn't want OSU to lose at this point to essentially have a Texas/OU champ game.

[wetwillie]

Does OSU losing even gain us anything? I think we have to have OU lose too, and I really wouldn't want OSU to lose at this point to essentially have a Texas/OU champ game.

I see OU vs UT as nearly inevitable now.

[MakeItRain]

Considering OkState is probably not going 2-0 to end the season, this is all going to be moot and the 'ship will be OU vs. Texas.  They are going to be chanting S-E-C in Arlington...

Yes on the first part, but I also don't think that OU and UT will both win their last two games.

Both the Oklahoma schools have very easy games to end the season. UT is really the only one on upset alert. Where do you see the red dirt teams failing?

Ion know what you've been watching the last month, but none of these teams have very easy games to end the season. Texas, K-State, and Iowa State seem, right now, to be the only teams capable of easily handling shitty teams and none of those three finish with shitty teams.

[MakeItRain]

This is hilarious. She's pretty easily the best tweeter of the hyper online K-State twitterazzi
https://twitter.com/alison_renner/status/1724773272913322449

[bananaeater]

They have already done it

As of 30 seconds ago they haven't announced anything, nor have they changed the procedure that's currently listed on the website.
https://big12sports.com/news/2008/7/31/1546006.aspx
I know this is hard for K-State fans and media but I'll actually wait to freakout until I'm given reason to. I still won't freak out though.

They already had the meeting and the outcome is decided, it will be released today.

Well, if this is the case and the ADs and/or the BOGs agreed to it, I'd hope that the meltdown would stop. Who the eff am I kidding though?

So, has there been anything official from the big12 or still speculation?  I can't figure out if we're still mad about tramel's article or some official word from the conference.

[TheHamburglar]

They have already done it

As of 30 seconds ago they haven't announced anything, nor have they changed the procedure that's currently listed on the website.
https://big12sports.com/news/2008/7/31/1546006.aspx
I know this is hard for K-State fans and media but I'll actually wait to freakout until I'm given reason to. I still won't freak out though.

They already had the meeting and the outcome is decided, it will be released today.

Well, if this is the case and the ADs and/or the BOGs agreed to it, I'd hope that the meltdown would stop. Who the eff am I kidding though?

So, has there been anything official from the big12 or still speculation?  I can't figure out if we're still mad about tramel's article or some official word from the conference.

The Big12 emailed it out to reporters this afternoon.

[Winters]

Cowards

[star seed 7]

fire yormak

[cfbandyman]

This is hilarious. She's pretty easily the best tweeter of the hyper online K-State twitterazzi
https://twitter.com/alison_renner/status/1724773272913322449

She's the only one I can semi handle. There are also some other reasons behind that too

[PurpleOil]

This is hilarious. She's pretty easily the best tweeter of the hyper online K-State twitterazzi
https://twitter.com/alison_renner/status/1724773272913322449

Oh wow, I'm not on twitter but I know her IRL.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

I’ll tell ya who really stands to gain something here it’s those Jayhawks. If we are apathetic now that the champy game is basically out of reach it really opens the door for the hawks to end The Streak

[catastrophe]

It’s baffling how this whole tiebreaker thing has been handled. Why would a statement be released only to reporters and not published on the Big 12’s website?

And the statement partially recited on si.com says the rules aren’t being changed, which also makes no sense in this context. Is that because they didn’t want to submit it to a vote?

[MakeItRain]

11:07 PM and the rules on the website still haven't been changed.

[Ghost of Stan Parrish]

From a legal perspective, it is not a clarification but a change. The stupider course of action is to try to pretend it's a clarification instead of admitting it's a change. The Big XII chose to take the stupider route here.

But if I had to argue the Big XII's position in court, I would point to the comma and say the rule is legal gibberish as written, so some clarification is required. The Commissioner is authorized to clarify the rules. That's what he did.

It's just the intent of the rule was clear even if it was poorly drafted, and the "clarification" completely changed the intent of the rule.

Oh well.