Texas kicker Hunter Lawrence
If ever a heavy favorite deserved to lose a game, it was Texas against Nebraska. But thanks to a lousy kickoff by Nebraska, a dumb roughness penalty and instant replay, the Longhorns beat the Cornhuskers, 13-12, to win the Big 12 championship and a spot in the BCS title game against Alabama. The Longhorns survived the worst clock management imaginable and I hope Texas quarterback Colt McCoy gives the replay official a giant hug for saving his burnt orange ass.
Nebraska, 14-point underdogs and with the worst offense I have ever seen on a good college football team, took a 12-10 lead with less than two minutes left. On the ensuing kickoff, Nebraska’s kickoff man screwed up and kicked it out of bounds, giving Texas the ball at its own 40. On the next play, a completed pass, the Longhorns got 15 yards tacked on when receiver Jordan Shipley was horse-collared.
The Longhorns were in field goal range but almost never got a chance to kick. That’s because McCoy screwed up and took his time running to the sidelines and throwing the ball away as time was running out (Texas had a timeout left). The ball sailed out of bounds and hit the ground as the clock hit :01. When the clock kept running and went to :00, Nebraska thought it had won, but the replay official ruled there was still a second left (it appeared to be the right call, though it was extremely close). Texas’ Hunter Lawrence kicked a 46-yard field goal and saved McCoy from committing one of the biggest blunders in college football history.
After the game, McCoy said “there were 15 seconds left” and he threw it out of bounds figuring there would be one or two seconds left. In actuality, there were only six seconds left when the ball was snapped. It’s stunning that McCoy could have messed up so badly and that Texas coach Mack Brown did not call a timeout when the clock got inside 10 seconds and it was obvious that any play could run out the clock.
So, Texas gets a gift for the ages and still likely gets to play for the BCS title when the polls come out Sunday. That in a nutshell is the embarrassment that is major college football. Alabama (which crushed Florida), Texas, TCU, Cincinnati and Boise State all finshed unbeaten but the awful BCS system will likely decree that the Tide and Longhorns are more “deserving” than the other three less-than-big-name teams. The winner of Texas-Alabama will win the BCS title, but any claim of being “national champions” will ring hollow if any of the other three unbeatens win their bowl game.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 1:00 AM
Texas fan here true and orange but yes, you’re right on this one. Luck and Hunter Lawrence put Texas into the national championship game. Sorry it came to this but Mack needs to sit down with the team and have a LONG heart to heart about winning. Let’s hope they bring a new game to Pasadena.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 1:35 AM
Lots of generalizations in this article Alabama played close games against Tennessee and Auburn. Tennessee had an opportunity to win the game in Tuscaloosa with a last minute field goal. This championship game was justifiably close as Nebraska’s defense played extremely well. Cincinnati was down 21 points, yet are somehow more deserving to play in the championship? TCU escaped past Clemson by a field goal earlier in the season. Style points shouldn’t matter — Texas won the game, and should be in the National Championship accordingly.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 1:44 AM
I like Colt, but have to say am not surprised at his subpar performance once he ran into a really good defense. Nebraska’s SUH is a beast. Too bad they have a godawful offense.
BCS system is a crap popularity contest. They need a real playoff.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 2:00 AM
“Lots of generalizations.” No, I was being specific about how lucky Texas was that the ball didn’t stay airborne another nanosecond.
You are right about the other teams have close games, but it proves my point about the BCS. Why is Texas or Alabama more deserving than the other unbeatens? My guess is that they are big names in big conferences and ranked high to start the season. The system blows.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 2:09 AM
Another nanosecond? That’s just foolish. The only real question is why they didn’t put two seconds on the clock.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 2:15 AM
Why not write articles about how Alabama lucked into the National Championship, then, or, how luck is highly proportionate to success in sports? Defensive Lineman tips a pass, interception = Luck, Field Goal slides in by half a foot = luck, etc. Silly, to me at least, to arbitrarily talk about how a team lucks into a national championship because of one play in a season where Texas played thirteen games. It’s just as easy to talk about how Alabama’s lucky to be in the Nat’l Championship because Terrence Cody’s block of Tennessee’s game winning field goal attempt.
I agree that the BCS is a flawed system that is highly arbitrarily, but when working within the paradigm of the BCS, the two teams with the toughest strength of schedule — in combination with unbeaten seasons — are the two teams most deserving to play in the Nat’l Championship.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 3:20 AM
and here i thought LSU-Ole Miss had the biggest wtf ending of the year! Bama will murder Texas, there’s no Vince Young to save your ass this year, Mack Brown….
the BCS is a joke, if there’s any justice TCU will jump over Texas into the title game. i hate to say it but Congress is probably our only hope to break up this good ole boy network between college presidents and their corporate sugardaddies….
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 6:10 AM
The title game is a joke. I will not watch it under any circumstances. Ridiculous. At some point, the B(C)S needs to be changed to a playoff. Another year without a true college football champion. A shame.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 9:22 AM
We have Army/Navy next weekend, then college football season comes to an end. It’s the only sport whose exhibition season follows the regular season rather than precedes it.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Remember the days when 1 and 2 didn’t even meet in a title game? When the SEC champ was tied to the Sugar and the Big 12 champ was tied to the Orange and the Big 10/Pac 10 were tied to the Rose? That system really sucked. For example, in 1996, you had an FSU team beat the No. 1 UF team during the regular season, and the only other undefeated team (Arizona State) had to play in the Pac 10 title game against a one-loss Ohio State. That meant a rematch of UF and FSU in New Orleans and OSU and ASU in the Rose. ASU lost a very close game to OSU, UF crushed FSU, and UF was awarded the national title. Under the BCS system, at least we would have had ASU play FSU.
The BCS system sucks, but it’s better than the old bowl system, and it only took, what, 96 years for the NCAA to come up with the BCS after the first Rose Bowl? I will watch the title game because I love the hell out of college football. If anyone has any viable suggestions on how to convince the powers that be to fix the system, let me know. But whining about it year in and year out is getting old.
One thing that’s been lost is thank god UT won. Now Boise State will actually have a chance to play in a BCS bowl. They would have been the odd man out had Nebraska beat UT.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 11:30 AM
Yeah, I agree with the above comment.
If we have an eight team playoff, there would be bitching about the ninth team that didn’t get in, etc. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to not have a playoff, and refusing to watch the National Championship makes you come across as a bitter child who didn’t get his way during school recess.
I, for instance, think that it’s a joke that number two Texas will likely have to play #10 Nebraska on their home court in the elite eight of the volleyball playoffs. I also think that the way NFL handles overtime is a sham. Finally, I think it’s ridiculous that there is no instant replay and France is in the World Cup instead of Ireland.
Guess I’m going to have to boycott NCAA volleyball, NFL, and Soccer.
Looks like I’ll have time to study for finals after all.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Mitch you are missing the point, sure every sport has it’s issues, but if college football had an 8 team playoff at least all 5 undefeated teams would have a CHANCE to win the whole thing, rather than just 2 of them. Sure there would be some controversy over the final 3 spots to make up the 8 teams but it’d be NOTHING like it is now.
In no other sport does an undefeated team NOT have a shot to win the championship!
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 3:59 PM
Cyd so your saying that the two teams in the championship game are not possibly the best? Any game. Any night buddy. I guess you’re hung up on Florida.
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 4:46 PM
No season in whichBOTH Oregon and Stanford wax USC can be a bad season, but imagine if both teams were still in a Division 1 playoff!!
on Dec 6th, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Hey Mitch. No. 1 Penn State has to play at No. 14 in the volleyball sweet 16 in the Gainesville Regional. Probably won’t be much of a test for PSU since Florida isn’t what it used to be, but it seems like the reward for ending the season at the top should be to host a regional.
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 2:16 AM
I’m saying the whole system is a sham, it has driven my fan interest in college football from “high” to “very low” in the last 10 years, and I have no interest in watching two teams playing for the National Championship because of the issues inherently wrong with the system. That TCU isn’t in that game makes it a complete fraud. And no, I have no ties to TCU.
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 3:17 AM
Just because they almost blew it through no act of Nebraska does not mean they didn’t deserve to win…by 1 against Nebraska.
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 10:42 AM
TCU had problems beating Clemson earlier in the season. 14-10 and Air Force 20-17. They’re hardly invincible and I wish I would have seen them paired up against Florida because they likely would have gotten killed. As previously mentioned, the old system was worse. There was no playoff and champions from conferences were tied to a specific bowl. I’m not sure how your interest under that system was “high” and now your interest is “low,” because as flawed as the BCS maybe be, it’s a lot better than the older system.
You may not have ties to TCU, but living in LA, you sure as hell are more likely than not to have ties against Texas.
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 11:20 AM
I HATE Texas and would have loved to see McCoy put a capper on the horrible clock mgmt (plus the BCS turmoil would have been fun). Regardless, the Tide is going to crush Texas…I’d put Alabama as a 6 to 7 point favorite.
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 2:16 PM
Hmmm. Interesting comments. After seeing the pairings my support of BCS is falling more. TCU and Boise State in the same bowl? I guess the BCS didn’t want to see another BCS conference team get beaten by someone like TCU or Boise St. That move was shabby at best.
Regarding Jeff K’s comments I hate to tell you 6-7 points is not a crush. Texas is hard to predict on their games. They can be all up or having a hard time. A&M and Nebraska were great examples.
Regarding who should be in there I don’t think we’ll ever get a true “national champion.” I like the way someone at work put it today – the playoff system is not about picking the best team, it’s about appeasing the fans and pundits.
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 3:54 PM
“the playoff system is not about picking the best team, it’s about appeasing the fans”
i’m sorry but you work w/ a moron. a playoff system WILL be about picking the best team because the best teams will be in the playoffs! and god forbid they listen to the fans who shell out the $ at the games and taxpayer $ to help fund the programs!
hey if you love the BCS so much I take it you’d like to see that system in the NFL as well, who needs the playoffs and Super Bowl when you can just take the winners of the AFC & NFC and put them in a “championship game”? Last year would have been Giants vs. Titans, a match-up between 2 TRUE champions, right?
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 3:56 PM
oh, and that entire month between the end of the regular NFL season and the “championship game” would be full of excitement, huh?
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 7:33 PM
Druggy Bear thanks for the slam. The best teams? Try watching the NCAA Basketball Tourney and tell me the “best” teams win the championship game. As I’ve said before any game, any night. I’ve seen a team be on top and slip on a single game. Did that one game decide who the “best” was? Give me a BREAK!
The problem with a college football playoff system is how you get the slate. Yep, you have to rely on that dreaded computer system everyone hates because the slate would have to be much smaller than 65 teams. You can play, at best, one game a weekend. What are you going to say to those bubble teams?
Hey, maybe you should contribute to http://www.playoffpac.com since you apparently have money to blow on the system. Then you can buy the likes of Rep. Joe Barton to help further your cause through Congress.
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 8:21 PM
“Did that one game decide who the “best” was? Give me a BREAK!”
actually no, the entire tournament decides who the best team is, cuz guess what: if you can’t win the tournament you AREN’T THE BEST! and why do you think a college football tournament would not be a money maker? get back to me after you see the half-full stadiums this year for the 20-25 mediocre bowls that make up this ridiculous system. and yes some teams won’t make the playoffs, but the 5 undefeated teams WOULD and would have a shot to play for the title. Now we’ll never know who the BEST really is.
but anyone who’d rather see a bowl-type system for college basketball rather than the thrill-ride that is march madness really can’t be reasoned with…..
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 9:18 PM
DruggyBear I love the NCAA basketball tournament as a tournament. Sorry but you have this disillusional thought that winning a 65 team tournament makes you the “best.” Sorry buddy, it means you won a tournament and that’s great. I love the entire experience, have worked the tourney several times when it was here in San Antonio, and have attended every year for the past 14 years at either subregionals, regionals, or the Final Four. Yep, I do love March Madness.
But at the end of the tournament I recognize the winner as just that, the winner of the tournament. I don’t even consider them the “best” college basketball team in the NCAA. Only people who don’t understand the purpose of the tournament and season make that claim. Remember, it’s a single elimination tournament. Any game, any night. (I keep repeating it because you don’t seem to get it.)
BTW, what happens if we don’t have five undefeated teams? Who’s to say Florida isn’t better than TCU? Why does it matter? Personally if people are so freaking gung-ho for a playoff system go for it. Oh, and the only fans who could even think about traveling to every playoff site are the rich fans so don’t even think this system benefits many people. As I said, it’s just there to make a small set of fans satisfied.
on Dec 7th, 2009 at 10:12 PM
“Personally if people are so freaking gung-ho for a playoff system go for it… As I said, it’s just there to make a small set of fans satisfied.”
a small set ay?:
“In the most recent poll I could find on the topic, Gallup recorded overwhelming support for a playoff among college football fans. In this January 2007 survey, 69% of college football fans supported a playoff that would involve at least four teams while an additional 16% favored a one-game playoff among the top two teams after the bowl games. Thus, only 15% of college football fans want to keep the present BCS system.”
source: http://www.pollster.com/blogs/obamas_support_for_college_foo.php
you were saying?
on Dec 8th, 2009 at 6:37 AM
Going back to my original position I don’t mind the dog catching this car. I’ll just enjoy the comments AFTER a playoff system is put in place about how badly its run. This is a no-win situation regarding building it out. But then again, it’s a great thing to yak about during December while we’re at holiday parties and visiting relatives.
It works at the D-II and III level because you’re not moving this big of a fan base. You keep saying the stadium’s would be sold out. Yea, let’s see you logistically move that many people around week to week during the holiday season.
I’ve given this topic more interest than it deserves. I am opposed to Rep. Barton’s STUPID call for congressional hearings on this matter and you should too. As if Congress doesn’t have anything else to deal with right now.
on Dec 8th, 2009 at 6:56 PM
DruggyBear I love the NCAA basketball tournament as a tournament. Sorry but you have this disillusional thought that winning a 65 team tournament makes you the “best.” Sorry buddy, it means you won a tournament and that’s great.
Actually, it means they’re the champions of D1 basketball, and recognized as such by the NCAA. That’s really all that those in favor of a playoff want at the end of the day. An NCAA sanctioned postseason that results in a champion being determined.
A tournament to determine a championship? Where else do they do that? Hmm..the NFL, MLB, NBA….oh heck with it. Everywhere else. Actually I’m trying to figure out where else a major sport leaves its champion to a bunch of voters? Anyone?
on Dec 13th, 2009 at 10:49 PM
I think alabama iz the bezt team out there they were on fire at the sec and they won without sweating and ingram diserved the heinsman award well thats what i think.alabama is going to make it to the super bowl and i will be an alabama fan for life=>
on Dec 15th, 2009 at 9:35 PM
I can’t stand people bitching constantly about the BCS system. As mentioned, it’s way better than the old system… so why in the world would you people complain now?
At least now there are computer formulas to go along with human votes to determine the ranked teams. Additionally, it’s fair enough to include teams based on their efforts in lesser (non-automatic bid) conferences. So what’s the problem?
Basketball tournaments are stupid, and they’re the only time a lot of people even watch basketball. This goes for NBA and college hoops. A 65 team tournament is RIDICULOUS, and it started with something like 8 teams… then it grew, and grew, and grew because people complained about teams not getting in.
You can’t play several football games in a week. It’s a much more physically demanding sport, not to mention the strategic preparation each game demands. Plus, these aren’t professionally conditioned NFL players. These are kids. Extending the season a couple games for a playoff could really wear a lot of these players down, and you might not even be looking at the same teams come chamionship game time.
In reality, the entire season is like a playoff. If you lose, you’re probably out of the title talk unless you’re very lucky. Hell, the SEC Chamionship the past couple years was like a playoff too.
I agree that playoffs are the way to go for most sports… but college football is different. I just don’t think it’s the right choice for this particular sport, and the system that is in place now is a pretty good compromise.
Besides, the people that complain about the BCS annually wouldn’t be saying a word if their teams were in the big game. And they know it.
on Dec 15th, 2009 at 10:11 PM
“In reality, the entire season is like a playoff.”
Um, no. Boise State, TCU and Cincinnati won all their games … and are not playing for the title.
“I agree that playoffs are the way to go for most sports… but college football is different.”
Really? Then how do you explain there being playoffs in Div. I, II and III college football?
Having a 16-team playoff is easy to do and you could do it and keep the bowls. The system now sucks.
on Dec 18th, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Even if you aren’t satisfied with who’s playing in the in the bowls, RFD-TV is running a contest on Facebook giving away free tickets to the Bama/Texas match. If you’re interested the URL is facebook.com/officialrfdtv…at least you’d get a trip out of the deal.
on Dec 20th, 2009 at 10:17 PM
If bama wins this game I don’t think anyone will disagree that they are the National Champions. Their season has been a treat and they are topping some serious stat columns. Not to mention that if they do win they will be sporting a National Championship and the #2 SOS in the nation. Hard to say that anyone else is more deserving when you look at it that way.
on Dec 20th, 2009 at 10:45 PM
A playoff system seems to be a standard way to provide a champion in everyone’s mind. There are a few different ways to do it and the BCS is a good way. Of course you will have a couple of teams that do not get a equal cut, but that is how it goes when you play cupcakes for 90% of your season. The BCS does a better job than a playoff does at providing a good game that the entire nation can get behind for a national championship game. If Texas were to get booted out for TCU, Boise or Cinn then it would be a gesture of good will more than a gesture of deserving. A playoff will gather a collection of teams that could range widely in how well they played in the regular season. Some teams may be 12-0 and some may be 7-5. Now if the 7-5 team catches some breaks and has one outstanding performance then they may win the whole thing. If that does happen then what was the point in playing the 12 games before the playoffs? Just to see some games for entertainment purposes only?
I was a avid playoff supporter for awhile. Then I started to consider how things could look after watching this year’s MLS championship game. In that game you had a great team playing another team that lost more games than they won. That terrible team ended up having a great game and was the better team on that day, but not the better team that season. So what was the point in all of those games before hand? Just eye candy? College football has a short season and has a very limited window to achieve anything in. Right now the system gives everyone good games to decide who is the best in the nation. It provides a legit championship game instead of a great team against a lucky terrible team. Feb. 3rd of 2008 is a fair example of what I am talking about. A wild card team won the big game against an undefeated team. The NFL’s playoff system didn’t provide the best team of the 2008 season. They provided the best team of Feb 3rd, 2008.