Where Is the Outrage about Mizzou's Schedule?

Where is the outrage over Mizzou winning the Big 12 North solely because of its weak schedule? Last year, KU was given a lot of grief and accused of being a fraud because the Jayhawks “avoided” Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas Tech. And wrongfully so. Texas and Tech last year were no better than two teams the Hawks played on the Road: Okie St (where Tech lost and UT escaped with a miracle fourth quarter), and A&M (where Texas lost)—and this doesn’t even account for UT’s 20 point loss at Home to k-state and its near death experience at Home vs. a Nebraska team that KU routed in an historical manner.

Playing Baylor instead of OU? Okay, you’ve got a point.

This year, Mizzou has had the schedule advantage, yet no one even mentions it.

In the Big 12 North, both Mizzou and KU are 4-1 (as is NU). In common opponents (the North and UT), both teams are 4-2. NU is also 4-2 vs. common opponents with Mizzou (the North plus Baylor); and vs. common opponents with KU (the North plus Tech).

So why is Mizzou playing in the Big 12 title game as the North’s sacrificial lamb, rather than KU? The Jayhawks, after all, beat the Tigers head to head on a neutral field?

Okay—so the Big 12 3 way tie-breaker discards head to head (and rightfully so), and Mizzou wins the hypothetical BCS ratings fiasco. Nevertheless, the ONLY reason Mizzou has an edge in the Big 12 North standings and has avoided the three way tie scenario is its schedule.

Mizzou’s non-common conference opponents vis a vis KU are Okie St at Home and Baylor in Waco vs. Texas Tech at home and Oklahoma in Norman. I will allow that Tech and Okie St are comparable opponents, making the teams’ comparable records 4-3.

But Baylor in Waco vs. OU in Norman? You decide whether Mizzou’s W at Baylor (a game they would have lost had a Baylor defender not dropped an easy Pick-6 in the last two minutes of a tie game) means they are more deserving than a team that had to play in a stadium where OU has lost twice in the Bob Stoops era.

The guess here is that Mizzou is 4-4 had they played OU rather than Baylor, and KU is 5-3 had the Hawks visited Waco instead of Norman.

At any rate, there is no logical basis for anyone concluding that Mizzou is a better team or a more deserving one than KU.