Texas shouldn't have gotten a 'second' chance

It's too bad the voters didn't have any more guts than the Big 12 game officials. They should have voted Texas Christian (or Cincinnati, for that matter) No. 2 and into the BCS national championship game. It's too bad it didn't happen. The referees had an excuse: They work for the Big 12 Conference, which desperately needed Texas to avoid an upset by Nebraska. The voters had no excuse. They still got to choose among undefeated teams to put in the national championship game against Alabama. But because Texas was ranked ahead of TCU and Cincinnati last week, they voted Texas ahead of TCU and Cincinnati this week. Four times over the years, the Big 12 has screwed itself out of the national title game with a huge upset in the conference championship game. They weren't going to allow that to happen again, no matter how dominant Ndamukong Suh was for Nebraska. Look, I don't hate the Longhorns. And I don't root for TCU, or Cincinnati ... or Nebraska. I don't hate the BCS, and I don't necessarily even crave a playoff tournament. But that ending of the Big 12 championship game was just wrong. Here's exactly what happened: There were 24 incomplete passes in the Texas-Nebraska game. On every one of them — every single one (I know, I went back and checked in slow motion) — the game clock ticked off that second, and sometimes another. That's how it always works in this and every other game: There's a bit of human element (the eye sending the message to the brain, the brain sending the synapse to the finger on the clock button, the electronic impulses prompting the clock to stop). And so, when Colt McCoy inexplicably decided to run a play with six seconds remaining instead of calling timeout or ... well, hurrying up, he rolled out and threw the ball away, way out of bounds, as the clock ticked down to 0:00. Nebraska rushed the field, what a sensational 12-10 triumph for Bo Pelini's team. But since Texas coach Mack Brown wanted a second placed back on the clock, and because the Big 12 wanted to have a second placed back on the clock, and because all of the six major BCS conferences HAD TO HAVE a second placed back on the clock, and because the referees figured they might never have a chance to work for the league ever again if they do this wrong ... it was like that. So, unlike every other similar play in the game, the officials overruled the clock and put 0:01 back up on the scoreboard, and Texas ran the field-goal team out there and Hunter Lawrence kicked it through. So, since the refs felt the need to overrule the clock, the voters had a chance to overrule the game officials. They should have voted TCU No. 2 ... Texas has no business being in this title game. Even if you agree with the outcome, that game and their previous game against Texas A&M give us no reason to think Texas is the second-best team in college football in 2009 — and that's exactly what playing in the national championship game means. The irony, of course, is that the Longhorns, as I wrote many times last year, absolutely deserved to be in the 2008 national championship game, but were snubbed by the voters. Remember, they beat Oklahoma, and later finished in a tie with those same Sooners atop the Big 12 — after the most amazing ending to any game of the season (Michael Crabtree's ridiculous catch and pirouette into the end zone as time expired, lifting Texas Tech over Texas). The voters decided, though, to choose a team that Texas beat, and left out the Longhorns. That's a year-old, tired story. But it's still the truth: Texas should have been in the 2008 national championship game. But it should not be in the 2009 national championship game. Ugh. It's reminiscent of the infamous Fifth Down Game for Colorado in 1990. That year, of course, the referees decided to give (forgot, really, but NOBODY corrected them) the Buffaloes five downs at the Missouri goal line, and they finally scored on fifth-and-goal from the 1. Colorado went on to win a share of the national championship. In fact, the Buffs would have won both the Writers and Coaches' versions of the national title in those pre-BCS days, but after the bowl games, coaches — certainly cognizant of the injustice — leapfrogged undefeated Georgia Tech (11-0-1) over Colorado (11-1-1, even with the fifth-down victory). To a large degree, voters righted the wrong. That should have happened again this year. In fact, it still can: If Texas beats Alabama, and TCU wins its bowl game, perhaps voters will think long and hard before casting their final ballot ... instead of the way they voted Sunday.

Tide will roll easily

Alabama's game plan for the SEC championship game was masterful. The Tide aired it out from the very beginning, using the pass to set up the run, and kept Florida's defense off-balance all day. Quarterback Greg McElroy performed in the championship game in just the way that Heisman hopefuls Tim Tebow and Colt McCoy had dreamed about. Had either Tebow or McCoy played like McElroy did, they would have won gotten every first-place vote. It was set up for them, but McElroy showed that he's capable of being an elite quarterback for a great team, in the biggest game. Maybe he should be a Heisman candidate next year ... except that teammate Mark Ingram is back, too. Certainly Alabama is the pick to beat Texas. McElroy, Ingram, the defense, the kicker, and even the way Marquis Maze has emerged to make for a double-threat pair of excellent wideouts with Julio Jones. The Tide will certainly go to school off the Nebraska defensive performance against UT (nine sacks, three interceptions), and Alabama has the personnel to be even more dominant. The Longhorns, meantime, couldn't get anything going offensively against Nebraska, one week after they were unable to get anything going defensively in a 49-39 victory over Texas A&M. Here's another way to look at it, if the good Texas offense AND the good Texas defense show up on the same day, and that day happens to be Jan. 7, this is going to be a great game! UT's defense, remember, shut down Nebraska, as well as Sam Bradford-less Oklahoma, and ... uh ... Wyoming, and UTEP, and Colorado, and Missouri, and UCF. Problem is, several other teams scored well into the 20s against the Longhorns. And the sensational UT offense was usually unstoppable, averaging 45 points a game for 10 games. But, in the two biggest games of the season, against Oklahoma and Nebraska, the 'Horns mustered just 16 and 13 points. Hey, it was enough to win, and that's what's important. But do you think Alabama's defense is as good as the 2009 Sooners and Cornhuskers? And do you think Alabama's offense is as good as the 2009 Louisiana-Monroe Warhawks, Kansas Jayhawks, and Texas A&M Aggies? We'll find out on Jan. 7.

Final Heisman consideration

When Tim Tebow was ending his day in tears and Colt McCoy ended his night with nerve-induced cottonmouth, the Heisman Trophy was sitting there Saturday waiting for somebody to grab it. Alabama's Mark Ingram might have done that for many voters, with his strong game against Florida capping a fine season. Stanford's Toby Gerhart might have done that for others merely by sitting at home, with his body of work as the nation's leading rusher as he played his best in the biggest games. But for me, Nebraska's Ndamukong Suh wrapped it up Saturday (and then probably dropped it for a loss). I'll admit, I like to look for players other than quarterbacks and running backs, but I don't force it. Over the years, I voted for LB Micheal Barrow in 1992 (rather than the winner, QB Gino Torretta), and OT Bryant McKinnie in 2001 (rather than QB Eric Crouch), and on various other ballots I wrote in DT Steve Emtman (second in 1991), DB Champ Bailey (third in 1998) DB Sean Taylor (third in 2003), as well as winners Desmond Howard and Charles Woodson. I make the choice judiciously. And this is a situation that calls for it. Look at it the way Nick Saban does, when he said it very well: Ingram "should be considered; he's one of the best players on one of the best teams." And so is Suh. The difference is, Suh would be the best player on any team he happened to play for. As offenses have tried all year, Texas tried to double-team him, and even at times triple-teamed him. None of it worked. And considering the Heisman vote is supposed to be for "the outstanding college football player in the United States for 2009," he should land on lots of late-casted ballots. And he'll get at least one first-place vote.