And they could just send the rest of the teams to bowls. Everybody wins. Why is that so fucking hard to see?
as long as Penn State loses I'll be happy.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
Friend of mine is a HUGE Penn State fan and always rags on my teams, so it'd be good to get some gloating in
Spoiler (highlight to read):
Friend of mine is a HUGE Penn State fan and always rags on my teams, so it'd be good to get some gloating in
So should we look at Oklahoma State? Texas barely beats them at home, hwile OU crushes them on the road? And one could easily argue that the RRSO loss was just because OU lost a key player to injury, or had a couple of poorly timed penalties. Those mistakes aren't any different than what the UT safety did at TT.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2008-11-30 20:49:05)
You seem to be forgetting that TEXAS BEAT OKLAHOMA ON A NEUTRAL FIELD.
...
They won; that's all that matters--too bad that's not the case.
I'm actually happy Texas got screwed. Maybe FINALLY these idiots that run the NCAA will do something about it.
...
They won; that's all that matters--too bad that's not the case.
I'm actually happy Texas got screwed. Maybe FINALLY these idiots that run the NCAA will do something about it.
Last edited by phishman420 (2008-11-30 20:52:30)
Yes, but Texas lost to a team that OU creamed, and nearly lost to a team that OU also creamed. You can't just look at head to head in a three way tie between two members, because its simply not fair. Even if the Texas loss was a fluke, that argument could easily be applied to the OU-Texas game, for the reasons discussed in the previous post.You seem to be forgetting that TEXAS BEAT OKLAHOMA ON A NEUTRAL FIELD.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2008-11-30 21:14:57)
Nobody even gives Texas any credit for the incredibly tough stretch of games that they had to go through. They had to play #1 Oklahoma, #11 Missouri, #7 Oklahoma St., and #6 Texas Tech in consecutive weeks.
How is there any indication that any of those teams were actually good, aside from Oklahoma? Rankings boosted by weak OOC schedules aren't accurate.
...
Right, playing 4 consecutive top 10 teams means jack shit. Like, it's only the ranking given out by the dumb BCS. BCS doesn't account for things like strength of schedule, or anything...nukchebi0 wrote:
How is there any indication that any of those teams were actually good, aside from Oklahoma? Rankings boosted by weak OOC schedules aren't accurate.
oh wait.
Too bad it fails completely, because pollsters are like "60-40 zomg they must B da best teem ever! Dey lost like 3 months ago which means they betta then a team that lost a month ago!!!one1one1eleven"
maybe the horns shouldnt have lost to tech then, if you take care of business on the field then you will be fine.MadKatter wrote:
Right, playing 4 consecutive top 10 teams means jack shit. Like, it's only the ranking given out by the dumb BCS. BCS doesn't account for things like strength of schedule, or anything...nukchebi0 wrote:
How is there any indication that any of those teams were actually good, aside from Oklahoma? Rankings boosted by weak OOC schedules aren't accurate.
oh wait.
Too bad it fails completely, because pollsters are like "60-40 zomg they must B da best teem ever! Dey lost like 3 months ago which means they betta then a team that lost a month ago!!!one1one1eleven"
As it is dont complain you are not the first team to get screwed nor will you be the last
ex. Auburn in 2004 i believe when they went 12-0
13-0spasticus5 wrote:
maybe the horns shouldnt have lost to tech then, if you take care of business on the field then you will be fine.MadKatter wrote:
Right, playing 4 consecutive top 10 teams means jack shit. Like, it's only the ranking given out by the dumb BCS. BCS doesn't account for things like strength of schedule, or anything...nukchebi0 wrote:
How is there any indication that any of those teams were actually good, aside from Oklahoma? Rankings boosted by weak OOC schedules aren't accurate.
oh wait.
Too bad it fails completely, because pollsters are like "60-40 zomg they must B da best teem ever! Dey lost like 3 months ago which means they betta then a team that lost a month ago!!!one1one1eleven"
As it is dont complain you are not the first team to get screwed nor will you be the last
ex. Auburn in 2004 i believe when they went 12-0
I fucking love college football, but this shit is really starting to get out of hand.
No, that's not what I meant. Those four consecutive top ten teams were only so because they had beat up on (with the exception of Oklahoma) very weak OOC competition. Would USC loss to Oregon State have looked as bad if Oregon State had scheduled UTEP and FAU like Texas did? No, because the Beavers would be 10-2 right now, and ranked in the top 15. The point is, the only indication you have that Texas played four straight Top Ten teams is their rankings, which were based primarily on OOC schedules, and since these OOC schedules were so weak, they didn't really give an accurate impression of those team's skills. And, btw, looking at the ranking of the team at the time of the game can only give you so much indication of their abilities. You could argue, with your current logic, that Alabama started off the season with a game against a top ten opponent. I think everyone now agrees that Clemson isn't anywhere near the top ten, and never was. So saying Texas played four straight top ten teams is inaccurate in that regard, anyways. The Longhorns don't have a case as compelling as their fans like to believe.MadKatter wrote:
Right, playing 4 consecutive top 10 teams means jack shit. Like, it's only the ranking given out by the dumb BCS. BCS doesn't account for things like strength of schedule, or anything...nukchebi0 wrote:
How is there any indication that any of those teams were actually good, aside from Oklahoma? Rankings boosted by weak OOC schedules aren't accurate.
oh wait.
Too bad it fails completely, because pollsters are like "60-40 zomg they must B da best teem ever! Dey lost like 3 months ago which means they betta then a team that lost a month ago!!!one1one1eleven"
You, sir, are and idiot.nukchebi0 wrote:
No, that's not what I meant. Those four consecutive top ten teams were only so because they had beat up on (with the exception of Oklahoma) very weak OOC competition. Would USC loss to Oregon State have looked as bad if Oregon State had scheduled UTEP and FAU like Texas did? No, because the Beavers would be 10-2 right now, and ranked in the top 15. The point is, the only indication you have that Texas played four straight Top Ten teams is their rankings, which were based primarily on OOC schedules, and since these OOC schedules were so weak, they didn't really give an accurate impression of those team's skills. And, btw, looking at the ranking of the team at the time of the game can only give you so much indication of their abilities. You could argue, with your current logic, that Alabama started off the season with a game against a top ten opponent. I think everyone now agrees that Clemson isn't anywhere near the top ten, and never was. So saying Texas played four straight top ten teams is inaccurate in that regard, anyways. The Longhorns don't have a case as compelling as their fans like to believe.MadKatter wrote:
Right, playing 4 consecutive top 10 teams means jack shit. Like, it's only the ranking given out by the dumb BCS. BCS doesn't account for things like strength of schedule, or anything...nukchebi0 wrote:
How is there any indication that any of those teams were actually good, aside from Oklahoma? Rankings boosted by weak OOC schedules aren't accurate.
oh wait.
Too bad it fails completely, because pollsters are like "60-40 zomg they must B da best teem ever! Dey lost like 3 months ago which means they betta then a team that lost a month ago!!!one1one1eleven"
You should probably check the spelling of your one line posts before insulting the mental capacity of other people. That being said, I'll take your inability to answer this as an indication that you can't respond to it, and thus that I am right. If you wish to differ, please explain why.phishman420 wrote:
You, sir, are and idiot.nukchebi0 wrote:
No, that's not what I meant. Those four consecutive top ten teams were only so because they had beat up on (with the exception of Oklahoma) very weak OOC competition. Would USC loss to Oregon State have looked as bad if Oregon State had scheduled UTEP and FAU like Texas did? No, because the Beavers would be 10-2 right now, and ranked in the top 15. The point is, the only indication you have that Texas played four straight Top Ten teams is their rankings, which were based primarily on OOC schedules, and since these OOC schedules were so weak, they didn't really give an accurate impression of those team's skills. And, btw, looking at the ranking of the team at the time of the game can only give you so much indication of their abilities. You could argue, with your current logic, that Alabama started off the season with a game against a top ten opponent. I think everyone now agrees that Clemson isn't anywhere near the top ten, and never was. So saying Texas played four straight top ten teams is inaccurate in that regard, anyways. The Longhorns don't have a case as compelling as their fans like to believe.MadKatter wrote:
Right, playing 4 consecutive top 10 teams means jack shit. Like, it's only the ranking given out by the dumb BCS. BCS doesn't account for things like strength of schedule, or anything...
oh wait.
Too bad it fails completely, because pollsters are like "60-40 zomg they must B da best teem ever! Dey lost like 3 months ago which means they betta then a team that lost a month ago!!!one1one1eleven"
Congratulations. I'm not going to argue why a team that I don't even like got screwed out of the Big 12 Championship. Tell me why if this happened in any other conference, the head to head tiebreaker would have gone in Texas' favor. Neither of these teams (OU and Texas) even stand a chance against the SEC.
Your fingers can breath? (breath or breathe?)phishman420 wrote:
so why should I even waste my breath talking about it to your punk ass?
What makes you think the SEC is so good, too? I'm not sure, btw, why you are arguing against me, especially considering the large post of mine wasn't even directed at you. Maybe you shouldn't waste your time, since it really isn't accomplishing anything. However, as you were the one who started it, I think you could answer your question about why you are arguing about it a bit better than I could.phishman420 wrote:
Congratulations. I'm not going to argue why a team that I don't even like got screwed out of the Big 12 Championship. Tell me why if this happened in any other conference, the head to head tiebreaker would have gone in Texas' favor. Neither of these teams (OU and Texas) even stand a chance against the SEC, so why should I even waste my breath talking about it to your punk ass?
What's so great about college football?
I wish we had it in school. Its great to play with mates-competitive spirit. I would say you never played any team sport in a club?Roc18 wrote:
What's so great about college football?
Much more intense atmosphere than the NFL. Go to a big college game and see what I mean.Roc18 wrote:
What's so great about college football?
My college doesnt have a football team smartass. Im talking about the college football that comes on ESPN that everyone watches..Sup wrote:
I wish we had it in school. Its great to play with mates-competitive spirit. I would say you never played any team sport in a club?Roc18 wrote:
What's so great about college football?
meh...i dont think so.phishman420 wrote:
Much more intense atmosphere than the NFL. Go to a big college game and see what I mean.Roc18 wrote:
What's so great about college football?
Why the attitude? I'm just asking.Roc18 wrote:
My college doesnt have a football team smartass. Im talking about the college football that comes on ESPN that everyone watches..Sup wrote:
I wish we had it in school. Its great to play with mates-competitive spirit. I would say you never played any team sport in a club?Roc18 wrote:
What's so great about college football?
You're crazy. NFL games are a lot of fun, don't get me wrong, but college games are way better. LOTS more hot girls.usmarine wrote:
meh...i dont think so.phishman420 wrote:
Much more intense atmosphere than the NFL. Go to a big college game and see what I mean.Roc18 wrote:
What's so great about college football?
How are the actual games? Would you say Pro or College is better to watch?phishman420 wrote:
Much more intense atmosphere than the NFL. Go to a big college game and see what I mean.Roc18 wrote:
What's so great about college football?