Jump to content

Pancho

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    13971
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Pancho

  1. Aggy gets revenge on Penn State at the disney tournament. A&M might win the regular season SEC title and be a top 2/3 seed in the tournament
  2. Ahh yes, futureman. Surly’s passive aggressive bigot who has emotional trauma because of his parents, children, wife, or all 3 and so you use this website as an outlet to be a bitch to everyone for no reason I never said I was offended by what he said. I just posted his fall from grace grace has been interesting and rapid from whatever he said. (Although I had heard his Netflix special was terrible before any of this happened) Happy thanksgiving future
  3. I’d like to bring this to a vote: After the B12 title game, we lock this thread since we have nothing to do with them any more. OR Maybe it’s time for a non-UT football forum
  4. Who here is arguing for Georgia to be in if they lose? I see media people doing that, but I haven’t seen that here. I have seen people say that’s still a possibility (which it is) and that doesn’t mean they want them in or they deserve to be in. People may be just recognizing it’s still a possibility.
  5. I don’t agree here. They are pushing Georgia because they truly believe Georgia is the best team in the country. To just say they wants clicks and views and it likely keeps them out is just a wish and hope, just like we wish and hope FSU loses. But, you’re right in that we won’t know until the rankings are revealed. I guess my only issue with some posters is the guaranteeing and the thought that they know exactly what will happen if a certain team wins or loses and none of us know what the committee will do. We know what they will consider but we don’t know what they are guaranteed to do.
  6. It’s absolutely being talked about among analysts that if Georgia loses to Alabama they should still—and could still—be in the top 4 along with Alabama. The only people “guaranteeing” that not happening are the “insiders” on this website.
  7. To clarify, Gerry said he heard Fisch is the leading candidate from someone at DCTF. He himself is hearing Fisch and Elko
  8. Mike Greenstein He’s reffed a lot of our games the last few years
  9. His fall from grace…
  10. It says “must CONSIDER” not must use. EDIT: And I don’t think there’s a conspiracy, but I think there are a significant number of Texas fans who will think there is if we don’t get in. If we don’t make it in, well we have no one to blame but ourselves. Frankly, I’m already resigned to the idea that we will be playing Missouri in the Cotton Bowl; however, I’ve been wrong before and I’ll be wrong again sometime in the future. 😎
  11. Correct. The weight of what they consider changes based on who is on the committee. It could be more, it could be less. That’s why going by past years precedent isn’t very helpful for this year.
  12. What goalposts lol? My thesis is still the same—the committee cna do whatever the fuck they want with no oversight. Arguing can consider and must consider doesn’t change the fact that they don’t have to abide by whatever they considered and can pick whoever the fuck 4 teams they believe are warranted.
  13. Dude, it’s saying you must consider it. It’s not saying you MUST abide by it. How do you not see that.
  14. I'm saying they can consider those, but there's nothing that says they MUST go by it.
  15. "Members' evaluation of..." Key phrase right there because that is subjective. It's not saying "if x happens, then the committee will go with x or y." It also says this:
  16. What stated criteria? There is no one set of criteria the committee goes by. I'm not sure if you're not comprehending or if there is a genuine lack of misunderstanding.
  17. I’ve heard some analysts make this argument, that it would be better for both Sark and the program. I don’t agree with it but I can see why someone would/could make that argument.
  18. I don’t disagree with any if this. It’s just unclear why your argument of data points (Texas vs Oregon) would suddenly come into play now when it hasn’t before, especially when it seems like Texas vs Oregon is moot because of their situation (win and in, lose—to OSU or Washington again—and out)
  19. Ahh you’re making the point I’ve been arguing on this board for weeks. The committee can use “eye test” and ignore resume and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. But now it feels like Texas vs Oregon is a moot point because if Oregon loses the P12 title game they are out and if they win it they are in. I heard someone on a college football podcast on Sunday say Texas needs to put up style points versus tech and whoever we play in the B12 title game just in case and I agree with that.
  20. I don’t disagree regarding Oregon; however, my primary question would be if that was the case then why has Oregon been ahead of Texas this entire time? If Oregon beats washington they are in. If Oregon loses, they are out. So is there a needed comparison with them or am I missing something? (No coffee yet)
  21. IT saying aggy sounds like they are leaning towards Traylor and are waiting to see if UTSA makes the AAC title game. They could potentially move forward after that.
  22. Now they’re back to just jacking up everything and it goes in
  23. I mean, I expected us to be down 20+ so I’ll take it.
×
×
  • Create New...