TXpride
-
Posts
683 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by TXpride
-
-
40 minutes ago, Keef said:
One of the mods on the Florida On3 board said after yesterday, they believe there is 50+% chance Ffrench signs with the Gators.
Wasn't he there last week when we skull fucked them? I guess they're going all in with NIL now that they've committed to Sun Belt Billy.
-
6 minutes ago, utexas8 said:
I know Texas has to take care of business first but can we beat bama? They look great then they don’t. I trust the defense but can the offense take care of things. I think I saw a stat that their defense is good but they didn’t look great against vandy.
If picking between UGA or bama. I’d wanna play UGA because they aren’t even that good but then they made us look not good so
I've seen nothing since the UGA game to give me much confidence about a potential rematch. They haven't looked great, but neither have we.
I think we match up better against Bama. Their defense is still shaky, and Milroe will turn it over a couple times. I think that game could go either way.
-
5 hours ago, Sawbonz said:
We broke them
They were always going to break. But yeah we sped up the process.
-
We have to win out. If we lose to aggy, there's a good chance we're looking at:
10-2 Texas
10-2 aggy
10-2 UGA
10-2 Bama
10-2 Ole Miss
10-2 Tenn
We would be the only team without a signature win, and 2 of those teams would have head-to-head over us. No one will care that Bama lost to Vandy, Ole Miss lost to UK, Tenn lost to Arkansas, etc.
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
We won by 2 scores and are now 9-1. Take the win pussies.
-
9
-
1
-
1
-
46 minutes ago, WinningIsHard said:
I never said he was great. I said he will get us to the SEC championship game and possibly the college football playoff. Our defense is bad ass, Quinn just needs to be a tad above average. He’s capable of that.
We were ranked 4th coming into the year. If we finish outside the top 12, the season will have been a colossal failure.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Codaxx said:
That isn’t the check down. It certainly isn’t a millisecond before the hit, unless you believe the CB can cover 4-5 yards in a millisecond. Perhaps you should go to the highlights and look at the play seeing how the front side opens up.
Starts at the freeze frame. It's probably between a quarter and half a second. Either way, not enough time to get the ball out unless he starts the throw the moment Bolden breaks (about half a second prior to the freeze frame), in which case it's maybe a 4-5 yard gain and everyone is bitching that he's a pussy for throwing it short of the sticks.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Codaxx said:
So now we all want Quinn to take the check down? Also he gets walloped literally a millisecond or two after this freeze frame. He played like shit, but this play was dead the moment the ball was snapped.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Tex Long said:
Nah. Doesn't have to be vastly so... just ummmm better. Okay, a lot better, just not vast, and particularly if accompanied by somebody stepping up in the RB room.
It will need to be vastly better compared to what we saw Saturday. Their QB also played like shit, and the game was never really in doubt.
-
2 hours ago, David Dennison said:
I think we can beat any team in the country.
Not without vastly improved QB play.
-
This loss was particularly disappointing because we saw Texas get physically outclassed for the first time in 2 years. I don't see how you fix that other than getting better players. Not sure how we would stack up against Oregon or OSU, but without otherworldly QB play (ha) it's hard to imagine us beating a healthy UGA if we meet again.
-
2 hours ago, BevoAbyss said:
So far, after 3.5 seasons can we dispense with two notions?
1. Sark is some kind of all-time play-designing, play-calling genius. He's not. At least not more than 50% chance in BIG games.
-- No doubt, Sark delivered v. Bama in 2023 and deserves the credit.
-- But, as of now, his 5-6 record is below 50% in big games, and that includes 3 BIG wins on over bad OU and Michigan teams. Otherwise, he is 2-6 in BIG games v. good teams.
-- In the 2023 playoff, had 4 shots v Washington inside 20 in final seconds, did not come close to scoring. In two bowl games v Washington, Sark has never even had the lead.
-- He is likely to get outclassed ... as out-coach and our-scheme the other coach. Kirby Smart and Sonny fucking Dykes schooled him on national TV. Kalen Deboer beat him twice and never trailed.
-- Put up a laughable 18 points combined in the two biggest DKR night games (TCU, Georgia) since Mack era. And one TD came on 9-yard drive!
-- And if QE can't deliver on his genius play designs, then it is Sark's responsibility to give Arch a shot.
2. QE is some kind of nut-dragging "big game" QB. He's not.
-- He delivered v. Bama in 2023. No doubt deserves credit for huge win.
-- He won big over 1 bad Michigan team with no Harbaugh, 2 wins over terrible OU teams (as bad as the Blake era)
-- Terrible v. TCU in 2022, Georgia last night.
-- Could not come close to scoring v Washington with 4 shots from inside red zone.
-- Way too inconsistent, so far, to win enough BIG games to win a title.
Bottom line: If Sark and QE are "on," then UT has great chance to win BIG games. If not, then little chance.
Right now, that's a less than 50% proposition.
Can Sark + QE win enough BIG games to win the title? Will Arch help do it?
Time will tell....
Pretty much how I feel. I was critical of Sark the first 2 seasons, but he won me over last year. That said, he's been outcoached several times already in big games. And the more time both teams have to prepare, the less confidence I have. Great program/culture builder, subpar/average game planner. He's the bizaro Herman. Maybe Sark can bring him in as an analyst when he gets fired from FAU.
-
They really are fucked. What advantage do they have going forward over Texas, aggy, LSU, Bama, Auburn, UGA, UF, Tenn, etc.? Some championships from the 1950s? They're going to be duking it out with Arkansas for some semblance of relevance.
-
2
-
-
18 hours ago, TrashMaster G said:
Currently, sure.
Historically, less so.
Currently and going forward. Demographics aren't on Nebraska's side.
-
Goosby and Baker may end up being a great duo, but who will they even be competing against for those spots? Cojoe and Agbo (assuming they're still here)? I wouldn't be opposed to grabbing a tackle in the portal so there's least some competition with two unproven guys. We should be loaded on the interior.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
35 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:horrible culture, and leadership …
i hope ut beats the shit out of them
He should at least be suspended for a game, and I'm not just saying that because we play them. That was bullshit. And he tried denying it after the game like a little bitch. No accountability in that program and it starts at the top.
-
5
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Home teams having a massive advantage in these cross country B1G matchups appears to be a trend.
-
33 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:
Okay, understand the miscommunication. Honestly my dream scenario would be Texas in a 12 team conference kind of like the Big 12 but with LSU instead of Baylor. A few other changes may be okay but the original Big 12 with Texas and Louisiana as in conference recruiting brings would be sweet, to be at least.
Swap LSU with Arkansas for old times sake and I would agree.
-
19 minutes ago, RoyalBevo21 said:
Are y’all opposed to being realigned with the Texas and Kansas schools again?
Being aligned with them only became a problem when NU, CU, Mizzou, and aggy left and were replaced by Cincinnati, UCF, BYU, etc. The original B12 was great. But we wouldn't be stuck playing only those teams if they were to be included in the hypothetical "super league."
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, RoyalBevo21 said:
I disagree, the NFL is a behemoth because any team can win on any Sunday. The networks are tired of shelling out millions and the first week of the season is filled with games like Ohio St vs Akron and Oregon vs Idaho. The fans don’t want it, TV networks don’t want it, we might finally get rid of those shitty games.
I'm fine with getting rid of those games. I'm talking about non blue blood (for lack of a better term) P4 teams.
-
10 minutes ago, statsman said:
But, why? What problem does this plan solve other than “How do schools like Baylor get high profile games of national interest and stay in the big time?”
It doesn’t solve Texas’ problem of “How to turn its blue blood status into competitive advantage and more revenue?” Or “How to get high profile games of great stakeholder interest?”
It doesn’t solve the broadcaster problem of “How to get games with greater appeal (and advertiser revenue)?”. They would rather broadcast Texas-Arkansas than Texas-Baylor.
This plan just re-established a status quo that Texas wanted to break.Texas would still play Arkansas (and OU/aggy) every year. Should the rest of the schedule be made up of Bama, UGA, USC, and Ohio State? You think those matchups will have the same appeal when it's two 6-4 teams? And how is that a competitive advantage wrt the playoff?
If the 70+ team "super league" happens, everybody has to play everybody, or it's not an actual league. I won't pretend to be an expert on revenue, but I wouldn't expect it to be equal across the board. If all that matters is high profile games and advertiser revenue, we might as well form a ~20 team "blue blood league" and call it a day.
-
11 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:
Right, but, to maximize money, you need more of those match ups. That's what the networks want and will pay for. That's the entire reason for realignment in the first place, they've just been doing it in little moves. Where CFB leaves the most money on the table is having like 5 negotiated TV contracts over 60-70 teams and not pairing those teams together more. This is why you're really only paid for a conference slate, because its the only part of the schedule that networks know is reliable year in and year out. OOC games, even the good ones, are still hit and miss based on if an AD schedules them or not. WHen the contract is signed the network may not even know, so it doesn't factor in. If you put all 70 teams under one global media and scheduling contract and say all 12 of those games will be against each other, now you're going to market with 420 (gnarly) defined games that the networks can bank on.
On top of that, if you own the schedule, you can lay out featured match ups all through the season and through time slots at various times of the day, instead of competing with yourself for eyeballs.
And lastly, you can go full out NFL and start windowing. National window games in various slots. Regional windows to maximize across the board on lower channels. If you want to watch outside your window, pay for the all in package. Oh, you just like the excitement, did you know we offer a redzone package now?
Those are things the NFL can do that CFB can't that would likely double the amount of money CFB could make for literally doing nothing else. Its the only no-brainer chess move left on the board.
And you're right, that's why you need the 70 teams. Blue bloods drive more interest at the end of the year, when games mean more, if they have no losses.
How I could see it playing out:
The B12/ACC (plus Oregon St/WSU and maybe Boise) get divided between the SEC/B1G to create 2 ~36 team divisions (South and North/West). Each team has 3 cross-divisional (OOC) games, 6 divisional, and 3 permanent rivals.
The OOC/divisional schedules would rotate to maintain competitive balance and allow every team to eventually play each other. The top 8 from each division (chosen either by committee or some series of tiebreakers) goes to the playoff, culminating in the SEC v B1G "Super Bowl."
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:
I don't think this was actually their proposal, because they said keep the conferences. What they wanted to do was take over the media rights and scheduling so that with the 3-4 games outside of conference they could put Alabama against USC, FSU, and Michigan and crap like that.
Which is also a stupid idea. Blue bloods are blue bloods because of how they stack up against "everyone else." Take "everyone else" out of the equation and there are no blue bloods, and pretty soon all those matchups become boring and meaningless.
(and before anyone gets upset, I'm using the term "blue blood" to refer to historically winning programs)
-

FINAL 2024 CFB polls/rankings - Texas #3/ #4 /#3 (CFP/AP/Coaches)
in Football
Posted
The problem we would face in a 6 team tie is the head to heads. We aren't getting in over UGA. UGA isn't getting in over Ole Miss or Bama. Bama isn't getting in over Tenn. Tenn isn't getting in over UGA.
Like rock paper scissors, except we don't beat anyone. Easy solution is don't lose.