-
Posts
2468 -
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 Magus Ossis
-
-
Please Ewers be well and whoever starts be well!
-
1
-
-
If we want to learn how to underperform national expectations despite padding our schedule with FCS opponents, we had better learn to waste more money on the things A&M does. And soon.
-
3
-
1
-
-
His ankle is not going to heal significantly between now and Saturday. If the only word out there that his sprain is mild comes from his camp, it could be that they are playing a little loose with the word "mild." For a one-off situation like this, I would think about shooting his ankle up with Naropin. It wouldn't fix anything, but it might block most of his pain enough to let him move and protect himself better. The problem is that then he might want to keep going on successive weeks, bolstered by reiterations of "the shot."
-
3
-
1
-
-
I do my day job because I like it and because I'm paid to do it. It has benefits other than the fungible payments. But I still ask for the payments.
EDIT and I prize loyalty in my employees, but they wouldn't work here forever without fair pay.
-
5
-
1
-
-
When we evaluate recruits, we often discuss ceiling and floor. One could say Mack was a high ceiling low floor coach during his Texas tenure and that he took seasons off. He did have some explosive seasons.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Mack Brown won 2 conference championships in 16 years at Texas and turned the knife in our back on his way out the door. Unless Mack had some special role in recruiting Vince Young or some brilliant input that game-planned the Horns into our only national title under his leadership, I am not sure his egregious failures and betrayal are outweighed by his accomplishments. Winning the B12 less than one year in 5 at Texas is failure-level coaching. I am grateful for what success we did have during his tenure. Add in, though, the painful rebuild his late years necessitated, and he basically gave us 2-3 years of championship-level success out of 2 decades. One might argue that another coach could have matched that, given our inherent advantages. He was basically an also-ran coach. He never beat FSU until this, their year of total collapse. He usually lost to OU. I don't hate MB or anyone else, but he wore out his welcome here.
-
12
-
1
-
Soul-crushing victory for the Horns. I don't know the numbers, but we will wound their psyches as deeply as is possible when demolishing the dreams of backwoods, anencephalic, disingenuous, ovinophilic, coat-tail-riding coelenterates (hat-tip to you-know-who). In the spirit of the contest, I offer 37-17 with 250 passing yards.
-
2
-
1
-
-
The historic cheaters are learning that some of us really weren't "doing the same thing" back in their bagman heyday. It is a painful lesson that will be reinforced regularly henceforth.
-
6
-
1
-
-
Not common to have been fired from one school at which you won the NC and another at which you are the winningest coach in its history.
-
4
-
-
This year is Banfire. It will remain in its perpetual state of non-realization as a symbol of A&M athletics in general and football in particular.
-
4
-
-
3 minutes ago, dcar00 said:
OK my assumption was they would never leave out the Big 12 conf champ but I guess who knows.
There may be some hesitation to leave out a P4 champ, and I think the assumption was that they would certainly all be in the top 5. The rules allow them to be excluded, however, and it would be hilarious.
-
1
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, statsman said:
As I understand it, there is a path for 7-4 Baylor to make the B12 CG. They need to beat Kansas, and for UCF, OSU, ASU, UH, TCU, KSU and WVU to win.
If that were to happen, and Baylor were to win the CG, Baylor would not get the 1st round bye. A G5 champ would. Question- could a second G5 champ (AAC champ?) displace the B12 champ?As the rules as written, yes
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
53 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:It's possible his ankle stiffened up. I'm no doctor, I'll defer to @Magus Ossis, but I don't think all injuries have immediate performance consequences.
And, he could have gotten in his own head, too.
Yes. Reading between the lines he has grade I (microscopic-level tears) sprain of his ankle. It does not make the ankle less stable. It hurts and can lead to enough swelling as a natural response (especially when he is actually playing on it) that it becomes stiffer and even more painful. Wrapping it well before the game and between series and popping a few Advil might be enough to let him function as well as he did before the most recent injury.
-
13
-
3
-
The balls I saw Reed complete last night were largely on plays when he had extended time to wait for an easy target. If we get home on the pass rush, I don't think he'll hit too many.
-
3
-
-
If Anwar's source is connected to Sark, I'd be shocked not to see QE play. They used the code word "sprain" instead of "tear."
-
At this point Sark has had two years to get Arch, by almost all accounts 5-star material, ready. If he isn't ready, that is quite an indictment of our supposed QB-guru HFBC. Much more of an indictment than the inability to keep a freshly re-injured starter as the guy. Is Arch such a huge recruiting and development miss that he can't outplay an injured pocket passer who lacked a credible long-ball threat before getting hurt? Don't let the CCG or CFP be Arch's first tough start.
-
4
-
2
-
-
The results that are reported will depend on whether Sark intends to start him. If it "just shows a sprain," that means Sark intends to play him. If he has (at least) "partially torn ligaments," this is Sark's cover to let Arch have a go. The two are the quite literally (no internet diction adjustment required) the same condition, and Quinn has what I have described.
EDIT the MRI may some other things as well, but overall his doc probably pretty much knows what it will show.
-
1
-
2
-
-
I like it that we are (apparently) the only returning playoff team from last year.
-
2
-
-
He is in at least one way a little like the late, great Mike Leach in that he is willing to ignore deeply rooted conventional wisdom if he thinks he has a better way that (essentially) no one else thinks makes sense.
-
1
-
1
-
-
No don't stop
-
Wasn't the old BCS "formula" really just a composite of the human polls with an average of the more popular computer algorithms as an add-on?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Js1 said:
I think the CCG runner-ups should make it, assuming they are ranked in the top 16 or so.
The CCG is playing for a bye, but the loser should not be punished unless it's 70-3 or 59-0.
I pretty much agree with these sentiments. I think having rankings plays a role, and then put teams in with degrees of bid certainty: top 4 (or whatever) champions are seeded 1-4 and given byes. 5th (or whatever) champ gets auto-bid. Next, all champs in top X get bids. Next, all runners-up in top Y get bids. Then fill remaining spots with highest ranked remaining teams. The harder question would be how fairly (and hopefully objectively) to distinguish between CCG losses and CCG beat-downs.
-
27 minutes ago, David Dennison said:
And you get to this dumb shit about a committee picking who goes. It's stupid.
I agree that the subjective aspect is frustrating. I think the combination of automatic and at-large bids helps ensure both that (major conference) teams have a "safe" path to the playoffs (win the conference) without the need for committee support as well as an opportunity to "come back" if they are having a good year, but might have some early-season wart or other one-off problem that caused them to miss or lose the CCG. There seem to be years when the #2 or #3 team from one conference is objectively (Sagarin, PFF, or whatever) better than other conferences' champions. Not everyone will agree, but I like the way the 12-team field allows for both paths to the post-season.
-
2
-
-
Just now, David Dennison said:
What sucks ass is at-large bids.
They need to stop.
Devise a system of automatic bids only.
Disagree. At-large bids allow for putting better teams in the playoff when the relative strengths of conferences vary. Guaranteeing the B12 runner-up a spot might make for more predictability, but there will be years when they belong and years when they do not. Much like with March madness, I think at-large bids are important.
The Game - Michigan vs. Ohio State
in Football
Posted
Yeah, the time to defend the field was before the score was final. I understand the response, but you can't un-lose the game by resisting or retaliating against the symbolism that follows it.