Jump to content

Magus Ossis

Full Members
  • Posts

    2488
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Magus Ossis

  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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. As the rules as written, yes
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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."
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. I like it that we are (apparently) the only returning playoff team from last year.
  15. 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.
  16. 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?
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. Words/expressions that have a different meaning in College Station Midnight Conference championship* Heisman candidate Military Big brother Rule Rich Sleeping giant (to name a few)
  21. They don't have the 80s JS payroll advantage. FedEx ain't deliverin' a win for them this time.
  22. Mensa qualification = top 2% on any of over 200 accepted "intelligence" tests. Allowing for variation of performance day to day and instrument to instrument, it is fair to estimate that sets the bar at roughly 4% of the population eligible. Other than special programs, Texas auto-admits top 6% by exactly one metric, one that does not permit re-takes. So Mensa is perhaps slightly more selective than is Texas. And is full of nerds who think scoring well on a standardized test is something about which they should structure their lives. Plus/minus coke, monkeys, and strippers.
  23. I've not read the entire thread, nor have I gone back to watch the game over. I may be wrong, but I have come to think a few things on this matter: 1. QE, though a man of significant talent, can not be relied upon to take the top off a defense 2. Playoff teams will scheme for this and smother us. The only really good team we've played handled us. 3. All wise-cracks aside, Arch may give us a chance to hit those throws 4. It stinks to bench a starting QB, especially when we sit at 9-1, but it needs to happen because 5. The future is likely to be better the sooner we start working on it in games Hookem and thanks, Quinn, but I think its time to let the team move on
  24. Here's some avocado dip, Quinn
×
×
  • Create New...