Jump to content

scramblyn

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    1712
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by scramblyn

  1. No one is advocating against Texas. This is effectively a committee mind reading exercise that’s all.
  2. I disagree. Right now we’d be about 12. We would have dropped from 1 early in the season looking terrible. We’d drop out of top 10 after Florida and would land 12-15 after the Georgia loss. We are probably 15 on Tuesday as it is (note the two spots we move up this week aren’t available if we were at 12 already). ND stays ahead of us, OU beat bama on the road the same day we were embarrassed by Georgia, OU leap frogs us. Bama probably stays above us. BYU is 1 loss. The Florida and Georgia losses are BAD. Now a Texas team that beats A&M with two losses is probably in, but Texas may still need help in that scenario - that’s what happens when you’re mid. If everyone ahead of Texas at 12 won on rivalry week, it’s 2 really bad losses vs 2 really good wins and a bunch of dog shit in the middle. there’s no way the tOSU loss means nothing (I think the third loss has cost us about 3 spots come this Tuesday), but it doesn’t mean nearly as much as the rest of the season’s terrible losses and terrible wins. That’s an impossibility. If Texas wins they don’t go to Atlanta.
  3. While A&M is in the playoffs and Texas is not, I’m pretty sure A&M will not be playing in January. The first top ten team they play is going to boat-race them. They are good but no way that team is winning anything this year. Georgia, Ohio state, Oregon, Texas Tech, possibly even OU and Vandy would fuck their shit up. And Notre Dame won’t lose to them twice.
  4. Is this supposed to be a video that makes people want to be an Aggie? It’s like the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen and seeing serious old guys doing it makes it 10x as cringy.
  5. Regardless of the Ohio state loss this team is mid, a 12-17 level team. 8 out of 11 games Texas has looked like hot rotting garbage. It ain’t the three losses it’s this team isn’t very good on a season’s resume. Texas with two losses and an extra victory over rice is still not an impressive team. 2 bad losses - Florida and getting waxed by Georgia. 2 good wins, another convincing (against an oh-fer league team), the rest is complete trash. Texas would not be in the top 10 right now.
  6. 5 years later I resemble the remark. 11:30pm is the new 1:30am
  7. lol. I do just fine young man.
  8. I wish my self destructive behavior let me make $30-50m so far in my career. Fuck man.
  9. Done going back and forth. We disagree. It’s fine. Acknowledged your response. You put time into it. Ok.
  10. We are the newcomer and the lower ranked team. wtf are they talking about ? If the BOMC was real we wouldn’t be 8-3.
  11. Vegas looks lit for F1, like a video game wow. man I’d enjoy the hell out of it.
  12. We beat them they aren’t in the championship game, but yes Texas then Texas tech would be awesome.
  13. When the big 10 added Washington and UCLA and the others (except Oregon) I bet they thought fuck yeah TV revenue. It’s still pac 10 shit football.
  14. Congrats great win! Most enjoyable game today.
  15. I played golf with a long time SEC alum from a mid program a few weeks ago, he was adamant like matter of fact that the SEC refs protect the higher ranked team, and that newcomers are going to be kept from the title for a while. That last one is suspect besides Texas what newcomer was really good enough, Missouri I guess but they also didn’t win now did they? here you have a higher ranked A&M and the newcomer Texas. I don’t know about cross game tendencies - ref to protect a team not playing. all of these is pure speculation and opinion but I found it interesting how definitive and emphatic his view was.
  16. I mean it wasn’t the worst we’ve seen so if it wasn’t called it wouldn’t be a blatant no call. I just want to make sure when we are bitching about the refs it’s for good reason. And there is plenty of good reason in the SEC. Truth be told the expectation should a screw job is headed to Austin in 6 days.
  17. Pitt happens can go both ways. nice run!!!
  18. Last thing I’ll say, the rule isn’t designed to punish bad players, it’s not really like unsportsmanlike conduct. the rule is designed to protect players by changing tackling and hitting technique. so a technique based rule makes perfect sense given the goal.
  19. It fits 3rd, could 1st and if the hit was upward it could fit the 2nd. Only the 4th one is a clear no (didn’t lead with the crown). player was defenseless, clearly in the act of catching.
  20. No where does it say, the player seemed extra mean or hit extra hard or the offensive player looks like he coulda gotten hurt. The rule defines targeting by hit technique and that’s it.
  21. Y'all are both thinking it has to be some evidence of mental intent, it doesn’t. It’s the way you hit period, that’s it. Read the rule.
  22. It wasn’t an egregious call. I recall helmet to helmet first. Could be the first one too. none require a manifestation of mental intent.
  23. Only difference is Quinn was seriously hurt because of it and last year a strain or tear in his core.
  24. He made contact with the helmet, his head was up but pretty sure it’s still a penalty by the rule.
×
×
  • Create New...