Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
13 hours ago, Hermanator said:

I'm mostly in favor of dropping the big name OOC game

Fucking stupid. Win or lose, big games make us tougher and better. With 12, 16 or however many teams in the playoffs, a loss doesn't eliminate us.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
5 minutes ago, texifornia said:

And, as a fan, it's just more fun

Even funner when we win.

Win, and damn, we're that good already. Lose, and we're young, got some work to do and ten-plus games to get there.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 hours ago, Hermanator said:

Or they're all SEC schools except Wisconsin who plays Alabama in non conference and both OSU and Oregon. 

This is also why I'm mostly in favor of dropping the big name OOC game, or at least only doing it once every 3 or 4 years or so. Our SEC schedule will be tough enough to clear strength of schedule questions, and we could use 4 games to play the freshman and backups while keeping the main rotation fresher for conference. 

If it were up to me, I'd schedule the top available teams every year. I would rather not go to a UTEP or Sam Houston game, even if Sam is #1 in FCS. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
16 minutes ago, Slacks said:

If it were up to me, I'd schedule the top available teams every year. I would rather not go to a UTEP or Sam Houston game, even if Sam is #1 in FCS. 

Sam is in FBS now, we've never scheduled an FCS school.

Also, the team needs a warm up for conference season even if it's not much of a spectacle for the fans.

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, cafe society said:

I'm having a brain fart, what film is this quoted from?

Office Space

spacer.png

Edited by Scholz
  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
14 hours ago, Hermanator said:

Or they're all SEC schools except Wisconsin who plays Alabama in non conference and both OSU and Oregon. 

This is also why I'm mostly in favor of dropping the big name OOC game, or at least only doing it once every 3 or 4 years or so. Our SEC schedule will be tough enough to clear strength of schedule questions, and we could use 4 games to play the freshman and backups while keeping the main rotation fresher for conference. 

I support this. Replace the big OOC game with FCS teams. 

7041412156257902520-3669129745-03-05-202

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, texifornia said:

Sam is in FBS now, we've never scheduled an FCS school.

Also, the team needs a warm up for conference season even if it's not much of a spectacle for the fans.

OK. Whatever. Warm up against the best you can. 

Posted
7 hours ago, texifornia said:

And, as a fan, it's just more fun

Agreed. The entertainment value of big brand teams vs our big brand team is so high. How big was OSU in 2005? How big was Michigan last year? How big is OSU next year?

We talked about Michigan well into the playoffs. Then having Georgia, OUsux, aggie and upstart Vandy on our schedule made it a fun ass year of entertaining football. We only reference ULM and UTSA due to Arch starting them both.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

 

 

The win over Bama in '23 got us into the playoffs.

I understand being in the SEC now our SOS is less likely to be a question, but those big non-conf games can still be a differentiator.

The 4 team playoff era versus more teams than that is not comparable.  Plus a non-conference SEC road win is likely worth more than any other road win - maybe an OSU road win is comparable.  Now, if you win the SEC, you’re likely to get the highest SEC spot even if #2 has the better non-conference win.

An extra loss is likely as detrimental as a win can be a positive.  That extra loss puts you one loss closer to exclusion but also drops you down in priority seeding.  When talking a long season, an extra, physical game makes that more difficult.

I am in favor of the extra tough game.  I am quite certain a number of programs will not favor the additional risk.

Posted

Fuck it. I want a cupcake so we can get the underclassman developmental time and keep their asses happy. Hang 50 and have fun. I know that’s why we schedule aggy.  But 2 cupcakes would be nice 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
23 minutes ago, Sgt Hulk said:

Fuck it. I want a cupcake so we can get the underclassman developmental time and keep their asses happy. Hang 50 and have fun. I know that’s why we schedule aggy.  But 2 cupcakes would be nice 

Tell me your favorite memories about the best cupcake game that Arch didnt start or play.

I'll hang up and listen.

Posted
20 hours ago, Had Enough said:

The 4 team playoff era versus more teams than that is not comparable.  Plus a non-conference SEC road win is likely worth more than any other road win - maybe an OSU road win is comparable.  Now, if you win the SEC, you’re likely to get the highest SEC spot even if #2 has the better non-conference win.

An extra loss is likely as detrimental as a win can be a positive.  That extra loss puts you one loss closer to exclusion but also drops you down in priority seeding.  When talking a long season, an extra, physical game makes that more difficult.

I am in favor of the extra tough game.  I am quite certain a number of programs will not favor the additional risk.

It's definitely an unnecessary risk, and all the goobers here wanting tough early season OOC games will be the first to whine and want to fire the coach when they miss the playoffs. 

Sark is building deep teams, but this is still more games to win a title than before. The team was beaten down last season after the OSU game, and that was with a relatively easy SEC schedule. That extra OOC game against a top opponent when you already play in the toughest conference will just wear them down even more than necessary heading down the stretch of conference and into the playoffs. 

I'd rather play OSU in the playoffs (minus the choking goober QB) than in game 1 or 2 of the season. It's just good strategy. 

Posted
17 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

It's definitely an unnecessary risk, and all the goobers here wanting tough early season OOC games will be the first to whine and want to fire the coach when they miss the playoffs. 

Sark is building deep teams, but this is still more games to win a title than before. The team was beaten down last season after the OSU game, and that was with a relatively easy SEC schedule. That extra OOC game against a top opponent when you already play in the toughest conference will just wear them down even more than necessary heading down the stretch of conference and into the playoffs. 

I'd rather play OSU in the playoffs (minus the choking goober QB) than in game 1 or 2 of the season. It's just good strategy. 

You’re conveniently forgetting the Michigan and Ohio State games got us out of that shit hole conference a year early. Without those games Texas has nothing to trade with FOX. 

Posted
7 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

You’re conveniently forgetting the Michigan and Ohio State games got us out of that shit hole conference a year early. Without those games Texas has nothing to trade with FOX. 

It made sense to schedule those games while in an inferior conference with a 4 team playoff format. There was immense benefit to be won from the risk of that game. 

We're in the opposite situation now. In the best conference with a 12 (soon to be 16) team playoff and more potential games. 

I'm not saying to schedule an FCS team. I'm saying don't schedule a national title contender. Schedule a Wake Forest or Rutgers or Colorado. 

Posted
28 minutes ago, texifornia said:

This is stupid and you should feel bad. I sincerely question whether you even like watching good college football games.

I like watching Texas win. I like watching Texas in the playoffs. And I want to watch Texas win a national title. 

Everything else is meaningless to me. All strategic thought by the AD should be placed into those goals.

Posted
22 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

It made sense to schedule those games while in an inferior conference with a 4 team playoff format. There was immense benefit to be won from the risk of that game. 

We're in the opposite situation now. In the best conference with a 12 (soon to be 16) team playoff and more potential games. 

I'm not saying to schedule an FCS team. I'm saying don't schedule a national title contender. Schedule a Wake Forest or Rutgers or Colorado. 

🐈

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

It made sense to schedule those games while in an inferior conference with a 4 team playoff format. There was immense benefit to be won from the risk of that game. 

We're in the opposite situation now. In the best conference with a 12 (soon to be 16) team playoff and more potential games. 

I'm not saying to schedule an FCS team. I'm saying don't schedule a national title contender. Schedule a Wake Forest or Rutgers or Colorado. 

So schedule a BYU / Maryland instead of a Notre Dame / Michigan? 

Edited by Beer Drinker
Posted
2 hours ago, Beer Drinker said:

So schedule a BYU / Maryland instead of a Notre Dame / Michigan? 

Just don't have Charlie or Herman coaching. 

The game has changed. The system has changed. Have to adapt or we will needlessly kill our chances at national titles. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 4
Posted
8 hours ago, Hermanator said:

Just don't have Charlie or Herman coaching. 

The game has changed. The system has changed. Have to adapt or we will needlessly kill our chances at national titles. 

If you think an early season loss to someone like Ohio State will keep Texas out of the 16 team playoff, then you also think Texas is going to lose a couple more games throughout the season.  A one-loss Texas that won the SEC and dropped an early season behemoth game doesn't have to worry about being on the wrong side of the bubble.  Conversely, a Texas team with three losses wasn't going to win a title anyway.  Scheduling big time marquee games only helps our brand, exposure, and recruiting even if we don't win them all. 

 

As you said, the system has changed, and a 16 team playoff changes the calculus of scheduling.  Your concerns are more appropriate for the former 4 team system.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Darth Tron said:

As you said, the system has changed, and a 16 team playoff changes the calculus of scheduling.  Your concerns are more appropriate for the former 4 team system.

Tv Land Teacher GIF by Teachers on TV Land

Posted
12 hours ago, Hermanator said:

It's definitely an unnecessary risk, and all the goobers here wanting tough early season OOC games will be the first to whine and want to fire the coach when they miss the playoffs. 

Sark is building deep teams, but this is still more games to win a title than before. The team was beaten down last season after the OSU game, and that was with a relatively easy SEC schedule. That extra OOC game against a top opponent when you already play in the toughest conference will just wear them down even more than necessary heading down the stretch of conference and into the playoffs. 

I'd rather play OSU in the playoffs (minus the choking goober QB) than in game 1 or 2 of the season. It's just good strategy. 

 

11 hours ago, Hermanator said:

It made sense to schedule those games while in an inferior conference with a 4 team playoff format. There was immense benefit to be won from the risk of that game. 

We're in the opposite situation now. In the best conference with a 12 (soon to be 16) team playoff and more potential games. 

I'm not saying to schedule an FCS team. I'm saying don't schedule a national title contender. Schedule a Wake Forest or Rutgers or Colorado. 

 

11 hours ago, Hermanator said:

I like watching Texas win. I like watching Texas in the playoffs. And I want to watch Texas win a national title. 

Everything else is meaningless to me. All strategic thought by the AD should be placed into those goals.

julianne moore GIF

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 3
Posted
12 hours ago, Hermanator said:

It made sense to schedule those games while in an inferior conference with a 4 team playoff format. There was immense benefit to be won from the risk of that game. 

We're in the opposite situation now. In the best conference with a 12 (soon to be 16) team playoff and more potential games. 

I'm not saying to schedule an FCS team. I'm saying don't schedule a national title contender. Schedule a Wake Forest or Rutgers or Colorado. 

"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.”

Good Lord.  I cannot fathom the mindset of a person who embraces mediocrity or the easy way out. That person, that school which identifies itself by the conference in which it competes instead of having the conference be identified by the strength and prestige we add. No thank you.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted

I think a lot of that “cupcake” talk (from our side) comes from having an easy OOC game in November.

In theory, we could just move one of our current OOC’s to a November slot, and still schedule exactly how we have been.

Would provide an opportunity to adjust things in-game, later in the season if/as needed. 

Strength stays the same, since the teams stay the same, and still get the good OOC match-up(s).

 

Something like that, I’d be willing to look at. 

Ditching marquee matchups? Hell no.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

the only page of this thread i have read over the past several weeks is this one, so i'm sure something along similar lines has already been posted, but here is my ideal schedule template:

week 1 - home game against someone from the MAC, AAC, Mountain West, or Sun Belt

week 2 - home/away against a big time BIG or ACC team (or Notre Dame)

week 3 - home game against someone from the MAC, AAC, Mountain West, or Sun Belt

week 4 - bye

then 9 conference games.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 hours ago, closetojumping said:

Credit to that dumb motherfucker, he is good at posting thoughts so idiotic that you guys can’t help but respond. Like moths to a flame every time he shows up and starts slinging turds on a thread. 

There aren't many places left in society where you can get away with picking on retarded folks. Gotta take advantage where you can.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Red Five said:

We used to have offseason talk about, you know, the team. That was cool.

I’ll start: Who’s gonna be the backup QB? Same guy in August as in January or no?

Nah. Transfer Matthew Caldwell seems to have been brought in from Troy so Trey Owens won't have to be the backup.

Posted
Nah. Transfer Matthew Caldwell seems to have been brought in from Troy so Trey Owens won't have to be the backup.

Yeah. I thought at first he was brought in for the Charles Wright, prep for coaching role. Nope. Sark even said something about bringing him in, in case something happens to Arch in Columbus.

Think Lacey will pass Owens at some point in the near future anyway.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...