Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 hours ago, 52-80 said:

OU beat 5 ranked teams: 3 of them came in the last 4 games; 2 of those were on the road; 1 of them was Alabama.

Their 1 squeaker was against LSU.

**

TX beat 4 ranked teams: 2 in the recent half of the season; 1 was on the road.

2 squeaker wins against opponents worse than LSU.

**

I think we're a better team than OU and would be on the favored side of a coin-flip, but you can see how their body of work can be vouched for. If hypothetical H-2-H performances is the determinant of playoff contender, we shouldn't even entertain Tulane, UNT, UVA in the group but so far nobody's strongly opposed to their inclusion? 

 

I do not know if you are supposed to take the rankings  when a team played or when the season ends as  the comparison point?  The notable teams we beat were all top ten when we played them. OU beat Bama when they were top 10.  The other ranked teams they beat, mizzou, michigan, tennessee, are not likely ranked anymore. OU's offense has regressed as the year has progressed. They look worse than Iowa on that side of the ball. Not to say that Iowa has not improved. Not sure who I would pick if OU played Iowa today?!
OU should probably be ranked below Vandy looking at the whole team. Pretty sure Texas would beat OU by at least two scores were there a rematch.  Either way, the only way Texas gets in is if the CFP corrects the horseshit of having Vandy and OU ranked above Texas. The chances are slim but certainly they can explain this if they do it.

Posted
2 hours ago, petscii said:

Texas is not being penalized for losing to Ohio State or Georgia. They are being penalized for losing the fucking Florida.

The team that beat Texas and kept Texas out of the CFP is Texas.


This is the laziest argument and the easiest to counter. If Texas schedules Abilene Christian in week one instead of Ohio St, we are in the playoffs. It’s that simple. People are sorting the Win/Loss column and ranking teams accordingly. 9-3 is why we are not in the playoffs and who we lost to does not matter. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
7 hours ago, redswingline said:

I'm 4 years older than Sweeney and would never put her in the same league, let alone the same sentence as a prime Cindy or Pam.

Guess it is the age old question silicon or naturals. As for Cindy, she is no Elle McPherson...

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Alien Octopus said:

The committee can easily fix this by ranking Texas above OU, due to our recent performance against the previously ranked # 3 team and OU's dogshit performance against an unranked LSU. The nail in the coffin should be our pasting of OU.  That is how they can save face. OU also has  some issue with the wr room. 

And they could use conference standings to justify it. We finished 5th in conference followed by OU and then Vandy. If a loss in SEC championship can’t knock Bama out because they finished 2nd in conference then us finishing above OU and Vandy should also matter. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Well Cindy and Pam are just prettier than that butter face 

Cindy is, Pam isn't. But to each their own. Pam likely has more of a petri dish between her legs which may or may not be part of the charm. 

Posted
7 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

So what you’re saying is that this group of 12 people that are functionally only ranking 25 teams each week during a televised broadcast to make the other television sports programs more appealing for networks and viewers get to the end of the season and then are able to select 7 at large teams which they announce on yet another broadcast which allows them to design a system where certain teams play other teams in a televised made-for-TV tournament which could potentially be viewed by tens of millions of people that would tune in live where they could be advertised to by certain corporations that would pay major money to these networks in order to sell them things, might have more interest in putting the biggest brands into their setup versus others smaller brands….

That’s just crazy talk…

And that just makes the sport suck even more. Sports is supposed to be about what happens on the field/court and this corporate corruption shit makes me want to watch it even less. 

7 hours ago, Newy25 said:


The alternative is we all turn into Indiana and schedule three god awful automatic wins and no one watches football until October. Schools will do what the incentives say to do. And this playoff committee is about to lay out the incentives for scheduling in the future. Reward the schools like Texas or the BYU’s and Ole Miss’s  of the world for scheduling and playing no one. 

And I've put out aboit the best solution to this problem under current circumstances. That would make them tons of money as well. 

But it won't happen. So we'll just get this shit every year. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Alien Octopus said:

Cindy is, Pam isn't. But to each their own. Pam likely has more of a petri dish between her legs which may or may not be part of the charm. 

Look at Pam when she was the age Sydney is or when she was discovered on a stadium cam

Posted
1 minute ago, Hermanator said:

And that just makes the sport suck even more. Sports is supposed to be about what happens on the field/court and this corporate corruption shit makes me want to watch it even less. 

And I've put out aboit the best solution to this problem under current circumstances. That would make them tons of money as well. 

But it won't happen. So we'll just get this shit every year. 


What we are going to get is every school will have to schedule to the lowest common denominator, Indiana in order to stay competitive. Football is going to be unwatchable in the month of September. 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

And that just makes the sport suck even more. Sports is supposed to be about what happens on the field/court and this corporate corruption shit makes me want to watch it even less. 

And I've put out aboit the best solution to this problem under current circumstances. That would make them tons of money as well. 

But it won't happen. So we'll just get this shit every year. 

I mean were all batching about what happens on the field 

 

The problem is the results are some laughable W/L ranking devoid of any weighting towards what happens in top games.

The results of the current ranking say losing to Ohio State is the same as losing to Oklahoma State. Same with winning. 

ND has no on the field justification for being in the top 15 when these are taken into account . 

Edited by BigHornedLurker
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Look at Pam when she was the age Sydney is or when she was discovered on a stadium cam

Ok let's do a fresh PamIMG_0299.thumb.jpeg.a233c6e72797773ecf5da6e05b90e0cc.jpegIMG_0298.thumb.jpeg.42b06606245d1970df7484b51bc86f1c.jpeg v Euphoria Sweeney

Edited by Alien Octopus
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

No it didn't. Auburn is not a ranked team. Tennessee is not a ranked team. Their ranked wins as of today are #10 Alabama, #18 Michigan, and #25 mizzou. Ours are #7 A&M, #8 OU, and # 13 Vandy. 

If that's the rule, we can also drop the pitch that Texas has "3 wins against the top 10"

Posted
2 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

If that's the rule, we can also drop the pitch that Texas has "3 wins against the top 10"

Texas is 2-2 against the top 10 or play off teams. No team has played as many and only tOSU and Indiana are the only two with no losses if my memory serves.  Texas would rank 6th on this metric. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

If that's the rule, we can also drop the pitch that Texas has "3 wins against the top 10"

That's the only rule that makes sense. I have no problem dropping that as 3 wins against the top 13 seems fine to me. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Alien Octopus said:

I do not know if you are supposed to take the rankings  when a team played or when the season ends as  the comparison point?  The notable teams we beat were all top ten when we played them. OU beat Bama when they were top 10.  The other ranked teams they beat, mizzou, michigan, tennessee, are not likely ranked anymore. OU's offense has regressed as the year has progressed. They look worse than Iowa on that side of the ball. Not to say that Iowa has not improved. Not sure who I would pick if OU played Iowa today?!
OU should probably be ranked below Vandy looking at the whole team. Pretty sure Texas would beat OU by at least two scores were there a rematch.  Either way, the only way Texas gets in is if the CFP corrects the horseshit of having Vandy and OU ranked above Texas. The chances are slim but certainly they can explain this if they do it.

NCAA, ESPN, and the Texas Longhorns record the rankings contemporaneously.  IMO this makes sense, because teams trend and the rankings tries -- imperfectly as it does -- to best reflect them.

You could argue that the earlier rankings are less reliable and try to unweight them, but the way its done is the way its done and is just as valid.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Sir Ulrich said:

It worked for ou in 2008

I remember their game against osu.  Late fourth hard fought game but ou had it in the bag.  Ou ran a running play and the osu dl basically escorted their back into the end zone.  Hated that ou staff.  Hated the rig 12

11 minutes ago, scramblyn said:

That’s great, loss column and style points matter. We somehow think they don’t. They shouldn’t. This sport is political and a beauty pageant and it’s not for the purists. That’s on us. 

Other than shsu and sjsu, our offense wasn’t good enough to blow anyone out

Posted
1 minute ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

I remember their game against osu.  Late fourth hard fought game but ou had it in the bag.  Ou ran a running play and the osu dl basically escorted their back into the end zone.  Hated that ou staff.  Hated the rig 12

Other than shsu and sjsu, our offense wasn’t good enough to blow anyone out

We blew out Vandy until the refs got involved. Called back a TD with massive pass interference that wouldve put us up 41-16 and then the reffing circus began. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

I remember their game against osu.  Late fourth hard fought game but ou had it in the bag.  Ou ran a running play and the osu dl basically escorted their back into the end zone.  Hated that ou staff.  Hated the rig 12

Here's what I remember. Up 44 on Tech and throwing the ball in the 4th Screenshot_20251202_075131_Chrome.thumb.jpg.64146b5eb4eb9aea2f6427668e05bcce.jpg

Posted
23 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

NCAA, ESPN, and the Texas Longhorns record the rankings contemporaneously.  IMO this makes sense, because teams trend and the rankings tries -- imperfectly as it does -- to best reflect them.

You could argue that the earlier rankings are less reliable and try to unweight them, but the way its done is the way its done and is just as valid.

No. If we are looking at the quality of the wins to compare resumes, we know objectively that Auburn isn't a ranked win. Come on now. The point is to figure out what teams are the best and have accomplished the most, not brag over what were essentially preseason rankings. But shit, if we can just play pretend, I say we are still #1 because we were before week 1 was played. 

Posted
10 hours ago, Kwix said:

image.thumb.jpeg.f9a662fd6ac62e54868417bccb54f069.jpeg

Posted by everyone's favorite longhorn.

Ole Miss and Bama (if they lose to UGA)  should be on the bubble then.   

Ole Miss because half of their coaching staff flew the coop on Sunday.   And Bama becuase they lost to OU and we beat OU.  

 

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, The Dog said:

 

We need to stop with this whole, "they were a top 25 team when we played them" business. It should be based off what they are in the CFP at the end of the season. Like Pitt obviously shouldnt be ranked. Missouri never shouldve been ranked. But look at Texas's wins. All solid top 15 CFP teams. The losses? Top 3 CFP teams on the road. 

Edited by The_Great_Hornsby
Posted
9 hours ago, redswingline said:

I'm 4 years older than Sweeney and would never put her in the same league, let alone the same sentence as a prime Cindy or Pam.

Vanderpump Rules Eye Roll GIF

Posted
1 hour ago, Alien Octopus said:

Ok let's do a fresh PamIMG_0299.thumb.jpeg.a233c6e72797773ecf5da6e05b90e0cc.jpegIMG_0298.thumb.jpeg.42b06606245d1970df7484b51bc86f1c.jpeg v Euphoria Sweeney

I must be too young to remember this Pam. 

We’re all winners in this game

Posted
1 hour ago, Newy25 said:


This is the laziest argument and the easiest to counter. If Texas schedules Abilene Christian in week one instead of Ohio St, we are in the playoffs. It’s that simple. People are sorting the Win/Loss column and ranking teams accordingly. 9-3 is why we are not in the playoffs and who we lost to does not matter. 

This is 100% correct. The committee is telling us a win over Abilene Christian would cancel out the loss to Florida. 

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...