Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Take as don't be delusional like he is. We're not going independent. We hitched our wagon to the SEC. If people want to cut out OOC marquee games then fine but a steady diet of worthless indy scheduling like Notre Dame, no thanks. 

Delusional is thinking that a 3 loss team makes it into the playoffs. But I see your point. Steve was saying we should just cancel OSU next year on that program earlier. Probably for the best. He cannot beat them anyway. Regular or post season. 

Posted (edited)

I think we'll be ranked 12 tonight. There's no risk to it. BYU beats Tech, you slide BYU up and take Tech down from 4/5 where they'll be tonight. BYU comes in at 8 or 9. Maybe it pushed OU back to 9 or 10. Bama wins or loses, they're still in. Kirby has a Bama problem. They would have to blow Bama out by 30+ for Bama to not still make it with a loss. They don't want the SEC removing the CCG so there will be no penalty to Bama unless they just don't show up and even then who knows. Duke wins the ACC then I believe they can take two G5 champions. 

Edited by mdmost
  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted (edited)

Those who don't like Texas like to point out that if we didn't have the Florida loss, we would be in and that the OOC loss to tOSU doesn't matter. Guess what, every team with 2 or fewer losses in the SEC is a shoe in except us because our 3rd loss is to #1 tOSU on the road at the beginning of the season. We also have 3 top 10 wins.

Screenshot_20251202_111731_Google.thumb.jpg.c20af0fd0c4900beca00e2700981b092.jpg

Edited by UTEE97
  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
55 minutes ago, Drew said:

How?  The fact we loss to a bad team like Florida does NOT matter. The fact that we have 3 losses do. They are literally not looking at who you lose to, OR who you play and beat, just the loss.

The strength of teams you beat and lose to is literally in the metrics calculation used by the committee.  They are literally looking at who you lose to, AND who you play and beat, not just the loss.

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

Those who don't like Texas like to point out that if we didn't have the Florida loss, we would be in and that the OOC loss to tOSU doesn't matter. Guess what, every team with 2 or fewer losses in the SEC is a shoe in except us because our 3rd loss is to #1 tOSU on the road at the beginning of the season. We also have 3 top 10 wins.

Screenshot_20251202_111731_Google.thumb.jpg.c20af0fd0c4900beca00e2700981b092.jpg

I'd also be talking about:

Having to play 4 teams in the top half of the SEC, unlike some jackass school 90 min east of us, and going 3-1
Playing an entire month away from home to open the SEC schedule, which nobody else had to do

The first point might bring up a whole thing about unbalanced conf schedules that Sankey doesn't want talked about too much 

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, gernblansten said:

The strength of teams you beat and lose to is literally in the metrics calculation used by the committee.  They are literally looking at who you lose to, AND who you play and beat, not just the loss.

What evidence do you have for this argument? It's one thing to say they are supposed to be considering the SOS and another to show that they have. Their ranking doesn't support your argument.

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

Orlowsky put out a video saying if Texas gets left out he sees the entire SEC start to cancel OOC games. I believe he is still an ESPN talking head. 

Not totally unrelated in all of this, do you have this week's viewership numbers posted anywhere yet?

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I'd also be talking about:
Playing an entire month away from home to open the SEC schedule, which nobody else had to do

 

Now we want xtra-credit for the Red River game being played at the Cotton Bowl?

 

Every game you played in September was at DKR  

 

Take it up with Sankey.  

Edited by Iceman
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

Not totally unrelated in all of this, do you have this week's viewership numbers posted anywhere yet?

Arkansas at Texas was the highest rated game last week with 5.6 million viewers

This week it was 

1. Texas vs Aggy 13.8 million

2. Ohio State-Michigan 12.4 million

3. Auburn vs Bama 9.8 million

Edited by The_Great_Hornsby
  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted
24 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

I want Texas to get in, Notre Dame to get pushed out, Texas players get healthy over the next few weeks while waiting for its playoff game, Texas wins the national championship, and six years from now there is some inconclusive evidence that Texas paid off certain members of the committee, each of whom has subsequently died in "accidents." 



I want to change my story. It would be even funnier if we get in the playoffs, win the whole thing,  and six years later it's proved that the members of the committee couldn't decide which teams should get in, so they asked ChatGPT which are the most deserving and ChatGPT decided. 

  • Haha 3
Posted

I enjoy the cautious optimism but I’ve accepted we are cooked.   Hope I am wrong.  The committee has completely changed things up this week in the past to get their desired outcome after CCG weekend though so who knows?

Setting us aside, if Bama and BYU win which of OU, ND and Tech are left out?

 

Posted
6 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

What evidence do you have for this argument? It's one thing to say they are supposed to be considering the SOS and another to show that they have. Their ranking doesn't support your argument.

The College Football Playoff selection committee will announce its first of six rankings on Nov. 4 using enhanced metrics to help evaluate schedule strength and how teams perform against their slate, the CFP announced Wednesday.

In the current schedule strength metric, more weight will now be applied to games against strong opponents. A new, added metric of "record strength" will help the committee determine how teams performed against their schedule, rewarding those that beat high-quality opponents while minimizing the penalty of losing to one. These changes will also provide minimal reward for beating a lower-quality opponent while imposing a greater penalty for losing to one.

Historically, the selection committee typically has evaluated in this manner, but adding it to a computerized metric should help codify the process publicly. It could also incentivize athletic directors to continue to schedule marquee matchups between blue-blood programs without fear of being penalized for a loss in the committee meeting room. This is something some FBS commissioners have been publicly pushing for and the CFP has been working on over the past six months.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/46027603/cfp-selection-committee-use-enhanced-metrics

It's interesting because you don't like the ranking, you think it proves they aren't considering the metrics. What evidence do you have to prove their position is not "UT is penalized slightly for losing to tOSU, and penalized a lot for losing to 4-8 UF and 35-10 to UGA. We have them behind the two loss teams because they have 1 good loss, 1 ouch okay loss, and 1 really bad loss. Alabama is the only 2 loss team with a comparable loss, and they nearly cancel it out with the best win of anyone. If UT would've beaten Purdue and had 2 losses, they would be the lowest 2 loss team because of the 35-10 loss and UF."

I think UT would be in at 10-2. But, that doesn't change the fact the committee can be following the stated position of what they consider and still have UT outside the playoff. It's not weird fanatics think it's so black and white, but it doesn't change the fact fanatics gonna fanatic and ignore reasonable difference from tunnel vision. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Iceman said:

Now we want xtra-credit for the Red River game being played at the Cotton Bowl?

 

Every game you played in September was at DKR  

 

Take it up with Sankey.  

I wasn't talking to you, so stay out of it. 

  • Haha 2
Posted
20 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

What evidence do you have for this argument? It's one thing to say they are supposed to be considering the SOS and another to show that they have. Their ranking doesn't support your argument.

Florida State, 2023 is calling you in a few.....

Posted
5 minutes ago, Iceman said:

Now we want xtra-credit for the Red River game being played at the Cotton Bowl?

 

Every game you played in September was at DKR  

 

Take it up with Sankey.  

Nobody asked you, Sally. Fuck off back to the Big 12 thread. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 4
Posted
3 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Arkansas at Texas was the highest rated game last week with 5.6 million viewers

This week it was 

1. Texas vs Aggy 13.8 million

2. Ohio State-Michigan 12.4 million

3. Auburn vs Bama 9.8 million

This evidence is irrefutable.  Red blooded Americans want Texas in the playoffs.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 3
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, nnm said:

 

This shows to me that they couldn't beat any good team. Lost to the only 2 good teams (Bama and Texas) they had on their schedule. If you haven't beaten a single playoff caliber team, how do you expect to be in the playoffs? 

Edited by UTEE97
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I wasn't talking to you, so stay out of it. 

I missed the DM notation. 
 

Sorry.  I've heard the October hardship line multiple times.  It's a fucking joke.  Talking up the strengths>>>>>wanting sympathy

Posted
3 minutes ago, El Hornarino said:

This evidence is irrefutable.  Red blooded Americans want Texas in the playoffs.

Orange blooded ones too! 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, gernblansten said:

The strength of teams you beat and lose to is literally in the metrics calculation used by the committee.  They are literally looking at who you lose to, AND who you play and beat, not just the loss.

youre suggesting if we lost to OU but beat Florida but we'd be in, and I find that to be incredibly regarded at best 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
12 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Arkansas at Texas was the highest rated game last week with 5.6 million viewers

This week it was 

1. Texas vs Aggy 13.8 million

2. Ohio State-Michigan 12.4 million

3. Auburn vs Bama 9.8 million

image.gif.e5889bfb0aba2ca2460460beed686f5a.gif

  • Haha 3
Posted
1 minute ago, BigHornedLurker said:

youre suggesting if we lost to OU but beat Florida but we'd be in, and I find that to be incredibly regarded at best 

We would be even more out than we are now because people would say Texas had a losing record against top 10 teams and could only win at home.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Drew said:

Real nut dragging there...I'd love to see it, but would come off as whiney.

Agreed.  They can join the ACC and take their bid...if they can't win that conference, don't give them an At large

Didn’t Dome go 5-1 in the ACC this year?  Throw them in the CCG against UVA or Miami or whoever and let them play for their spot.

FCS should not count on you record, if Bama loses to UGA they will have the same 9-3 record we have so fuck them too.  

Ole Miss is interesting since the offensive playcallers are gone and the defensive playcaller now has to play HC for the first time ever.  To think that’s not a complete clusterfuck is disingenuous 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
17 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Arkansas at Texas was the highest rated game last week with 5.6 million viewers

This week it was 

1. Texas vs Aggy 13.8 million

2. Ohio State-Michigan 12.4 million

3. Auburn vs Bama 9.8 million

I hadn't seen that drop yet, but if correct, I'm pretty sure that means Texas-OSU and Texas - Aggy are top 2 rated games of the season.   As others have noted, ABC does not want to lose future rights to Texas/OSU, Michigan and ND.  That is why you see Herbstreit and others beating the drum.

Posted
15 minutes ago, The Drum said:

Florida State, 2023 is calling you in a few.....

They got left out because of their star QB getting injured, not because of their schedule.

Posted
Just now, BigHornedLurker said:

youre suggesting if we lost to OU but beat Florida but we'd be in, and I find that to be incredibly regarded at best 

Feel free to show me where I made that suggestion. I do not present a scenario of taking away a good win, taking away a bad loss, adding a good loss, and still being 9-3. Due to your avatar, I've noticed your posts, and you and highly regarded go well together. 

Posted
5 hours ago, 52-80 said:

That's not the rule. Nobody is making that game or making that ex-post claim.

Is Ole Miss the de facto 2015 champion because they beat what would later, at the end of the season, turn out to be the #1 team in Alabama?

The rankings are as-best-determined at at time of record. They are not retroactively updated at the end - almost nothing in life works this way.

This is wrong because rankings are wrong, especially early in the season. 

We obviously weren't the best team in the country in late August but were ranked 1. 

Ideally, there should only be 1 single ranking done and that's at the end of the season. Since they won't do that, the best you can do is wait until the end of the season and judge based on where every team finished, not where they started or were at any point before the season finished. 

Posted
18 minutes ago, gernblansten said:

The College Football Playoff selection committee will announce its first of six rankings on Nov. 4 using enhanced metrics to help evaluate schedule strength and how teams perform against their slate, the CFP announced Wednesday.

In the current schedule strength metric, more weight will now be applied to games against strong opponents. A new, added metric of "record strength" will help the committee determine how teams performed against their schedule, rewarding those that beat high-quality opponents while minimizing the penalty of losing to one. These changes will also provide minimal reward for beating a lower-quality opponent while imposing a greater penalty for losing to one.

Historically, the selection committee typically has evaluated in this manner, but adding it to a computerized metric should help codify the process publicly. It could also incentivize athletic directors to continue to schedule marquee matchups between blue-blood programs without fear of being penalized for a loss in the committee meeting room. This is something some FBS commissioners have been publicly pushing for and the CFP has been working on over the past six months.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/46027603/cfp-selection-committee-use-enhanced-metrics

It's interesting because you don't like the ranking, you think it proves they aren't considering the metrics. What evidence do you have to prove their position is not "UT is penalized slightly for losing to tOSU, and penalized a lot for losing to 4-8 UF and 35-10 to UGA. We have them behind the two loss teams because they have 1 good loss, 1 ouch okay loss, and 1 really bad loss. Alabama is the only 2 loss team with a comparable loss, and they nearly cancel it out with the best win of anyone. If UT would've beaten Purdue and had 2 losses, they would be the lowest 2 loss team because of the 35-10 loss and UF."

I think UT would be in at 10-2. But, that doesn't change the fact the committee can be following the stated position of what they consider and still have UT outside the playoff. It's not weird fanatics think it's so black and white, but it doesn't change the fact fanatics gonna fanatic and ignore reasonable difference from tunnel vision. 

All those words to show no proof and to regurgitate what haters are saying. A 2 loss SEC team with 3 top 10 wins gets in easily. Our 3rd loss, which is on the road to the #1 team, who nobody else has beaten either, is keeping us out. SOS means shit to the committee.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, The Drum said:

This should keep us busy for a while….

Now our university employees are publicly begging to be picked in the CFB beauty pageant.  

This sucks so much. I've been trending away from football and towards hockey a little bit more every year for about a decade, I'm about done with this beauty pageant bullshit. 

Posted
26 minutes ago, The_Great_Hornsby said:

Arkansas at Texas was the highest rated game last week with 5.6 million viewers

This week it was 

1. Texas vs Aggy 13.8 million

2. Ohio State-Michigan 12.4 million

3. Auburn vs Bama 9.8 million

What's your source? I've been googling around trying to find this all day and none of the typical sites have an update (usually On3 is among the first).

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

All those words to show no proof and to regurgitate what haters are saying. A 2 loss SEC team with 3 top 10 wins gets in easily. Our 3rd loss, which is on the road to the #1 team, who nobody else has beaten either, is keeping us out. SOS means shit to the committee.

they are treating this like it’s the nfl: strictly based on record. only the ncaa doesn’t get to make our schedule; we do. so now, instead of scheduling the nfc west or nfc north to prove that we are one if the 12 best teams, we are going to schedule the nfc south and afc north because why the hell would we not do that when all that matters in the w-l? hell, as an sec team it is now imperative to schedule the three most dogshit teams possible for ooc. you can’t afford not to.

Edited by Derka
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
45 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

What evidence do you have for this argument? It's one thing to say they are supposed to be considering the SOS and another to show that they have. Their ranking doesn't support your argument.

It is in their written statement. The rules the CFP Committee put forth and memorialized.

Posted
Just now, UTEE97 said:

All those words to show no proof and to regurgitate what haters are saying. A 2 loss SEC team with 3 top 10 wins gets in easily. Our 3rd loss, which is on the road to the #1 team, who nobody else has beaten either, is keeping us out. SOS means shit to the committee.

I didn't see anything in your post with the proof that the committee isn't considering what it publicly states it considers. Provide your proof. Or, hell, just keep regurgitating your personal wants and desires. It don't make a shit.

Posted
1 minute ago, Alien Octopus said:

It is in their written statement. The rules the CFP Committee put forth and memorialized.

Are you stupid or something? We are all saying that follow your own metrics that you put forth instead of putting most of the weight on W/L regardless of quality like the idiotic fans and AP voters. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Nicole44 said:

3 Losses is not ever going to happen. 

So you think both Texas and Alabama (if they lose to Georgia) are out? Maybe if you use an even bigger font that will be true. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 4
Posted
3 minutes ago, gernblansten said:

I didn't see anything in your post with the proof that the committee isn't considering what it publicly states it considers. Provide your proof. Or, hell, just keep regurgitating your personal wants and desires. It don't make a shit.

The proof is Vandy and OU and Miami being above us. FFs get a clue.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, UTEE97 said:

The proof is Vandy and OU and Miami being above us. FFs get a clue.

All you had to say is, "I don't have any proof. I can't prove they aren't considering it. I'm just an emotional boy is all."

Posted
2 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

Are you stupid or something? We are all saying that follow your own metrics that you put forth instead of putting most of the weight on W/L regardless of quality like the idiotic fans and AP voters. 

GFY to start. Second, eabod. That is all.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

Now our university employees are publicly begging to be picked in the CFB beauty pageant.  

This sucks so much. I've been trending away from football and towards hockey a little bit more every year for about a decade, I'm about done with this beauty pageant bullshit. 

He's literally the Communications Director for our football program.  It would be a fireable offense to NOT be doing what he's doing.

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted

Personally I don't care if Texas gets left out this year. I think most Texas fans would be fine with it as well, but the consequences of this will be felt by the entire college football when there are no marquee no conference games anymore. We will all get to watch a bunch of cupcake games early in the season. Yay!

Posted
1 hour ago, 'stache said:

Isn't it more their sweetheart TV deal with NBC? They'd make far less in the ACC with its shitty contract. They've spurned the BIG enough that they may have given up and have already expanded to 18, but I suppose they'd still go to 19 if ND agreed. It's the only move that would remotely make sense. They aren't a cultural fit for SEC, and the Big XII while better than ACC doesn't pay enough (in addition to similarly being a bad cultural fit).

I took a look and their next years' schedule looks similarly shitty. Better in 2027, could be salty in 2028.

image.png.10759fdf4f3936208db283d041b97d68.png

image.png.2cea8b7ffbf20eb267e04d58669d600e.png

image.png.43a322458fc37e1211319113665c33f4.png

Miami should cancel that game next year if ND ends up ahead of them.

Posted
1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Whats gonna be funny is when all these teams schedule dogshit opponents and then still don’t make the playoffs, that’s surely hugely good for fans and donors and alums. No playoff and you are watching your team play Rutgers as your big OOC matchup. I don’t see the downside. 
 

The playoff was designed by people who don’t like college football and it keeps making the game worse in new ways. 

This same problem existed before as well. Just you didnt have any way of determining a true champion so the beauty pageant stuff was about who was #1 at the end of the season. Not #12. 

The problem with the sport is conferences being completely unbalanced. The only way to fix it is to cut out G5 into their own separate level of CFB and re-rack the conferences to balance them out with power teams. 

The other option is to force OOC matchups between the p4 conferences where every team has to play them. If everyone has to play difficult OOC games then it adds more balance and we get a lot more of this stuff settled head to head. They could even cut out all cupcake games and have each p4 conference play the other 3 p4 conferences in 3 ranked matches then have the 9 game conference schedule. That would be a true battle to crown a champion as all 4 of the conference champions from the previous year would have to play each other as their non con games. 

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...