Football Articles
There are two teams in major college football this season who I do not want to see the Longhorns play. Luckily, neither of those teams is on our schedule, and we are at this point unlikely to be matched with either of them in a bowl game.
Obviously, those two teams are not SEC teams. Not Florida, not Alabama. Bring those no-offense dogs on – Muschamp’s boys will shut those teams down just as they’ve shut everyone else down this year. We might win 7 to 6, but we win.
The two teams I want no part of this season are the Horned Frogs of TCU and the Ramblin’ Wreck of Georgia Tech. Not that I don’t think we could beat either team – Texas is the best team in the country right now, and can defeat anyone on a neutral field – but that I’d likely be a stroke victim by the time the game was over. Give me a boring win over a no-offense-playing SEC school any old day.
This was the conclusion I reached at the end of the 12 hours I spent watching and betting on college football at the sports book at the Flamingo in chilly Las Vegas this past Saturday. Stanford also is on my list of teams I’d rather not see Texas have to play, but I suspect their recent success is as much a function of USC and Oregon not being everything they were cracked up to be as it is excellence on the part of the Cardinal. Still, no use tempting fate, and no chance that will ultimately happen anyway.
Some of you may remember that my trip to the Flamingo last September produced a once-in-a-lifetime, perfect 11-0 day of betting on college football, an event I chronicled on this site. This trip produced a much more reasonable, but still excellent 10-5 outcome, leaving plenty of money for me and the wifey to lose on slot machines roulette tables and black jack, and still have enough left over to pay for shows and meals. Oh, well, easy come, easy go.
And don’t think that I’m bragging about my prowess as a bettor here. I have been pretty much uniformly awful betting college football this season thus far, and my winnings in Vegas this week barely got me back to even on the season. I just tend to do well at Vegas sports books, especially at the Flamingo for whatever reason.
Home away from home. The Flamingo Sports Book has been berry berry good to Eyes.
Georgia Tech was one of my high-dollar bets of the day, along with Texas and Oklahoma State, and had me pretty worried about halfway through the first quarter, trailing a decent Duke team by 10 points. But then the Yellowjacket players woke up and the offense began clicking, and 49 straight GT points later I was feeling much better.
The TCU game had me a little confused, just because I had a hard time getting my mind around the Frogs giving 20 to a national Top 20 team. About 10 minutes into the game, all confusion was gone. TCU is really good, in all phases of the game. Let’s just let them take on the loser of the SEC title game in the Fiesta or Sugar bowl, and leave it at that.
Baylor, on the other hand, is not real good in every phase of the game, or any phase of the game, especially since Robert Griffin went down to injury. They aren’t real bad, either, just not all that good. And when ‘not all that good’ goes up against this Texas team, the result is a 40-0 halftime score, which could have gotten a lot worse had the Longhorns not just lost focus in the second half. One of my lost bets was jumping on a Texas -9 halftime line. Oh, well.
I was reminded earlier in the week that November 9 was the 35th anniversary of the Miracle on the Brazos, the 1974 Texas/Baylor contest that resulted in Baylor getting its first SWC title in 50 years. For those too young to remember, Texas was highly favored in the contest, and took a 24-7 lead into halftime. But Baylor made a halftime adjustment to run blitz on most every down, taking out both the QB and the pitchman on the triple option play, and overloading the middle to deal with Earl Campbell. This forced Texas to try to move the ball through the air, and the resulting offensive mistakes allowed Baylor back into what ended up a stunning, 34-24 win.
That was 35 years ago, a lifetime. The first half of this year’s game must have felt like a lifetime for Art Briles. Good.
Let’s go to the Good, Bad and Ugly:
Ugly: FSN coverage of the game. It’s bad enough we had to listen to Dave Lapham piped into the sportsbook, forcing me to explain to everyone around me just who the guy is and how in the world he could possibly have that job. Even worse was the fact that the moron who was directing the broadcast constantly missed play after play after play, showing replays while Texas was in its hurry up offense. It’s as if these dipshits have never televised a two minute drill. At this point, the Big 12 TV deal with FSN is the single biggest irritant about college football for me. I hate these guys, literally hate them.
The FSN Control Room.
Ugly: The jackass Florida fan who occupied the seat next to me during the late afternoon games. Any of you folks who think Texas fans are spoiled an unreasonable need to spend an hour or so sitting beside this assclown. This guy roots for a team whose coach has won 2 national championships, whose QB has won the Heisman, and is in annual contention for the SEC title, and he did not have a single good word to say about the Gators. To listen to this guy talk, Urban Meyer is an abject idiot, and Tim Tebow should be benched for not pitching the ball to the tailback on the option. What a turd.
Jackass Gator fan.
Bad: The USC fan who occupied the seat next to me during the morning games. He was actually a nice enough guy, but I let him talk me out of taking Stanford to cover, and into taking the freaking over on the BC/Virginia game. Ouch. Unlike the Florida fan, this guy had an unrealistically optimistic view of his team. Cost him some bucks. Me, too.
Good: Painful, brutal first half beat down of Art Briles and his team. The Baylor chop blocks were a little fewer and further between than last year, but it was still good to see Mack Brown and his staff send a message that that behavior will have consequences. I just wish the beating had gone on for another two quarters.
40-0 at halftime. Chop block that, coach.
Bad: Ka. This is the Cirque du Soleil show at the MGM Grand. The lovely wifey and I have always enjoyed the Cirque shows we’ve seen, and try to catch one each time we’re out in Vegas. This was the next-to-last one on our list, so we decided to take it in. Ugh. What a waste of money. Unless you’re a big fan of kung fu movies with paint-by-numbers plots, avoid this shit like the plague. We were traveling with three other people, and all of us had a hard time staying awake during this tedious nonsense show. The highlight – and I kid you not here – was a baton twirling act by one of the lead characters, and it was indeed spectacular. But I’d have enjoyed it more with the Longhorn Band playing in the background, from my seats at DKR Texas Memorial Stadium.
The gal at the top could do a pretty passable halftime show.
Good: Texas first half defense. Baylor’s first drive netted 62 total yards. With about 4 minutes left in the first half, Baylor’s total yardage measured 25. The defense showed no mercy until the backups got on the field in the fourth quarter. This is a recurring theme with this incredible defense.
Good: Cody Johnson. Best game of the year from any Texas tailback. He looked like Earl on a few carries. It was nice to see the Texas running game actually function with some semblance of efficiency in the first quarter for once. Which leads to…
Good: Offensive intensity in the first half. For only about the fourth time all year, the Texas offense showed up actually ready to play from the opening drive. Of course, they let down completely in the 2nd half, but everything had been long decided by then.
Ugly: Texas A&M. I started to take the Aggies to cover in this game, thinking that even their pitiful defense could contend with OU’s beaten up offense. But then I thought that, with my luck, A&M would show up in the same mode the displayed at Kansas State. Bingo. Disaster avoided.
Good: Notre Dame gets beat by Pitt. Debate now rages on whether Charlie Weis has displaced Dave Wannstedt as the worst head coach in major college football. To me, it’s a tossup, with Mike Sherman placing a close third.
Bad: Malcolm Williams not on the field for half the game. This is just nuts. Every play he is not on the field is a play on which he is not developing into the monster he can be. It’s just mind-numbing.
Good: Eddie Jones’s read, tip, pick, and return for TD. Just an outstanding, outstanding defensive football play.
Good: Emmanuel Acho continues to raise the Acho brothers’ turnover creation totals with a pick of his own.
Bad: Fozzy Whittaker gets two carries – a 15 yard gain, a 3 yard loss – and never sees the field again. Yes, Cody and Tre’ were having good days, but it is baffling what Fozzy, the starter just 2 weeks ago, has done to merit a virtual benching. The personnel decisions at RB and WR continue to defy any logic at all.
Offensive Player of the Game: Cody Johnson. Excellent first start for the big guy.
Defensive Player of the Game: Yet another week in which the defense was so damn good that it is hard to single anyone out. The candidates are Eddie Jones, Emmanuel Acho, Chykie Brown (led the team in tackles, 2 tfls) and Lamarr Houston. I’m going with Houston, who just dominated the middle all day and had 3 tfls, including 2 sacks.
Special Teams Player of the Game: Jordan Shipley, who had an excellent day returning punts.
Honestly, it gets harder and harder to find anything related to our games to place in the “Bad” and “Ugly” categories. This is especially true of the defense, which remains the finest D in the country, regardless of what that nitwit Florida fan had to say on Saturday.
There remain criticisms to be made related to the offense and special teams, but at this point they largely amount to bitching about personnel decisions and picking at nits.
The Longhorns are good. Really, really damn good. It would take a massive failure by the coaching staff to prepare the entire team to play in order to lose either of the last two regular season games. We know without any doubt Will Muschamp is not going to let that happen on his side of the ball. It’s been 7 weeks now since the Longhorn D surrendered more than 14 points in a game, and about half of the points they have allowed have come in mop-up time. This defense just does not allow points before the outcome has been decided. So unless our offense gets skunked by either of two of the worst defenses in the Big 12 – Kansas and A&M – a 12-0 regular season is virtually assured.
Nebraska is shaping up to be a more difficult Big 12 Championship Game opponent than we might have expected a few weeks back, given the quality of the Cornhusker defense. But they do nothing on offense that our defense will not stuff down their throats. So again, if the offense can score 14 or more, a win there is a virtual certainty as well.
In fact, assuming either Alabama or Florida are the ultimate opponent in the National Championship Game, I’m thinking the Texas offense can win by scoring 14+ in that game as well.
That’s an entirely different equation than the one our 2005 team took into the Rose Bowl. We knew going in to that game that we’d need 35+ to have a shot, even with a defense sporting about 8 starters destined to play in the NFL.
It’s been a long, long time since we had a defense at Texas that remotely approached the bad-assedness of this bunch.
Put that in the Good category.
Thanks, coach.
Hook ‘em!!!
Share This
76 Responses
Leave a Reply
Follow Us
- On Twitter »
- Subscribe via Email »
- Subscribe via RSS »
Related Articles
-
38
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly - Texas 45, Baylor 21
By EyesOfTX on November 9th, 2008 -
30
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly - Texas 59, ULM 20
By EyesOfTX on September 6th, 2009 -
34
Defensive Thoughts: Texas Longhorns @ Baylor Bears
By HenryJames on November 16th, 2009 -
77
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly - Texas 41, Missouri 7
By EyesOfTX on October 25th, 2009 -
46
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly - Texas 38, Colorado 14
By EyesOfTX on October 11th, 2009
Woody Bombay said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Didn’t see Cher this time around? I was looking forward to your rundown of her costume changes.
You’re 100 percent right about this team’s defense. I’ve been envious of various other teams’ Ds for so long now that it’s downright weird seeing one wearing burnt orange. Great, but still a little weird.
houstonearler said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Bad - Kirkendoll’s blocking on run plays. He does not even try. On one play McCoy gets 10+ untouched if Kirkendoll just exerts a 50% effort at blocking his man.
Good - Kenny Vaccarro and Aaron Smith on special teams. Also, Kenny laid out a Baylor offensive player while playing DB.
Good - Marcus Davis
Good - our first team D not missing a beat when Muckelroy takes a week off to get healthy
Good - Hunter Lawrence. Our best kicker this decade.
Bad - our punting game. The Tucker halfass Rugby punt results in a quick line drive punt to the return man that is begging to get taken back all the way. The advantage of a Rugby punt is the 2-3 seconds it takes to kick it after the snap that lets the coverage team get downfield. We need to either let Tucker do the Rugby punt like it was done last year (Tucker sprinting out) or let Gold boom it away.
Good - Tre Newton getting more snaps after the concussion layoff. And Newton looking good.
Okay - our running game on the season. Not terrible. Our backs our averaging 5.0 per carry. I will take that.
Great - our defense. Taking out scores due to opponents’ defense or special teams or garbage points against backups in blowouts, we are giving up 6.8 per game. Our defense and special teams are scoring 7.2 per game (and this does not count short fields our offense gets from turnovers). That is sick.
I agree with you, Malcolm Williams should never leave the field. Even when he is not the receiver, he does all the other things that help the team.
Greg said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Malcom should have squeezed that pass in the endzone… that’s why he was ignored the rest of the game, although I think he was part of Shipley’s second TD ( he faked like he was going to receive the pass that Ship caught.)
nordberg said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
“Bad: Fozzy Whittaker gets two carries – a 15 yard gain, a 3 yard loss – and never sees the field again. Yes, Cody and Tre’ were having good days, but it is baffling what Fozzy, the starter just 2 weeks ago, has done to merit a virtual benching.”
11 carries for 21 yards the previous two games.
ghostofagroundgame said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
“The personnel decisions at RB and WR continue to defy any logic at all.”
Seriously. Strange decisions. I have no idea what the logic of continuing to play Kirkendoll and/or Chiles over Malc and Goodwin could possibly be. I also wouldn’t mind a couple of two-back sets that aren’t I-formation and might allow CJ and Tre, or Tre and Fozzy, or CJ and Fozzy to be on the field at the same time. We could run some mean traps.
hornbymarriage said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Great write up. Congrats on the winnings. I remain similarly befuddled by the personnel decisions. On the other hand, after every game it gets harder to suppress my man-crush on Muschamp and the D. My friends and neighbors are beginning to worry about my proclivities…not that there is anything wrong with that!
EyesOfTX said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
“11 carries for 21 yards the previous two games.”
The 11 carries part is, IMO, the problem here. If you’re only getting your starting RB 5 totes a game, it’s hard for them to be effective. I’d love to see Fozzy get 15 carries as Cody did Saturday. He did just fine carrying the ball about that many times in the biggest game of the season (OU).
Hook ‘em!!!
Kenneth Ivory said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Excellent write up. Gotta disagree on a small point and say Vaccarro should be special teams player of the game after great kickoff coverage and the punt block.
EyesOfTX said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Yeah, I was torn between Shipley and Vacarro. Good call.
Hook ‘em!!!
Capt. Obvious said:
November 16th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
“The personnel decisions at RB and WR continue to defy any logic at all.”
There’s one personel decision I can get on board with, Cody Johnson.
Our blocking mishaps and schematic difficulties become less apparent with a runner that has a 50/50 shot of blowing up the first tackle.
Also, Tre looked great out there. I don’t know if we have anyone that reads the cut back lanes better than he does.
Confused and Dazed said:
November 16th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
If you want to understand the correlation between the jackassery of the Big 12 contract with FSN and why we are in it, just go back, if you can stand the pain, and listen to the interview with Dan BeebeeBrain and the two assclowns in the booth about a playoff.
The fool actually said that he’d rather go back to the days before the BCS than have a playoff, and that it is better for a team to win a bowl game that means nothing than to lose a playoff game and be scarred for life, or some such shit.
Does anyone really wonder why the SEC gets so much more positive pub and recognition than the Big 12 with a Renaissance(sp?) Man like this at the helm.
MidTexHorn said:
November 16th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Can’t quibble with your choice of Houston for Defensive Player of the Game, but it’s a close call between him and Aaron Williams and you didn’t even mention him. AJ was spectacular.
EyesOfTX said:
November 16th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Dammit. AJ was greatness, and had a big impact on the game. I knew I was leaving someone out. Sorry about that.
Hook ‘em!!!
bob said:
November 16th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
The offense may not even have to score 14+ every game for us to win out. They just have to not turn to ball over.
I’d be suprised in the defense doesn’t score 14 a game on their own for our next 3 games.
kafka said:
November 16th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
I’m a big Cody fan (glad that he is starting and doing well) but Iwould like to see how he runs at 230 to 235 pounds.
Why not play Buckner as the 3rd WR (after Malcolm and Ship)? He has some of the best hands of anybody in the world and he is a huge WR (6′4″, 220 lbs). His blocking has not been great but if he can just use his size to block smaller WRs effectively, he would be a great guy to block for Ship on WR screens and would be a dynamite short yardage receiver plus great at deep 50-50 passes.
I am close to jumping re: Malcolm not playing much.
TXinDC said:
November 16th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Bob - totally agree. We should go Navy in the B12CG or MNCG to ensure ball control and TOP control, then just let the D do their thing.
Jigglebilly said:
November 16th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
The ugliest: Dave Lapham. Hey asshole do you ever STFU? Why do you insist on doing radio play by play during a TV broadcast? It is insulting to your audience when you go back for every play and point out the things that people clearly just saw with their own eyes.
UT_BKC said:
November 16th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Houstonearler - regarding the Kirk blocking, see the ship screen that gets a 1st down due to his blocking:
http://www.burntorangenation.com/2009/11/16/1159885/anatomy-of-momentum-scoring-after
I know you mentioned run blocking, but he obviously has more impact on screens. I don’t think he’s quite as bad (any more).
thirtyand0 said:
November 16th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
I heard Mack say after the game that Colt is getting more comfortable with his receivers.
My first thought was here it comes again. John Chiles has dropped 2 passes at a stationary position the past 2 weeks. In addition, he cut inside during the hurry up before half wasting valuable time. Watch Colt jump all over him if you haven’t seen this.
Malcom Williams gets benched for far less while running real pass patterns and trying to make tough catches in the end zone.
This kind of play doesn’t matter against the Baylors but without our defense would have gotten us beat against OU. John Chiles is only playing since he changed positions is all I can figure. He pouts when things don’t go well or at least his body language suggests he is.
Fozzy? The only guy on the team that makes the TD run he did against Tech.
This may present a potential struggle against NU since we are back to this again.
nordberg said:
November 16th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Does Chiles ever run, you know, routes? It seems like we ask very little of him, and what we get is a bunch of dropped balls.
BeatenDeadHorse said:
November 16th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
I was in Waco 35 years ago and the only “Miracle” was that the entire officiating crew consisted of Baptist Deacons with an edict from God that Grant get a win over the satan-loving heathens from River City.
Art Vandelay said:
November 16th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Bad - typical 90 minutes to get from Dallas to Waco, another 30 minutes to make it through (1) stop light getting off the highway. I guess the kind folks at Baylor and Waco’s finest didn’t anticipate people actually.. you know…. coming to Floyd Casey stadium.
Good - Crowd was 60% Texas fans (that’s conservative).
Bobby_Batronic said:
November 16th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
“Why not play Buckner as the 3rd WR ”
Because he has the acceleration of Leonard Davis and is easy to stuff at the LOS. Good hands though. He needs to put on some more weight and see what he can do at TE or H back.
HenryJames said:
November 16th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Yes, that’s true. And the coaches decided to give him some Chilesian routes against Baylor which are about the worst possible way to get him the ball.
lawdog13 said:
November 16th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
I too would put Beebe at the top of the “Bad” list. He’s a posterchild for rule of the wannabe’s and an assclown to boot. He says there’s just too much pressure on these poor scholar athletes and we need to make sure that every 6-6 team in America has a reward for its achievement in places like Shreveport and Mobile. Gotta love a country in which there are no winners and losers, don’t you?
Groundhogday said:
November 16th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
I actually like the concept of what Beebe had to say, but I disagree with his reasoning. I’m a firm believer that a playoff would ruin what we all love about college football. Why should Stanford, Oregon, VT, Clemson, GT, LSU, etc. have a shot to win it all? The regular season is what differentiates the sport from all other sports including college hoops which is a 4 week season starting in March. I like the idea of going back to have all bowl games on New Year’s Day and having 4 or 5 bowl games have national title implications. From there the computers or the pollsters can choose the two most deserving teams after these bowl games are played to play for all the marbles a week later. Everyone wins. The bowls win, the players win, all teams are included, and the regular season is protected. There is no reason that a texas team should have to play LSU or Stanford in the first round of 16 team or 8 team playoff after going undefeated this year.
Sugarpants said:
November 16th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
The ‘05 D was pretty good, even if the scheme sucked. Held CO to 3 points in a championship game and held USC well below their average. We knew we had to score 30+ against USC because they were used to scoring 50+ a game.
nordberg said:
November 16th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
“Why should Stanford, Oregon, VT, Clemson, GT, LSU, etc. have a shot to win it all?”
That would have to be a 16+ team playoff, which would kind of suck, although it’s still obviously preferable to what we have now.
Imagine for a second that Alabama is in the SEC, and Florida is in the ACC. Undefeated Texas gets left out of the NC game and you’ll change your anti-playoff tune pretty fucking quick. Ask Auburn about that.
Groundhogday said:
November 16th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Nordberg, they are not in the same conference. The point is in some years teams will feel cheated or left out no matter what system you choose. We felt cheated last year as USC should have felt cheated, but college football has the best regular season in all of sports. It’s not an accident that 8 of the 10 best rivalries in sports exist in CFB. Auburn has nobody to blame but themselves for being left out. Play an out of conference schedule and they play for all the marbles.
As for a playoff, what would it look like? Conferences will never agree to a 4 team playoff and an 8 team playoff would have to include conference champions so that doesn’t work either. So Ohio State is one of the best 8 or potentially a Clemson team is in the top 8? I don’t think so, but who knows. This kind of scenario could lead to massive conference realignment and flight which would put an end to some of the great rivalries in this sport. In many cases you would have to play teams twice in a season which isn’t fair either. Should Bama or Florida have to play LSU again this season? Mathematically, with only a 12 game season and over 120 teams eligible, it’s impossible to know which 8 teams are the best (just like it is today). So what value is a playoff, when you can’t accurately even determine the best 8 (or 16) teams.
If you want to argue that the Bowl Season is terrible, I’m right there with you as I remember how great New Year’s Day was before the invention of the BCS. All games played on one day and many games having National Title Implications just like the regular season every weekend. A plus one system isn’t perfect but it’s the best possible solution for the sport.
WWGDD said:
November 16th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
“I too would put Beebe at the top of the “Bad” list. He’s a posterchild for rule of the wannabe’s and an assclown to boot. He says there’s just too much pressure on these poor scholar athletes and we need to make sure that every 6-6 team in America has a reward for its achievement in places like Shreveport and Mobile. Gotta love a country in which there are no winners and losers, don’t you?”
Beebe obviously voted for Obama…what a coward
WWGDD said:
November 16th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Ghost, remember Shon and Ricky as split backs? Was pretty effective under Davis. I’m with you.
hopefulhorn said:
November 16th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Cody was very good as featured RB. He is remarkably quick and athletic for such a big guy and has a real knack for falling forward after contact for one or two more yards.
Read after the game that the team practiced the same 3-4 running plays during the week against every conceivable look they would see on Saturday. Thought the OL looked much more physical and aggressive in blocking and this may have been why.
Only hesitation in getting on the RTDB bandwagon is it was Baylor. Let’s see if we can keep this going vs. KU, aggy and (probably) NU.
Confused and Dazed said:
November 16th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
I don’t agree at all that a playoff would have to be a 16 team format, and that’s why Beebee is an assclown for suggesting that’s the only way, among other reasons. Everything he said was stupid…period! He is a typical reason why the Big 12 is on the slide and will someday be abandoned by UT, OU and maybe one or two other schools and become extinct.
The plus one is the answer. You take the Top 4 BCS teams and seed them accordingly, designating two of the major bowls as semifinals sites. The two winners play in the championship game two weeks later. You can rotate which two of the major bowls get the semifinals and rotate the championship game the way it is now. The two winners can share some of the revenue with the other BCS conferences so they will STFU when one of their schools isn’t in it.
Will there be howls from the fifth and sixth teams…yes, but that’s a damned sight better than what happened to us last year and to Auburn a few years back. Besides, if you are fifth or sixth, you ain’t got all that much to howl about.
Confused and Dazed said:
November 16th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
Don’t know what happened to my handle there. I’m in a Fantasy League dogfight right now, and having to try to type here and listen to the TV in the next room so I must have hit a bad key. I’m done and up by four points while my opponent has the Ravens kicker, who has obligingly missed a chip shot FG and a PAT.
Luckily for me she picked him up on waivers based on the point projections because her regular guy is on bye without reading that he has been awful this season. An example of why I never pay any attention to the projections.
Groundhogday said:
November 16th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Teams and Seed,
I like the plus one scenario but I would structure it another way to give all teams a shot at the title and bring back tradition. In your scenario, Cincy gets left out assuming they win out. Go back to conference tie ins and you have some great bowl games.
Sugar - Florida/Bama winner vs. TCU
Orange- Cincy vs. GT
Fiesta - Texas vs. Fl Bama loser
Rose Ohio State vs. Oregon
That is one hell of a New Years Day that could produce any number of scenarios for a plus one.
bigdukesix said:
November 16th, 2009 at 9:40 pm
I’m very confident Texas would beat TCU, but I agree completely with you about Ga. Tech. That offense tough to deal with. I could definitely envision Texas losing that game. Wouldn’t happen all of the time, or even most of the time, but enough to make me uncomfortable.
ut_bkc said:
November 16th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
So what if Cincy, Florida/Bama winner, and UT all won on that new years day? You can’t fault Cincy for playing GT in that case.
UT fans who fault Cincy ‘for not playing anyone’ are fucking fools. Our con con AND conference schedule is not any better. Our best two wins are against a 4 loss team and another team that lost to fucking UH. If we had gone 10-3ish last year and not started the year ranked 2/3, I’m not sure we’d be ahead of Cincy/TCU, and I pretty sure we’d been behind Iowa until they lost.
bigdukesix said:
November 16th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
So what value is a playoff, when you can’t accurately even determine the best 8 (or 16) teams.
It’s simple. Entertainment value. It would be a tremendous spectacle that would make bowl season look like women’s billiards in comparison.
nimrodxi said:
November 16th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Bad - Watching the Sooners put 65 on the Aggies and immediately getting frustrated since I know we won’t come close to doing the same.
Ugly - OSU QB/Tech DB collision near the end of their game. Both players put their heads down right before contact. Why do players keep doing this? That play could have really ended badly for both players. However, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen two players hit each other head on at full speed in the open field like that.
Groundhogday said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
UT,
It would be very close between the three and Texas might pay for not playing anyone of note outside the conference but if Neb wins out that would make us look better and I believe our resume would look better than Cincy. However, Cincy would have a shot if things broke right on NYD. Regardless, I think TX is the best team in the country and a lot of other people do as well, but I commend Cincy for the schedule they have played. They still have to play Pitt.
Big Duke,
Yes, it would be a tremendous spectacle that would come at the expense of the regular season and the sport in general.
There are also numerous problems that don’t get talked about….traveling for fans for all of these games, season ticket sales, students not in school, finals for players, what happens to bowls. Basically, A playoff throws a number of logistical items into question and creates an unlimited number of potential scenarios that would change CFB for the worse.
ut_bkc said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Ground - I too think we are better. But Cincy is unfairly dismissed before any real consideration.
If we played in an 8 team conference and had 5 non con games to schedule, who really thinks that our 5th game wouldn’t be against North Texas instead of another BCS team? If OU or UF had to schedule a 5th game, who really thinks it wouldn’t be against a 2nd D2 team?
kafka said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
Bobby_Batronic:
Buckner, like a lot of tall guys, is faster than he looks. I don’t remember him getting jammed at the LOS this season (he is a lot bigger and stronger this year than last year). It is very unlikely that he will ever be a successful tight end because of his blocking. He should be able to block DBs though because it is much less demanding than the type of blocking that real TEs do. When you want to move the chains, run a quick slant, contest a 50-50 pass, block on a WR screen, or go over the middle, it is great to have a big WR. Big WRs are especially useful in the red zone.
Buckner has great hands, way better than good hands.
If UT plays Alabama or Florida in a bowl game, there will be little time for WRs to run pretty routes (because of the pass rush). Most of the passes will have to be quick and it will help if the WRs are big enough to shield the ball and can take a big hit.
.Because he has the acceleration of Leonard Davis and is easy to stuff at the LOS. Good hands though. He needs to put on some more weight and see what he can do at TE or H back.
kafka said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
The last paragraph about L. Davis, etc. was accidentally pasted in. I should have removed it. I got one of those little netbooks and my typos are way up.
ut_bkc said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Damn the no edit…
Couple other thigns Ground: I don’t think Logistics is a good excuse. There are many years that teams for the conference title game aren’t known until the week before the game (last year for instance: OU or UT), and the fans get to those with no problem.
Also, the ‘cheapening’ the season is a horrible argument. Would our games against Wyoming or UF’s versus the School of the Blind be any less meaninful? If it is like a playoff now, how the hell did LSU win it 2 years ago, and why weren’t we eliminated from all discussion last year as soon as we lost to TTech? (Sorry, I’m sure you’ve heard all of these arguments before, just like I’ve heard the student athelete argument a million times — D2 and D3 make it work).
If there is an honest play off system (meaning that Boise, TCU, ect have an equal chance of getting in), then 12-13 games does not leave much room for error to make the top 8. If there was a play off system, then maybe the season could be shortend back to 10 or 11 games to accomdate the “student schedules.” Sadly, the only thing these 2 extra games has done has given us more games against D2 teams. I’d gladly give those up to see the top 16 play every year.
Groundhogday said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
I hear you, UT. They should be commended, but they do play in a historically weaker conference even though I think the top 3 teams are pretty good and it is a better conf than it’s been. Cincy had no idea Illinois would be this bad when they scheduled them. Imagine if that team was similar to the Rose Bowl team from a couple of years ago. I will never accuse OU of light schedules; they always play teams of note outside of the Big 12. UT’s philosophy is a bit different, however.
kafka said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
hopefulhorn:
“Read after the game that the team practiced the same 3-4 running plays during the week against every conceivable look they would see on Saturday. Thought the OL looked much more physical and aggressive in blocking and this may have been why.”
When I have studied the video, so often the problem with OL blocking is that some defender will go completely unblocked (presumably because of confusion about blocking assignments). By practising fewer plays versus a more extensive set of possible defensive looks,, the OL understood their assignments better. The OL probably looked better because they made fewer mental mistakes.
Groundhogday said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
UT,
Those CC games are in the region of those conferences and a lot of those fans drive. Regarding the playoff system, are you really going to ask fans to potentially travel all over the country for a month to follow their teams?
LSU won the national championship because of all the craziness that happened at the end of the year. WVA lost at home to a 28 point underdog pitt team in the last game of the year. With a playoff, that game is meaningless and all teams play for the title. Those last two weeks or three weeks were unbelievable. Don’t forget Missouri knocked of KU in a battle of the unbeatens and were then knocked off by OU. Call me crazy but that season was unbelievably exciting and would have been more so had the bowls stuck to tradition.
We were not eliminated last year because games still had to be played and our schedule was ridiculous. Don’t forget that Baylor almost beat Tech which would have sent us to the Big 12 CC game. A plus one last year with the conference tie in scenario along with at large bids would have been extremely exciting.
I have already given the reasons why the conferences wouldn’t go for a 4 team playoff, why an 8 team playoff wouldn’t necessarily get the best 8 along with possible rematches, and why a 16 team playoff would hurt the sport. If we go back to the conference tie ins with at large bids and a plus one, everyone would have a shot. I have no sympathy for Boise with that schedule. Yes, they beat Oregon, but if it takes traveling to get people to schedule you then you must do so. Fresno does it and TCU does it.
Groundhogday said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:57 pm
Damn, I wish I had the edit button but Mizzou lost to OU in the reg season as well. However, if they beat OU in the CC game that year they play tOSU for all the marbles.
dick said:
November 16th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
Georgia Tech would not be giving this Texas defense coached by Muschamp any trouble especially after a month to prepare for that triple option offense. See LSU last year in bowl game and LSU did not have Muschamp. We should destroy GT and as usual would only be limited by the GDGD up in the booth.
kafka said:
November 16th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
There is a lot of corruption in college football. Coaches, players, players’ families, boosters, and media have been corrupted. A playoff system is less corrupt than the current system (eg: coaches poll voting last season). A playoff system is the most likely way to determine the actual best team. It is also the fairest way because it gives the players the opportunity to win or lose the championship on the field.
I don’t care if a playoff sytem impacts the bowls or the interest in the regular season because determining the champion on the field is much more important.
ut_bkc said:
November 16th, 2009 at 11:32 pm
I have no problem with asking fans to travel around. The manage to do it in D2 and D3. The NFL. College basketball. No problem at all.
Our anger for last year is soley focused on OU and the Big 12 tie breaker system. I don’t have a problem with that. However, it keeps us from focusing on the bigger problem.
First, why is it so exciting relying on BAYLOR to punch our ticket to the MNC game? That’s what you are arguing for, the excitement of those games down the stretch. I HATED having to root for Baylor to beat TTech last year to ‘prove’ that my Horns deserved to play in the NC.
Imagine the scenario where we beat OU in the Polls and win the big 12, but alos imagine that Virginia and/or ND are worth a damn that year (lets say one is in the top 12 and makes a BCS). USC’s strength of schedule shoots way up, and they jump us top lay UF in the title game. Why is it exciting pulling for USC’s opponents to tank so that they have a worse SOS? The horrible feeling you would feel at the end of the season is probably what USC fans felt last year knowing that even though they had the balls to play 2 BCS non cons (for a total of 11) and lost to a pretty good Oregon St, they were not getting into the title game. Even though the two teams that did play in the NC game had the same record and filled their schedules’ with non BCS and D2 opponents.
What would have bene MUCH more exciting is if Utah, USC, Bama, UF, UT, OU, TTech, and Penn St had played.
We would have started with UF and played the winner of OU/Ttech (no I don’t mind the rematch just like I don’t mind rematches in conf title games). Bama would have gotten PSU and played the winner of USC/Utah. That would have been incredible.
Groundhogday said:
November 17th, 2009 at 12:05 am
Yes, USC was robbed last year just like Texas was. The upsets that Baylor almost had and that Pitt had in 2007 makes a miserable season worth it for those teams, but that’s besides the point.
College basketball is not a good example as people don’t travel during the regular season to watch their team play. They have to take 3 trips max during the tourney. Also, the college basketball season is an absolute yawner. Does anyone care until March?
Your second to last paragraph is one of many reasons why an 8 team playoff will never happen. You have 2 teams from the SEC and 3 from the Big 12 but you left out teams from 2 power conferences which are also the perceived weak sisters. Why would they be financially incentivised to agree to this system? You must represent all the power conferences for this thing to pass, but then you run the risk of not fielding the best 8 teams if you go that route and you’re right back to where you started with bitching and whining from different fanbases. You also rendered the SEC CG meaningless under your scenario. A plus one system protects the integrity of the regular season, protects the bowls, theoretically gives more teams the opportunity to play for the NC, etc, etc.
EyesOfTX said:
November 17th, 2009 at 3:43 am
Bebe is a moron who only wants to keep his pockets lined by the bowl promoters. Anyone who agreed with anything he had to say is a dupe.
There is not a single, solitary valid argument in favor of keeping this abortion of a BCS system over a playoff for major college football. Not one. I’m sad a post I put up got diverted off into such an absurd circle jerk.
Hook ‘em!!!
ChicagoHorn said:
November 17th, 2009 at 4:57 am
Being forced to suffer through The John Chiles Experience has been the most painful aspect of recent games, particularly with so many infinitely better options available. The sight of him on the field tends to provoke screaming fits. However, if that’s the worst of it, then things must be going very well. One can’t help but dream of how awesome the Horns could be with a few minor tweaks though…
Vasherized said:
November 17th, 2009 at 6:54 am
Groundhog,
The college basketball regular season is anything but a yawner. It’s over before you know it. Texas squares off against 7 top ten teams this year so you might want to tune in before March.
Big Monday games in February are like a crack hit.
8 month MLB schedules on the other hand …
nordberg said:
November 17th, 2009 at 7:15 am
No shit Vasherized. I’d go apeshit without college basketball in January and February.
houstonearler said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:07 am
There would be a hell of a lot more meaningful games if there were a ton of teams fighting for the top 8. You better not lose more than one game. And even then there would be a ton of pressure to stay undefeated. Take for instance this year. If we lost a game late we would still be top 8. But we would draw Alabama or FL instead of a team like Boise State in the first round.
houstonearler said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:10 am
“UT fans who fault Cincy ‘for not playing anyone’ are fucking fools.”
How about UT fans who fault Cincy for giving up 45 to fucking U Conn in a home game they won by 2 points? U Conn is 1-4 in the Big East.
vandy said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:12 am
Has no one screen capped the baylor band girl girl who weighed in slightly under a duece and a half getting clocked in the face by a colt throw away? my tivo deleted the game or i’d do it. it was sometime in the first q. i’ve been looking for it for 3 days, waking up laughing at the memory and heartbroken the game was deleted by an ass.
Groundhogday said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:18 am
Eyes,
I respectfully disagree although I’m in the minority and like most others on this board I would like to think I know a thing or two about the sport. I do agree, however, that the BCS system is a joke and has rendered NYD meaningless and quite boring. There is no easy or perfect solution for the sport when you weigh all factors as I’ve said numerous times on this blog. Do you also think Kirk Herbstreit is a dupe? I would like to think the guy knows a thing or two about the sport as an announcer and former player. Look up his opinion on the matter.
I’ve always wondered why people who detest such an awful system follow the sport so passionately. Seems a bit odd to me. I don’t follow any sport on a regular basis the way I follow CFB because the individual games are meaningless in the big picture. Yes, watching the horns play nationally ranked teams is fun, but do you watch other teams play during the regular season? Is there any doubt the horns are going to be one of the top 3 seeds in their region come March?
Art Vandelay said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:27 am
“Bebe is a moron who only wants to keep his pockets lined by the bowl promoters. Anyone who agreed with anything he had to say is a dupe.
There is not a single, solitary valid argument in favor of keeping this abortion of a BCS system over a playoff for major college football. Not one. I’m sad a post I put up got diverted off into such an absurd circle jerk.”
I couldn’t agree more Eyes. Thanks for doing this every week.
nordberg said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:28 am
“I’ve always wondered why people who detest such an awful system follow the sport so passionately. Seems a bit odd to me.”
Nothing odd about it at all. It’s a fantastic sport that has a horrific way of choosing its “national champion”.
ghostofagroundgame said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:53 am
Agreed with Nordberg, Eyes, and Art -
College football is the best thing going, warts and all. There is no reason we couldn’t do away with bullshit conference championships, add one additonal intermediate game, and go to an 8 team play-off. The champion would play one more game than a national champion from the Big 12 or SEC plays now, which could be made up by one less early season directional school. The only people arguing against it are the assholes at Poulan Weedeater who sponsor the Independence Bowl, or the Napa Car Parts Motor City Shit Bowl, or the Gator Bait Baton Rouge Bowl which pits the MAC runner-up against the 3rd best Moutain West team.
lurkerinthedark said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:58 am
I don’t want to change the subject, but…
“Not Florida, not Alabama. Bring those no-offense dogs on – Muschamp’s boys will shut those teams down just as they’ve shut everyone else down this year. We might win 7 to 6, but we win.”
I totally agree. I stopped worrying about whether Texas could beat these guys weeks ago. I’m just afraid we wouldn’t beat them as bad as we COULD because Mack is such a nice guy.
(I suspect Muschamp has a little bit of a nasty streak, though.)
Sugarpants said:
November 17th, 2009 at 9:01 am
Jeez, settle down, Beavis. I think there are some valid arguments for keeping the BCS system. Anyone who says “there is not a single valid argument…” is making the sweet sweet love to hyperbole and coming up with truth herpes.
How about this: in a playoff system, the best team rarely wins. In a weighted system comprising human judgement and actuarial prediction, the best team is much more likely to win. Even if you’re a 3:1 favorite to win a semi-final and a 2:1 favorite in the final, you’re only going to win that 4-team playoff 50% of the time despite being a heavy favorite in both games. Expand that to an 8 team playoff and you’re below 50% for the best team.
We see lesser quality teams win almost every year in college basketball. Does anyone want to argue that Duke was better than UNLV in 1991? Please, be my guest. I would like to hear this. Villanova in 85? Clearly “the best team.”
The old voter-only based system was a joke because we know humans are stupid in very particular ways (see Cal 2004), and sometimes biased (Art Briles). Computer-only systems are also weak, because they have a hard time realizing that losing at the last second in an away game after playing 4 top 15 teams in a row is excusable.
I would have loved to play Florida last year, not because I think we were the best team, but because if we had played them we would have had a chance to win, even if they were the better team. We were close.
Grange95 said:
November 17th, 2009 at 9:15 am
As a Husker fan, I have to disagree with your prediction for the Big XII title game. Assuming the Huskers beat the Mildcats (and after watching that ISU debacle in person from 50 yd. line seats with an old college bud who is a CyClown fan, I’m not assuming anything), I think Texas will need to score at least 17 points to win. The Husker offense is humming along now that Tom Osborne has been “advising” OC Watson on power running plays, so I think we can put the O down for at least one TD (probably on some flukey broken play, but we’ll take what we can get). The Husker D will probably score another TD, most likely off a boneheaded call for a pass to the flats, or off a fumble on a sack. Hmmm, yeah, that’s a pretty full day of scoring for the Huskers.
In all seriousness, Texas is playing much better than any team in the country, except maybe TCU. Frankly, TCU may have faced better competition in conference this year than did Texas (can we all agree to ditch Baylor, Kansas St., Colorado, and Iowa St., and pick up TCU, BYU, Utah, and Boise St. so the Big XII can try to compete with the SEC?). I think Texas wins in a rout over Florida or Alabama (who have both struggled against even mediocre opposition all season). The best game would easily be Texas-TCU, but the SEC/BCS/TV powers that be will never stand for that happening.
ghostofagroundgame said:
November 17th, 2009 at 9:28 am
“How about this: in a playoff system, the best team rarely wins. ”
This only supports your argument if: (1) you believe that there is a lower probability of the worse team winning one single game (as in the current BCS game) than there is of a worse team winning 3 games in a row (as in a proposed playoff); and (2) you are fundamentally retarded.
Your turn.
kafka said:
November 17th, 2009 at 9:56 am
There is much more willingness to play a tough OOC schedule in basketball than football at UT. This is because losing a single game in B ball does not cost you a national championship like it probably does in football. Barnes wants a tough OOC schedule to prepare his team for the rigors of the Big 12 and March Madness so we get treated to several blockbuster OOC games every season.
I prefer a playoff system because the winner should be decided on the field (thus also reducing the risk of corruption in deciding the winner). Beyond that argument, playoffs will generate much more money, reduce the influence of the bowl operators, and facilitate a more interesting OOC and post season schedule.
BTW, HerbStreet is a complete and total Ohio State and Big 10 homer who relentlessly uses his media voice to push anything that will help tOSU and/or the Big 10. The Big 10 commissioner is probably the most important supporter of the current BCS system.
Bobby_Batronic said:
November 17th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Kafka:
Buck hasn’t been jammed much at the line of scrimmage because he’s been lined up at Flex TE almost exclusively this year, and by alignment hasn’t had anyone really trying to chuck him at the snap. It’s actually a great thing as it allows him a free release and puts him in advantageous match ups.
His speed is not really the question. He’s not fast by any stretch of the imagination, but he’s plenty fast for college ball. His acceleration does remind one of L. Davis after a three hour rampage at the Wortham catfish buffet. When thrown some of the quick sprint out passes from the Flex TE, Buck is nearly always tackled for a 2-4 yard gain. Sufficient for a pseudo running game, but not really the production we’re looking for on that play I think. His reception of the step back “Chilesian” passes further the point. It’s good for 4-6 yards, but he’s not going to take it for 10-20 against anything more physical than an ‘06 Beasley clone.
His run blocking is atrocious. Kirkendallish in fact. However, our run deficient OC has decided that our OL needs an EBS to properly run block his sorry schemes. Given that as the case, and the fact that Buck would probably like to spend more time on the field, he needs to bulk up and see if he can be a TE. He’ll find that the NFL is not particularly fond of the Flex TE specialist, and I’d sure like to see someone run up the seem from the TE position or gain more than 10 yards from the reception without EBS’ patented volleyball set. A competent OC might even help Buck with his blocking by alignment from the H back position.
I’m not going to quibble with you over good/great hands.
Agree with you about the red zone, but we don’t have enough data points with him in that situation to really suggest he’d be successful from the WR position other than he’s big with good hands. He’s been great thus far from the Flex TE though.
kafka said:
November 17th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Bobby:
So you are arguing that Buckner cannot defeat a jam from a DB that he outweighs by up to 40 pounds but that next year he will be up to the much, much more challenging blocking that a real TE does? Based on my experience as an actual TE (and common sense) that argument seems ridiculous to me. If he can’t defeat a jam from a CB now, how does he transform himself in one off season into a guy that blocks a DE by himself (something that Greg Smith has done many, many times by himself this season?
I’m pretty sure DCs don’t try to jam Buckner with a much smaller CB because they realize it would be futile and would give Buckner the opportunity to swim right by the jammer.
I also consider the alignment argument equally absurd. Having actually jammed WRs, I can tell you that the closer the end is to the OT, the easier it is to channel his movement.
Let’s not pretend that Buckner has not been a productive WR this year. Despite having reduced playing time since the OU game, he is still the second leading receiver on the team in terms of number of catches, yards, and TDs. The idea that UT does not play Buckner if a real TE is in the game makes no sense.
I consider the flex TE a WR that is supposed to be able to block a LB from the side.
Sounds like you don’t understand the positive impact that Greg Smith has had on the OL. You don’t seem to know that much about receiving or blocking yet you feel that it is OK to be dismissive about Greg Smith and call him EBS. Here’s a mental experiment: imagine that you and Greg Smith are together with no witnesses, do you still call him EBS? I don’t understand insulting a good longhorn kid, especially anonymously. It just seems like a chicken shit act to me.
As far as volley ball sets go, yeah, a ball went through Greg’s hands vs Baylor. That pass was really zipped at close range. Most of the time Greg has been a sure handed pass catcher this season.
java said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Eyes, the twirling act at Cirque, unless something has changed in the last 6 months, is one of two world champions. They are both very good. Three nights a week a former WC from Texas performs. She actually took lessons from my instructor. The other evenings a girl from Japan performs. She studied in Japan and had additional coaching from my former coach, who is now retired and, btw, does not do the choreography.
I love our defense. It makes the game so much fun to watch them play. Twice this week they have played ‘highlights’ on Fox, but they have only shown scoring plays… no defense. It is stunning to think that is all most people want to see.
Did they air our basketball game in Vegas?
Bobby_Batronic said:
November 17th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Kafka:
I’m not arguing that he’ll be competent at blocking a DE by himself next year. It might take him the rest of his days on the 40 acres to get it down. Jermichael Finely didn’t show up as some blocking monster either.
To the best of my recollection, opposing DC’s haven’t been lining up DB’s over him because he’s been lined up as our TE. Maybe you had a lot of NB’s lined up over you at TE, but I’m pretty sure it’s a LB who’ll take the TE on most snaps. If he’s such a threat to swim move an opposing DB then we need to put him on the outside and either punish them for the cushion, or actually swim move them and get down field. You figure out why he’s not out there.
You’ll find that I never argued that Buck was not a productive receiver. What I argued is that he is not suited to the quick hitting outs and now passes due to his acceleration. He’s outstanding up the seam, on crosses, or settling down in a zone. You know, like a TE often does.
You can unwad your panties with regard to EBS. He’s referred to as that on this site and others extensively. Good God man. There are plenty of “good longhorn kids” who are less than stellar on the field. it’s ok to say that. It’s said all the time on this blog, on this particular thread in fact, and yet I don’t see you stepping on your crank running to their defense.
I believe Smith’s volleyball set monicker is well established and warranted. You’ll find that most of Longhorn fandom would agree with this assessment.
I didn’t start these postings to get in a pissing match. Just gave my point of view. See if you can do with same without showing your backside. the entire time.
Sugarpants said:
November 17th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
“This only supports your argument if: (1) you believe that there is a lower probability of the worse team winning one single game (as in the current BCS game) than there is of a worse team winning 3 games in a row (as in a proposed playoff); and (2) you are fundamentally retarded.
Your turn.”
Well, #1 is a fundamental law of conditional probability… so yeah.
#2 I must be to retarded to understand.
Why do BCS bashers constantly resort to name calling when people point out that their arbitrary system for defining a champion has drawbacks as well?
Would I prefer a workable playoff system? Maybe. I haven’t seen a good plan. I sure as hell enjoy the bowl games. I would hate to lose the history and tradition behind that and replace it with a McPlayoff. But what do I count?. I am retarded.
Your turn, I guess.
EyesOfTX said:
November 18th, 2009 at 6:36 am
Java - very interesting about the twirler. I was not joking when I said she was spectacular, and the highlight of the show.
Our basketball game did air in the sportsbook at Flamingo, and I imagine everywhere else.
kafka said:
November 19th, 2009 at 6:14 am
“You figure out why he’s not out there”.
There is not a logical explanation for Buckner not being out there most of the snaps. Malcolm not playing more is an even bigger mystery.
“What I argued is that he is not suited to the quick hitting outs and now passes due to his acceleration. He’s outstanding up the seam, on crosses, or settling down in a zone. You know, like a TE often does.”
Buckner is the best receiver on the team for going over the middle because he is big enough to take the hit without fumblig or getting injured, is a huge target, is big enough to shield the ball from the defender and has great targets. On a very quick pass, size/shielding the ball from the defender is as important as speed. Whe Kirk and Ship are on the same side, Ship has to be the one to go over the middle for a 7 yard gain, with a big hit from an LB for his rewards.
My point about the use of EBS is that it originated as an insult and is time to retire it. I have no problem with criticizing player performance, I just think gratuitous insults are out of line. Nice bit of propaganda on your part.
“I believe Smith’s volleyball set monicker is well established and warranted.”
Actually, it isn’t warranted. I don’t think Smith has had a single volley ball set this season and has actually caught the ball quite well . You may be confusing Greg with Pete Ullman (who played last season).
I’m guessing you are not an ex player or coach because you seem to know know very little about actual blocking, jamming, receiving. You write well but not accurately and truthfully. Isn’that what a propagandist does?
kafka said:
November 19th, 2009 at 6:16 am
“Buckner …has great targets” should have been “Buckner…has great hands”.