Was there actually serious consideration for banning him?  Rolling out the same argument on the same topic isn't too egregious.

And don't be so hard on yourself Wells, those were two classic moments in BON history.

I don't get over here nearly as often as I'd like (well, at least not to post), but I love this environment.

You guys run one helluva site PB, and thanks for always being open to other's ideas.

Cheers, and goodluck with the offseason.

HornsChamps is like the old guy who was sitting behind you at the OU game last year at half time when we were down 10 to 7, bitching about how horrible our offense is, how Mack and GD should be fired before the game is over because he could call a better game, and how the season was a failure already.

.

How ironic. At our watch party down at Port Aransas, it was this guy telling everyone at halftime that we had no reason to worry until we had completed our 2nd possession of the the 2nd half. Everyone was in a panic and I was the one talking calm. We needed to see how our adjustments would impact the game.

Sure enough Chizik's defense held OU to a 3'n out.

We scored 7 in just 3 plays.

After gaining something like 35 yards, OU was forced to punt again.

Our Longhorns went on an 80-yard drive to score another 7 points and the game was all but over.

OU then turned the ball over another 4 times (one returned by Ross for a TD) and the game was indeed over.

I'm sorry Wells, while you claim to "know" how I think, you aren't even close. I DO appreciate your showing a degree of tolerance. Let's hope DeLoss will pick up the phone and tell USC we want that home/home they are shopping. It would be great for college football!

As a new contributor who has no understanding of the history of BON, let me say that I enjoy the spirited exchanges. I think both HC and BZ are right most of the time. I want to see Texas play somebody better than North Texas and UL-Lafayette, but not TOO MUCH BETTER!!!  I don't like getting beat, period.

So, that leaves a lot of room in the middle. If we can't play USC, let's play Minnesota. At least the Gophers look like the Trojans. Let's play Illinois, Army, and Arizona State. We should also have a real local rival in another conference like we used to have with OU (maybe LSU or Ol'Miss?).

One reason we end up playing nearby smaller schools is that those schools want to get some money and don't want to spend it all on travel. That's why ArkState will play us, but Toledo won't.  

Some folks think that keeping the money within the borders of Texas is a good thing. We are seeing Tech playing TCU and UTEP and the Big12 South teams playing more games locally because they already have to travel to Nebraska and Colorado ($). Texas is where we recruit and we should play in-state as much as possible (can you say Cougar High?).

The real problem IMHO is that the conference is too big. We already have 8 automatic games. In an 8-team league we would have one more OOC game. All teams in a league should play each other EVERY YEAR. The Big12 amounts to two conferences with an automatic bowl tie-in (the championship game).  

So, a top-level team like Texas or OU, who have a reasonable expectation of playing yet another really good team at the end of the season, don't  want to schedule a really good team at the beginning of it.

To me, money, logistics, and politics have had a bigger effect on the strength of schedule than anything else.

I have no problem with opposing issues.  If everyone had the same opinion, this would be a shitty blog.

However, I dont remember hornchamps ever bringing anything positive to the table.  Maybe around basketball season.  I have no doubt that he's a passionate longhorn fan, I just want to know why.

Why do you support a program financially if it makes you so sick?  What joy do you get out of it?  Or are you one of those guys who isnt happy unless he's complaining about something?

And trust me, Texas has got its fair share of the latter.  So maybe that's just it.  Help us understand why it seems you're so upset with the athletic department.

I too support and encourage comments and viewpoints from all sides; as several BONers noted, that's what keeps it interesting and informative. I have a bit of a problem with railing someone for being not "positive." Often the dissenting view, a minority view, turns out to be the prescient or transforming one. Peter, don't ban anyone unless they utter hateful or bigoted remarks and then you should have no mercy. So do unto others and rock on, 54b, HC, bz, Wells et al. One last thing: I don't know what the point is about financial donors and season ticket holders. I fall into both categories for a long time and my decision to donate and/or buy tickets is unaffected by who we're playing or whether I agree with every play that's called. I suffered through Weltlich and McWilliams and I exalted with Darrell, Fred, Mack and Rick.

You can't ban everyone who is prickly.  I say racism, bigotry, spamming and irrational hate on a regular basis should be the only grounds for banishment. It's a blog and a forum for disagreement.  I say let it fly, as long as it isn't something you wouldn't say over a few beers and a game of football.  I think the people who need to be banished show themselves pretty quickly and it is a clean, decisive decapitation by the BONation that won't even merit much debate or second thought from the community.    

But there's no need to ban him.  I just choose to not read his entries.  At least he's not DHab or Brazos.