Brad Edwards from ESPN answers some Questions on his chat

by MN_longhorny on Nov 10, 2008 1:51 PM CST Comment 12 comments

Interesting thoughts- I think this guy doesnt seem to be one of the biased idiots on ESPN. I find him making really excellent and articulate judgments on the system and college football in general.. I think compared to the pro-USC and pro-SEC people who always think that Big 12 sucks no matter what this guy is always a nice read..

I have posted the link to his latest chat after this weeks BCS rankings were out...

http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=23506

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

0 recs | Comment 12 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Style points...

Thanks for sharing and I noted that he said same thing that I posted yesterday – style points are important for the end of the year. That is why I was so dismayed by Mack pulling Colt at start of 4th quarter with Texas having a first down at the Baylor 30 yard line. Voters saw OU put up 66 on A&M on the road while Texas put up 45 on Baylor at home. That touchdown makes it 52 points and I think voters looking at scores see a team scoring 50 points and that is dominating win.

We must win convincingly these last two games – no close scores.

by texascfo on Nov 10, 2008 2:53 PM CST reply actions

Especially since...........

Tech went into Lawrence and put up 60+ on Kansas

by texascfo on Nov 10, 2008 2:55 PM CST reply actions

But I agree to the comments Mack made in his presser today…running up points just is insulting to the other team (Note that putting your back up’s in is insulting too but somehow to a lesser degree per Mack). Perhaps our defenses hold down the KU to fewer points. I mean the Mizzou game- see the end result- 56-31 and recall the 1st half it was 35-0. Now in the voters it will be a OK victory and would look rather impressive if it was 56-14. At the same time it would reduce the “insult” which Mack indicated towards.

In the end even if OU put up 60 + points I think they lost ground to us in the human polls. I have to give the benefit of the doubt to the human voters and hope they remember the OU and Mizzou beating we handed down.

I sincerely hope that OU wins against Tech, FL looses one of the two games and Bama looses one and OU looses to OSU.. though as much as I want us to go to a Big 12 I think I am greedy in looking at a MNC for a consolation prize!

by MN_longhorny on Nov 10, 2008 3:06 PM CST reply actions

Comparatively speaking...

Texas beating KU 42-10 in Lawrence looks just as good as Tech beating KU 63-21, because of the lower score on the right. Now, if the score was 42-21, not so much. Which is why I was upset that Mack pulled his starters in the middle of the 4th quarter. He could have at least left the defense in to keep the score at 45-14, instead it bulloned to 45-21, which doesn’t look as impressive.

Against aTm OU won 66-28. Which means we need something like a nice 4-5 TD win to offset that, probably 52-17 area.

by HornsFaninCalifornia on Nov 10, 2008 3:17 PM CST up reply actions

Love this from Schlabach today..................

Scott: if Texas and OU played again this weekend, who would you pick to win?

SportsNation Mark Schlabach: Texas. OU defense isn’t as good without Reynolds.

by texascfo on Nov 10, 2008 3:21 PM CST reply actions

Human voters take this seriously

and no voter is going to cop to methodology for voting. It is all opinion and conjecture as there are no voting criteria or standards. Just opinion.

So, in keeping with the voters, IMO, I believe the pollsters review the box score and recap for each game the top 8-10 team’s play on Saturday. So, what does that mean? For the non-head-to-head games, they are probably looking at play through middle of 3rd quarter. That is what is baffling to me. How do you continue to vote Alabama ahead of Tech? Only reason I can think of is Alabama won against rival in Death Valley and Tech won marauding in their own frigate.

…..or, maybe it is more of the same SEC myopia.

And, how does Texas gain on OU when fake army put up about as strong a defensive stand (next to Nebraska) v. Tech? Maybe the Nebraska OT game is hurting Tech in the minds of some?

by TXStampede on Nov 10, 2008 3:38 PM CST reply actions

I think what is hurting Tech more than anything is we’re not a regular player in the title hunt. There’s no name recognition with us so when we win, we have to kick a** for it to be noticed. That’s why USC somehow is still a darling despite their weak showings from time to time this year. Yeah, they pasted a few schools, but they got pushed by a very average Arizona team and they lost to a slightly above average OSU team.

It’s the same with y’all. If you pull out a close win, it’s the character of the team shining when it counts. If Tech pulls out a close win, it’s escaping. It’s not fair, per se. But life isn’t fair, and it’s the cards Tech has to deal with until we have this kind of season on a semi-regular basis.

I will say it’s one reason Leach doesn’t call off the dogs at the end of games. He’s not stupid and he’s not trying to make nice on the scoreboard. He knows that to really get attention, he needs the team to roll over other schools. It’s not personal (except A&M), it’s the reality of our system. I get the sportsmanship bit, but at the same time you are playing to perceptions of voters. A 35 point win looks a lot worse than a 24 point win, especially if the other guy hits 21 or 24 points. A 50-spot makes the win look better …55-24 vs. 48-24. One is a nice beating, one is an a** whipping.

by Tech92 on Nov 10, 2008 4:47 PM CST up reply actions

Exactly....

I’ll take a 35-7 win over a 45-21 any day.

by HornsFaninCalifornia on Nov 10, 2008 5:10 PM CST up reply actions

you know why right?

Look at the record. There is a reason why you guys need to kick ass. Since unlike programs like Texas, USC or LSU I think Tech is more towards once in a blue moon. This team is the same team for most part as the one which we defeated last year…I am trying to draw a analogy here…if you recall the USF team last year which was ranked # 2 last year..they were doing excellent till they lost and boy they were punished. I will not take what rightfully belongs to Tech- They are playing like hell and deserve whatever they are getting at this point….but like most posts indicate you guys have never been in this situation before…makes a huge difference. Also I think if you loose you will be punished really badly…unfortunately experience makes a hell of a difference..since if you loose getting that bad taste takes experience both from coaches and players…which can have a domino effect really fast……ask KU, USF and Mizzou

by MN_longhorny on Nov 10, 2008 9:03 PM CST up reply actions

The word you are searching for is "lose"

by 2Bearnest on Nov 11, 2008 10:18 AM CST up reply actions

another comment from Rece Davis of ESPN on OU-Texas

deeone(houston,tx): hey rece will the voters get off the sooner juice and keep them below texas

Rece Davis: There is no justifiable reason to rank Oklahoma ahead of Texas. Inexcusable.

by texascfo on Nov 10, 2008 7:54 PM CST reply actions

This particular season...

I think style points may be a little less important than normal this season. In normal seasons, there is considerably less attention paid to a Big 12 game.

With the strength of the conference this season, though, I think a lot more voters are actually watching the games instead of glancing at the final scores. So perhaps more voters saw that: 1. That Baylor team is vastly improved, and 2. Mack called in the dogs very early. If so, that probably really offset the disparity in final scores from Okie land.

by Pflash on Nov 11, 2008 9:25 AM CST reply actions