Questions du Jour

by 54b on Oct 31, 2006 1:26 PM CST

1) A&M or OU...who ya rootin' for?

Things to consider:

If OU wins and Texas beats OSU and K-State, the Big XII South race is over, Texas wins
If A&M wins and beats Nebraska, they will probably be ranked in the Top 12 by the time they get to Austin making a potential Longhorn victory more compelling to voters and increasing our SOS
If OU wins and keeps winning, they'll probably end up in the Top 15 by seasons end which will also help our SOS (how ironic that the Oregon loss may hurt Texas more than OU)
If Texas is already the Big XII South Champ, A&M will come to Austin with nothing to lose (pressure will be on Texas)

2) Should the Big XII do away with the Conference Championship and opt for a nine-game conference schedule like the Pac 10 (Stoops is quoted in the paper today suggesting this happen)?

Things to consider:

The Pac 10, Big 10 and Big East don't have conference championship games which may increase their chances of getting two teams into the BCS, but diminish their chances of putting a team into the title game because of SOS
Even with a 9-game conference schedule, with 12 teams, each team is going to miss playing two other teams each season, meaning you could have two teams finish with identical conference records who never played each other (co-champions)
A marginally good team like Kansas, who avoids playing both OU and Texas this year, could win the conference without breaking a sweat
It's never fun to play the same team twice in one season, but the duel division conference championship system does ensure that the two best teams in the Big XII will have to meet and settle it on the field at least once at a neutral site

Okay, discuss...

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

Tweet Comment 45 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Squeeze 'Em Ags

I've done some poking around with the numbers, and because of the way wins and losses are valued in the pooters, Texas is best served beating a 9-1 Texas A&M team than retaining its victory over an OU team that wins out.

Basically, we want A&M to beat OU, and OU to win out after that. Texas Aggies come to Austin 9-1, ranked solidly in the computers and moving up the human ballots. We thump 'em and head to KC, watching the SEC and Big East closely.

It's a longshot, but USC's loss to Oregon State really helped us out.

by Peter Bean on Oct 31, 2006 1:46 PM CST reply actions

10-1

A&M still has to play Nebraska too, so we'd need them to be 10-1...so if you want A&M to beat OU, you have to root for them to beat Nebraska too. A win over OU and a loss to Nebraska would really suck for us.

by 54b on Oct 31, 2006 2:04 PM CST up reply actions

Yes

You're right. Yeah, Ags win out. Not just OU. If Ags are gonna drop to Nebraska, then we'd prefer OU beat A&M. One of the two teams has to win out. Ideally, A&M wins out and OU wins all but the A&M game.

by Peter Bean on Oct 31, 2006 2:08 PM CST up reply actions

I know

you guys are right, but I feel dirty reading about any of us wanting ou or a&m to win. I guess one of them has to win and the aggies would be our best choice but it still does not feel right.

Can't they both lose??? I'm cheering for a meteor. Yea that's the ticket.

Street level

by UT2001 on Oct 31, 2006 2:24 PM CST reply actions

So

we are talking about whats good for Texas even if the aggies and sooners have to win

Da' Horns

by number1hornsfan on Nov 2, 2006 7:40 PM CST up reply actions

Ugh

I'm rooting for "operator error" on a B-52 flying overhead, resulting in a full bomb-load landing on the field during the first quarter.
Get rid of the Championship Game. The second game against Colorado last year really put a bad taste in my mouth. A championship game makes sense if you have a conference of 16 teams and you need a way to duke it out between the two division winners, but to potentially have a rematch game just seems lame.

Speaking of which, how do most of the BCS computer systems deal with SOS when they factor in playing the same team twice in a season? Do they recognize different rankings for the same team at different points in the season? That would affect the desirability of a potential rematch as well...

by Kahuna on Oct 31, 2006 2:37 PM CST reply actions

But What If?.....

What if we need that conference championship game next season? I feel like our schedule next year is the weakest it has been in some time, and even if Texas crushes its opponents, may end up losing a spot in the title game to an undefeated pac-10, big 10 or god forbid, a big east team. If some team in the North establishes its dominance and ends up being pretty damn good, wouldnt that help out our resume and give us that added bump if we need it? I forget if we play Mizzou next year, but they could end up being a handful if Chase Daniel continues to evolve.

Joe John Finley?

by SuperBentley on Oct 31, 2006 2:45 PM CST up reply actions

This is why

We're going to spend a lot of December talking about scheduling. Forget next year - Texas may get bit from its lousy non-con scheduling this year, if there's a one-loss logjam.

by Peter Bean on Oct 31, 2006 2:51 PM CST up reply actions

You mean bit

by scheduling too tough an oponent right?

by Wells on Oct 31, 2006 4:02 PM CST up reply actions

No, Wells

I mean by scheduling Rice, North Texas, and Sam Houston State in the same year.

by Peter Bean on Oct 31, 2006 5:58 PM CST up reply actions

Follow-up Q

Did the BCS Coalition or whatever they're called, pass a rule last year that states you can't play in the National Title game if you don't win your conference?

Supposedly, that rule was proposed after OU got to play in the title game even though they didn't win the Big XII two year ago.

I doubt this is a rule because I can't see the conferences with championship games agreeing to it. But if it was a rule, it would prohibit a rematch between Michigan and tOSU this year.

by 54b on Oct 31, 2006 3:50 PM CST reply actions

Answers

aTm, but only because they are a TEXAS school, and OU SUCKS
Keep the Big 12 CCG, but require the Big 10 and Pac 10 to add two more teams each and schedule a CCG too.
No, they didn't change the BCS rules, so Michigan and tOSU could play a rematch in the MNC game. But they won't.

by patienthornsfan on Oct 31, 2006 3:57 PM CST reply actions

Big 10 only needs one more

They're actually 11 schools with Penn State. They just never changed their name. And they tried to get Notre Dame to be their 12th team since the God Squad plays half the Big 10 anyway, but ND got all uppity and said no because they like their nice little NBC TV contract and keeping all their sweet, sweet BCS money. The bastards.

by 54b on Oct 31, 2006 4:10 PM CST up reply actions

Right

I knew that. ;-)

So let's give them Iowa State, we'll give Colorado to the Pac 10, we'll take TCU and Houston, and the Pac 10 can have Fresno State or Utah or some such.

by patienthornsfan on Oct 31, 2006 4:37 PM CST up reply actions

If

if they make the big 10 add two teams what would they be caledd.......Big XII???

Da' Horns

by number1hornsfan on Nov 2, 2006 7:42 PM CST up reply actions

No

Big XIII

Hook 'em. 'Nuff said.

by GoHorns on Nov 3, 2006 7:23 AM CST up reply actions

I think we want OU to win, heres why

If we lose to A&M (the horror), we'd still go to the Big 12 CCG in kansas city because we hold the tiebreaker over OU. If A&M wins out, theyd go to K.C.

All I care about right now is winning the Big 12 and playing in a BCS game.

I'm gonna save all my BCS Title Game arguing for after the Big 12 champ. game.

by the other Andrew on Oct 31, 2006 4:10 PM CST reply actions

Goal is to win Big XII

Best case right now is for A&M to lose another game as we already have in effect a two game lead on OU so for this weekend its Boomer Sooner. Team only needs to worry about winning the Big XII everything else will sort itself out.

by FWHORN on Oct 31, 2006 4:31 PM CST reply actions

if you want a&m to win

you must not know any aggies. they are getting very annoying.

by Vice President Coco (40118) on Oct 31, 2006 6:39 PM CST reply actions

But Todd

Don't you see? Don't you SEE?!?

That's why it's so great. They're going to get soooo high...

Which will make the crash landing that much harder.

I'm counting on this.

by Peter Bean on Oct 31, 2006 6:48 PM CST up reply actions

all things being equal, OU STILL SUCKS

Since both teams are on our schedule, me sense is that it probably makes no difference to our strength of schedule. SOS is largely determined by opponents'winning percentage.Since a win for one is a loss for the other, the net effect on our opponents' winning percentage is the same.In terms of a decisive victory over a potentially 10-1 A&M team impressing the voters, there is already considerable talk among the national media about the aggies being a paper tiger. Not only that, the only way we move up in the human polls is if the teams ahead of us lose. Even lackluster wins by osu,mi,and wv would not have an effect, especially since the horns have not exactly looked dominant in wins over the last 2 weeks

by mento on Oct 31, 2006 7:38 PM CST reply actions

Big 12 SOS concerns

The way I see it, we need the following:

Texas A&M moves to 10-1, then loses the "Big 12 South title game" in Austin. I don't think pressure will be an issue for UT in this game.
OU finishes 9-3, losing next week in College Station. I'm not betting on that, but it's wishful thinking.
Missouri finishes 10-2, ranked in the Top 15, and plays for the Big 12 title.

by AMB on Nov 1, 2006 5:02 AM CST reply actions

Taking computers out

Do you think a&m or OU would be better served by the Human voters with a win? My instinct is that because of the "paper tiger" concept, OU would move up higher with 2 losses then a&m would with 1. Granted, a&m would be with 1 loss and OU with 3, and I like the idea of building the aggies up so high only to destroy their self esteem, but my thought is that OU would be better served with the win. So...

OU. I just think the SOS would be higher for us if OU wins out.
Keep the Big XII Champ. game. In a year like this, we need every opportunity to add to our SOS. It also gives us one last impression with the voters.

Hook 'em. 'Nuff said.

by GoHorns on Nov 1, 2006 7:40 AM CST reply actions

I don't care

about the BCS or what is better with A&M or OU winning. We just need to win out. If we win out, we have a shot, and if we don't get in, its b/c we didn't beat Ohio State. And thats the bottom line. But all we can control is winning. SOS is fun to talk about, but all I really care about is having 1-loss after the Big 12 Title game. If we can do that, I will be happy.

If we end up playing Boise State in a BCS Bowl and win, and we are 12-1 and ranked 2nd or 3rd in the final BCS Rankings, it would be STUPID not to call that a successful season. I want a NC Every year, but that would be a great season. Especially with a Freshman Quarterback.

Iw will save my thoughts on the Big 12 Title Game discussion until later

by SwimTexas on Nov 1, 2006 7:59 AM CST reply actions

I couldn't agree more

I had this team going 8-4 this year, so we're already well ahead of that expectation. Finishing up at #2 or #3 in the final poll also positions us to start at #1 next season, and hopefully go wire-to-wire at the top of the polls.

As a fan of college football - and particularly UT football - I enjoy the game regardless of the results, for the most part. As long as the team is playing well. We've gotten increasingly more spoiled as Mack's teams have gotten increasingly more successful. Going from the #1 team in the country to the #3 team in the country after losing VY is far more than any of us could have expected from this team.

by patienthornsfan on Nov 1, 2006 8:47 AM CST up reply actions

Very true

This year's team is well positioned to exceed my expectations. I figured we'd go 9-3 or 10-2 and figured that we still had a good shot at the Big 12 title.

We need to worry about winning the Big 12, but it's good to talk about some of the things that this team may have the opportunity to do before it is all said and done.

by AMB on Nov 1, 2006 8:56 AM CST up reply actions

Yes, but

I'm all for being positive about what this team has accomplished, and I'm already proud of what we've done.

BUT...

There's a big difference between being proud of what we've done, and being indifferent about what the weak scheduling might cost it. Imagine if North Texas and Sam Houston had been Washington and Pittsburgh. We would have won both games and be in a much better position nationally. If Texas "only" wins a Big 12 title because other teams finish undefeated, that's okay. I'll be really proud and happy. But if Texas should be in a position to earn a title berth, but doesn't because of SCHEDULING, then we should be disappointed. Not in the team, but in the athletic department.

by Peter Bean on Nov 1, 2006 9:06 AM CST up reply actions

Scheduling

I agree with you on the scheduling and that it should improve. I was just making that comment based on this year's schedule and what I expected to happen. I'd prefer to play a non-conference schedule comparable to USC's this year. I also believe that patsy scheduling doesn't properly prepare the team for the challenges it may face during conference play.

Enough about scheduling though, we may have all of December to discuss that problem while we await the beginning of bowl season. Until then, let's hope the Horns can beat the team lining up on the other side of the ball every Saturday.

by AMB on Nov 1, 2006 9:22 AM CST up reply actions

You had us going 8-4?

Damn, that is patient.

by the other Andrew on Nov 1, 2006 9:12 AM CST up reply actions

That was based on what I saw

... at the Spring game. I was concerned at the development of Colt and Jevan. Obviously Colt has improved at light speed, where I had expected him to learn from losses to tOSU, OU, Nebraska and Tech, and then be ready to lead this team to an undefeated season in 2007. I don't think any of us expected him to improve as much as he has this year.

PatientHornsFan doesn't mean OptimisticHornsFan or PessimisticHornsFan, just RealisticHornsFan. I wear Burnt Orange Glasses as much as any other fan, but quite frankly I wasn't impressed by what I saw in the spring game. Thus my original season forecast.

by patienthornsfan on Nov 1, 2006 9:27 AM CST up reply actions

This would really suck......

We go wire-to-wire in the human polls #1 but miss out on the MNC game due to SOS in the computers.

by Bevoboy94 on Nov 1, 2006 2:06 PM CST up reply actions

Not possible

I think we would have to play in the WAC to do that.

by Wells on Nov 1, 2006 4:19 PM CST up reply actions

Even though

we have a chance to be #1 i think WVU will be with Slaton and White returning but I think we have as good a chance as anyone for #2

Da' Horns

by number1hornsfan on Nov 2, 2006 7:46 PM CST up reply actions

Speaking for probably the majority

I agree with your sentiments. We should be, and are, very happy with where this team is. The team has far surpassed our expectations, and regardless of where we end up, I am happy with the progress of this team. However, we are in a position that we can see this team play for a repeat. It's at least a little fun to try to figure out what needs to happen to see it happen.

Hook 'em. 'Nuff said.

by GoHorns on Nov 1, 2006 9:20 AM CST up reply actions

Oh I agree

I'm in the scenario business, it's what I do for a living, so I have followed the "what if" and "what has to happen" threads with great interest.

by patienthornsfan on Nov 1, 2006 10:02 AM CST up reply actions

BCS and Conference Camps aside,

I think that I am going to be rooting for a&m. Fran was on the hot seat going into the year, but a 10 win season, and the Ags might just be dumb enough to give him and Arnell a contract extension.

As far as SoS, it works both ways. The tougher schedule that you play, the more likely you are to drop a game, whether it be to a highly ranked opponent, or a Texas Tech when you are coming off an emotionally charged game.

If we start losing too many of those "preconfernce" warm-ups, we are going to be right back here saying that we should have scheduled more patsies.

Play for the conference championship - that should be the goal every year. Anything else is just gravy. As such, I realy don't have that big of a problem with our SoS. The rest of our conference is improving, which will in turn help our SoS.

by Brandon 97 on Nov 1, 2006 9:04 AM CST reply actions

Interesting ESPN Bowl predictions

Don't know if this is posted yet, but here are Mark Schlabach and Ivan Maisel's predictions.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2627844

by SuperHorn on Nov 1, 2006 1:16 PM CST reply actions

USC vs. aTm

Ho ho!!! Now that's a game I'd like to see. I have a feeling a disgruntled USC would be openin' up a can on the Aggies. Or they could be like Cal 2 years ago, and just pout and get whooped.

by patienthornsfan on Nov 1, 2006 1:21 PM CST up reply actions

Texas vs Boise St.

That pick looks so foreboding.

It is the certainty implied by those identical, side-by-side picks that makes that prediction seem like an inevitable reality.

by BrooklynHorn on Nov 1, 2006 3:10 PM CST up reply actions

The aggroids

Lets get real folks...the soonies are going to crush the aggroids....has anybody looked at their wins? They are a classic paper tiger...they will come to Austin with 3 losses.

And Okie lite scares the bejezus outa me...I cant take another 4th quarter rally. If we lose this one, the soonies will put us in the Championship game by winning Sat.

OLD SCHOOL 70

by MeatchickenHorn on Nov 1, 2006 2:25 PM CST reply actions

They're in the top 25 the same way Tech was top 10

last year when we played them.

It would look good if A&M was highly ranked when we play them T+1, but the computers wouldnt necessarily be fooled.

by the other Andrew on Nov 1, 2006 5:32 PM CST up reply actions

Which team is actually better ???

I am rooting for ATM, but I think OU will roll them. So will Nebraska. Then it will our turn. This team has Three-Game-Losing-Streak written all over it. They finish 8-4 and play South Carolina in the Motor City Bowl.

by HydroBoos on Nov 1, 2006 6:51 PM CST reply actions

Times Sure have changed

It sure is great to ponder our second straight Big12 championship as if it had already happened. It is also great to feel so confident that UT will beat ATM. Time was when neither of those things was likely, much less probable. Can anybody say, 'Bucky Richardson' ???

Mack is always trying to get the players to stop and smell the roses. We fans should do the same. We have a great program right now. It is shur fun to watch UT football these days. We literally can beat any team out there, even with a freshman QB. I shur am enjoying this.

We are so sure of going to KC that we are picking our opponents and their records. But, stop and think: can ATM beat OU ??? They haven't done that in a long time. OU hasn't been that bad in a long time. Remember 77-0 ? It could have been worse. That game was at AgLand. It wasn't that long ago. If ATM is good enough to beat OU, they have improved dramatically and might actually be a threat to our beat up defense and young QB.

by HydroBoos on Nov 1, 2006 6:52 PM CST reply actions