Both made the playoff with less talent and resources. Who's running this circus?
Post Reply
1 of 1
SMU and TCU
3,039 Views |
23 Replies |
Last: 3 days ago by Ag1188
And played the exact same strength of schedule. Totally the same thing. That why TCU was so well prepared for their beat down.
Well done OP
Well done OP
Irrelevant. And SMU would probably dog walk our defense.
No it's not and SMU's offense is good but doubt they "dog walk" us
World's worst proofreader
I wouldn't have thought that at the beginning of the season.
TCU got killed against Georgia, but everyone forgets that they beat a really good Michigan team to get there.
SteveA said:
I wouldn't have thought that at the beginning of the season.
I don't think it now. SMU is a good team don't get me wrong but they haven't exactly been tested. Their ranked wins all have 4 loses now.
Their best win is probably against Duke.
World's worst proofreader
Do we have wins against teams that are currently ranked?
SteveA said:
Do we have wins against teams that are currently ranked?
Yes we do.
Missouri was 23 in the last CFP poll and they beat State by 19.
World's worst proofreader
Mizzou. Two loss BYU would be the toughest test for a team playing SMU's sked.
I can't help but be happy for Mustang fans though given their time wandering the desert while TCU made the playoffs and likely lorded it over them relentlessly.
I can't help but be happy for Mustang fans though given their time wandering the desert while TCU made the playoffs and likely lorded it over them relentlessly.
OP would probably like to go back to Big Xii
No, but I question what going to the sec has gained us. We are essentially the mid tier team we were in that conference, despite the many advantages we have over most of the other schools. We make more money now, but in terms on a n field success, it's been quite minimal. Recruiting has been much better, but wins are about the same. Yes, the competition is better, for the most part, but still same, same.
SteveA said:
Irrelevant. And SMU would probably dog walk our defense.
It's very relevant when making the playoffs is more about avoiding losses than getting quality wins. They lost to BYU and eked out wins against a few other weak teams. You're telling me that SMU doesn't lose at least 4 of the following games:
- Norte Dame
- Arkansas (early in the season and still healthy as TN found out)
- LSU
- SCar
- Texas.
If you believe that, idk what to tell you
No, I'm saying that they are in the top 10 and will be in the playoff, barring a meltdown. Is that goal to put up a good fight and lose, or have a chance at the playoff?
They probably will have to win the ACC championship to be in.
A 10-1 team thats legit should be in almost no matter what.
A 10-1 team thats legit should be in almost no matter what.
World's worst proofreader
Your opener was that they made the playoff with less talent and resources. It seems we both agree that they could have never accomplished that with our schedule, so you're comparing apples to oranges.
Unless you're advocating for moving down to a crappier league, I'm not sure what your point is.
Unless you're advocating for moving down to a crappier league, I'm not sure what your point is.
The problem is that the fans goals and the university's goals are not aligned. We moved to the sec to make more cash, not to win anything of substance. We as a fan base can't seem to comprehend that
Give me the guy who shoots for excellence and fails over the guy who shoots for mediocrity and succeeds.
TheDecadeSapling said:
The problem is that the fans goals and the university's goals are not aligned. We moved to the sec to make more cash, not to win anything of substance. We as a fan base can't seem to comprehend that
So a 600 million stadium, one of the top facilities in the nation, they gave Jimbo a blank check and now the University is not serious about anything of substance? Good Lord man! It's football, it's not life and death!
They haven't been serious for 80+ years. But they're more than willing to spend your money 8-4 every year keeps the stands and the coffers full.
Give me the guy who shoots for excellence and fails over the guy who shoots for mediocrity and succeeds.
TheDecadeSapling said:
They haven't been serious for 80+ years. But they're more than willing to spend your money 8-4 every year keeps the stands and the coffers full.
Unfortunately that sounds like A&M.
vander54 said:
No it's not and SMU's offense is good but doubt they "dog walk" us
Why not half the other teams we have played did.
All of that changes with a win over Texas and a trip to Atlanta.SteveA said:
No, but I question what going to the sec has gained us. We are essentially the mid tier team we were in that conference, despite the many advantages we have over most of the other schools. We make more money now, but in terms on a n field success, it's been quite minimal. Recruiting has been much better, but wins are about the same. Yes, the competition is better, for the most part, but still same, same.
The closest that an A&M coach has come to getting to Atlanta was Coach Sumlin in 2012.
Atlanta has become the center of college football, and there is a certain level of prestige that comes with playing in the SEC title game.
UT is doing to the SEC what TCU did about 10 years ago....which is show up and immediately be better tthan teams that had already been in the conference.
TCU has been more successful in the BIGXII than Texas Tech....despite Tech's 15 year advantage in a major conference.
I don't think UT is all that great and its a blessing for A&M fans that this game is in College Station rather than Austin.
TexasAggie_97 said:vander54 said:
No it's not and SMU's offense is good but doubt they "dog walk" us
Why not half the other teams we have played did.
Your math is just a little off.
World's worst proofreader
SMU appears to have a QB who can pass unlike us.SteveA said:
Irrelevant. And SMU would probably dog walk our defense.