THey made it in and we are out> Accept reality folks!

Reality is they did not play a real schedule worthy of a top 12 team, and are clearly not a top 12 team.

Some of y'all are too busy trying to crap on us to see the reality of the sheer stupidity of the committee.

A good 2A team high school team has more wins than a good 6A team. Does that mean the 2A team is better? Even though they don't have, and haven't played against, a single player who could start for the junior varsity B team at a 6A school? Who is better? The better record, or the team with better players who played better competition?

The rub is that schools in the SEC like SC, Arky, Missouri, and A&M could be in the playoffs if they played in other conferences, but the money and prestige of being in the SEC makes that a null and void point. Any of the four listed above are playing still if they played SMU's schedule or Arizona State's schedule. But that the thing you give up as an SEC school that's not a blue blood.

Could say this about every non SEC team in the playoffs except for maybe Oregon. Everyone one of them would have 3 or more losses with an SEC schedule.

The committee only put SMU in so they could leave an SEC team out. This was to help the other teams such as Penn State or Notre Dame finally win a playoff game. Had zero to do with them being worthy. Can't lose to the SEC if you do not have to play them.

SunrayAg said:

---

they don't have, and haven't played against, a single player who could start for the junior varsity B team at a 6A school?

---

Well Bama offered Jennings $2M to go play for them, but I guess he's not good enough.

SMU will win today.

Then what's our excuse?

I disagree. I think SMU is legit and would have won in the SEC and still possibly made CFP.

About to find out.

And please stop making this about Elko and our team. Purely unrealistic expectations and you are destine to be a whining, disappointed fan each and every year except for a special season that comes rarely...if ever. Get a grip on reality and Elko a chance to succeed Or continue to be miserable but please go to sec rant for that...

jrgypsum said:

---

SMU will win today.

Then what's our excuse?

---

Big 10 overrated.

If SMU wins it all, it's because they didn't face A real SEC team, so championship doesn't count

one safe place said:

---

Hamburger Dan said:

---

Another entitled aTm thread about a team that overachieved. SMU played the schedule their league gave them. They also signed on with the ACC without receiving any "league money" from the conference. Besides Arizona State, SMU has has been as impressive or more, than any other team in a major conference. TexAgs loves to ***** about things that could've, would've, should've happened. aTm had a fairly easy schedule this year- if they'd taken care of their business, they might still be playing.

---

Every team plays the schedule their league gives them.

---

Yep and least three of the teams in the playoff are there because they played one MAYBE two tough teams.

The SEC and Big 10 stacked their leagues with the best teams. It's their own fault true top 12 teams won't see the playoffs.

LB12Diamond said:

---

Could say this about every non SEC team in the playoffs except for maybe Oregon. Everyone one of them would have 3 or more losses with an SEC schedule.

The committee only put SMU in so they could leave an SEC team out. This was to help the other teams such as Penn State or Notre Dame finally win a playoff game. Had zero to do with them being worthy. Can't lose to the SEC if you do not have to play them.

---

That's a ridiculous take. The committee put smu in because they earned it and they need a Cinderella along with Indiana.

I know smu would stroll into Norman and score more than 3 points and would beat OU by 10+.

Ole Miss lost at home Vs 4-8 Kentucky.

Bama lost to 6-6 Vandy and blown out by 6-6 OU.

South Carolina got hosed by SEC officiating or they would have been in the playoff.

Georgia and OUs schedules were stacked. Everyone else was fine. Sips did get an easy one similar to Indiana.

UF was also stacked

Pony up Aggies!! SMU representing the 214!!

Why is OP such a nancy???

AggieBiker said:

---

UF was also stacked

---

Yeppers, forgot about them.

southern methodist could not stand up to the physicality of being in the SEC. Because of their obvious lack of depth, they wouldn't have anything left but second stringers and scout team players if they played our schedule.

Ghost of Bisbee said:

---

Why is OP such a nancy???

---

OP here. You're right, ghostie. SMU is really good. They've dominated great teams all year. They are deserving of this spot.

Hahaha

Sorry, troll, but SMU and Indiana have proved this whole playoff process is a scam. SMU does not belong in the playoffs. They are inferior and should be in the mayonnaise bowl. If they played our schedule, they would be lucky to win four games. It's not about being fair, it's about being right and putting the best 12 teams in the playoffs.

Ag CPA said:

---

Another butthurt Ag thread…

---

Lol, this aged so well.

Smu would've been 6-6 at best. Get a dog.

jrgypsum said:

---

SMU will win today.

Then what's our excuse?

---

Wow, do you even watch football?

SMU almost lost to a 3-10 Nevada team. No way they go 8-4 in the SEC.

bigsky23 said:

---

SMU almost lost to a 3-10 Nevada team. No way they go 8-4 in the SEC.

---

8-4

If RC had coached against JFF, how successful would JFF have been?

Probably gave the same or better record than us

ND L
McNeese W
Florida W
Bowling Green W
Arky W
Mizz W
Miss. St. W
LSU W
USCe L
NM St. W
Auburn W
sips L

I'm going with 9-3. I think 10-2 would be attainable with USC being a tossup. We weren't exactly presented with Burma Road this year. Our schedule wasn't tough. SMU would likely beat us this year. I'm not butthurt and I'm realistic. They'd move the ball on us and D would keep us from scoring much. The folks discounting how good SMU was this year, just because they don't play in the SEC and because they played like sht in the playoffs, is laughable. We'd trade most all of our seasons with the one they had this year. Good for the Ponies.

the most cool guy said:

---

Honestly probably 8-4. Not terrible, but not in the playoffs.

---

Probably this, give or take a game based upon schedule

Notre Dame loss
McNeese State win
Florida loss
Bowling Green win
Arkansas: win
Missouri: win
Mississippi State: win
LSU loss
South Carolina: loss
New Mexico State: win
Auburn win
Texas: loss

I think SMU would finish 7-5 (4-4 SEC) with our schedule.

The current playoffs is a compromise. The selection committee is adjusting to a new world. The CFP can't afford to lose an anti-trust suit.

The compromise stabilizes the ACC and Big 12 and lets me Group conference winner in the playoff. The selection committee overvalues raw results and made no serious attempt to formalize an approach for considering difficulty of schedule for the same reasons the UIL has always used a series of tiebreakers for seeding their tournaments and even coin flips for location choices. It's too political to do anything else.

The SEC and Big Ten strategy for creating super conferences has hit the brick wall of maximum revenue from current members v. marginal revenue from adding new members. Texas and IU benefited current teams not at all. Big Ten & ACC added members at cut rate discounts (all the way to zero for SMU) on revenue to retain and mollify voting current members with less sizzle to their steak.

I think we are in the incremental change period to conference alignment since money moves reams between conferences. But the revenue will likely vacillate and we might see an economic promotion and relegation system. Keep in mind the elite private schools upended themselves by allowing vicious racial protests against some of their core contributors and Yeshiva University is benefiting from the fall out.

SMU exceeded any reasonable expectation in the ACC. Give it to them since the ACC schedule is arguably better than any of the Group conference schedules including Boise State's as was Arizona State's and even Clemson.

Final score?