Statement: We've actually made the conference stronger by replacing two underperforming teams with BCS calibur programs.

Is this a myth, or is this fact?

Before we answer the question above, one must look at the statistical laws that apply to the conference.

10 teams
9 conference games per team
45 conference games as a whole
45 winners
45 losers

No matter how you slice it, when you add up the conference standings at the end of the year, the records will be 45-45.

So, you are replacing Texas A&M and Mizzou, teams that went 4-5 and 5-4 in conference, respectively, for a total of 9-9. That means the other 8 teams in conference went 36-36.

If, as you posit, TCU and WVU are to enter the conference as measurably stronger teams than Texas A&M and Mizzou, then I challenge anyone to predict their record, so that you can realize the direct result of that prediction. If you are confident that WVU and TCU are going to come in and be better than .500 combined as Mizzou and A&M were, then you must realize what that means to the rest of the conference.

Let's hypothesize! Let's assume both teams come in and compete for a 7-2, 6-3 record in the conference. Very respectable and measurably better than 2011 Texas A&M and 2011 Mizzou. That would put their combined records at 13-5. That would also leave the rest of the conference to go 32-40, a losing record and winning percentage of .444. You cannot argue the laws of statistics in this endeavor. The end result is always going to be 45-45 in conference.

So, if WVU and TCU are to come into this conference as stronger members than A&M and Mizzou, the natural and correct result is this......"Who is going to get weaker?"....In other words, for every action, there is an equal and opposite, reaction.

Baylor without RGIII? Sure. Who else? Has to be someone.
Are you prepared to deal with that? Are you prepared to be the school who takes it right in the ass from your new, stronger conference mates?

What if WVU comes in and makes a title run, and TCU comes in at a respectable 7-2? I hear WVU has untold talent coming back on offense, and Dana has that ***** rolling. 9-0 and 7-2 would mean a 16-2 record leaving the rest of the conference fighting for scraps at 29-43 or a .402 winning percentage! That is 29 conference wins split up amongst 8 teams folks.

Your answer is, "Well, A&M sure is prepared for that in moving to the SEC!" And that maybe true, but A&M will be doing it with untold tens of millions on its way to the ADs revenue rolls. The Big 12 will be doing it for the same amount of money, well even less when losing a top 3 sponsor as it did recently.

Thoughts you dumb asses? Did you really think this through? Does it make sense that a .500 ballclub over the past two years should be bragging about its newer, stronger conference?

[This message has been edited by Bonfire 1996 (edited 10/1/2012 9:59a).]

It's the first Tuesday of the month. The sips are prepping crosses to burn and getting sized for their March hoods.

They'll get back with you tomorrow

How does this logic apply to the Ag's move to the SEC? Several Ags believe that A&M will get better over time. Who in the SEC will get worse as the result of A&M going into the conference?

33 - you fail at logic.

A&M and Mizzou are expanding the SEC. There will be more conference games, and hence, more wins to be had as a statistical law.

SEC - 2011
12 teams
8 conference games per team
48 games
48-48 wins and losses

SEC - 2012
14 teams
8 conference games per team
56 games
56-56 wins and losses

[This message has been edited by Bonfire 1996 (edited 10/1/2012 10:00a).]

quote:

---

So, if WVU and TCU are to come into this conference as stronger members than A&M and Mizzou, the natural result is this, "Who is going to get weaker?"

Baylor without RGIII? Sure. Who else? Has to be someone.

---

Tceh, perhaps? Or can they get any worse?

quote:

---

How does this logic apply to the Ag's move to the SEC? Several Ags believe that A&M will get better over time. Who in the SEC will get worse as the result of A&M going into the conference?

---

It's dumb to try and place a status quo to college sports. If you don't believe me, ask LSU and Colorado, back in the mid-late 90s

It's a beautiful day for Blimp watching.

This should be good.

Bonfire -- did non-conference games cease to exist? Just checking.

Because if WestVa and TCU are better teams, and have more success out of conference than Mizzou and A&M then they can improve the conference in numerous ways, including but not limited to: Improved strength of schedule for the conference as a whole; more ranked teams for the conference; better bowl record (you might note that the Big 12 had a better bowl record than the $EC last season). And that is aside from the nontangible benefits that come with adding two teams with a recent history of BCS Bowl success.

Incidentally, if you are going to try to go the faux-scholar route with your smack you might try to spell "caliber" correctly. Just sayin'

quote:

---

Bonfire -- did non-conference games cease to exist? Just checking.

---

No one cares who can beat Eastern Indiana, you brain dead chop.

It's conference record that we're talking about. Try and keep up.

[This message has been edited by Samuel E. Cronkowitz (edited 3/6/2012 3:47p).]

Oooh...

Ahhh...

quote:

---

It's a beautiful day for Blimp watching.

---

quote:

---

And that is aside from the nontangible benefits that come with adding two teams with a recent history of BCS Bowl success.

---

What benefit does the conference add when neither of those 2 teams will be returning to a BCS bowl?

Well John666. And exactly what is A&Ms record over the last few years been for OOC games!

When we play the same cup cake schedule that the sips and others play we generally go undefeated.

Mizzou has a strong OOC record as well.

Blimp number 1! Come on sips you can do better then that.

a lesson in logic? see anything wrong with this:

10 teams
9 conference games per team
90 conference games as a whole

usually there are two teams in a game.


hard to get past that to the rest of your argument....but, TCU and WVa have had more success on a national scale in recent years than A&M and Missou. you are the ones making the argument that our SOS is going to drop.

Well Red Five they just might make the BCS game next year and if they do it proves Bonfire's statement. The Big 12 will have remained the same or gotten slightly better as a conference but at the sips and other's cost! Of course they have to use our records during a down year.

Horns know all there is to know about soft OOC scheduling.

Further, leave it to the horns to bring up OOC, which for the Big 12 is over before October begins. Therefore, we can predict a great many blimps before the winds of fall arrive to Texas. Then, when the conference schedule begins and the laws of averages and statistics take over, we can point, laugh, and bump threads to our heart's content as the Big 12 wallows in mediocrity and the obscurity of regional coverage.

Please explain the "non tangible benefits" as they pertain to yourself personally.

Inigo, those 45 games have 45 winners and 45 losers.

Still need any help?

quote:

---

you are the ones making the argument that our SOS is going to drop.

---

And you're assuming that they're "success" in weak conferences is going to continue, while A&M's mediocrity will also continue. It takes about two seconds to realize why that's a terrible assumption.

What is recent? Mizzou has been a strong upper tier Big XII conference team for several years and A&M even under achieving was better then the sips last year and was equal to them this year?

Furthermore the competition that TCU and WVU have played needs to be taken in consideration.

Simply put you must choose one of the other. If the competition that TCU and WVU has played to obtain their recent success is of equal status to what the Ags have played in the Big XII then you are dissing on the overall level of competition of the Big 12.

If however their success is based on playing inferior competition and they come in and kick the crap out of the Big XII then what does that say!?

Personally both programs are historically mid tier programs that feast off of being in weak conferences and the possibility of that trend continuing next year is real.

The Ags would of handled TCU last year and surely would of competed against WVU as well. Yet both those teams would be cannon fodder in the SEC!

[This message has been edited by OPAG (edited 3/6/2012 4:12p).]

aggie logic always fails

[This message has been edited by utexhorns84 (edited 3/6/2012 4:12p).]

Nice edit, utex.

Read the entire thread next time and you'll avoid the embarrassing edits.

Inigo is right, he is making fun of me pointing out that osu vs. texas is one game, whereas I viewed it as two games, one for texas and one for osu.

Nonetheless, the argument is sound. If WVU and TCU come in as stronger teams, however many wins they get in excess of Mizzou and A&M 2011 will come at the expense of an existing conference mate.

God Help them if it is texas. They have been so busy yelling it till they are blue in the face, "WE REPLACED YOU WITH BETTER TEAMS!" It will be hilarious to watch if the result of that is them having the worse record compared to 2011. I have already predicted it...

Sip 1 - "Gosh darn that Dana Holgerson, put up 50 in DKR. IS this what we can expect in our new conference?"

Sip 2 - "Yeah, but at least I can tell that Aggie in my office that we upgraded."

Sip 1 - "Yeah, at least we have that."

Really, based on what? Shoot that's not even a blimp! That's more like a child's helium balloon!

Who cares?

Your tv money is going to decrease.

And sooner or later that will have an effect.

Maybe not on tu so much, but ou is going to get killed unless they come up with their own network.

This is what happens when 1 conference member wants to be treated differently than other conference members.

And that is the bottom line problem.

And will never change.

That is why anyone who could leave, did.

utex with the most pitiful edit ever.
The edit is almost as pointless as the original was wrong

quote:

---

aggie logic always fails

---

Explain, using logical argument, why this is so. Please provide support for your arguments. If you can't, it's because you realize that I'm much, much more intelligent than you are, in addition to being right. Of course, everyone here already knows that. Including you. It's the same reason you sell travel packages online-your limited intelligence.

---

quote:

---

aggie logic always fails

---

quote:

Explain, using logical argument, why this is so. Please provide support for your arguments. If you can't, it's because you realize that I'm much, much more intelligent than you are, in addition to being right. Of course, everyone here already knows that. Including you. It's the same reason you sell travel packages online-your limited intelligence.

---

utex had nothing to say because his original post was calling out "Aggie" Inigo on his idiocy. The edit would have been better left blank.

Doc, utex's stupid ass was just rehashing Inigo's non-existent hang-up over the total number of games.

When he realized his logic failed, he deleted his post and left that bit of irony.

CrossTex09 makes the Plan II program proud

Texas Christian in.

Texas A&M University out.

There's some kind of debate?

Teams that win bowl games IN, aggie OUT.

Is there any debating?

Wow, utex is BACK?

Utex - did America's best conference even SNIFF
Texas Christian (Big East-bound TCU)?...because
Texas A&M was their FIRST choice, as you know.

I think they did their research.

Amazed your dumbass popped up again on this thread...

[This message has been edited by GHT27 (edited 3/6/2012 5:03p).]