CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Four => SEC => Topic started by: Gigem on August 12, 2025, 03:40:38 PM
-
Almost time for football ! Let's Vote !
-
I voted Georgia.
-
Voted LSU.
I honestly think it's up for grabs between Bama, Texas, UGA, and LSU.
-
ala & ga have more difficult sched's which made it easy to vote tx to win the league. i like probably lsu to get there & lose to them due to their comparably favorable sched.
-
Has anyone been more accurate than Vegas in picking such things?
-
Has anyone been more accurate than Vegas in picking such things?
What does Vegas say exactly ?
-
I don't really follow this stuff but one quick google search shows the odds at Vegasinsider.com to be:
- Texas +210
- Georgia +390
- Alabama +700
- Tennessee +700
- LSU +1000
- Ole Miss +1000
- Texas A&M +1600
- South Carolina +1800
- Florida +3300
- Auburn +3500
- Missouri +5000
- Oklahoma +65000
- Arkansas +12000
- Vanderbilt +30000
- Kentucky +30000
- Mississippi State +50000
-
I've actually heard of Fanduel, from those ads they run during football games. They say:
- Texas +290
- Georgia +300
- Alabama +490
- LSU (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/LSU/lsu-tigers/) +600
- Texas A&M (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/TXAM/texas-am-aggies/) +1500
- Florida +1800
- Auburn +2000
- Ole Miss (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/MISS/ole-miss-rebels/) +2100
- Oklahoma +2200
- Tennessee (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/TENN/tennessee-volunteers/) +3300
- South Carolina (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/SC/south-carolina-gamecocks/) +3300
- Missouri (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/MIZZOU/missouri-tigers/) 7000
- Arkansas (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/ARK/arkansas-razorbacks/) +19000
- Kentucky (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/UK/kentucky-wildcats/) +30000
- Mississippi State (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/MISSST/mississippi-state-bulldogs/) +30000
- Vanderbilt (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/teams/VANDY/vanderbilt-commodores/) +30000
-
If I could bet one dollar, I would choose South Carolina (to win $33 if I understand the odds).
I suspect the CG will not be a rematch from last season. But then I don't really know what to think about Bama and LSU.
-
The media only gets it right like half the time.
I don't think anyone is super great. Unless Deboer is a bad HC, Bama is great and only needs 'okay' QB play to be elite.
-
I voted Georgia.
So did I. We make two.
-
So did I. We make two.
CD trying desperately not to upset the ecfgs, so he won't vote for his own team... :)
-
CD trying desperately not to upset the ecfgs, so he won't vote for his own team... :)
Yes.
Of course, one could say that about you too.
-
Yes.
Of course, one could say that about you too.
Nah 'cause I actually believe Georgia is going to win the SEC.
-
I watched a bit of a few "prediction shows" on Youtube. None of them "know" either of course. They all make guesses because they have to ($$$), and nobody in December will check their accuracy (nor mine). Vegas odds are "always right", in a sense. I suspect they make money on every conference champ odds they list, it's a near mathematical certainty with the vig.
Basically, the most probable winner is Texas, with UGA and Bama pretty close behind, and LSU close behind them, then a drop off.
Last year of course UGA and Texas played in the CG and it went into OT, so neither team dominated. UGA was playing with a backup QB much of the game, but he did pretty well. Games like that usually come down to some unpredictables.
-
Close game for sure. It's entirely possible that the backup QB provided an advantage. For some reason the Texas defense was absolutely befuddled by the change in the position and never really recovered. That was an extremely disappointing performance by Texas DC Pete Kwiatkowski.
Anyway, I won't believe that the current Texas coaching staff is going to beat Georgia, until I see it. They've performed quite poorly in this game so far.
-
Close game for sure. It's entirely possible that the backup QB provided an advantage. For some reason the Texas defense was absolutely befuddled by the change in the position and never really recovered. That was an extremely disappointing performance by Texas DC Pete Kwiatkowski.
Anyway, I won't believe that the current Texas coaching staff is going to beat Georgia, until I see it. They've performed quite poorly in this game so far.
(https://i.imgur.com/ARUr7sj.png)
-
Close game for sure. It's entirely possible that the backup QB provided an advantage. For some reason the Texas defense was absolutely befuddled by the change in the position and never really recovered. That was an extremely disappointing performance by Texas DC Pete Kwiatkowski.
Anyway, I won't believe that the current Texas coaching staff is going to beat Georgia, until I see it. They've performed quite poorly in this game so far.
It’s weird that even though I knew Texas and Georgia played twice I totally forgot about the 2nd game going to OT.
-
All y'all suckas that voted for Texas. I voted for Georgia, of course.
(https://i.imgur.com/dJiSPEo.png)
-
ala & ga have more difficult sched's which made it easy to vote tx to win the league. i like probably lsu to get there & lose to them due to their comparably favorable sched.
holy **** this was bad.
-
All y'all suckas that voted for Texas. I voted for Georgia, of course.
(https://i.imgur.com/dJiSPEo.png)
Texas is still very much in the running with 1 loss, same as Georgia.
-
Horns aren't gonna win in Athens.
-
https://bball.notnothing.net/sec.php?sport=fb
You can manipulate the tie-breakers here if you're curious on how it all works.
Two teams with zero losses, A&M and Alabama.
Three teams with one loss, Georgia, OM, Texas.
Georgia and Texas each have 1 loss and play each other, this week I think. One of these drops out of the running, at least unless some crazy stuff happens.
Texas A&M has USC (1-6) and @Texas (4-1).
Bama has OU and @ Auburn.
Georgia has Texas left in conference play, then GT end of November.
OM has Florida and @Miss St.
Texas has @UGa, Ark, and A&M.
Of the remaining contests I think the biggest upset is likely to be Texas and A&M, with Texas winning. There is a good chance Texas will be favored so it won't even be an upset by traditional terms, both teams are currently in the Top Ten.
I don't see Georgia losing at home to Texas. The 2nd most likely is OU beating Bama. 3rd most likely is Miss State beating OM.
If A&M loses @Texas, it will be Georgia and Bama in the SEC CCG, assuming they win out (likely).
Now if OU beats Bama, and nothing else changes, it will still be Alabama/Georgia in the title game.
Change a few more games, for example Texas beats UGa, it would be Alabama/Ole Miss. This would be a fun one.
Bottom line, the only way A&M is guaranteed to make it is to win out.
-
I can't post images from my work computer (stupid security) but I can now.
(https://i.imgur.com/UtTFZjs.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/gWlzOfc.png)
-
Now start tweakin the scenarios a bit...
Most likely "upset" Texas beats A&M (I've seen reports they are currently favored).
Nobody else favored loses
(https://i.imgur.com/odWj8hf.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/5bzXHzT.png)
-
OU beats Alabama, Texas Beats A&M (Still Bama Georgia)
(https://i.imgur.com/Pa8UOPv.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/TkLOY71.png)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/cE4Mnc7.png)(https://i.imgur.com/R0viKMY.png)
-
Now I know everybody knows that the last week or two of the season can be pure pandemonium. Almost anything can happen. Lots of scenarios put Alabama and Georgia together, even if Bama drops a game.
Couple of scenarios put Alabama and Ole Miss together. I kinda have this feeling that OM will lose to Miss State.
Right now I'm trending 80% that it will be Bama/Georgia, just purely based on the number of scenarios that could play out most likely.
Next is A&M/Bama.
Small chance it's Bama/OM, but it's not unforeseeable.
But personally, my favorite scenario:
OU beats Bama (realistic probability). Then Texas Beats Georgia. You kinda have to think, 3rd time is the charm, right?
Last week of the season, Miss State beats OM.
Texas beats A&M
and for the coup de'etat, Auburn beats Alabama. Folks, I give you the first ever ALL TEXAS SEC Championship game, where A&M redeems itself and wins the SEC:
(https://i.imgur.com/rpoIIr7.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/2SKFFTW.png)
-
Your favorite scenario is one where Texas beats you in the regular season?
Away with you.
-
Your favorite scenario is one where Texas beats you in the regular season?
Away with you.
I want to win the SEC and beat Texas. My *favorite* scenario isn't possible, beating Texas twice in the SEC to win the SEC, like Georgia did last year. Plus, I think it would unlock some deep-seated fear from the "old guard" of Texas and A&M taking over the SEC.
-
It would get interesting is UGA beats Texas, Texas beats A&M, and OU beats Bama.
-
It would get interesting is UGA beats Texas, Texas beats A&M, and OU beats Bama.
I pretty much laid that out, it would be Bama/UGa in a re-match. Yay....
-
I want to win the SEC and beat Texas. My *favorite* scenario isn't possible, beating Texas twice in the SEC to win the SEC, like Georgia did last year. Plus, I think it would unlock some deep-seated fear from the "old guard" of Texas and A&M taking over the SEC.
Yup, it's pretty much an impossible scenario, but I've been relishing the idea of beating A&M on T+1, beating A&M in a rematch in Atlanta, and then beating A&M in the CFP. It would be glorious.
:)
-
Things are about to congeal a good bit after the weekend.
The ACC also is ... interesting, meaning, unresolved.
-
Things are about to congeal a good bit after the weekend.
The ACC also is ... interesting, meaning, unresolved.
I haven't kept up with them, except that Clemson sucks, and GT seems to be doing well.
Who else is in the running? Miami? I know they have 2 losses.
-
Basically, when the playoff rankings are released, your team has to be no lower than #10.
Slots 11-12 are going to be bounced to include the ACC champ and Group of 5 addition - neither of which will be anywhere near the top 12.
-
Basically, when the playoff rankings are released, your team has to be no lower than #10.
Slots 11-12 are going to be bounced to include the ACC champ and Group of 5 addition - neither of which will be anywhere near the top 12.
I suspect that the rankings will be the same 1 through 6, with several schools below BYU moving up a notch.
1. Ohio State
2. Indiana (overrated, IMO)
3. Texas A&M (underrated, IMO)
4. Alabama
5 Georgia
6. Ole Miss
7. Texas Tech
8. Oregon
9. Notre Dame
10. Texas
11. Oklahoma
12. Vanderbilt
I'd love to see current #21 Michigan move up, since OU beat them in Week 2. I'd really love to see Michigan beat Ohio State at the end of the regular season.
-
I suspect that the rankings will be the same 1 through 6, with several schools below BYU moving up a notch.
1. Ohio State
2. Indiana (overrated, IMO)
3. Texas A&M (underrated, IMO)
4. Alabama
5 Georgia
6. Ole Miss
7. Texas Tech
8. Oregon
9. Notre Dame
10. Texas
11. Oklahoma
12. Vanderbilt
I'd love to see current #21 Michigan move up, since OU beat them in Week 2. I'd really love to see Michigan beat Ohio State at the end of the regular season.
Ohio State's fans heads would literally explode. Well, maybe not literally, but there would be some smoke.
-
Literally no longer means literally, literally.
I figure if the Dawgs can somehow survive this onslaught by a powerful Texas team (unlikely though that may be), they should be a lock for the CFP.
-
Literally no longer means literally, literally.
I figure if the Dawgs can somehow survive this onslaught by a powerful Texas team (unlikely though that may be), they should be a lock for the CFP.
Lulz
The powerful Texas team that lost to hapless Florida and went to OT against both Miss State AND Kentucky?
I don't think there's enough room on the sandbaggin' wagon for both Gigem and CD.
-
Literally no longer means literally, literally.
😆
-
Lulz
The powerful Texas team that lost to hapless Florida and went to OT against both Miss State AND Kentucky?
I don't think there's enough room on the sandbaggin' wagon for both Gigem and CD.
Especially when you're trying to hop on it at the same time.
-
Ha!
I've stated I think Texas is going to lose to Georgia in Athens. Is that really some unrealistic or controversial position?
I believe Texas will beat Arkansas in Austin, and has a good chance at beating A&M in Austin as well.
I mean, the word used was "powerful" and I don't think that's an appropriate descriptor for this year's Texas team. A loss to Florida, barely scraping by in OT against Kentucky and Miss State, and a 4th quarter collapse against Vanderbilt at home that nearly cost Texas a game they had been dominating? This is not a powerful team. If you were so inclined I guess you could call it a team that finds ways to win.
I don't really view any of that as sandbagging, but...
-
It's years of imbibing the "Horns are doomed" mantra combined with a firm belief that all true Texas fans believe "We're still Texas, dammit" that makes any realistic assessment of a flawed team a target for poking fun of sandbagging.
This was, like, done to me, man, by hordes of burnt orange people, over a 6+ year period of living amongst them.
-
Texas will win by double digits this Saturday
I had a dream
no problem
-
Anyway, we all do it, either believing it, or hedging our bets before the ECFGs. When I first met CD in Austin in 2007, we were ranked 1 or 2 or something like that, and CD asked me where I had us on ELA's user poll I was participating in that year. I said something like 5th or 6th, and he looked at me as if to say "Go on...." which is when I elaborated on the rash of injuries the defense was piling up and how the D hadn't been the same of late, but that if/when they got healthy and began stopping teams at the level they previously had, I'd probably move them up. After which he said, "Oh, I see. You're poor-mouthing."
Though said lightly and with mirth, there was probably some truth to it. To be sure, I wanted them to be the #1 team, and I thought they could be, if healthy and playing well, but in an effort not to get my hopes up I likely magnified every flaw I could find and refused to put them past other teams I thought may be doing better in those areas.
The ECFGs rewarded me, with chaos, a roller-coaster ride, an SEC title with a backup QB, and even an NC :)
Now, of course, the ECFGs are off the table. Somebody somewhere in this fanbase sold our collective soul to the devil for whatever voodoo brought Burrow here and took him from Buckeye also-ran to Heisman winner, and now there is no amount of groveling that will make the ECFGs hear us.
Sandbagging entails a genuine underlying belief in one's team that is hidden either for humility or for favor from the ECFGs. We have no such belief, ergo, we can no longer be sandbaggers.
Dammit.
-
It's years of imbibing the "Horns are doomed" mantra combined with a firm belief that all true Texas fans believe "We're still Texas, dammit" that makes any realistic assessment of a flawed team a target for poking fun of sandbagging.
This was, like, done to me, man, by hordes of burnt orange people, over a 6+ year period of living amongst them.
Over the past couple of decades your team has won multiple national championships with varying degrees of muppet characters as your head coach. Y'all don't get to complain or sandbag about ANYthing.
-
Texas will win by double digits this Saturday
I had a dream
no problem
My nose has been sniffing a Texas W also, not sure why.
It's probably the kiss of death and UT will get run out of the stadium. If they play a clean game and don't shoot their own feet off, I do think they're capable of beating UGA even in Athens. Just not sure they are going to play any clean, full games this year.
-
Over the past couple of decades your team has won multiple national championships with varying degrees of muppet characters as your head coach. Y'all don't get to complain or sandbag about ANYthing.
Pfft. LSU fans complaining is part of our identity. If you took that away, you wouldn't even have an LSU fan.
-
Pfft. LSU fans complaining is part of our identity. If you took that away, you wouldn't even have an LSU fan.
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/9-22-2015/Ca7k8Q.gif)
-
My nose has been sniffing a Texas W also, not sure why.
It's probably the kiss of death and UT will get run out of the stadium. If they play a clean game and don't shoot their own feet off, I do think they're capable of beating UGA even in Athens. Just not sure they are going to play any clean, full games this year.
Texas playing a clean game could beat anyone this year. If Arch hadn't been throwing the ball into the dirt at the feet of wide open receivers throughout the Ohio State game, the Horns absolutely could have won that one.
But Texas does not play clean games this season and, in general, under Sarkisian. There are very few games where Texas has just come out and done what it should do, all game long. Maybe the OU game last season? Other than that, it's unnecessarily close games against bad teams, and losses to good teams that are beatable, as the general rule.
-
Speaking of complaining, UGA fans have gone off on Mike Bobo (the OC) as the source of nearly all our ills for years now. Frankly, I don't really know enough about CFB to have much of an opinion (nor do most of them), but I do find it ... amuaazing, which is a new word. Replace this ONE guy and everything would be 15-0, apparently.
I don't pay it much attention, as I note, I know little about play calling, it sounds ... difficult, to me. Now, when we had Bowers and McConkey, I'd probably opine we should target them fairly often, duh. We don't any more.
I recall being at an Ole Miss tailgate and one lady there was an Alabama fan explaining Bama fans vs Ole Miss fans. The former would TG after the game and complain that the score was only 63-10, and why did they allow 10? It would all be some kind of fan analysis.
Ole Miss fans TG after a loss and have a good time and get drunk. I took something from that.
A problem now UGA is trying to be a new Bama, for better or worse, which is a laudble goal I guess, but the fans see themselves as already being there, or should be.
-
Well we’re almost done with the season, only two weeks of conference games left.
I think it’s safe to say anybody with two losses is out. I’m not 100% sure if that is completely true mathematically but the scenarios would be very unlikely. Although it also seems unlikely that a team could rally from 30-3 and win 31-30, but I digress.
-
Texas, OU, and Vandy all have two losses.
Georgia is done with conference play. 1 loss.
I was heavily rooting for OU to beat Alabama (ick) to give A&M a little extra help in case we slip up vs Texas but it’s simply not going to do much to help us unless they lose to Auburn. Highly unlikely, although the game is at Auburn.
OM, Georgia, and Alabama each have one loss. OM is the least likely to reach the SECCCG.
There is almost no plausible scenario that put A&M into the CCG if we lose to Texas. The only thing that would help is Auburn beating Alabama. Recall that last season all we had to do is beat Texas at Kyle and we’re in. And we didn’t even score an offensive point and lost at home. I can tell you right now that being 10-0 will mean dick if we lose that game and miss the SECCCG.
I think even if we make the CFP and win a couple games it would still be a major blight on an otherwise sterling season.
So essentially we’re down to two scenarios. A&M beats Texas, we will face Alabama in the CCG, or Georgia.
A&M loses, it’s UGA vs Bama, pt 2. Yawn!
-
https://twitter.com/colecubelic/status/1989965591554199879?s=61
-
My preference would be A&M vs. UGA. Not from a rooting interest perspective, but just as far as a game I'd like to see.
-
I think we’d have a sot vs Alabama. UGA zero chance.
-
I think A&M would beat Alabama. I think A&M vs. UGA would be a heckuva game, which is why I want to see it.
Although watching Alabama lose would be fine with me too.
-
Back "in the day", I viewed winning the SEC as The Thing. Winning some NC was basically out of reach, almost, needing some weird highly improbable sequence of events. Not really a thing to which I aspired for "my team".
Now, I ponder if missing out on the CG is a "good thing". Another week to rest up, get healthy, work on things in general, prepare for the playoff. A win over Tech and the Dawgs get a 3 or 4 seed and bye (which last season was not much of a perk). On the other hand, it's a plus to get to play in the CG, recruits probably see it, it's on national TV etc.
But you come out dinged up, with a 50% chance of a loss, no mo ... huh.
-
Back "in the day", I viewed winning the SEC as The Thing. Winning some NC was basically out of reach, almost, needing some weird highly improbable sequence of events. Not really a thing to which I aspired for "my team".
Now, I ponder if missing out on the CG is a "good thing". Another week to rest up, get healthy, work on things in general, prepare for the playoff. A win over Tech and the Dawgs get a 3 or 4 seed and bye (which last season was not much of a perk). On the other hand, it's a plus to get to play in the CG, recruits probably see it, it's on national TV etc.
But you come out dinged up, with a 50% chance of a loss, no mo ... huh.
One of the things I rue most about today's CFB environment is that conference championships have lost much of their significance.
Utee and I have lamented this for years. Back in the "good old days," if you won your conference championship, you had a very successful year. You would go to a good bowl game. If you were lucky, and some things beyond your control fell into place, you might have a chance to be awarded a national championship.
I also lament that conferences are less and less regionally based.
-
I also lament that conferences are less and less regionally based.
Sort of related to this: the sheer size of conferences now.
I was thinking this morning about how with 16 teams now and no discernible rotation so far, the schedules are more disparate than ever, and without divisions, I greatly struggle to remember who plays who.
There's always been games I didn't get the chance to watch, but prior to Texas and OU entering the league, I knew Vanderbilt played Kentucky at some point. I knew Ole Miss played Arkansas at some point. Etc., etc. It seems that just knowing about the schedules helped me retain the results better. So now I'm not even sure if those two example games happened this year, and it exacerbates my failure to remember much about league results. Granted, I've also mentioned my failure to remember much about LSU's schedule or the results.
But the point is I think I identified another facet of today's game that detracts another small piece that used to make it more enjoyable. I don't know who's playing who anymore. There's more conference games than ever to keep up with, so I'm missing a greater percentage of games, having only the time to watch the same amount as I used to, so I'm aware of less than I used to be. And I have no general knowledge--such as teams in the East and West who will all play each other--so the landscape of the SEC is that much more dizzying and out of focus for me.
I hope having the three "perma"-rivals will help with that. I won't be able to keep up with a lot of matches, but at least there will be a small handful of teams tied to other teams that will help me better recall the schedules, and thus remember results.
-
Sort of related to this: the sheer size of conferences now.
I was thinking this morning about how with 16 teams now and no discernible rotation so far, the schedules are more disparate than ever, and without divisions, I greatly struggle to remember who plays who.
There's always been games I didn't get the chance to watch, but prior to Texas and OU entering the league, I knew Vanderbilt played Kentucky at some point. I knew Ole Miss played Arkansas at some point. Etc., etc. It seems that just knowing about the schedules helped me retain the results better. So now I'm not even sure if those two example games happened this year, and it exacerbates my failure to remember much about league results. Granted, I've also mentioned my failure to remember much about LSU's schedule or the results.
But the point is I think I identified another facet of today's game that detracts another small piece that used to make it more enjoyable. I don't know who's playing who anymore. There's more conference games than ever to keep up with, so I'm missing a greater percentage of games, having only the time to watch the same amount as I used to, so I'm aware of less than I used to be. And I have no general knowledge--such as teams in the East and West who will all play each other--so the landscape of the SEC is that much more dizzying and out of focus for me.
I hope having the three "perma"-rivals will help with that. I won't be able to keep up with a lot of matches, but at least there will be a small handful of teams tied to other teams that will help me better recall the schedules, and thus remember results.
I agree with all of that. The increase in conference sizes has come hand-in-hand with expanding beyond the geographic boundaries of the traditional conferences.
I think that 12 teams is about the max size for a conference where fans know what teams are playing whom. Except for the loss of the OU-Nebraska rivalry as an annual game, I loved the 2-division arrangement of the Big 12 in its original form. We played every other team in our division, and for years A1 and A2, we played 3 teams in the other division, and for years B1 and B2, we played the other 3 teams in the other division. I liked the arrangement of the Big 8 even better. Round-robin is the best of all conference schedules.
-
So let me ask you: Would you rather have had the SEC's old rotation when OU was in the Big 12 with Nebraska and Colorado? This would've meant having one cross-division game locked in every year, in OU's case let's assume it would've been Nebraska. The trade-off for playing Nebraska every year would've been that OU played all the other North teams home and away over a 5 year period instead of a 4 year period.
Would you have made that tradeoff to keep Nebraska annual? Or would you prefer what y'all had, with all six cross-division teams rotating on and off the schedule every 4 years?
Texas, of course, would've been locked into K-State, since that's who UT loved playing so much :)
-
So let me ask you: Would you rather have had the SEC's old rotation when OU was in the Big 12 with Nebraska and Colorado? This would've meant having one cross-division game locked in every year, in OU's case let's assume it would've been Nebraska. The trade-off for playing Nebraska every year would've been that OU played all the other North teams home and away over a 5 year period instead of a 4 year period.
Would you have made that tradeoff to keep Nebraska annual? Or would you prefer what y'all had, with all six cross-division teams rotating on and off the schedule every 4 years?
Texas, of course, would've been locked into K-State, since that's who UT loved playing so much :)
When the B12 was formed, they considered doing the 1 x-div perma-rival thing, primarily because it would preserve NU-OU.
From the rumor mill, Texas' likely x-div perma-rival, would have been Colorado.
-
Colorado makes some cultural sense. The Stoned River Rivalry, maybe.
-
There has been suggestions that any team can schedule any other team at any time, even when those teams are conference foes. If the game was so important to those fanbases, they could have simply scheduled to play them as a "non-conference" game. I have no idea how that would work WRT payout splits, TV rights, the whole 9, but I'm assuming something could be worked out.
Of course you'd have to give up one of your LSOP (Little Sisters of the Poor) games, but I don't even really think you'd have to do that as most teams schedule one "marquee" game every season anyways like Ohio St/UT or A&M/ND. You could just make your marquee game your rival game.
-
There has been suggestions that any team can schedule any other team at any time, even when those teams are conference foes. If the game was so important to those fanbases, they could have simply scheduled to play them as a "non-conference" game. I have no idea how that would work WRT payout splits, TV rights, the whole 9, but I'm assuming something could be worked out.
Of course you'd have to give up one of your LSOP (Little Sisters of the Poor) games, but I don't even really think you'd have to do that as most teams schedule one "marquee" game every season anyways like Ohio St/UT or A&M/ND. You could just make your marquee game your rival game.
Assuming that's correct in theory, the drawback is most non-con. dates are early in the season, and teams like OU and Nebraska probably would prefer to put that game later in the season.
Most of the biggest rivalry games are delayed until the final weekend, and even UT-OU is played in the middle of the season. I doubt they'd want to move it any earlier than that, because they want the team to have fully gelled and had some warmup layups to tune up on.
Novelty games are often played in week 1, i.e., LSU and Clemson this year. But if LSU and Clemson were big rivals who wanted to play each other every year and actually cared way more about the game, they wouldn't want it to be week 1. Or even week 2 or 3.
-
Assuming that's correct in theory, the drawback is most non-con. dates are early in the season, and teams like OU and Nebraska probably would prefer to put that game later in the season.
Most of the biggest rivalry games are delayed until the final weekend, and even UT-OU is played in the middle of the season. I doubt they'd want to move it any earlier than that, because they want the team to have fully gelled and had some warmup layups to tune up on.
Novelty games are often played in week 1, i.e., LSU and Clemson this year. But if LSU and Clemson were big rivals who wanted to play each other every year and actually cared way more about the game, they wouldn't want it to be week 1. Or even week 2 or 3.
Well, to be blunt, I think the Big 12 f'ked up on this one. They could have done whatever they wanted to at the start, in 1996 season. And if you think about it, it was probably both OU and Nebraska to blame, but whoever made the choice made a major blunder.
Given the fact that the conference had an un-equal revenue sharing structure, it was already apparent that oSu, KSU, KU, ISU, Baylor, and Texas Tech were essentially along for the ride, they would probably be good for whatever NU/OU wanted. I think about this quite a bit, as I really enjoyed the old Big 12. We had 3 true blue bloods in OU/Tex/Nebraska, a couple of "barons" or whatever you want to call the #10-20 group in A&M, Mizzou, CU, and possibly KSU and oSu, and there were some times where the rest of the conference could be really good with Tech having really good teams in the 2000s and hell even KU won the Orange Bowl one year. It was a great conference that we somehow let slip away for reasons nobody fully understands.
Anyways, I feel strongly that all the logistics and details could have been easily worked out before anything ever got set, and Neb/OU should have been a top priority in the early days and for whatever reason they dropped the ball.
-
Well, to be blunt, I think the Big 12 f'ked up on this one. They could have done whatever they wanted to at the start, in 1996 season. And if you think about it, it was probably both OU and Nebraska to blame, but whoever made the choice made a major blunder.
Given the fact that the conference had an un-equal revenue sharing structure, it was already apparent that oSu, KSU, KU, ISU, Baylor, and Texas Tech were essentially along for the ride, they would probably be good for whatever NU/OU wanted. I think about this quite a bit, as I really enjoyed the old Big 12. We had 3 true blue bloods in OU/Tex/Nebraska, a couple of "barons" or whatever you want to call the #10-20 group in A&M, Mizzou, CU, and possibly KSU and oSu, and there were some times where the rest of the conference could be really good with Tech having really good teams in the 2000s and hell even KU won the Orange Bowl one year. It was a great conference that we somehow let slip away for reasons nobody fully understands.
Anyways, I feel strongly that all the logistics and details could have been easily worked out before anything ever got set, and Neb/OU should have been a top priority in the early days and for whatever reason they dropped the ball.
It has been suggested by posters (that are still posting on this message board), that Oklahoma didn't push too hard to maintain it. They were in the middle of a bit of a slump and Nebraska was on fire, and the idea of NOT getting clobbered by that Husker freight train every year, might have been appealing to some of the folks in the administration at OU.
As you point out, ultimately if they'd wanted it bad enough, they would have made it happen. They didn't, and they didn't.
The rest, as they say, is history.
-
It has been suggested by posters (that are still posting on this message board), that Oklahoma didn't push too hard to maintain it. They were in the middle of a bit of a slump and Nebraska was on fire, and the idea of NOT getting clobbered by that Husker freight train every year, might have been appealing to some of the folks in the administration at OU.
As you point out, ultimately if they'd wanted it bad enough, they would have made it happen. They didn't, and they didn't.
The rest, as they say, is history.
I've often heard that, but what is true and what is simply rumors, who knows? Surely the OU players at the time weren't that scared of Nebraska? I mean OU had won the MNC not even ten years prior, especially around the 1994 time frame when the Big 12 first started to evolve.
But we can talk about it until the cows come home, what's done is done.
-
I've often heard that, but what is true and what is simply rumors, who knows? Surely the OU players at the time weren't that scared of Nebraska? I mean OU had won the MNC not even ten years prior, especially around the 1994 time frame when the Big 12 first started to evolve.
But we can talk about it until the cows come home, what's done is done.
Well what we do know, is that somebody didn't want it bad enough to make it happen. You're 100% correct when you say if they wanted it, there were multiple different ways to make it happen.
So the proof is in the pudding-- it didn't happen, which means that it wasn't fought for hard enough to make it happen.
In contrast, both Texas and OU wanted that game to be annual, and maneuvered to make it so.
-
Well what we do know, is that somebody didn't want it bad enough to make it happen. You're 100% correct when you say if they wanted it, there were multiple different ways to make it happen.
So the proof is in the pudding-- it didn't happen, which means that it wasn't fought for hard enough to make it happen.
In contrast, both Texas and OU wanted that game to be annual, and maneuvered to make it so.
Yep. It must have been somewhat weird for the OU/Texas game to go in-conference for the first time in ~80 years or whatever it was. I do faintly recall that maybe OU was part of the SWC briefly, but I may be mistaken, and there probably wasn't much of a rivalry then. Hell, the SWC may be older than OU being a state.
I never really knew much about CFB before the 1996 season, but it was my impression later on that the OU/Nebraska rivalry was a big deal.
OU and Texas really seemed kind of equal about the mid 90's, maybe that played a factor in it. At any rate, the powers that be didn't want it bad enough so that's that.
-
I've often heard that, but what is true and what is simply rumors, who knows? Surely the OU players at the time weren't that scared of Nebraska? I mean OU had won the MNC not even ten years prior, especially around the 1994 time frame when the Big 12 first started to evolve.
But we can talk about it until the cows come home, what's done is done.
Everyone was scared of THAT Nebraska.
-
So let me ask you: Would you rather have had the SEC's old rotation when OU was in the Big 12 with Nebraska and Colorado? This would've meant having one cross-division game locked in every year, in OU's case let's assume it would've been Nebraska. The trade-off for playing Nebraska every year would've been that OU played all the other North teams home and away over a 5 year period instead of a 4 year period.
Would you have made that tradeoff to keep Nebraska annual? Or would you prefer what y'all had, with all six cross-division teams rotating on and off the schedule every 4 years? . . .
I had a long MB discussion about this with the late, great Hooky Hornstein. I figured out a 5-year cycle (probably just like the one you mentioned) and it would have worked fine. The problem was that nobody but Nebraska was particularly interested in keeping OU-Nebraska an annual affair. Texas didn't want a permanent inter-divisional opponent and, I'm sad to say, neither did OU. Nebraska was kicking Sooner butt at the time, and the short-sighted PTBs at OU took the easy way out and went along with Texas' PoV.
Nebraska, at the pinnacle of its on-field excellence, was the odd man out when the Big 12 was organized. There were several 11-1 decisions that went against the Huskers. The big one was probably the ban on playing partial qualifiers. Would we have had permanent inter-division rivals had OU sided with Nebraska? Maybe, but I think probably not.
To answer your question, had I been king of the Big 12 at its founding, I would have mandated that OU-Nebraska be an annual game. Even if it had to be an OOC game half the time. I would have told the weenies at OU to suck it up and put better teams on the field, because we're not going to drop the annual battle of the Big Reds.
OU fans 20 years or more younger than I am just remember the butt-kickings if they remember anything about OU-NU at all. They don't care one way or the other about the future OOC series with Nebraska that we have coming up in 2029-30. But I do care. I'm looking forward to it. Maybe I can run into Fearless again.
-
Yep. It must have been somewhat weird for the OU/Texas game to go in-conference for the first time in ~80 years or whatever it was. I do faintly recall that maybe OU was part of the SWC briefly, but I may be mistaken, and there probably wasn't much of a rivalry then. Hell, the SWC may be older than OU being a state.
OU started football with a 1-game season as an independent in 1895, 12 years before statehood in 1907. The SWC was founded in 1914, and OU joined the following season. OU was a member of the SWC from 1915 through 1919, were co-champs in 1915 and champs in 1918. The SWC at that time was sort of like the SEC was for so much of its existence. The number of conference games was not set. OU never played more than 3 conference games a year in the SWC.
I never really knew much about CFB before the 1996 season, but it was my impression later on that the OU/Nebraska rivalry was a big deal.
Yep. In the '70s and '80s, roughly the equal of the RRS in competitiveness, with a somewhat shorter history and with less hatred. And the conference winner in those years typically played in the Orange Bowl.
OU and Texas really seemed kind of equal about the mid 90's, maybe that played a factor in it. At any rate, the powers that be didn't want it bad enough so that's that.
Not in the '90s. Nebraska won 3 MNCs in the '90s, while that was a bad decade for Sooner football. Mediocre from 1990 through 1995, terrible from 1996 through 1998, and salvaged with Bob Stoops' arrival for 1999.
-
Yeah, I meant that OU and Texas were about equal to each other. I don’t really recall Texas being much in the formative years of the Big 12, which was 1995-1996.
Yes, I know Texas was the last SWC champion in 1995 but it seems like they got assassinated in the bowl by upstart VT. I do remember vividly how shocking it was that Texas won the first Big 12 CCG.
-
Yeah, I meant that OU and Texas were about equal to each other. I don’t really recall Texas being much in the formative years of the Big 12, which was 1995-1996.
Yes, I know Texas was the last SWC champion in 1995 but it seems like they got assassinated in the bowl by upstart VT. I do remember vividly how shocking it was that Texas won the first Big 12 CCG.
Boy, I completely missed on your comparison. You posted "Texas" and I read "Nebraska." ~???
Texas was better than OU in the mid-'90s, but bad enough to get beaten by a John Blake-coached OU team. In 1997, I believe.
It took some doing to lose to any of John Blake's 3 Sooner teams. I think that John Blake was Barry Switzer's delayed payback to the OU PTBs for firing him after the 1988 season. These were the same PTBs who were content to let the OU-Nebraska game no longer be an annual rivalry. Maybe more than "content." Maybe "relieved and ecstatic."
-
Yeah, I meant that OU and Texas were about equal to each other. I don’t really recall Texas being much in the formative years of the Big 12, which was 1995-1996.
Yes, I know Texas was the last SWC champion in 1995 but it seems like they got assassinated in the bowl by upstart VT. I do remember vividly how shocking it was that Texas won the first Big 12 CCG.
As a future SEC! SEC! SEC! team, I assure you they weren't up for it.
-
Somebody should resurrect Shiner. Ags are having the best season in my memory, and he's out sleeping in a gutter somewhere.
-
Somebody should resurrect Shiner. Ags are having the best season in my memory, and he's out sleeping in a gutter somewhere.
Probably got rolled over in the garage by his vintage Corvette restoration project...
-
Probably got rolled over in the garage by his vintage Corvette restoration project...
Shiner...and Bonfired.
I actually met Bonfired once, around 98/99 or maybe '00. We had a beer in the Dixie Chicken. I can't remember his first name, but I'll think of it eventually. He remains the only person IRL on these boards I have interreacted with in person.
-
I recall that Bonfired was a teacher, and he had already been graduated by the late 90's. Which means that if he was still teaching, he'd be close to 30 years, or maybe more, and possibly retired by now. My how time flys.
-
Boy, I completely missed on your comparison. You posted "Texas" and I read "Nebraska." ~???
Texas was better than OU in the mid-'90s, but bad enough to get beaten by a John Blake-coached OU team. In 1997, I believe.
It took some doing to lose to any of John Blake's 3 Sooner teams. I think that John Blake was Barry Switzer's delayed payback to the OU PTBs for firing him after the 1988 season. These were the same PTBs who were content to let the OU-Nebraska game no longer be an annual rivalry. Maybe more than "content." Maybe "relieved and ecstatic."
A&M was pretty damn good in the early to mid-90's, but there was one season in there where OU whipped us badly in a non-conference game. I think it was '94 or '95.
-
Shiner...and Bonfired.
I actually met Bonfired once, around 98/99 or maybe '00. We had a beer in the Dixie Chicken. I can't remember his first name, but I'll think of it eventually. He remains the only person IRL on these boards I have interreacted with in person.
You're not missing much. Most of these guys are schmucks in real life.
I keed, I keed.
Aren't you in Houston-ish? Tell you what, if the Ags win it all I'll buy you a A&M shot glass commemorating the occasion and deliver it to you personally at a watering hole/fine-dining establishment of your choosing. My Georgia buddy got me a cool one in 2019, and I returned the favor in 2021. I don't actually drink shots from it, but it looks cool.
-
Very gracious of you. If the impossible happens I’ll take you up on it, but until then I’ve got to stay “in character”. 🤣
-
https://twitter.com/colecubelic/status/1990786602847908332?s=20
-
I'll take A&M vs. UGA for 19%, Alex.
Not what I think it most likely, but based on the game I'd like to watch. Maybe they'd meet in the playoffs if not in ATL.
-
Only way that can happen is for Aub to beat Ala.
Even if it does happen, moot point since Texas is beating A&M.
-
So, if the Dawgs beat Tech, they are in the four slot at minimum. If they lose in a CG, they drop to 7 or 8. If they win the CG, they don't move up, not that it would matter much.
This is frustrating, really. I guess my view is whatever, if they make the CG, go try and win of course, but the downside is pretty significant. If you lose, you pick up in effect two extra games of wear and tear and possible injury.
-
Even if it does happen, moot point since Texas is beating A&M.
11-1 still gonna be a heck of a year for the Ags! And then anything can happen in the CFP.
-
Only way that can happen is for Aub to beat Ala.
Even if it does happen, moot point since Texas is beating A&M.
Don't sleep on Bama at Auburn.
Sometimes strange things happen at the Barn, and last time they played there AU nearly knocked them smooth out of the playoffs, needing a monumental disaster at the end to help them lose.
-
Don't sleep on Bama at Auburn.
Sometimes strange things happen at the Barn, and last time they played there AU nearly knocked them smooth out of the playoffs, needing a monumental disaster at the end to help them lose.
I guess I don't recall that game...what happened?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOf_eFMfA8Y
The girl in the blue sweater at the end says it all. I figure that was one of the worst, gut-wrenching losses AU has ever endured.
Second to the Earthquake Game in Baton Rouge, of course :)
-
I'm confused on why the punting team (Alabama) wasn't awarded a TD on the punt recovery. The Auburn guy muffed the punt, Alabama picked it up and ran it in. I heard in the video the official say the ball was down by rule or something? Weird.
And then on the TD play, after it looked like a lucky break for Auburn, Milroe was literally given all day to make that throw, and the coverage was not great.
We had something similar happen in about 2004 vs OU. Our best receiver/PR muffed the punt near the end of the game with A&M leading, OU recovered on like the 5 yard line or something. Trying to remember our PR guys name, it was a terrible mistake that pretty much cost us the game. It was later found out when he barely got into the NFL he had some kind of major injury or suffered one early or something and never played pro ball. Terrance Murphy, I just remembered. He's supposedly a big shot business man in BCS area now.
-
A muffed punt cannot be advanced by the kicking team because the receiving team never secured possession, and the ball is considered live until it is possessed. This is a long-standing rule in both college and professional football that applies to all kicks, including punts and kickoffs. The kicking team can recover the ball, but play stops at that point, and possession changes hands.
-
A variant came up in the UGA game when a UGA player recovered the on side kick and then went to the ground with no one around him. He can't advance it after recovery. I thought it a heady play by Cash Jones, who recovered it.
Great name. Just as good as money.
-
And then on the TD play, after it looked like a lucky break for Auburn, Milroe was literally given all day to make that throw, and the coverage was not great.
Yeah, they rushed TWO and kept a spy in the middle, so I guess you could say 3 at the line with 8 in coverage. Like.....with 6 full seconds, you expect somebody to get home, no matter how good the protection is. And if you don't, well, they only have to cover the endzone and enough real estate in front of it for a ball carrier to plausibly advance to the endzone before being tackled. I estimate about out to the 10 yard line. Shouldn't have a guy open in the corner. And really, in that situation, I think it's probably safer to keep the secondary back and blitz the bejeezus out of the QB. If he gets it off, it likely won't be a good throw, or to a spot where the secondary can do something about it before a player reaches the EZ.
It was just bad all the way around.
-
Yeah, they rushed TWO and kept a spy in the middle, so I guess you could say 3 at the line with 8 in coverage. Like.....with 6 full seconds, you expect somebody to get home, no matter how good the protection is. And if you don't, well, they only have to cover the endzone and enough real estate in front of it for a ball carrier to plausibly advance to the endzone before being tackled. I estimate about out to the 10 yard line. Shouldn't have a guy open in the corner. And really, in that situation, I think it's probably safer to keep the secondary back and blitz the bejeezus out of the QB. If he gets it off, it likely won't be a good throw, or to a spot where the secondary can't do something about it before a player reaches the EZ.
It was just bad all the way around.
I absolutely hate it when they simply put almost zero pressure on the QB and he has all day to make a throw like that. I'd rather get burned blitzing and fail then just give them all day like that.
-
We had something similar happen in about 2004 vs OU. Our best receiver/PR muffed the punt near the end of the game with A&M leading, OU recovered on like the 5 yard line or something. Trying to remember our PR guys name, it was a terrible mistake that pretty much cost us the game. It was later found out when he barely got into the NFL he had some kind of major injury or suffered one early or something and never played pro ball. Terrance Murphy, I just remembered. He's supposedly a big shot business man in BCS area now.
I was at the 2004 game in College Station between A&M and OU. I don't remember the muffed punt, but I remember some other details, some apparently incorrectly. I thought I remembered A&M taking a 28-14 lead into the half, but I looked it up and it was 28-21. And the final score was closer than I remembered.....I thought OU kinda shut down A&M in the second half and ran away with it, but A&M did score a TD in the 4th and it was a one score game. But the 14-0 3rd quarter in favor of OU makes my memory think second-half blowout, similar to what A&M just did to LSU, although OU only took a 7 pt lead into the 4th, according to the webz. I also remember a great desire from the fans there for revenge and redemption, because, iirc, the year earlier was when OU had mercilessly beaten A&M 77-0, which is still the worst thing I've ever seen on television, ever.
I believe (didn't look this up) Reggie McNeal was the Aggie QB at that time. I know for sure Adrian Peterson was with OU that day, and I was highly impressed by him in person.
My one and only foray into the Aggie sanctuary, to this day. My cousin was a student at the time and I met him there, though I don't think we were sitting the student section. We had really good seats tho, and I was there. In a green shirt. Literally the only person in the entire section, perhaps stadium, not wearing maroon. I've wondered, since that game was probably on tv, if the camera ever caught the oddity.....I should've stuck out like a sore thumb. I later would spend more than a year working in College Station, but I never went back to a game.
A girl I was after at the time was in the cool-kids suite because she was also being pursued by the Chancellor's son.....this schmuck, who had just put this book out. (https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/your-body-your-life-eating-and-exercise-fundamentals_scott-mcteer/2979979/#edition=35380239)....so she had the luxury-box experience that day. He was older than me, had a way better lifestyle (dunno if he made lots of money or his family just had it, or both) and drove a way nicer car than me. Fortunately, he had the personality of a platypus (my opinion, no one else's) and I got her anyway. She was a Longhorn fan anyway, from Austin, where I knew her from, so there was really no sense in her getting tangled up with an Aggie like that. Made way more sense to get tangled up with a poor, but way cooler, tiger like myself.
Anyway, it was a good time with a great atmosphere, I reckon. Just never could figure out why the fan chants kept sawing the Horns off.....of Oklahoma?
-
What's worse is when the other team rushes two linemen and get a sack.
-
It's a pity, as I said before, that making the CG can have a pretty dark downside.
-
What's worse is when the other team rushes two linemen and get a sack.
We've gotten sacked all year when 3 DLs rush against our 5 OLs. First it was frustrating, then it was just sad, and finally it was kinda funny. Sean McDonough seemed to be actually irritated by the whole thing during our Alabama game, which was funny, because those guys don't usually express sentiments like that, especially for teams they have no vested interest in.
-
I was at the 2004 game in College Station between A&M and OU. I don't remember the muffed punt, but I remember some other details, some apparently incorrectly. I thought I remembered A&M taking a 28-14 lead into the half, but I looked it up and it was 28-21. And the final score was closer than I remembered.....I thought OU kinda shut down A&M in the second half and ran away with it, but A&M did score a TD in the 4th and it was a one score game. But the 14-0 3rd quarter in favor of OU makes my memory think second-half blowout, similar to what A&M just did to LSU, although OU only took a 7 pt lead into the 4th, according to the webz. I also remember a great desire from the fans there for revenge and redemption, because, iirc, the year earlier was when OU had mercilessly beaten A&M 77-0, which is still the worst thing I've ever seen on television, ever.
I believe (didn't look this up) Reggie McNeal was the Aggie QB at that time. I know for sure Adrian Peterson was with OU that day, and I was highly impressed by him in person.
My one and only foray into the Aggie sanctuary, to this day. My cousin was a student at the time and I met him there, though I don't think we were sitting the student section. We had really good seats tho, and I was there. In a green shirt. Literally the only person in the entire section, perhaps stadium, not wearing maroon. I've wondered, since that game was probably on tv, if the camera ever caught the oddity.....I should've stuck out like a sore thumb. I later would spend more than a year working in College Station, but I never went back to a game.
A girl I was after at the time was in the cool-kids suite because she was also being pursued by the Chancellor's son.....this schmuck, who had just put this book out. (https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/your-body-your-life-eating-and-exercise-fundamentals_scott-mcteer/2979979/#edition=35380239)....so she had the luxury-box experience that day. He was older than me, had a way better lifestyle (dunno if he made lots of money or his family just had it, or both) and drove a way nicer car than me. Fortunately, he had the personality of a platypus (my opinion, no one else's) and I got her anyway. She was a Longhorn fan anyway, from Austin, where I knew her from, so there was really no sense in her getting tangled up with an Aggie like that. Made way more sense to get tangled up with a poor, but way cooler, tiger like myself.
Anyway, it was a good time with a great atmosphere, I reckon. Just never could figure out why the fan chants kept sawing the Horns off.....of Oklahoma?
A little more backstory...in 2000 A&M nearly upset OU at Kyle. A very late int-return-TD was the difference. This was the OU national championship team. In 2002, we beat #1 OU at Kyle, RC's last season. In 2003, OU decapitated us 77-0. I didn't actually watch the game, but I heard it was an abject disaster. Somebody should do a 20+ years later backstory on that one, because that score is absurd. I heard that OU actually quit playing sometime during the 3rd quarter, just backups and falling down and stuff, it was that bad.
So yes the 2004 game was a heartbreaker. I don't think we beat OU again until 2010, but we came real close at Kyle again in about 2006. The worst part was that in 2010 we beat OU, by 10 points or something, but lost the 3 way tie to represent the Big 12 South in the CCG. What a shame.
-
A little more backstory...in 2000 A&M nearly upset OU at Kyle. A very late int-return-TD was the difference. This was the OU national championship team. In 2002, we beat #1 OU at Kyle, RC's last season. In 2003, OU decapitated us 77-0. I didn't actually watch the game, but I heard it was an abject disaster. Somebody should do a 20+ years later backstory on that one, because that score is absurd. I heard that OU actually quit playing sometime during the 3rd quarter, just backups and falling down and stuff, it was that bad.
I watched it on TV. I had second-hand embarrassment and anger. They didn't score in the 4th quarter, and I think their tailback (Kejuan Jones?) did fall down at some point at the angry behest of the OU coaches, for fear he was about to score again. But as I recall, OU pretty much quit throwing the ball the entire second half. I kept thinking they're embarrassing A&M, but what are they supposed to do, they're playing the most vanilla, predictable game possible at this point, but A&M just won't stop them. A&M looked flat out slow compared to OU. I don't know if the difference in athleticism was that great, because there can be a difference in true speed and game speed, but it was near comical on tv. The Aggies looked like they were running in mud compared to the OU kids.
Actually, in 2019 I hoped we piled on A&M worse and beat that record due to the mind-boggling 7 OT game we lost the year before where we won it twice before we finally lost it (thanks, refs). I also hoped we did the same thing to Oklahoma in the playoffs, just to say we got them worse than they got the Aggies that day. In both cases, I think we could've busted 77 if they'd kept the pedal to the metal, though we weren't going to hold OU to 0 points with CeeDee Lamb.
But it kinda underscores how.....bad....A&M looked that day. Even having watched it, it's hard to fathom trying to hit the brakes, and you still win 77-0.
-
Well it has to be obvious that the kids quit on the coaches. There were trickles of information coming out years later where it was alluded that the players ended up hating Coach Fran, he was abusive, all kinds of innuendo.
Weirdly, we beat somebody else right before that game 70 something, but it wasn’t 70 to zero. Like 70-20 or something. It may have been Baylor.
If you think about it, even when teams like The Citadel play Alabama, they usually score a few points. Maybe 3 or 10. 55-6, 45-3. But 77-0? Never happens.
-
Yeah, both the 77 and the 0 are highly irregular and hard to come by. To have both of them happen in the same game is.....something.
apropos of nothing, Dusty Dvoracek was on that OU team. I hated him as a broadcaster in his early days, but he's one of the ones who really improved over his first few years and now I don't mind when he's in the booth at all.
-
Again, I've always felt that there had to be a little backstory to that one. Something behind the scenes that transpired, either between Fran and Stoops, or possibly some of the players who had to have had some kind of relationship either in HS or whatever. Just simply winning the previous years game by a slim margin isn't enough motivation to kill somebody like that.
-
I missed the Big 12 Championship game that year against K-State where apparently Darren Sproles went berserk on OU, so I never knew exactly what happened on the field in that game and if there were any clues as to a story behind it. I remember feeling like the media couldn't have been helpful, who spent the entire week explaining that OU's lead in the BCS was so commanding that they could lose the game and still be ranked #1. Turns out, they were proved to be correct. I wondered if the OU players heard all that and if that kind of thing can get in your head. KSU has to be given their due credit too, of course.
What I did know (I thought, at least) was that they were a far, far better team than the B12CG showed, and they were gonna be pissed, especially with the media thereafter acting like they hadn't been hyping them up all year as the Greatest Team Of All Time and crying and moaning for a USC vs. LSU matchup and to leave OU out. OU was going to be more dangerous than ever. And they had murder-balled nearly every team, sans KSU. And despite the 2001 SEC CG two years earlier for LSU, which seemed a bit fluky anyway, my brain was still stuck in the 90's and I didn't perceive LSU the way I would in the years that followed. And the NC was in fact a close affair, 21-14 with a defensive TD being the difference. And that remained my perception for quite a while.
One day I rewatched that NC game, and then sometime later I rewatched it again just to be sure I wasn't crazy the first time. Rewatching without emotion and without adrenaline and excitement......LSU whipped OU's ass that day, everywhere except the scoreboard. The game shouldn't have been a one-score game, and OU was lucky to keep it that way. They gained 154 total yards, less than half of what LSU gained, and just 52 rushing, which isn't going to win you many games. LSU won the turnover battle and also the field position battle most of the game. OU got half their points on a turnover that gave them first and goal, and then they still needed a penalty and an extra set of downs to get the ball in the endzone. Only a dumb LSU penalty when the players were pretty much already celebrating near the end kept LSU from scoring again, at least a FG to make it a two-score game.
I think I credit that game with making me expect LSU to hang with the big dogs instead of expecting a loss.
Also, Bob Stoops kicked a puppy during that game.
-
I missed the Big 12 Championship game that year against K-State where apparently Darren Sproles went berserk on OU, so I never knew exactly what happened on the field in that game and if there were any clues as to a story behind it. I remember feeling like the media couldn't have been helpful, who spent the entire week explaining that OU's lead in the BCS was so commanding that they could lose the game and still be ranked #1. Turns out, they were proved to be correct. I wondered if the OU players heard all that and if that kind of thing can get in your head. KSU has to be given their due credit too, of course.
What I did know (I thought, at least) was that they were a far, far better team than the B12CG showed, and they were gonna be pissed, especially with the media thereafter acting like they hadn't been hyping them up all year as the Greatest Team Of All Time and crying and moaning for a USC vs. LSU matchup and to leave OU out. OU was going to be more dangerous than ever. And they had murder-balled nearly every team, sans KSU. And despite the 2001 SEC CG two years earlier for LSU, which seemed a bit fluky anyway, my brain was still stuck in the 90's and I didn't perceive LSU the way I would in the years that followed. And the NC was in fact a close affair, 21-14 with a defensive TD being the difference. And that remained my perception for quite a while.
One day I rewatched that NC game, and then sometime later I rewatched it again just to be sure I wasn't crazy the first time. Rewatching without emotion and without adrenaline and excitement......LSU whipped OU's ass that day, everywhere except the scoreboard. The game shouldn't have been a one-score game, and OU was lucky to keep it that way. They gained 154 total yards, less than half of what LSU gained, and just 52 rushing, which isn't going to win you many games. LSU won the turnover battle and also the field position battle most of the game. OU got half their points on a turnover that gave them first and goal, and then they still needed a penalty and an extra set of downs to get the ball in the endzone. Only a dumb LSU penalty when the players were pretty much already celebrating near the end kept LSU from scoring again, at least a FG to make it a two-score game.
I think I credit that game with making me expect LSU to hang with the big dogs instead of expecting a loss.
Also, Bob Stoops kicked a puppy during that game.
I do remember all the hype about that OU team. This was when the Big 12 was still a "proper" conference, and before UT had won their MNC in 2005. But there for awhile, it was all-OU. The SEC at the time was not near as elite as it is considered to be now. Anyways I don't think hardly anybody gave LSU much chance to win the game, and still to this day I kinda regard that BCS game as when the SEC "came into it's own", and started a pretty long winning streak of BCS/MNC/CFP championships. I think that the SEC went on to win like 9/10 of all the MNC after that game, with the exception being 2005 Texas, and USC in 04.
-
Yeah, maybe retroactively it could be viewed that way. As you said, USC and Texas won the next two years, so I'm not sure how it was perceived at the time.
Florida began the SEC's BCS run in earnest in the 2006 season. People really gave them no chance against Ohio State, but they blew them out. In my perception, that was the game set the SEC apart from the rest for a while. Which did coincide with the actual SEC run from '06 - '12.
-
I think the pre-SEC IS THE BEST consensus on the SEC was more like we had elite, special defensive linemen. That was THE thing about the SEC then. We had 280 lb dudes running a 4.6 forty yard dash. That was the acknowledged, complimentary thing about us.
And then 2006 happened, which coincided with both FSU and Miami having downturns. Those 2 being out of it, coupled with Big Ten top teams having a ceiling below SEC teams, really allowed for the SEC's dominance.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/4LTH3bo.png)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/4LTH3bo.png)
So to recap rooting interests:
Texas A&M fans are rooting for Auburn and Clanga this week.
Georgia fans are rooting for Auburn and/or Texas.
Ole Miss fans are also rooting for Auburn and Texas.
And....even I generally root for Auburn in the Iron Bowl.
That is way too much rooting for Auburn. Ew.
-
Texas A&M is a 2.5-point favorite against Texas. The over/under for the total points scored in the game is set at 51.5. Moneyline odds for the game list Texas A&M at -134 and Texas at +112.
-
Auburn is a 5.5 point dog, oddly enough.
A&M should win about 58% of the time, Bama should win about 60% of the time.
-
Auburn is a 5.5 point dog, oddly enough.
A&M should win about 58% of the time, Bama should win about 60% of the time.
Could you explain how that works? 118%?
-
Different games.
-
So they are. "A&M" does not equal "Auburn."
-
So they are. "A&M" does not equal "Auburn."
A&M Auburn and Alabama, all "A" schools. I can see the confusion.
-
A&M Auburn and Alabama, all "A" schools. I can see the confusion.
Further confusion for people stuck in the past (like me): From 1872 to 1899, Auburn was The Agricultural and Mechanical College of Alabama (1872–1899)
-
Cincy isn't stuck in the past, he IS the past.
-
I don't get the A&M-Texas line. The Aggies are legit and Texas is....not great.
-
I don't get the A&M-Texas line. The Aggies are legit and Texas is....not great.
Honestly I think we’re very evenly matched. Games at Austin, HFA.
-
Teams with those spreads win about 60% of the time.
Texas A&M is a 3.5 point favorite and "should win" about 58% of the time.
Alabama is a 5.5 point favorite and should win about 60& of the time.
By "should win", of course, I mean teams in the past with those spreads win about that often. The possibility that one of them loses is then about 65%.
Kirby says he wants to be in the CG, which is what he should be saying. If UGA misses the CG it'll be interesting to see if they get dropped out of the #4 slot, presuming they beat Tech.
UGA is a 13 point favorite over Tech, which to me looks like an overly large spread.
-
Further confusion for people stuck in the past (like me): From 1872 to 1899, Auburn was The Agricultural and Mechanical College of Alabama (1872–1899)
Not many people know that LSU's full name is Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College.
-
UGA is a 13 point favorite over Tech, which to me looks like an overly large spread.
Why is the game being played at the Falcons place, and how long has that been going on?
Why do teams feel the need to do stuff like this? Games between the hedges are awesome, and presumably Bobby Dodd stadium has it's own unique flare too, almost every place does. Why sterilize this in an NFL venue like it's the SEC CG?
-
I don't get the A&M-Texas line. The Aggies are legit and Texas is....not great.
Was just looking at the FEI and F+ advanced stats. Can't see the S&P+ anymore since Bill Connolly tooks his toys and went home behind a paywall, but the F+ is some undefined combination of the S&P+ (per play metric) and FEI (per drive metric).
Texas is ranked #21 overall in the F+, with the 12th ranked defense and 38th ranked offense. Texas A&M is #9 overall in the F+, with the 16 ranked defense and 8th ranked offense.
If you use a little non-artificial intelligence to polish that summary, it could be argued that Texas' offense of late is now better than it's F+ season average.
Since the game is in Austin, it seems to have the statistical makings of a good game. We'll see.
-
F+ for LSU @ OU:
LSU is ranked #32 overall, with the 9th ranked defense and 77th ranked offense.
OU is ranked #13 overall, with the 4th ranked defense and 45th ranked offense.
Wouldn't expect much scoring here, but OU certainly has the edge.
Add to that, the special teams rankings have OU #5 and LSU #60.
I'm a little surprised the injuries and poor showing against dual threat QBs didn't hurt LSU's defensive ranking more, but they've been really good against QBs who don't do a lot of damage with their legs.
-
Why is the game being played at the Falcons place, and how long has that been going on?
Why do teams feel the need to do stuff like this? Games between the hedges are awesome, and presumably Bobby Dodd stadium has it's own unique flare too, almost every place does. Why sterilize this in an NFL venue like it's the SEC CG?
This has been going on for, I dunno, zero years.
Why do most things happen in life today? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
MB stadium does have more seats than the Tech stadium. Tech is no doubt getting a handsome payout. Bobby Dodd stadium at Grant Field is an ancient stadium in dire need of updates. It's probably the ugliest venue I've visited.
-
Before the UGA-Texas game, I glanced at scores of course, and noted Texas had been in some close ones against lesser quality teams, and of course got ambushed in the Swamp. On the other hand, they have a ton of talent, enough to be very dangerous. They beat OU in a rivalry of course and Vandy, who looks pretty solid. But like GaTech, a team with a nice record but a lot of close wins might not be all that and "regress to the mean".
Anyway, we all know real rivalry games seem often to go against the spread.
-
Georgia Tech Cashes In on Home Game Move With Zero Regrets | Fanrecap.com (https://fanrecap.com/georgia-tech-yellow-jackets/georgia-tech-cashes-in-on-home-game-move-with-zero-regrets--gbrlH?utm_source=georgia-tech-yellow-jackets&utm_medium=SS&utm_campaign=ncaaf-mk&utm_content=378046855691247&utm_term=pp&fbclid=IwY2xjawOSvM9leHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFxSUZPcHFZbTNIc0c4VkI4c3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHnlVIvS1086-alde00W4pfCG2ARODzg1-6tmsA6X6CBSeZ4_wbjxmbwv5aCT_aem_rsvfhVnu4QDynbyCH8aCCw)
But when Georgia Tech faces off against archrival Georgia this Friday, it won’t be at their historic home stadium. Instead, the two teams will meet just a few miles away at Mercedes-Benz Stadium, a neutral-site venue that could very well tilt in Georgia’s favor when it comes to crowd noise.
The reason? Georgia Tech sold the rights to host the game for $10 million.
That decision, made more than a year ago by a now-departed athletic director, came at a time when the Yellow Jackets were still trying to find their footing under head coach Brent Key. The program wasn’t yet flirting with College Football Playoff contention.
-
Not many people know that LSU's full name is Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College.
I don't think that most people know that William T. Sherman was on the faculty president of what was then known as the Louisiana State Seminary of Learning & Military Academy right before the Civil War.
In late 1860, he wrote this to a friend on the faculty:
You people of the South don’t know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don’t know what you’re talking about. War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it … Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth — right at your doors. You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail.
-
William Tecumseh Sherman was the first president of the Louisiana State Seminary of Learning and Military Academy, the institution that would eventually become LSU. He served from 1859 to 1861, during which time he established the school's curriculum, hired professors, and wrote its rules. He was responsible for teaching engineering and military tactics to the cadets.
-
Ahah! Thank you for the correction, CD.
-
Sherman is pretty quotable, I think. He's probably my favorite CW general, oddly enough. Maybe his tactics were not brilliant all the time, but he seemed to have a strategic grasp of how to end the dang war. I wonder at times how he would have handled the Army of the Potomac in 1864.
But I digress.
-
Before the UGA-Texas game, I glanced at scores of course, and noted Texas had been in some close ones against lesser quality teams, and of course got ambushed in the Swamp. On the other hand, they have a ton of talent, enough to be very dangerous. They beat OU in a rivalry of course and Vandy, who looks pretty solid. But like GaTech, a team with a nice record but a lot of close wins might not be all that and "regress to the mean".
Anyway, we all know real rivalry games seem often to go against the spread.
Spread? I'm not sure. Gambling is for stupid people and I'm not stupid.
As far as the old rivalry saying "throw out the record books!" Well, Texas-TAMU really isn't like this. There are occasional upsets but generally the better team wins.
-
Spread? I'm not sure. Gambling is for stupid people and I'm not stupid.
As far as the old rivalry saying "throw out the record books!" Well, Texas-TAMU really isn't like this. There are occasional upsets but generally the better team wins.
As far as the game THIS year is concerned, I expect it to be pretty close, I expect a lot of offense, I expect a lot of what appears to be defensive breakdowns, and I think Texas will win by just a bit.
The Horns are playing putrid on the road but if you look at the home plus neutral site games, Texas plays much better when they're not a true visitor.
If this game were in College Station I'd predict an Ag win. I'm very glad it's in Austin this year.
But I'll go ahead and tell myself-- the Texas-TAMU thread is over there ------> :)
-
I don't think that most people know that William T. Sherman was on the faculty president of what was then known as the Louisiana State Seminary of Learning & Military Academy right before the Civil War.
In late 1860, he wrote this to a friend on the faculty:
You people of the South don’t know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don’t know what you’re talking about. War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it … Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth — right at your doors. You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail.
Yes, I knew that Sherman was the first president at LSU (not "LSU" back then). I have not ever read that letter. Rather prescient, and well-worded. He appears to have been a decent writer.
I'm not nearly enough of a historian know the ins and outs, but the Mississippi River is such an important trade commodity that it seems the South should have expected some advantage as far as trade with Europe and anyone else, contrary to Sherman's words here. Its ports, presumably, would've been under control of the South.
But maybe he meant something else, or the situation was, most likely, much more intricate than I understand.
-
Sherman is pretty quotable, I think. He's probably my favorite CW general, oddly enough. Maybe his tactics were not brilliant all the time, but he seemed to have a strategic grasp of how to end the dang war. I wonder at times how he would have handled the Army of the Potomac in 1864.
But I digress.
From what little I learned about him in school, he seems to be regarded as not nearly the military mind of Robert E. Lee--who may have been the only reason the under-supplied South had any success at all.
He did have enough sense to burn Atlanta to the ground, which in my estimation should probably be taken as the beginning of LSU's all-time dominance over UGA :)
-
https://www.historicalpublicationsllc.com/civilwarnews/the-burning-of-atlanta-what-really-happened/article_0f304440-34f0-11ed-acfc-7b4f80e30e60.html
-
Whatever the real story, it's quite something that anyone would've even thought about burning the churches.
-
Yes, I knew that Sherman was the first president at LSU (not "LSU" back then). I have not ever read that letter. Rather prescient, and well-worded. He appears to have been a decent writer.
Sherman and Grant were both good writers. Clear communicators.
I'm not nearly enough of a historian know the ins and outs, but the Mississippi River is such an important trade commodity that it seems the South should have expected some advantage as far as trade with Europe and anyone else, contrary to Sherman's words here. Its ports, presumably, would've been under control of the South.
But maybe he meant something else, or the situation was, most likely, much more intricate than I understand.
Union forces captured New Orleans on 1 May 1862. That blocked most sea traffic into and out of the Mississippi River. The Confederacy wasted 1861 as far as exporting its most valuable commodity--cotton. Jefferson Davis announced a boycott of cotton to Europe in an attempt to force Britain and France to recognize the CSA and to provide military aid. It didn't work, because 1860 had seen a bumper cotton crop, so the British cotton mills had a lot of raw cotton left over. That was typical of the CSA's maladroit diplomacy.
-
Fires of course tend to spread. Atlanta had a pretty bad fire in 1917 that spread quite bit. We live in the northwest portion of said map. The railroad is now the Beltline.
(https://i.imgur.com/NgSkOPa.png)
100 Years After the Fire | Atlanta History Center (https://www.atlantahistorycenter.com/blog/new-entry/)
And there wasn't just one "fire" when Sherman had the city burned, the Confederates started one before they left which was localized to the downtown area. Sherman ordered brick buildings to be demolished before he left. Apparently his troops took to burning indiscriminantly against his orders. A lot of the city did burn at that time, it wasn't of course that large a place, about 10,000 residents. so maybe 2500 residences or so.
But I digress.
-
Sherman and Grant were both good writers. Clear communicators.
Union forces captured New Orleans on 1 May 1862. That blocked most sea traffic into and out of the Mississippi River. The Confederacy wasted 1861 as far as exporting its most valuable commodity--cotton. Jefferson Davis announced a boycott of cotton to Europe in an attempt to force Britain and France to recognize the CSA and to provide military aid. It didn't work, because 1860 had seen a bumper cotton crop, so the British cotton mills had a lot of raw cotton left over. That was typical of the CSA's maladroit diplomacy.
Britain also found Egypt could grow cotton pretty well ....
-
From what little I learned about him in school, he seems to be regarded as not nearly the military mind of Robert E. Lee--who may have been the only reason the under-supplied South had any success at all.
Lee was best at the tactical and operational levels of war. When it came to strategy, he wasn't so great. His focus on the Richmond-Washington area left everything west of the Smokies under-resourced.
-
Lee was best at the tactical and operational levels of war. When it came to strategy, he wasn't so great. His focus on the Richmond-Washington area left everything west of the Smokies under-resourced.
He did send Longstreet's corps to Georgia in 1863 when Virginia was in a lull. There was talk of sending him to Vicksburg before Gettysburg, but Lee of course figured a victory in the north would seal it. Lee really benefitted from having indecisive Northern commanders like Hooker, who figured the battle was won, no need to do anything else.
I tend to think "historical opinions" of military leaders gets overblown, usually, one way or the other, then over corrected, the over over corrected.
I've been reading more about Hannibal and Alexander and Caesar and Martel, and a few others. They are either reported as being incredibly fantastic or really not all that.
-
He did send Longstreet's corps to Georgia in 1863 when Virginia was in a lull. There was talk of sending him to Vicksburg before Gettysburg, but Lee of course figured a victory in the north would seal it. Lee really benefitted from having indecisive Northern commanders like Hooker, who figured the battle was won, no need to do anything else.
I tend to think "historical opinions" of military leaders gets overblown, usually, one way or the other, then over corrected, the over over corrected.
I've been reading more about Hannibal and Alexander and Caesar and Martel, and a few others. They are either reported as being incredibly fantastic or really not all that.
Shelby Foote--who was a writer, not a historian, contrary to what Civil War "buffs" think--wrote that Battle of Gettysburg was "the price the Confederacy payed for having R.E. Lee." I'm not a big fan of Foote, but I think he got that one right.
Lee's rationales for the campaign that culminated at Gettysburg were really rationalizations, IMO. Defeating the Union forces that were in and/or threatening northern Virginia was too important to him, and by Jun 1863, there was no one in authority who had the stones to overrule him. Lee's offensives into the North were beyond what the Confederacy could afford, and his two big ones were disasters. Antietam was close enough to a Union victory that Lincoln could issue the Emancipation Proclamation, ending the prospect that Britain and France might intervene and opening an artery into the Confederacy's domestic labor force. Gettysburg was a terrible bloodletting from which the ANVA never fully recovered.
Re your final comment, I think that writers of military history tend to be either advocates or debunkers. What's the motivation for writing balanced treatments of mediocrities?
-
Britain also found Egypt could grow cotton pretty well ....
Yep! And India too, I think.
-
I don't get the A&M-Texas line. The Aggies are legit and Texas is....not great.
Honestly I think we’re very evenly matched. Games at Austin, HFA.
Yup, this. Texas has been a talented but erratic team playing below its capability all season, and A&M has been a very good but not great team playing a little over its head all season. I predicted a Texas win and the game went about as I expected-- a tough and gritty matchup with two evenly matched teams going at it for 60 minutes.
Ironically, if the Aggies hadn't insisted on playing Texas at home in our first season in the SEC last year, and thus had us at home this year, I have no doubt that the outcome of this game would have been the opposite. Texas has been terrible on the road all season long and A&M would have punished us for it.
Anyway, the Ags will get to "laugh all the way to the bank" as they go to their first playoff while Texas sits at home. Congrats the Texas A&M on an excellent season and I wish them good luck from here on out. I really want to see how they stack up against the rest of the elite in the post-season.
-
Ironically, if the Aggies hadn't insisted on playing Texas at home in our first season in the SEC last year, and thus had us at home this year, I have no doubt that the outcome of this game would have been the opposite. Texas has been terrible on the road all season long and A&M would have punished us for it.
Anyway, the Ags will get to "laugh all the way to the bank" as they go to their first playoff while Texas sits at home. Congrats the Texas A&M on an excellent season and I wish them good luck from here on out. I really want to see how they stack up against the rest of the elite in the post-season.
I had this same thought. They pushed for that when Jimbo was still our coach. I have no idea why, it seems misguided at best. But, in both games the SECCCG was on the line. I don’t recall if this was a real thing or if the SEC just randomly decided it. It was reported by MBG (message board geniuses).
I still think Texas has a good shot for the CFP, but I don’t know exactly how it all works. Weren’t there several 9-3 teams that got in last year?
-
I had this same thought. They pushed for that when Jimbo was still our coach. I have no idea why, it seems misguided at best. But, in both games the SECCCG was on the line. I don’t recall if this was a real thing or if the SEC just randomly decided it. It was reported by MBG (message board geniuses).
I still think Texas has a good shot for the CFP, but I don’t know exactly how it all works. Weren’t there several 9-3 teams that got in last year?
Maybe? I really don't remember how it went down, either. I'd be thrilled to see Texas in the CFP, obviously, if it's even a remote possibility.
I did see you comment on another thread that it would send a bad message for punishing Texas for scheduling Ohio State and then losing to them, and I think that idea has some merit. It really will be interesting to see what happens.
But if Texas doesn't get into the playoff I won't grouse about it. Your record is your record, ultimately. This year's Texas team is good but not elite, but there's a lot to build on for next year.
-
Yeah, it always kind of makes me laugh about some CBB team or pro team with a so so record making a big deal about not getting in or trying to get into the NCAA tournament or the playoffs. I mean truly when you watch a team that is clearly not a good team why do you care so much? Houston Texans are a great example. They’re hovering around .500 right now, maybe 6-5. A lot of their wins are close ones, some of their losses are not. It’s not like they had a couple of losses earlier in the season and have improved, on either side of the ball. Nobody believes they can do much in the playoffs yet it still gets a lot of hype.
Same thing with one of our basketball teams a few years ago. They were a very hot and cold team, won a bunch of big games but lost some head scratchers. Lot of griping about getting left out but I actually thought it was better because they ended up playing for the title in the NIT.
-
I actually think Texas could be a decent playoff team, they’re clearly a better team at the end of the year. Arch has come a long way and is proven to be a quite capable QB. The way he handled the 2nd half offense last night you simply have to be impressed by him.
-
A&M vs Texas is why I don't bet on 20 year-olds playing football.
Arch impressed me...with his speed. Funny how he is fast as shit and has a janky throwing motion, but no one is suggesting a position change. No WR-playing-QB talk. I guess it's his last name.
No team with 3 losses can complain about being left out. Don't lose 3 times. Duh.
Last year Alabama, Ole Miss, and South Carolina were 3-loss teams who were left out behind 2-loss SMU.
-
Wow. Auburn and Bama tied. 4th quarter. I didn’t see this one coming.
-
Well my preseason pick is still in it and already beat their opponent.
-
The ACC Championship Game reminds me of an old Jefferson Pilot noon game. For real.
-
A&M vs Texas is why I don't bet on 20 year-olds playing football.
Arch impressed me...with his speed. Funny how he is fast as shit and has a janky throwing motion, but no one is suggesting a position change. No WR-playing-QB talk. I guess it's his last name.
No team with 3 losses can complain about being left out. Don't lose 3 times. Duh.
Last year Alabama, Ole Miss, and South Carolina were 3-loss teams who were left out behind 2-loss SMU.
Who's complaining?
-
https://twitter.com/zach_barnett/status/1994948611554381835?s=61
-
I see UGA is a 1.5 point favorite, which basically is pick'em. They do have the Bama monkey at play.
Which is the better team? No idea, probably neither.
-
My own personal opinion. The problem with UGA is right between their ears. Put Bama in any other uniform, they win handily. Something about that A just messes them up.
-
I was rooting for either an A&M win, or UGA/Bama losses, or basically anything that would avoid UGA/Bama in the CG.
Ugh.
I might actually skip it for the first time ever. I'm tired of both of them, and Ohio State too.
-
Had UGA lost to Tech, guess what?
-
I saw an ESPN guy on the ESPN CFB page arguing that CCGs are worse than worthless. And I think he's right. When making the CFP becomes the primary goal, as it has become, the CCG is more of a road-block than a help. Before we had CCGs, we never had a problem determining the champs, or accepting that there were co-champs at times.
But . . . $$$.
-
We also didn't have 16 team conferences back then, which is a problem when determining a champ.
-
We also didn't have 16 team conferences back then, which is a problem when determining a champ.
It drives me insane because every single SEC team at the top has 1 conference loss. So you end up with all these tie-breakers. And then you go to some formula to break the tie-breaker, and of course it splits for UGA-Bama. Honestly, with the advent of the CFP and 12 teams able to get in, it no longer makes sense to do it this way. It made sense under the old BCS to have the best team play in the CCG to give them a chance for a BCS game. There was only one game, two teams.
I don't see what it would hurt to include the teams that have went the longest without a title. It should have been A&M-Ole Miss. It would probably draw more ratings (given that Kiffin was still the coach and what not). And yes I'm totally a homer about this but I would feel the same way if it was Miss State or OM or Kentucky or anybody except Fla-Bama. I think I may not watch just in protest. If we did it this way, both Bama and UGA would still get into the CFP, the winner of the SEC CCG would get in, and quite possibly the loser would get in as well, depending on how the rest of the chips fall.
-
UGA has not played in the CG in nearly a year.
-
UGA has not played in the CG in nearly a year.
Somebody might want to sue.
-
I was rooting for either an A&M win, or UGA/Bama losses, or basically anything that would avoid UGA/Bama in the CG.
Ugh.
I might actually skip it for the first time ever. I'm tired of both of them, and Ohio State too.
I'm sure your wife was down with that!
-
If A&M had won, UGA would have been out. The UGA-Tech game was a nonfactor. I stopped watching the Bama-Barn game but understand it got close near the end.
UGA plays often in the MB dome. I attended one SEC CG with Bama a few years back and it was pretty loud on both sides. I don't know if playing often means anything or not, they just played there on Friday. They do get one more day of recovery.
-
I don't know that UGA has another mode. What they do, they do so well that it's hard to stop. It's fundamentally sound ball - even if it isn't all that exciting. Boring = wins when done correctly.
What I mean is that Alabama can push up their risk factor when they're facing (what I regard as) a superior opponent. Their offense can design a plan that is riskier but might generate enough to win. You don't want to live life that way, but 'Bama isn't 2nd best too often.
-
I'm sure your wife was down with that!
If she wanted my support, she could've shared her Thanksgiving Magic, of which she seemed to have plenty. In a matter of days, her Cowboys took down the Eagles, even after getting down 21-0, and then took out the Mahomie and the Chiefs, and then the Horns upended the Aggies. I asked her to spare some of that mojo so the Tigers could somehow, someway knock off OU, but she was stingy and did not comply.
-
If she wanted my support, she could've shared her Thanksgiving Magic, of which she seemed to have plenty. In a matter of days, her Cowboys took down the Eagles, even after getting down 21-0, and then took out the Mahomie and the Chiefs, and then the Horns upended the Aggies. I asked her to spare some of that mojo so the Tigers could somehow, someway knock off OU, but she was stingy and did not comply.
It woulda been good for the Horns, for OU to lose that game, so it's not like she was deliberately withholding...
:)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/KZYUrK6.jpeg)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/KZYUrK6.jpeg)
So that's:
Bama - 11
Fla - 7
UGA - 5
LSU - 5
AUB - 3
Tenn - 2
Wonder how many SECCG appearances each team has made. Arkansas joins the list, a division winner in '06. South Carolina, I think, in 2010. Off the top of my head, I'm struggling to think of any other teams to add. Mostly, even the SECCG losers come from this same list.
EDIT: Well, Texas last year, iirc. But I'm talking about real SEC teams, so come to think of it, get Arkansas and SCar outta there too :)
-
Missouri lost twice.
-
Miss St in 98.
-
Missouri lost twice.
Put 'em in the trash with USC, Arky, and Bevo. As Mr. Hoople used to say, "Learn to be SEC, boy."
-
Put 'em in the trash with USC, Arky, and Bevo. As Mr. Hoople used to say, "Learn to be SEC, boy."
All the Young Dudes can carry that news.
-
Cool to look back. Some great teams in there.
It's funny how much better the 01 Gators were than the 2000 team who won the SEC.
Arkansas got to Atlanta 3 times. 95, 08 and some other time.
It will be comical to see how long it takes one of the new big-boys to join the haves.
-
Texas did make it last season of course only to lose in OT. Sans that loss to Florida they would have made it this year I think.
I'm really pulling for Duke. A Duke win might well get Miami in over ND.
-
Texas did make it last season of course only to lose in OT. Sans that loss to Florida they would have made it this year I think.
I'm really pulling for Duke. A Duke win might well get Miami in over ND.
Yeah what would be the tie-breaker if they hadn't lost to Fla and instead only lost to UGa?
-
I don't know of course, complicated no doubt, something about record of SEC teams faced that season, which is why UGA gets in vs Bama while both are 7-1.
-
Yeah what would be the tie-breaker if they hadn't lost to Fla and instead only lost to UGa?
Yeah there would have been even one more, 1-loss team in that case. When it can't be decided by straight head-to-head it goes to some weird things like conference opponents win%, and other stuff.
That website you posted could probably tell us what would have happened in that scenario.
-
All I can tell you is my team didn't even sniff it, and maybe I'll rejoin an SEC Champion thread when baseball season gets here.
-
All I can tell you is my team didn't even sniff it, and maybe I'll rejoin an SEC Champion thread when baseball season gets here.
Yeah I don't have any interest in it either. I'm busy tomorrow with some volunteering, and then hosting our annual Christmas party. It's unlikely I'll have the TV on at all, other than maybe some Christmas movies during the party.
-
Yeah there would have been even one more, 1-loss team in that case. When it can't be decided by straight head-to-head it goes to some weird things like conference opponents win%, and other stuff.
That website you posted could probably tell us what would have happened in that scenario.
OK I went back and you can in fact change the past outcomes and it still shows UGa and Alabama, FFS.
Damn you Texas, you couldn't let A&M have this one little thing could you? :96:
-
OK I went back and you can in fact change the past outcomes and it still shows UGa and Alabama, FFS.
Damn you Texas, you couldn't let A&M have this one little thing could you? :96:
(https://i.imgur.com/6Kw5Hq6.png)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/6Kw5Hq6.png)
Bastage.
-
Sorry not sorry.
One thing's for sure, I don't think anyone can say the rivalry is dead.
-
Yeah I don't have any interest in it either. I'm busy tomorrow with some volunteering, and then hosting our annual Christmas party. It's unlikely I'll have the TV on at all, other than maybe some Christmas movies during the party.
I am a little interested in Texas Tech and then Indiana later in the evening, since I haven't seen much of Tech, and none of Indiana. So I hope to be able to catch those games. But I also have things to do tomorrow, and I'm likely to be out and about during the SECCG, and I've made no efforts to move any of it around or accommodate it some other way. Actually, even if I'm home for some of the 2:30 slot, I've still got no urge to watch the rematch of the same tired teams and will find something productive to do.
-
I don't even know when's the last year I didn't watch the SECCG.
-
(https://external-preview.redd.it/wM6BUBp4mxazaT8Jr_uv1kofht9lT8EC-UplGrabfK4.jpg?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=85b838ab93e4623626ae5f08bb51b8f317088f2e)
-
Holy cow, being Belloq is even worse than being a cockroach, I think!
-
Holy cow, being Belloq is even worse than being a cockroach, I think!
At least the wrath of God didn't explode the Aggies' heads at the end of the game.
Their heads only figuratively exploded.
-
Well, not to be morbid, but it’s been all over the headlines some attractive co-Ed jumped off a balcony after the game. Cops say suicide.
-
It’s all Marcus’ fault.
-
NOBODY picked Arkansas to win the SEC, shocked!
-
Who is this rookie?
-
It’s all Marcus’ fault.
Always is!
-
Georgia takes it. Yay, so excited. 🙄
(https://i.imgur.com/PdLwJ9C.png)
-
Congrats to the Georgia Bulldogs!
Do the two of us who predicted Georgia get a prize?
-
I'll note that I was one of the two that picked Georgia... congrats to CD and his Dawgs.
Now it's time to focus on volleyball and then baseball.
-
I'll note that I was one of the two that picked Georgia...
I'm pretty sure that I was the other one. So when and where do we get our prizes?
-
You boys really went out on a limb there. 🤣
I commend you!!
I picked LSU….doink **
-
I'll note that I was one of the two that picked Georgia... congrats to CD and his Dawgs.
Now it's time to focus on volleyball and then baseball.
-
We're a softball school!
-
I didn't pick UGA, not that it's relevant. I thought they were a "year away", too many really young players, and a mostly untested QB. The QB really exceeded expectations of nearly everyone. And they were able to run the ball some.
Kinda weird how they lost to Bama at home, and barely edged Tennessee, Ole Miss, and Auburn and Tech were close wins also. A bounce of the ball the other way and they could be 9-4.