Portland Frog
Full Member
Whoever loses Saturday needs to fall on the sword in CCG
Yep. Pull a 2014 Wisky.
Last edited:
Whoever loses Saturday needs to fall on the sword in CCG
is that what it says for you? In actuality and truth be told the committee has 3 Big 10 teams that all have 2 losses ahead of a 2 loss Big 12 team that got beat by TCU #6 in a close game and Oklahoma #5 in a shootout and close also. Ohio State lost by 30 last week to an unranked team. PSU lost 2 weeks in a row. Mich State lost at home to ND by 20 lost to the "N" and is currently a 16 point dog at Ohio S.
Whoever loses Saturday needs to fall on the sword in CCG
Not an ounce of TCU talk
And right on cue....the Contrarian, with no intelligent contribution.
Very suprised we are at 6...Interesting that we arent really hearing anything about TCU possibily winning Sat..It's as if everyone just thinks OU is a lock..They just said OU's offense is the most dominant unit in college football and is guaranteed lto put up 30 on anyone in the country
Moose is one of the few rational posters here.
How are you coping?It says OSU and Penn State moved down 7 spots each after their losses, Okie State moved down 4 spots after their loss, and MSU moved up 12 spots after their win.
How are you coping?
is that what it says for you? In actuality and truth be told the committee has 3 Big 10 teams that all have 2 losses ahead of a 2 loss Big 12 team that got beat by TCU #6 in a close game and Oklahoma #5 in a shootout and close also. Ohio State lost by 30 last week to an unranked team. PSU lost 2 weeks in a row. Mich State lost at home to ND by 20 lost to the "N" and is currently a 16 point dog at Ohio S.
Whoever loses Saturday needs to fall on the sword in CCG
The committee is giving us a not-so-subtle reminder of who to feed this week:
We would have jumped two spots whether we beat Kennedale HS or the 1985 Bears. Trying to make an argument that the conference doesn’t benefit from a good UT based on that is beyond silly.
Not to mention the fact that UT isn't good, yet by beating a not good UT we STILL jumped 2 spots and didn't get leapfrogged by Wisky nor the U. Doesn't that imply that we as a conference, in fact, DON'T need UT to be good to benefit from their deep blue blood?
We would have jumped two spots whether we beat Kennedale HS or the 1985 Bears. Trying to make an argument that the conference doesn’t benefit from a good UT based on that is beyond silly.
The odds of all of the top 5 plus Wisconsin all winning out before the CCGs are rare. But let's play what it anyways.
Let's say this happens:
Georgia - 12-0
Alabama - 12-0
ND (meaning they beat Miami) - 11-1
Clemson - 11-1
OU/TCU - 11-1
Wisconsin 12-0
Big scary possibility:
If Clemson doesn't lose their CCG, I'm not sure TCU will be able to get in at 12-1 over either GA or Bama at 12-1. You'll hear all the analysts say, "do you think TCU is better than either GA or Bama? If not, that's why they were left out."
Yes, which is a case for why we DON'T need them to be any good to still get that boost.To actually believe beating a 4-4 TT or K St. would have achieved the same result is naive.
Whether our thin skinned fan base like it or not beating UT did provide an additional bounce.
Ditto.I was a little surprised we didn’t get jumped by Miami but it literally makes no difference. Win this week and we’re going to LOVE where we’re sitting.
Beating UT did nothing for us other than adding another dominating win over another mediocre opponent. No one in that committee room has any respect for UT’s 2017 team.To actually believe beating a 4-4 TT or K St. would have achieved the same result is naive.
Whether our thin skinned fan base like it or not beating UT did provide an additional bounce.