• The KillerFrogs

2020 “Other” Bowl Games

CountryFrog

Active Member
I do try and be an objective fan. Why wouldn't I?

If we had a bunch of guys sitting out and we were getting beat by a team we thought we were better than, and they didn't have anyone sitting out, do you honestly think we'd say well, they are just better than us. Hell no, everyone would be sayin had we had those guys, the outcome would have been different. If that's being an objective fan, then I'm guilty as charged.

And I'd have had ZERO problem had they left Ohio State out of the playoffs for the reason you cite. It would have been hilarious for the Big 10.
Fair enough then on the last point. I just assumed that you held your standard position of the CFP always being right about everything.

As for the point about whether TCU fans would or wouldn't use missing players as an excuse for losing:
#1) That's another one of your favorite arguments when you don't have much else to fall back on. Wouldn't TCU fans be upset if... But I don't know how fan opinions actually back up any point because almost all fans are insane people with zero perspective.
#2) I don't know what board you've been reading as it relates to TCU fans because it seems to me there are a huge number of people here who are pissed with every single poor performance by our football and basketball team regardless of injuries, transfers, etc causing roster depletion.
 

OICU812

Active Member
I do try and be an objective fan. Why wouldn't I?

If we had a bunch of guys sitting out and we were getting beat by a team we thought we were better than, and they didn't have anyone sitting out, do you honestly think we'd say well, they are just better than us. Hell no, everyone would be sayin had we had those guys, the outcome would have been different. If that's being an objective fan, then I'm guilty as charged.

And I'd have had ZERO problem had they left Ohio State out of the playoffs for the reason you cite. It would have been hilarious for the Big 10.

Edit: And I'll add, had TCU been 6-0 this year and didn't play 3 additional games against, say, Kansas, Kansas State, and Texas Tech because those three teams opted out of the game, I don't think there's be many, if any, TCU fans saying we should not have received consideration for the playoffs. In fact, I think it'd be quite the opposite.

Maybe you should turn on the audio portion of this game. You'd know that at the very least Cincy is missing their all-conference starting RB who's 230 lbs and would undoubtedly be more helpful than the slow, petite guy who's playing in his place. I have no idea who else they might be missing, but when you pretend they aren't missing anybody you lose credibility.

Edit: Also BTW, since Cincy lost their all-conference starting LT in the first half, if they don't win it doesn't count.
 
Last edited:

Pharm Frog

Full Member
I do try and be an objective fan. Why wouldn't I?

If we had a bunch of guys sitting out and we were getting beat by a team we thought we were better than, and they didn't have anyone sitting out, do you honestly think we'd say well, they are just better than us. Hell no, everyone would be sayin had we had those guys, the outcome would have been different. If that's being an objective fan, then I'm guilty as charged.

And I'd have had ZERO problem had they left Ohio State out of the playoffs for the reason you cite. It would have been hilarious for the Big 10.

I disagree on a few points. First, your assertion that everyone would be saying that. If I count as one then that statement is false. Secondly, some would be saying the opt outs lacked Frog Factor. Thirdly, some would question why GP didn’t develop better depth from repeated 3rd best recruiting classes. Finally, it doesn’t matter if they are better on Tuesdays or last Saturday or whatever. If they beat you on the scoreboard they are better than you when it counts. Personally, if we were down to 14 scholarship players and the second place flag football intramural team, I think we should have showed up in Houston and played. Get beat by 72 points? I’d never suggest that we would have won if everyone had been available because they became irrelevant to the game.
 

CountryFrog

Active Member
Maybe you should turn on the audio portion of this game. You'd know that at the very least Cincy is missing their all-conference starting RB who's 230 lbs and would undoubtedly be more helpful than the slow, petite guy who's playing in his place. I have no idea who else they might be missing, but when you pretend they aren't missing anybody you lose credibility.
that's the other part of these arguments. No football team is ever actually playing at full strength. Nor is there ever a game played between 2 teams who have the exact same level of attrition. So while those things obviously impact games they are simply part of football.

And again, the fact that this excuse is being made for SEC teams who allegedly have so much more depth than everyone else is so ridiculous. They have tremendous depth that helps them be better than everyone else all the way up to the time where they actually have to use that depth and lose a game.
 

OICU812

Active Member
I don't disagree with that. But saying the outcome of this game supposedly proves that Cincy is a playoff-worthy team? No.

IDK if it's my screed you're referencing but if so, that's not what I said. At all. My take is that *regardless* of the final outcome, Cincy's play here, and throughout the season, shows they deserved to be there more than ND or tOSU. Because they actually played a full season, and won them all, and their ability to go toe-to-toe with this "blue blood" proves it wasn't a fluke against inferior competition.
And like another commenter already said, you can't take the stance that on the one hand a team is better because of their talent level across the board but on the other hand they should get extra credit because they are missing guys. That's about as credible as "they don't want to be there."
Here's a test for you: Were you saying, BEFORE the game, that, "Georgia would win if they had everybody but since they don't, they will lose?"
 

OICU812

Active Member
Anybody here have any special teams expertise? There's been an obvious proliferation of the Aussie kickers the last few years, and it seems to me like it puts added pressure on the return team.
The successful fake that Cincy executed was set up beautifully by the prior punt where the punter ran all the way up to the line of scrimmage before kicking it.
That seems like it would do a couple of things: 1, create added pressure on the return team to, "stay home," rather than peel off to go block for the return. The bigger thing though, is 2, looks like that gives the punt coverage guys extra time to get downfield and not allow a return. Those seem like huge advantages.
Aaaaand as usual, we have the *potential* to have similar advantages but don't seem to be getting it coached to take advantage.
 

Wexahu

Full Member
IDK if it's my screed you're referencing but if so, that's not what I said. At all. My take is that *regardless* of the final outcome, Cincy's play here, and throughout the season, shows they deserved to be there more than ND or tOSU. Because they actually played a full season, and won them all, and their ability to go toe-to-toe with this "blue blood" proves it wasn't a fluke against inferior competition.
And like another commenter already said, you can't take the stance that on the one hand a team is better because of their talent level across the board but on the other hand they should get extra credit because they are missing guys. That's about as credible as "they don't want to be there."
Here's a test for you: Were you saying, BEFORE the game, that, "Georgia would win if they had everybody but since they don't, they will lose?"

This game doesn't show anything or prove anything other than that Cincy can go toe-to-toe with today's Georgia team today.
 
Top