Are you READY for some FOOTBALL!

Mr. Sharpe

exalted512 wrote: »

Dropped in the toilet, I already know He's winning the Heisman, but I don't care, they aren't playing the BCs championship.

Mr. Sharpe

Dawgfish wrote: »

That may be true, but the Ga defense has been a totally different animal since the Florida game. Sorry, my bad for thinking GA has a chance. Everyone knows GA would only be the fourth best team in the SEC West. I hear that everyday from Bama, LSU, and A&M fans. Oh yeah we backed into the SEC championship game also. We don't have a snowball's chance in hell. Clearly Zach Mettenburger is clearly a much better QB than Murray.

Getting beat by South Carolina 35-7 doesn't really help either. I just hope it's a good game.

exalted512

Mr. Sharpe wrote: »

Dropped in the toilet, I already know He's winning the Heisman, but I don't care, they aren't playing the BCs championship.

You're more confident than I am then. Seems like too many people will not vote for a freshman. I'll be rooting for Bama...just because if they win, that means we beat the national champions

Kind of ironic...had a&m stayed in the big 12...there's a good chance they'd be in the national championship game this year. Oh well. Playing in the SEC will definitely benefit A&M more in the long run.
-Cody

Mr. Sharpe

exalted512 wrote: »

You're more confident than I am then. Seems like too many people will not vote for a freshman. I'll be rooting for Bama...just because if they win, that means we beat the national champions

Kind of ironic...had a&m stayed in the big 12...there's a good chance they'd be in the national championship game this year. Oh well. Playing in the SEC will definitely benefit A&M more in the long run.
-Cody

Hey it's cool man. I'll be honest, it's good they're doing so awesome, I'm glad they are, they stunk it up bad several times last year in the second half. they belong in the SEC no doubt, and Manzeil deserves the heisman. it's definitely is good to beat the champions at least once, yeah if they were in the big 12 it'd be between them, Bama and ND. because they wouldn't have played Bama and Bama would be undefeated most likely.

I didn't mind losing to a&m all that much because they haven't played every year, but they will from now on... which means Bama and A&M are real time rivals now:D we're like brothers you and me lol not really

Erik Tracy

kevhed72 wrote: »

I turned the Pats game off after the second half, but I am sure they won. How many more years of Rex can the Jets endure?

Change Rex to Norv
Change Jets to Chargers

But please do not swap Norv for Rex - I wouldn't wish that on anyone....

*sigh* ....maybe next year....

scottyboy76

I gotta admit, the dawgs defense, now that rambo and the other suspended players have meshed, kinda have me thinkin we got a chance against bama.

Mr. Sharpe

I haven't seen Ga play, all I know is they gave up a ton of points to Tennessee... a long time ago obviously.

AsSiMiLaTeD

I'm sure Alabama will end up winning the championship...again....

I hate Alabama the same way I hated the Patriots through the first half of the last decade, when you already know who's gonna win it takes all the fun and excitement out of watching the game. Funny, because now that the Patriots aren't automatic I actually find myself rooting for them from time to time.

Alabama is a great team, but they are BORING to watch. I don't have much hope for my Notre Dame, but I suppose anything is possible. Having to wait over a month to see them play is ridiculous.

PSOVLSK

exalted512 wrote: »

Kind of ironic...had a&m stayed in the big 12...there's a good chance they'd be in the national championship game this year.
-Cody

Nah. They would have lost two or three games just like they did every year they were in the Big 12. I think A&M, TCU, and W.Va. prove that the Big 12 is pretty solid from top to bottom minus Kansas of course. You have to come and play every single week or you'll lose. Though the SEC is obviously stout at the top, they don't have the depth of the Big 12. Look at UT vs Ole Miss...both middle of the road teams in their conference but UT won by 30. Also, check out some SEC vs. Sun Belt results this year...not impressive.

Back to W. Va. Now there's a team that wishing they'd never joined the Big 12. Had they stayed in the Big East, they'd be in line for a BCS bowl, maybe even national championship...just like always.

Don't tell me A&M just suddenly got good after basically an entire existence of mediocrity in the Big 12. And don't tell me TCU* and W.Va. just all of a sudden got bad after dominating their conferences for the last several years. The offenses of the Big 12 can be stopped with a month to prepare for a bowl game, but not week-in, week-out.

I do agree that being in the SEC will benefit them in the long run. And I think "the long run" will be much sooner than expected. I bet they get a killer recruiting class this year.

As for Manziel, if he doesn't win the Heisman he's getting robbed. It's idiotic not to vote for him because he's a freshman. The Heisman is for "the best player" not "the best player who isn't a freshman."

*I understand their injury situation, so I cut them a little slack

exalted512

The only 'bad' game they had all year was against LA Tech. Yes, they lost to Florida and LSU...but you're also talking about JM's first collegiate game EVER and they lost by 3 points. JM had a bad game against LSU with 3 interceptions. Which again - he was still getting his ducks in a row. He seemed like a different player after that game. He took a lot from that game and learned from his mistakes. The thing about FL and LSU is that they are among the best defenses in football. The big 12 doesn't have that.

If A&M had stayed in the big 12, the only chance of losing they had would have been if they had played K-State early and just had a bad game. Otherwise, I don't see anyone in the big 12 beating them.

I think OU is better than they showed this year. K-state should be a top 15 team. OSU, Baylor, and Tech should be in the top 20-25...but none of the teams are great. W. Va sucked. They were probably the most over-rated team in the top 25. TU did get better as the year went on. I couldn't believe they were ranked in the first place. Well, I can considering the BCS has a boner for them...but wow.

Obviously - I'm biased, but I don't see a big 12 team beating A&M this year. I just wish we were contenders for a better bowl game. I would have loved to play K-state in the Fiesta bowl - or TU in the cotton bowl, but I'm betting that we'll be playing Michigan in the Capitol One bowl.
-Cody

DMara

Here comes the If games :razz: Texas A&M just caught a tired Alabama team at the right time, and that's all there is to the SEC, teams killing each other due to heavy schedule. This year they deserved to be below Alabama - Georgia - Florida because they lost 2 games AT HOME.

PSOVLSK

exalted512 wrote: »

...but I don't see a big 12 team beating A&M this year...
-Cody

I agree on paper, but it just happens. You roll into Waco and lose to Baylor or head out to Lubbock and lose to Tech. Or as OSU found out last year, you go to Ames and lose to an Iowa St. team that should never beat you. And that's not even talking about OU, K-St., or the rivalry game with UT where records mean nothing. I just think there are a lot more "losable" games in the Big 12.

W.Va. was way over rated, but they'd still be Top 5 if they were in the Big East and everybody would be talking about how great they are...and Manziel could forget the Heisman because it would be going to Geno Smith.

exalted512

DMara wrote: »

Here comes the If games :razz: Texas A&M just caught a tired Alabama team at the right time, and that's all there is to the SEC, teams killing each other due to heavy schedule. This year they deserved to be below Alabama - Georgia - Florida because they lost 2 games AT HOME.

I was waiting for this post. It wasn't a short week for them...nor was it the case that A&M played a crappy team before that game. Discredit it all you want, but they put up more points in THE FIRST QUARTER THAN ANYONE ELSE DID ALL YEAR. Don't give me this they were tired BS.

As far as losing 2 games at home. Like I said earlier, it was JM's first collegiate game ever. Not to mention an entirely new program in an entirely new conference for the rest of the team. Going in and playing against a power house like FL for you first game of the season - and then being up at half and losing by 3 points. Then making a lot of mistakes late after going up 12-0 in the LSU game and losing by 5. These aren't blow out losses like BU put on KS.

PSOVLSK wrote: »

I agree on paper, but it just happens. You roll into Waco and lose to Baylor or head out to Lubbock and lose to Tech. Or as OSU found out last year, you go to Ames and lose to an Iowa St. team that should never beat you. And that's not even talking about OU, K-St., or the rivalry game with UT where records mean nothing. I just think there are a lot more "losable" games in the Big 12.

W.Va. was way over rated, but they'd still be Top 5 if they were in the Big East and everybody would be talking about how great they are...and Manziel could forget the Heisman because it would be going to Geno Smith.

I certainly understand. A&M was supposed to be great last year...only to have a mediocre year due to second half collapses. It was obvious then A&M had great talent - they just couldn't close out a game.

I'm still not sure about more losable games (comparing A&M's and K-State's schedule). By current rankings

A&M has played #4 FL, #7 LSU, and #2 AL (whom will be number 1 when they kill ND)

K-State has played #11 OU, #23 OSU, and #18 TU.

Honorable mentions for A&M:
I think Ole Miss should be top 25, LA Tech is probably a top 35 team, and Miss St. should be top 25. If you look at Miss St.'s losses - they were all to top 10 teams and a rivalry game. Mizzou had a rough year in the SEC. Injuries took a toll on them, but I still think they're a top 35 team.

K-State: Iowa St. I think they should be a top 25 team. With tech, baylor, and W. Va as top 30-35 teams.

A&M had a much harder schedule, but I don't think K-State had more losable games. Unless I'm missing something. If A&M played OU in Norman - that would have been the only game that would have been a close one. Hell, even here it might have been close. But I see that as the only game where either team just runs out of time with the other team on top.

That doesn't go without saying that playing and losing to teams like FL and LSU didn't make A&M the team they were to go in and beat Alabama - where they might not have had the experience of playing high caliber teams otherwise. So you never really know.
-Cody

PSOVLSK

No way Ole Miss is top 25. They lost by 35 to a UT team who is over-ranked in the top 20. La. Tech: They'd finish just above Kansas in the Big 12. Miss. St.: Look at that schedule and show me a good team they beat. And feel free to do the same with Georgia's schedule. Most overrated #3 team ever???

Look at TCU's schedule. They didn't have an easy game from Oct. 6-Dec.1. I say more "losable" games because every game except Kansas is a losable game in the Big 12 this year. As I said in my first post, you go to Waco, Lubbock, or Stillwater and lose a game you're not supposed to lose. It happened every year A&M was in the Big 12. I just think they went to the SEC with something to prove and probably didn't get the respect they got from teams in the Big 12. But props to them, they played the schedule and went 9-2. It just drives me nuts to hear people say, "A&M would have gone undefeated in the Big 12." (I've heard this from multiple sources). Why??? They had 15 years to go undefeated in the Big 12 and never did and they've had some good/great teams.

la9ers

So who do you think the 9ers will pick as starting QB ? .......... my heart goes for smith but keap looks like the better player.

DMara

exalted512 wrote: »

As far as losing 2 games at home. Like I said earlier, it was JM's first collegiate game ever. Not to mention an entirely new program in an entirely new conference for the rest of the team. Going in and playing against a power house like FL for you first game of the season - and then being up at half and losing by 3 points. Then making a lot of mistakes late after going up 12-0 in the LSU game and losing by 5. These aren't blow out losses like BU put on KS.

Do you think people care if your team was led by a freshman QB instead of an experienced one? Losing is losing, and losing at home has always been worse than on the road. The stats don't lie, a 9-2 team in the SEC is still 4th at most. SEC teams have been killing each other each and every year with their physical plays, but the steadier teams have always been crowned appropriately in the conference. Your team's season was over after the LSU loss, so they might have played with the abandonment needed to beat a better team from time to time. Mind you Alabama has just gone through the extremely physical match against a home LSU team who got 2 weeks to prepare for them. It was an emotional win after what happened last year between those 2 teams, so guess what, to say that the Crimson Tide was d@mn tired both physically and mentally wasn't overstated at all. You beat the champ, more power to you, but that was their only loss in the conference and they are going to the SEC championship game, not a 2-loss team. After all, nothing justified the would-have-gone-undefeated-in-the-Big-12 BS. The woulda coulda shoulda game has never been used to to compute the BCS standings.

PSOVLSK wrote: »

No way Ole Miss is top 25. They lost by 35 to a UT team who is over-ranked in the top 20. La. Tech: They'd finish just above Kansas in the Big 12. Miss. St.: Look at that schedule and show me a good team they beat. And feel free to do the same with Georgia's schedule. Most overrated #3 team ever???

Look at TCU's schedule. They didn't have an easy game from Oct. 6-Dec.1. I say more "losable" games because every game except Kansas is a losable game in the Big 12 this year. As I said in my first post, you go to Waco, Lubbock, or Stillwater and lose a game you're not supposed to lose. It happened every year A&M was in the Big 12. I just think they went to the SEC with something to prove and probably didn't get the respect they got from teams in the Big 12. But props to them, they played the schedule and went 9-2. It just drives me nuts to hear people say, "A&M would have gone undefeated in the Big 12." (I've heard this from multiple sources). Why??? They had 15 years to go undefeated in the Big 12 and never did and they've had some good/great teams.

Exactly. The games that A&M lost during the last few years were due to the fact that they could not hold the lead after the break, and it happened again this year, twice. So why all of a sudden would they have gone undeafeated in the Big 12 this year? Go ahead and wait until next year to see what kind of excuses there will be :razz:

exalted512

Ol Miss / TU game was a freak...no doubt. (kind of like the BU KS game) I think I remember reading they had that many points scored on them since the 19-teens. No one else put those numbers on them. Their other losses? 4 top 10 teams and a one point loss to Vanderbilt. Maybe not top 25, but close.

As far at TCU. I don't see the cyclones as a threat to anyone. Maybe if they would've played some harder preseason games, they would've been better prepared for later in the year. I didn't see anything overly impressive from them all year. I think they were probably the most consistent team in the big 12 this year. They lost to the teams they should have, and won against the teams they should have. With a couple of close games that could have gone either way to teams they are about equal to, but still not quite as good as the other team. That's what I didn't mention them. Add to the fact that had A&M stayed, the likelihood of the Big 12 admitting TCU is slim...


A&M played 3 top 10 teams and 4 other respectable teams. 7 games to lose.

If they stayed in the Big 12, they would have played 1 top 10 team. 3 top 25 teams, and 4 other honorable mentions. 8 games to lose.

One more game to lose...but when you're talking about 3 top 10 teams vs 1...that's where my argument comes in.

But of course, like I said and you hinted on, maybe it was playing these high caliber teams that made them into the team they are today. Maybe they got a fire under their **** because everyone said they couldn't compete in the SEC. Or maybe it was just a new team this year. One that came off a disappointing last season and one who knew they had to show up and play every game and not blow it in the second half. It was a new program and they had JM. I still say they go undefeated in the Big 12, but we'll never know and it's all pure speculation.

I was looking forward to a TU - A&M Cotton bowl game.
-Cody

Jimbo18

la9ers wrote: »

So who do you think the 9ers will pick as starting QB ? .......... my heart goes for smith but keap looks like the better player.

I don't think it was announced yet, but I read that it will be today instead of making Kap wait till Saturday like last week. It would surprising if he doesn't remain the starter (assuming he doesn't get hurt or totally faceplant). The 49ers are a lot more fun to watch with him at QB.

AsSiMiLaTeD

I love how DMara accuses other people of playing the 'IF' game and making excuses, and then in the same posts makes excuses for Alabama losing, unbelievable.

PSOVLSK

exalted512 wrote: »

... I still say they go undefeated in the Big 12, but we'll never know and it's all pure speculation...
-Cody

And that's part of the greatness of college football. It drives you insane, but it sure is fun to speculate, etc. It was even better before the BCS. I much preferred the good ol' days when several bowls had national championship implications. In ways I'm looking forward to the mini-playoff, but I sure don't want the regular season to be minimized because college football is the only sport where the regular season really matters.

UT vs. A&M: You'd think since the bowls are in the business of making money that this would happen. That would probably draw a record crowd to Cowboys Stadium.

DMara

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

I love how DMara accuses other people of playing the 'IF' game and making excuses, and then in the same posts makes excuses for Alabama losing, unbelievable.

I didn't make excuses for Alabama, I said SEC teams are killing each other each and every week, so it's easy to understand one of their teams was more tired after a critical game. But I understand why you jumped in after proclaiming your love for Notre Dame. Basically the BCS championship game should be between 2 SEC teams, not your weak Notre Dame :razz: Just wait and see how bad your team will lose

AsSiMiLaTeD

You're making excuses, how do you not see that??? Saying a team lost because they're tired is making excuses, ANY reasonable person would agree with that.

And yes I've already acknowledged that I don't have much hope for Notre Dame against Alabama, so what's your point?

DMara

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

You're making excuses, how do you not see that??? Saying a team lost because they're tired is making excuses, ANY reasonable person would agree with that.

And yes I've already acknowledged that I don't have much hope for Notre Dame against Alabama, so what's your point?

Apparently you didn't know how to read. Your original post said that I made excuses for the Alabama loss. I then clarified that I didn't make excuses for Alabama only. I specifically said that the SEC teams have been killing each other for others to take advantage of. Any reasonable person would agree with that. Well, maybe not you, since you're still clinging to your tiny hope that Notre Dame will beat Alabama, as you said: "I don't have much hope for my Notre Dame, but I suppose anything is possible."

AsSiMiLaTeD

So now I'm unreasonable because of who I'm rooting for? Do I expect Notre Dame to beat Alabama? No, and I've said that now in two posts in two different ways. I would like to see them win and will be rooting for them, but I don't expect them to win.

So basically you're saying I'm not a reasonable person because I WANT Notre Dame to win, so you're calling me unreasonable because of who I'm rooting for. That's not only rude and classless, it's also illogical. If I'd come in here with grand dilusions of Notre Dame stomping Alabama then you'd at least be able to make the argument that I'm unreasonable, but that's not what happened. Take a look at the FIRST sentence I had in post 131, doesn't get much clearer than this that I'm a realist and expect Alabama to win it all. The fan in me wants Notre Dame to win, the realist in me says that Alabama will win and the logical side says that anything is possible - while it's highly unlikely that ND will beat Alabama, it is possible.

How does that line of thinking make me an unreasonable person.

You came in here accusing someone of making excuses for A&M, and then turned around and did the same thing for Alabama, simple as that. Everyone else here sees it, why don't you?

AsSiMiLaTeD

Oh, and not everybody agrees with the notion that the SEC is THAT much better and beats up on each other, here's a great article by Pat Forde that breaks things down a bit:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--sec-rout-of-notre-dame-far-from-guaranteed-205348035.html#more-id

AsSiMiLaTeD

Finally, to put it another way, saying that Alabama lost because they were 'tired' is no less an excuse than saying A&M lost because it was the first college game for their quarterback.

DMara

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

So now I'm unreasonable because of who I'm rooting for? Do I expect Notre Dame to beat Alabama? No, and I've said that now in two posts in two different ways. I would like to see them win and will be rooting for them, but I don't expect them to win.

So basically you're saying I'm not a reasonable person because I WANT Notre Dame to win, so you're calling me unreasonable because of who I'm rooting for. That's not only rude and classless, it's also illogical. If I'd come in here with grand dilusions of Notre Dame stomping Alabama then you'd at least be able to make the argument that I'm unreasonable, but that's not what happened. Take a look at the FIRST sentence I had in post 131, doesn't get much clearer than this that I'm a realist and expect Alabama to win it all. The fan in me wants Notre Dame to win, the realist in me says that Alabama will win and the logical side says that anything is possible - while it's highly unlikely that ND will beat Alabama, it is possible.

How does that line of thinking make me an unreasonable person.

You came in here accusing someone of making excuses for A&M, and then turned around and did the same thing for Alabama, simple as that. Everyone else here sees it, why don't you?

Calm down now, you don't have to shoot 3 posts at a time to make a point :razz: I'm not rude or classless or illogical to believe that most people in the United States would like to see 2 best teams playing in the Champoinship match, and Notre Dame isn't one of the two. That's why there will be a playoff soon, don't you think?
My quote didn't say you're not a reasonable person to want Notre Dame to win. My quote said that you MIGHT be unreasonable for not agreeing that the SEC teams have been killing each other for other teams such as Notre Dame to take advantage of. That's 2 different things, so please do not distort my sentences.
The fan side of any person doesn't make him or her reasonable, in fact most of the times it's quite on the contrary.

PSOVLSK

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

Oh, and not everybody agrees with the notion that the SEC is THAT much better and beats up on each other, here's a great article by Pat Forde that breaks things down a bit:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--sec-rout-of-notre-dame-far-from-guaranteed-205348035.html#more-id

Thanks for the link. This is basically what I've been saying in my posts. The SEC has a few very, very good teams, but the depth isn't there this year. I don't care what anybody says, it's tough for a bunch of 18-21 year old kids to play their best every single week. In the Big 12 this year that's what you have to do or you'll get beat. Not a huge difference between #1 and #8 (maybe #9) in the Big 12. Put any of those teams against each other and you've got a pretty good game. There's the occasional blowout, but it's usually a fluke and not a true measure of the disparity between the teams. In the SEC, there are weeks when you can bring your "B" game and still win.

AsSiMiLaTeD

Take a look at the article I linked, it paints a much different picture of ND and their wins than the one you're painting. And that's not by some crackpot writer or some guy on an audio forum, it's written by a well respected sports journalist.

Look, nobody (myself included) is going to argue that ND is a better team than Alabama or even has a good chance of beating them (I think Alabama is the best team in the country and it's not even close), but to say that ND isn't one of the two best teams when they're undefeated and have played STATISTICALLY a tougher schedule than Alabama, I disagree.

And I'm not distorting your words, you said "Any reasonable person would agree with that. Well, maybe not you, since you're still clinging to your tiny hope that Notre Dame will beat Alabama". Maybe you didn't intend for it to across that way, but I have a decent command of the English language, and that sure comes across as I"m not a reasonable because I'm clinging on to hope that Notre Dame will win.

exalted512

DMara wrote: »

Do you think people care if your team was led by a freshman QB instead of an experienced one? Losing is losing, and losing at home has always been worse than on the road. The stats don't lie, a 9-2 team in the SEC is still 4th at most. SEC teams have been killing each other each and every year with their physical plays, but the steadier teams have always been crowned appropriately in the conference. Your team's season was over after the LSU loss, so they might have played with the abandonment needed to beat a better team from time to time. Mind you Alabama has just gone through the extremely physical match against a home LSU team who got 2 weeks to prepare for them. It was an emotional win after what happened last year between those 2 teams, so guess what, to say that the Crimson Tide was d@mn tired both physically and mentally wasn't overstated at all. You beat the champ, more power to you, but that was their only loss in the conference and they are going to the SEC championship game, not a 2-loss team. After all, nothing justified the would-have-gone-undefeated-in-the-Big-12 BS. The woulda coulda shoulda game has never been used to to compute the BCS standings.

I'm not making excuses for A&M. Well, I guess it could be construed that way but I'm not trying to take away for FL or LSU. The reason why I mentioned that is because FL and LSU both have better defenses than any big 12 team. The reason why I mentioned having a freshman quarterback was because even early in the year, the only defense in the big 12 that would have made for a good defensive battle against A&M's style of offense is OU. But they're not as good as FL or LSU...in which we lost to both teams by a total of 8 points. That's all I was getting at. I'm not saying the AL didn't deserve to be in the SEC championship or that LSU / FL didn't deserve their wins over us.

And if AL was so weak, then why were the majority of our points in the first quarter? If that was truly the case, it would have been in the second half. AL was outplayed. Just like A&M was out played against FL and LSU.
-Cody