Eagle1855

...like Sunday mornin'.

I think you are forgetting that our job as posters on this board is to exude effusive positivity. If we lose this game, it will fall squarely on the shoulders of those posters who did not showcase enough sunshine. (but seriously, I agree with your break-down of this potential game)

Just because his attempted act of violence didn't result in the mass-casualties he had hoped for doesn't mean this wasn't an act of terror with an agenda. He alluded to himself following in the footsteps of other patriots hoping others might follow suit. He doesn't need to advance an agenda; his intent is what matters. This was an act of terror, plain and simple. It was an attack against an agency of the United States of America. It was meant to provoke fear and it was meant to make a statement. In my opinion, it accomplished neither, however he will forever be remembered as a complete and total dickhead. I feel sorry for the family he leaves behind and the families that were affected by his inability to deal with life's routine frustrations.

Excellent. Looking forward to that second round match-up with Baylor.

good grief this conference is exciting, isn't it?

This blog has some interesting takes on why this isn't as far-fetched as some (myself) have thought... and why it would in fact be mutually beneficial for both parties. I do find it intriguing to see what kind of massive realignment would take place if this happened. One scenario posted is if Texas did in fact go to the Big Ten, would the Pac-10 then grab A&M and Colorado? Surely increase their footprint substantially while basically destroying the Big 12.

I've found Plan B to be quite effective.

True. And it would appear we just ran off the woman that was trying to take us there...

Looking less likely for the latter with the news of UCF's probation. Conference alignments generally don't favor those in the doghouse (look at Houston & SMU circa 1996). Otherwise, I mostly agree with the rest of your assessment. I still think MWC is our best bet for the future, however unlikely. I'd really just like to capitalize on the situation we've got. We're in a league that people generally look to be weak (like the WAC) and play only one or two "body bag" games a year. If we could go back to running the table in the SBC then start winning these games vs middle-of-the-road BCS schools (ie, K-State) and knock off an occasional "big dog" (Clemson), we'd slowly garner national attention, a la Boise. Of course, this is probably the same thing being discussed on every fan board of every program in the WAC, MAC, and SBC, at present.

You're right about filling a stadium regardless of opponent. As for the rest, I could probably argue it both ways. I think the ease of travel thing/regional rivals is the thing they'd miss out on most. But like you, I just don't see it happening regardless, which is why I believe this is mostly just the usual fill-the-off-season-with-what-ifs chatter. YAY, we're all friends.

You can replace "yankee" schools with "schools nobody in Texas really cares about besides transients who may have gone to school at one of them", if it sounds better to you. The NFL is a different beast entirely, where players are drafted or follow paychecks and fans generally don't travel to road games. I think kids like staying and playing close to home... UT is evidence of that. Then again, Texas has never been a conference that wasn't largely a regional conference, who knows how it would work out? It will be interesting to watch it unfold.

Should, perhaps. But Houston will NEVER be in the Big 12 as long as Texas and Texas A&M are there. I doubt Texas Tech would support it either. They are already competing for recruits and UH is in C-USA. Give them AQ status and they'd surpass Tech in a heartbeat. Same goes for UNT. UNT's best bet at AQ status is the MWC or some fluke with a BCS conference that wants a foot in Texas that can't sway any of the current members in the Big 12.

I would argue the Big 12 is the REASON UT has had such great success. To think UT is even entertaining it almost seems arrogant. Playing several games in the state (and region) every year without question has to have had an impact on the unprecedented support they've received from merchandise to recruiting. You switch conferences, turn your back on the other state schools in Texas to go play with a bunch of "yankee" schools and you risk losing that, in my opinion. Additionally, their closest home game would be over 1000 miles away. Yes, they've got the money, but do the majority of students? Fans? I just don't think it's worth it. But then again, I'm just a guy with a computer and an internet connection.

I also can't figure out how this would benefit Texas in any way. Seems like a bigger win for the Big 10.

I'm having a hard time envisioning a situation where Texas goes to a conference that does not include A&M.

Didn't you start the other one? The addition of Canales means we will beat Clemson. Probably by 3 touchdowns. Mark it.

That was a decidedly different Troy team, however I can say I witnessed it in person. We played a bit of defense in those days. Ran the ball a little too, as I recall. Wish I could remember who was the coach during all that...

Well I mean, how good is the Big East, really? And Vanderbilt is hardly Florida or Alabama. For the sake of Dodge, I hope the gamble pays off.

Ditto, holmes.

I can't believe the University of Houston didn't make the top 15.

This is a good get and a hell of a birthday present. Does this mean that we'll be using TEs next year?

agreed. Like others, I think this is a great step in the right direction.

In every game I watched and attended last year, our offensive problems (aside from turnovers) seemed to be throwing the deep ball and moving the ball in short yardage situations. Has either of those been addressed in the offseason? I guess we can also finally kill the "this team is young excuse" with the majority of the guesstimated starters being upperclassmen.

Did you hear the 'woosh'? That's the sound of ECU re-passing us by.