Eagle1855

true.

One good way to tell if a season hasn't turned out the way the fans might have hoped is if threads can be found complaining about the music the band chooses to play. Ah, lookie here!

true.

...ship, then...

sigh.

Calm down, sooner homer. Stoops was very vocal in his campaigning for OU to be ranked ahead of Texas and continued to do so in the press conference following the BCS announcement. They both played the game because the way the system is set up, it requires it. We would want our coach to do the same thing for us.

Actually, it's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.

I see what you're saying, but with half the schools in the Big 12 South at 11-1 having only lost to one another, how can you really say which is the best team? Mizzou would be the 4th/5th best team in the Big 12 south. In fact, had Baylor pulled the upset, they would have put Mizzou on pace to go 0-4 against the South (assuming a loss to OU). My point is, its all subjective. Of course, that's kind of the fun of college football.

in that case, you couldn't have a repeat of Bama nd Florida... so you decide between Penn State and USC as to which loss was more egregious. Personally, I think Texas is a better team than both, which is why I don't know that you can play the whole "only win a national title if you win your conference" card. What I find more alarming than any of this is the fact that there are 3 teams that are undefeated that aren't in a BCS conference and only one of them is going to a respectable bowl game.

We're not going to agree on which teams had tougher schedules or which team has proven more... though I think you makes some good points about Florida. However, I feel like they are going to rock Bama next weekend and I think the Big 10 is just as weak as the Pac-10, top to bottom, so UF will ultimately have a better resume. What we can agree on is the fact that USC is a good ways away from Texas in the BCS standings and the fact that neither play another game before the bowl season makes the chance of voters jumping USC over Texas as close to 0% as I can imagine.

nah, voters wont want to see that again and they wont be able to resist a Florida - Texas showdown. Story writes itself. Pitting the biggest recruiting state's best programs, each led by heisman candidates for the National Title? ESPN would be showing their O face for 5 straight weeks. You thought USC/Texas was bad...

not. a. chance. I know you're out there in La-La land (which is meant as a fun jab, as I love southern california) but Texas' body of work is far more impressive than that of USC. If OU loses, I suspect Texas sneaks in the back door of the title game. Florida will jump Texas if it beats Alabama so I can't envision a situation where Texas is in the title game with OU. Take a look at the latest BCS to see how far USC would have to go. I will agree with your first post, however. Auburn getting left out was a joke, as was a couple of teams that didnt win their conference playing for the title. But this is the system we've got. I think OU or Texas are both interchangeable this year. Tough thing for UT is realizing they were one dropped INT away from this not even being a discussion. OU cannot say the same.

lazer taint. seriously though, I'd kill for MSU's defense. Or even half of it. If that team ever had any semblance of an offense... wait I suddenly just felt like I was back in 2001.

This was a pretty awful showing on our part, but I wouldn't sell Houston too short. They are a good basketball team and I think we'll see that as the season plays out.

this is true, mon amie.

SI Article

It isnt Obama's fault the previous administration treated the economy as an afterthought. Im surprised our citizens even support our govt after all we've been put through over the years. You've got to let him bring in the people he needs, give him a full 4 years. Then we'll see if he can take us where we want to be.

Regardless of what he says or does, if you keep taxing the F out of the "wealthy" there won't be any bailouts that can save this economy. Removing incentive doesnt create wealth. It creates mediocrity.

not to bring this thread back up (but to totally do that), here's the update on the week-long pork-a-thon (not to cheapen the union between man and woman).

I thought about that after making my post and I agree... I could go back and edit my post, but Im right so often I think I'll enjoy being wrong for once. (just. a. joke.) Regarding the topic at hand, I have a hard time taking anything Dickey said seriously because of the things that were going on, which is why I posted what I did. That being said, Dodge has had more resources and more support than ever before. That, of course, doesn't make it on-par with major programs. But I gotta figure even the likes of UH, Troy, La Tech or other "peer institutions" have about the same amount (or maybe even less) resources and they seem to make do just fine. Dodge's seeming inability to adapt his game to our players and D1 is what stands out to me. But Im no expert on anything, so I revert you back to the first line of this comment.

well this is a disappointing article, in my opinion. Not because it is negative about UNT- there are certainly many justifications for negative press surrounding this program- but because it shows how little Vito knows about how bad things were the last couple years of Dickey's tenure... off the field, with problems Dickey created. Bummer

Its kind of like being in a relationship where you had some really great times, maybe you were college sweethearts. You grew up together. You became the people you are in part because of one another. But ultimately you never took the next step, for whatever reason. So you both go your seperate ways. You're with another woman for a while and its fun. It isnt great but it isnt bad. Its just good. You have some good times and a couple shaky ones before you realize its just too blah to continue. So now that you're lonely, you start thinking about what used to be. Man, things were really good back then. I mean, it was you and old college girl versus the world! So you call her up. You start talking about the way it was and neither of you can figure out where things went wrong. You agree to give it another go. And then 6 months into the deal, you remember why you both went seperate ways in the first. It isnt as great as you remember it because you're different people now. You need different things. And then you're back to where you were. Except the legacy of the relationship is now tarnished. This is where K-State is headed.

I might say did not defeat because like Penn State against Iowa, I think USC probably wins that game at least 7 out of 10 times, but I see your point. Its a crazy, fun debate. I'd love to see Utah in there just to shake things up. That would be a dream scenario for me as the consummate fan of the underdog.

If that scenario played out as you said, you absolutely put Texas in the title game and you make a it a rematch of 2005 against USC-- regardless of whether or not either team "won their conference." Penn State losing to Iowa is far less acceptable than UT losing on the road to (eventually) 11-1 Tech on the last play of the game. You aren't going to argue to put Boise State in there over USC just because they "won their conference", are you?

hope our production increases 50%, else we'll have serious issues with the value of the dollar...