bah007
Hall of Fame
Well each school gets the same number of tickets to sell.
I didn't realize they could also be had in the way you mentioned.
Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
Dear Tech Fans...
- Thread starter Yankee_In_TX
- Start date
Well each school gets the same number of tickets to sell.
I didn't realize they could also be had in the way you mentioned.
Yankee_In_TX
Dance Lindsay!
Neither did I - 50/50 sounds good. BUT, as long as I can benefit from being a Texans season ticket holder (hey, we deserve SOMETHING, right?) I'm a hypocrite for buying everything I can. Some times to enjoy, some times to resell.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
I wasn't accusing u of homerism guy, relax...it was more geared at those who think that it doesn't matter what OU does from this point out...UT beat OU so that means they are better....quite frankly that's just proposterous.
As for the bolded UP TO TODAY's DATE.......they have. Let the season play out before we crown Texas, OU or Tech the best out of the big 12. They are for the most part virtually the same teams.
Hell, if i asked u to name me the team out of the big 12 who can put up lots of points, has a top heisman trophy candidate & great Qb play to boot.. would u even know which 1 of the 3 i was talking about if i mentioned no names or tell-tell clues?
bah007
Hall of Fame
I know. What were we thinking? Why do they even play the games anymore if head to head wins on a neutral field don't even matter?
I know that you weren't accusing me of homerism. I just think its quite funny that you can make a bold statement like that about anyone when you don't even provide evidence for the argument you are trying to make.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
You don't need "evidence" to see who looks to be the stronger teams..... Watch the games... Besides, the "evidence" of these ridiculous computer averages & BCS composite rankings you submitted earlier in this thread is garbage in & of itself. But lets play your game..
* More than 1 of those computer ranking polls has Utah as the 3rd/4th best team in the nation; 1 in particular has them ahead of Texas, Oklahoma & Florida as of now.
* Still another has the SEC's undefeated crimson tide ranked 4th!
* Furthermore, the Harris Interactive, USA today & Coach's Polls are based largely on the same human reasoning i & everyone else uses when watching these games: Within reason, who looks better & most impressive as of right now.
Now tell me, does any of that make any sense to you?
& I'm sure i don't have to tell u that it's just not as simple as Team X beating Team y therefore they're better...that is unless the victor goes on to be undefeated....which is not possible for anyone anymore save for T. Tech in the big 12 this year to this point. A four loss unranked Arkansas team beat LSU last year... & late in the season. Did anybody think Arkansas should be moved into the top 10 much less think they were better than LSU?
This whole BCS crap is a joke, it's only gotten it right like 3 out of 10 years of its existence...scrap it in yesterday & get a real system here in place to settle who's better than who.
Last edited:
bah007
Hall of Fame
If Team A plays a harder shedule than Team B....plus beats Team B in a head to head matchup on a neutral field....and the teams both finish with the same amount of losses....how does Team B finish the season ranked higher?
The only reason Team B is ranked higher is because they lost earlier in the season. They lost by 10 points.
Team A lost late in the season. They lost on the last play of the game to another good team.
I am a UT fan through and through. I am trying to be unbiased here but I just cannot understand how the Coaches poll has OU higher than UT right now.
It seems as if UT is being penalized for running their gauntlet early in the season and OU gets a bonus for getting almost a full season of experience before running theirs.
I think the reason this discussion has taken the turn it has is because I cannot understand how OU is ranked higher than Texas in any poll RIGHT NOW.
If OU does put a heavy beating on both Tech and Okie St then maybe we can have this discussion again and you will have a better chance of convincing me.
For now, I am astounded and confused that Texas dropped the same amount of spots for losing to Tech that Penn St lost for losing to Iowa.
Yankee_In_TX
Dance Lindsay!
Hey bah007 - 3 words - 8 Team Playoff 
Yay, Matt Jackson was spinning the Texas/Tech national championship scenario tonight.
Yay, Matt Jackson was spinning the Texas/Tech national championship scenario tonight.
bah007
Hall of Fame
Hey bah007 - 3 words - 8 Team Playoff
Yay, Matt Jackson was spinning the Texas/Tech national championship scenario tonight.
I like the idea of a playoff, but problems like this still aren't gonna go away.
Let's say you do an eight team playoff with the current BCS top 8:
1. Alabama
2. Texas Tech
3. Texas
4. Florida
5. Oklahoma
6. USC
7. Utah
8. Penn St
In the current system, the top two play for the championship and you have a few teams just outside the top two who feel snubbed.
Let's look at the playoff scenario:
Let's say #8 Penn St loses to #1 Alabama and #7 Utah loses to #2 Texas Tech.
If Boise St and Georgia both dominate their bowl games now they feel snubbed because maybe they should have gotten into the playoff instead of Utah and Penn St.
I like that a playoff gives more teams a shot at the title, but it doesn't really fix the current problems, it just tries to make the margin of error smaller.
bah007
Hall of Fame
The #1 statement I hear in support of a playoff is to, "let things be decided on the field".
That is never going to happen in college football unless you had a 32 or 64 team playoff, which for the time being, seems unreasonable.
The participants for a playoff would still be chosen by people with a bias or by a poll where the voters don't even watch the games.
That is never going to happen in college football unless you had a 32 or 64 team playoff, which for the time being, seems unreasonable.
The participants for a playoff would still be chosen by people with a bias or by a poll where the voters don't even watch the games.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
I felt the same when u guys only dropped 3 after losing to tech when they were a lower ranked team than UT was when OU lost to them in which OU dropped 5. Perfect example of why & how playing impressively boosts rankings & influences the human element.
Koolaid Time
Drink Up!
While the NCAA would probabaly make a billion dollars or more in a FBS Championship Playoff, I can see where the schools would have a concern becayse it will extend the season almost to February, cut down time to recruit , etc.
Yankee_In_TX
Dance Lindsay!
BS. How? Bowl season is currently what, 5 weeks long? You need 3 weeks for an 8 team playoff.
Koolaid Time
Drink Up!
Are you assuming the New Years Bowl games are 1st level of the playoffs?
The Head Coach of the Georgia Bulldogs proposed a playoff system last year that had 10 The winners from Sugar, Rose, Fiesta, Cotton and Orange then play off, with one team getting a bye. That put it out into the thrid weekend of January
Last edited:
Koolaid Time
Drink Up!
no message
Yankee_In_TX
Dance Lindsay!
8 teams, and you start sooner than Jan. 1.
bah007
Hall of Fame
I really don't know why everyone is crapping all over the BCS. It's a way better system than what we had before.
Nowadays, teams like Utah get a shot to go to a BCS bowl and earn a huge payday. Before the BCS came around, an undefeated Utah team would be stuck in the Sun Bowl or something like that, and they wouldn't have any more shot at the national title than they do now.
I'm not completely opposed to a playoff, but I have yet to see a scenario that is better than the current system. I'm all ears if you have one...
I think there is a simple fix for the BCS:
You make the computers count for 50% of the formula.
You let the Harris Poll and the Coaches Poll each count for 25% of the formula, PLUS they must make their ballots public every week so they are open to critique.
Nowadays, teams like Utah get a shot to go to a BCS bowl and earn a huge payday. Before the BCS came around, an undefeated Utah team would be stuck in the Sun Bowl or something like that, and they wouldn't have any more shot at the national title than they do now.
I'm not completely opposed to a playoff, but I have yet to see a scenario that is better than the current system. I'm all ears if you have one...
I think there is a simple fix for the BCS:
You make the computers count for 50% of the formula.
You let the Harris Poll and the Coaches Poll each count for 25% of the formula, PLUS they must make their ballots public every week so they are open to critique.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
The BCS is garbage...plain & simple. Yeah it's better than what we had before but that's like saying i'm the tallest midget in the rooom.
Charlie Palillo sums up my thoughts about the BCS: Every major sport has their champion determined by a playoff...... except college football which is ridiculous.
Now, The BCS ranking system can be used to determine the top 8 or however many teams you want in your playoff & would be tremendously effective. I say this b/c 99% of the teams that usually complain about not getting a shot to play in the NC are teams that wind up ranked in the top 10-12. If you're ranked lower than that...you've probably got more than 1 loss & aren't good enough to play for the NC anyway.
It also further opens up the possiblility for the mid-majors to get a real shot at the NC. As it stands now, a team like a Utah & Boise State only climb so far before the human polls & their schedules essentially freeze them out from climbing any further than 7.
Screw the bowls...no one cares about a bush's baked beans bowl featuring a 6-6 Iowa state & 7-5 Indiana. To date there are like 25 meaningless bowls......& growing.
Charlie Palillo sums up my thoughts about the BCS: Every major sport has their champion determined by a playoff...... except college football which is ridiculous.
Now, The BCS ranking system can be used to determine the top 8 or however many teams you want in your playoff & would be tremendously effective. I say this b/c 99% of the teams that usually complain about not getting a shot to play in the NC are teams that wind up ranked in the top 10-12. If you're ranked lower than that...you've probably got more than 1 loss & aren't good enough to play for the NC anyway.
It also further opens up the possiblility for the mid-majors to get a real shot at the NC. As it stands now, a team like a Utah & Boise State only climb so far before the human polls & their schedules essentially freeze them out from climbing any further than 7.
Screw the bowls...no one cares about a bush's baked beans bowl featuring a 6-6 Iowa state & 7-5 Indiana. To date there are like 25 meaningless bowls......& growing.
Last edited:
bah007
Hall of Fame
The BCS is garbage.....yet you want it to determine who gets into the playoffs?
Kinda like right now how it determines who gets into the BCS bowls and national championship?
Yankee_In_TX
Dance Lindsay!
I'm open to another system. But they're SO slow to change...
At least you know with an 8 team playoff that the top 4 teams in college football will get in. Maybe 6 or 7, if you're lucky.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
It is garbage when used by itself...but it could still b used to determine the top 10 or so teams b/c the polls usually due have the same top 10 or so teams, just in different slots.
Aside from all its other crap, The fundamental reason it's not effective now is b/c the margin for potential error is so small & unless the teams seperate themselves during the regular season (usually unlikely) all it does is give way to the human element & things teams can't control (schedule, bad calls etc). There are only 2 slots for the NC & the human element in the polls alone can influence the BCS rankings enough to potentially propel 1 team over another equally deserving team in to 1 of those 2.
If u go to a tournament stlye format & have only a certain number of teams that will be able to get in that tournament, the margin for error is broadened thus the main thing that is screwing with the polls..... the human element, plays less of a factor in who goes to the NC. Suddenly a team moving from #4 to #1 doesn't matter as much b/c as long as you're in that top whatever, you're guaranteed to get a shot @ the NC.
The champ is decided on the field, you get match ups that don't or rarely happen & it gives every conference a better chance at actually competing for the NC instead of trying to appease them by giving them BCS bowl bids & calling them "BCS busters".
bah007
Hall of Fame
All good points.
I would love a playoff if it is effective. I just don't want a playoff for the sake of a playoff. It needs to be something that will work for Div-1A football.
Because if you make a playoff and take away these lower tier bowl games, teams like Baylor, Northern Illinois, & UCF (just examples) have nothing to play for. They know their only shot most years is low-tier bowls.
I like that the FBS divison gives most every team with a winning record a chance to call their season a success. It's a tradition that no other sport has.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
Yeah, it'd be cool if a sponsor willing to shell out the cash still wanted to host a bowl game with teams out of the conferences of its choosing...That's essentially what the NIT is these days in college basketball.
Me personally, i don't pay attn. to any of the lower tier bowls unless my alma mater (U of H) is playing in 1. But they do have use. Aside from what you stated, they also provide exposure to those "diamond in the rough" guys that they otherwise wouldn't get as all of college football's most avid fans & draft niks are likely watching.
I'd venture to say that some players have at least gotten invitations to the NFL scouting combine just b/c of what they did in a bowl game.
Wolf
100% Texan
http://thefatherlife.com/testnewsite/2008/11/11/nfl-power-rankings-week-11/
Hey Tech in number 26 in the NFL rankings
Hey Tech in number 26 in the NFL rankings