Ya, I know it's due to the system. I just bit on fault's claim that Tchaikovsky couldn't keep up with a tougher schedule. System sucks, but it is what it is. Only thing that will help is further realignment of conferences, where TCU jumps ship to an AQ, or with the additions of Boise etc to the mountain west gets it aq status when further system changes. Man I just wish there was a playoff system.
This is the part I was referring to: "Yes, '07. This team is '07 all over again. You don't ever know who's going to show up. It scares you to death. I felt it in pregame, like I said. I was scared to death all week. I kept telling everybody Iowa State is going to play as hard as they can. I kept telling everybody that if we sit around and think we're as good as we played at Lincoln all week and listen to it all week, then we'll stink. That's what we did . On if he can draw from what happened in 2007: I'm trying. I'm fighting my guts out to get them to turn. That's what I did in '07. I fought my guts out every day. You've got to stay after it every day. You've got to go back and every day look at every little thing you're doing and figure out where it can help." Lot's of "I"s and no "we"s. Why did he have to disassociate himself from the bad performance? He could have reference the poor play without repeatedly bringing up how hard he personally was trying to make them better.
Meh, who cares. Mack Brown is still Mack Brown. I'm willing to bet I can find more people that think that a tinfoil hat will keep the aliens from reading their thoughts than you can find Texas fans who want to get rid of Mack Brown. He's still one of the best in the game at what he does. Now, Greg Davis? Well, what else is new?
sometimes people need to be called out, especially if he spent the entire week warning against that kind of performance.
How is it a joke to play 6 teams that were/are ranked sometime in the season? I am in NO WAY saying that TCU's schedule is even close to an SEC schedule but it is very comparable to a Big 12 schedule this year. The Big 12 being highly over rated at the top (do have some solid depth this year though). It is also pretty tough when teams won't play you. Texas Tech pulled out this season so TCU filled that with Tennessee Tech (I guess it made it easier to reuse the "Beat Tech" shirts) but the only big time teams that will play MWC teams are Oklahoma and Florida St, but after TCU beat Oklahoma in Norman in 05. Since 04, TCU is 6-2 against Big 12 teams.
This is how it's a joke. Here are the six teams that you listed as being ranked that TCU has played or will: Utah BYU Air Force Oregon St Baylor (and possibly soon) San Diego St Only one team is a real challenge for them and they haven't even played Utah yet. But look at the other powerhouses that they've played. I don't even remember BYU being ranked this year...but if they were then they've had a great season so far with three wins. Air force was ranked 24th for one week. Oregon st. has won three games this year and Baylor is ranked for the first since forever and San Diego St. is 5-2 playing against schools known as "Nicholls". Big 12 is overrated this year...the best team is Missouri but still that schedule is nowhere near as difficult as one in the Big 12.
Fine with calling players out...that happens all the time. However, it's less common for the coach to then proceed to talk about what a great job he did trying to prepare them for the game. I'm not saying he should be fired or anything, just seemed like a dick move with no real benefit other than trying to make himself look better.
We all know there is no real way to compare conferences but ESPN has their system of ranking the conferences. http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/10587/conference-power-rankings-week-8 Here are the current "power rankings" for the conferences. MWC coming in one spot behind the Big 12. Then if you look at Missouri's out of conference compared to TCU's out of conference games: Missouri: vs Illinois (neutral site) 23-13 vs McNeese St 50-6 vs San Diego St 27-24 vs Miami (OH) 51-13 TCU: vs Oregon St (neutral site) 30-21 vs Tennessee Tech 62-7 vs Baylor 45-10 @ SMU 41-24 So although the Big 12 is ranked one spot above the MWC in conference ranking, TCU makes up for it in out of conference games (and we'll ignore that Texas Tech decided to pull out of playing TCU this year) Another thing to note is how TCU is winning these games. They have one game that's been decided by 9 pts, all the others are at least 3 possession differences. Ed Wesley alone out rushed the #1 rushing team in the nation this week.
Stop kidding yourself. TCU has an easy schedule. They have 1 or 2 teams that can really challenge them on that schedule... one of which they already played.
I don't care about any of this bull ****. What I said was... if you give TCU Bama's schedule... they'll be lucky to win 8 games. The fact of the matter is... TCU is going to get jumped by Alabama if Alabama wins out. It might not be fair, but the point is that's how the system works.
A one loss team will not jump TCU.....the BCS system won't do that. 2/3rds of it are poll based and TCU will be above Alabama in that situation....Bama's NC hopes are pretty much toast. DD
No... the polls are where Bama would win. Bama still has Aurburn, LSU, and Mississippi State on it's schedule... you don't think the voters will rank them higher if they beat all of those teams?
Exactly. I have no dog in the fight as i'm a Michigan fan. That said, if Alabama beats Auburn and LSU they play for the National Championship
Only if the polls move them above teams without a loss, and I just don't think they will.... There is no precendent for it......I mean if the 1 loss team was already ahead in the standings then sure, but they are behind.....I don't think they jump an undefeated team. DD
No offense, but have you been under a rock these past few months? The debate - primarily among HUMAN pollsters - has been made numerous times about whether a 1-loss SEC champ would jump Boise or TCU. In about 99% of them, the analysts have all agreed that the SEC team would. Is there a precedent? Uh, of course there is. Look at the final regular season poll of 2008, a year in which there were NO UNDEFEATEDS other than Utah and Boise State. http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings/_/poll/2/year/2008/week/16 Alabama isn't a win and you're in team yet - they aren't jumping Missouri if MU goes undefeated, and Michigan State is 50-50, so they probably need losses from those teams. But they would jump Boise State and TCU in a heartbeat, and anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.
Wait, what? That's the most bizarre way to rank a schedule I've ever heard in my life. First of all, you do realize that not all Big 12 teams play each other, right? So not sure why overall conference strength would have any direct relevance. Also, do you not realize how misleading it is to throw out the phrase "MWC is one spot behind the Big 12"? Look at the enormous GAP between the two. The Big 12 (No. 4) is significantly closer to the SEC (No. 1) than it is to the MWC (No. 5). You're twisting the data using vague and overly broad qualifiers. Why not just look at the actual strength of schedule, measuring the actual games the teams have played? Missouri at 30, TCU at 62. And Missouri still has games at Nebraska, at Texas Tech and (most likely) neutral site Oklahoma, if they keep winning. Sorry, the schedules aren't going to be close. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt10.htm Also, why would you not ignore that Tech backed out of playing TCU? Yes, I agree, that sucks for TCU. But no one is BLAMING them. No one is out to get you guys. It's just that most pollsters look at the full BODY OF WORK and what actually happened on the football field in a given year. The system sucks, we agree, but folks have to try and be the most fair they can be within the confines. That's a valid argument, and certainly holds weight with human pollsters. That's the case you guys need to be making. Trying to twist overly broad and vague data is a turnoff to your case.
