Glabra Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 There've been noises out of Texas that with SOS not being a factor in the BCS formula, they don't stand to gain anything by playing at Ohio State as scheduled for September of this year. Today on the Jim Rome show, Mack reinforced that suggestion by reiterating that it didn't make sense to play games like this when strength of schedule wasn't factored into the BCS ratings. He didn't come out and say they would cancel this game, but given the posturing that's been going on, I wouldn't be totally surprised if they do. Even if he meant this more as an indictment of the BCS system rather than an attempt to duck out, it just comes out in a very poor light. The best thing to do in this scenario is to not talk about it and just play the game. To even come out and biatch about having to play a tough non-con game is un-becoming of a top-notch head coach, unless your name is Tommy Tuberville that is. I doubt that coaches like Stoops, Bowden, Paterno and Tressel would ever complain like this about having to play a tough opponent with no supposed benefit coming out of it. And that's not even taking into consideration the excitement it generates in the fan base for a tremendous matchup like this, and the up-tick it creates for you in the polls. The similiarities between Mack and John Cooper are getting eerier. Great recruiter, underachieving as a coach, won one close, big game in the Rose Bowl, isn't thrilled about having to play tough non-conference opponents. Hmm..The only notable difference is that Mack actually beat Michigan in a close game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Texas has nothing to gain from playing this game, especially knowing that 1 loss can keep you from playing for the trophy. Pin 2 losses and most likely you're not playing on New Year's Day, unless you're from the Big East If they back out, it would be very bad form. However, a tough early game would serve them well for the OU game--there's a lot to be said about playing a tough game early in the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 I'm glad he said it. He is 100% right, if strength of schedule doesn't matter, they could be playing powder puff teams at home, instead of having to do home and homes. Not only is there a chance for an early season loss, but there is also lost revenue. I don't think that he is so much complaining about playing a tough team, as he is about the program not getting any advantage for playing a tought team, and turning down revenue that would be generated if they played a lesser opponent at home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 I just hope Texas doesn't pu$$ out and pull out like Mizzou did on Iowa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt. Ryan Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Wouldnt it be ironic for Texas to beat OSU and then Michigan again in the Rose Bowl, while OU is playing in another National Championship game next season.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Wouldnt it be ironic for Texas to beat OSU and then Michigan again in the Rose Bowl, while OU is playing in another National Championship game next season.... 640904[/snapback] It will be funny when the two BEST teams in the country come out of the Big 10 next year..............won't you be so proud of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted January 3, 2005 Author Share Posted January 3, 2005 Wouldnt it be ironic for Texas to beat OSU and then Michigan again in the Rose Bowl, while OU is playing in another National Championship game next season.... 640904[/snapback] Ummm..The Rose Bowl IS the NC game next year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Ummm..The Rose Bowl IS the NC game next year 640907[/snapback] We'll be there, hope it's Texas as the Bucks are undefeatable against the Big 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted January 3, 2005 Author Share Posted January 3, 2005 tOSU, SgtRyan..can you 2 pls choose any of the 50 other threads to continue your bickering? Thanks.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 I can see why Texas would not want to face the Bucks to start the season, after a loss. Texas would go back to the Big 12 and beat up on some teams and destroy that precious SOS the Big 12 so undeservingly gets to push them into the big bowl games where they dissappoint year in , year out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 I can see why Texas would not want to face the Bucks to start the season, after a loss. Texas would go back to the Big 12 and beat up on some teams and destroy that precious SOS the Big 12 so undeservingly gets to push them into the big bowl games where they dissappoint year in , year out. 641039[/snapback] Are you truely that dumb? When the two teams signed on for these games, SOS mattered. Now SOS doesn't matter, if it did it would be Auburn and OU in the big game, and USC would be ranked 3rd or 3th. The reason Mack is complaining, is because when they signed the contract the reward out weighed the risk, now there is know reward, only risk. I'm sure OSU feels the same way, but are not honest enough to verbalize it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 I disagree about that perch. SOS didn't matter before the BCS, and teams still played tough non conference opponents. And there is reward. If you win, you move up in the polls, you also get momentum, something i think Texas could definately use vs that team from up north that mack can't seem to beat. Plus computers take games like that into there system as well. Why do you think Oklahoma was ahead of Auburn in the computers? Because they looked at Texas A & M and Oklahoma States win-loss record, the fact that the games were on the road, and it played a big part. So there is reward for winning big games on the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted January 3, 2005 Author Share Posted January 3, 2005 I disagree about that perch. SOS didn't matter before the BCS, and teams still played tough non conference opponents. And there is reward. If you win, you move up in the polls, you also get momentum, something i think Texas could definately use vs that team from up north that mack can't seem to beat. Plus computers take games like that into there system as well. Why do you think Oklahoma was ahead of Auburn in the computers? Because they looked at Texas A & M and Oklahoma States win-loss record, the fact that the games were on the road, and it played a big part. So there is reward for winning big games on the road. 641125[/snapback] Very good points. The reason the SOS component was taken out of the formula was because the computer rankings already accounted for them. Hence, including a separate SOS component was akin to 'double-counting' the effect of SOS. In any case, If Mack has a problem with such match-ups, he should simply not schedule them for the future, but honor the current commitments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 exactly, don't be like Missouri, get scared and back out of a signed and sealed contract. That is just pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McSooner Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Ask Auburn if SOS doesn't matter. Their pittiful out of conference schedule precluded them from having a chance to get into the BCS title game. Good God, they scheduled a d-2 team. SOS IS counted in the computer polls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I disagree about that perch. SOS didn't matter before the BCS, and teams still played tough non conference opponents. And there is reward. If you win, you move up in the polls, you also get momentum, something i think Texas could definately use vs that team from up north that mack can't seem to beat. Plus computers take games like that into there system as well. Why do you think Oklahoma was ahead of Auburn in the computers? Because they looked at Texas A & M and Oklahoma States win-loss record, the fact that the games were on the road, and it played a big part. So there is reward for winning big games on the road. 641125[/snapback] All that you have said is correct, but you have to admit that strength of schedule is not as important as it was when the contract for these games was signed. I hope that Texas does honor their contract, and would be sorely disappointed if it didn't. You have to admit that the BCS is pure BS, and everytime they change it, it screws someone. They either need to say this is the way it is going to be and leave it alone, or they need to scrap it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Im of the opinion, if you arent going to have a playoff, then go back to the old system and save tradition. But I'm a traditionalist, and a rare specie. National Championships now can very easily be argued still. Sure one team might get a nice crystal trophy, but did they TRULY win the national championship. Auburn did just as much as USC and Oklahoma (and IMO more) this season. The fact is, USC and Oklahoma had the preseason hype, and high expectations. I mean if Alabama in 1941 can claim a national title, after getting shut out twice, finishing 4th in the SEC, and having 4 other teams in the nation undefeated, then Auburn can do the same. If I was Auburn, I'd get the works. Banners, Rings, Trophies, and claim the National Title. It means as much as USCs or Oklahomas. The ONLY difference is the crystal trophy, but they all get the same pay out. Whats funny is Texas and Michigan each made more for participating in the Rose Bowl. Further proves that it's the grand daddy. And lets face it, money is all the administrators at these schools really care about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.