Whether you went to Texas or Texas State everyone knows you root for the Longhorns in the big 12, which is fine. But Texas lost 3 games last year, lost to A&M how many years in a row now? Talent wise they have a better teams than the rest of the big 12. But other teams for the heck of it and hope Texas sleeps on them. I am sure Michigan has more talent than Toledo, but Toledo thought they could still beat them. I for one wont be suprised if Tech still beats Texas this year. Texas will lose a game this season, they have the #1 target on them now, can they handle the pressure only time will telll.
You're still being blinded by regional homerism. This is still a "Big XII" board, regionally, so everyone is bound to be better informed and watch more of these games. I don't understand how you can just discount the SEC and claim it's not up to par with the Big XII. I also don't understand how you can say some schools are "2nd tier." If you want to clarify and say "they get '2nd tier' recruits" that's one thing. But even that's a fallacy. The region is so talent-rich, "2nd tier" recruits are still top recruits in other regions. Plus, the "2nd tier" argument won't matter because it's the regular season and "1st tier" teams have lost and will lose. Texas is not far and away the best team in the nation. There isn't a "best team." There's about 5 really GREAT teams that can beat anyone, but the talent and player development has prevented a "dominant and consensus #1" at least this year thus far. You didn't watch the Penn State game. If you had you would definitely be talking them up. They looked as great as any I've seen this season last night and I HATE Big Ten football.
What other QBs in college football are getting NFL scouts excited right now? As of right now, I would say Sam Bradford tops that list. The QB class this year just isn't all that great, no matter what conference you play for. And why the are you brining up a 3 year old bowl game as reference? Let alone a game that was won on a FG. What about Mizzou beating Arkansas 38-7 just last year?
Here is the truth as I see it.... USC has dominated a top 10 team in Ohio State, beaten a ranked Oregon team, and totally destroyed an average Arizona State team. Mizzou has outscored a lesser Big 10 team (giving up 42 pts. in the process), destroyed a mediocre big 12 team in Nebraska and...well...beat up on some very poor small conf. teams like Nevada and Buffalo. Cat- you seem extremely focused on who each team lost to. Fair enough, but what about who each team has beaten as well? Mizzou has beaten NO ONE. USC has at least taken down a good (If not great) Ohio State and Oregon team. USC lost on the road to an average Oregon State team. Mizzou lost at home to a top 25 team. You seem to only want to use logic that best fits your argument. For example, you claim that Mizzou lost to the #8 team in the nation, probably because using the #10 status from the other poll doesn't support your example as well. But they are #8 now, not when they beat you. Are you going to consistently use the current rankings of the teams, or the rankings as they best fit your argument? Why does who USC (or any team) lost to carry more weight than who they beat? Bottom line- the drop Mizzou took is consistent with what's happened to all other top teams that have lost. We ALL know it sucks to lose later than early. And Mizzou looked pretty damn bad on national tv. When people across the nation get to see it, it's a high risk, high reward situation. You take care of Texas, you can worry about it then. But until then, you are worried about a lot of stuff that won't matter if the Tigers can't take care of business on the field. Enjoy the cushy schedule this year. You can be the KU of the north, and take advantage of not beating anyone and still getting a shot at the BCS.
It's interesting how your perspective distorts things. Oregon (then ranked, now unranked) is called a "ranked team". Illinois (then ranked, now unranked) is called a "lesser team". Arizona State (not ranked and 2-4 in a weak conference) is called an "average team". Nebraska (not ranked and 3-3 in a tougher conference) is called "mediocre". I'm not here to defend Missouri. But your bias is clear and your assessment of the respective schedules is flawed as indicated above.
Sam already called you on it, but nice twist calling Oregon "ranked" and forgetting to mention it with Illinois. As for the drop, the issue is that it's October and not September -- the drops shouldn't be equivalent in size. LOLOL. Surely you can't be serious, calling Ohio State "good if not great." Have you watched them play? They're slow all over the field and struggle against teams like Ohio, Troy and Purdue! Plus, USC beat the version without Beanie Wells (the only plus player on the entire offense) and with the statue, Todd Boeckman. It's funny you accuse me of using logic that "best fits my argument," when you're doing the same thing. When it comes to Ohio State, you draw a distinction with "top 10," showing that they're better than merely ranked. But Oklahoma State, who was much better than merely top 25 (they were ranked 17), you only list as "top 25." How convenient for you. Also, what does it matter what a team was ranked "at the time" you beat them? Rankings are determined arbitrarily at this point in the year by preseason hype. It's how they finish that tells you what kind of opponent a given team was. With that said, of course USC has a better resume than Missouri now. The debate is in the context of winning out and contending for a spot in the national title game. If Missouri wins out, that will include wins at Texas, a neutral site game against KU and a Big 12 Championship against either UT/OU. If USC wins out, they'll have a win against a mediocre Ohio State squad... and that's pretty much it. Missouri would have both the more impressive wins as well as the better loss.
If Oklahoma and Texas goes undefeated the rest of the year including their bowl games Does that mean Big 12 ends the year #1 and #2 [#2 is the best Oklahoma can hope for if Texas or Mizzou win the big 12 am I correct?] Rocket River
I'm not sure a 28-0 victory is totally destroying a team, especially considering that Arizona State has lost 4 games in a row, including one to UNLV.
It's possible, but that's assuming that Bama and Penn State don't win out as well. Bama still has to play at LSU and probably Florida in the SEC championship game, Penn State could very well win out though.
Texas and Alabama would be a nice little game for the national title. Both teams could be undefeated headed into December, before their conference championship games. I think Texas will take care of Kansas, Missouri (somewhat overrated), and Oklahoma State. The Tech game might be kind of tough, but winnable. On the other hand, Alabama actually has easier schedule...and played most of their toughest opponents. The only threats left are Auburn and the dreaded LSU game. If Alabama falls off, it will probably be that game.
Whoops, I almost didn't catch this gem. If losing by 5 (and being in a position to win it with 2:00 left) to a No. 17 team (now No. 8) is looking "pretty damn bad," then what would you call it when you lose to Ole Miss or Oregon State?
Alabama's Coach . . . that guy just wins everywhere he goes . . . he don't stay but .. . .when he there he builds a program Rocket River
Too bad...it didn't translate in the NFL. Still, I think if he stayed with the Dolphins...they would've had respectable record. 7-9 or 8-8.
What is your problem with me, dude? My team lost a football game. So has everyone's team on this BBS, at one time or another... why don't you go antagonize them a bit?
im not picking on you at all but in my opinion they got beat by a good team and dropped about where they should have. at this point in the season. that goes with saying that teams like UT,USC,OU will always be given the benefit of the doubt when voting. Until you have a few years like florida state and michegan and you and finally have a tarnished image. its kinda just they way it is.
would have been nice to see TTU move up as 3 teams above them lost. But that didn't look great in the ot win over Nebraska. Guess they'll just have to keep winning.
I was initially going to agree with cat that they should have been ranked higher, but after reading all his whining I'm glad they aren't
