USC [-8] vs. Texas

The AM game was much more important!! They lose that , they do not go to the national title. Nobody cares who won the Rose Bowl last Year.

 

And the time after that when we lost against...

Oh, wait.

For Mr. Brightside -

I think this game will be decided by a touchdown or less. There is way too much talent on both sides of the ball at any given moment for the game to get out of hand, imo.

 

Liquidity depends on the game you're trading. If it's a nationally televised game, you're going to get solid trading. ~30k contracts traded for a monday night football game, for example. If it's some obscure college basketball game, obviously it will be a lot lighter - but hey, you could always serve as the market maker in a situation like that and arbitrage the prices there versus at the traditional sportsbooks. Tons of opportunities available.

The juice is MUCH less at an exchange than a typical sportsbook, also. Tradesports charges $0.04 per contract traded, and that's only for price takers. Price makers can trade for free (unless their contracts expire, in which case there are expiry fees...another $0.04 per...)

 

Tradesports is awesome

 

I love it too.

 

This is kinda funny.

A post like that might make people think the Aggies actually won. The Aggies played a very good game. The Longhorns played a poor game. The Longhorns won by double digits.

I repeat: the Longhorns played a bad game against a team playing a good game, and still won handily *on the road*. That chain of events isn't supposed to happen in a "big game".

 

Well if they lost to OU, would they go to the national title?

Let me know when A&M makes it to a BCS Bowl and let me know if you care.

 

Hey tex, try reading what you quote next time before you make an ass of yourself. You quoted me, and yet I never said Vince always steps up in big games. I made no "clearly wrong statements." I predicted that Vince would step up in this particular big game (like he did in last year's Rose Bowl).

And I'd argue that while rivalry games are always "big games", including UT-A&M, they are less big when one of the teams is clearly having an inferior season.

 

Historically, OU has always been the more hated rival. That changed in the 90's when the Aggies were good and OU was not ,but that was a short period. In the history of the UT-A&M series, there have been a grand total of 3 real upsets - it's just a big game that always goes to form.

 

The National media is giving USC too much credit, this is NOT the same team as last year.

IMHO it is a toss up....and I am getting GREAT odds on UT....so gonna go with the money line.

DD

 

Ut played bad because they were not ready or motivated, still nothing to do with the aggies.

 

they made the sugar bowl and i don't care becuase it was a worthless game years ago.

 

atm rules all. King of the big 12 you guys are.

as for the original post , usc is likely better, but UT has trailed for like 26 minutes this year, usc forty plus.

 

what was the last worthwhile game you guys played in? Any sport?

 

y'all played a great game but still lost by 11 at home? that's atm moral victory I guess.

 

I think you missed his point. He is not arguing as to what the cause and effect are. You say the Aggies played great defense and offense, and that is why UT looked bad in that game. All he is saying is that UT looked bad. You two actually agree. His point is that, regardless of WHY the Longhorns had a very subpar showing, they did in fact have it, and the Aggies looked probably the best they had all season.

And despite all that they still lost by 11 points. If it was truly a "big game" as some would like to argue, that sort of thing would never happen.

I find it humorous that bigtexxx, someone who has never attended UT, has the gall to condescend to tell ACTUAL UT STUDENTS who their biggest rivals are, as if he can somehow read their mind. It's one thing to argue basic sports with UT fans, but don't try to prove a point where the best possible evidence one could gather is by actually being on campus and seeing peoples' reactions to games.

Edit: And crap, it seems I've done a naughty and assisted in derailing a thread. My apologies, reggietodd.

 

oops...you obviously don't realize that this thread involves the University of Texas football team and this board has a member named bigtexxx.

 

I didn't say they were all hype, but yes, they're overhyped. For one thing, the 35-game win streak is irrelevant. Different teams, different years. The USC defense last year was completely different and much better than the one from this year, for example.

Second, lost in the glitz of the Reggie Bush highlights is how vulnerable that defense has been all season. They got five turnovers against Fresno State, had the home field advantage, and still gave up 42 points! They beat Fresno State by 8, Notre Dame by 3 and Arizona State by 10 (and only that because of a late fluke ASU turnover).

OTOH, Texas averages more points per game than USC, has a higher average margin of victory and has played a similar schedule in terms of difficulty. And it's supposedly some lock that they're going to lose by more than a touchdown at a neutral site game? That's overhyped. They're good, but this isn't a team that's beaten good teams by 20+ points all season.