Yes, I am. But I have the same rules you do when it comes to betting. I haven't bet on Texas all season... ditto for the Astros and Texans. This is just an exception to the rule because the spread and the hype (imo) is out of control and it's time to take advantage. I made similar plays the last two years on the Patriots/Colts in the playoffs for this very reason... and had great rewards from it. That said, before I made a bet, I did ask myself one question. What if it wasn't Texas playing in the game? What if it were Penn State, Notre Dame, or Ohio State? And if it were one of those teams... I'd still put some money on them to cover a +8 spread vs. USC. USC's track record against good opponents just isn't enough to make me think they'll win by multiple possessions in a neutral site game. The fact that it's an undefeated Texas team that's better than Penn State, Notre Dame and OSU just makes it easier. Texas wins this game, straight up... and if they don't, please bump this to the top and I'll take the abuse.
The same can be said for Texas' games against Louisiana-Lafayette, Rice, Baylor and Kansas. Are they huge rivals too?
Doesn't hurt that Texas is 10-2 (best of all D1 teams) vs. the spread and USC is 6-6. Texas consistently does better than the average sportsbetter expects. USC does not.
Baylor and Kansas were both games in November. Had they lost either one of those, they wouldn't be playing on the 4th.
Wait thats right UT dominated the game and it was never in doubt. It was priceless seeing all the UT fans in College Station (and there was a lot), about to cry when vince fumbled.
Not as priceless as having a lot of UT fans in Kyle Field where they couldn't even sell out their student allotment. Hell, Aggies don't even consider it a rivalry anymore the way UT has completely dominated that series, save a few years in the late 80s, early 90s. If one team plays the best game they've played all year while the other team plays their worst, and the latter still wins by double-digits, it was not a losable game.
Most Aggies had given up on the team/game and were hoping to lose big so Fran would be fired. Once again the crap with UT played their worse game. They played bad because they had no answer for A&M and Mack Brown was not ready for Mcgee. The A&M defense caused Vince Young to play bad. The game was not decided till two mins left in the game. If not for two awful special teams plays by the aggies, they win that game. This is why UT fans are so hated, because they are delusional. How can you say it was not loseable?
It will truly require UT-Austin to play the absolute game of their life, coupled with USC having a bad day for the longhorns to win this game. That is clear to all of America.
Please. Who's delusional now? A Fresno State team didn't play the game of their lives (5 turnovers) and nearly beat USC on their home field even with Bush having an absolutely amazing game.
Absolutely. UT can't compete in this game... if only they were as good as mighty Arizona State, Notre Dame and Fresno State.
So you define a "big game" after the fact, based on what happens during the game? Because between Kansas and A&M: Kansas had a winning record Kansas made a bowl Kansas won a bowl Texas was favored over Kansas at home by about as much as they were favored on the road against A&M. Kansas is unquestionably a better team than A&M. I would say, before the games, Kansas was a bigger game for Texas than A&M. The A&M-Texas rivalry was big in the 1990's when they were contending for SWC/B12 South titles. It also was big because these were generally the best and last team each faced during the season. It was big for Texas in the early/mid 1990's because A&M was a top-15 caliber team so it would be an big win for Texas. Today, it's just another game on the schedule for Texas. For A&M, it's a big game because (like Texas in the early 90's), it's a chance to knock off a top-15 team. This is a "rivalry" that has upsets once every 30 years. The better team basically always wins. No one at UT cared about the A&M game - it was expected to be a blowout. Whether you want to say UT played its worst game or A&M played its best, or a combination of both, A&M lost by double digits. Big deal. USC-Fresno State was a bigger game, a better team, and a closer game than A&M. For both USC and Texas, it was another game on the schedule. For Fresno State and A&M, it was "the game" on the schedule.
All those teams would STEAMROLL the Aggies, who gave UT-Austin all they could handle. And don't forget, A&M was starting a FRESHMAN at quarterback. USC will have a heisman trophy winner back there.
Clearly. Never mind that UT has a higher rated offense, defense, and a clear advantage across the board on special teams.
So the A&M game is all that matters? Tech would steamroll Fresno State and ASU, yet got blown out by Texas. That must mean USC is terrible, right? Are you that desperate to justify your position that you have to use what you clearly know is idiotic logic?
So that's why the line is -8? Open your eyes. You're clearly the minority in America in this argument.
Well, it was McGee's legs that hurt UT more than his arm. And since Leinart's legs aren't really much of a worry, I don't think the comparison holds any significance to the Rose Bowl game.
Oh, so we can pick and choose one game out of 12 instead of looking at the entire season? Arizona State was a 5-loss team in a mediocre conference, and they played USC much closer than A&M played Texas. In fact, they had USC down 21-3 at the half. And don't forget, Arizona State had mediocre talent on both sides of the ball... Texas has the runner-up for the Heisman Trophy and elite recruits everywhere. Also, Arizona State couldn't even steamroll Rutgers.
The sportsbetting majority has underestimated Texas 10 out of 12 times this season. Besides which, unlike you apparently, I actually trust my own brain more than sportsbetters.
