You would think that being a Texas fan, there would be some sympathy shown, but apparently not. I like Texas too, since I'm from the state, but am annoyed by such a callous response after what Texas fans went through last year.
There's a bit of a difference there. Did UT belong in the BCS last year even though they were absolutely thrashed by Oklahoma...probably. However, the rules clearly state that the Big XII champion gets an automatic bid. This year's scenario involves a lot of subjective flip flopping, meriting more shows of skepticism.
Only if you choose to look at it as a UT-Cal angle, which is the wrong frame for the issue imo. Cal lost out on a bid to UT, but also to 4 teams that were ranked behind them. Pittsburgh got in as the champion of a very weak conference. Cal was higher ranked than Michigan, Va Tech, and Utah. And, with respect to Utah, they found themselves in the position of losing a bid to a team from a non-BCS conference when that team met the arbitrary rule of being ranked top-6 at the end of the season. The people who made the rules could have made them top-5 or top-4 or top-8, there's no particular reason why top-6 should have been the measure for acceptance. A rather arbitrary rule denied Cal of a spot more than UT did. Similarly, UT lost out last year because of a somewhat arbitrary rule that limits at-large bids to one per conference, along with the upset of OU in the Big 12 championship game.
Back on topic... For those flying to the game, the rates to LAX aren't looking too good. Be sure to check the other local airports (and don't arrive/depart during rush hour if flying on a workday): Burbank, Long Beach, Ontario, Orange County (aka Santa Ana ... a bit of a drive though).
If Texas and Cal played at a nuetral field who do you think would win the game? (I think it be UT 9 times out of 10 because of the quality of the O-line , linebackers and the superiority at QB) And you gotta fly though John Wayne International Airport, Pilgram.
I'm still confused why some people think Mack Brown lobbying for a spot in the BCS is "classless." Is there a book on class somewhere that defines what it means for a coach to be "classy"? If Mack insulted other teams in order to bring Texas up, then I would better understand the criticisms against Mack. But all Mack did was criticize the BCS system generally and advertise his team as deserving of a BCS bowl. Coaches in all sports lobby all the time. For example, every year coaches lobby for the Heisman and other individual awards for their players. Is this a classless practice? It seems that according to Rodgers, coaches would properly be eunuchs with no public opinion whatsoever about their team or players in the national picture.
Although I am happy Texas got the spot, I do think it opens up this can of worms: Shouldn't the coaches polls be public knowledge? I think I read that in two polls Texa was 2nd and in 6 polls Cal was below 6th. Again there needs to be a little accountability if it's true (espacially Texas getting 2nd place votes). Would look very crooked if it's Big 12 coaches voting UT 2nd and Cal 7th just due o the money involved (but please note a 2nd BCS team from the same conference gets a much smaller payout than other teams).
apparently 4 coaches had Cal at #7, and 2 had them at #8. Big 12 coaches maybe? they should show who votes for who
I wouldn't quite call So. Miss, Cal's "Kansas". After that quick first score by So. Miss, Cal grabbed relative control of the game all the way up until So. Miss almost tied it. Again, it was not an impressive win, as Cal had the extra pt block returned, but the running game tacked on another touchdown after that. Against Kansas, Texas was down by 10 w/ 7 minutes to go, needing a TD w/ 11 seconds left in regulation to get the win. And I would say Kansas is a lower quality football team than So. Miss. is. Anyway that's enough for me on this topic. Congrats to Texas...no doubt that they were deserving of a BCS bid.
"If you've got a vote, vote for us," ... "I'm asking you to do that and I'm asking everyone across the nation. "This team deserves to be in the BCS," he said. "They deserve to go more than some teams that are being talked about." This is what everyone is making such a huge deal about(And not just guys here on the board, it's like a freaking chant on ESPN). On his knees? Are you kidding me? This is a guy rooting for the team he coaches, and it had absolutely no effect(Maybe a negative one, Cal increased their lead that week while idle) on any voters at all, nor should it. I don't see the big deal. Looking back, I wish he hadn't said it, because there's no way it convinced anyone to vote for us and we're catching so much heat for it now. Like halfbreed said, of course Tedford wouldn't lobby for votes. At the time of the A&M game, he was winning. After seeing the heat that Mack caught, why would he do it at all? Tedford hasn't exactly been silent since the bowls were announced... Rodgers' statements are nothing short of ignorant. I mean...look at this: "I thought it was a little classless how Coach Brown was begging for votes after the (Texas A&M) game," Rodgers said. "I think a team's record and the way you play should speak for itself, and you shouldn't have to complain about the BCS system. Coach Tedford isn't going to, although he's frustrated just like we are. I think we're a bigger team, classier than that." He has no right to make such claims. The way he has spouted off to the media speaks volumes about his so-called class. LiLStevie3, "Who had a better season is not the issue right now." Shouldn't it be? And how do you know that voters didn't do that? I know of at least one:McCready something or another had Texas at #9 last week behind Utah, Boise State, and Iowa. He re-evaluated and moved Texas up to #5. I don't think the So. Miss game convinced him that Texas should move up four spots. And with a more convincing win against Kansas, maybe Texas jumps Cal a long time ago? You can't say which game had more of an impact. BTW, I do sympathize. I even said it earlier. But if roles were reversed, there would be absolutely no cain raised at all, especially outside of Longhorn circles. Just look at last year for proof. This year, all people are talking about is Texas over Cal, while an undefeated Auburn with a stronger schedule than USC is forced to play VA Tech. wrath_of_khan, you make the loss sound impressive(Though, it's still sort of weird that that loss seems to be hailed as Cal's biggest accomplishment of the year), but the same can be done for the Texas game. We held OU to their lowest point total of the year(Second lowest was more than twice of their point total against Texas), dominated in special teams, and moved the ball past the 50 numerous times. If it weren't for untimely fumbles, the game goes even more down to the wire.
BTW, I don't really know how I would go about checking this guy's math, but I doubt any of the info is false, and it is interesting... http://forums.hornfans.com/php/wwwt...6885&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=all
and that's why it's callous. no one wept for us last year getting knocked out by the arbitrary no 3 teams from a conference rule. and no one was gonna weep for us this year if cal had edged us out by 0.0001. so like i said, no one was gonna care about the "injustice" against us the way countless articles have already been written taking up cal's case. it's too bad cal didn't make it. it's too bad they didn't whip So Miss. i'm glad we're in. if both teams deserved it, i'd just as soon it be my team that makes it after getting screwed last year. I think I read that in two polls Texa was 2nd and in 6 polls Cal was below 6th guess how many polls we were below 6th in. 8. two more than cal. in fact, we actually picked up an 8th place vote the final week (one of the 7's apparently moved us down to 8th for fun). cinderella's sob story isn't so great when stacked up against reality. while our 2 2nd place votes are ridiculous, they just cancel out the stupid 7th's and 8th's differential (when neither team should be below 6th on any ballot). the computers loved us, the coaches thought we were tied, the ap loved cal, it all came out to a tiny advantage for us. yay. maybe cal can get back here next year like we did after last year and they can screw someone else out of a bcs next year. hell, if they get a little closer to usc next year they may just get voted #1 and be handed the trophy in midseason for being so close to winning.
well for every AP vote cal picks up or we lose, that's 1/1725 of the AP component and since it counts for 1/3 of the BCS score, that's 1/5175. similarly, for the coaches, it's 1/4875. in either case, it's close to .0002 for each vote. so however many he gave cal back in his post, just multiply by 0.0002 and the numbers should work out pretty much.
Texas did not deserve a BCS bowl last year, I don't know why people keep saying that. A 65-13 loss, a loss at home to Arkansas, and not winning their conference? Come on.
How do you figure? I mean, you make good points about their losses, but they were early and who else would you put in UT's place? There wasn't a qualified 1 loss team to put in there and #9 Miami, the team that took their place, was hardly impressive with a loss to Tennessee and a blowout loss to a bad Va Tech team.
He posted his work this morning: USA Today published the coach's ballot totals for Cal and Texas. This week Last week Cal 2nd 0 0 3rd 1 0 4th 27 39 5th 17 16 6th 10 6 7th 4 0 8th 2 0 Tex 2nd 1 1 3rd 3 1 4th 18 8 5th 23 33 6th 8 10 7th 5 6 8th 3 2 To the poster who suggested we double check my accuracy... I agree, we need to be sure! Old actual Texas AP total = 1337 I removed 3 for the Texas AP "flip" with Cal, and 4 for removing the benefit of the Alabama writer. New Texas AP total = 1330 New Texas AP score = 1330/1625 = 0.8185 Old actual Cal AP total = 1399 I added 3 for the Texas AP "flip" with Cal. New Cal AP total = 1402 New Cal AP score = 1402/1625 = 0.8628 Old actual Texas coach's total = 1281 I removed 9 total points. That's 3 points for moving one Texas #2 vote to #5, and 6 points for moving three Texas #3 votes to #5. New Texas coach's total = 1272 New Texas coach's score = 1272/1525 = 0.8341 Old actual Cal coach's total = 1286 I added 20 total points. That's 8 points for moving two Cal #8 votes to #4, and 12 points for moving four Cal #7 votes to #4. New Cal coach's total = 1306 New Texas coach's score = 1306/1525 = 0.8564 Texas computer avg remains 0.88, and Cal remains 0.80. Average Texas (0.8185, 0.8341, 0.8800) = 0.8442 Average Cal (0.8628, 0.8564, 0.8000) = 0.8397 Difference of 0.0045
This was the first couple of sentences of the AP summary for the two losses: "The Oklahoma Sooners found a new way to devastate the Texas Longhorns.Slowly. Painfully. And with a freshman plucked from East Texas doing most of the damage." "Southern California seemed helpless as Aaron Rodgers picked away at its defense, hitting pass after pass. But with California just 9 yards from a potential winning score, the Trojans finally found a way to stop the Golden Bears' near-perfect quarterback." Texas got their butt kicked by OU that day. Maybe not as bad as before, but don't think OU didn't take pride in shutting out Texas for the first time in 24 years. CAL has been the only team in two years to play USC tough. Anyone who watched that game knows that USC got lucky not to get upset again. If not for October 9th, Texas would have run-away with the at-large birth. The loss to the national championship contenders was rightly taken into account
