[quote]DJHT wrote:
No worries, I love all FOOTBALL. If you look I am not keeping this on a Big-12 topic. I thought Texas should have gone into the SEC and I believe you and I have actually discussed this before. I try not to look at things through orange tinted glasses (or if we are talking NFL blue tinted glasses).[/quote]
I was so, so disappointed that Texas didn’t come over to the SEC. Of course they’d probably have to find another team to add in to the conference as well, but that’d be epic. I still think Superconference is going to happen at some point anyway… the question at this point is, how long?
[quote]DJHT wrote:
[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
It’s the interweb. This disagreement can be solved in two ways:
Someone finds a video of the disputed call; or
Dance off.[/quote]
HaHaHa @ #2 we are both large white men, you like watching Gorilla’s dance? sorry I am at work and fire walled against video. And he said I was right. [/quote]
Hey, I’m a Dance Dance Revolution master. It may not be dancing, but I can definitely get down on rhythmic feet-tapping!
Just for the sake of conversation, because I have to listen to Blah Blah Big 10 crap all year, what do you all think of Rich Rodriguez? Should he be on the hot-seat? How many games should he be allowed to win/lose without negative reprocussion?
[quote]DJHT wrote:
I thought Texas should have gone into the SEC [/quote]
The Longhorns are not welcome.[/quote]
Why?!
Add Florida State to the East and Texas to the West and you have unquestionably one of the most powerful conferences in the nation. Mike Slive wants money = Superconference inevitablity.
[quote]DJHT wrote:
I thought Texas should have gone into the SEC [/quote]
The Longhorns are not welcome.[/quote]
Why?!
Add Florida State to the East and Texas to the West and you have unquestionably one of the most powerful conferences in the nation. Mike Slive wants money = Superconference inevitablity.[/quote]
Arkansas doesnt like Texas. Simple as that.
Plus I dont see Florida bringing their (here recently) non conference punching bag Florida State into the SEC with them.
[quote]DJHT wrote:
I thought Texas should have gone into the SEC [/quote]
The Longhorns are not welcome.[/quote]
Why?!
Add Florida State to the East and Texas to the West and you have unquestionably one of the most powerful conferences in the nation. Mike Slive wants money = Superconference inevitablity.[/quote]
Arkansas doesn’t want to have to lose to texas more often than it already does.
[quote]gregron wrote:
this thread should be called “The Big 12 thread” lol… Lets talk college football not about how shitty the mid west is! ZING!
:)[/quote]
Agree so who is going to take the Pac 10? And when is your conference going to get a conference championship game like the real conferences?[/quote]
good question. I would have said Oregon but with their issues I dont really know who will win it this year. Luck from Stanford is awesome so they have to be the top contender I would guess.
As far as the Championship game goes… We add Utah and Colorado next year so maybe then? or the year after that?
ohh and all of you texas/nebraska game people better hope that they rematch this year cause after that there’s VERY LITTLE chance of them playing each other once Nebraska is in the Big 10(which has 11 teams and next year will have 12. How confusing)
Add Florida State to the East and Texas to the West and you have unquestionably one of the most powerful conferences in the nation. Mike Slive wants money = Superconference inevitablity.[/quote]
Everyone in the media already sucks the SEC’s dicks off every year. They dont need texas or florida state to be “one of the most powerful conferences in the nation”… Most SEC teams would probably win the NFC West havent you heard?
[quote]DJHT wrote:
I thought Texas should have gone into the SEC [/quote]
The Longhorns are not welcome.[/quote]
Why?!
Add Florida State to the East and Texas to the West and you have unquestionably one of the most powerful conferences in the nation. Mike Slive wants money = Superconference inevitablity.[/quote]
I’m good with Texas in the west but I’d rather have Virginia Tech or Miami in the east. I’m also sure the Texas would never agree to join the SEC West.
Eic…“lucky” is not the right word to throw around regarding the Big12 championship. Both teams played great D and fought hard. Yes, McCoy fucked around and wasn’t paying attention, but who cares? It’s not like we cheated or the call wasn’t correct. There was one full second left. Give Lawrence credit for making such a pressure packed kick. The kicking game is where championships/ undefeated seasons are achieved (ask Alabama fans when they played Tennessee last year). Of course, luck is involved. There is always small amounts of luck when your talking about a team going UNDEFEATED during the reg. season. I counter the “luck” notion with the prevalent rumor that Venables aided the Huskers in preparation. There was reports/rumors that Venables and Sooners decoded our play signals (and yes, O coord Greg Davis is a moron if this did happen).
Is that a childish argument on my part? Yes. But it is also childish to call a hard fought game of that degree “luck.” Hell, we had a receiver drop a wide ass open pass in the 4th quarter who is normally sure handed. Luck is hardly the right word.
Looking forward to Lincoln. [/quote]
Honestly, I wasn’t even talking about the 0:01 call. I was actually the one talking my Nebraska friends down about that. I believed at the time the call was correct and still believe it to this day.
My “lucky” comment was more to say exactly what you did: That the game could have gone either way. Adi Kunalic* doesn’t shank that kickoff out of bounds and I think my Huskers win the game. But as you said, your receiver doesn’t drop the pass, you win the game. So, again, Texas was “lucky” to win the game in the sense that it took hard play plus a dash of good fortune to come away. But I meant no disrespect and did not intend to convey the idea that Nebraska definitely should have won the game. (Incidentally, if Nebraska had won, I would have said we got lucky, too.)
Why is this important? Because if Nebraska played a McCoy/Shipley lead Texas team to within a second/inches/knat’s vagina of a victory on a “neutral” field, I feel okay about the chances that a Suh-less Nebraska team can beat Texas in Lincoln.
And yes, Hunter Lawrence’s kick was insane. Just like Ryan Bailey’s game-winning kick in Lincoln in 2006 when ya’ll picked up Terrance Nunn’s fumble deep in Nebraska territory and hit the game winner with a minute left. Saw it in person. My voice is still sore from that game.
*Incidentally, Kunalic is from Texas originally. Conspiracy theory? I’ve got my foil hat on.
[quote]gregron wrote:
this thread should be called “The Big 12 thread” lol… Lets talk college football not about how shitty the mid west is! ZING!
:)[/quote]
Agree so who is going to take the Pac 10? And when is your conference going to get a conference championship game like the real conferences?[/quote]
good question. I would have said Oregon but with their issues I dont really know who will win it this year. Luck from Stanford is awesome so they have to be the top contender I would guess.
As far as the Championship game goes… We add Utah and Colorado next year so maybe then? or the year after that?[/quote]
Oregon is still the top dog. They have something like 20 starters returning from a solid team, minus there fucking center and, of course, Jeremiah “Dude, I stole a Dell” Masoli. But their coaching staff has shown an uncanny ability to plug-and-play shifty QBs like it’s their job . . . because it is. I think Oregon is still going to be a force.
USC will be right behind. The coaching staff this year is leaps and bounds better than last year in all three phases, most especially on offense. The offense was so fucking predictable and shitty that it was painful to watch. It’s like Bates had a playbook with 300 pages, 299 of which said “Bubble Screen.”
Luck is a bitch and will fold like an old lawn chair without his boy Gerhart.
[quote]lavi wrote:
Pac-10 race seems pretty wide open. Here’s how I would rank the teams, in order:
Maybe:
Oregon
Stanford
Oregon State (actually, I forgot if they have a decent QB or not?)
Washington
Arizona
Probably not:
Cal
UCLA
No chance:
Arizona State
Washington State
USC (literally no chance :P)
Cal’s Shane Vereen should get some attention this year.[/quote]
Technically you’re right that USC cannot win the Pac-10, but they still stand a very good chance of being in the top two in the conference. Please tell me you know this.
And no, Oregon State does not have a decent QB. Sean Canfield graduated. They have a sick running back, though, in 'Quiz Rodgers. Here is how I see the standings (based on win-loss record):
[quote]lavi wrote:
Pac-10 race seems pretty wide open. Here’s how I would rank the teams, in order:
Maybe:
Oregon
Stanford
Oregon State (actually, I forgot if they have a decent QB or not?)
Washington
Arizona
Probably not:
Cal
UCLA
No chance:
Arizona State
Washington State
USC (literally no chance :P)
Cal’s Shane Vereen should get some attention this year.[/quote]
Technically you’re right that USC cannot win the Pac-10, but they still stand a very good chance of being in the top two in the conference. Please tell me you know this.
And no, Oregon State does not have a decent QB. Sean Canfield graduated. They have a sick running back, though, in 'Quiz Rodgers. Here is how I see the standings (based on win-loss record):
Oregon
USC
Oregon State
Stanford
Washington
Arizona
Cal
fUCLA
Arizona State
Washington State
[/quote]
I was thinking of my ranking more in terms of “probability of winning the Pac-10.” USC has a 0% chance of winning the Pac-10, so I put them last, just slightly behind Washington State :P.
Our rankings are almost identical. Why do you put Oregon State as #2 even though they don’t have a good QB? I’m a Cal follower, and their lack of a consistent QB since Aaron Rodgers has totally fucked them even when they had otherwise great teams and great running backs (Marshawn Lynch, Justin Forsett, Jahvid Best).
[quote]DJHT wrote:
I thought Texas should have gone into the SEC [/quote]
The Longhorns are not welcome.[/quote]
Why?!
Add Florida State to the East and Texas to the West and you have unquestionably one of the most powerful conferences in the nation. Mike Slive wants money = Superconference inevitablity.[/quote]
[quote]DJHT wrote:
I thought Texas should have gone into the SEC [/quote]
The Longhorns are not welcome.[/quote]
Why?!
Add Florida State to the East and Texas to the West and you have unquestionably one of the most powerful conferences in the nation. Mike Slive wants money = Superconference inevitablity.[/quote]
TUCK FEXAS![/quote]
Spoken like someone from Arkansas. You forgot to put your teeth in again.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Why are we talking about Arkansas??[/quote]
They miss the SWC and the good ole days. What up Big_Boss how is life. Ready for the game next weekend?
[/quote]
Yes,sir. I actually miss the SWC days. I actually would love to see Texas,TCU,Ark,and LSU in conference together one day.[/quote]
Me too, that is why I wanted Texas to go into the SEC for a super conference, where we have those teams above in the west division. Just rename it the South Conference.
