Jump to content
The Smoakhouse Forums

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

And teams don’t get to schedule easy wins and start the year 4-0 automatically 

Those tune up games are important to the smaller schools - It pays about half of their athletic budget.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The usual...

I find both fanbases equally annoying, and seldom find myself rooting for either team.   That said: I would LOVE to watch a Texas/Texas A&M game every Thanksgiving. 

Posted Images

6 minutes ago, DB2point0 said:

Who cares?  

The other 95% of college football players that are not quite good enough to get a full scholarship. Some of the best coaches I've worked with played small college football and are better men because of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Lhornfan said:

The other 95% of college football players that are not quite good enough to get a full scholarship. Some of the best coaches I've worked with played small college football and are better men because of it.

Do you watch sfa or UT?  I might watch a sfa game once every 10 years and I went to school there .  
 

that money is the only benefit in the game.  That, and the bigger school not getting a loss 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Valhalla said:

This is really my thought process and why I believe it is an advantage. 

Let's say that there are 6 SEC teams in the top 25 in that week. Well, the other 19 teams are playing a conference game where at least half of the teams in their conference will lose a game. In that week every SEC team is going to win there game which at worst will keep them stationary in the rankings. Some borderline teams might even sneak into the #20-#25 range that next week. Then they will place other SEC schools who will credit for a ranked win.

True, at the end of the day the SOS will be the same regardless, but in my opinion it influences perception towards the end of the season.

That's true, and I 100% agree- the late game gives the SEC teams a little "break" while others are playing tougher games and could lose. 

But then take that a step further and most SEC teams THEN play a big rivalry game. Some are less  of a tough game (like Georgia vs Georgia Tech), but otherwise those are big, emotional games where all bets are off (see the Iron Bowl), you know? 

Plus, it's never really helped any SEC team out, the perception. The possibility is there for that to happen, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DB2point0 said:

Do you watch sfa or UT?  I might watch a sfa game once every 10 years and I went to school there .  
 

that money is the only benefit in the game.  That, and the bigger school not getting a loss 

That money can change the culture of a small university campus. I would say that is a huge benefit of playing the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest thing that I take away from this conversation is that the game of college football would benefit greatly from some rules changes to bring the conferences more in line with each other to level the playing field, so to speak. For example, the conferences should all be playing the same number of conference games. The conference championship games should all have the same selection format. I hate the squash games, even the ones where the P5 powerhouses host a G5 team. But I believe those are necessary because a lot of those G5s don’t have the budget they need for their program without it. I would just like to see some consistency. If there is a way to eliminate the FCS squash games and still allow the P5 conferences to help fund FCS, do it. I don’t have all the answers, but the game is hurting the way it is. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 903GUY said:

Do you think A&M (& Bama) are the same teams they were in Week 2? 

Obviously not. Both have gotten better through reps, film evaluation, etc... Why would the argument that A&M has improved greatly from week 2 not be the same with Alabama? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 903GUY said:

Do you think A&M (& Bama) are the same teams they were in Week 2? 

I think they are both improved and the outcome would be the same.  I just found that tweet hilarious

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lhornfan said:

Obviously not. Both have gotten better through reps, film evaluation, etc... Why would the argument that A&M has improved greatly from week 2 not be the same with Alabama? 

I think it would be a different game this go round.  Bama lost one of their better playmakers in Waddle since then and I think this A&M team has come a long way since playing a Bama team one week after they looked awful againt Vanderbilt

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MavGrad99 said:

I think they are both improved and the outcome would be the same.  I just found that tweet hilarious

I agree that the likely outcome would be the same.  I'm not sure it would be 28 points, but a Bama win nonetheless.  I guess I just feel like it A&M has a better chance of beating them than ND does at this point in the season, but media bias won't let us find out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 903GUY said:

I agree that the likely outcome would be the same.  I'm not sure it would be 28 points, but a Bama win nonetheless.  I guess I just feel like it A&M has a better chance of beating them than ND does at this point in the season, but media bias won't let us find out.

Notre Dame or Texas A&M does not have the QB or the style of offense that is required to beat a Nick Saban team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 903GUY said:

I think it would be a different game this go round.  Bama lost one of their better playmakers in Waddle since then and I think this A&M team has come a long way since playing a Bama team one week after they looked awful againt Vanderbilt

Alabama has not slowed down since losing Waddle. Think of the book/movie Friday Night Lights when Boobie Miles gets hurt; there is someone there to take his place.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, 903GUY said:

I agree that the likely outcome would be the same.  I'm not sure it would be 28 points, but a Bama win nonetheless.  I guess I just feel like it A&M has a better chance of beating them than ND does at this point in the season, but media bias won't let us find out.

I guess I would feel the same if this happened to the Longhorns. You might as well throw in the coaches being biased because the one true Coaches' Poll was posted with where they ranked teams, and most of them had ND over A&M. What did the Aggies do to ESPN that makes them hate you so much? 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lhornfan said:

Obviously not. Both have gotten better through reps, film evaluation, etc... Why would the argument that A&M has improved greatly from week 2 not be the same with Alabama? 

Cause they lost an all-star receiver who was KEY in the game against us. 

I think Bama still wins against us, but it isn't 28 points. Maybe 14-10. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lhornfan said:

I guess I would feel the same if this happened to the Longhorns. You might as well throw in the coaches being biased because the one true Coaches' Poll was posted with where they ranked teams, and most of them had ND over A&M. What did the Aggies do to ESPN that makes them hate you so much? 🤣

So I looked into this exact thing. 

ESPN is mostly made up of Midwestern guys. Joey Galloway, Herbie, Desmond Howard, Mike Golic, Mike Golic Jr.... All Midwest guys who went to Ohio State/Michigan/Notre Dame. Todd Blackledge? From Ohio, played at Penn St. 

They have a pretty heavy bias towards that area of the country. It is what it is. Why do you think they want Michigan to be back SO badly? Every year they rank Michigan like #3 and have them in the playoffs, and every year they disappoint. 

Next, A&M is not historically a blue blood program. Those guys and teams are the equivalent of The Establishment in College Football. Notice how they dislike Clemson?  That's cause until recently Clemson wasn't one of the big names- they weren't Ohio State, Alabama, Michigan, Texas, Notre Dame, or USC. A&M is on their way up, and they don't like that.

Finally, ESPN is owned by Disney who is SUPER Liberal. Bob Iger is the chairman of Disney and he wants to run for president as a Democrat. Notice all the coverage they give to Kaeperpick, BLM, etc.? A&M is very Conservative and in the south. This is a little less important than the above points, but it's something to consider. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hookemhorns88 said:

Alabama has not slowed down since losing Waddle. Think of the book/movie Friday Night Lights when Boobie Miles gets hurt; there is someone there to take his place.

Yeah, but who's to say that replacement would do what Waddle did? He was DIRECTLY responsible for a lot of their offense. 

Not only that, A&M is obviously not the same team we were at the beginning of the season. We struggled with Vanderbilt back then, ya know? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, JohnnyFootball said:

So I looked into this exact thing. 

ESPN is mostly made up of Midwestern guys. Joey Galloway, Herbie, Desmond Howard, Mike Golic, Mike Golic Jr.... All Midwest guys who went to Ohio State/Michigan/Notre Dame. Todd Blackledge? From Ohio, played at Penn St. 

They have a pretty heavy bias towards that area of the country. It is what it is. Why do you think they want Michigan to be back SO badly? Every year they rank Michigan like #3 and have them in the playoffs, and every year they disappoint. 

Next, A&M is not historically a blue blood program. Those guys and teams are the equivalent of The Establishment in College Football. Notice how they dislike Clemson?  That's cause until recently Clemson wasn't one of the big names- they weren't Ohio State, Alabama, Michigan, Texas, Notre Dame, or USC. A&M is on their way up, and they don't like that.

Finally, ESPN is owned by Disney who is SUPER Liberal. Bob Iger is the chairman of Disney and he wants to run for president as a Democrat. Notice all the coverage they give to Kaeperpick, BLM, etc.? A&M is very Conservative and in the south. This is a little less important than the above points, but it's something to consider. 

Great points! I guess the only question is why they seem to fawn over the other SEC schools like Bama (goes with your big names), LSU, Auburn, Georgia, and Florida. Do you think it's because some still consider A&M new to the SEC? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JohnnyFootball said:

Cause they lost an all-star receiver who was KEY in the game against us. 

I think Bama still wins against us, but it isn't 28 points. Maybe 14-10. 

I went back and looked at the box score and it was kind of what I remembered. Bama was up big after the half and 42-17 early in the 3rd quarter. Looking at their play-by-play they became run heavy to run clock. When they wanted to throw, they did - for long TDs. I know for a fact the Aggies are better than they were that day. The struggle against Vandy was due to looking ahead to Bama in my opinion. But Bama did pretty much what they wanted that day - it could have been worse. I'm going to go a little higher than you and say Bama by 21.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lhornfan said:

I went back and looked at the box score and it was kind of what I remembered. Bama was up big after the half and 42-17 early in the 3rd quarter. Looking at their play-by-play they became run heavy to run clock. When they wanted to throw, they did - for long TDs. I know for a fact the Aggies are better than they were that day. The struggle against Vandy was due to looking ahead to Bama in my opinion. But Bama did pretty much what they wanted that day - it could have been worse. I'm going to go a little higher than you and say Bama by 21.

That game was 14-14 in the 2nd quarter. The wheels fell off for A&M when we dropped a 4th down catch that would've been a TD and Bama jumped on that opportunity. I know the score was bad at half, but the difference was about 3 plays at that point (most of them had to do with Waddle lol)

Also, Bama has struggled on defense some since that day, I don't really know why. They gave up 46 to Florida and 48 to Ole Miss. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't understand, is why do people continue to make an argument that implies Waddle was the only player that had a great game against A&M? John Metchie was just as good during that game, if not better. And the last I checked, he has continued to get even better since then, as has DeVonta Smith (who just happens to be the best WR on the team, by the way). 

 

Would the outcome be different if they played again? Most likely not. Would it be a 28 point difference, no idea. But I do believe it would still be more than a 4 point game. 

Either way, it doesn't make any difference anyway as we won't be seeing it happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JohnnyFootball said:

That game was 14-14 in the 2nd quarter. The wheels fell off for A&M when we dropped a 4th down catch that would've been a TD and Bama jumped on that opportunity. I know the score was bad at half, but the difference was about 3 plays at that point (most of them had to do with Waddle lol)

Also, Bama has struggled on defense some since that day, I don't really know why. They gave up 46 to Florida and 48 to Ole Miss. 

Florida and Ole Miss are coached by two guys that know Saban's system. I've got to think that has a lot to do with it. I've watched a lot of film in my days, but nothing beats coaching with a guy or having years experience playing against them. It got to where I knew what Temple or Waco was going to do on offense depending on D&D and part of the field. I think Kiffin and Mullen kind of feel that way about Bama's defense. Now stopping Bama's offense was a whole different problem. 

Okay you've talked me down to 17 points. But if the Aggies could get a nice bounce hear or there like Manziel did years ago, it could be one heck of a game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...