Big 12 - Completely done

[Cripes]

With the Longhorns losing, the Big 12 has certainly lost its only chance to have a team that at is a serious contender for the BCS title game. Come Saturday, the conference may be officially eliminated from the hunt: both Nebraska and my Sooners will get their salads tossed in Pac 10 road games (USC and Oregon).

 

Even among the periennial also-rans, there doesn't seem to be any hope of a K-State like revival: if Texas Tech barely escaped a road win against UTEP, then they'll surely get theiry candy ass spread offense squished like a bug at TCU. Colorado is about as competent as FEMA, and K-State/Okie State are riding high on the feel-good jollies from beating up Florida Atlantic. The ONLY team worth mentioning for an impressive early run is Missouri, for God's sake.

 

It doesn't look like the Longhorns can do it without a one-man Superman running the show. The Sooners bid buh-by to Peterson in January, and will have no chance of fielding a great quarterback until 2009 thanks to Bomar's Boner. This conference is going into hibernation for the next couple of years. America: get used to seeing two-loss Big 12 champions coming to soil the field of a consolation BCS bowl near you!

[Chilly]

With the Longhorns losing, the Big 12 has certainly lost its only chance to have a team that at is a serious contender for the BCS title game. Come Saturday, the conference may be officially eliminated from the hunt: both Nebraska and my Sooners  will get their salads tossed in Pac 10 road games (USC and Oregon).

 

Even among the periennial also-rans, there doesn't seem to be any hope of a K-State like revival: if Texas Tech barely escaped a road win against UTEP, then they'll surely get theiry candy ass spread offense squished like a bug at TCU.  Colorado  is about as competent as FEMA, and K-State/Okie State are riding high on the feel-good jollies from beating up Florida Atlantic. The ONLY team worth mentioning for an impressive early run is Missouri, for God's sake.

 

It doesn't look like the Longhorns can do it without a one-man Superman running the show.  The Sooners bid buh-by to Peterson in January, and will have no chance of fielding a great quarterback until 2009 thanks to Bomar's Boner. This conference is going into hibernation for the next couple of years. America: get used to seeing two-loss Big 12 champions coming to soil the field of a consolation BCS bowl near you! 

769970[/snapback]

 

el oh el

 

As much as you Sooners would love to think that Texas was out of the national championship picture, it relaly depends on how the rest of the year plays out. If there are a bunch of other one-loss teams, its quite possible that losing in the 2nd week of the year to the #1 ranked team wouldn't hurt us all that much.

 

As far as your prediction that the Big 12 will not produce a national contender in years to come, again you dismiss my Horns. Sorry, but with the player turnover in college and consistently strong recruiting classes Texas brings in, we will be competing for a national championship once again. Whether or not we make the game and or win it is another story obviously.

 

Again, the important thing to note is that player turnover in college football shakes up how good teams are tremendously from year to year. Also, recruiting classes need multiple seasons before fully making the impact that they do.

 

To look at how strong the Big 12 still is, all you need to do is take a look at the recruiting rankings for last year.

 

CSTV's 2006 Rankings

 

Texas #3, OU #9, Nebraska #21, Oklahoma State #22, Texas A&M #24, Texas Tech tied for 25.

 

Guess what? Thats 6 teams in the top 25 recruiting classes for the last year.

 

Or, if you want to look at another source:

 

2006 Rival's Rankings

 

5.) Texas

9.) Oklahoma

20.) Nebraska

22.) Oklahoma State

25.) Texas Tech

27.) Texas A&M

 

6 teams in the top 27, again thats half the conference.

 

Guess what? 6 teams received votes for the AP top 25 this week in the Big 12.

 

What I'm not going to try to claim is that the Big 12 is going to produce multiple BCS candidates this year, like the Big 10 or SEC could. What I will say, though, is that the Big 12 is not the horrible conference everyone portrays it to be.

 

My point is that there are five major conferences ahead of everyone else: Big 12, Pac 10, SEC, Big Ten, ACC. All of these conferences are capable of having a down year, and all are capable of having years better then the other conferences. It really all comes down to player turnover year in and year out.

[I 90]

With the Longhorns losing, the Big 12 has certainly lost its only chance to have a team that at is a serious contender for the BCS title game. Come Saturday, the conference may be officially eliminated from the hunt: both Nebraska and my Sooners  will get their salads tossed in Pac 10 road games (USC and Oregon).

769970[/snapback]

 

 

As much as you Sooners would love to think that Texas was out of the national championship picture, it relaly depends on how the rest of the year plays out.  If there are a bunch of other one-loss teams, its quite possible that losing in the 2nd week of the year to the #1 ranked team wouldn't hurt us all that much.

770126[/snapback]

 

As for the Pac 10, from your lips to Great Merciful Zeus' ears.

 

And the weakness of the conference of which you speak ensures Texas a role at seasons end. That loss will feel like it happened in a prior lifetime after another season of big games. College football is short attention span theatre.

 

 

.

[smokinandjokin]

As far as your prediction that the Big 12 will not produce a national contender in years to come, again you dismiss my Horns.  Sorry, but with the player turnover in college and consistently strong recruiting classes Texas brings in, we will be competing for a national championship once again.  Whether or not we make the game and or win it is another story obviously.

770126[/snapback]

 

USC's little run of success on the field and in the Heisman race since '02 has overshadowed Texas somewhat. But Texas has consistently brought in some of the best players in the country year after year, similar to what USC has done since Carroll took over. Both schools give freshman a chance to play and always try to make certain that they are putting their best 11 on the field. What UT has been building down there can't be overlooked. I'm a USC alum, but I don't begrudge Texas anything, even after their one-man wrecking crew won the crystal ball last year. They have a remarkable program, and while the Big 12 has been down, I don't fight that battle because the PAC 10 has plenty of weak sisters as well.

 

Had Texas been able to get over the Oklahoma hump at some point before last season, their '02-'05 teams would've been considered among the best college teams in history.

 

It's like BlueFire said, these teams reload rather than rebuild.

 

There's no doubt Texas is the favorite to rep the Big 12 in a BCS game. But they could easily figure into the championship picture by season's end. Look at the teams ranked ahead of them in this week's AP poll: (1)Ohio St has not proven they can stop the run, and they have to play at Iowa, and of course Michigan. Either (4)USC or (2)Notre Dame will have at least one loss, because they play each other. (5)West Virginia will probably not lose, so we'll have to see how the computers and the pollsters rank their season. (3)Auburn and (6)LSU play this weekend. One of them will have a loss. And there's no way (7)Florida makes it through their BRUTAL schedule unblemished. That's it. Next is (8)Texas.

 

We've discussed it before- Texas' loss in Week 2 to a highly-ranked team does not kill a national title. However, assuming they're both still undefeated at the time, the loser of the top-5 matchup between Notre Dame and USC on November 25th would put that team out of the picture. It may not be right, but it is what it is. Texas needs to refocus after that loss and win out. They are still very much in the picture.

[Guest Guest_Cripes_*]

What kills Texas is they're not going to get a chance to move up much in the computer rankings because of the weakness of the Big 12 overall this year. No top 10 teams will be on their schedule there unless Nebraska pulls off the big upset at USC and runs the table. Any takers on that???

 

Frankly, Texas doesn't need to be thinking about national championships until -- Hey Look! Anthony Gonzalez just caught another one -- they fix their secondary.

[Chilly]

What kills Texas is they're not going to get a chance to move up much in the computer rankings because of the weakness of the Big 12 overall this year. No top 10 teams will be on their schedule there unless Nebraska pulls off the big upset at USC and runs the table. Any takers on that???

 

Frankly, Texas doesn't need to be thinking about national championships until -- Hey Look! Anthony Gonzalez just caught another one -- they fix their secondary.

770498[/snapback]

 

Yeah, there were issues in the secondary (Chizik screwed up and I think the loss of Tarrell Brown hurt us more then I thought it would), but the Horns still held Ohio State to 24 points. Ohio State is considered one of the top, if not the top, offense in the country.

 

The computers might end up hurting Texas, you're right.

 

However, this post has more to do with being anti-Texas then with your claim that the Big 12 won't produce a real national title contender. Guess what, if Texas is in the hunt for the national championship this year, but the computers keep them back, they were still in the hunt for the national championship, which is exactly what you claimed that the Big 12 wouldn't be.

 

The Big 12 and Pac 10 are very similar. There is one or two teams that have distinguished themselves, and then there are usually several pretty good teams after them. This is one of the reasons why the national title contenders have come from the Big 12 and Pac 10 lately - while there are multiple top 25 teams, there aren't multiple top 10 teams to lose to "on any given saturday".

[smokinandjokin]

Frankly, Texas doesn't need to be thinking about national championships until -- Hey Look! Anthony Gonzalez just caught another one -- they fix their secondary.

770498[/snapback]

 

Every team has holes. USC has unproven RBs and QB, and their defense is coming off a down year. Ohio St's run defense is highly suspect. Notre Dame's D will continue to be a question mark, although that unit does look much faster. The SEC teams all have the looming question of if it's possible to make it through that treacherous schedule unscathed. Each team will have to win 1 or 2 huge road games just to get to the always-tough conference title game. Will pollsters respect WVU's schedule enough to propel them to the top-2? Can QB Pat White make plays with his arm if a team shuts down White and Slaton's rushing attack?

 

As for the conferences, only the Big 10 and SEC have no worries regarding schedule strength. I agree, the Big 12 and PAC 10 are a step down from those two. But playing Cal and Oregon in the PAC 10 or Oklahoma and Nebraska in the Big 12 is still better than playing Louisville and Pitt in the Big East. The ACC has depth, but the conference is hurt by not having that one marquee contender. I place the Miami and FSU defenses on par with anybody, but the offenses have a ways to go. Clemson was a projected sleeper, and they lost their ACC-opener to BC.

 

Lots of games left, with lots of different ways it can shake out. The playoffs began in Week 1.

[Cripes]

Guess what, if Texas is in the hunt for the national championship this year, but the computers keep them back, they were still in the hunt for the national championship, which is exactly what you claimed that the Big 12 wouldn't be.

770533[/snapback]

 

Well, if the computer polls in the BCS rankings that factor in quality wins and strength of schedule do hold them back, then, no, Texas will not have been in the hunt for a national title.

 

And I didn't say Texas was mathematically eliminated from the championship game. Hell, there might be 10 - 15 teams that can plausibly work up a scenario now that puts them in the title match (Texas included). What I meant to say iis I don't see a basis yet for expecting that to happen after they got manhandled by the Buckeyes . Perhaps they do rebound and they get a rematch with OSU. But the first priority avoiding the Big Mack Attacks that crippled them in past Cotton Bowls, handling Zac Taylor in Lincoln, and not tempting the fates by falling 19 points behind Okie State again (it's a shorter game this year, remember).

 

As for the lthe downturn I (half-kiddingly) noted on the Big 12, I'm not being anti-Texas. Just consider that Texas loses 10 senior starters this year (including three on that stud offensive line and most of the secondary.) That's bound to produce a dropoff for the next year or two. Experience counts, not Rivals.com and Mel Kiper rankings. OU has its own troubles because it will not be able to put a difference maker at QB until at least 2009, and that's IF they can get a blue chipper this off-season who'll take two years to gel. Those circumstances to me sound like a pair of 9-2 squads for the near-term, and those sound like Holiday Bowl seasons.

[Chilly]

Well, if the computer polls in the BCS rankings that factor in quality wins and strength of schedule do hold them back, then, no, Texas will not have been in the hunt for a national title. 

 

And I didn't say Texas was mathematically eliminated from the championship game. Hell, there might be 10 - 15 teams that can plausibly work up a scenario now that puts them in the title match (Texas included). What I meant to say iis I don't see a basis yet for expecting that to happen after they got manhandled by the Buckeyes . Perhaps they do rebound and they get a rematch with OSU. But the first priority avoiding the Big Mack Attacks that crippled them in past Cotton Bowls,  handling Zac Taylor in Lincoln, and not tempting the fates by falling 19 points behind Okie State again (it's a shorter game this year, remember).

 

As for the lthe downturn I (half-kiddingly) noted on the Big 12, I'm not being anti-Texas. Just consider that Texas loses 10 senior starters this year (including three on that stud offensive line and  most of the secondary.)  That's bound to produce a dropoff for the next year or two. Experience counts, not Rivals.com and Mel Kiper rankings. OU has its own troubles because it will not be able to put a difference maker at QB until at least 2009,  and that's IF they can get a blue chipper this off-season who'll take two years to gel. Those circumstances to me sound like a pair of 9-2 squads  for the near-term, and those sound like Holiday Bowl seasons.

770861[/snapback]

 

I guess you have a different notion of what it means to be in the hunt for a national championship. Seems to me that if you aren't ranked 1 or 2, you aren't in the hunt for one by your definition. I'd beg to differ and say that any team which was close at the end of the year to being in the National Championship game was in the hunt for one.

 

You have your priorities wrong though when you are talking about experience. Experience is not the end-all be-all of what makes a team good. Take a look at Ohio State this year, they are starting 7 sophmores and/or freshman, and lost 9 senior starters. Altogether, they lost 12 starters from the year before.

 

Ohio State sure did have a dropoff this year, didn't they?

 

Yeah, experience will count for something, but good coaching and talent more then make up for the lack of experience on a football team, so I don't buy for a second what you're saying.

 

You're other observation, that Texas needs to win out in order to have a shot at the National Championship, is stating quite the obvious. However, they *do* still have a pretty decent shot at the title, therefore they *are* still in the hunt.

[Cripes]

Well, we could all be wrong yet about Ohio State, couldn't we? Considering (as pointed out earlier) that Texas ran all over Ohio State, then maybe the Buckeyes WILL be dearly missing A.J. Hawk, Whitner and their other classmates by mid-season.

 

And if that day comes, it certainly won't buttress Texas' claim to be a contender.