Re: about that \"miracle\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wait, is your position that margin of victory doesn't matter? Because that's obviously wrong,

[/ QUOTE ]
so by your reasoning then Texas Tech should be the best 9-2 team in the country, waaaay better than Notre Dame right? b/c they beat the snot out of anemic teams like fla int., sam houston st. and indiana st., teams that give scholarships to kids that are catatonic and partial scholarships to kids that have down syndrome. i mean you can't be serious, they frickin' schedule stat padders for there first few games to see if they can hit the century mark and that should mean that they are better than Notre Dame and Auburn and teams that actual play real teams, teams with some substance. if tech is in any other conference they are at the bottom.

margin of victory doesn't really matter b/c if you haven't played anybody good what does it matter? the big12 is horrendous, the north division is a mess and the south has one bright light so tell me why texas pounding on a bunch of [censored] teams means anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

What conference would Tech be at the "bottom" of? The Big 12 has a lot of mediocre teams, with only a few real bad teams. Tech fits right in that mix, but would easily be in the top half of most conferences.

Re: about that \"miracle\"
 

1. auburn is better than tech.
2. if texas showed up and played the way they did aginst ok state or a&m against the majority of the big 10 the ball game would have been over, they just made too many mistakes. i guess you just look at the end score and not how the game was played...like yesterday that 40-29 score looks a lot worse than how close the game really was, which is why margin of victory is pointless.


[ QUOTE ]
you also obviously need to take into account opponent quality. For example, Notre Dame gets a lot of credit for their three-point loss to USC. That is a GREAT loss in my mind, and adss evidence to the case that they're excellent.


[/ QUOTE ]
that is the truth. TT lost to UT (great opponent) and oklahoma st. (terrible team)...we won't get into the oklahoma game (such bullsh*t!, pretty good opponent FWIW.)

Auburn has lost to Ga Tech (solid/tough team, upset miami) and LSU (top ranked team).

you really think they are the same? texas tech doesn't come close to playing a well-balanced football game and they should be glad they scheduled gimme games non-conference instead of tough ones like Ga Tech or else they could easily have more losses. that coach and that team in lubbock is a joke, and us texans like to laugh at them.

i guess auburn should have been playing oklahoma school for the deaf and kansas school for the hearing impaired before they got to conference play so they could get those solid wide margin of victory's [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img].

Re: about that \"miracle\"
 

[ QUOTE ]

What conference would Tech be at the "bottom" of? The Big 12 has a lot of mediocre teams, with only a few real bad teams. Tech fits right in that mix, but would easily be in the top half of most conferences.

[/ QUOTE ]
i think there are a couple conference in which if they were in i don't think they would be in the top 25 by the end of the year. i just don't think they have a balanced enough team to play a tough game every week, that coach is no dummy, there is a reason there schedule is so soft.

Re: about that \"miracle\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not just a total geek who doesn't watch games. But honestly, just using numbers is a pretty good guide to evaluating teams, because public perception is often way off. Just look at how many NFL commentators pick some BSP team against the Vegas line. And that's their job!

[/ QUOTE ]

My favorite was Jason Whitlock saying that "Vegas blew it" with the Thanksgiving line of Denver -2 and that "Bledsoe would fumble at least twice" and "the Denver line would put him in a clown suit," leading Denver to a victory of at least two touchdowns. Uh, Jason, Denver only had 1.4 sacks/game this season... they got to Drew once and he never fumbled. Denver covered by a whopping 1 point.

Re: about that \"miracle\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
My favorite was Jason Whitlock saying that "Vegas blew it"

[/ QUOTE ]

Whitlock is an idiot, and of course he's wrong about this as well. Vegas NEVER blows it.

In fact, in some sense Dallas outperformed the line because the margin at the end of regulation was 0. I always think it would suck if you lost a game like that; it seems almost unfair.

Re: about that \"miracle\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not just a total geek who doesn't watch games. But honestly, just using numbers is a pretty good guide to evaluating teams, because public perception is often way off. Just look at how many NFL commentators pick some BSP team against the Vegas line. And that's their job!

[/ QUOTE ]

My favorite was Jason Whitlock saying that "Vegas blew it" with the Thanksgiving line of Denver -2 and that "Bledsoe would fumble at least twice" and "the Denver line would put him in a clown suit," leading Denver to a victory of at least two touchdowns. Uh, Jason, Denver only had 1.4 sacks/game this season... they got to Drew once and he never fumbled. Denver covered by a whopping 1 point.

[/ QUOTE ]
Look, if there's anything Whitlock values, it's accuracy and objectivity.