Recent Comments
I don’t agree with necessarily, but I don’t disagree with it either. I do respect that its just a take and doesn’t seem motivated by anything other than his opinion, unlike the biased stench Herby gives off when he speaks. I think A&M’s D line is better than there’s. We could have gone that route, we also likely have better WRs including a TE, and a RB group. I think what ND is being propped up on the most is the UNC win in addition to not having played Clemson with Trevor the first time. If they play Clemson with Trevor the first time, we aren’t’ having this conversation and A&M is #4. The Clemson part is mostly a no brainer. The UNC aspect is most interesting - if for no other reason, A&M now gets to play them. Anyhow, UNC is being said to be a very good win, but they are propped up by playing a cupcake in Western Carolina. It may not be that huge a benefit, but it is another W and not an L. Plus, every team in the ACC got to play that which propped up how many teams ND played that were above .500. Now, I’d have no problem with this if they played a tougher schedule, but they don’t, ND or UNC, its not an SEC schedule. When the SEC plays the cupcake, we all know that the schedule is tougher for every team except bama. For the Bama folks reading this, thats not a knock, the best part about being bama is you don’t have to play bama. The SEC schedule is tougher, so playing one more cupcake that the rest likely evens the difficulty. So my point is simply, with basically zero overlap in schedules, there is no real good way to know how good UNC is, but ND is getting the benefit. I think ND craps the bed, like for a 6th time. I also think A&M shows UNC who is boss.
The truth of the matter is, you don’t know much of what you’re talking about, especially your “air-tight” case. Lol. You used what I like to call as third hand information. When comparing ND and A&M, you don’t have a head to head, you don’t even have a common opponent. All you have is record, strength of schedule, pt differential. If you took a closer look, you’d likely realize why those are very weak evidences. For the audience, record, SOS, and pt differential are weak because they only account for what happened in your conference. That info, being third hand, already weak, is weakened even more because you have no cross conference games for calibrating. Everyone on this thread knows how the SEC gets knocked for playing an extra cupcake each year as compared to the other conferences. We’ve all been taken to task by our friends outside of the conference for “cupcake weekend”. Why do they complain, because we play an additional team who ain’t worth a crap. I get it. The point is, you can’t tell me if ND or A&M plays more or less worse opponents. If A&M played better opponents, then a good case could be made that a 9-1 A&M is better than a 10-0 ND. And for the record, can’t get any dumber of an argument when trying to determine the 4 best teams than worry about who they will play. Thats political BS. Can it! So the point is, you don’t know anything, not a point of attack, but as fact. You can’t speak authoritatively about either team being better, you don’t have the info to give a strong opinion.
I'm surprised people aren't looking more closely at ND and their schedule. I'm fine with where they are currently, but if they don't beat clemson with them at full strength, then there should be heavy scrutiny. In addition, if they get beat "convincingly" I think they should out or at least heavy compared to A&M. ND hasn't played a single team this year whose talent is rated at .90 per 247 besides clemson, 9 teams are less a .88 - but A&M plays 5 teams .90 or better, 4 with more talent than themselves (we beat 3 of 4), and 8 of our opponents are at .88 or better. ND is getting pass here, no one is willing to scrutinize them.
AMEN to that, if no other reason, to at least hear one voice who thinks we are worthy.
Ohio St. should consider this model going forward, but don't play any games, so advance token to the CFP each year without playing. Looking at point differential is such a worthless thing to do without context. If your point differential is +5 against the #1, #2, and #3 teams, and then someone else is +10 against #98, #99, and #100, then we might not be too worried about the +5 being less than the +10. You know, tOSU hasn't faced one team who has talent rated .90 or better for a three year avg per 247, except for 2-4 Penn St. A&M has played 5! A&M only had 2 teams on the 10 game schedule less than .88 (vandy and ole miss), while tOSU enjoys 5, 3 of which they played. A&M has 4 opponents who recruited better than they did, FLA, LSU, AUB, and LSU. A&M beat 3 of the 4. tOSU plays none with more talent. The talent differential btw tOSU and their opponents, vs A&M and their opponents, is considerable - the talent A&M faces is just on the other side of Schit's creek, tOSU's talent is on the other side of the Mississippi. A&m plays evenly matched talent week in and week out, while tOSU consistently enjoys playing teams whose talent is considerably less. Look at their schedule, Ole Miss or Arkansas could be in playoff contention with that schedule. What team are they not beating? Penn St? they are terrible this year. Syracuse, Maryland, Illinois, Rutgers, or Nebraska. Indiana would be a good game for them.
I’ve made this same argument for a long time. Essentially, no one argues about who should be 1 or 2, it will always be about who is #4, or #8, or #16 and so on, and then that reasoning is used to expand the group. I’m fine with going to 8, and I have other reasons, but we should all be honest about that and acknowledge that 4 is enough to figure out who the best is.
If only tOSU, Clemson, and ND got all their games compared to how Bama played that same team. Do we really think that is fair?
Let me know when tOSU plays a team with a 3 year avg. recruiting rating higher than .88, per 247, that isn’t 2-4 or 2-5 on the year. A&M has 5 teams - count them, 5 teams - on the schedule with 3 year avg. of .90 or higher. ND doesn’t have a single one! Not a one. Not even Clemson, although we realize that they are top notch, but we know the context of that game. A&M faces 2 teams with less than a .88 rating, Ole Miss (.87), and Vandy (.84). ND played 9 teams with a .86 rating or less. Nine! If Vandy (.84) is a knock for A&M, what is 12-7 against Louisville (.84) for ND? They gave up 21 to Syracuse (.84)! Let me amend a quote from Top Gun, from Stinger to Maverick. Your family name [is] the best in the Navy. You [don’t] need to be doing it better and cleaner than the other guy.
I'm not saying LSU will beat Florida. I'm saying if Florida plays against LSU's D tomorrow, they would not score as much as they would against LSU's D of 4 weeks ago. They may still even put up 40, but they would have done 60 pts on LSU of 4 weeks ago. Florida is good, and improving. A&M did not have their best game against LSU, in part, because we were rusty, partially because of LSU, and partially because we didn't play well. In what proportion, thats up for debate.
Edit: "Yes, the passing game was horrendous, [but that was] against a [much improved] {bad} LSU defense." The LSU defense against A&M was not the same defense through their first 6 games. If I'm right, we should see a decrease in production from Florida when they play.
This article exemplifies a problem within college football. Just look at the Heisman for instance. Use to, a defensive player could win. Use to, a RB could win (not so much anymore). Now its transitioning to a certain kind of QB is the one who is most likely to win. So to say he has to play at a heisman contender level is to say he has to put up 300 yards and 3 TDs, or A&M can't get in to the CFP. Think about what wasn't said; the D has to play like they did the last 2-3 games. Why not something like that as the criteria? Mond may play like that, he could have a good game against Auburn, and then Tennessee and Ole Miss he has a good chance - but to single this criteria out seems to be narrowing to the point of looking for justification to exclude A&M. It would be like saying, well, I need to see top tier defensive play from Florida to be convinced.
Excuse me? SDS needs to get together before hand to get the story straight. So you are telling me LSU's defense played their best game of the year? Does that mean the expectation that A&M win "convincingly" could have been misconstrued? For example, if the expectation that a convincing win was 52-17, is that realistic when LSU's D played like this author claims they did? Surely that expectation was meant for playing against the D that Mizzou or Auburn saw, not the one A&M saw.
Anyone here who doesn’t think Stingley is an NFL talent? LSU is one of a few who are consistently able to play man like that. Anyone here think most other teams are able to play at that level? Let’s not get ahead of ourselves with this blueprint
Thats fine, but don’t tell me that our offense should have put up 40+ on that defense last night either. If we are going to contextualize LSU’s offense then lets do it for the defense too, and that defense was on point last night. We dropped a lot of balls, mond was off, and the oline didn’t do their best work, but nearly every throw was highly contested, and LSU’s defense applied as much pressure as they have all year. So it goes both ways, right?
Let me ask you this, does tOSU have to win convincingly to get in? The point is to not place expectations on A&M that you wouldn’t on any other team. Sure, we are 5 trying to make it to 4, so we have to make a case. So what case did tOSU make to get inside 4 in the first place. Also, don’t hold them to expectations of playing particular teams in particular circumstances, and then when those particular teams and circumstance are different, expect the same result. I think A&M won convincingly, but peoples expectation of what that was going to look like was different. Everyone wanted 42-17 or something. Well, that might be fine if it were the LSU of 3 weeks ago, or not wet conditions, or not 3 weeks off from COVID. 20-0 until the last 30 seconds of the game is convincing with those new conditions. LSU obviously stepped up their D, even coach O said it in his presser - it doesn’t take a football savant to know they playing more motivated and purposeful. Did you watch the game? On the record, I don’t think we did a lot to help ourselves, but it shouldn’t hurt us either.
As usual, these kinds of discussion always require additional detail. My point partially is not be down on Florida, but to point out the writer is basing what he thinks on Pitts in large part as if Bama can’t do anything about it, and then to emphasize that Bama has other players too. My comments aren’t meant to be down on Florida, but high on Alabama. Florida has grimes and toney, sure, they are great, but bama has people too. We can’t just assume that if Pitts is keyed on that Florida will simply just use someone else. This can’t be treated that simply. So ironically, the simplicity of the argument I used, highlighted the simplicity of the point the author made, but to point out the absurdity. You did the same as the author. Its not that simple. They are not just going to throw to grimes to toney. Florida may score 30, but that won’t be enough. Bama is the most complete team, and that will take its toll. Did you watch the Bama game?
You guys are in for a rude awakening. Ill go on record and say Florida is going to get served a slice of humble pie against Bama. They will key on Pitts, and then what? If I’m wrong, ill eat crow. This column sounds like Herbstreit saying ND is the most complete team yesterday. Like did anyone even watch Alabama play?
You want to be real, fine, lets be real. You will make that argument about A&M, but you wont make it about anyone else, like tOSU. Who have they played? What’s their resume? A single win over #9 Indiana, that’s it. Sounds a lot like what you said about A&M. And who else, Penn St? Michigan? Good luck convincing anyone that those are quality wins, so unless you plan on excusing those two teams for tOSU, or saying they beat Rutgers by more than we beat Miss St, then you have no argument. LSU played their best game of the year last night, and it wasn’t because we made them look good. Our O made our O look bad, not their D look good. They were coming hard at the line of attack, and the DBs were smothering, nearly every pass was contested. I hear convincingly last bat 100 times, but no one said what convincingly meant. And no one said what team had to be beat convincingly. Any A&M fan will tell you, Arkansas plays us tough every year, it never fails, no matter how good they are. That was no different this year. The game Arkansas played against us was their best effort of the year. The game LSU played last night was their best of the year, they are getting better each week. So win convincingly, this result may not be convincing if it were LSU of 3 weeks ago, but its not, and anyone watching that game should be able to tell that. Did you watch the game? What about tOSU? Because tOSU has been struggling on D. I hear people saying it, but not really holding them accountable for it. Its like we have to play like Alabama, but no one else does. Like Kirk Herbstreit talking i yesterday about how ND was the most complete team, like what are you guys watching? Wake up! Anyhow, I know LSU rushed for 36 yards last night, and basically scored one TD in garbage time with 0:36 left on the clock in the game. Our D was the story of the night, smothering and debilitating. It was pretty clear we were rusty on offense after 3 weeks off. That was to be expected. Wish we could have shaken the rust. Clearly our O didn’t play like we had against Fla, Miss St. Arkansas, and SC. But offense are skill based, so getting that back will take some time, wish it would have come off sooner. But the D won the day. They weren’t just convincing, they were overwhelming, ask Finley! Ask coach O, his postgame presser is out there to watch, have you made that effort? The truth is you didn’t see what you had convinced your self was supposed to happen, but the same team and conditions (wet and 3 weeks off) were not the same either. That just doesn’t seem reasonable!
You’re saying A&M fans are delusional, but yet asserting they have no chance? Of course we have a chance. How much of a chance, that’s debatable, but there is a chance, and that chance is better than most. It’s not as clear as Florida’s chance, but it is a chance. You look like the delusional one.
@hbobodraw, great, you and I both agree that we both cherry picked. It seems my point rang true. However, margin of victory are just as shaky a stat, I really cant imagine why people would care much about it, except to compare common opponents. The issue will eventually get back to, after each of us contextualizes all the stats we cite, get all that subjectively weighted stuff out of the way, we will be left with a search for an objective comparison. Do we have something like that? It seems we do. Look, in the end, we will get more info like and this may work it self out. A&M gets the chance to win out. Yall get the chance to play bama. Go beat Bama and there will literally be no one who wants to argue. If yall don't beat them, then you can go at it by making folks believe yall played them harder than we did. Lose by about the same amount, and sorry, but move on. They had their chances. Same thing goes for us, if we dont win out, sorry, we had our chance.
You know, it just feels like cherry picking. But I'm not mad. A&M rank in SEC: total defense - 1st yards per game - 1st total TD's allowed - 3rd total yards allowed - 2nd Interesting side note, 6 teams out of 7 for total offense are from the west. The only east team in the top half is Florida. A&M will of course play them all, but has already played, 2nd, 3rd, and 7th, in Bama, Fla, and Ark. Florida ranks 9th in total defense in the SEC, and that's by feasting on the lower half of the teams in total offense. A&M is ranked 1st and has played the best. A&M on the other hand is 5th in total offense in the SEC, 3rd in rushing offense, 7th in passing offense. So A&M is in the top half of the conference in offensive and defensive categories, particularly big ones. Florida, not nearly as much. When I look at the stats from our game, I don't see a team that won by 3, I see a team that won by 2 TDs. 1st downs: 32 - 22 A&M total yads: 543 - 402 A&M passing yards: 338 - 312 A&M rushing yards: 205 - 90 A&M Was Florida lucky to be within 7?
If you were going to make a similar argument, but for A&M, what would it be?
There are a lot of things to consider with this article, it's more about morals than football, with many imbedded implications for what is right and wrong. First, it implies that being selfish is wrong - selfish being thinking of themselves rather than the program. Right off the bat, the question that looms as I see it, is the program more important than the individual? Maybe, maybe not. If the program is more important, upon what basis was that formulated from. It could be that these people were thinking about their family as a reason for not accepting the pay cut. Perhaps taking the pay cut would affect their housing, they could miss payments, etc. So its possible that their decision wasn't entirely selfish, but this article implies that it was. To be fair, the article does say, irrespective of winning, it would be selfish to not accept the pay cut, although seemingly more easily justifiable if they did. I don't accept that its selfish at surface level - it may have been a selfish decision, but we don't seem to be able to to determine that without more information. Maybe the author has that info, and if so, it would be good to share, because otherwise, it looks like there is a blacklisting going on.
Against those spreads, Ill take Arkansas, Ole Miss, and Kentucky. I really like Florida and Arkansas. I've watched their games against A&M multiple times now. Arkansas plays us tough every year, but this years team is different. They are motivated and believe. Very different team, and I think they will surprise here in this game. I still have Florida to win though, that is an excellent team, I'd say dangerous is a better description. I think we were lucky in some ways to get the win in that game, but I do think we were the better team. However, it might be that A&M only wins 51 out of 100 games, not sure. The teams are close, and Florida is built differently, which means they will be more dangerous to some, than others. I think they will make a smooth run to the SECCG and then give us some flash against Bama.
No question if they played tomorrow who would win? Ill just leave this right here. Total Yards: A&M - 543 FLA - 402 Passing Yards: A&M - 338 FLA - 312 Rushing Yards: A&M - 205 FLA - 90 Yards Per Carry: A&M - 5.4 FLA - 3.8 Yards Per Pass: A&M - 9.4 FLA - 9.8 TOP: A&M - 34:37 FLA - 25:23 From my perspective, yall over achieved. Anyhow, all posturing aside, I think yall are a very good team and have gotten better since our game, just like us. I look forward to yall giving Bama your best shot.
yea, I understand the reasoning behind this, but I don't understand why there isn't an offset. I work in a high school as an AP, and we manage this exact same stuff as well. If someone tests positive, their 14 days started 3 days prior, they are on the day of which is one more, and then have to do 10 additional. If you are close contact, then your symptoms could flare up a day or two later, but your count starts when contact was presumed, and then goes 14 days. It seems to me though, that after 3-6 days, if you have a negative test, then you should be cleared. Just as Saban was cleared after testing positive, he took 3 consecutive tests to confirm he was negative. This allowance should be made to players in close contact as well.
That's a good point about beating bama in the SEC championship. If they do that, then yeah, probably put them up ahead of A&M. Or maybe even if they play Bama tougher than A&M did (not that we played them all that tough). So right now it seems A&M should get the benefit with the H2H, because Florida has a obvious path to the playoff and to be ranked higher than A&M, but we do not if we don't start ahead.
What concerns me about the way Kirk reasons is that he could basically say the same stuff about A&M and justify them being #5. Mond playing with poise, the A&M defense stepping up, looked like a different team. I guess my question is this, if you are going to rank Florida ahead of A&M, what would A&M have to do convince you that they should be higher? head to head win doesn't do it for you. Dismantling South Carolina doesn't do it for you. #1 defense in the SEC per #2 Rush Defense, #2 rushing offense, #1 in third down conv.! When Kirk and others reason in this way, it basically makes it impossible for A&M to convince you otherwise, unless a specific, reasonable, criteria can be given. Besides, what criteria would you want that to be that I have already mentioned? Its not like A&M will get to play them again. So we beat them, we did what we had to do. Its not like they were without Pitts or Trask, they were as full strength as any team. So there really aren't any caveats. But honestly, I think Kirk is doing us a favor, I think you can expect our team to play with a chip on their shoulder the rest of the way.
Honestly, I'm not that worried about it. Now, you might be thinking, well that's because your an Aggie. I really like Arkansas in general, their ppl and state are really something I like. Anyhow, I think Pittman has this team culture changed. If he is out, culture wont change. I think they will capitalize on their momentum too.