NCAA Football 2012-13 season

[Ronnie-]

I don't. Jimbo fisher is not the type to run up the score against lower division teams. They might win by 40+, but not 70+.

I agree that he probably wont intentionally, but like others have said, if his backups (and their backups) can score, or if his backups (and their backups) can keep the other team from scoring, what should he do? Tell them not to play hard?

 

[yaz96]

Oh, and A&M is in the SEC now

Yes, I know that, but Texas is still pretty far away from you folks!

 

[yaz96]

Not bent out of shape over it as all. Just surprised that they would claim it, or at least clarify as to what exactly they are claiming. Also figured it would be an interesting topic of discussion.

My guess is, is that across the country there are many schools that are "embellishing", if you will, their records.

 

[Ronnie-]

My guess is, is that across the country there are many schools that are "embellishing", if you will, their records.

As far as national championships, there is no doubt of this. However, most of those were awarded by some valid entity at the time, even if their importance has diminished over time.

This seems different to me. I may be wrong but I can not remember any team claiming a conference title when they a) lost the title game for one of the years and b) did not even play in it for the other. If there was no title game to play, and they had the same record as the recognized champ, then maybe I could see an argument, but that is not the case here.

Big difference between claiming a title that was awarded by Freds Sports Authority in 1944 and what they are doing with the conference (division but not specified) titles IMO.

 

[Ronnie-]

Yes, I know that, but Texas is still pretty far away from you folks!

600 ish miles from Tuscaloosa to College Station. Its a haul for us.

For other SEC schools it is closer than some that they already play.

Granted, I doubt I make many trips out there, lol, although I would love to go.

 

[yaz96]

As far as national championships, there is no doubt of this. However, most of those were awarded by some valid entity at the time, even if their importance has diminished over time.

This seems different to me. I may be wrong but I can not remember any team claiming a conference title when they a) lost the title game for one of the years and b) did not even play in it for the other. If there was no title game to play, and they had the same record as the recognized champ, then maybe I could see an argument, but that is not the case here.

Big difference between claiming a title that was awarded by Freds Sports Authority in 1944 and what they are doing with the conference (division but not specified) titles IMO.

I say you do some investigating and send an email to the Sports Press Department at Texas A&M and ask for an explanation......

You could be the beginning of a minor scandal!

 

[Will94]

If you look at pre WWII MNCs in college football, it is very common to have any number of schools claiming titles for the same season. As far as I am concerned, we were just late to the party on this one.

The conference title claims are completely different. A number of Aggies have spent the day trying to get 1997 and 2010 removed before Kyle Field's gates open tomorrow. People who have heard back from AD officials have been told repeatedly that they (the Athletic Dept) are unaware of the 1997 and 2010 title signage. Complete BS if you ask me. Here's a thread from texags.com if any of you care to follow the saga (beats working on a Friday afternoon).
http://texags.com/main/forum.reply.asp?topic_id=2145277&forum_id=5

 

[Ronnie-]

I say I just discuss it here and watch football tomorrow.

I just thought it was interesting, and going off of most threads that I have read, many aggie fans are just embarrassed by it.

 

[Ronnie-]

If you look at pre WWII MNCs in college football, it is very common to have any number of schools claiming titles for the same season. As far as I am concerned, we were just late to the party on this one.

Lord knows Bama has a few.

 

[Derwin0]

The conference title claims are completely different. A number of Aggies have spent the day trying to get 1997 and 2010 removed before Kyle Field's gates open tomorrow. People who have heard back from AD officials have been told repeatedly that they (the Athletic Dept) are unaware of the 1997 and 2010 title signage. Complete BS if you ask me. Here's a thread from texags.com if any of you care to follow the saga (beats working on a Friday afternoon).
http://texags.com/main/forum.reply.asp?topic_id=2145277&forum_id=5

Sounds like the CYA has begun. I'm guessing the numbers will be quickly removed with the excuse that it was a mistake made by the contracting crew.

 

[osu1991]

Yes, I know that, but Texas is still pretty far away from you folks!

How's that a bad thing?

 

[dvrexpander]

Well, looks like Pitt is playing up to ACC football standards a year in advance of joining...

WTF.. you can NOT blame the ACC for that - they are not in it yet. I do admit they made Cincy look better than I believe they are.

 

[Derwin0]

I'm not blaming the ACC for anything, I'm making a general comment/joke on our playing of OOC games the last several years, which has been beyond awful.

 

[hancox]

WTF.. you can NOT blame the ACC for that - they are not in it yet. I do admit they made Cincy look better than I believe they are.

? I was making a joke, given that Pitt just lost to a I-AA, the ACC has a recent history of doing the same, and Pitt is joining next year. No #$%@#$^ "they are not in yet!"

 

[dvrexpander]

all jokes aside - I think pitt will be much better in the coming years, however last night they made Cincy look like National Champs. At least the game wasn't boring and we got to read the colorful language from Pitt's head coach's lips

 

[Ronnie-]

I am sorry DVR, Cincy did NOT look like Bama.

 

[Derwin0]

I am sorry DVR, Cincy did NOT look like Bama.

No, but Pitt did look like Vandy

 

[Ronnie-]

No, but Pitt did look like Vandy

Lol, these days its more like Ole Miss. Vandy is a step above.

 

[cosmo_kramer]

Thats my point, they make a stupid rule up to keep people from showboating and because a guyn on the bottom of a pile ends up without his hat on, he has to sit... stupid rule, should have to show intent of showboating or taunting for it to be a penalty.

Like was mentioned earlier...The new rule has nothing to do with showboating. It's purely a safety issue. Make sure the kids have a proper fitting helmet and it's properly secured. Good rule.

 

[osu1991]

Well it was the only college game on, figured I would watch a little and then switch to the CFL game, but Utah/Utah St was a heckuva game. The Aggies knock off the Utes in OT