Started By
Message
Something A&M and Texas fans might find agreement on
Posted on 12/3/25 at 2:54 pm
Posted on 12/3/25 at 2:54 pm
Neither one of us is getting any credit for playing difficult OOC games. For Texas at best it isn't helping you and possibly hurting you since you lost. For A&M we are ranked almost certainly exactly where we would be had we played a creampuff instead of beating ND as the lowest of the 4 1 loss teams. You can argue how much or how little either was rewarded or punished but in the end the Committee has made it clear that the juice is not worth the squeeze in scheduling difficult OOC games going forward.
Personally I think that's terrible for the sport. The other really bad precedent is the Chair specifically stated that Tech's margin of victory was the big reason they like them in spite of their soft schedule and they don't care about their loss at ASU. So they want teams to run up the score on much weaker teams.
So when OOC schedules become absolute garbage and teams feel the need to leave in starters and score 60 plus against teams that are completely overmatched they have no room to complain, it's what they are asking for. I just hope A&M makes that adjustment as well going forward since that's what they want.
Personally I think that's terrible for the sport. The other really bad precedent is the Chair specifically stated that Tech's margin of victory was the big reason they like them in spite of their soft schedule and they don't care about their loss at ASU. So they want teams to run up the score on much weaker teams.
So when OOC schedules become absolute garbage and teams feel the need to leave in starters and score 60 plus against teams that are completely overmatched they have no room to complain, it's what they are asking for. I just hope A&M makes that adjustment as well going forward since that's what they want.
12
Posted on 12/3/25 at 3:08 pm to aggressor
quote:
Personally I think that's terrible for the sport. The other really bad precedent is the Chair specifically stated that Tech's margin of victory was the big reason they like them in spite of their soft schedule and they don't care about their loss at ASU. So they want teams to run up the score on much weaker teams.
Yeah that’s a terrible message.
Until next year when they decide that a different metric is more important.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 3:08 pm to aggressor
Yes, we agree with this and the committee just told us boldly they do not care about SOS, especially if you run the score up. They use a formula, make W-L record the most important aspect, and then stack rank in pods.
The problem with that is if W-L record is the most important you are not factoring in how a tea got that record.
The problem with that is if W-L record is the most important you are not factoring in how a tea got that record.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 3:27 pm to aggressor
Quit whining. We are in and hosting, barring something weird.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 3:31 pm to aggressor
A&M has one loss and is getting passed over by teams with worse losses. It seems ND is respectable enough to get into the playoffs but not so respected that it can be used as a SOS talking point for A&M to least one loss teams.
Texas has three losses and is getting passed over because they lost three games.
So some difference.
Texas has three losses and is getting passed over because they lost three games.
So some difference.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 3:39 pm to Ag Zwin
Its not whining to acknowledge the message the committee is sending here.
A&M and Texas both scheduled premier OOC games to beef up our schedules.
Texas is being punished for losing theirs. They could be 10-2 and probably in over OU right now without that game.
So what's the flip side If you schedule the big OOC game and win it, it should boost your resume, right?
Nope.
A&M beat a top 10 ND team on the road, and we're the lowest seeded 11-1 team, behind teams like TT, Oregon, and Ole Miss who all played crap OOC schedules.
The way they are treating Texas proves there is very real risk to losing.
The way they are treating A&M proves there is no real benefit to winning.
A&M and Texas both scheduled premier OOC games to beef up our schedules.
Texas is being punished for losing theirs. They could be 10-2 and probably in over OU right now without that game.
So what's the flip side If you schedule the big OOC game and win it, it should boost your resume, right?
Nope.
A&M beat a top 10 ND team on the road, and we're the lowest seeded 11-1 team, behind teams like TT, Oregon, and Ole Miss who all played crap OOC schedules.
The way they are treating Texas proves there is very real risk to losing.
The way they are treating A&M proves there is no real benefit to winning.
This post was edited on 12/3/25 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 12/3/25 at 3:40 pm to aggressor
Yep. Also, they disrespected both of us for our game against each other. A&M took a ridiculous hit falling all the way to #7 after losing a competitive rivalry game on the road at night. Texas gets an insignificant bump for knocking off #3 A&M.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 3:42 pm to aggressor
Cry cry cry . You know who got screwed the most ? Miami . Beat their OOC opponent and is still ranked below them with the same number of losses. A&M benefited from a soft schedule and the cfp committee sniffed that out
Posted on 12/3/25 at 3:43 pm to aggressor
texas tech and ole miss especially are benefitting from losing early.
Its a recency bias that people acknowledge is real, but are still seemingly powerless to get out of the way of.
in short, people are stupid and selfish.
Its a recency bias that people acknowledge is real, but are still seemingly powerless to get out of the way of.
in short, people are stupid and selfish.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 4:15 pm to aggressor
Well, I don’t know about A&M, but Texas is only won 7 out of their last 22 out of conference games versus a power 4 Team
You would think maybe they shouldn’t schedule strong out of conference opponents? But not because of this year this year maybe they shouldn’t have had Florida on their schedule.
You would think maybe they shouldn’t schedule strong out of conference opponents? But not because of this year this year maybe they shouldn’t have had Florida on their schedule.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 4:26 pm to bfpri
quote:
Cry cry cry . You know who got screwed the most ? Miami . Beat their OOC opponent and is still ranked below them with the same number of losses. A&M benefited from a soft schedule and the cfp committee sniffed that out
Oh please....Texas Tech at 4? (played one maybe 2 teams with a pulse) Ole Miss (also a soft schedule)?
Not to mention some other small schools going to the playoffs because it has to "be fair."
Both Texas teams got hosed by the Committee somehow...in both directions.
But, yes, Miami is in fact getting screwed.
This post was edited on 12/3/25 at 4:27 pm
Posted on 12/3/25 at 4:35 pm to Krampus
quote:
Texas is being punished for losing theirs. They could be 10-2 and probably in over OU right now without that game.
So what's the flip side If you schedule the big OOC game and win it, it should boost your resume, right?
Nope.
A&M beat a top 10 ND team on the road, and we're the lowest seeded 11-1 team, behind teams like TT, Oregon, and Ole Miss who all played crap OOC schedules.
The way they are treating Texas proves there is very real risk to losing.
The way they are treating A&M proves there is no real benefit to winning.
Finally, a sane Aggie. The 2030s is going to be full of boring G5 OOC games for eerybody.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 4:36 pm to aggressor
honestly, I think crappy OOC games were going to come anyway with the move to 9 conference games. SEC is brutal and no one wants to risk injury playing a tough opponent out of conference. Especially when it's clear that the playoff committee doesn't care.
Your loss was to #13. Tech lost to ASU. Yet Tech is in front of you in the playoff seeding. They have no idea what they are doing.
Your loss was to #13. Tech lost to ASU. Yet Tech is in front of you in the playoff seeding. They have no idea what they are doing.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 4:43 pm to aggressor
BCS started with using margin of victory and then excluded it. Seems like we're right back where we started.
quote:
The Bowl Championship Series (BCS) deliberately excluded margin of victory from its computer rankings to discourage teams from running up the score, though this decision was controversial. The average margin of victory for the BCS system as a whole was 14.56 points, while the subsequent College Football Playoff era had an average margin of 19.05 points in all games, according to CBS Sports.
How margin of victory was handled in the BCS
Deliberately excluded: To prevent teams from focusing on scoring as much as possible, the BCS told mathematicians to remove margin of victory from their calculations.
Controversial decision: The decision was criticized because it was seen as a way to make the formula more palatable to human voters, but it removed a factor that many felt was an important indicator of a team's quality and dominance.
Tinkering with the formula: In an effort to prevent controversy and what was perceived as the over-emphasis on running up the score, the BCS formula was tweaked multiple times, often changing based on the results of specific seasons.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 4:46 pm to Krampus
quote:This right here ^^^
The way they are treating Texas proves there is very real risk to losing.
The way they are treating A&M proves there is no real benefit to winning.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 4:50 pm to aggressor
I agree that the selection committee is taking into your weaker schedule and not giving you a bump because of it maybe.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 4:59 pm to Errerrerrwere
I think OU is getting a lot of credit for beating Michigan. If you schedule these types of game you have to win them!
Posted on 12/3/25 at 5:06 pm to Wishbone85
Michigan sucks.
Posted on 12/3/25 at 5:09 pm to aggressor
quote:
The other really bad precedent is the Chair specifically stated that Tech's margin of victory was the big reason they like them in spite of their soft schedule and they don't care about their loss at ASU. So they want teams to run up the score on much weaker teams.
Pretty much.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News