12 Team CFP Playoff

WhosYourDawggy said:
Yeah, but you have to include expansion teams ... that is what is driving this. Adding TX and OU for the SEC, and then USC, UO, and UW for the B1G drives that up. Candidly, UT and OU > USC, UW, and UO unless moving them to the B1G makes them play better all of the sudden.

I think the rational is that with these better teams in the SEC, divisionless schedules and a 9 game schedules means we are going to have a champ with a loss, and multiple 2 loss teams. The SEC thinks that our 2 loss teams will be better than 1 loss teams in the ACC and the B12. That has to be the reason they are doing it.
Click to expand...
Candidly didnt UW just beat UT 2 years in a row? TX is 4-7 vs the 4 new Big teams since 2000

yes but what people dont think about is in that final Playoff ranking 9 Missouri 11 Ole Miss 13 LSU arent going to finish that way when they now play in with 12 Oklahoma. who wins and loses will move the rankings 1 more loss alone could move them back to not mattering in the standings.
 
OlyDuck said:
Candidly didnt UW just beat UT 2 years in a row? TX is 4-7 vs the 4 new Big teams since 2000

yes but what people dont think about is in that final Playoff ranking 9 Missouri 11 Ole Miss 13 LSU arent going to finish that way when they now play in with 12 Oklahoma. who wins and loses will move the rankings 1 more loss alone could move them back to not mattering in the standings.
Click to expand...
I, and everyone else, know that UT has done less with more for decades. I am looking forward. UT and NIL are a match made in heaven. And, coaching is the thing that makes the difference, and right now Sark seems to be the right fit. Say what you will about them but they are the most valuable CFB brand year in and year out. So, the combination of 2 bluebloods like OU and TX are > than UW, UO, and USC, IMO.

UW has never been a consistent top level team, recent results notwithstanding. Now they have to travel, play B1G competition, they lost their coach, and are in one of the worst recruiting areas. UO, at least, has a great coach and great NIL cash. USC is as bad as UT for doing less with more. And Riley has shown his true colors ... he's not a good coach.

So, yeah, I think UT and OU to the SEC, which already had more better teams that the B1G makes it the tougher conference, and I don't think it's really that close.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I, and everyone else, know that UT has done less with more for decades. I am looking forward. UT and NIL are a match made in heaven. And, coaching is the thing that makes the difference, and right now Sark seems to be the right fit. Say what you will about them but they are the most valuable CFB brand year in and year out. So, the combination of 2 bluebloods like OU and TX are > than UW, UO, and USC, IMO.

UW has never been a consistent top level team, recent results notwithstanding. Now they have to travel, play B1G competition, they lost their coach, and are in one of the worst recruiting areas. UO, at least, has a great coach and great NIL cash. USC is as bad as UT for doing less with more. And Riley has shown his true colors ... he's not a good coach.

So, yeah, I think UT and OU to the SEC, which already had more better teams that the B1G makes it the tougher conference, and I don't think it's really that close.
Click to expand...
yep.. UT is gonna be a machine.. with the way NIL is playing out and Sark is a hit on the recruiting trail for prospects.. We are here to stay for the foreseeable future

also while i agree how this 14 CFP set up is dumb.. it's all for the P2 to take much more of the percentage than what they are currently getting with the 12 team playoff
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Yeah, but you have to include expansion teams ... that is what is driving this. Adding TX and OU for the SEC, and then USC, UO, and UW for the B1G drives that up. Candidly, UT and OU > USC, UW, and UO unless moving them to the B1G makes them play better all of the sudden.

I think the rational is that with these better teams in the SEC, divisionless schedules and a 9 game schedules means we are going to have a champ with a loss, and multiple 2 loss teams. The SEC thinks that our 2 loss teams will be better than 1 loss teams in the ACC and the B12. That has to be the reason they are doing it.
Click to expand...
So UCLA doesn't get to go?
 
OlyDuck said:
Candidly didnt UW just beat UT 2 years in a row? TX is 4-7 vs the 4 new Big teams since 2000

yes but what people dont think about is in that final Playoff ranking 9 Missouri 11 Ole Miss 13 LSU arent going to finish that way when they now play in with 12 Oklahoma. who wins and loses will move the rankings 1 more loss alone could move them back to not mattering in the standings.
Click to expand...
You're talking quality of football here you silly duck. That doesn't matter anymore. It is all about the.......

Pay Me Make It Rain GIF by GIPHY CAM
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I, and everyone else, know that UT has done less with more for decades. I am looking forward. UT and NIL are a match made in heaven. And, coaching is the thing that makes the difference, and right now Sark seems to be the right fit. Say what you will about them but they are the most valuable CFB brand year in and year out. So, the combination of 2 bluebloods like OU and TX are > than UW, UO, and USC, IMO.

UW has never been a consistent top level team, recent results notwithstanding. Now they have to travel, play B1G competition, they lost their coach, and are in one of the worst recruiting areas. UO, at least, has a great coach and great NIL cash. USC is as bad as UT for doing less with more. And Riley has shown his true colors ... he's not a good coach.

So, yeah, I think UT and OU to the SEC, which already had more better teams that the B1G makes it the tougher conference, and I don't think it's really that close.
Click to expand...
See you crazy duck, even a hairy dawg attorney knows it is ALL about the money.
 
Deep Creek said:
See you crazy duck, even a hairy dawg attorney knows it is ALL about the money.
Click to expand...
So am I the only one on here who sees a similarity between the Texas Longhorns and the Dallas Cowboys?

I can make a list of things where they are a mirror image. Let's start with all the National Championships and Super Bowls wins they have when they are "the most valuable brand". And how it's always "we are so close to winning it all next year". And they both have oodles of talent that somehow always seems to underperform. The list just keeps going.

Tell me I'm wrong.
 
Goldbug said:
So am I the only one on here who sees a similarity between the Texas Longhorns and the Dallas Cowboys?

I can make a list of things where they are a mirror image. Let's start with all the National Championships and Super Bowls wins they have when they are "the most valuable brand". And how it's always "we are so close to winning it all next year". And they both have oodles of talent that somehow always seems to underperform. The list just keeps going.

Tell me I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
Hell no you ain’t the only one. Unfortunately, it was the Cowgirls and rusty cows that figured out the new objective before others. The new objective is to be the “most valuable” in purely a monetary sense. Stuff like winning Super Bowls and National Championships is so passe. It is now about assembling talent that can con people into forking over money without having to perform well enough to win.Just make ‘em feel good enough so they can brag about being a fan of the “most valuable” entity.

The B1G has kind of figured it out too. They can pay out the most dinero to their teams regardless of on field performance. So did the aggies. They can fork over mucho dinero to a guy so he won’t coach a team… and it wasn’t Charlie Weiss.
 
Goldbug said:
So am I the only one on here who sees a similarity between the Texas Longhorns and the Dallas Cowboys?

I can make a list of things where they are a mirror image. Let's start with all the National Championships and Super Bowls wins they have when they are "the most valuable brand". And how it's always "we are so close to winning it all next year". And they both have oodles of talent that somehow always seems to underperform. The list just keeps going.

Tell me I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
we actually won a national title more recently than the Dallas Cowboys.. and the landthieves..

also.. now with NIL, UT is recruiting better than it has since the Mack Brown golden era.. no longer are the classes skewed by DB and WR recruiting.. We actually been able to recruit well on both sides of the lines and at LB...
 
Deep Creek said:
Hell no you ain’t the only one. Unfortunately, it was the Cowgirls and rusty cows that figured out the new objective before others. The new objective is to be the “most valuable” in purely a monetary sense. Stuff like winning Super Bowls and National Championships is so passe. It is now about assembling talent that can con people into forking over money without having to perform well enough to win.Just make ‘em feel good enough so they can brag about being a fan of the “most valuable” entity.

The B1G has kind of figured it out too. They can pay out the most dinero to their teams regardless of on field performance. So did the aggies. They can fork over mucho dinero to a guy so he won’t coach a team… and it wasn’t Charlie Weiss.
Click to expand...
what? they didn't have to figure out how to be the most valuable brand.. cowboys were the most popular team in the 70s 80s 90s and even today.. didn't matter that other teams had more SB wins in those decades or not

for all the UT slander.. people still think of Texas whenever CFB is mentioned.. when they are good or not.

UT had a perfect storm of issues the last decade.. AD retiring with no replacement, then finding an AD that alienated everyone..including his own coaching hires. Had a power struggle between the UT president and the Gov of TX which forced the President to step down which also messed up the AD situation.. literally just had an alum that was well loved who had no experience fill in an interim role for over 2 years before CDC was hired.

None of that affected the brand which was powerful or not cause they continued to make millions.. hell they had a bigger deal than ND.. and it was just to show tier 3 sports on LHN.. more money than ND was getting from NBC for all their sports lol
 
Goldbug said:
So am I the only one on here who sees a similarity between the Texas Longhorns and the Dallas Cowboys?

I can make a list of things where they are a mirror image. Let's start with all the National Championships and Super Bowls wins they have when they are "the most valuable brand". And how it's always "we are so close to winning it all next year". And they both have oodles of talent that somehow always seems to underperform. The list just keeps going.

Tell me I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
New landscape.
Before, the SEC, tOSU, USC, and OU cheated their way to the top. Even so, Texas was the team of the 2000s and has been doing well.
Now that the “cheating” is above board with NIL and it’s all evened out, the Longhorns are gonna dominate.
You’re welcome.
 
ELTEXAN said:
New landscape.
Before, the SEC, tOSU, USC, and OU cheated their way to the top. Even so, Texas was the team of the 2000s and has been doing well.
Now that the “cheating” is above board with NIL and it’s all evened out, the Longhorns are gonna dominate.
You’re welcome.
Click to expand...
it's ironic since now people demand limits to NIL.. but it was cool just to say "everyone does it" when it came to bags being given under the table..
 
ELTEXAN said:
New landscape.
Before, the SEC, tOSU, USC, and OU cheated their way to the top. Even so, Texas was the team of the 2000s and has been doing well.
Now that the “cheating” is above board with NIL and it’s all evened out, the Longhorns are gonna dominate.
You’re welcome.
Click to expand...
prove it
 
Deep Creek said:
You just proved my point. Don’t have to be any good or win. Just make $$$$$
Click to expand...
they make money regardless.. I guess you are saying if we were all in we should have won more WITH NCAA punishments?
 
outofyourmind said:
Uh...........NO
Click to expand...
Texas win more games than any team except Boise state, I think.
They win a natty.
They went to another.
They won two other BCS bowls.
If not for a freak injury to the most prolific passer in ncaa history, Colt McCoy, at the time in the 2009 natty (Garett Gilbert had the ball with three minutes left only down by three after Mack and GDGD gave the game away in the second quarter), Texas would have ended the 2000s with the second most wins in all of ncaa, 4 BCS wins, two nattys, and wins over blue bloods, NU, tOSU, Michigan, OU, and Bama, the latter four at the very top of their games.
Thanks for playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top