Posted on 11/26/2001 11:25:33 AM PST by codebreaker
1. Miami 2.92
2.Florida 6.95
3.Texas 8.77
4.Nebraska 10.48
5.Oregon 10.87
6.Tennessee 11.87
7. Colorado 18.06
8.Illinois 20.45
9. Oklahoma 21.68
10.Stanford 22.04
11.Maryland 24.61
12. BYU 25.49
So what you're saying is that to the Left Coasters it matters to, it matters alot, there's just not that many of them? My point to the other poster was in regards to TV ratings as an indicator of perceived quality of football conferences. I'd guess the population of SEC states is around 50 million, less than PAC10 or Big10 areas. And the SEC has to compete against ACC and Miami. Who does the PAC10 compete against, the WAC? Since the SEC regularly garners more TV money, it indicates the executives believe it will draw more interest. Interest=quality.
A&M also played Notre Dame and Wyoming, two far superior teams to anything t.u. played. Well, I guess there was North Carolina; but New Mexico State? BTW: A&M did not "nearly" lose to McNeese. The score was essentially a blowout, it just took them 2 and a half quarters to get warmed up.
Hey, I'm no fan of how the Aggies schedule. But if you look at the next few years, you will find the following teams playing at College Station and then the Aggies at their house: Pittsburg, Virginia Tech, and FLORIDA STATE. What's on t.u.'s schedule?
A&M plays one marquee game, one money game (anyone that wants a check) and one mid-major game. I wish they would go with 2 marquee games, but home games generate revenue, especially with 87,000 seats and 15,000 more coming in a few years.
The BCS computers do consider strength of schedule, of course.
Part of the problem in the Big 12 is that the conference teams are pretty good at beating each other up. (Texas lost to Oklahoma, which lost to Nebraska, which lost to Colorado, which lost to Texas.)
I realize scheduling is tough, but I think this year t.u. will find out that their schedule was their downfall. They need to emulate their hoops team, who has scheduled tough games.
The BCS computers do consider strength of schedule, of course.
Part of the problem in the Big 12 is that the conference teams are pretty good at beating each other up. (Texas lost to Oklahoma, which lost to Nebraska, which lost to Colorado, which lost to Texas.)
It would be a better argument to say Texas ducked out of playing in Hawaii before the season began. Texas said they'd lose money playing the game. Hawaii said they were afraid of an improving Rainbow program.
And it's really tough for an Aggie to puff their chests about tough schedules after all those years of playing Louisiana Tech, McNeese St. and Southwest Louisiana (now UL-Lafayette) as part of their pre-conference schedule. Of course, A&M has LOST a few of those games too so I guess they'd consider them a worthy opponent.
You wish.
BOOMER SOONER!
OU destroyed Free Shoes University last year and would've done the same to the Co'Canes! Who's overrated?
I wish you would actually read my posts before commenting on them. I said that it is tough making schedules. But look at the teams t.u. will play that I've listed: Rice, Houston, New Mexico State, and Utah. None of these teams have been very good for any period of time, and they all play in a mid-major conference or worse. Now, say t.u. scheduled Penn State this year and next. PSU isn't a good team this year, but t.u. couldn't be blamed for that. I also don't think North Carolina State is a bad move, either. But outside of Arkansas and Ohio State, there is nothing on t.u.'s future noncon schedules that are any more than cream puffs.
And I need to correct you on one point: A&M hasn't lost "a few" of the games against the Louisiana schools; they have lost ONCE -- in 1996 at USL (now Layfeyette). 1996, if you will recall, was A&M's worst season since 1983. Refresh my memory: has t.u. ever played AT New Mexico State?
Please read my post carefully, then get your facts straight before responding. It is a liberal tactic to take something I didn't say and try to smash that into the ground.
Texas is Burnt Orange, Hereford colorishlike....
As for New Mexico State, Texas isn't interested in playing that on the road. For that matter, neither is NMSU. The reason this game is on the schedule at all is because Texas then gets an easy game to open the season while players adjust to live action. NMSU benefits by getting a large gate for the privilege of having the snot beat out of them. University of North Texas will be the designated patsy in 2003. No, there won't be a return date in Denton. Do you think Nebraska will be playing *at* Troy State anytime soon?
Texas seems to have either Houston or Rice on their schedule for several years. Why? It's the recruiting advantage of getting Houston area high schoolers a chance to see them live and to schmooze the top prospects. They'd do the same with TCU/SMU but they don't have to since they play Oklahoma in Dallas every year.
So, in three non-conference games you have the three types of opponents that typically make up a non-conference schedule: 1) the patsy opener (New Mexico State, North Texas) against an inferior team who gets paid well for travelling into a slaughter, 2) the out-of-area home-and-home game (UCLA, Stanford, North Carolina, Arkansas, Ohio State) to provide interest outside the region and serve as a recruiting tool and 3) the team who plays in an area of importance for recruiting (Houston, Rice). The rest of the season is tied up with conference games then finished with the bowl. Occasionally, a twelfth game will show up in Hawaii or one of the August "classic" games. That's your schedule-making right there.
A&M primarily does the same thing, which explains why they usually have a Louisiana school on their schedule (which can serve as both reasons 1 & 3). In the old SWC days, Texas always had Oklahoma on the non-conference schedule which gave A&M more flexibility in their non-conference slate than Texas. Now that Oklahoma is a conference game, both schools are in the same boat as far as building a schedule.
And don't give me that cheap "don't argue like a liberal" BS. It only reveals the shallowness of your logic when you attack this way. We're discussing sports, not politics. And notice I'm not using perjoratives about your school although I easily could.
The Big 12 is the toughest football conference in the nation. While I think Miami is a great team, and historically a great team, I think they play pushovers who would always inhabit the cellar of the Big 12, Big 10, PAC 10 or SEC.
If they had to suffer the physical abuse week in an week out of these conferences, they'd be more believable.
In summary, east coast leagues are weak. I don't understand it, but it's true.
This is only part of the reason. The other part is that they can schedule a home and home and still make money due to the fact that the game will be on regional tv. And, though I don't know this for a fact, I would bet a sizable amount of money that they get tickets from road games at Cougar High and Rice "wholesale" then sell them to their fans. That's what I would do, anyway. They can do this because Houston isn't any more inconvenient than Austin for many t.u. fans.
2) the out-of-area home-and-home game (UCLA, Stanford, North Carolina, Arkansas, Ohio State) to provide interest outside the region and serve as a recruiting tool
My point is that this isn't happening -- anymore anyway. Sure, it did happen, especially when Makovic was there, but apparantly, the games were not too advantagous to t.u. (remember 66-3?). Go look at t.u.'s website: ONE h&h with the pigs and ONE h&h with OSU. That's it, and that's chicken#$&* in my book.
A&M primarily does the same thing, which explains why they usually have a Louisiana school on their schedule
If you look at A&M's schedules, you will see that the Louisiana schools' games are A&M's money games -- at Kyle for a check. In addition, A&M has a show game (~Wyoming -- mid major) and a marquee game. From the looks of things, t.u. has either 2 money games, or 2 show games and Ark. and OSU over the next 9 years are their only marquee games. A&M has a marquee game every year (well, in all fairness one year, I think Air Force is considered the marquee game, which is questionable, but just about every year). THEN there's the B12.
In the old SWC days, Texas always had Oklahoma on the non-conference schedule which gave A&M more flexibility in their non-conference slate than Texas.
Don't change the subject: we aren't talking about what was. We can't change that, and if you want to criticize A&M for a particular year or more of weak scheduling, go right ahead. I won't argue with that. My whole point has always been with this thread that t.u. will pay a price this year for their weak schedule. Yes, they had B12 opponents that they couldn't do anything about. That's a bitch, but it bites both ways. But they didn't, and they won't for the foreseable future, schedule tough home and home games with quality opponents (i.e. nothing changes from this year, except the B12). I firmly believe that there are numerous quality schools that would beg t.u. for a home and home continual contract. That game would always be on t.v. and since t.u. is never BAD, it would work well for an early season game since a loss early doesn't mean as much late (hopefully, no more Sept. 11ths). It appears, however, that t.u. is wanting more money than quality opponents.
And don't give me that cheap "don't argue like a liberal" BS. It only reveals the shallowness of your logic when you attack this way.
Shallowness of my logic? You've got to be &^%#ing me!! You put in quotes something I didn't say (it was "liberal tactic to take something I didn't say and try to smash that into the ground", which is exactly what you did, and you are doing it again) and then call my logic shallow? That's simply amazing.
And notice I'm not using perjoratives about your school although I easily could.
Go ahead! I don't care. But stick to the point: I never puffed my chest about A&M's previous schedule; I DO wish the NCAA would install a rule requiring all football game contracts to be home and home -- therefore unless t.u. (or A&M) want to go to Denton (or Nacodoches), they won't schedule UNT (or SFA).
I also would like A&M to play 2 marquee games or 2 show games and no money games. Over the long haul, I have to believe that the money part takes care of itself with tv and bowl revenues.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.