quote:
You wouldn't play Stanford, Cal, Oregon, and USC in the same year ever. The division Texas would likely be in is the Big 12 south (minus Baylor) + Arizona schools and Colorado. So basically the 1 game playoff with OU for a BCS bid would remain intact, albeit with the added risk of actually losing the conference championship game because you might have to play a decent team.

Dr. Drunkenstein shamelessly overlooks the truth to suit his argument. USC is the only school that will be strong (after the sanctions are over) year in and year out. OU and UT will dominate that league.

Will the Texas branch of the PAC whatever get a shot at the Rose Bowl? Or will that stay with the traditional West coast branch? If they did, then a potential Rose Bowl matchup could be OU and Nebraska! Ironic, no?

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by 1LoudTideFan

Member since May 2008

3682 posts

Posted on 6/12/10 at 2:01 pm to Carlos Santannaclaus

Texas, like Colt, is afraid of competition.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by jatebe

Queen of Links

Member since Oct 2008

18498 posts

Posted on 6/12/10 at 2:02 pm to MShorn

Alabama beating Texas was probably the reason Texas doesn't want to join the SEC. They saw the writing on the wall and knew they would not be able to compete with the big boys.

After Bama beat the Horns, the shock on all the fans and players faces and Coach Mack Brown's face was priceless.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Tiger in NY

Neptune Beach, FL

Member since Sep 2003

31407 posts

Posted on 6/12/10 at 2:40 pm to Dr Drunkenstein

quote:
Playing USC, Oregon, OU, Texas Tech, Okie State, Stanford and Cal is not a 'cream puff schedule'.

USC - We'll see how good they'll be over the next decade
Oregon - Decent at best
OU - Great program
Texas Tech - please
Okie St. - Real tough challenge there
Stanford - Bwahahaha
Cal - They are a 6 win team in the new conference

I like how you conveniently leave out Wazzu, Arizona, Washington, Oregon St. who are always going to be average at best.

Page 1 2