boyfriend said:

---

MEENag said:

---

Then what were we?

---

A flawed SEC team that earned their way into the playoff and lost a defensive battle at home in the fourth quarter to a good Miami team.

---

AKA a fraud?????!!!!!

Saying tech or any team in the final 10 is a fraud is stupid.

3whatever to 0 = fraud

10-3 does not = fraud

A team losing does not mean they are frauds. Otherwise, every team but the eventual NC is a fraud.

Unbalanced schedules lie. But it doesn't make conferences or teams frauds. They are in a good if not dominating league and executing Texas's traditional strategy. Seems smart since their goal is to be included in the next round of musical conferences.

Sure was nice when we had the Southwest Conference. Got to play the teams we hated and lots of years we got whupped by damn near everybody. But then the National Cash Accumulation Assn and big media invented all this playoff crap. SWC championship was enough.

DX Bible, Homer Norton, John David Crow, Bear Bryant, Gene Stallings, RC Slocum, Jackie Sherrill, the Junction Boys, the Baylor game in Waco in 1926.

There is so much more Aggie football in the history books than people know.

I remember walking past Kyle field a few years back and realizing I could never afford another game ticket.

Yeah, I'm an old guy.

SpeedyNoilsGhost said:

---

Tech will spend north of 30 million on a roster, they will destroy the Big 12, get an auto CFP bid, and lose to a lower ranking power 4 school.

---

And then every time they lose they'll revert back to making "historical record" claims.

Seems like we've seen this before.

Idiot, if they're "frauds", what does that make us ? They would whip our butts greatly. We are and have been only a mediocre team for the last 86 years, and we're just waiting to start year 87.

davido said:

---

SpeedyNoilsGhost said:

---

Tech will spend north of 30 million on a roster, they will destroy the Big 12, get an auto CFP bid, and lose to a lower ranking power 4 school.

---

And then every time they lose they'll revert back to making "historical record" claims.

Seems like we've seen this before.

---

fmhofstetter said:

---

Sure was nice when we had the Southwest Conference. Got to play the teams we hated and lots of years we got whupped by damn near everybody. But then the National Cash Accumulation Assn and big media invented all this playoff crap. SWC championship was enough.

DX Bible, Homer Norton, John David Crow, Bear Bryant, Gene Stallings, RC Slocum, Jackie Sherrill, the Junction Boys, the Baylor game in Waco in 1926.

There is so much more Aggie football in the history books than people know.

I remember walking past Kyle field a few years back and realizing I could never afford another game ticket.

Yeah, I'm an old guy.

---

I'm an old guy and I miss the SWC. It wasn't perfect but it was ours and it meant something to Texans.

Heisenberg01 said:

---

Aggie_Nuke said:

---

Idiot, if they're "frauds", what does that make us ? They would whip our butts greatly. We are and have been only a mediocre team for the last 86 years, and we're just waiting to start year 87.

---

You're the idiot if you think Tech could "whip our butts" right now.

---

Tech vs A&M would end in a 2-0 win for one team or the other after 12 overtimes.

I don't understand the use of the word fraud here. We, just like Tech, played our schedule. We don't rank ourselves. We didn't declare that we were better than anyone else. Fraud implies purposeful deception...who did we try to deceive? Should Tech or A&M have declined the playoff invite because we had what turned out to be a relatively easy schedule?

The problem isn't the individual schools, it is the system. You cannot rank teams that do not play comparable schedules. The NFL system is "better" but even with what are supposed to be relatively comparable divisions/conferences, you end up with teams getting left out because you have division winners.

^^^

I have a slightly different take here, that maybe arrives at the same spot.

Admittingly, I only watched them play Oregon off and on. But (putting aside their turnovers for a second), they seemed pretty legit to me and could possibly beat anyone they played. I am NOT saying they WOULD beat anyone, just saying they seemed to have good enough players and seemed well coached enough to contend at least.

Said another way, I generally think the entire "Big 12" is now a collection of crap teams and not a major conference anymore. But I would say what I saw was pretty good players on a team that was better than at least half of the teams in the SEC and Big 10, and would not have been surprised if they had beaten Oregon.

That said, turnovers are a part of the game and they committed 4 and got 1 back. So yea, including that, they were crap. But I don't think they are "frauds" this year in the sense they just had an easy, crap conference schedule. Did not deserve to be #4, maybe like 12 and in the CFP, but not #4.

agpetz said:

---

I don't understand the use of the word fraud here. We, just like Tech, played our schedule. We don't rank ourselves. We didn't declare that we were better than anyone else. Fraud implies purposeful deception...who did we try to deceive? Should Tech or A&M have declined the playoff invite because we had what turned out to be a relatively easy schedule?

The problem isn't the individual schools, it is the system. You cannot rank teams that do not play comparable schedules. The NFL system is "better" but even with what are supposed to be relatively comparable divisions/conferences, you end up with teams getting left out because you have division winners.

---

It's simply the word of the season.

If you have a perceived weak SoS, and then lose to "real" team. You are a "fraud."

What it should mean is that the committee and even the computers are weighted too heavily in wins and loses.

C2 Ag 93 said:

---

I have a slightly different take here, that maybe arrives at the same spot.

Admittingly, I only watched them play Oregon off and on. But (putting aside their turnovers for a second), they seemed pretty legit to me and could possibly beat anyone they played. I am NOT saying they WOULD beat anyone, just saying they seemed to have good enough players and seemed well coached enough to contend at least.

Said another way, I generally think the entire "Big 12" is now a collection of crap teams and not a major conference anymore. But I would say what I saw was pretty good players on a team that was better than at least half of the teams in the SEC and Big 10, and would not have been surprised if they had beaten Oregon.

That said, turnovers are a part of the game and they committed 4 and got 1 back. So yea, including that, they were crap. But I don't think they are "frauds" this year in the sense they just had an easy, crap conference schedule. Did not deserve to be #4, maybe like 12 and in the CFP, but not #4.

---

Big 12 is the sunbelt conference. And were propped up by the committee to try and keep the narrative that there are 4 power conferences. They are not.

Aggie_Nuke said:

---

Idiot, if they're "frauds", what does that make us ? They would whip our butts greatly. We are and have been only a mediocre team for the last 86 years, and we're just waiting to start year 87.

---

If you think we've been bad for 86 years let me show you Tech's history.

agpetz said:

---

I don't understand the use of the word fraud here. We, just like Tech, played our schedule. We don't rank ourselves. We didn't declare that we were better than anyone else. Fraud implies purposeful deception...who did we try to deceive? Should Tech or A&M have declined the playoff invite because we had what turned out to be a relatively easy schedule?

The problem isn't the individual schools, it is the system. You cannot rank teams that do not play comparable schedules. The NFL system is "better" but even with what are supposed to be relatively comparable divisions/conferences, you end up with teams getting left out because you have division winners.

---

We need a CFP rule that no G6 team (this includes the Big12) is ever seeded higher than 10.

Oh, I agree. They aren't a major conference anymore.

My only point is I think people want to revel in this thread about their loss, but miss the fact they did have good talent and seemed well coached. Not sure I would call them "frauds" if what is meant by that was CFP worthy this year. Definitely didn't deserve to be #4, but I think we all knew that.

Put it this way, if this year's Bama played TT 5 times, I bet Bama wins 2, TT wins 2, and coin toss on who would win the 5th game.

C2 Ag 93 said:

---

Oh, I agree. They aren't a major conference anymore.

My only point is I think people want to revel in this thread about their loss, but miss the fact they did have good talent and seemed well coached. Not sure I would call them "frauds" if what is meant by that was CFP worthy this year. Definitely didn't deserve to be #4, but I think we all knew that.

Put it this way, if this year's Bama played TT 5 times, I bet Bama wins 2, TT wins 2, and coin toss on who would win the 5th game.

---

yeah, I mean, they are the last big fish in small pond. And still got smoked by somewhat weaker Oregon team.

But everyone has to start taking note that the big12 is "g5" at this point.

KCup17 said:

---

Not really a fraud when you had no chance to win it all. We knew the offense was inept and their defense was elite against suspect offenses. Played a real offense today and got exposed

---

Did we watch the same game? Tech's offense completely no-showed, but their defense looked fantastic. Tech lost 2 fumbles, threw 2 interceptions, had 3 turnovers on downs (7 total TOs!!) and Oregon still only scored 23 (17 of those points were off of TOs on very short fields, and 7 were on nearly the last play of the game).

OP is full of crap. That D was AMAZING. Their QB was off today- offense looked bad and I agree some of it was due to Big 12 not having a lot of good defenses.

But you're full of it if you don't recognize how good Tech was, is, and will be in the future.

I haven't read 4 pages of replies ...

That being said, TT is no more a fraud than the entirety of the SEC this year.

Tech was a damn good team on defense, and a decent team on offense.

Put that team in the SEC ... 7-5 at best.

Technical should have been the 9 or 10 seed and the lowest ranked / seeded 1 loss team behind aTm, Ole Miss and Oregon, period. Their best win and worst loss didn't even remotely compare to aTm, Ole Miss or Oregon.

CFP committee didn't even apply their own metrics, and continue to equate 11-1 records and confernce champs despite years and a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

Technical getting in the CFP with their record and Big 12 (G6 league) title is fine, a #4 seed is BS and that was the problem.

Tech was basically the exact same team as Missouri.

It just shows how bad the Big 12 is in football for them to dominate it.

James Madison scored 34 on Oregon.

LOL

You forgot Emory Bellard.

Divining Rod said:

---

OP is full of crap. That D was AMAZING. Their QB was off today- offense looked bad and I agree some of it was due to Big 12 not having a lot of good defenses.

But you're full of it if you don't recognize how good Tech was, is, and will be in the future by Big XII standards.

---

FIFY

TyperWoods said:

---

3whatever to 0 = fraud

10-3 does not = fraud

---

In the sec 10-3 yes. No fraud

margin of defeat makes a difference

if Tech loses 23-20 the narrative is different

23-0 = no business being in the playoff

Tceh just won their first outright conference championship EVER. They tied for second with two other teams when the Aggies won the conference in the 80s but were on probation,and that's the first time they ever went to the Cotton Bowl because they had never been there. They lost By the largest margin of any school in history. there are at least 10 to 12 teams in the SEC that could have won the big 12 this season. they had to have someone represent their conference so tech gets in and gets shut out. Their conference schedule consisted of the weakest of the weak. They had to overpay at least twice to get players to live in Lubbock for a season. Can you tell me what I'm missing here? Have I left anything out?

Im Gipper said:

---

Their defense was as advertised

---

Not really. What prolific offense did they face? BYU?? LMAO.
Oregon was the best team they faced all year and tech's defense gave up 23 to what looked like a better than average offense. Their "AIR RAID" offense was nothing more than high schoolish, just like that goofball, redneck head coach of theirs. **** that traveling tard circus from no where land.