From: zcjm0f@wwnv45.uucp (CJohn Mace)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Lee Corso Screws A&M
Keywords: nn
Date: 20 Nov 92 23:16:17 GMT
Organization: Amoco Production


>>
>>Can't be much worse than Colorado...  Colorado lost by a LARGE margin to
>>Nebraska...
>
>At least it wasn't in Boulder... If you have a short memory, the same
>Coloraro beat the sh*t out of Baylor team in WACO.. How did aggies do
>against Baylor? I heard it was a lot closer (and that too at home?)


One clue Njan...  If you are going to start shooting at ppl, don't stand
in the open!!

ok, your above statement.  Wasn't it Colorado who LOST to Baylor at home
last year, and A&M who blew them away?  That proves nothing, just like
your statement above proves nothing.  Look at it from Baylors point of
view (or Tech, or Houston, or Rice, etc,)  You have 90 guys on scholarship,
most of whom grew up in Texas.  Most of whom grew up wanting to play 
bigtime football for Texas or A&M.  These kids go to high school, they 
do well, and they don't even get looked at by Texas or A&M.  They go to
Baylor (or Tech, or Houston, or Rice, etc,).  As a coach, do you think
you would have ANY trouble in motivating these guys to showing up for
the Texas or A&M games?  Damn straight you don't, just ask Texas, TCU
surprised them this year.



>
>>SOME TEAMS DON'T LINE UP WELL WITH EACH OTHER!!!  Michigan started rolling
>
>I can understand if A&M had one close game ( Like Miami ) Every team plays bad
>sometimes... But, Baylor, Texas Tech, UH, (and some others I don't care to
>remember!!!). You guys have no claim against FSU jumping you in the polls.
>Remember, FSU's only loss was a close one against #1 Miami... what else do 
>you expect when a lower ranked team plays a higher ranked team?

If there was a playoff system, then I would have NO beef, but there is not
a playoff system.  Those "pollsters" out there are affecting the budgets
of every top team out there.  They need to take it a bit more seriously 
and make up their minds.  In the past, they give the undefeated team the
benefit of the doubt.  Examples you say?  (How about a few in the '80s)
Clemson, Georgia Tech, BYU.  Now they appear to have decided that they
are capable of determining who would win a game if any two particular 
teams met.  That is LUDICROUS!  How would you like the US Gov't to come
along and tell you that you have to divorce your wife, because they 
predict your kids will be ugly?  (yeah, its a little abstract, but it
gets the point)

>
>My point is that A&M (and Colorado, if you don't get it) doesn't belong
>in the class of FSU (at least right now). I thought Nebraska was till last
>saturday! (*hehe*)

A&M traditionally wins with DEFENSE.  This means close games.  Maybe not
as close as this year, but none the less, we don't win 70-7 very often.
I was at the Cotton Bowl last year, I saw how the game went.  A&M stood
toe to toe with FSU.  We lost, but we were not "dominated" or "pounded
to dust," and we did it with 69 fresh/sophs on scholarship, and only
5 seniors!  FSU had nearly 50% seniors in its first 2 strings.  (17/44)
Yes, I do feel that we belong in that group.  And we still have 67 
players on scholarship who are fresh/sophs.  After watching the A&M 
team this year, this is the only advice I can give to whoever we meet
in the Cotton Bowl: You had better have a 21 point lead or more at 
halftime, or you will lose.  This team does not panic, and is capable 
of doing well on either side of the ball and in the special teams.  
There are no really weak links in the chain.  Of course, it is not
guaranteed that we will go to the Cotton Bowl.  Texas does have the
ability to upset us.   Look at how many times they beat Penn State and
Oklahoma in those 4-7 years... 

>
>>so according to Njan (Mr. Colorado), I derive that every team that has
>>lost by more than 2 touchdowns sucks eggs.
>
>especially at home!
>
>>cmuck
>
>Njan

cmuck
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college