Jump to content

2023 Texas @ Alabama - 6pm on ESPN

Pancho

By Pancho
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

GTNY

GTNY 284

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, utee94 said:

Just imagine if they'd put it on ABC instead of ESPN.  So, for the 2023 season so far, this game sits behind FSU-LSU which drew 9.17M viewers on ABC on a Sunday night of a holiday weekend, with zero other college football competition.

and no charter blackout

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

BamaATL
BamaATL

Good game guys.  A no doubter, the better team won, best of luck the rest of the way.  

Zharkov
Zharkov

My daughter sent this to me from campus tonight. 😁

Sock Monkey
Sock Monkey

Posted Images

Alien Octopus

Alien Octopus 665

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Zeus said:

Nah man if Sanders didn't whiff on that block he's dancing in the endzone. You have to rely on guys making blocks you can't hesitate and wait around to see if a guy is going to miss a block then change your running lane accordingly. The running lane is built into the play assuming people make their blocks - which they all did - except poor Sanders. Not a great blocker yet but he can tighten that up and be a 2nd or 3rd rounder maybe next year.

Game speed, I do not fault Worthy. He waits a beat , that defender has to go into blocker. Don’t know if he makes corner, but sure has a better chance than running his tiny ass into to two defenders. That said, I am More concerned with the butter fingers on other plays than sloppy blocks and at speed decisions. I am greedy.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patricio Swayze

Patricio Swayze 17058

Posted
Posted
Sometimes after big wins, Texas' media department will cut some sick looking mini-films of the game with epic soundtracks. My favorite example of this, despite being fools gold, was the Notre Dame game:
 
 
I hope we get something similarly as great for the Alabama game.

Same. Been hoping they would put something out. Now that years have passed and I don’t care that both teams were dogshit, that night and game were awesome and fun as hell. I’ll watch that video from time to time still.

We also need the Spanish play calling clips of the Bama game.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WelfareBuysMyWeed

WelfareBuysMyWeed 5662

Posted
Posted
Just now, Patricio Swayze said:


Same. Been hoping they would put something out. Now that years have passed and I don’t care that both teams were dogshit, that night and game were awesome and fun as hell. I’ll watch that video from time to time still.

We also need the Spanish play calling clips of the Bama game.

It don't make a shit what else happened that year, any time Texas beats Notre Dame it's great for the university. That is still one of the most fun wins I've ever seen out of the Horns. Swoopes and Buchelle were great that night.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
C-Man

C-Man 27779

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Zeus said:

Alabama carried the SEC SEC SEC hype for a long time after Florida. It's bullshit and they know it. The SEC was very good but Alabama being absolutely dominant was the main thing carrying that hype. 

Also helped that Bama only went undefeated twice during this run of dominance. You know, the SEC is so tough that big, bad Bama can't navigate the minefield of the conference without getting dinged once.

 

33 minutes ago, Zeus said:

Man this show is so fake lol these "callers" are all fucking goofballs doing hillbilly voices. 

I Gaarrreeiiiuunteee you I gar-ye-iun-tee you I believe it now Paul, and I'm not a dummy! 

Paul's lines are so rehearsed when he responds to them lol he's a horrible actor

image.png.a5d730b4438de7a80f3ee7aea3f05761.png

 

It's entertaining but it's as dumb and fake as the jerry springer show

Oh, that's real. As real as the Jim Rome Show ever was. Pretty sure those are just regular callers that have basically become characters on the show. Like that Phyllis from Mulga lady who finally died, I think.

 

25 minutes ago, CashMcCoy said:

He said it so proudly too

Klatt is good people. Can't wait for his appearance on The Ticket this week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15698

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

Chuck Landon and Mike Niziolek seem HIGHLY regarded.

My counterpoint on that is that the amount of groupthink reflected by that chart is staggering.  

Is "1) Georgia, 2) Michigan" so clear cut that it should be on a majority of ballots?  Perhaps you're giving Georgia the benefit of the doubt as the two-time defending champion, even though they haven't played anyone and have sleepwalked through their first two games.  Perhaps.  But what was Michigan done to deserve that kind of deference?

And you go down the list and see Duke in a very narrow band between 18 and 21 on nearly everyone's ballot.  Why does that make any sense?  One could easily make he case that Duke should be anywhere from 10 to 25.  

If these writers were honest, you should see a lot more divergence in their ballots.  You should have some with Texas at No. 1; you should also have some with Texas at No. 11.  There's a lot of subjectivity to this, particularly this early in the season.  The fact that you don't see more diversity of opinion reflects the fact that they're all just lazily cheating off one another's papers. 

And that makes the poll inherently invalid.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WelfareBuysMyWeed

WelfareBuysMyWeed 5662

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

My counterpoint on that is that the amount of groupthink reflected by that chart is staggering.  

Is "1) Georgia, 2) Michigan" so clear cut that it should be on a majority of ballots?  Perhaps you're giving Georgia the benefit of the doubt as the two-time defending champion, even though they haven't played anyone and have sleepwalked through their first two games.  Perhaps.  But what was Michigan done to deserve that kind of deference?

And you go down the list and see Duke in a very narrow band between 18 and 21 on nearly everyone's ballot.  Why does that make any sense?  One could easily make he case that Duke should be anywhere from 10 to 25.  

If these writers were honest, you should see a lot more divergence in their ballots.  You should have some with Texas at No. 1; you should also have some with Texas at No. 11.  There's a lot of subjectivity to this, particularly this early in the season.  The fact that you don't see more diversity of opinion reflects the fact that they're all just lazily cheating off one another's papers. 

And that makes the poll inherently invalid.

Chuck ranked Alabama over Texas, you mongoloid. That's not "divergence," that's an extra chromosome.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
C-Man

C-Man 27779

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

My counterpoint on that is that the amount of groupthink reflected by that chart is staggering.  

Is "1) Georgia, 2) Michigan" so clear cut that it should be on a majority of ballots?  Perhaps you're giving Georgia the benefit of the doubt as the two-time defending champion, even though they haven't played anyone and have sleepwalked through their first two games.  Perhaps.  But what was Michigan done to deserve that kind of deference?

And you go down the list and see Duke in a very narrow band between 18 and 21 on nearly everyone's ballot.  Why does that make any sense?  One could easily make he case that Duke should be anywhere from 10 to 25.  

If these writers were honest, you should see a lot more divergence in their ballots.  You should have some with Texas at No. 1; you should also have some with Texas at No. 11.  There's a lot of subjectivity to this, particularly this early in the season.  The fact that you don't see more diversity of opinion reflects the fact that they're all just lazily cheating off one another's papers. 

And that makes the poll inherently invalid.

A big reason for that, I think, is that you might get some bigger variance on the preseason ballots but then once the season starts, the voters accept the overall homogenized poll as the one to use moving forward and vote accordingly. Dave Reardon and Brett McMurphy seem to be voting a much more "what have you actually done this season" ballot. McMurphy has FSU #1 and Texas #2. Reardon has Texas #1 and FSU #3.

1 minute ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

Chuck ranked Alabama over Texas, you mongoloid. That's not "divergence," that's an extra chromosome.

I wonder if the creator of that spreadsheet might've accidentally flip-flopped those two for Chuck. I hope that's what happened because otherwise, Chuck needs to have his ballot taken away.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Daneeka

Doc Daneeka 6793

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, C-Man said:

A big reason for that, I think, is that you might get some bigger variance on the preseason ballots but then once the season starts, the voters accept the overall homogenized poll as the one to use moving forward and vote accordingly. Dave Reardon and Brett McMurphy seem to be voting a much more "what have you actually done this season" ballot. McMurphy has FSU #1 and Texas #2. Reardon has Texas #1 and FSU #3.

I wonder if the creator of that spreadsheet might've accidentally flip-flopped those two for Chuck. I hope that's what happened because otherwise, Chuck needs to have his ballot taken away.

 No, that’s Chuck’s actual vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15698

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

Chuck ranked Alabama over Texas, you mongoloid. That's not "divergence," that's an extra chromosome.

Do you think your post is maybe a touch more hostile than is merited under the circumstances?

And what's up with you and the "regarded," "mongoloid," "extra chromosome" epithets?  You don't think that's a little . . . I don't know . . . assholish? 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3827

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

My counterpoint on that is that the amount of groupthink reflected by that chart is staggering.  

Is "1) Georgia, 2) Michigan" so clear cut that it should be on a majority of ballots?  Perhaps you're giving Georgia the benefit of the doubt as the two-time defending champion, even though they haven't played anyone and have sleepwalked through their first two games.  Perhaps.  But what was Michigan done to deserve that kind of deference?

And you go down the list and see Duke in a very narrow band between 18 and 21 on nearly everyone's ballot.  Why does that make any sense?  One could easily make he case that Duke should be anywhere from 10 to 25.  

If these writers were honest, you should see a lot more divergence in their ballots.  You should have some with Texas at No. 1; you should also have some with Texas at No. 11.  There's a lot of subjectivity to this, particularly this early in the season.  The fact that you don't see more diversity of opinion reflects the fact that they're all just lazily cheating off one another's papers. 

And that makes the poll inherently invalid.

Yes.  And ordering them by deviation against weekly polls only reinforces the idea that the closer they vote to the poll the better their votes are. 

They should be ordered based on game results - like how few upsets according to ballot that they've had.

Edited by JBJ
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horndog

Horndog 2295

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Yep. Despite Bama's 34-24 beat-down vs Texas at HOME, Chuck feels Bama should be ranked #7 and Texas #10 this week? Da fuq?

Man, how I've missed the days when we complained about being disrespected because someone didn't vote us higher than no. 7.  Surly is back. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15698

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, JBJ said:

Yes.  And ordering them by deviation against weekly polls only reinforces the idea that the closer they votes to the poll the better their votes are. 

They should be ordered based on game results - like how few upsets according to ballot that they've had.

I kinda like that idea.

But at the same time, that mistakenly assumes that the No. 5 ranked team should never beat the No. 4 ranked team.  And we both know that's false.  No matter how perfect the ranking system is, there are always going to be instances in which the lower-ranked team wins.

That's not to say that the poll was wrong.  It is to say that the lower-ranked team maybe only had a 30% chance of winning.  But that means 30% of the time, it wins every time.  And really, 30% isn't that low of a likelihood, even though we'd all rather have a 70% chance of winning.

 

 

But even with the writers obviously herding, it is a lot better poll than the coaches, who never watch any of the games.  The coaches poll made sense 50 years ago, when only a handful of games were on television, and hence the coaches were likely the most informed people about the state of college football nationally.  But today, the coaches are probably the least informed people about college football outside their own teams and their upcoming opponents.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WelfareBuysMyWeed

WelfareBuysMyWeed 5662

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Do you think your post is maybe a touch more hostile than is merited under the circumstances?

And what's up with you and the "regarded," "mongoloid," "extra chromosome" epithets?  You don't think that's a little . . . I don't know . . . assholish? 

I think your asshole is pretty fucking large

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...