No, but it goes to my point that we actually WON against Kansas (wasn't ever really close) and the thread was incredibly negative. So, I can only infer that we didn't win by enough to appease most on here... i.e. the spread.
Ketch's 10 Thoughts From the Weekend (The thing I was most wrong about this season...)
- Thread starter Ketchum
- Start date
- Status
No, but it goes to my point that we actually WON against Kansas (wasn't ever really close) and the thread was incredibly negative. So, I can only infer that we didn't win by enough to appease most on here... i.e. the spread.
The reality is we could have beat KU 35-0 and rightly so this board would have said "It's Kansas."
It’s going to be hard to fall out of the top 5 in the composite rankings unless recruiting just flops. That and 247, espn etc are likely going to have Texas ranked higher than rivals most likely in the final ranking.
No offense,but I don't really care about the composite rankings.
Fans will look at whatever system or set of rankings that favors them the most. It's pretty time-tested.
Not your original post, but the thread was all doom and gloom after a win. It gets tiresome. I get it.... We have sucked ass forever, but I think TH is the right guy.
If we lose to WVU, maybe I'll have to join you guys, along with Eeyore, down in the dumps.
I haven't given any indications that TH is the wrong guy. He has a tougher task in front of him than most realized, probably even myself.
considering the composite rankings take into account ALL the services to give an average how is that just Cherry picking one service over another by fans? Most fans consider the composite rankings because you get a wider view and not just using one ranking out of many. I get why you have a preference but I’d imagine most here don’t rely on just one ranking.
People flock to the composites because they mostly aren't educated enough (through no fault of their own) about the metrics of the rankings that they are looking at.
247 and scout have never taken the time to break their historical rankings in a way that would educate its viewers.
I have done that with the Rivals rankings. My preference has to do with the fact that I can speak of the Rivals metrics in a way that it's almost scientific. I cannot do that with the composite or any other set of rankings.
Whether you like the Rivals history or not, it can be presented in a way that allows you to understand what it means to land a 6.0 type of recruit vs. a 5.8.
You know my give a shit level about recruiting is as low as it's ever been and I used to be a junkie.
Winning and covering beats winning and not covering. Losing and covering beats losing and not covering.
Covering is better in both scenarios. Plus, you are likely winning a lot when you are covering a lot. Bottom line, covering means you are performing better than expected, which is usually a good thing.
he could only take TEXAS to a BIG XII championship with ten all-conference players around him
I wouldn’t say that. Granted he’s had quite a bit of misfortune, but he made it tougher before he ever started. Whether he figures that out or not will determine his fate.
I'm speaking in smaller,more nuanced areas, not so much big picture.
- Status
