PonyFans.com

The RED RAIDERS are capable of hanging 48 on the Fightin Texas Aggies, but can barely score 24 against lowly SMU, and if everyone will remember, SMU was not awarded 7 pts last year when they went for it on the inch line. SMU also missed FG late that would have kept it within reach.

And I love all the dog piling on Baylor to get out of the Big12, because they 'can't compete'. WHY??

Now, exactly what are the barriers that keep them from competing? I am not talking about their own incompetence, but rather the so-called 'BARRIER' that a private school just CANNOT overcome??

If TCU or SMU were to be in the Big12 instead, the only limit out there is the one they place upon themselves (i.e., SMU doesn't have a PE major, or higher entrance requirements, etc).

There is no BARRIER to entry to compete with the big boys. If there were, then MIAMI would suck, USC would suck, NWestern would have never won back to back Big10 Championships, etc...

As for this TV RATINGS blow that says the largest schools have the largest alumni bases, and therefore higher TV viewership...total baloney. Only a fraction of people watching these games are actually alumni, the rest are just football fans of that school. All SMU needs to do is become a regional school that people WANT to watch (a la Miami) -- yes, this requires winning, marketing and foresight. Yes, this is not easy to do.

Hell, only 25% of people in the US graduated from College (the rest are just football fans).

Back to TECH, TECH has no BARRIERS and they have NEVER been near competing for the SWC title (other than the 5-way tie when aTm won it on probation) or the Big12 title. It's all about what that school is capable of attracting as talent -- and in Tech's case, has 'less' academic barriers to entry than OU/Tex/aTm...and still lose 4-5 per year. The problem is that TECH is just not attractive in Lubbock compared to AUSTIN or the AGGIE TRADITIONS...

Anyway, SMU can and will beat Tech. TECH has inexperience at the QB position, a depleted OLine, and a non-existent DLine...SMU's strength is the DBs and LBs...

LEACH was trying to get out of Lubbock this year (which COULD mean that he is set for an AWEFUL year).

(Realize that Franchione left TCU when he did because he lost 28 seniors and there was an opportunity on the table. Had he stayed and gone 6-6 he would have been there until they were 'winners' again. As it turned out, last year they were supposed to be 3rd/4th in CUSA, but won the damn thing (10-2)).

Translation: SMU will play ball control offense and score. Tech will sputter on offense in their first game and not be able to score (at will, as with Kliff K).

LOL...depleted OL?,man u may want to attend the game and let me know how you think these scrubs held up.

No Defense: <A HREF="http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/fb/fbc/2056905" TARGET=_blank>http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/fb/fbc/2056905</A>

<A HREF="http://www.redraiders.com/stories/081303/foo_081303011.shtml" TARGET=_blank>http://www.redraiders.com/stories/081303/foo_081303011.shtml</A>


Pickings slim for Tech OL
<A HREF="http://www.redraiders.com/stories/041003/foo_0410030001.shtml" TARGET=_blank>http://www.redraiders.com/stories/041003/foo_0410030001.shtml</A>

GRGB, you might want to let Bennett and the boys do the talking for us. Lubbock is a damn tough place to play and its hard for anybody visitor to predict a victory out there. Nevermind that we are 22 pt dogs.

The story you've linked to about minor injuries the offensive linemen were contending with in April. Everybody is pretty much healthy now, I think.

Tech is redshirting a JUCO lineman that's 6'5" 250, mainly because he's out of shape. If they were depleted, that wouldn't be an option.


I think most Tech fans would contend that the OL and the receiving corps are the strengths of the team.

I will concur with you that the defense is suspect, but I believe the overall physical talent level is better than last year with a number of young players working into the mix. The defense can only get better.

Usatoday preview:

Who's down: Texas Tech has to replace prolific QB Kliff Kingsbury and six defensive starters.

HMM...NEW DEFENCE vs. ESTABLISHED RB SITUATION, plus IMPROVED QB PLAY = SMU Runs on Tech

"Versatile lineman injures shoulder

LUBBOCK – Do-it-all offensive lineman E.J. Whitley did not practice Wednesday after suffering a left elbow injury when he took a glancing blow off a teammate's helmet. Even though Whitley said the injury is nothing serious, it's worth watching. He is the team's most versatile lineman, having started at three positions last season. "

Hmm...looks like the OL is not so stable...

Look fellow Mustangs. It is not impossible for us to win in Lubbock, but I don't think the drop off for Tech is as big as some are making it out to be. The media talk about the big drop off at QB is ridiculous. All last year they criticized Kliff's numbers because it was "just" the system -- that anyone could go in and throw for those kind of numbers with the kind of offense Leach has. Yet although Kliff couldn't get much of a sniff from Heisman voters, somehow those same nay sayers are now talking like the loss of Kingsbury is a great tragedy, and with him gone, their offense (same system) is going sharply downhill with an experienced back up? Makes absolutely no sense. Can't have it both ways. And as far a OLine "depletion" goes, I think we ought to worry more about our own lack of depth on the DLine opposite that OLine.

That said, our biggest asset is that we play them first game of the season, and Tech's offense will take a little longer to get their game timing down than our defense. Plus, despite last year, I still think Tech has an inherent disrespect for us and despite urging by the coaching staff not to take us lightly, it will be hard for them not to look past us thinking last year was a fluke. I'm just hoping we catch them off guard again because, let's face it, on paper, Tech wins.

DiamondM "the Voice of Reason"-welcome aboard.

Today's sign of the apocolypse: Stallion thinks I'm reasonable.

I didn't say anything I hadn't said before-- that we can win but it will take a lot of breaks going our way, but before I was just a "sunshiner," now I'm the "voice of reason." As I have always said, I feel that my brand of hopeful optimism is more "realistic" than Stallion's usual "we have no chance" attitude. Buy I HATE smack talk. It makes a person look silly and almost always comes back to bite you on the [deleted]. I guess boys will be boys...

I think I can be fairly confident in saying that we are all very glad to be playing Texas Tech again. It's all about having rivalries with folks we know as opposed to some team out on the left coast. Part of a rivalry is talking smack. No where in the rules does it say that smack has to be the truth or even close to reality...it is just a matter of trying to get the other guy's goat...so to speak. It ain't much of a rivalry if all you do is slap each other on the back and say how great they are. We have yanked their chains and they have yanked ours...it makes the actual game that much more interesting. I'm like OP and support Tech when they take on the Texas's and A&M's of college football, but for this game they are taking on SMU and it is our duty to give them a ration of smack. It's all just good nature ribbing and it is part of being in a rivalry...ain't it great?

[This message has been edited by PK (edited 08-22-2003).]

All I ever said was that we CAN win, that's all. I am pointing out evidence in the favor of the argument that we CAN win.

Never did I say that we WILL win, never did I say that we are going to be FAVORED to win. I merely pointed out situations that point to positive matchups, in OUR favor.

Namely:

1) They have been ranked in the Top 30-40 for the past 4-5 years, but this year they are ranked in the mid-70s by many sources.

2) Mike Leach is rumored to have been looking to get out of Lubbock, which would seem to indicate, that if true, his team is not going to be as good as past years.

3) Their OL situation, though somewhat strong in the past, is looking vulnerable to injuries from last April, and current injuries.

4) Their new QB situation...perhaps he will be a plug-in to their system...or maybe KKlings was an excellent QB for that system.

5) Their DL is going to be horrible. Relative to our 4 returning starters on OUR OL, and with what is considered a very good stable of RBs, we SHOULD be able to run through this team -- right down the middle.

6) With a little clock management, perhaps 4 and 5 above will combine to produce a win.

And finally,

7) Their DBs are not set as we speak. That probably means our young WRs get a "pass" and Bartel may be ALLOWED to pass on occasion to mix things up as we mainly grind the ball down the middle.

I believe that this scenario is entirely REASONABLE.

[This message has been edited by GoRedGoBlue (edited 08-22-2003).]

[This message has been edited by GoRedGoBlue (edited 08-22-2003).]

[This message has been edited by GoRedGoBlue (edited 08-22-2003).]