PonyFans.com

mrydel wrote:

SMU 86 wrote:It would be one good game if Oregon and Baylor got to play one another.

Needs to be on a 3 day weekend.

It would be a 6 hour game. . . That's for sure

Baylor and Oregon would be fun. The ball does not hit the ground much and they both run the ball a lot. Would not be any longer than the Oregon ASU game.

Baylor is a really good football team. They really play well on the defensive side of the ball as well as on offense. Really fast team everywhere.

From the scheduling perspective, Mizzou and Baylor are already in BCS conferences (Big 12 obviously way down this year, but still...).

TCU playing LSU basically eliminated them from BCS consideration on the first day of the season.

Mizzou and Baylor played Yahoos non-conference. As a reward, they are in the top ten and getting a ton of pub.

Mizzou and Baylor absolutely made the correct decision from a financial standpoint, a football standpoint, and a recruiting standpoint. Free pub. Free advertising. Get recruits to notice.

If you win ten or more games, people notice it nationally and talk about it nationally, regardless of if you played the sisters of the poor all ten games.

I understand that from a competitive standpoint, we all want to see competitive games all the time. But Baylor and Missou absolutely, 100% made great decisions in playing crappy non-conference schedules. There is no financial, football or recruiting reason to do otherwise.

We are all disappointed with how we played non-conference this year. We all want better. In a perfect world, I would love to be 5-1 at this point because we beat a bunch of really good football teams.

In the real world, however, I would love to be 5-1 right now even if we beat the sisters of the poor non-conference. We would be talked up around town. People would argue whether or not we are as good as our record. And I am fine with that. You have to start somewhere. Go 10-2 against a crappy schedule, and then worry about going 10-2 against a good one. Baby steps.

JasonB wrote:If you win ten or more games, people notice it nationally and talk about it nationally, regardless of if you played the sisters of the poor all ten games.
Baby steps.

Our team still barely crawls against teams with winning records........shouldn't it be at least walking by year six?

Big XII is a big winner this weekend. It might not last.

JasonB wrote:Baylor is a really good football team. They really play well on the defensive side of the ball as well as on offense. Really fast team everywhere.

From the scheduling perspective, Mizzou and Baylor are already in BCS conferences (Big 12 obviously way down this year, but still...).

TCU playing LSU basically eliminated them from BCS consideration on the first day of the season.

Mizzou and Baylor played Yahoos non-conference. As a reward, they are in the top ten and getting a ton of pub.

Mizzou and Baylor absolutely made the correct decision from a financial standpoint, a football standpoint, and a recruiting standpoint. Free pub. Free advertising. Get recruits to notice.

If you win ten or more games, people notice it nationally and talk about it nationally, regardless of if you played the sisters of the poor all ten games.

I understand that from a competitive standpoint, we all want to see competitive games all the time. But Baylor and Missou absolutely, 100% made great decisions in playing crappy non-conference schedules. There is no financial, football or recruiting reason to do otherwise.

We are all disappointed with how we played non-conference this year. We all want better. In a perfect world, I would love to be 5-1 at this point because we beat a bunch of really good football teams.

In the real world, however, I would love to be 5-1 right now even if we beat the sisters of the poor non-conference. We would be talked up around town. People would argue whether or not we are as good as our record. And I am fine with that. You have to start somewhere. Go 10-2 against a crappy schedule, and then worry about going 10-2 against a good one. Baby steps.

I have no problem with Baylor being a school that pees sitting down. Just don't claim to be more than you are, which to the title of this thread is a "top 10 team".

Baylor will put up half a hundred on Kansas by halftime

Stallion wrote:Baylor will put up half a hundred on Kansas by halftime

Whether that's true or not, when did beating KU in football become the bar you judge your worthiness to be a top 10 team?

Okay, if Baylor isn't top ten, then neither is Ohio State, because they have only played patsies and have looked less impressive doing it than Baylor.

In fact, Baylor and OSU have one team in common on their schedule - Buffalo. Baylor played much better against Buffalo. So I would argue that Baylor should be ranked ahead of Ohio State.

Baylor's nitemare is bad weather but they still got Lache Seastrunk- Linwood (7.3 ypc on 46 carries) and Glasco Martin aren't bad either. They would be much easier defend on the ground in wet weather without the deep threat stretching the field

JasonB wrote:Okay, if Baylor isn't top ten, then neither is Ohio State, because they have only played patsies and have looked less impressive doing it than Baylor.

In fact, Baylor and OSU have one team in common on their schedule - Buffalo. Baylor played much better against Buffalo. So I would argue that Baylor should be ranked ahead of Ohio State.

Okay, so SD State + Cal + Flor A&M + then ranked #23 Wisconsin + then ranked #16 Northwestern + a solid Iowa team is LESS than Wofford, La-Monroe, WVa, K-State (near loss) and Iowa State? Ok.

JasonB wrote:
Mizzou and Baylor played Yahoos non-conference. As a reward, they are in the top ten and getting a ton of pub.

Mizzou and Baylor absolutely made the correct decision from a financial standpoint, a football standpoint, and a recruiting standpoint. Free pub. Free advertising. Get recruits to notice.

If you win ten or more games, people notice it nationally and talk about it nationally, regardless of if you played the sisters of the poor all ten games.

I understand that from a competitive standpoint, we all want to see competitive games all the time. But Baylor and Missou absolutely, 100% made great decisions in playing crappy non-conference schedules. There is no financial, football or recruiting reason to do otherwise.

We are all disappointed with how we played non-conference this year. We all want better. In a perfect world, I would love to be 5-1 at this point because we beat a bunch of really good football teams.

In the real world, however, I would love to be 5-1 right now even if we beat the sisters of the poor non-conference. We would be talked up around town. People would argue whether or not we are as good as our record. And I am fine with that. You have to start somewhere. Go 10-2 against a crappy schedule, and then worry about going 10-2 against a good one. Baby steps.

THIS! SO this!! ^^

Why would JasonB want to rearrange schedule when he thought SMU would beat Tech at Home and TCU? I seem to remember SMU was going to blow Tech out. We couldn't have dreamed of a better opportunity to beat Tech than we had this year

Yep- the perfect storm that wasn't

Stallion wrote: We couldn't have dreamed of a better opportunity to beat Tech than we had this year

Well, I definitely agree with this. That game really hurt especially when we let a few plays get away from us as we weren't too far away from pulling it out.