This exchange took place Tuesday--I almost forgot to post it...have been a little distracted this week...you'll probably understand later this evening...
1) In the Big 12...what the hell happened last weekend??
2) What the hell happens now??
3) Rank the teams in the North. I dare you. And then I double-dog dare you to explain yourself.
4) Make your predictions for this week: NU @ MU, KU @ KSU, UT vs OU, OSU @ ATM, ISU @ TT, CU @ BU.
Bonus) How many days until Dennis Franchione resigns?
The Beef: In the Big XII last weekend, um….I did not see much of it. From what I can tell, OU had a freshman play like a freshman, and the Longhorns displayed worse special teams than the St. Louis Rams of a year ago and just could not get it done at home. I have said it before, Ron Prince, though having few other people’s numbers, seems to have Mack Brown’s. I think OU rebounds this week since I think UT may finally be exposed like some thought they might be early in the season. In the end, I think it just means that OU runs away with the south and UT comes back to the pack a little bit, which may or may not hurt my personal aspirations of the MU getting to the Cotton Bowl this year.
Well, as I said, I think OU ends up winning the south by a few over a couple of teams. As for the north, it is an elimination style weekend I think with MU/NU and kSU/kU. Winners are much better off and losers are going to struggle to come back from it unless another crazy weekend happens. I think ISU is really pretty bad, and I think while it was a good win for CU and they wont get blown out of games, I think they will still lose enough to come in 5th.
6. ISU, 5. CU, 4. kU (but I think they still finish the season well and make a bowl) , 3. NU, 2. kSU, 1. MU (I think my predictions for the weekend may be bleeding through here a bit) As for my explanation….yeah…I think kU does not quite get it done on the road and I think we win this weekend setting these rankings in motion. I could see NU and kSU flopping during the season, but if Okie State has figured out their offense, I think NU will struggle to keep them from scoring as much as I hope/believe we will.
I think MU by 10-14, kSU in a squeaker, OU by a good amount, OSU to go in and “upset” aTm who has had a helluva week, TT all over ISU and Baylor beating Colorado.
90 days…just after the first of the year I believe for Coach Fran.
Michael Atchison: 1) (1) The world spun off its axis; (2) Texas is good, but not single-digit ranking good; (3) Oklahoma built a lead and then started dreaming about next week; and (4) Kansas and Colorado made plays on defense. The Cats beat Colt McCoy to a a pulp, and CU linebacker Jordon Dizon was all over the field in the fourth quarter.ZouDave: 1 - Well, see, what happened was....um....it uh....we....Go Tigers? I don't know what happened last weekend, but I do know that the Mizzou/Nebraska game is no longer the de facto Big XII North Championship game because ksu and Colorado each picked up a win there was just NO WAY they were going to get. And when you consider that Missouri, the team picked to win the North and the team favored in the game against Nebraska, has to travel to BOTH ksu and CU, then the North just got a lot cloudier. And the South got smacked in the mouth, and I love it.
2) How should I know? I said there was a 0% chance that either K-State or Colorado would win on Saturday. Now, it's a free-for-all. The Kansas/KSU and Missouri/Nebraska games are huge. The losers of those games are going to need help if they hope to advance to San Antonio.
1. Missouri - Because I'm a homer
2. Kansas State - Because they have the division's best win, hands down.
3. Kansas - Because they've gone all Ali-Wepner on their opponents.
4. Colorado - Because they're too mercurial for me to believe in - yet.
5. Nebraska - Because they haven't been impressive in a month.
6. Iowa State - Because they already won their one game.
4) Missouri 45 Nebraska 34
K-State 24 Kansas 21
Oklahoma 38 Texas 14
Texas A&M 27 Oklahoma State 20
Texas Tech 946 Iowa State 14
Colorado 23 Baylor 16
Bonus) That guy has made himself radioactive as a coach. Having a vagabond heart and a crushing lack of judgment is a bad combo. The rumor was he'd be gone by today, and having no other clue, I'll go with that.
2 - This weekend will unmuddy the waters a bit. There will be a clearer pecking order after Saturday, because every team in the North will have played and many of them will have played each other. We'll know more about ku after Saturday than we know after their first 4 games, we'll know if ksu means business this year or if it's just that Prince owns Brown, and we'll know if Missouri is at least serious about being the team we think they are. As for what actually happens? My rankings will probably indicate that.
#6 - Iowa State. The only easy answer. Iowa State is worse than last year. They shouldn't have won a game in the conference last year, and now they're worse. Is it possible for them to go 0-9? If it is, they'll do it. Awful team. Just horrible.
#5 - kansas. ku is clearly better this year than last, and I think they're clearly better than I gave them credit for. We still have no idea how good, and their fluffy fresh schedule so far this year did NOT harden them and their alarm clock is going off but they want to continue to hit snooze. ku will be 3-5 in conference this year, because there's not a road game on their schedule that looks good for them and I obviously don't like them in the game at Arrowhead. Much like last year, ku will probably be close in games but I still don't think they're quite good enough to pull them out. But this is definitely a bowl team, and it appears they'll have a nice foundation to build from after this.
#4 - Nebraska. This will be a tie-breaker thing. I had Nebraska picked 5-3 in the conference before the season started, but now I'm giving the nod to Colorado over them based on new information. Their passing game just isn't good enough and their defense sure isn't good enough. Their running game is probably good enough, but a good running game only gets you multiple wins when it's combined with a good defense. Nebraska is going to get beaten a few times this year by teams they don't like losing to. And they're going to lose at home to Texas A&M, who will run for approximately 861 yards against them.
#3 - Colorado. Where did this come from? Even I said before the season that Colorado won't be as bad as last year but I didn't expect this. But this is now a very real 4-4 team in conference and could easily move up to 5-3 if Missouri isn't good enough on the road. They win the tie-breaker over Nebraska in the last game of the year.
#2 - Missouri. Do you know how painful it is to put this here? It physically hurts me. But when ksu beat Texas, they picked up a win they just shouldn't have been able to get. Missouri is still as good as I thought they were, because I still think we're a 10-2 team. We're going to lose in Norman and we're going to lose in Manhattan. We'll have a better overall record than every other team in the North, but the tie-breaker is going to get us.
#1 - kansas state. Ugh. I feel dirty. But seriously, they beat Texas which wasn't supposed to happen and now their schedule is setup perfectly. They have 3 of the meaningful 4 North opponents at home, plus they have Baylor at home and travel to Iowa State. They'll probably lose down in Stillwater because OSU plays differently at home, and I think they'll lose to Nebraska in Lincoln. But at 6-2, with a win over Missouri, they win the North by tie-breaker. This won't so much be Missouri not doing something right, because we're going to go 6-2 for crying out loud, but ksu needed that other loss. We could have afforded a loss to them if they were going to be 5-3. Missouri is going to have to go 7-1 to win the North, or at least make that other loss to Colorado instead of ksu. The Wildcats just have too perfect of a schedule now. Manhatter is going to be insufferable for the rest of time. I may have to leave Tigerboard over this. I think the good that could come from this is it's entirely possible a major program comes courting Prince if he was to win the North in his 2nd season, and I just don't think ksu can keep him if someone like Michigan, Notre Dame, etc. was to offer him a job.
4 - Mizzou defeats Nebraska, KSU defeats ku, Oklahoma defeats Texas, A&M defeats OSU, Texas Tech defeats Iowa State, Baylor upsets Colorado. There has to be at least one upset this week.
Bonus - I think he will announce his resignation on Monday of next week, but he will finish the year as head coach. He's going to have a hard time getting another high profile job. Mike Price from UTEP will be his replacement at aTm. This time, however, there will be no strippers involved.
Doug: 1) I was too busy wandering around Las Vegas Blvd to realize what was going on, until I stopped at the sportsbook in the Bellagio. To see the spreads next to the final scores was really stunning. I think Seth has a point, Ron Price may very well have Mack Brown's number, especially Mack Brown without Vince Young. And, I think the gap between the have's and have-not's of the conference is shrinking, how else can you explain the failure of Nebraska to cover, Oklahoma to win and Texas to even show up? The Boy: 1) For CU-OU, I really do think it was a case of OU letting up and never taking CU out of the game mentally. Even when they were down 24-7, CU was trying harder than OU was. And by the time OU realized they were in a dogfight, they had been knocked back on their heels. A Daily Oklahoman columnist tried to say that the altitude had something to do with it, and maybe it did, but...momentum is so huge in college sports, and I think momentum had as much or more to do with it than stamina. That said, I bet there were a lot of laps being run in Norman Sunday and Monday.
2) I'm still sticking with OU to win the South, and in fact, the conference. I think the North is still up for grabs between NU, MU and... Kansas.
3) Frankly, with KU and MU missing a conference game, I think you have to basically go off the current standings, 1) Nebraska 2) KSU 3) CU 4) KU 5) MU 6) ISU
4) MU 35 NU 31 , KU 28 KSU 21 , OU 24 UT 17 , OSU 42 aTm 21 , TT 52 ISU 9 , CU 21 BU 17
Bonus) Coach Fran... even if he makes it to the end of the season, I'm pretty sure A&M fans will be ready to force him out at the end of the season, bowl or not.
As for KSU-UT...with about 6 minutes left in the first half, KSU punted with the score 7-7. The next time Josh Freeman touched the ball, they had 21 points. KSU avoided mistakes of its own while Texas peed down its leg, allowing an INT return, kick return, and punt return for TD's, not to mention throwing an additional two INT's in its own territory. KSU obviously played a part in that, but once KSU got the 10-point lead (24-14), UT was out of its gameplan and out of its element. I think it said a bit about K-State and a ton about UT--they repeatedly threw for 3 yards on 3rd-and-10, a Mizzou-with-Brad-Smith-esque thing to do. McCoy has no confidence, the staff has no confidence in McCoy, and if the score gets away from them before Jamaal Charles can establish himself, UT's in deep trouble.
As for the other two games, NU-ISU was a crap fest for a half before NU decided to look like a somwhat competent team, and BU-ATM was a crap fest for a half before ATM decided to look like a somewhat competent team. Neither game did the two favorites any favors.
2) I think KSU has a golden opportunity due to their schedule. If they continue to avoid mistakes--a pretty hefty 'if', but it's at least somewhat feasible--they really could be 5-1 before finishing up with NU and MU. But to take advantage of that opportunity, they have to beat KU this Saturday. Their North chances aren't crippled with a loss (due to the fact that they already have a road win over UT on their resume), but they're damaged. As for OU-UT, the only notable thing to mention is simply that the loser ( i.e. Texas) has almost no chance of catching back up to the pack. The winner (i.e. OU) will be 1-1, and the winner of ATM/OSU will be 2-0. A 2-game hole with that many teams in front of you is pretty rough.
3) I guess I already posted about this yesterday. 1) MU, 2) KSU, 3) NU, 4) KU, 5) CU, 6) ISU.
4) OU 31, UT 17. MU 38, NU 31. KSU 24, KU 20. ATM 35, OSU 27. Tech 44, ISU 24. BU 20, CU 16.
*) I just checked Google News to make sure he hadn't already. It appears he might weather the 'insider info' scandal for now (then again, still four days till Saturday), but he better go at least 9-3 at this point. They're looking for a reason to oust him, and 8-4 might not be enough for him.
Now, as always...questions from the field?
The Beef: Alright…I will ask this for a roundtable questionThe Boy: Honestly, the thought of a mustard and old gold mix makes me nauseous, but hey...whatever the players want to do, I'm cool with it. I'm apparently one of the few that completely enjoys the all black look, but I have also enjoyed breaking out the gold pants once a year (2005 against NU, 2006 at Tech). If they really want to do gold helmets, I'll laugh, I'll dry heave a little, and then I'll enjoy the game just as much as I otherwise would have.
With another installment of the “gold helmets” rumor….as a fan…or I guess to each of you personally, how do you feel? Would you be in favor of something like that? Or do you prefer we remain traditional (as much as we can) in that aspect?
The Beef: I suppose my only problem with it would be a change to the “M” since either you go with a black “M” or you go with the new logo….either way, you change one of the few enduring things we actually have about our uniforms. And as an unabashed proponent of tradition in unis (yes, Penn State has the best with a couple of other schools), I think changing the helmet is a step in a bad direction. I would ALMOST rather gold unis, at least we have had them at SOME point…I do not recall ever seeing gold helmets though.The Boy: As long as it was a one-game change, I'd be okay with it. Lots of teams do various throwback ideas (though you're right, gold helmets aren't much of a throwback since I can't recall them ever doing it), and I'd be okay if they broke out something interesting just once, then went back to the original...
Doug: A quick glance at Helmet Project, which goes back to 1970, shows no gold helmets in MU's past.Michael Atchison: I can't tell you how much I don't care about uniforms. I'm astonished how bat$%!t crazy it makes some people, and how much mental energy is devoted to it. If they want to pull out a special helmet, jersey or jockstrap from time to time, fine by me.
Now, the "M" has undergone some changes, from white to yellow-gold back to white to the current dark gold. What makes me wonder about MU's uniforms is the fact the yellow pants are bright yellow, instead of matching more closely with the color of the M.
Of course, I'd like to see KU add a pair of blue pants, for use with the road white or alternate red jerseys, so what the hell do I now?
ZouDave: In the end, as long as we're wearing black and gold then I don't necessarily care where and how much they appear on the uniform.
If it was my call, though, I'd leave the helmets as they are now and I'd have black tops with gold pants at home, white tops with black pants on the road, and then for the blackout game at Faurot the team would wear all black.
But, that's only if it were up to me. As long as it's black and gold, I don't care. I also don't really care about the M on the helmets vs the Tiger logo, because I happen to really like that logo. But, I do respect the fact that we've had the M on our helmet for so long. If it's my choice, we leave the M, but if we change to the tiger (even for one game) it will not bother me nor make me happier.
I'm far more concerned with those idiots wearing St. Louis Cardinals hats to a Mizzou game against Nebraska!!!!!!
Thursday, October 4, 2007
This exchange took place Tuesday--I almost forgot to post it...have been a little distracted this week...you'll probably understand later this evening...