NT93

I'd say they had by far the worst. Too much credit given for the beat down of Wisconsin considering the rest of their "body of work." Just like everyone is ignoring a 35-21 loss at home to Virginia Tech (6-6)? Just like everyone is ignoring the fact that TCU beat Minnesota 30-7* while Ohio St. beat them 31-24? *They called off the dogs in the 4th quarter after being up 30-0 after 3 quarters.

And once again the SEC will have a good bowl record thanks in large part to the fact that they play (4) Big 10, (3) ACC, (1) AAC and (1) against Notre Dame. The have no games vs the Pac 12. They do play 3 against the Big 12 which seems like more than usual. Big 12 only gets (1) Big 10, (1) ACC, and (2) Pac 12. Pac 12 gets (2) ACC, (2) Big 10, (2) Big 12, and Boise St. along with the aforementioned no matchups vs the SEC.

I think someone mentioned it earlier: Most think we are superior to them and that they haven't earned the right to join "our" conference since they just moved up to FBS a couple of years ago. I'd love to have a mostly Texas conference with UNT, UTEP. Rice, UTSA, La. Tech, Tulsa, Tulane, SMU, Texas St. and Houston. Not gonna happen, but I'd like it nonetheless.

We could probably get A&M... Commerce.

So I'm not missing anything??? lol

I think Idaho, Georgia St., NM St. might have something to say about that. Bottom line on the season: Not many teams, even P5 teams, can win with their 3rd string QB. I feel confident in saying that our starter (any of them) would be a 3rd string QB at most FBS schools. I know QB was far from our only problem, but you just can't win consistently with the type of QB we rolled out each week even if you don't have the other issues.

Because you can see everything that's happening. Same reason coaches are in the same type seats. Actually, I may agree with you since you said "pay more money." haha

Serious question: How can Ohio State be ranked ahead of Baylor? Baylor has beaten OU and TCU. Ohio St. has beaten Mich. St. and Minnesota. Most other wins seem fairly equal against mostly average to below average teams. Baylor lost to W. Va. which has lost to Alabama, K. St., TCU, OU, and UT. (All ranked except UT) Ohio St. lost to Va. Tech which has lost to E. Carolina, Pitt, Ga. Tech, Boston College, Miami, and Wake Forest. (Only Ga. Tech is ranked) In my mind these facts are clearly in favor of Baylor. What am I missing?

My thoughts exactly.

Great info. These stats are not what my eyes told me this year...specifically in regards to Greer.

This is what they said at Miss St. until Dan Mullen showed up and told everyone, "Show up and we will win." Maybe he's on to something.

I'm not sure how many of the losses would be wins, but I'm confident that most of the blowouts would be much closer games...and maybe we win a couple of them.

I agree. C-USA is already has too many former Sun Belt members. I didn't want us to get out of the Sun Belt just to be right back in it 5 years later under a different name. Is a MAC school any better? I think so, but even if it's not at least it's not contributing to the reuniting of the ol Belt.

This is the exact reason I specified pre-season. When I was originally thinking about it, A&M was near the top, but then I realized their expectations really went up after week 1...and even higher after about week 5 as mentioned by Eagle1855. It will be interesting to see how much our opinions change over the final few weeks of the season.

I knew I was leaving out Texas St., but no knowledge whatsoever of how they are doing or what they were expected to do. My expectations are not from the teams fan base, just college football fans in general. I'd say most people expected SMU to win 5-6 games, so I'd say being the worst team in the FBS would qualify that as pretty disappointing. As far as UTEP, I originally thought they were way better than anyone expected, but after looking at my Texas Football magazine last night, they are basically spot on in their prediction. I put them 9 because I do feel they are better than expected. I put UTSA ahead of us mainly because they have so many seniors and this was going to be "their year." From my original list, I'd say that teams 1-5 are below expectations, teams 6-10 are about where expected and TCU is the only one who is truly exceeding expectations...though I can see the UTEP argument. untjim: Can't argue with your rankings, not too far off from mine.

We're obviously having a disappointing season, but so are several other Texas colleges. At this point in the season, I'd rank them in this order from below expectations to exceeding expectations based on pre-season expectations. Obviously lots of room for debate. 1. SMU 2. Houston 3. UTSA 4. UNT 5. Texas Tech 6. Texas 7. Texas A&M 8. Rice 9. UTEP 10. Baylor 11. TCU I went with SMU as most disappointing only because they are the worst team in the FBS...that's probably a little below their expectations.

But for the most part they can only stop them when given a month to prepare. They can't do it on a weekly basis.

Not true. If your QB isn't filling up the stat sheet the wins really don't matter. And I know this to be a fact because I saw it on the internet... gomeangreen.com to be exact.

I didn't ask if you'd rather have the QB, I asked if you'd rather have the stats? And a loss. I guess I should have just listed the stats and kept the actual QB unknown. There's a reason they didn't play against garbage CUSA, they're Big 12 and SEC. Each game I listed were fairly equal teams playing one another, much like us vs FAU. My point has nothing to do with the QB's or the teams. I could pick a few high school QB's from Friday or a few NFL QB's from today and make the same point: I don't care if my QB doesn't have an impressive stat line as long as we win. Conversely, I don't care if he fills up the stat sheet if we lose. I am glad we can agree about the W Go Mean Green!!!

Amen!! Who cares how we won??? It's a much needed win that could lead to another one next week. Instead of being happy about a 20 point victory we're upset because our QB didn't put up Bryce Petty type stats? Seriously? I'm not a Mini-Mac fan, but unlike others here, I'm not rooting against him. I don't really care who plays QB as long as were winning. And I don't care if the defense, running game, and special teams are more responsible for the wins than the QB. Would have rather have had these stats? 15/21 219 1TD 0 INT That's Nick Marshall. Loss How about: 20/37 291 2 1? Jake Waters. Loss Or: 36/49 248 0 1? Clint Trickett. Loss I could continue...

Yes I did...and yes we are showing our age. The former New Boston Lion and of course UNT Eagle great. His high school basketball team won the state championship in '84. Undefeated I believe.

Not picking and choosing. Iowa St. and Kansas are currently tied for last place.

The SEC might win every one of those games, but I think they'd all be good games. Thus my stance that the SEC isn't "way more stout" than the Big 12 (or the Pac 12). If I'm being honest, I think 5 evenly matched games like the ones you listed would probably result in a 2-3 record for one conference and a 3-2 record for the other. None of the games should be blowouts barring unlikely circumstances. Also, Georgia vs. W. Va. is hardly a gimme for the SEC. Kind of hard to compare "middle of the pack" since the SEC has so many more teams, but are you really confident that Vandy would easily handle Kansas or Iowa St.? I might give you Kansas because they're pretty weak, but I'll take Iowa St. over Vandy.

Not sure what Miss. St. not starting the season as a top team has to do with it. And I don't think I'd say the SEC West is "way more stout" than the Big 12. Auburn was lucky to beat K. St. on a night when K.St didn't play well. OU is currently 5th place in the conference and they should have beaten K.St. on a night when they didn't play great (and missed a 19 yd field goal that would have won the game). In addition, OU beat Tennessee worse than any SEC school besides Ole Miss. Give me the top 5 teams from each conference and I'll take my chances that the Big 12 doesn't embarrass itself...which would surely be the case if the SEC was way more stout than the Big 12.

Fixed it for ya.