Jump to content

2019


PhatMack19

Recommended Posts

Early meaningless poll

 

Early Top 25 for 2019 (Athlon)

 

1 Alabama

2 Clemson

3 Georgia

4 Oklahoma

5 Ohio St

6 Texas

7 Florida

8 Michigan

9 LSU

10 Texas A&M

11 ND

12 Oregon

13 Penn St

14 Wash

15 UCF

16 Utah

17 Iowa

18 Wisconsin

19 Nebraska

20 Missouri

21 Va Tech

22 Iowa St

23 Auburn

24 Northwestern

25 WSU

 

This is the hidden content, please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sporting News is pretty similar 

This is the hidden content, please


1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3. Georgia
4. Oklahoma
5. Ohio State
6. Texas
7. LSU
8. Notre Dame
9. Florida
10. Michigan
11. Texas A&M
12. Penn State
13. Oregon
14. Washington
15. Miss State
16. Auburn
17. Army
18. UCF
19. Wash State
20. Syracuse 
21. Stanford
22. Wisconsin
23. Iowa State
24. Northwestern
25. Wisconsin
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TexazBall said:

I would think as long as Lincoln is there they'll Be the favorite til someone knocks them off 

I agree. I just think it will be tough to find 3 guys in a row that can go donknate like Baker and Murray did.  With everything Texas has coming back, I think they should be the favorite to win it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Tigers2010 said:

I agree. I just think it will be tough to find 3 guys in a row that can go donknate like Baker and Murray did.  With everything Texas has coming back, I think they should be the favorite to win it.

OU has won 12 of the 19 Big 12 titles this century including the last 4.  They’ve done ok without Baker and Kyler. 

 

Texas is tied with Baylor and K-State for the same amount of conference titles in that period with 2. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, PhatMack19 said:

OU has won 12 of the 19 Big 12 titles this century including the last 4.  They’ve done ok without Baker and Kyler. 

 

Texas is tied with Baylor and K-State for the same amount of conference titles in that period with 2. 

3 hours ago, Whoopi Goldberg's Lips said:

We've been saying this for how many years now?

Obviously they have done fine. Texas has been down since 2009. 

This century lol. Who has the most National Championships in this century?

How many Conference titles have the Faggies won this century?

And sorry whoopie for quoting you too, my phone is jacking up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tigers2010 said:

Obviously they have done fine. Texas has been down since 2009. 

This century lol. Who has the most National Championships in this century?

How many Conference titles have the Faggies won this century?

And sorry whoopie for quoting you too, my phone is jacking up.

 

Texas has won the same amount of natty’s in the past 15 years as aggy in its history*

 

 

 

*Not including the Good Housekeeping National titles the pathetic gomers starting claiming when they conference hopped.  If we claimed all those fake titles like they do in that conference, we’d have 9.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TxHoops said:

Texas has won the same amount of natty’s in the past 15 years as aggy in its history*

 

 

 

*Not including the Good Housekeeping National titles the pathetic gomers starting claiming when they conference hopped.  If we claimed all those fake titles like they do in that conference, we’d have 9.  

If Herman plays his cards right he could have a string of Big 12 titles for the next few years, Just have to figure out how to keep all of these talented QBs around

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, TxHoops said:

Texas has won the same amount of natty’s in the past 15 years as aggy in its history*

 

*Not including the Good Housekeeping National titles the pathetic gomers starting claiming when they conference hopped.  If we claimed all those fake titles like they do in that conference, we’d have 9.  

Your 2nd to most recent “claimed” Title was was 49 years ago and was rewarded in December before you lost the Cotton Bowl by 2 TD’s.  How can you claim a title before the season ends then get blown out in your bowl game?

 

One of those good housekeeping titles 100 years ago, A&M didn’t allow a point all season and outscored their opponents 275-0 in 10 games.  I would say that’s deserving.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, PhatMack19 said:

Your 2nd to most recent “claimed” Title was was 49 years ago and was rewarded in December before you lost the Cotton Bowl by 2 TD’s.  How can you claim a title before the season ends then get blown out in your bowl game?

 

One of those good housekeeping titles 100 years ago, A&M didn’t allow a point all season and outscored their opponents 275-0 in 10 games.  I would say that’s deserving.  

Claimed titles are not real titles, ask UCF. Surely you don't count "claimed titles"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, TxHoops said:

Texas has won the same amount of natty’s in the past 15 years as aggy in its history*

 

 

 

*Not including the Good Housekeeping National titles the pathetic gomers starting claiming when they conference hopped.  If we claimed all those fake titles like they do in that conference, we’d have 9.  

Not true, they have claimed many of the recent titles Bama has won. Win as a conference, lose as a conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PhatMack19 said:

Your 2nd to most recent “claimed” Title was was 49 years ago and was rewarded in December before you lost the Cotton Bowl by 2 TD’s.  How can you claim a title before the season ends then get blown out in your bowl game?

 

One of those good housekeeping titles 100 years ago, A&M didn’t allow a point all season and outscored their opponents 275-0 in 10 games.  I would say that’s deserving.  

Every school claims AP titles.  That’s how the system was back then.  Don’t hate the player, hate the game.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

Every school claims AP titles.  That’s how the system was back then.  Don’t hate the player, hate the game.   

1970 was the coaches title that was awarded in December before Notre Dame dominated you in the Cotton Bowl.  Nebraska won the AP by actually winning all of their games 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PhatMack19 said:

1970 was the coaches title that was awarded in December before Notre Dame dominated you in the Cotton Bowl.  Nebraska won the AP by actually winning all of their games 

Who’s name is in the books for the championship? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, STiger85 said:

Who’s name is in the books for the championship? 

Texas was awarded by the coaches before the end of the season.  

Nebraska after all games were played by the AP

 

They shouldn’t count your big win over Georgia using that logic.  Just give all of the favorites wins and crown Bama the Champion.  They could have done that before the season and saved a lot of time and effort.  It will probably save a lot of players from injuries as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,937
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined


  • Posts

    • There is a difference, but I wouldn't at all put it past Trump to do so if he had the infrastructure in place to get away with it like the Dems currently do.  With the amount of effort he's invested in ruining those republicans who've opposed him, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
    • I think it will be an interesting case and could potentially come up for appeal on a different constitutional point.  The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the government doesn’t have to take possession of property in order to take it under the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.  If they take away the enjoyment or use of the property, it is no different than physically seizing it to build a highway for example. In a lawsuit as opposed to a criminal trial, a person/plaintiff doesn’t have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt but rather by a preponderance of evidence or “more likely” to have happened. Maybe it could be described as more likely yes than no or 51%-49%.  ”IF” it can be shown at a trial by a preponderance of evidence that Texas more likely yes than no caused the flooding with its engineering of the project, the people suing might have a case. But…. Does that alone win the case under the Fifth Amendment taking clause? I am not so sure. In US v Causby the Supreme Court ruled that the US government took a man’s property by flying airplanes over it. It was a public airport lawfully leased by the US in WWII and used to fly heavy bombers from it. Causby had an egg farm and the extremely loud noise of some airplanes under full power and sometimes at night with a landing lights being so close, it bothered and scared the family and damaged his egg farm production. Some chickens died and some quit laying eggs due to the extreme disturbances and lights at night. The Supreme Court ruled in Causby’s favor saying that the US had taken away the enjoyment and use of his land even though they didn’t physically seize it. The use of the land was hampered and that was enough for the taking clause under the Fifth Amendment. So in the IH-10 case, did Texas take away the use or enjoyment of the property?  A point of Causby was that the military bombers at a public airport was certainly for “public use”. The planes were public/taxpayers’ and the airport and lease were taxpayers’ property so the “public” definitely used it   My question in this lawsuit against Texas, even in they can prove the damage, was the damage (like in Causby) for “public use”? If not would it then not be a Fifth Amendment case but rather a state law case?  If Texas law denies such a lawsuit under state sovereignty and the families can’t prove a Fifth Amendment case of “public use”, could they prove the damages but still lose the case under state law? I haven’t read that anywhere and just thinking out loud. I could be way off base. But I think it could be interesting…..
    • Both sides...that is, everyone tries to get their people elected. Trump has not weaponized the government to bankrupt and imprison his political opponents. Night and day difference for me.
    • Surely you're aware of the great lengths Trump has gone to disrupt the elections and destroy the careers of republican politicians who haven't supported some of his most outlandish claims, or dared to question him or disagree with him about January 6.  You and I actually agree on this issue, although it must only go one way for you, because Trump's actions against republicans who didn't fall into lockstep with him is one of my biggest concerns about reelecting him.  The fact that he took action to affect literally hundreds of republican primaries from national elections down to municipal levels across the country, is concerning. It would've been one thing had he done it in an effort to help republicans win. Instead his purpose was to push out his perceived detractors and install MAGA politicians at every level of government in as many places as possible, and has resulted in a fractured republican party.
    • Lmao. No doubt. With a name like that, he would've gotten made fun of even if he was home-schooled.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...