Comments on: National polls are subjective, imperfect

By: mark

mark — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:06:55 +0000

I’m not sure why Alabama is in the top ten either; especially when you consider how far down several teams got pounded in the rankings after losing (e.g. Missouri & LSU & Ohio State)

I agree that Tech has not YET proven itself worthy of it’s ranking. As Jonathon says, we’ll get our chance.

Richard, I did watch a game at Jones stadium with USC, also. Not sure of the year, though.

Hit ‘em, Wreck ‘em!!

Report this comment

By: Robert

Robert — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 18:05:26 +0000

Better take another look at that Alabama schedule. For example, they struggled against a Tulane team that had to hold on (at home) to beat SMU, a team that Tech smothered. Other than beating Georgia, I don’t see it. We both know that Clemson was exposed, so that win doesn’t get you much.

Report this comment

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 03:21:29 +0000

I completely agree with Mike on the lack of “toughness” in the Tech schedule. The only “Marquee” school to come play Tech in Lubbock was Miami in the early 90’s. During that same time period we played Georgia, Penn State. Those schools refuse to come to Lubbock. Those schools want Home games, just the same as we do at Tech. Unfortunately, somebody has to go on the road. In order for Tech to get the tough teams we have to go there.

The rankings are subjective, but I do not disagree with Tech not moving up this week. I do have problems with TU and Flordia making the moves they made. Tech is sitting great at #7.

Report this comment

By: RC

RC — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 03:14:50 +0000

Jeff, you left out “bad losses”. They too should be accounted for. When not, they make voters such as look silly.

You are not a voter but you have tried to justify SC being where they are because some voters “think” they can beat the other top teams.

And then there’s Utah, who you site as not really being top15 worthy.

Funny thing, Utah beat Oregon St who beat SC. To me, this invalidates any consideration of who SC may or may not beat. There’s already proof that ANYONE can beat SC.

It’s a shame that SC now has an easier road to the title game than OU. An embarrassment really.

Report this comment

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 22:34:13 +0000

It will all work out after we play Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Okie State. If we are good enough to be in the top 3, then we will be after we play them. If not, then we loose and drop out of the top 10. Its too early to complain. Our schedule is setting up for a great leap into #1 if we win, because we have too many top 10 teams in our path.

Report this comment

By: Mike Feagan

Mike Feagan — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 20:47:44 +0000

First, don’t think that because of our e-mail address we are UT supporters, we just had to have this address for buisiness purposes. Jeff, I just wanted to know if reporters or voters realize that tougher schedules mean that you have to schedule opponents that do not want home and home dates? That seems to put someone like Tech (with only 53,000 seats) at a disadvantage trying to schedule Georgia, Tennessee, Penn State, and Ohio State (all of which we have played but wouldn’t reciprocate). To play a tough opponent on the road but not a chance to schedule a home date against the same opponent doesn’t seem to be the fault of the mid majors or even the second level BCS conference programs like Tech, but the fault of the programs like Alabama, USC, etc. that get the breaks of voters because of who they have been. How can someone say someone like Tech should schedule tougher opponents when they can’t get those same opponents to come to our place and play? What seems fair to you as a voter? Not looking to put this in the paper, just wanted to know your point of view. Thanks.

Mike Feagan

Report this comment