Cowherd is touting OM as the number...
- Thread starter TheHorrorTheHorror
- Start date
top ten team like they stole something, how is this not accurate. I went to several SEC games this year (Albeit none involving Florida) and Ole Miss was BY FAR the best team I saw, and it wasn't really close. And personally, I think it might be the best thing to happen to Mississippi State in a while. Maybe it's the motivation we need to get off our asses and do something for the first time in 8 years.
first. i think you're dead on! another analogy for that situation would be the UA-AU sitiation over the past few years... hopefully state can pull a nice turnaround under Mullen. i know this is the first time ive really been excited about an upcoming football season since i've lived in starkville.
coming out and eating a buffet of crow after that moronic statement. he's a pac-10 humper, but one of the few national guys to give the SEC any credit. he spoke out positively about Mullen a few weeks back. i listen to him about every morning here @ work...
...and probably the best Ole Miss team (right now) that I have seen since I have been following SEC football (1991). This team would beat the 2003 team because they have a much better defense.
Cowherd's right. I give them credit.
Cowherd's right. I give them credit.
He's not a dumbass. He's a shock jock who knows how to push the right buttons (like yours) to get people to listen and talk about his show.Bdog9090 said:
They are definitely playing like a top 10 team but they do not deserve a top 10 ranking. The college ranking system is based on the entire body of work that teams put together and not on who is hot at the moment. Four losses cannot be discounted. In spite of how Alabama has looked lately, there is no way that you could put an Ole Miss team that they beat ahead of them after Bama went undefeated in the SEC in the regular season.
I've got to think there aren't many teams that would want to face that defensive line right now. That defensive front is like an NFL team attacking the QB. And with the way the entire team is clicking right now, there's no doubt they are better than most teams that beat them (Vandy, South Carolina, and Wake Forest). So yeah, I'd say they are currently a top 10 team - not sure about top 6. Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, USC, Utah, Bama - that's a pretty solid top 6. But I wouldn't put them much further behind.
Ol Blue said:
No offense, but I doubt he's pushing buttons in Mississippi to try to rile up the listeners. If he was going to say something to get people riled up, he'd probably aim it at Notre Dame or Ohio State. We're small potatoes down in Mississippi.
Right now, there is pretty much a consensus Top 5 with Florida, OU, Texas, Utah, and USC in that mix. What Cowherd is saying is that he believes that we're the best of the rest at this moment. When we were turning it over 6 times to lose to Vandy, no, but the way we're playing right now is up for argument at least.
H
hdghdawg
Guest
It's a good thing we don't have a playoff in college football, or Ole Miss would win the thing, or at least get close. But then again, they may not have gotten in unless it was a wide playoff, like the Men's NCAA, due to the four losses.
We are currently one of the top 10 teams in the country, based on the way we are playing, but you're right, we don't deserve a top 10 ranking, because the rankings aren't based on how you are playing right now. They are based on the full results of your season.
Compare it somewhat to Florida's 2006 national championship basketball team. They were only a 3 seed I believe in the NCAA tourney, because their entire body of work was not the resume of one of the top 5 teams in the country. However, they were very clearly playing the best basketball in the country, and they proved it.
Compare it somewhat to Florida's 2006 national championship basketball team. They were only a 3 seed I believe in the NCAA tourney, because their entire body of work was not the resume of one of the top 5 teams in the country. However, they were very clearly playing the best basketball in the country, and they proved it.
who loves tweaking conventional wisdom. Sometimes that makes for interesting radio.
My problem is his whole shtick of making a point at the beginning of the show, giving an analogy to the business world or personal life ("signing T.O. is like dating a stripper"), repeating that point for 10 minutes, and then spending the rest of the hour talking about how great his original point and analogy were.
My problem is his whole shtick of making a point at the beginning of the show, giving an analogy to the business world or personal life ("signing T.O. is like dating a stripper"), repeating that point for 10 minutes, and then spending the rest of the hour talking about how great his original point and analogy were.
H
hdghdawg
Guest
That fact right there is one of the biggest cons to the playoff systems. They clearly take away the importance of the regular season. MSU has been a victim of the system and taken advantage of it as well. '96 basketball team and '04 basketball team come to mind. So does the '07 baseball team.
But you really need to be able to play the games on the field too. Most times, if you're good enough, you'll win in the regular season AND the postseason. But not all. So which way is 'more' fair?
But you really need to be able to play the games on the field too. Most times, if you're good enough, you'll win in the regular season AND the postseason. But not all. So which way is 'more' fair?
I don't know the number, but I think there is a happy medium for a playoff. I'd probably set it at about 10% of the total number of teams. That way you reward the teams that did well enough while punishing teams like ours that lost enough early that the late peak didn't matter.
I think the NCAA basketball tourney is a little too big, as is the NCAA baseball tourney, but I'd rather see a field be too big than too small.
I think the NCAA basketball tourney is a little too big, as is the NCAA baseball tourney, but I'd rather see a field be too big than too small.
that I have with Cowherd. Jim Rome does the same thing... he says the same thing over and over and over again. If Rome were confined to only repeating things one time, his show would only last 1 hour.
I find Rome to be much more annoying than Cowherd. I can only stomach 5-10 minutes of Rome per day.
I find Rome to be much more annoying than Cowherd. I can only stomach 5-10 minutes of Rome per day.
that I would bet against OleMiss if they were playing a neutral field at this point. Florida, Oklahoma, USC, Texas. Possibly some other teams like UGA, Oregon, but it's hard for me to put many more ahead of them the way they played against TTech. Maybe TTech is just overrated like the rest of the Big 12....who knows.</p>
rant thing was at the end of the show. As he moved into more markets, the show began to be less about interviewing sports folks and more about Rome. Eventually, it grew into the $%$#+#*+!!% that is now is. You know, I really don't give a rat's *** what "Dave in Buffalo" or "Raider Fan" or "Phil Dog" thinks. Give me information about the Lakers from the players, coaches, and beat writers... not some hapless schmuck who's calling in because his mom didn't wash enough underpants for him to leave the house today.
....he's boring. Absolutely boring. Long pauses between mundane sentences make me change the channel. And on top of the unforgivable sin... he usually comes off as an *******. I thought it was a good thing for ESPN Radio when he left.
I'm not sure Mike Tirico is a huge step up, but at least he's likable
I'm not sure Mike Tirico is a huge step up, but at least he's likable
RebelBruiser said:
And you don't think that got the attention of listeners all across the fruited plain? As in, Mississippi? Is he serious?
rexxx said:
You must be from Hogville. That's the mantra over there. Of course, the other mantra is that his team would always play uninspired in bowl games, leading to losses, which obviously was the case last week.