Lone Star Conference Rematch

[Firebird]

WTAMU took care of business against Central Washington today, setting up a rematch of the LSC title tilt in Abilene next week. In the other 1st round region 4 game, Pitt State advances to face Northwest Missouri State.

I have harped on this before, but would like to again for all you people salivating over a playoff for division IA. ACU beat WTAMU once already to win the conference title, and NW Missouri beat down Pitt State for the conference crown in the MIAA. Now those wins are essentially meaningless, which to my mind is ridiculous. Why even bother with playing a conference schedule?

In any event, I am glad that WTAMU gave up 42 points to CWU, which was a team inferior in most every respect to ACU. Billy Malone is healthy and the team is rested, so I still have to think that ACU gets it done again against a Buff team whose defense is not all it was cracked up to be at the beginning of the year. If they come out without rust and play mistake-free ball, we'll see another game in Abilene.

[Maroondog]

You got a good point but I'd still rather see the title won on the field in a playoff than by some flawed set of calculations in a computer program.
The only way to keep this scenario from occuring is to only allow one representative from a given conf. into the tournament.
But, even with the current set up, ACU and WTAMU should not meet until the semis at the earliest. I believe that is a flaw in the way the matchups are determined. However, I also realize that would cause heartburn for the powers that be in that a conference rematch in the semis is not what THEY want to see.

ACU on home turf wins it.

[slorch]

WTAMU took care of business against Central Washington today, setting up a rematch of the LSC title tilt in Abilene next week. In the other 1st round region 4 game, Pitt State advances to face Northwest Missouri State.

I have harped on this before, but would like to again for all you people salivating over a playoff for division IA. ACU beat WTAMU once already to win the conference title, and NW Missouri beat down Pitt State for the conference crown in the MIAA. Now those wins are essentially meaningless, which to my mind is ridiculous. Why even bother with playing a conference schedule?

In any event, I am glad that WTAMU gave up 42 points to CWU, which was a team inferior in most every respect to ACU. Billy Malone is healthy and the team is rested, so I still have to think that ACU gets it done again against a Buff team whose defense is not all it was cracked up to be at the beginning of the year. If they come out without rust and play mistake-free ball, we'll see another game in Abilene.


shut up and win your game.;):D

happens in high school and in pros all of the time.

[RocklandDragon]

shut up and win your game.;):D

happens in high school and in pros all of the time.

Look what happened to Dallas last year.

They defeated the Giants twice last year, but lost the game that mattered more.

It is the way of the playoffs. Dallas had the better record. Dallas had the home-field but lost. Even though those evil Giants were the beneficiaries of a wild-card system, I think they are worthy champions and defeated great teams for their run to a SuperBowl. They earned it on the field...not through computers.

Same thing goes for ACU. They defeated WTAMU before? Why not defeat them again? Seeding should be better for this, however than regional setups (but I understand they do this because of costs of travel). D-II has the right idea where the "wild card team" has to play an extra game and then travel to hostile territory. WTAMU and ACU should be on opposite sides of the bracket but it is what it is.

[Firebird]

Look what happened to Dallas last year.

They defeated the Giants twice last year, but lost the game that mattered more.

It is the way of the playoffs. Dallas had the better record. Dallas had the home-field but lost. Even though those evil Giants were the beneficiaries of a wild-card system, I think they are worthy champions and defeated great teams for their run to a SuperBowl. They earned it on the field...not through computers.

Same thing goes for ACU. They defeated WTAMU before? Why not defeat them again? Seeding should be better for this, however than regional setups (but I understand they do this because of costs of travel). D-II has the right idea where the "wild card team" has to play an extra game and then travel to hostile territory. WTAMU and ACU should be on opposite sides of the bracket but it is what it is.

Only four DII teams this year made it through the season without a loss. Why should those teams now have to clear another hurdle, giving teams that didn't play as well in the regular season another bite on the apple.

You and slorch say that ACU needs to earn it on the field, I say that WTAMU should have earned it on the field already and not be given another shot at something they failed at the first time. ACU already earned it on the field. But apparently, you can't earn anything in October or September.:rolleyes:

[RocklandDragon]

Only four DII teams this year made it through the season without a loss. Why should those teams now have to clear another hurdle, giving teams that didn't play as well in the regular season another bite on the apple.

You and slorch say that ACU needs to earn it on the field, I say that WTAMU should have earned it on the field already and not be given another shot at something they failed at the first time. ACU already earned it on the field. But apparently, you can't earn anything in October or September.:rolleyes:

Sorry, Firebird. It's just the way it goes. They beat them before and now they have to do it again. They earned their conference championship (pratically) in September and October and got a bye and home game. To earn the National Championship they must play WTAMU again.

In the 2007 Texas HS season, Odessa Permian defeated Euless Trinity in a non-district game. Well as matchups would have it, Permian had to play Trinity again in the playoffs, where Trinity was victorious. Sucks that Permian had already defeated Trinity but they had to beat them again in the playoffs in order to advance. Of course, Euless Trinity became State Champs. They earned it and had to play the team that gave them their defeat.

[RocklandDragon]

It seems to me that you would rather have only the Conference Champ in the playoffs.

That's a fair point.

But you were also emphasizing that there is 4 undefeated teams in D-II. Is that what you would rather have? Just the undefeated teams in a playoff? What about stronger conferences where a team might lose a game but is better than some of these undefeated schools from weaker conferences?

That is why I'm glad they have a playoff in D-II.

My only issue is with the placement of teams. Like I said before WTAMU and ACU should be on opposite sides of the bracket.

[slorch]

Only four DII teams this year made it through the season without a loss. Why should those teams now have to clear another hurdle, giving teams that didn't play as well in the regular season another bite on the apple.

You and slorch say that ACU needs to earn it on the field, I say that WTAMU should have earned it on the field already and not be given another shot at something they failed at the first time. ACU already earned it on the field. But apparently, you can't earn anything in October or September.:rolleyes:

they received a better seed, no?

who's to say one team didn't have one or more of their stars for the earlier game? If ACU was missing their stud RB and lost to WT in the first game, I am pretty sure you would be relishing another shot at the Buffs...

maybe weather played a role.

maybe one team has improved or grasped the coach's philosophy better.

There's any number of factors that legitimize playing again.

ACU received the better seed and thus, the easier opponent in the first round. The LSC is a great conference and it is a complement to the quality of play that they have 2 teams in the postseason. Their paths have to cross again if they keep winning.

If there is anything I would change is that I would put the lower seeded team of a conference in a spot in the bracket where they wouldn't play until the final 4 or so. texas high school brackets are set up where two teams from the same district cannot meet until quarterfinals. I agree with that set up.

[Firebird]

Sorry, Firebird. It's just the way it goes. They beat them before and now they have to do it again. They earned their conference championship (pratically) in September and October and got a bye and home game. To earn the National Championship they must play WTAMU again.

In the 2007 Texas HS season, Odessa Permian defeated Euless Trinity in a non-district game. Well as matchups would have it, Permian had to play Trinity again in the playoffs, where Trinity was victorious. Sucks that Permian had already defeated Trinity but they had to beat them again in the playoffs in order to advance. Of course, Euless Trinity became State Champs. They earned it and had to play the team that gave them their defeat.


I don't mind too much having to play the MIAA champ NW Missouri again, as at least they won the conference. I look at the POs the same way, as it doesn't bug me too much to play someone from a different district, even if my team already beat them. I'd rather not to, but thems the breaks.

But it bugs the crap out of me to have to play a conference foe. It is not parallel to the Permian--ET game, but rather as if Permian had to play Abilene again in the playoffs. Then again, I have complained to no end about letting multiple district champs in the playoffs.

It was BS that Dallas was asked to play a division foe that they handled in the regular season.

[Firebird]

they received a better seed, no?

who's to say one team didn't have one or more of their stars for the earlier game?

maybe weather played a role.

maybe one team has improved or grasped the coach's philosophy better.

There's any number of factors that legitimize playing again.

ACU received the better seed and thus, the easier opponent in the first round. The LSC is a great conference and it is a complement to the quality of play that they have 2 teams in the postseason. Their paths have to cross again if they keep winning.

If there is anything I would change is that I would put the lower seeded team of a conference in a spot in the bracket where they wouldn't play until the final 4 or so. texas high school brackets are set up where two teams from the same district cannot meet until quarterfinals. I agree with that set up.

I think that Texas should get another shot at Tech.:rolleyes:

There is no legitimate reason to play again. All of the reasons that you mentioned could just as easily be an excuse ACU could toss out should they use.

[slorch]

I think that Texas should get another shot at Tech.:rolleyes:

There is no legitimate reason to play again. All of the reasons that you mentioned could just as easily be an excuse ACU could toss out should they use.

I knew you would bring it up, and I wish you could have heard me talking to all of my familoy and buddies this past week.

I have been hoping for a rematch with UT. I'm sick of the doubt and lack of acknowlegment that Tech kicked their *****. let's do it again.

I want the best teams to play in the playoffs. i think it sucks that two very strong teams from the Big XII will be left out of the BCS just because of what conference they play in.

You seem to favor a beurocratic solution with numerical limits.( 1 team per Conference)

I want the best teams to play. I'd freaking love another shot at Texas.

[RocklandDragon]

I don't mind too much having to play the MIAA champ NW Missouri again, as at least they won the conference. I look at the POs the same way, as it doesn't bug me too much to play someone from a different district, even if my team already beat them. I'd rather not to, but thems the breaks.

But it bugs the crap out of me to have to play a conference foe. It is not parallel to the Permian--ET game, but rather as if Permian had to play Abilene again in the playoffs. Then again, I have complained to no end about letting multiple district champs in the playoffs.

It was BS that Dallas was asked to play a division foe that they handled in the regular season.

Ok...go to 1983, 1984, and 1991 where Midland Lee and Odessa Permian had to play against each other in the Regional Final.

1983--Lee defeated Permian in the regular season but faced them again in the playoffs where Lee was victorious.

1984--Odessa Permian defeated Lee in the regular season and defeated Lee in the playoffs in a squeaker (15 to 14).

1991--Odessa Permian shutout Midland Lee in the regular season. Permian had given Lee their only loss and now had to face Midland Lee in the Regional Final. Permian won again, 35-7.

It happens. A district or conference can field two strong teams and can be better than district or conference champs.

[Firebird]

I knew you would bring it up, and I wish you could have heard me talking to all of my familoy and buddies this past week.

I have been hoping for a rematch with UT. I'm sick of the doubt and lack of acknowlegment that Tech kicked their *****. let's do it again.

I want the best teams to play in the playoffs. i think it sucks that two very strong teams from the Big XII will be left out of the BCS just because of what conference they play in.

You seem to favor a beurocratic solution with numerical limits.( 1 team per Conference)

I want the best teams to play. I'd freaking love another shot at Texas.


How many times have we heard that th 5A Texas playoffs let too many schools in. Sorry for caring about the regular season. I think that teams should have to play well all year, not just time it to get hot at PO time.

[slorch]

How many times have we heard that th 5A Texas playoffs let too many schools in. Sorry for caring about the regular season. I think that teams should have to play well all year, not just time it to get hot at PO time.

I think everyone could agree that the old way of having one team in the playoffs sucked in Texas High school football. Four teams is too many, in my opinion.

Your position on this whole situation is pointless. Just win the freaking games ahead of you and acknoewledge the fact that the LSC is good enough to deserve 2 teams in the POs. You come across as if you feel like ACU got lucky in the first game. why else would you not want to play someone that you soundly defeated already?

Sometimes you're quite the wimp...;):D

[Firebird]

I think everyone could agree that the old way of having one team in the playoffs sucked in Texas High school football. Four teams is too many, in my opinion.

Your position on this whole situation is pointless. Just win the freaking games ahead of you and acknoewledge the fact that the LSC is good enough to deserve 2 teams in the POs. You come across as if you feel like ACU got lucky in the first game. why else would you not want to play someone that you soundly defeated already?

Sometimes you're quite the wimp...;):D

So rewarding regular season excellence is now the wimpy way out? When did we agree that the old way sucked? I personally believe that excellence should be rewarded. Second place is the first loser. If you can't win your league, you don't deserve the shot at a bigger crown.

[slorch]

So rewarding regular season excellence is now the wimpy way out? When did we agree that the old way sucked? I personally believe that excellence should be rewarded. Second place is the first loser. If you can't win your league, you don't deserve the shot at a bigger crown.

you're not changing my mind...

I'd have to get with Wos87, but plenty of teams have won state titles that did not win their district in Texas high school football. Basketball is chock full of teams that didn't win District, but they won in the regional finals and went to State.

Lots of teams in the 70's and 80's got screwed out of a chance for the playoffs because of a freak injury or because they were young and developed late in the season.

the excellence is being rewarded. The NCAA recognized ACU's season with a top seed. they recognized the value of the conference they play in and gave an at-large bid to WT. Why is that bad?

The only part I will agree on is that they shouldn't meet until later, but WT absolurtely deserves to be in the tourney.

[Firebird]

you're not changing my mind...

I'd have to get with Wos87, but plenty of teams have won state titles that did not win their district in Texas high school football. Basketball is chock full of teams that didn't win District, but they won in the regional finals and went to State.

Lots of teams in the 70's and 80's got screwed out of a chance for the playoffs because of a freak injury or because they were young and developed late in the season.

the excellence is being rewarded. The NCAA recognized ACU's season with a top seed. they recognized the value of the conference they play in and gave an at-large bid to WT. Why is that bad?

The only part I will agree on is that they shouldn't meet until later, but WT absolurtely deserves to be in the tourney.

I would gladly have conceded last year that ACU should miss the POs for not winning the conference. Not to say that as I fan I wasn't glad they got in under the current system, but I firmly believe that you should have to win your league. Your points about being young and developing or injuries go to prove my point. The PO system doesn't reward the best team, it rewards the hottest team. I want the best team, the team that sustained excellence right out of the gate, to be rewarded.

For instance, Billy Malone broke his thumb after beating WTAMU. Luckily he is back and hopefully he is 100%. But according to your logic, it is better to give WTAMU another shot at ACU since they didn't have Keithon Fleming 100% the first go round. But now that Malone might not be 100%, WTAMU gets another shot at ACU, only this time ACU will get no second chance. If you have a star get injured in the middle of the season, no problemo, you can have another shot. But if your star gets injured late or in the POs, then you don't get another shot. That argument makes no sense at all. Again, why even play the regular season?

Baseball and basketball are completely different animals. HS football was better when only the district champ got to play for a ring and NCAA would be better that way. Injuries, having a young team, etc., are all part of the game and it isn't fair to the teams that are able to be good all year long to give teams that took part of the year off a chance at redemption. They should have to take care of business the first time around. Nobody gets "screwed" out of the playoffs when only a league champ advances. In fact, that's the only way to avoid the controversy. Win you league or don't complain.

[slorch]

I'm going to start a poll in the high school board about which format people prefer. we'll see what other fans think.

I know a lot of good second place teams could have made great runs in the POs back then if they had today's format.

[Firebird]

I'm going to start a poll in the high school board about which format people prefer. we'll see what other fans think.

I know a lot of good second place teams could have made great runs in the POs back then if they had today's format.

Maybe so. That argument worked, so we let in 2nd place teams. Then people started talking about how some 3rd place teams could really do well, so we let them in. Then......

It's only a matter of time before a 4th place team wins a state championship and people start clamoring to let in a fifth place team. Especally now that we have two state "championships."

You see where this goes. I don't like to hear the whining of what a 2nd place team "could do" if only they had a shot. They had a shot, it was called the regular season. Maybe the NCAA should give the losers a consolation bracket or something.