11 Most Dangerous Non BCS Teams

[CK Sooner]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=fearless/080905

:eek:

[boomrsoonr]

Well crap, now I'm skeered!

[SteelClip49]

What a difference it makes between 2005 and 2008. Considering how mediocre OU was in 2005, TCU winning ended up not being that bad considering TCU going 11-1. But yes, a loss to a mid-major will always sting. TCU may be good but they are not Oklahoma good. I don't think OU scores over 50...but they very well could. If TCU is as good as they claim to be then I give them a slim chance to make it competitive up til halftime.

OU 48 TCU 21 I hope I am wrong and it's a lot worse.

[badger]

Ja, I saw this back when I called OSU bullies for scheduling all sorts of non-BCS opponents (to which a kind OSU fan said they weren't bullies because they let the non-BCS teams beat them, lolz).

I have long been a fan of the Bottom 10 on ESPN.com. It is wondeful to see some of these "fearless" teams move out of the Bottom 10 and onto bowl eligibility after being the BCS' beyonce opponent for so long.

[soonerpike697]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=fearless/080905

:eek:

Wonder why Michigan wasn't listed as one of Utah's victims...

[badger]

Wonder why Michigan wasn't listed as one of Utah's victims...

1998-2007 only

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I think this team may be a bit better than the team that started out in 2005....remember needing a big run from AD to put Tulsa away?

[StormySooner-IN]

yea..come on.

at one point we were 0-12 in 2005.

;)

[goingoneight]

2005 was an absolute clusterfark to say it nicely.

The young guys on what was said to be THE YOUNGEST team in the NCAA came into the game all hot-headed and out-of-control. There was no leadership, no drive, and certainly no big game experience at that point for guys like Manuel Johnson, Juaqin Iglesias, Quentin Chaney, Nic Harris and a slew of other guys who are at this point no longer with us, but you get the picture. Neither of OUr QBs had played a significant down of college football yet.
We came out flat, both offensively and defensively, and soon found that "turning it on" isn't exactly easy with what we had to offer. The only guy doing much of anything for us was AD, who was in that game injured and held to a career worst game. We were pretty much lucky he sprung free for the touchdown in the second half, and Fumbles McBigRed fumbled away snaps left and right, eventually TCU made the most of all the ridiculously easy oppurtunities to score and take the game.

This team, for a lot of reasons should pwn TCU.
1. Sam Bradford... if not for numbers, efficiency and the like... hes experienced, way smarter and more prepared than PT and Bomar were, NTM the receiving corps is no longer a bunch of green n00bs dropping passes, but an elite corps with tons of starts among them and plenty of depth, unlike the TWO returning WRs we had in 2005.
2. Motivation... the Sooner senior class of 2008 opened their careers, on their home field, their very first game, their very first OOC opponent against this program, and lost a game that has been a monkey on their back since the strike of triple zeros September 5, 2005. Imagine if you will how badly we'd pour it on Boise State if they were a'coming into Norman this weekend. About as bad as we poured it on :les: in 2003 for his snide remarks and cocky approach to the Bed-lame matchup.
3. The crowd won't have the life sucked out of them AT ALL. No matter how good or bad the situation appears to be, OUr fans are extremely rowdy when they want to win, and this doesn't bode well for just a "meh" offense that TCU's bringing to town.
4. They want no part of choking early like we did last year at Colorado. People were pointing fingers left and right for the loss at Boulder, but the team realizes that truthfully, elite teams go into situations like that and lay the hammer down. Washington may be bad, but they're not as bad as we made them look this weekend. And this with a defense that's "not quite there yet" according to Stoops. At 3-0, there's plenty of motivation and reason to get in, get it done and get out.
5. Barring major injury, we're just flat-out better than TCU this year. We're deeper, faster, more talented and solid a football team. I think we all agree that on this team there's only one injury really that would spell disaster, and against an opponent quality, but not great-great as TCU... the No. 2 guy should be able and ready to hold his own this year.

[StoopTroup]

They are not to be overlooked IMO.

They have snuck into the Top 25 and I for one am happy with that.

I hope we dispatch them quickly and that they continue to win after the loss.

I hold them no ill will for the 17-10 thing.

I just don't want them thinking they can do it again...ever.

[VA Sooner]

Definitely not a team to be overlooked. TCU doesn't have their all-American lineman this year but still will be ready to play to try to repeat an upset. This will be a good workout for the defense. Go get 'em boys!

[85sooners]

:gary:

[CK Sooner]

:gary:

:texan: :gary:

[SicEmBaylor]

Whoever wrote that is clearly a moron and, more to the point, a d*****bag.

I'd like to lynch the next person who questions Baylor's placement in the Big XII over TCU's. There are other schools besides us that would have been a better fit (Arkansas), but NOT TCU. At the time the Big XII was formed, Baylor was clearly the stronger football power in the SWC behind UT and Aggie (I'd say we and Tech were about equal). They have clearly been more successful out of the BCS than we have while in it, but this claim that TCU should have been included originally is absurd.

Plus, the ONLY thing that TCU has over Baylor athletically is football. They aren't anywhere near as successful or competitive as we are in any of the other sports. You'd be gaining a marginally better football school while losing Baylor's competitiveness and national success in other sports.

Have you people ever met a TCU fan? They're fairies.

[FroggyStyle22]

Sic 'em calling someone else a fairy? Too ironic for words.

I believe we are competitive in baseball and track.

However, I agree at the time Baylor was a better choice. I just think that they should not be there either.

[yermom]

i haven't dug that deeply, but he doesn't even have all the facts right. Fresno didn't beat CU in 2001, that was CSU

[bri]

Here's my one gripe about articles like this: They're disingenuous. For the most part, these teams haven't beaten "BCS teams" but rather the bottom feeders from BCS conferences that will NEVER sniff a BCS bowl. To wit, of TCU's 14 "BCS victims" only two have acutally participated in the Bowl Championship Series - OU and USC.

It's a crock of sh*t on par with saying that some second-place MAC team jumping up and beating a disinterested sixth- or seventh-place "power conference" team with a .500 record in a bowl game "proves" that mid-majors are just as good. My second-favorite team is a mid-major, and I have no illusions about the disparity in resources, talent, support, etc between a C-USA team and a Big 12 or SEC team.

[8timechamps]

I think of the BCS the same way I think of Valentines Day. A manufactured event that benefits one group. Valentines Day benefits the card companies, and the BCS benefits the NCAA.

If this jackwad looked at the pre-BCS stats, the article would be useless (not that it's not anyway).

[8timechamps]

My second-favorite team is a mid-major, and I have no illusions about the disparity in resources, talent, support, etc between a C-USA team and a Big 12 or SEC team.

I didn't know you were a Tulane fan?!

[bri]

I wish I could shatter your monitor from the inside and stab you in the eyes for that. :mad: :D

[8timechamps]

I wish I could shatter your monitor from the inside and stab you in the eyes for that. :mad: :D

GO GREEN WAVE!

[bri]

STABBY!!!

[StoopTroup]

LMAO!