Scouting TCU Thread

Submitted by hart20 on December 3rd, 2011 at 3:20 PM

So Houston is confirming what we all knew: They suck. As in they're really, really bad. Barring the unforeseeable, Houston is going to lose and that means we'll be playing #18 TCU in the Sugar Bowl. 

I haven't watched much of TCU this season so I know nothing of their strengths or weaknesses. To those who have watched TCU this season, please elaborate on their playing style, what they're good at, what they're bad at, etc.

The UNLV-TCU game is on Versus. Here's a link for those without Versus:




December 3rd, 2011 at 3:29 PM ^

"TCU: If TCU beats UNLV and Houston loses, the Horned Frogs only need to make the top 16 to be an automatic bid. Currently at #18, they can't depend on passing the Cougars nor on gaining any ground for their win over the Rebels, so they need a couple of teams above them to lose. Those teams could be: Wisconsin/Michigan State, Georgia, or Baylor. If Georgia and Baylor win, TCU is out of luck—even a Kansas State loss probably doesn't help. Then they'd be dependant on a longshot Boise State loss, as the Broncos would tumble and logically fall below the Horned Frogs, who beat them earlier. Suffice it to say TCU should be rooting primarily for LSU to beat Georgia, and Houston to lose."

So its far from concrete. They still need a couple of losses, and if The B1G & SEC champ games are close, they might not make it regardless.

Avant's Hands

December 3rd, 2011 at 3:29 PM ^

I have watched TCU play Baylor and Boise this season. The defense is no where near where it has been the last 5 years, although their one LB is still a beast. On offense, they lost their top playmaker in Kerley, but Wesley is good as we just saw on the punt return. The QB is young. I have gotten the impression that he has talent, but is very raw. He can really toss it around and make plays with his legs at times.


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:35 PM ^

He's got Michigan as about a 5 point favorite vs. TCU. That line would have been 4 vs. Houston, and will be 11 or 12 if Michigan draws West Virginia.


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:35 PM ^

TCU needs to be No. 12 or better in the final BCS standings to get an auto-bid.  That's not a given. 

We could very well play Kansas State, or even Okie State, depending on how today's games go. 



December 3rd, 2011 at 3:47 PM ^

OK, that's right, due to the horrorshow that is the Big East.  Here are the rules:


3. The champion of Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference, or the Western Athletic Conference will earn an automatic berth in a BCS bowl game if either:

  A. Such team is ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS Standings, or,
  B. Such team is ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS Standings and its ranking in the final BCS Standings is higher than that of a champion of a conference that has an annual automatic berth in one of the BCS bowls.



December 3rd, 2011 at 4:54 PM ^

Houston essentially represented "Non-AQ BCS team".  If it's not Houston, it's the next non-AQ team in line because the Big East sucks so much.  So Houston's "slot" in the BCS is still going to be taken by (probably TCU).

Which takes us back to why we were rooting for Georgia in the first place.  In part it was to get to the top 14, but it was also so that they wouldn't force LSU to take a BCS at-large spot.

The concern at this point after Houston has lost (and they will drop behind us for sure) isn't the top 14, it's whether there will be an at-large spot available for us.


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:40 PM ^

There might be some merit to this BCS model after all as much as I hate to say it (key word: some).  If Houston got matched up with an SEC team in a playoff they would lose 100-0.  I have to imagine the same could be said of TCU this year if they're ranked so much lower. I'm not really worried about TCU if we get them.


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:41 PM ^

So maybe I'm a bit confused, but why wouldn't Boise also be an option?  They are the higher-ranked non-AQ team, and a match-up with UM would be pretty attractive.  I'm sure there are factors beyond that, but it seems weird that TCU is the presumed choice if Boise is out there.  Of course, I'm probably missing something, so please correct/forgive my ignorance.


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:42 PM ^

Now that Houston is out, do we really need LSU to win? It was my understanding that we were going to be one of a few at large teams in the BCS, along with Houston. But not that Houston lost, wouldn't we just take their spot?


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:49 PM ^

I think the computers might not drop Houston enough to to make them fall out of the top 14. They have pretty good computer numbers, and even though this loss makes them look "exposed", the computers will probably keep them top 14.

It's about even money whether they drop below Michigan with this loss.


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:51 PM ^

If Georgia wins, SEC will get three BCS bids, almost certainly (loophole involving the #1 and #2 teams being from the same conference and not the champions of that conference). That leaves seven more slots.

1. Oregon (Pac 12 Champ)
2. ACC champ
3. Big East Champ
4. Big 12 Champ
5. B1G champ

Therefore, we only get two more at-large bids.

First one almost certainly goes to Stanford, unless they somehow fall out of the top 4 in the final standings (even then, they're likely to get one).

That only leaves one slot, which would have to go to TCU if they're #16 or higher in the final standings. Crazy auto-bid rule.

Michigan gets left out in that scenario. If, on the other hand, LSU loses, you get one additional at-large bid, which probably goes to Michigan.


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:49 PM ^

Here's the deal.

Assuming TCU gets into the top 16 and bama stays #2, there are only 2 at large spots because there are 6 auto bids, TCU and bama. 

The Sugar would get the first pick and everyone believes they would take us.  Fiesta then will choose Stanford.  Then Sugar picks again, they have a choice of TCU and the Big East champ likely West Virginia.  Why do people assume they will choose TCU?  I assume distance?


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:52 PM ^

Just curious as to why it wouldn't be Boise St.  Houston was 6th in the BCS and Boise St. is 7th.  With Houston losing, you would think Boise St would at least move up to their spot, and possibly higher since Okie St and Va Tech each have a game to play yet and are ahead of them.  Couldn't they snag an at-large bid yet?


December 3rd, 2011 at 4:17 PM ^

I know the Mountain West isn't an auto-bid, which is what kinda creates this dilemma.  TCU may win their conference while Boise is only runner up,  but being ranked #6 in the nation is more attractive than #16.  They say we have to be #14 for an at-large, but TCU can get in being ranked #16, despite playing in a weaker conference.  I would just think Boise should get an at-large over TCU because of the polls.  It's similar to us and Sparty should Sparty lose to Wisky in the B10 Championship.  They beat us and finished ahead of us in the Conference, but they had one more loss than us and we finshed ranked higher so we get BCS...


December 3rd, 2011 at 3:52 PM ^

assumes a Sugar Bowl bid if we play in the BCS.   There is still a possibility of a Fiesta Bowl bid if we qualify for a BCS bowl.  It all is going to depend on how the rankings shake out and which match ups will be the most attrractive for at large BCS bids.  The Fiesta bowl people were at the Nebraska game and the Sugar bowl people never made it to a game.  I don't know if that means anything.


December 3rd, 2011 at 4:03 PM ^

And TCU is a worst case bowl match-up scenario, because it's truly the no credit to win, crap if you lose game, like Houston...except that, unlike Houston, TCU is good and would be a much harder game to win.