December 13, 2005
SEC Leads Nation in Football Attendance
According to the NCAA statistics for attendance (pdf file), the SEC lead the nation in total football attendance for 2005.
In 2005, a total of 5,593,699 fans attended 75 games hosted at SEC institutions, an average of 74,583 fans per game, which is also best in the nation. SEC stadiums were filled to 97.43 percent of capacity for each home game in 2005, which was also best in the nation. The SEC has led the nation in percentage of capacity since the statistic was first kept in 1983.
| Conference | G | Total Attendance | Total Capacity | Average | Percentage |
| SEC | 75 | 5,593,699 | 5,741,371 | 74,583 | 97.43 |
| Big 12 | 72 | 4,204,574 | 4,425,186 | 58,397 | 95.01 |
| Big Ten | 69 | 5,007,067 | 5,333,226 | 72,566 | 93.88 |
| ACC | 72 | 3,762,511 | 4,150,596 | 52,257 | 90.65 |
| Pac-10 | 60 | 3,448,759 | 4,063,411 | 57,479 | 84.87 |
| Big East | 46 | 1,812,406 | 2,170,505 | 39,400 | 83.50 |
| Mountain West | 48 | 1,693,216 | 2,154,584 | 35,275 | 78.59 |
| SEC School | G | Total Attendance | Total Capacity | Average | Percentage |
| Alabama | 7 | 567,126 | 567,126 | 81,018 | 100.0 |
| Arkansas | 6 | 382,070 | 395,454 | 63,678 | 96.6 |
| Auburn | 7 | 589,124 | 612,157 | 84,160 | 96.2 |
| Florida | 6 | 542,435 | 531,288 | 90,406 | 102.1 |
| Georgia | 6 | 556,476 | 556,476 | 92,746 | 100.0 |
| Kentucky | 6 | 374,697 | 405,636 | 62,450 | 92.4 |
| LSU | 6 | 549,480 | 554,400 | 91,580 | 99.1 |
| Ole Miss | 6 | 325,348 | 363,480 | 54,225 | 89.5 |
| Miss. State | 6 | 286,127 | 330,492 | 47,687 | 86.6 |
| South Carolina | 7 | 559,071 | 561,750 | 79,867 | 99.5 |
| Tennessee | 6 | 645,558 | 624,474 | 107,593 | 103.4 |
| Vanderbilt | 6 | 216,187 | 238,638 | 36,031 | 90.6 |
| TOTALS | 75 | 5,593,699 | 5,741,371 | 74,583 | 97.43 |
It's also interesting to note that while a few schools had lower overall attendance, Rice had the largest percentage of empty seats, filling just over 14% of their seats for home games.
Hat Tip: The greatness of EDSBS
Comments:
Gator Nation '96 said:
posted on December 13, 2005 2:54 PM — 152.163.100.139 — link — abuse?
Not only do we have the most fans in stands but we also have the loudest fans. The 3 loudest satdiums are from the SEC, 1. The Swamp, 2. Neyland stadium, 3. Death Valley. The SEC is the best confernce in the country. GO GATORS!!!!!!!!
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on December 13, 2005 3:17 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
Even I got to applaud the Southern fans. Greatest in the country for sure. No dispute here! It's just too bad that the rest of the country doesn't support their teams the way that they do down south. And, don't be hatin' on me just because I have been lovin' the Trojans since I was nine years old in 65'. Yep, I remember OJ and even Earl McCullough and Steve Sogge. So, I applaud the "real" fans from the South.
Tommie Trojan
Orson Swindle said:
posted on December 13, 2005 4:17 PM — 12.13.183.235 — link — abuse?
Thanks for the kind words.
Notre Dame Fan 444 said:
posted on December 14, 2005 9:40 AM — 199.208.239.140 — link — abuse?
Congrats to the SEC fans.........You are what makes college football great !!!! Looks like you need to build larger staduims........PAC 10& ACC where are you at ???
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on December 14, 2005 12:14 PM — 208.57.130.196 — link — abuse?
NOTaNole: I do think that you people are great fans. I just don't beleive that all of your teams are great every single year. I think some are great, some are good, and some are having a off year just like anybody else. I think that overall - SEC teams probably play a "little tougher" than most conference teams. I just think that the talent pool is watered down somewhat - therefore, no truly terrific teams at this time. That does not mean that there hasn't been any in the past - or that, there will not be any in the future. I take offense to the fact that all "southerners" beleive that west coast football is weak. Well, you can't really know, because of mostly geographical concerns I am sure, we just don't play each other very often. We could have the same mindset out here. I just like to throw it all back on ya'. What goes around comes around. What I see is two totally opposite strategies for playing the game. That's all. We like to "air it out" and you like to "pound the rock". Neither is a bad strategy. Most teams would like more balance. Some achieve that and some don't. The best teams, I beleive, will have balance.
Tommie Trojan
GOBOSOX said:
posted on December 14, 2005 8:30 PM — 71.12.14.156 — link — abuse?
Yes, the SEC leads the country yet again in football attendance. But all football is not in the ACC. Remember Clemson in the heart of SEC country. They sell a lot or most of their tickets. FSU too. And we can't forget VT either. In my opinion Clemson is the loudest stadium in the ACC (especially this year against Miami, gahlee it was so loud in there. I'm glad I wasn't on Miami's team. It was a great atmosphere to view a game for a neutral fan, it had an even better ending, 3 OTs in UM win.) Clemson def. beat any Big 10 or SEC team that day. I hoe to see more loud stadiums in the future.
ItsGettingHotInEER said:
posted on December 15, 2005 8:49 AM — 205.188.116.199 — link — abuse?
No, that dosn't proove that the SEC is the best conference, that just means there is nothing else to do in the south then go to a football game. They do not have a lot of other options other then football.
Fan of the Game said:
posted on December 15, 2005 1:12 PM — 12.43.234.14 — link — abuse?
I have to applaud the fans of the SEC as well. It is the great fan support that these teams receive that helps to keep programs and traditions strong. Oh there is no doubt that every team has fans who go to the extreme and would rather cause trouble than actually watch the game, but those people aren't the majority. The majority lives and breathes it's football and it's why the rest of the country views football as a sport and we Southerners view it more as a religion. Again, my congratulations to the fans of the SEC and to all fans who share the same passion for the game. Happy Hollidays!!
GA Boy said:
posted on December 16, 2005 10:30 PM — 66.110.197.20 — link — abuse?
ItsgettinghotinERR. Are you kidding or what? Atlanta is the gateway to the South. There is tons to do in the South. You'll see if you come down here for the Sugar Bowl.
It just shocks me that you would say something about the South. I guess you don't have a TV to watch in your shante up in Booger Holler West VA. I was going to be nice about the Sugar match up, but hey, you started it. GO DAWGS!!!!Bleed Crimson said:
posted on December 19, 2005 11:20 PM — 65.4.30.159 — link — abuse?
I just love it how alabama fills up every game
Thats why were adding 10,000 seats for next season
91,000 capacity baby--not to mention-two new jumbotrons and a huge glass building in the front--its gonna look better than some pro stadiums and a hell of alot better than auburn's
Alabama-100% attendance
Auburn-96.2% attendance
(at least we beat yall in something every year and thats loyalty of the fans)BigSoonerFan said:
posted on January 5, 2006 10:40 AM — 24.253.232.168 — link — abuse?
A break down on the Big 12 stadium capacities. I have now been to all twelve stadiums, in my opinon, Kyle field is the nicest one in the big 12 and OUs Memorial Stadium is second. Baylor would come in last place, I have seen nicer and bigger High School Stadiums. Nicest fans would go to Nebraska and the worst would be K-State. Just my opion...The following are listed in no particular order.
KSU Wagner field 50,000
KU Memorial Stadium 50,250
Baylor Floyd Casey Stadium 50,000
Colorado Folsum Field 51,655
Iowa St. Jack Trice Stadium 43,000
Nebraska Memorial Stadium 74,031
OU Gaylord Memorial Stadium 84,943
OSU Boone Pickens Stadium 48,000
Texas Royal-Memorial Stadium 80,082
Texas A&M Kyle Field 86,128
Texas Tech Jones Stadium 52,702
Missouri Memorial Stadium 62,000goooodawgssicem said:
posted on January 23, 2006 1:15 PM — 68.67.96.38 — link — abuse?
ok SEC is obviously the best conference year after year, including the loudest stadiums. look at it. you got LSu's tiger stadium, the swamp, sanford stadium, neyland, its no challenge. theres just so much competition in the sec and thats why theres usually not a standout #1 team. because theyre all good.
wareagle524 said:
posted on April 27, 2006 7:04 PM — 63.162.187.111 — link — abuse?
Bleed Crimson says:
posted on December 19, 2005 11:20 PM — link
I just love it how alabama fills up every gameThats why were adding 10,000 seats for next season
91,000 capacity baby--not to mention-two new jumbotrons and a huge glass building in the front--its gonna look better than some pro stadiums and a hell of alot better than auburn's
Alabama-100% attendance
Auburn-96.2% attendance
(at least we beat yall in something every year and thats loyalty of the fans)
And only 10% went to school there!Elliot Daverty said:
posted on May 4, 2006 9:02 AM — 202.65.159.54 — link — abuse?
I totally agree with what you're saying. I wish more people felt this way and took the time to express themselves. Keep up the great
work.
Elliot Davertywolverine fan said:
posted on May 23, 2006 6:59 PM — 129.101.155.10 — link — abuse?
Oh GROW UP! It's easy for the SEC to draw lots of fans when they play in such nice weather. If the SEC schools played under the same weather conditions as the Big Ten, I'm sure you'd see at least 2,000 people less per game (if only the elderly and young children who couldn't handle the harsh conditions) and the conferences would be equal. It's easy to pack the stadium in 70 degree weather but a packed Big House in sub-zero windchills and blizzard like conditions -- that's impressive! You shouldn't be able to call yourself a real football fan until you've had frostbite from staying to the last second of a Michigan vs. Ohio State game in late November. So let's have the statisticians control for weather and then see what the numbers look like...
wareagle524 said:
posted on May 24, 2006 7:33 PM — 63.162.187.150 — link — abuse?
hey wolverine...have you ever been to Alabama in August??? 96 degrees with 80%-85% humidity, thats not a dry heat. I think the elderly have just as much problem with the heat ie: heat stroke, heat exhaustion. I understand where you are coming from (I'm from the north) but that southern heat doesn't stop the fans...when northerners come to play in the south, a fair majority of their fans leave at halftime, to recover. Not a shot at you, just a thought.
Franko G said:
posted on May 25, 2006 10:29 AM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
Once again...another testament to the greatest conference. Look at the fan support in the South! People will say" Oh, it's because the weather is nice down there.." or "cuz there's nothing else to do.." Both are retarded assumptions. The heat can be pretty tough on teams and fans too. Last year Boise State heated their practice field to get used to the heat before their opening day game with Georgia..needlesss to say it didn't help them much! The Dawgs showed 'em what the South is all about. How bout a 48-13 good ole-fahsioned whooping!
and also, Look at the migration of northerners moving to the South...the South is the greatest part of the country. You got beaches, you got beautiful country, there are thriving cities throughout the South. you have nice people down here(unlike those damn yankees up in New York...theyre all bitter up there for some reason..), and also the South has, NO DOUBT, the best girls anywhere. They got that southern twang, they're sweet and better looking than anywhere else.
And of course, we got the best football, but that's always been a given.
AU03 said:
posted on May 25, 2006 1:13 PM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
You shouldn't be able to call yourself a real football fan until you've had frostbite from staying to the last second of a Michigan vs. Ohio State game in late November.
Let's hear a round of applause for WolverineFan, he's more of a college football fan than us, because he goes to games in the north, where it gets colder. Oh, excuse me, I'm NOT a college football fan because I only have been to games in the south.I think we should get him a trophy for being such a good sport about it. Somebody call John Edward- I think he still has that
"Biggest Douche in the Universe Award," perhaps we have found a new recipient.OU Fan said:
posted on May 25, 2006 11:28 PM — 207.119.209.226 — link — abuse?
The only reason SEC teams have more attendance than Big 12 teams is because of population. Texas has the largest population out of all the Big 12 states. The rest of the Big 12 states are have tiny populations compared to states in the SEC. And I agree with Wolverine Fan. Let all you Southerners go to a football game in 20 degree weather, and the SEC football game attendance will be cut in half, because Southerner's can't handle anything below 40 degress.
Tomcat said:
posted on May 26, 2006 1:57 AM — 69.150.49.47 — link — abuse?
I must agree with WE524. Ohio State is coming to Austin in September, last year in September it was 117 F in the shade. The opposing bench is in the sun.Due to T.V. you will get a break instead of 2:00 pm and 110 F it will be 7:00 pm and only about 99 F cooling off to about 92 F after dark.
Cramps and exhaustion will take its toll on players and fans.
Every game in Austin is a sellout. Hookem-HornsAU03 said:
posted on May 26, 2006 9:23 AM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
And I agree with Wolverine Fan. Let all you Southerners go to a football game in 20 degree weather, and the SEC football game attendance will be cut in half, because Southerner's can't handle anything below 40 degress.
At the 2000 Iron Bowl, the temperature was around 34 and raining (just cold enough so it wouldn't snow), and the wind was blowing 10-15 MPH. While that isn't as cold as 20 degrees, you can also add the fact the the entire stadium ran out of hot water before halftime. If it were 15 at the the IRon Bowl, the stadium would STILL be packed. We cannot help the fact that the weather up there sucks.
The only reason SEC teams have more attendance than Big 12 teams is because of population. Texas has the largest population out of all the Big 12 states. The rest of the Big 12 states are have tiny populations compared to states in the SEC.
Hmm, let's see:
(Estimates, in millions by US Census, as of 7/1/05)SEC B12
AL 4.63 TX 21.49
GA 8.4 CO 4.47
SC 4.03 IA 2.94
AR 2.75 NB 1.76
LA 4.53 OK 3.49
TN 5.96 KS 2.76
KY 4.09 MO 5.72
FL 16.28Avg. pop. of SEC state- 6.33
B12 state- 6.09
Around 200k per state- not a big dealAlso, by your rationale, the PAC-10, Big East, and Big 10 should lead everyone, since their states have more people (ie. CA, NY, IL, etc).
Plus the physical size of an average Big 12 state is larger, making for longer travel times to games. I live in Birmingham, which is 45 mi from Tuscaloosa and about 90 mi from Auburn. On the other hand, say you are a Texas fan who lives in El Paso- that's a long drive.So Cal Clippers said:
posted on May 26, 2006 4:51 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
SEC over-hype? lest anyone take "attendance figures" to make any kind of direct coorelation or substantive claim about the "Best Conference" issue.
2005 - SEC, worst record among the 5 major conferneces. Rated 5th overall.So Cal Clippers said:
posted on May 26, 2006 5:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Population/census stuff -
The South = 100 Million
The Midwest = 60 Million
The West = 60 Million
The Northeast = 55 Million
(roughly, per the 2000 projected census)And not to get racial... dont know the exact brakedown among CFB athletes, but...
55% of all blacks live in The South
about 20% live in the Northeast
about 20% live in the Midwest
about 8% live in the WestI'm only sayin...
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on May 26, 2006 5:21 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Bama's at 96.6
Auburn's at 96.2
http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/2005/Internet/attendance/ia_attendance.htmlThe Mayor said:
posted on May 26, 2006 6:18 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
I'll take a cold rainy game over a hot humid game anyday!
Watching College Football at Sun Devil Stadium in Tempe in September is pure hell...I can't even imagine what it's like in the Southeast with the humidity.
As a Pac-10 fan, I for one am impressed with the SEC attendance figures.
I'd love to go to an Iron Bowl or the World's Largest Cocktail Party someday just to see what real college football tradition is all about.
The Mayor said:
posted on May 26, 2006 6:23 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clips
Thanks for the link!!!! Look who's number one in the nation for attendance in terms of capacity percentage...The Fighting Ducks of Oregon at 108.21% It must be the uniforms???
http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/2005/Internet/attendance/IA_CAPACITY.pdf
136 days
Tomcat said:
posted on May 26, 2006 10:40 PM — 69.152.136.237 — link — abuse?
Hey war eagle if you are from ohio and you come down here you would be considered a Yankee.All those attendance records also show that in some areas there are no professional teams as well. For example here in Texas there are only two pro teams, and there are Ten division 1-A college Teams. I think that the college game is more exciting and I dont have to drive for five hours to see a game live. In places like Ohio and Pennsylvania they have more NFL teams closer together. Hookem-Horns
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on May 27, 2006 3:27 PM — 204.62.107.217 — link — abuse?
Franko G, second part of Post #29; Uh oh, here we go...
"you have nice people" in the South -- uuuuuh, too may caveats to attacth to THAT statement.
New York-ians may be obnoxious loud-mouths, but its pretty ironic for the word "bitter" to be thrown out there by a guy from the SOUTH!
As for the chicks, take a tour of the PAC schools bro (Arizona St, UCLA, etc). Not just smokin but you get a variety.
Mooka said:
posted on May 27, 2006 11:48 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
What did I say about your stupid Conference stat? That stat doesn't prove the SEC doesn't have more powerhouses. Hey, even ask the 'experts' on ESPN who recently acknowledged SEC has the most powerhouses. For some weird reason you think The entire Conference has to have a good record. Well, SEC proved that wrong. I think were you get it twisted is most Conferences did mediocre at best all the way through, though the SEC has 1/2 their Conference tearing it up, and the other 1/2 losing just about every game they play. I'm sure you could see how that would bring the Conference as a whole down. What you need to recognize is the 1/2 of the Conference that is tearing it up aren't just winning at a mediocre level. They are actually kicking ass. While I see the average in most Conferences are at about 3 powerhouses, the SEC is pushing 6 powerhouses. Get your head outa your ass and shake the shit outa your ears. PAC-10 doesn't even have one powerhouse now that Bush and Leinhart are gone. Don't be mad, just jump on the band wagon. VRRRRRRMMMMMM, VVVVRRRRRMMMM, get ready for take off. Get with the program, or get left behind.
Mooka said:
posted on May 28, 2006 2:17 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Yea, I've seen the girls from PAC schools and you are right about variety...only if you don't mind a materialistic, unrealistic, wanna be rich, think their shit don't stink type of broad. That's about all the variety I've seen in LA and the likes. They are hot though.
wareagle524 said:
posted on May 30, 2006 4:23 PM — 63.162.186.219 — link — abuse?
South = hot temp/women!
Everyone knows it!As for ASU...a fair amount of those girls are from somewhere else.
I lived/worked in Tempe for 2 years and most the women I met would be from random places like Lincoln, Nebraska or somewhere in Oregon, or California...dont get me wrong they were as hot as the weather, but not born and raised like the southern girls are.So Cal Clippers said:
posted on May 31, 2006 6:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, I think we settled this issue (somewhat) on another thread, but... (just read this post)... you still seem to have things twisted a bit.
What I said in #37 stands alone - I said nothing about "powerhouse teams". SEC-er were stroking eachother, getting a bit carried away... I just reminded them that the even despite the attendence, the SEC was 5th in 2005
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on May 31, 2006 6:54 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, who said anything about "powerhouse teams"?
The SEC had the worst record (and was Rated 5th) among the major conferences in 2005. That statement stands alone.
These SEC-ers were stroking each-other way too much about their "attendances" that I heard...
... "ok SEC is obviously the best conference year after year"
... "Once again...another testament to the greatest conference. Look at the fan support in the South!"
... "And of course, we got the best football, but that's always been a given"just wanted to bring people back to reality - attendance is attendance, dont equate that with what happens on the field
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on May 31, 2006 7:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
My head is where?
Mooka, I've let you and FrankoG slide on the "powerhouse" description up til now: the SEC has SIX "powerhouse" teams?! really?! By what definition !!?!
I'd argue that in 2005 the SEC didnt even have ONE real powerhouse team! Not any.BTEN faced 5 Top 10* teams, (2-3)
XII faced 5 Top 10 teams (2-3)
ACC faced 5 Top 10 teams (1-4)
PAC faced 5 Top 10 teams (1-4)
SEC faced 3 Top 10 teams (0-3)
note: * based on the AP/Coaches polls, 3 teams tied for No. 9/10/11... this stuff isnt Voo-Doo, these scary "Stats" youre so afraid of are a reflection of WHAT HAPPENED in this CBF season!!! Am I supposed to draw pictures? And any data I post is germane to whatever the issue is; in support of whatever claim I'm making, or hype that I may be dispelling.
Mooka, so when YOU "saaaaay" something, is that supposed to be enough? just cause you "said" it, its Gospel? -- regardless of stats/data/results/reality/truth that may reflect otherwise? No offense but youre like a women, yapping and yapping... have something to stand on, dont be a flake. Back-up your shet.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 2, 2006 5:32 PM — 204.62.104.211 — link — abuse?
Rust, pay close attention: Every Conference ends up .500 against itself.
So, No, most of those losses were NOT against other SEC teams, its EXACTLY HALF, not "most" or "fewer". Half, same goes for every other Conference.And anyway, thats sorta Secondary to this point (I now its not easy to conceptualized, but...), we're comparing Conferences - what happens WITHIN a conference does NOT reflect on those comparisons (in-it of itself, that is).
And specifically in refering to question of "Powerhouses" in the SEC, wouldnt you say that they would have to prove themselves against the best of the other confs? (how do YOU define Powerhouse?)
I'll give you the most clear example (admittedly being selective here):
Auburn had the best record in the SEC (7-1)
- Lost to a 5-3 ACC team
- Lost to a 5-3 BTEN teamOr can Boise St, Reno, La Tech, F State all claim to be "powerhouses" because they beat-up on the rest of the WAC teams?
And for those SEC-hypster claiming 6 "Powerhouses"... reasonably speaking, the SEC 2005 had 5 "good teams", none of which were Outstanding in-conf or nationally (er, none were Powerhouses). Curious, who's the 6th in your mind?
So Carolina, SEC 5-3
- Lost to a 4-4 XII team
- Lost to a 4-4 ACC teamSo Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 2, 2006 6:10 PM — 204.62.104.211 — link — abuse?
Like I said, just wanted to bring people back to reality - attendance is attendance, dont equate that with what happens on the field.
But, I'll give credit where credit is due. The SEC & SEC fans have exploited CFB's $kewed $en$e of "equitable" play; capitali$m is capitali$m. SEC teams hiding behind their attendance continues in 2006 (at least, relatively speaking):
SEC - 16.7 percent of their OOC games are on the Road
PAC - 38.7 percent of their OOC games are on the RoadMooka said:
posted on June 2, 2006 11:52 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
Dude, you are the most clueless MOFO. Even when you do get Stats slapped in your face, like Championships, depth in Conference, etc, etc, you start to divert the topic by talking about what exactly a Powerhouse means. Don't make me copy and paste Rusty's post from the Michigan site. There is no use in me even replying to you from here on out because now I see you are nothing but a jealous SEC hater who couldn't get a clue if it was pasted to his forehead.
Reed4AU said:
posted on June 3, 2006 3:46 AM — 4.152.90.246 — link — abuse?
Not gonna say the SEC was the best conference last year, but 5th? C'mon you have to be joking.
At the end of everything and in both polls there were 3 SEC teams in the top 10 and 5 in the top 14. I can't understand how they could possibly be the 5th best conference.By comparison the Big 10 had 2 in the top 10(yes they were #s 3 and 4) but they only had 3 total in the top 25.
The PAC-10 had 1 top 10 team 2 in the top 15(3 in 1 poll) and 4 total in the top 25 with Cal being #25.
The big 12 had the #1 team but only had 3 in the top 25 and Tex Tech the next highest ranked was #19/20.
The ACC had 1 top 10 team and 5 in the top 25 with the next highest ranked team starting at #17.
The Big East had WVU and Lousiville and umm.... well we all know what the Big Least is now.So you can say the SEC wasn't the best conference if you want, but you are just stupid if you think there were 4 better conferences last year.
Franko G said:
posted on June 3, 2006 5:42 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers,
You still continue to beat around the bush...throwing out STATS that you believe pertain to your arguement. I will only say this once more, and if you refuse to look into IT I'll give up, because you're beyond saving:
Find me 6 teams in any conference who can compare with Georgia, LSU, Tennessee, Florida, Auburn, and Alabama year in and year out. Compare six teams from any conference who can even come close to those six....please!!!! until then I will continue to see you for what you are....one of the few Pac10 fans willing to stand up to the Big Bad Boys of the SEC...trying to pick out stats that pertain to your argument....
once again...
ANYBODY CAN FIND STATS TO BACK UP THEIR ARGUEMENT IF THEY LOOK HARD ENOUGH!! STATS DON'T TELL THE WHOLE STORY, EVEN THOUGH YOU STILL HAVEN'T GIVEN ME 6 TEAMS FROM ANY OTHER CONFERENCE WHO CAN COMPARE TO THE BIG 6 FROM THE SEC...STATISTICALLY OR OTHERWISE!!
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 3, 2006 7:31 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Reed4AU,
Even though you use mis-guided criteria in your determination/assessment, you at least gotta be accurate dont you think? Or, please dont even Open your Yap - Mooka, people like this are the fuel to the Hype-ism/misconception in CFB.The "Top 25" is only a partial/incomplete view of the entire Football landscape. Big TEN had 3 in the Top 25, but were STILL the BEST C-O-N-F-E-R-E-N-C-E in 2005. If we're doing CONFERENCE Comparisons, we look at the ENTIRE CONFERENCE, top-to-bottom, overall. SEC had the most teams in the "top 25"... on the flip-side, the SEC also had the most "Bottom 30" Rated teams of any other major conference (as per the *Consensus Ratings), also MORE "Bottom Half" Rated teams and any other major conference (Rated worse than 60th); the SEC had just as many "bad" teams as the WAC did!!!
*http://www.bcsfootball.org/index2.cfm?page=rankingsIve said this time and time again - LACK of PARITY in a conference (ie SEC 2005) does NOT equate to STRENGTH (in-it of itself) which is what we're talking about! The SEC had a cluster of good teams at the top beating up on a cluster of horrible teams at the bottom in their own conference. The result of that effect is "more Top 25 teams" relative to other conferences that DONT have that issue (of "Haves and Have-Nots")
Let your feeble mind absorb that for a while...Besides all that, Reed, dispute this:
The Almighty SEC had the 5th best Record in 2005.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 3, 2006 7:32 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Reed4AU, you use mis-guided criteria in your determination/assessment.
The "Top 25" is only a partial/incomplete view of the entire Football landscape. Big TEN had 3 in the Top 25, but were STILL the BEST C-O-N-F-E-R-E-N-C-E in 2005. If we're doing CONFERENCE Comparisons, we look at the ENTIRE CONFERENCE, top-to-bottom, overall. SEC had the most teams in the "top 25"... on the flip-side, the SEC also had the most "Bottom 30" Rated teams of any other major conference (as per the *Consensus Ratings), also MORE "Bottom Half" Rated teams and any other major conference (Rated worse than 60th); the SEC had just as many "bad" teams as the WAC did!!!
*http://www.bcsfootball.org/index2.cfm?page=rankingsIve said this time and time again - LACK of PARITY in a conference (ie SEC 2005) does NOT equate to STRENGTH (in-it of itself) which is what we're talking about! The SEC had a cluster of good teams at the top beating up on a cluster of horrible teams at the bottom in their own conference. The result of that effect is "more Top 25 teams" relative to other conferences that DONT have that issue (of "Haves and Have-Nots")
Let your feeble mind absorb that for a while...Besides all that, Reed, dispute this:
The Almighty SEC had the 5th best Record in 2005.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 3, 2006 7:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Frank G, IVE SAID IT PRACTICALLY EVERY TIME this has come up...
Thats NOT what I'm disputing. Listen carefully, The SEC has more good teams than other conferences (generally speaking). I havent said any different.My claims that the SEC is largely OVER-HYPED (generally speaking) and that acknowlegement are NOT mutually exclusive! Matter'o fact, that issue, partially/in some respect, is what feeds that Hype!
The SEC had a bunch of good teams and a bunch of horrible teams - THAT DOES NOT demostrate the SEC's relative STRENGTH... just one "ei", the SEC finished with the 5th best Record among the 5 major confs. That dynamic doesnt demonstrate the relative strength of ANY conference.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 3, 2006 7:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Find a major Conference with as many Bad/HORRIBLE teams as the SEC.
Teams *Rated in the "Bottom Half" of College Football Div 1A - Bad teams
SEC = 5
PAC = 3
BTEN = 2
ACC = 1
XII = 1Teams *Rated in the "Bottom 30" - Horrible teams
SEC = 3
ACC = 1
PAC = 1
BTEN = 1
XII = 0The SEC generally has more good teams than other confs, but also more bad & horrible teams than other confs. If there's no dispute there, we can move on.
* per the Consensus Ratings - http://www.bcsfootball.org/index2.cfm?page=rankings
... remember the precious "polls" only rate the top 25 of 119 teams... and that the only thing these Ratings take into consideration are Wins & Losses, on top of Wins & Losses, on top of Wins & Losses (for the most part) - no regional bias, no personal bias.mooka said:
posted on June 4, 2006 12:38 AM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
I'll be damn...I think SoCal is finally kinda getting what we've been talking about thanks to Frank G.
Socal says,"Listen carefully, The SEC has more good teams than other conferences (generally speaking). I havent said any different."
Stop the press. That's What I'm Talking About!!!!! I think we might be able to save him.
SoCal, also I wanted to point out again while you say the upper half of SEC was beating up on the lower, the lower was also getting beat up by out of Conference which explains the terrible standing in overall conference. Okay, so you constantly show stats of Conference from 05, but still, how many years of dominance has the SEC actually had. That to me isn't hype. One, or even two years of lousy Conference stats doesn't constitute a century of top notch, hard nose, helmet to helmet SEC football which also holds the best rivalry match-ups. Especially when you can still see that there is usually 6 of the upper half of the conference constantly fighting for a chance at the National Title. For that reason alone you can not say that a Conference is over hyped just because of the bottom half of the Conference. People are smarter than that and can see passed that. Most people anyway. Since sometimes you seem to make sense on other topics I will forgive you for your ignorance in this one.
Franko G said:
posted on June 4, 2006 1:53 AM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
Well So Cal Clippers,
That's all I've been saying here...that the SEC has more good teams in its conference than any other....and the fact that there are "more horrible teams as well" points to contradiction on your part. One of YOUR HUGE THEMES is this:
All conferences are .500 against itself...EXACTLY!! And these overrall rankings you're pointing to incorporate all games-both in conference AND out of conference. And since there are so many good teams in the SEC, the bottom teams are the ones who take the beating from the SEC Monsters. Your "quote on quote"-"terrible" teams from the SEC are not as bad as their record shows...its simply because they have to go up against the big boys week after week. You think the bottom feeders of the Pac10, BTEN, XII, or ACC would do any better consistently over a year or so against the Top SEC teams??? Come on man..Think about what you say!
I'll take you on all summer If need be. Your crazy stat research is simply that- you searching for the CONVENIENT stats to fit your arguement....iiiiiiiinteresting!
Franko G said:
posted on June 4, 2006 2:03 AM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
Notice this So Cal Clippers,
Last year these were the final Top 25 rankings of the Top SEC Teams:
#6 LSU(only losses: Georgia and Tennessee)
#8 Alabama(only losses: LSU and Auburn)
#10 Georgia(only losses: Florida, Auburn, WVU)
#12 Florida(only losses: Alabama, LSU, South Carolina)
#14 Auburn(only losses: Georgia Tech, LSU, Wisconsin)That's 5 SEC teams in the Top 14 of the AP Poll. Those 5 teams combined to lose 3 games out of conference last year!! 3!! They all beat each other around because none of those 5 were significantly better than the others. PLUS- the fact that people say this was actually a DOWN YEAR for the SEC shows the TRUE STRENGTH of the conference....5 teams in the top 14 and it's a down year??? Interesting!
Once again, find me another conference with 5 teams who can boast those kind of rankings....yea...I THOUGHT SO.
The Mayor said:
posted on June 4, 2006 2:18 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Franko G, Mooka and other SEC fans,
In reference to your 6 Powerhouse teams, my research backs up your claim. I base it on the following criteria:
Ramkings in the Top 25 final poll since the inception of the BCS title Game (1998).
There have been 61 different teams that have finished in the top 25 over the last 9 years. Only 3 have finished in the top 25 each year...Miami, Florida State and Texas.
My rankings are based on top 25 rank at years end. Those teams that did not finsh in the top 25 are all assigned the same numerical value. 26th is as good as 112th, not entirely accurate, but I'll leave it to someone else to carry this research further. Besides, Powerhouse teams don't finish outside of the top 25.
The rankings are as follows:
1 Miami
2 Texas
3 Florida State
4 Michigan
5 Georgia SEC Powerhouse
6 Ohio State
7 Tennessee SEC Powerhouse
8 Oklahoma
9 USC
10 Virginia Tech
11 Kansas State
12 Nebraska
13 LSU SEC Powerhouse
14 Wisconsin
15 Oregon
16 Florida SEC Powerhouse
17 Auburn SEC Powerhouse
18 Penn State
19 Iowa
20 Alabama SEC Powerhouse
21 Washington State
22 Notre Dame
23 Maryland
24 Louisville
25 Georgia Tech
26 TCU
27 Purdue
28 UCLA
29 Washington
30 Utah
31 Boston College
32 Clemson
33 Colorado
34 Marshall
35 West Virginia
36 South Carolina
37 Arkansas
38 Texas A&M
39 California
40 Oregon State
41 Illinois
42 Texas Tech
43 Michigan State
44 Mississippi State
45 Syracuse
46 Arizona State
47 Miami Ohio
48 Stanford
49 Boise State
50 North Carolina State
51 Pittsburg
52 Colorado State
53 Southern Miss
54 Minnesota
55 Mississippi
56 Virginia
57 Bowling Greem
58 Fresno State
59 Toledo
60 Brigham Young
61 NavyI am proud to say that my Ducks have finished ahead of three of the SEC Powerhouse teams and is ranked number one in the nation for attendance at home games!!!
In terms of "Powerhouse" though, I only consider the following five teams to be truly worthy of that title:
Miami, Texas, Florida State, Michigan and Georgia.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 4, 2006 9:50 AM — 208.57.3.120 — link — abuse?
Mooka, Franko dont make be bring out the "Hey Moe Rons, pay attention"-card.
Read:So Cal Clippers says:
posted on May 24, 2006 04:14 PM — link
Franko G, the SEC being hyped as being "theee dominant conference, without question, always" sorta talk is what I'm disputing.So Cal Clippers says:
posted on May 25, 2006 04:19 PM — link
Mooka, you say that I twist things - lets clear it up. Please read the first sentence of Post # 24 I made my stance specific... I probably shouldnt have included Franko-G's name in the reply I made in Post # 22, my remarks were directed primarily at Patrick's comment (# 20): "The SEC has been the best conference and remains so."
... the other part of what he said, which Franko agreed with, I dont have an issue with: "It is laden with heavyweight programs with much tradition including LSU, Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee".
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 4, 2006 9:58 AM — 208.57.3.120 — link — abuse?
The SEC is just OVER-hyped (relatively speaking)... the general perception does NOT match reality - always been my premise; nothing specific about "powerhouses".
I offer this to the discussion, again... (btw, Rusty's list is one of the wackiest Ive seen - from Wikenpedifile I think)Historically? ... in terms of National Champions based on all AP, all BCS/Coaches, all Dickinson, pre-1936 Helms, pre-1936 CFRA, pre-1936 NCF (the 6 most legit/widely recognized Championship Selection Orgs)...
SEC Titles breakdown:
Bama - 10
LSU - 3
Tenn - 2
Auburn - 1
Geo - 1
Florida - 1PAC Titles breakdown:
USC - 11
Cal - 3
Stanford - 1
Wash - 1
F.UCLA - 1XII Titles breakdown:
OK - 7
Nebraska - 5
Texas - 4
aTm - 2
Colorado - 1BTEN Titles breakdown:
Michigan - 10 (or 9, conflicting data)
Minn - 6
Ohio St - 5
Penn St - 4
Illy - 3
Mich St - 2
Now, how do you define "powerhouses"? or how do you define "more"?
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 4, 2006 10:15 AM — 208.57.3.120 — link — abuse?
Franko, when were talking about CONFERENCES its about CONFERENCES, meaning top to bottom.
The "top 25" is only a partial view (even ignoring its major flaw: regional bias). The SEC has 5 teams in the Top 25 helps the so-called "powerhouse" issue (WHICH WE DONT DISAGREE ON, well maybe only in semantics), that does NOT determine CONFERENCE STRENGTH (Which has consistantly been my point)... and when/if YOU mis-guidedly believe it DOES, that only feeds the fire pertaining to my issue that "Perception" doesnt match reality, er SEC is over-hyped.ColReb said:
posted on June 4, 2006 12:11 PM — 68.154.191.36 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers-
It looks as though, according to your rankings, the SEC has 6 teams averaging a top 25 finish. Thats not bad. More than any of the other conferences. You sure are good at statistics though. Maybe you should leave your mom's basement every now and then.
Reed4AU said:
posted on June 4, 2006 2:13 PM — 4.152.111.218 — link — abuse?
Ok!!!! I'll agree that according to statistics the SEC is the 5th best conference if you look at overall record. Having 5 teams teams in the top 15 means nothing, your conference is overhyped because there are 3 very bad teams and 4 ok teams. There's no point in this arguement. So Cal says they were the 5th best conference, but I dare you to find 1 respected college football fan who would agree who's not biased. Ahh there's the problem, there's no such thing as a college fan without bias. You say the SEC is overhyped and I say the PAC 10 is overrated and the Big East shouldn't get an automatic BCS bid. You'll never convince me with your statistics, because they are based on the same win loss crap that's used to figure out SOS. A 10-1 TCU is better than a 9-2 OSU or 8-3 LSU? Sure there are, it doesn't matter who you play as long as you get more wins. Facing that TCU team looks better than facing that OSU team, but do reallt think the competition is equal? The undefeated Utah acoupl years ago(who beat who, NC?) was about as deserving of that BCS bid as the crap Pitt team they faced. I'll take a 2 loss team from the Big 10 or 12, SEC, or ACC over a Pac-10 team anyday. It's the level of competition. Who cares if 4 or teams are bottom feeders. Of course they are because they can't compete with the recruiting, the money, and the facilities at the powerhouses.
Franko G said:
posted on June 5, 2006 11:26 AM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
Reed4AU,
Great post man! I totally agree with you. So Cal Clippers is delusional...he thinks he can move worlds with his statistics. So Cal Clippers, you're actually trying to say the SEC was the 5th best conference last year??? You've got a skewed way of thinking bro, if thats what you truly think. Yeah, who cares if the SEC had 5 teams in the top 14...I think that outweighs the fact that the bottom teams' records were horrible...I stress again:
OF COURSE THEIR RECORD IS HORRIBLE! THEY HAVE TO GO UP AGAINST MONSTERS WEEK AFTER WEEK. ALL BOTTOM FEEDERS OF ALL CONFERENCES WOULD GET CONSISTENTLY OWNED BY THE TOP TEAMS OF THE SEC.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 5, 2006 4:45 PM — 204.62.104.213 — link — abuse?
REEEED!
Thats the POINT! And the 2005 season illustrates it dramatically, coincidentally enough.Hype is hype when "perception" (ei, "I dare you to find 1 respected college football fan who would agree who's not biased")
... doesnt match "reality" (ei, SEC 5th best record, SEC rated 5th overall - no personal bias, no regional bias, barebones Wins & Losses on top of Wins & Losses)Atleast over the past 7 seasons 1998-2004 - Against the Spread (base on one reputable source)
Your dogmatic outlook on this is what perpetuates it (in a sense).
Here, argue with Las Vegas:
ACC +40 (partially skewed by ACC/BEast realingnment)
PAC +19
BTEN +4
XII -9
SEC -23figures are from on reputable source (others may vary) the past 7 years 1998-2004 Against the Spread.
Tomcat said:
posted on June 5, 2006 8:04 PM — 69.153.89.245 — link — abuse?
Hey So Cal I thought this was about attendance?
1.Michigan 110,915 avg.
2.Tenn 107,593 avg.
3.Ohio State 105,017 avg.
4.Penn St 104,859 avg.
5.Georgia 92,701 avg.
6.LSU 91,580 avg.
7.USC. 90,812 avg.
8. Florida 90,406 avg.
9. Oklahoma 84,331 avg.
10. Auburn 84,333 avg.
11.Texas 83,333 avg.
heres a good Stat for yall all time winning percentage
!. Michigan .744
2.Notre Dame .744
3. Texas .714
4.Oklahoma .713
5.Alabama .711
Hookem-Hornsmooka said:
posted on June 6, 2006 2:15 AM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal says,"The SEC has more good teams than other conferences (generally speaking). I havent said any different."
Then goes on to say they are over-rated. I'm only laughing at you now, but just for kicks what do you have to say to Rusty's (#71) reply now?
Reed4AU said:
posted on June 6, 2006 12:34 PM — 4.152.90.158 — link — abuse?
SOO CALL CLIPPERSS!
Numbers aren't everything! The fact is that if a conference has 5 teams in the top 14 at the end of a year they are a good conference. Sure they are most certaintly top heavy, but a weak "underclass" doesn't make them the 5th best conference. My last post was a bit sarcastic, but I did agree with you in the first line. If you look at wins/losses they were rated 5th last year, but numbers don't measure intangibles(i.e. level of opponents, hostile environments(it's harder to play at the Swamp than at Arizona, although I hear Eugene is supposed to be crazy loud), and the parity ov athletes among the top teams. Also who covers the spread doesn't mean anything, unless you got money on the game.
You make great points and you back them up with mutiple statistics. However I feel(I doubt it, but it could be just my opinion) that numbers aren't everything. Like I said before a 7-4 Big 10/12 team, a 7-4 SEC team, a 7-4 ACC team, and yes a 7-4 PAC-10 team are all better than 10-1 mid major. Nothing against WVU and Louisville because they are good teams, but do you honestly think the Big EAT was better than the SEC? So what if their win/loss record was better, that doesn't mean they were a better conference. Numbers aren't everything!
You like the PAC-10(I assume) and I like the SEC, we will never agree on which is better even if the numbers say that our conference is the worst. That'e just the way it is because we are all biased. By the way I actually cheered for a PAC-10 team last year, I put some money on USC to cover for the Arkansas' game last year and it turned out very well. However after the initial torrent I was hoping Arkansa would put on a better showing.
Franko G said:
posted on June 6, 2006 1:27 PM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers,
so you got those stats from a "reputable source"?? o yea? what source??
For some reason, fanblogs did not post my last message...but all I'm saying is- you still think the stats are everything. Once again!
ANY PERSON CAN FIND STATS TO BACK UP THEIR ARGUEMENT! JUST ABOUT ANY ARGUEMENT YOU WANT TO MAKE REGARDING FOOTBALL CAN BE MADE IF THE RIGHT STATS ARE "SELECTED." AND THAT'S ALL YOU DO SO CAL CLIPPERS, SELECT THE RIGHT STATS TO FIT YOUR ARGUEMENT.
There are also the blatant, RIGHT IN YOUR FACE, facts. Yeah, the ones that show how many SEC teams are ranked in the top 25 year in and year out. And please, be bold enough to tell me those are meaningless...When you have 5 teams in the top 14:
A) it's not a down year for that conference.
B) That conference is NOT "the 5th best conference." No matter what stat you pull out trying to say they are ranked 5th. Actually, regarding the number of teams in the top 25, thats a very valid argument to why they are THE BEST conference.
So Cal, stop avoiding the points that refute your claims.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 6, 2006 6:22 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, youre right, it is.
If anything Im reminding the Hypsters of that.
37) So Cal Clippers says:
posted on May 26, 2006 04:51 PM
SEC over-hype? lest anyone take "attendance figures" to make any kind of direct coorelation or substantive claim about the "Best Conference" issue.
2005 - SEC, worst record among the 5 major conferneces. Rated 5th overall.
49) So Cal Clippers says:
posted on May 31, 2006 06:54 PM
The SEC had the worst record (and was Rated 5th) among the major conferences in 2005. That statement stands alone.
These SEC-ers were stroking each-other way too much about their "attendances" that I heard...
... "ok SEC is obviously the best conference year after year"
... "Once again...another testament to the greatest conference. Look at the fan support in the South!"
... "And of course, we got the best football, but that's always been a given"just wanted to bring people back to reality - attendance is attendance, dont equate that with what happens on the field
Tomcat said:
posted on June 6, 2006 6:57 PM — 68.91.252.150 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal you like stats, here are some stats
most vicories 1.Michigan
2.Notre Dame
3.Texas
4.Nebraska
5.Alabama
Thats 1 Big 10 1 Ind 2 BigXII 1 SECwinning percentage
1.Michigan .7442.Notre Dame .744
3.Texas .714
4.Oklahoma .7135. Alabama .711
I don't see any pac-10 teams on these lists
stats are stats and they need to be acurate.
I dont agree with your stats from post #50
you say the Big 12 went 2-3 against top ten opponents in 05
Texas beat three Texas Tech, Ohio State and USC?
Was Iowa ranked in the top ten when Iowa State beat them?
What was Oregon ranked when Oklahoma beat them?
it is obvious that when playing teams from other conferences that the Big 12 dominates
Hookem-HornsSo Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 6, 2006 8:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, youre not paying much attention; you been on the "Michigan on the Brick" thread lately?
Even on this thread, Ive said that there are discrepencies with the list Rusty found on "Wikenpedifilepedia" search engie... I've looked at lots of varying list of NCs but that one's been the Wackiest; the "Recognition" of certian Selection Orgs starting some Year and stopping and then starting again?! - its kinda goofy. Honestly Mooka, if you look into the history CFB Championships, the various Selection Orgs, archives, you'll have a better basis to debate this.This, from the very list that Rusty provided:
1934
- Minnesota (H)(D)(CFRA)(NCF)
- Alabama (Other)
1942
- Ohio State (AP)(CFRA)(NCF)
- Wisconsin (H)
- Georgia (Other)
Now what the hell is "Other" exactly? Rusty's Wikepedia list provided the Recognized Selection Orgs up at the Top... it didnt mention "Other".The Sports Illustrated Almanac:
Big TEN - 11-teams, 26 Titles = 2.36 (incl. 2 Titles from the Dark Ages of CFB; pre-1920 or so)
PAC - 10-teams, 15 Titles = 1.50
XII - 12-teams, 18 Titles = 1.50
SEC - 12-teams, 16 Titles = 1.33
ACC - 12-teams, 11 Titles = 0.92
(SI doesNT count CFRA, NCF, or FWs at all)The ESPN Almanac:
BTEN - 33 Titles = 3.00 (incl. 7 Titles in the Dark Ages of CFB)
SEC - 20 Titles = 1.67 (incl. LSU Title in 1908)
PAC - 16 Titles = 1.60
XII - 18 Titles = 1.50
ACC - 13 Titles = 1.08
(ESPN counts NCF, CFRA, FWs, INS, NFF... doesNT count Dickinson post-1936)btw... SI says Alabama has 9, ESPN says 10, Hypsters say 12 - point made?
As we know there's been no Official recognition of CFB Champs by the NCAA. We all know that its a highly subjective endevour. There is sort-of a general consensus about some Selection Orgs (AP, Coaches/BCS, Dickinson, Helms) and there are others that are sorta outside the general consensus (CFRA, NCF, FW, NFF) but still used/considered valid, and even others that are not widely considered (INS, NY Times, Williamson, etc). THAT is an entire discusion on its own.
... But just to remind everyone that this whole thing is about the SEC being over-hyped, that perception not matching reality, that the SEC is not as dominant as SEC fans like to think (and in this particular discusion its in terms of National Titles, historically team-for-team). We may disagree on which Selection Orgs are valid/should be considered, BUT even in a compromise (Rusty has yet to explain his list/mis-count) defering to SI and ESPN:The SEC is NOT dominant!
The general "perception" is that it IS.
Over-Hype.Oh and by the way...
Excluding the ambiguous "other" titles, based on Rusty's own list, the SEC's Count is 21. The PAC's count is 17 (and thats even allowing the wackiness that doesnt recognize Cal Berkeley's NCF and CFRA Titles of 1921 & 1922!):1.67 - XII - 20 Titles
1.70 - PAC - 17 Titles
1.75 - SEC - 21 Titles
... big gap...
2.64 - BTEN - 29 Titleswho's dominant?
Franko G said:
posted on June 6, 2006 9:55 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers,
Your posts are putting me to sleep...What are you trying to prove again?? I forgot...anyways, who cares, you're not changing anybody's minds here. You're not "bringing anyone to reality." You're basically just wasting your time and mine. The SEC is a great football conference. "Best" or "dominant" are all in the eyes of the beholder, and anyone can try and make arguements to back up their claim. Either way, nobody's gonna budge. I know I'm not gonna give up any ground. So I say we call this a draw. Frankly I'm sick of it.
-Proud Fan of the SEC
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 6, 2006 10:12 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko, you tell me what are my "claims"? - lets see if you're paying attention.
And what "points" that refute them am I avoiding?Who's avoiding what here?
The "Top 25" ISNT a Conference Comparison chart! Do you NOT realize that - honestly?
It ranks individual teams RELATIVE to each other it says nothing about a conference TOP-TO-BOTTOM (and lets ignore the regional biases for the purpose of this discussion). Beyond THAT, can you justify why is it a Top "25" list? You, and the novice-CFB afficionados that hold the "top 25" lists in such Mis-Guided reverence, avoid, er, dont even REALIZE that its an Arbitrary number/list. Blaugh...
And that's already going way too far into a false premise - I cant stand on a branch and cut down the tree.
The Top 25, flaws-n-all, serves to rank "Teams" and not Conferneces.
Conceptual example here, give a genuine attempt to follow along...
There are 5 Basketball teams, and we need to determine the average height of each team.One team has
5 - Kevin Garnett & Alonzo Morning types 7'0" to 6'9"
2 - Bruce Bowen & Mike Finely types 6'7" to 6'5"
2 - Gil Arenas & Steve Nash types 6'3" to 6'0"
3 - Mugsy Bogues types 5'2" (Miss, Miss St, Kentucky)Another team (PAC) has
1 - Yao Ming 7'5"
2 - Alonzo Mourning types
1 - Elton Brand 6'8"
3 - Bowen/Finleys
2 - Nashes
1 - MugsyA third team has
1 - Manute Bol (Texas) 7'7"
3 - Elton Brands
7 - Bowen/Finely
1 - Gil Arenas
[note, No Mugsy'es's]Another team had
2 - Shaq Oneal's 7'3"
1 - Mourning
3 - Elton Brands (Michigan, NWern, Iowa)
3 - Bowen/Finleys
1 - Nash
1 - MugsyHorrible example maybe, but I got to far into it to go back (I dont know how they add up)... the point is that the team with the most "tall guys", Kevin Garnetts and Alonzo Mournings, ISNT NECESSARILY the "tallest team" so to speak, 'cause you gotta average in the Mugsyes.
Wow, what an analogy.
The 2 Shaq Oneals-team was supposed to be the Tallest - the Big TEN 2005.Franko G said:
posted on June 6, 2006 10:24 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers,
you totally lost me...that basketball analogy was horrible. Look man, Im serious. You're getting nowhere and you're wasting my time. You aren't going to "bring me back to earth" in regards to the SEC being a great conference. You can bring all the stats you want to try and "bring the SEC down to Earth"...but nobody's buying your stats. It's truly getting old. Give up!
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 6, 2006 11:03 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Reed, Franko, Mooka every bit of your cynicism in light of the ~scary data~ is what builds the arguement that perception doesnt match reality (pertaining to the SEC in the CFB fan landscape).
--- Specifically speaking of 2005 (microcosm):
SEC hype - "the SEC is the Best once again! just look at the top 25 list, Yay for us! I'll S you D while you S mine... okay... S, S, S..."--- Reality, er those VooDoo ~stats~: The SEC as a C-o-n-f-e-r-e-n-c-e finished with the 5th best Record. Even scarier stats... the SEC was also ranked 5th by a consensus of 4-of-the-6 official Ratings that actually provide a Conference Comparison. Mind you, that these are similar Ratings that had the SEC ranked No. 1 & No. 2 in past seasons.
http://www.bcsfootball.org/index2.cfm?page=rankingsAnd by the way Texas being 13-0 is a "Stat"... the SEC having 5 of their 12 teams ranked in the Top 25 is a "Stat", dont use that "stats could prove anything" crap. There are rational interpretations that can be made. Dont fool yourself into thinking that I'm perverting any of the data I use. Most of it is Bare-Bones, and when its not I atleast insert a reference.
Which reminds me...
The reputable source is Phil Steele, ATS, 1998-2004:
ACC +40
PAC +19
BTEN +4
XII -9
SEC -23
(my guess is that the ACC/BE merger skews the ACC's plus side; I dont know if thats against Steele's own Line, or a particular Las Vegas Book, if its the Opening number or at Kickoff, but I got it from the same source - and I previously asked if anyone could help verify).mooka said:
posted on June 6, 2006 11:35 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal says,"The SEC has more good teams than other conferences (generally speaking). I havent said any different."
Now to answer your question (post #79) on who is dominant, it looks to me like the SEC is more dominant than the PAC even in your twisted standards. Not only that, but you could also break down your little Championships and see that pretty much only USC won those Championships. So what next...USC is the entire PAC-10??!! On the other hand you see SEC's Championships distributed throughout the Conference. Now I could make a stat saying that only PAC-10 has had 3 teams win Championships where the SEC has had 7. Though I don't really need to do any math to see that the SEC is and has been clearly more dominant. You do the math!PAC-10 has had 3 teams win Championships where the SEC has had 7.
Who's more dominant? (This one should be real good)
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 7, 2006 8:25 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko - Theyre not "My Stats"
They EXIST whether I point them out or not; whether you "want to believe" them or you dont.
5 of 12 SEC teams in the top 15 is a "STAT"!
Whats more "in your face" than: 2005 the SEC = 5th best Record?
How would anyone make a case for anything if you DONT BACK IT UP??? "Top ##" lists dont give Conference Rankings - a similarly MIS-GUIDED notion is for someone to say that because the Big East Champs beat the SEC Champs that the Big East is the Better "CONFERENCE".
Everything I point out (I dont make up) is in reference to C-o-n-f-e-r-e-n-c-e Comparisons, the "Top ##" lists dont provide that.
And WHAT am I "avoiding" exactly ?!? Dont make me cut-n-paste again.Franko the post that put you to sleep wasnt directed at YOU (well, not the first one #80) the horrible b-ball/height analogy was (#82), but just take this:
The SEC 2005, DID have the "most tall guys/good teams"... but overall, had the "shortest team/worst record" among the 5 major conferences. Again, the erroneous use of the "top 25" lists that many mis-guided CFB fans are guilty of, contributes to the SEC Over-hype that I'm talking about (particularly this past season).Think, when the SEC finishes with the 5th Best Record! (and Rated 5th), but the general fan's perception is still: "the SEC is the best conference again, just look at the Top 25 list"
... Then thats perception not matching reality, meaning Hype. And this is just one year.Im NOT doggin the SEC (necessarily) - never said anything like "the SEC Sucks" or B.S. like that. Only that its Overly hyped (generally speaking).
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 7, 2006 8:41 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko G, the Las Vegas/Phil Steele/ATS thing was sortava tangent issue, but still pertains to "this discussion" - being, whether the SEC is Over-Hyped or not. People putting their money where their mouth is and LOSING their money more often with the SEC.
Thread: Michigan on the Brink - post: 60
... "The SEC is over-VALUED", could be another fitting description. From what Ive found (reputable source), the SEC has been the WORST major conference "Against The Spread" in the BCS era...So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 7, 2006 8:55 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, says who?
The SEC title breakdown looks more like the PAC than it does the XII or BTEN. Remember, if you extend the criteria/selection orgs that would count those extra Bama, Tennessee & Auburn titles, then teams like Washington (2), Stanford (1), Arizona St (ei, NCF 1975), USC (2), Cal Berkeley (1) all pickup Titles of their own... if you argue that Arkansas "should be" the Recognized Champ in 1964, then Alabama LOSES its 1964 farce-of-a-Title (Lost in the Orange Bowl) and Tennessee's 1951 Title comes into Question too, and DEFINATELY Alabama's 1973 utter-joke-of-a-Title (Lost to Undefeated Notre Dame in the Sugar and still "split the Title" ?!... ask yourself how valid would it be if USC "split the Title" with Texas in 2005)
National Champions based on all AP, all BCS/Coaches, all Dickinson, pre-1936 Helms, pre-1936 CFRA, pre-1936 NCF (the 6 most legit/widely recognized Championship Selection Orgs)...SEC Titles breakdown:
Bama - 10
LSU - 3
Tenn - 2
Auburn - 1
Geo - 1
Florida - 1PAC Titles breakdown:
USC - 11
Cal - 3
Stanford - 1
Wash - 1
F.UCLA - 1XII Titles breakdown:
OK - 7
Nebraska - 5
Texas - 4
aTm - 2
Colorado - 1BTEN Titles breakdown:
Michigan - 10 (or 9, conflicting data)
Minn - 6
Ohio St - 5
Penn St - 4
Illy - 3
Mich St - 2
Franko G said:
posted on June 7, 2006 9:35 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
So Cal Clippers,
................................................................................................................................................................this is me snoring...give it up man!! You've argued all this time to try and say the SEC is overhyped???...well, that's your opinion. Congratulations.
Mooka said:
posted on June 8, 2006 11:09 AM — 138.163.0.37 — link — abuse?
Socal says,"The SEC has more good teams than other conferences (generally speaking). I havent said any different."
Man, let's be fair. If you are going to take some of the Championships away from SEC then take them from the PAC like you said. This shows you how stats can not be trusted be/c you always have to consider the biased sources. Any frikin way as much as you try to take away from the SEC, amazingly enough they still have more Championships than the PAC. I know, I know, it's not about PAC vs SEC--it's about SEC being overhyped, but that argument has been laid to rest months ago on a post which showed SEC having about 200 game wins over other conferences. Not to mention the Championships won along the way. Anyone who could sit there and tell you that is a bunch of hype is obviously confused or just a hater. But as Franko says even confused haters are entitled to their opinion, and I hope you realize your twisted stats do not make anything you say fact be/c you twist your stats with biased opinions, and not what actually is. You only choose stats that will help your case and you have no credibility.
I'm giving you the bullshit card to carry with you for the remainder of your time on this site. Have fun with it.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 8, 2006 7:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The "Haves and Have Nots" effect in the SEC - the lack of parity within a conf is simply more likely to produce "more top 25 teams", however that does NOT make a Conferences "better" or stronger in relation to the other Confs (in-it of itself).Baby steps...
Do we all understand what it means when I say the every conf ends up .500 against itself? You people are afraid of stats, analogies bore you, then how about hypotheticals?SEC version 1 - All SEC teams finish 4-4 in-Conf play:
Auburn 4-4
Vandy 4-4
Geo 4-4 (1-0, CCG)
LSU 4-4 (0-1, CCG)
Miss St 4-4
Florida 4-4
etc...SEC version 2 - The way SEC teams actually finished in-conf in 2005
Auburn 7-1
LSU 7-1 (0-1, CCG)
Geo 6-2 (1-0, CCG)
Bama 6-2
Vandy 3-5
Miss 1-7
Miss St 1-7
etc...Which version would be a "Stronger" conference?
Would you even be able to make that determination at all, base solely on that information?
What if the Version 1 SEC finished with a better Record than Version 2 SEC - In the version 1 SEC lets say Georgia beat WVU, South Carl beat Mizzu, Old Miss beat Wyoming... compared to version 2, the actual 2005 resultsWhich would be the "stronger" conference?
So Cal USMCr Clips said:
posted on June 8, 2006 8:10 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
We got em.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.al.zarqawi/index.html
Franko G said:
posted on June 8, 2006 10:46 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
Here's to you So Cal Clippers...you have tried valiantly. But I'm seriously sick and tired of reading your posts. This is my last comment to anything connected to "The SEC is overhyped." And yes, apparently the SEC had the 5th best record against out of conference opponents in 2005...if your stats are true...Ill assume they are just because I dont care enough to go check and validate them.
Here's to you So Cal Clippers..you have successfully bored everyone...listening to your posts is like trying to endure my hour-and-a-half math class, I find myself dozing off in the middle and just losing all interest completely. And to top it all off, you havent really gotten anywhere with your arguement...Well done. Now if you want to comment on this post- Go ahead, but I'm not answering it b/c Im completely-totally-utterly sick of this conversation.
Go SEC Baby!! Gooooooo Dawgs! Sic em! Woof woof woof woof woof!
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 9, 2006 5:49 PM — 204.62.104.211 — link — abuse?
Franko. Yeah, slither away... the guy announces:
~Im not responding to you anymore~Then to who's ever reading this... I dont believe it. This guy didnt even KNOW what he hell he was Defending All Along!!!#!@! what a fuggin deck.
FG, you shoulda used the "sick em, wuf wuf" thing a long time ago - it woulda given me a clue as to what kinda goofball I was dealing with (no offense; you 12 years old?).
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 9, 2006 7:16 PM — 204.62.104.211 — link — abuse?
SEC Over-Rated. This here is not my premise, exactly, but it's atleast an Independent view concerning this issue.
http://preseason.stassen.com/over-under/conferences.html
... again, it doesNT completely demonstrate my point (it only goes back so many years, deals primarily with the AP Poll) but even in the context of just "the top 25 polls" and their results, the SEC is considered Over-Rated.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 9, 2006 8:32 PM — 204.62.104.211 — link — abuse?
Making the SEC-PAC comparison - not my issue, but Mooka...
Do you "believe in" something called homefield advantage? Hypothetical - Two teams, that somehow we know virtually for a Fact, are evenly matched play 10 games, 5 at home, 5 on the Road. The likely outcome is both teams end up 5-5, right? If they played over 10 years, 100 games it would be close to 50-50, maybe something like 52-48 depending on chance (ei, flip a coin 100 times heads or tails), but theoretically it would be Even, 50-50 - are you with me on that?SEC vs PAC all-time = 60.6 winning percentage
62-39-7 (including Bowls)SEC's Home/Road ratio advantage = 63.9 percent
58 @ SEC, 28 @ PAC (22 Bowls divided evenly)
[something like 67% if you ignore the Bowls altogether; something like 60% if you consider not-so-neutral Bowls, ei USC vs Bama in the Rose Bowl]Now, I'm not making any claims of what "coulda, woulda, shoulda" been, or "what if", etc... but just reminding folks that the raw heads-up record is not the only thing to consider. Besides that, also noteworthy is the fact that a number of those PAC Losses were little-bitty O State & Wazzu playing @ Georgia, Tenn, LSU (with ZERO return games)... and that there were hardly any Miss St or Vanderbilt playing @ USC, Washington, UCLA type of matchups (actually only one; Miss St @ Wash)
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 9, 2006 8:38 PM — 204.62.104.211 — link — abuse?
And while Im on the topic of ACCOUNTING FOR homefield advantage, SEC and PAC, for 2006:
SEC - 17 percent of all of their OOC games are on the Road
PAC - 39 percent of all of their OOC games are on the RoadLaying out all the cards...
SEC - 31% of OOC are vs BCS opponents
PAC - 42% of OOC are vs BCS opponentsSEC - 33% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl Teams
PAC - 55% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl Teams
In General terms, making a guess, what would be the results (2006) if we knew that the SEC and PAC were hypothetically exactly even in strength?Mooka said:
posted on June 10, 2006 7:26 AM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
I believe home field advantage plays a small role in the outcome of the game. The better team will always win. I could only assume the reason they try to get as many OOC games played at home is be/c it would benefit both teams significantly to play at a 100,000 + stadium (give or take a little). Not to mention it is a privaledge for some of these teams to have an oppurtunity to play against a dominant, historic, great, fantastic, absolutely superb conference such as the SEC. Don't you agree?
Tomcat said:
posted on June 10, 2006 2:39 PM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Hey Mooka Ever been to Kyle Feild in College Station Texas? It doesn't matter if the Aggies are 8-4 or 4-8 they can beat anybody at home.Its over 80,000 screaming fans that don't sit down. homefeild advantage does make a difference.
Hookem-Horns Sic-em BearsSo Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 10, 2006 6:13 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The SEC is swinging from the Women's Tee - the "reason" why is irrelevant.
I'm not here complaining about the inequitible Home/Road distribution (capitalism is capitalism). I'm making it know and/or reminding fans that the Homefield Effect does exist, and should be accounted for in any "conference comparison" discussion.
Ive said this before, somewhere - the biggest disparity between the SEC and the PAC in terms of CFB is their Fandom, not the play on the field.
Mooka said:
posted on June 11, 2006 12:47 AM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Yea, I saw the Texas vs Aggie game last year, and I think the home field advantage can help to motivate a team, but in the long run the better team won, right? I can also talk about LSU vs. Georgia as an example. Seems appropriate since those teams have been battling in the SEC Championship 2 outa the last 3 years. Well, as you probably know the SEC championship is played in Georgia. So what happened to the home field advantage in 2003? The rightful team won the game and went on to win the National Championship(LSU for those who don't recognize). Last year when they met in Georgia I won't take anything away from the way LSU was out coached and put the win on the 'field' as an excuse. The better team won.
So Cal USMCr Clips said:
posted on June 11, 2006 6:57 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Reed4AU, concerning your TCU 10-1 issue... You gotta come with actual examples, otherwise youre talking out of your ass.
- 2004 Ratings -
Miami 9-3
Navy 10-2
Miami was Rated higher than Navy, acutally 18 teams with "worse records" were ranked ahead of "unranked" 10-2 Navy; Navy was rated 1 spot above 5-6 North Carolina.
Not based on the SOS ratings that you think.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 12, 2006 7:52 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, "the better team won"... now refering back to the hypothetical, what if the teams are evenly matched - playing 100 games where one team gets to play 70 Home games and the other only gets 30 Home games, whats the "likely" result/record?
(I cant believe Im having to "pull teeth" from a so-called CFB fan to have him acknowlege that Homefield "exists").So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 12, 2006 8:09 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka Refering to/Replying to Posts 85 and 94: Five of 10 PAC teams have Titles (thats half the conf); 6 of 12 SEC teams have Titles (thats half the conf)... based on the very specific breakdown of Seletion Orgs I listed (from Research, not personal bias'). Now, LIKE IVE SAID BEFORE, theres no official recognition of "National Champs" by the NCAA so there are varying interpretations of who the Champs were and which Selection Orgs are valid or not, or lets say more-valid and less-valid. In light of that, I gave you two independent and reputable interpretations - neither the Sports Illustrated Almanac's Title count, nor the ESPN Almanac's Title count demonstrate that the SEC is even close to "Dominant" in terms of College Football Titles, team-for-team. The SEC is in among the rest of the pack; closer to the XII, the PAC than it is to the Big TEN (which IS dominant, in that respect).
Mooka, I'm anything but a "Hater". I'm the anti-hater - I challenge the haters, the hypsters, the homers. Which reminds me, do some research of your own on this; like on the National Title-Selection Orgs thing, see which you find more "valid" historically, or what-have-you.
In the list I posted, I didnt "take away" Titles from Bama & Tennessee, I only suggested/warned that if we really open-up questioning of the Selection Orgs (ie, Old Miss NOT winning either AP or Coaches Titles in 1960 but You still COUNTING it as one; same with Arkansas 1964), that other Titles would have to come in to question TOO! Alabama 1973 would be first on the Chopping block (look into it; Notre Dame beat Bama in the Sugar. ND finished undefeated! Four other major teams finished undefeated (1 tie each) but somehow Bama got a "Share" of the Title?!?! Its laughable). The SEC has THREE of those kind of Dubious Titles (Bama 1964, Tennessee 1951), the XII has one or two (Texas 1970 comes to mind), the Big TEN has one or two (8-2 Minnesota comes to mind), the PAC doesnt have any teams that were "Named" Champs who went on to LOSE in their Bowl Game. 1926/27 Stanford tied Bama in the Rose Bowl; arguably the first genuine "Split" Title, though Dickinson was the only Selection Org around back then (for the record, Dickinson presented Stanford the Championship Trophy that year)brownsrodeo88 said:
posted on June 12, 2006 10:51 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
Good point USmCr, but you could apply the same thing in Bama's favor.
I think it was 1966, 3 undefeated teams. Two go to the championship game, but Bama doesnt. Bama wins its game in a big way while the other two tie the game at nine and are happy.
By most standards bama was the best team in the nation that year. So we can play that game all day and apply it to loads of teams.
AU03 said:
posted on June 13, 2006 10:19 AM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
brownsrodeo, while I agree that 'Bama got screwed in 1966, you made a mistake:
ND played Michigan State in a regular season game, not a "championship game"- Notre Dame did not go to bowl games back then. Alabama deserved the NC that year, but if Auburn counted NC's the way BAMA did (1941, 1964, 1973, 1979), they'd have 5, not 1 (1913, 1957, 1983, 1993, 2004).
Do I claim those other titles? No- although it's really hard to argue with 1913, 1983, and 2004. Note that in all of these years, Auburn was undefeated, except in 1983, when they were in a tie with Miami, Texas, Nebraska, and UGA for the best record, and if you look at the schedules, Aurun had the toughest- BY FAR. In fact, I'd argue that Auburn's 1983 is the toughest in NCAA football history. Miami got the NC, but the only ranked team they played in the regular season was Florida, who beat them 28-3.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 13, 2006 7:31 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rodeo88, Notre Dame (9-0-1) got both the AP & Coaches Title, and didnt play in a Bowl (Michigan St also 9-0-1, no bowl). Again, if "we decide" to open this up, I said the "FIRST" on the chopping block is Bama's 1973. The Obvious difference there is that one (Bama 73) went on to LOSE AGAINST THE VERY SAME TEAM THEY "SPLIT" THE TITLE WITH!!! Think of it this way, who today would recognize a USC and Texas "split" 2005 Title?!
The other (ND 66) didnt play in a Bowl - could you fault a team for just not playing in a Bowl as much as for LOSING in a Bowl?. If we were to open it up, Notre Dame's 1966 AP/Coaches Title wouldnt even be top 10 on the Chopping block. We'd stick to the more flagrant & egregious Title Selections.An arguement for Bama ADDING a Title for 1966 starts-off on a bad foot, and Im not being biased here. The Helms Championship (widely recognized) made their Selections AFTER the Bowls were accounted for and it awarded a rare Split Title; Notre Dame & Michigan St. Bama was Assed-out. Coinsidently, the Football Writers voted after the Bowls in 1966 too and had the same results. Even the NFF split their Title... the NCF gave it to Norte Dame... the CFRA gave it to Mich St (not sure about their inclusion of Bowl results back then).
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 13, 2006 7:57 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rodeo - So, no, Bama was not the best team by "most standards" that yr, not even by "a few standards" there was actually only ONE second-rate, peripheral-level Selection Org that had Bama as the 1966 Champs; Berryman (which is even lower-grade than, for example, the three that voted 11-2 USC the Champs in 2002 over 14-0 Ohio State)
With Arkansas in 1964 and Old Miss in 1960 (among other teams, other years), there were atleast somewhat "reputable" Selection Orgs that disagreed with the defacto-quasi-official AP and Coaches selections. That wasnt really the case for Bama in 1966.
(By the way, Washington would also have a claim to atleast "a share" of that 1960 Title, for they beat the AP/Coaches Champs in the Rose Bowl, and was awared the Helms Championship that yr - Minnesota finished 8-2, Old Miss happen to beat a second rate team in the Sugar Bowl, Unranked, RICE!).brownsrodeo88 said:
posted on June 13, 2006 10:34 PM — 172.162.191.118 — link — abuse?
Point well taken. My point wasnt necessarily just for Bama's instance, but for the case of alot of teams that have met the same fate. I feel like Bama would of beat either of the teams in that got in, but w/e. It doesn't really matter (even without '73, Bama would have 11). So, there you go.
Semper Fi, btw.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 14, 2006 3:17 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Everyone out there needs to quit drinking the Haterade!Alabama is on the way back to national prominence and people are hatin on them.The last 8 or 9 years have been tough for Bama,but they are coming back around.The probation is over and the other teams are nervous.They should be.We have been down basically since the mid 90's and are storming back.The 2005 season was good,but it could have been great.Tyrone Prothro doesn't go down and we go undefeated.I challenge anyone on that.Bring it on.Look up stats or do whatever it is you all do.Reggie Bush goes down and USC doesn't go to play Texas.I'm pretty good on stats,but I don't sit around and memorize them.I always hear don't live in the past,but that is all I get from you guys.People talkin about 1966,1973 and stuff like that.Let's try talkin about the future for once.I'm an Alabama fan and the past has been great for Bama,but let's look to the future for once.I'm not making any predictions for 2006.I just would like for people to talk about some of the thing's that are current.We are all college football fans.That is why we are on this site.Let's all get Jacked for the 2006 season!!!Roll Tide
P.S. Our thoughts and prayers are with Ben Roethlisberger and his family!Mooka said:
posted on June 14, 2006 11:32 AM — 138.145.219.3 — link — abuse?
Socal,
I heard was blah, blah, blah. Everything is it Could be this, or it Could be that then you take all these could be's, would be's, and what if this; and you out pops out your waky little stats. You my friend are the hypster.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 14, 2006 6:25 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, you silly fool.
IS THERE SUCH A THING AS HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE???
Does that dynamic exist?! (in your squishy brain)And as for the Hypothetical... IM ASKING YOU of YOUR interpretation - Im NOT giving you what I think "shoulda, coulda, woulda" happend, sort of thing. Its just that, a hypothetical - trying to understand your logic, etc.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 14, 2006 7:36 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Bama didnt get "screwed" in 1966!
That kind of talk is the fuel that feeds the SEC Hype Im refering to.
The most egregious so-called "Champs" by AP/Coaches:
Bama 1973, Minnesota 1960, Maryland 1953, Tennessee 1951 (LOST Bowl games to more deserving Champs that other Selection Orgs that DID ACCOUNT FOR BOWL RESULTS awarded their title to; like Helms, Football Writers, etc).
next level... Texas 1970, Bama 1964 (just Bowl-Losers, in seasons that simply other major teams that were arguably more deserving in the end - Neb'70, Ark'64, also O'Miss'60 split w/Wash).
then further down... Michigan St 1965, Oklahoma 1950 (Bowl-Losers, but named Champs even AFTER accounting for the Bowl results; Helms, FWs. So a bit less flagrant).
Besides those, there's not been any other seasons where the AP and/or Coaches Champ LOST in there Bowl game.You gotta come up with a helluva agruement to make a serious case for Bama 1966. From NCAAsports.com, though theres no "Official" recognizion, this is from the list of Selection Orgs it posts... I'd say "if" Bama can make a case for 1966, then a team like Arizona St can make a case for 1970, but I'm not accepting Bama's "if"... post:
1966
- Alabama: Berryman
- Michigan St.: Football Research, Helms*, NFF*, Poling*
- Notre Dame: AP, Billingsley, DeVold, Dunkel, FB N e w s , FW, Helms*, Litkenhous, Matthews, National Championship Foundation, NFF*, Poling*, Sagarin, UPI1970
- Arizona St.: Poling
- Nebraska: AP, Billingsley, DeVold, Dunkel, FACT*, FB News, Football Research, FW, Helms, National Championship Foundation
- Notre Dame: FACT*, Matthews
- Ohio St.: NFF*
- Texas: Berryman, FACT*, Litkenhous, NFF*, Sagarin, UPISo Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 14, 2006 7:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac no one's "hating" on Bama.
It just happens to be Bama that has these dubious National Titles that come into question when discussing this issue (about recognized/valid Titles, etc). And it happens to be SEC teams that account for the most of these questionable AP/Coaches Titles among the different Confs.
So in that respect, the SEC is sort-of "spinning there wheels" when they want to COUNT Arkanasas 1964 and Old Miss 1960 as Titles.
In the end, the SEC probably LOSES GROUND in comparison with the PAC.btw, Auburn 2004 didnt even have ONE peripheral-level, second-rate Selection Org that name them Champs. Not one. Even Auburn 1993, 1983 atleast had one or two.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 14, 2006 8:16 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
PROTHRO!!! now that's high octaine hype-fuel... holy shet, please, enough with the Prothro Injury-excuse. The guy made a truely spectacular catch, but the way some of you build him up... you're wacky.
Oregon and Cal ended their seasons playing their THIRD-STRING QBs, ASU their 2nd-string QB, USC had a revolving-door of injuries to their Defense of Biblical proportions all season long (2nd & 3rd stringers were forced to play heavy minutes & in prime-time situations - most memorably in the Rose Bowl).brownsrodeo88 said:
posted on June 14, 2006 8:16 PM — 172.130.31.236 — link — abuse?
Who said Bama got screwed in '66?
So Cal, thats becuase most people recognized that Auburn '04's strength of schedule was absolute CRAP. Most SEC teams would of gone undefeated with that schedule.
And anyways, the SEC has enough titles that they could lose 3 or 4 and have loads more than most, maybe any, i havent checked the stats.
I know Bama's got 12, UGA has like 4 UF's got 1, Tennessee has a couple, AUBURN HAS ONE 50 years ago lol lol lol.
But SEC hasnt been up to par since the turn of the millenium. By 2010 the SEC championship game should be like it was in the 90's: Florida vs. Bama. Year in and year out. And the SEC will be back where it was. There will be no talk of the ACC being the best, which is laughable even now but people still entertain the idea for some reason.
But yeah.... there you go. ND i beleive is the only school w/ more titles that Bama, with 13.
brownsrodeo88 said:
posted on June 14, 2006 8:38 PM — 172.130.31.236 — link — abuse?
Losing an all-star is much worse than losing whoever the heck is QB for Oregon. Was he good? Heck yeah. Was he as good as Croyle, or as big a playmaker as Prothro? Not even close.
Prothro was truely special, aside from the incredible catch against So. Miss.If you watch the Florida game, he's one of the only reasons Bama blew UF out like they did. From the opening 80yd td toss, to the sideline toss up to the rest of his catches, he was an incredible playmaker. And anyone who has watched him play can recognize that. Not only was he excellent, he brought up the level of play of his team mates. Thats something you rarely get out of a player, and to call him hype is rediculous. I would say losing Prothro in '05 was more crippling to Bama than losing Croyle in '04, Prothro is just that good on the field, as far as talent goes as well as intangibles.
PLEASE dont reduce Prothro to just hype. He's much more than a lucky catch vs. So. Miss.
Hopefully he'll be 100% this year and prove what im saying.
But i think your right on the level that if your team needs one player that badly, than your not THAT good. I'll go with that.
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 14, 2006 9:51 PM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
In 1966 alabama went 11-0 with one bowl game win, and michigan st. and notre dame tied their bowl game. Which should get the title, alabama-undefeated, only allowed 58 points all season on defense, or michigan st./notre dame-tied their bowl game. I think 11-0 sounds better(especially coming from the SEC)than 10-0-1.
Franko G said:
posted on June 14, 2006 10:17 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
The selection orgs felt bad for "screwing" USC in 2003, so they wanted to make sure they didn't screw USC again in 2004. This was at the expense of Auburn. There is no good reason that Auburn should not have gotten numerous "peripheral-level, second-rate" selection organizations to name them champs...other than the fact they didn't wanna screw over USC again. That year was garbage and it just feeds my arguement that numbers dont mean everything. People plug numbers and stats into formulas and expect it to spit out the best teams....thats what So Cal USMcr's arguement has been all along. Yeah, those formulas really worked well in 2004.......I don't think there's one person who thinks Oklahoma was better than Auburn that year..especially after the results of the BCS title game that year. That was an absolute disgrace. Auburn beat a tough Virginia Tech team in the Sugar Bowl 16-13, and they got chastized b/c it was a close game...Virginia Tech played USC close at the beginning of that same season...but nobody complained about that.
It's just total garbage that people think they can insert a bunch of numbers into formulas and come up with an accurate number to rank teams. That's all trash, and I cant believe so many people put so much faith in them.
NCAA Football would be so much better off if they could come up with a system where there isn't so much grey area when comparing teams from all over the country. Any person can make claims like "The SEC is overhyped" and there's no real stats to prove that theyre completely right or completely wrong. So much is left up to speculation/ bias and its just ridiculous.
It all comes down to the fact that football has become a beauty pageant.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 14, 2006 10:25 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Hey So Cal USMCr.All those teams you mentioned didn't end their season playing LSU and AUBURN either.Yes you are right about one thing also.Prothro is high octane fuel as you put it.He is when he is on the football field and not laying in a hospital bed.Do me a big favor.Since you are so big into statistics.Go back and check Tyrone Prothro's stats in those first 5 games of 2005.Check all his stats.Not just his receiving stats.Post back and tell me what you think.I think you'll find out that he did a whole lot more than just made 1 spectacular catch.As far as defense goes.I hate to hear you say that USC had injuries of Biblical proportions on defense.That's a shame.The Pac 10 doesn't have any defense anyway bro.That's why games are 55-49 and scores like that.You wan't to see DEFENSE?Watch an IRON BOWL.You might not know what that is though.It's the Alabama-Auburn game.Nuff said!Holla at ya boy
Mooka said:
posted on June 14, 2006 11:20 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal,
Pay attention hypster. Did I ever say there wasn't a such a thing as Home Field Advantage? No, okay, thank you. I did say and it is proven the better team will win no matter where they play. Answer this and then take your 'home field advantage' theory and take a hike. Who won the Rose Bowl? The Rose Bowl is near LA right? That's what I thought. Don't give me your excuses either. "oh there were a lot of Texas fans there!!! it wasn't home field advantage." My ass, the game was practically played in LA and guess what....The better team won.
au03 said:
posted on June 15, 2006 8:10 AM — 68.17.165.103 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
Just because no major organization picks a team as a NC, doesn't mean they don't deserve it.
BAMA outscores their opponents 301-44 in 1966, including a 34-7 win over Nebraska in the Sugar Bowl. ND outscored theirs 362-38. In 1966, BAMA got some bad karma- after being picked for titles they didn't deserve, they missed out on one that they did dseerve. Lost amongst all of your crap, is an actual REASON why BAMA didn't deserve the '66 title- it doesn't matter who did or didn't choose them- the media loved ND more than BAMA, so BAMA did not get chosen by anything major, the same thing that happened to Auburn in 2004- the media likes USC more (which is also why the AP gave USC the title in 2003). Auburn doesn not have that "love affair" with the media, so they got spurned.
The fact reamins this- in 1966, BAMA had a perfect record, Notre Dame DIDN'T. They took the chikenshit way to the National title (playing to a tie), and they got it.
Mooka said:
posted on June 15, 2006 11:41 AM — 138.145.219.3 — link — abuse?
The best teams are not determined by what there offense ranks or how many rushing yards there running backs get rather the depth of the team. Alabama is on it's way back up but they do need more receivers than just Prothro. Though people who actually watch them play know that Croyle and Prothro had a certain chemistry in there efforts. It really would have been interesting to see how far they might have gone last year if he didn't get hurt. We all know they have depth in defense unlike USC. Most SEC teams have that more than offense. I like LSU's depth in offense this year though. In key positions too. 3 QBs, 3 RBs, 3 receivers maybe four. If our center steps up nobody can mess with the Tiger offense next year.
So Cal USMCr Clippers said:
posted on June 15, 2006 7:25 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko besides the AP and Coaches (and a couple of others), the rest are mostly Computer Ratings. So it wasnt "People" just deciding not to screw this or that team in 2004 for personal reasons. Most of the reputable Selc Orgs (the official BCS Ratings), provide their Rating System to the public - its not some sort of secretive formula. And 5 of the 6 BCS Ratings are SOLELY based on WINS & LOSSES, on top of Ws & Ls, on top of Ws & Ls, etc... and THAT is the "beauty" of it if-you-will, THAT is what gives it legitimacy, its DEMOCRACY in action, WHO DID YOU BEAT? and WHO DID YOU LOSE TO?, every team gets the same treatment, NO special recognition for Notre Dame for being "Notre Dame".
The "formula" for the RPI in Collge B-Ball is NOT even made public! The issue we have with the BCS is NOT about the Ratings System, its about NOT having Playoffs!
To clarify, I'm not saying that the Ratings are the End-All, Be-All. Im saying that these Ratings are another "tool", useful in helping determine where teams Rank, etc. It so happens that these Ratings are the only thing that provide any kind of CONFERENCE comparisons in form of Ratings/Rankings in any comprehensive capacity (actually only 4 of the 6 do), the AP or Coaches Polls DONT.
So its not "total garbage", its not College Football Doctine either; its atleast an OBJECTIVE perspective on the matter, thats all (remember, based democratically on wins & losses).
So Cal USMCr Clippers said:
posted on June 15, 2006 9:10 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, I dont know if my last post went threw...
SEC Defensive Stats were as fluffed-up as PAC Offensive Stats were.
For one, SEC Offenses were TOOTHLESS!
Ei, the 100th Ranked Defense, Wisconsin, held the SEC's Best Offense to 10 Points! Matter-o-fact Auburn's the TWO LOWEST Point Totals all season were to Non-SEC teams (surprise, surprise); the other was Geo Tech, held the SEC's Best Offense to 14 Points. I could go on.
On the flip-side, SEC Defenses seem to shrivel, out-of-Conference (facing more dynamic Offenses).
Ei, the SEC's Best Defense, LSU (or 2nd best), gave up 31 Points and 560 Total Yards, more than DOUBLE their average, to a 4-4 PAC team! Only the SEC Champs, Georgia (7-2) put up more Pts than Arizona St did on LSU's scary defense, no team put up more Yds.
Arkansas' Defense would have been Ranked TOP 10 in the Country! if they hadnt faced USC. Arkansas, 4th best Defense vs the SEC, gave up a school Record (I believe) 736 Total Yds & 70 Pts to a PAC team, next closest was Auburn w/436 Yds & 34 Pts.Prothro Injury-Excuse, those teams didnt face LSU and Auburn? Come on bro.
- Cal Berkeley's last two games w/their 3rd String QB werent tough, but, NINE other games were with their 2nd String QB!... including USC, Oregon, UCLA (all Cal Losses).
- Oregon facing Oklahoma, final minutes of the Bowl game, driving 60-Yds, with momentum, in the Red Zone, 2nd-n-7, a Touch-Down Wins it for Oregon, a chippy FG sends it to OT... the 3rd-String QB tosses an Unforced, inexplicable, 3rd-string-level INT, drive over, game over. Oregon 10-2 not 11-1.
- USC with their m.a.s.h unit-D faced TEXAS!So Cal USMCr Clippers said:
posted on June 15, 2006 9:16 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, and I have looked at Prothro's Stats, back when the Excuse-making first began... otherwise I wouldnt be saying anything!
3 whole TDs, 325 Rec Yds, 19 Yds/Rec(nice), 65 Red Yds/Game (5 Games)...
Projected-out to 12 games, Prothro's closest equivelant is Clinton Soloman... "who?"... some Iowa WR.Prothro is solid, can make the big play, but some of you go way over board with his value to the team's success (compared to other teams with significant injuries).
So Cal USMCr Clippers said:
posted on June 15, 2006 9:55 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
au03, In this entire mini-thread where we've been discussing questionable Titles, and so-forth, we're already Over-looking the "Media" Polls (AP & Coaches), thats sort-of the Premise of the whole thing.
And... looking beyond those Media Polls, in years like 1951, 1960, 1964, 1970, 1973, and the rest that I mentioned, there ARRRRE other Reputable Selection Orgs (not the bias Media Polls) that named Arkansas the Champs insted of Bama, or Washinton and Old Miss "Split" Champs insted of Minnesota, or Nebraska the "real" Champs insted of Texas getting a "Share" of it, and so on.For 1966, there simply Are No such Selection Orgs that named Bama the Champs. Only one second-rate, two bit ranking had Bama 1966 Champs and thats: Berryman.
How well-reknown is Berryman's rankings? How reputable is that Selection Org?... Berryman was also the "one" that named Oklahoma the 2003 Champs ~~insert laughter here~~
T-Mac said:
posted on June 15, 2006 11:32 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr you obviously haven't looked up the correct stats on Tyrone Prothro.He only got to play in the first 5 games of the 2005 season.He actually didn't even play the whole fifth game against Florida.I have NO idea where you got your stats from on Prothro,but brother I'm gonna take you to school so sharpen your pencil.His stats are as follows 325 yds rec on 17 catches which is a 19.1 yard avg per game.92 yards rushing on 9 carries which is a 10.2 yard avg.Punt returns are 81 yards and Kickoff returns are 193 yards on 7 returns which is a 27.6 yard avg.IF you know how to add all those stats are 691 yards in 5 games bro.In my post I told you to look up ALL his stats not just his receiving yards.ALL PURPOSE YARDS!!!Now you know what that means???He had 691 yards in not even 5 complete games.That translates to an average of 138.2 Yards Per Game.I've never heard of anybody named Clinton Soloman.You mentioned about his stats being projected out over 12 games.If you project 138.2 yards per game than that comes to 1658.4 yards.In your post you said you looked at Prothro's stats.You forgot to do 1 important thing bro!ADD THEM UP!If you are going to pop off and makeup false statistics than you need to do something else with your time.Go to Rolltide.com and look up his stats.It's all there bro.If your gonna Bring It-Bring It Bro,but Bring It HONEST!!!I'm not going to act like Prothro is the best ever or anything like that,but I think any team in the country would love to have a player putting out 138.2 yards per game.Wouldn't you agree?Holla at ya boy
AU03 said:
posted on June 16, 2006 7:52 AM — 68.17.165.103 — link — abuse?
So Cal,
Every organization that gives NC's has biases. Again, the only reason you point out BAMA did not deserve a title is no one game them one. Perhaps if you used your ability to reason, you would see that that's called HEARSAY. BAMA had a perfect season that year, Notre Dame did not- end of story.
Franko G said:
posted on June 16, 2006 11:42 AM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
You tell him T-Mac,
I'm sure SoCal will come up with some excuse...he loves to pick and choose his stats as best suits him. I just can't believe he still hates on the SEC. People should know better, they really should. I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall when I try and reason with SoCal.
So Cal USMC stats said:
posted on June 16, 2006 7:42 PM — 208.57.3.120 — link — abuse?
Brandon Brooks essentially spelled Prothro on the STs. NEITHER guy scored a STs TD all season - I'll ask you, that big a drop-off? Here correct me if Im wrong; from 15 to 11 Yds/KR+PR. You can disagree on WHICH Stats we should look at, and you can make an arguement for using AP-Yds (I'll buy it), but dont try to make it seem that I got the Stats wrong (I made specific reference to Prothro as a "WR").
So as for "All Purpose Yds/Game"... Bama & the almight Prothro faced Middle Tenn State, So Miss, So Carl, Arkansas, Florida... projecting out AP-Yds, Prothro's close equivelant I beleive is Terry Richardson (27+ Yds/KR, a whopping 7 Total TDs all season, 138 AP-Yds/Game). "Whos that?"
Arizona State's SECOND-STRING WR!!! But I guess that wow's the SEC folk.
The point stands - PROTHRO wasnt/isnt a world beater! Pleanty of teams around the country played some critical games with out their teams-Studs. So give Bama the Win vs LSU (Missing Prothro)... Give Georgia the Win vs Florida (missing DJ)... give Oregon the Win vs Oklahoma... drone, drone, drone on.
So Cal USMC stats said:
posted on June 16, 2006 8:10 PM — 208.57.3.120 — link — abuse?
AU03, yeah sure... in the literal sense there is an inherent "bias" in the sense that a WIN is preferred over a LOSS... the computer Ratings (some, anyway) are geared toward demonstrating a Ranking without "PERSONAL" biases, it also looks at the entire Football landscape (not Top so-n-so Number of teams, its 1st thru 119th).
Oregon was 10-1 Ohio State was 9-2 week 15. Ohio State was Ranked ahead of Oregon. "What possible explination could there be for that?"
Again NONE of the various reputable Selection Orgs name Bama the Champs? Im saying that 1966 was just NOT, NOT, as egregious as those Blatant others (not even close). 12-0 Arizona St 1975, the only Undefeated team; OSU 11-1, OK 11-1. ASU beat Nebraska? in the Fiesta Bowl... No AP Title, No Coaches Title... BUT the National Championship Foundation (NCF, one of the well-reknown retro-active polls) gave ASU a piece of the Title that year. ASU was also the ONLY Undefeated team in 1970, I think, but WASNT named Champs by ANY Selc Org that year; Neb 11-0-1.
When NONE of the reputable Rankings/Ratings/Selection Orgs name you the Champs... you dont have much to stand on. But its gonna take more than "Well they were the only undefeated and untied team".
T-Mac said:
posted on June 17, 2006 12:02 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
This is for So Cal USMC.Let me start off by saying that you are fairly brazen to even reply to my last post,but at the same time I respect your right to voice your opinion.That is what makes this country so great!Now,let me school you again in a few things so sharpen your pencil.I never said that Prothro was a world beater as you put it.I simply gave you his statistics in the games that he was able to play in last year.The stats that I gave you in my post on June 15 at 11:32 are Tyrone Prothro's stats from 2005.In your post on June 16th at 7:42 you say to me that I can disagree with you on which stats we should look at.Brotherman there is NO disagreement on his stats.Those are his stats.Go to Rolltide.com and they are all right there for the world to see.Can You Read Bro?You also say that Brandon Brooks spelled Prothro.Yes he did at times.What player doesn't get spelled from time to time?Also, you did get his stats wrong.I told you in my post to look up All his stats not just his REC yards and you didn't.What you are telling me is that you only count Prothro's stats as a wide receiver?Have you ever heard of players like DeAngelo Williams or Reggie Bush?They are both Running Backs,but that isn't the only thing they do bro.They are what you call All Purpose Players!That is what Tyrone was to Bama.To me essentially what you are saying is that we not even look at a players production besides the yards they get for their given position.You also keep mentioning these players and saying projecting out over 12 games.You brought it up and I gave you the STATS.There is NO GRAY AREA WITH STATS!!!They are what they are bro.He had 138.2 yards per game.He had 691 total yards in the 5 games he played in.If you project that out to 12 games that would be 1658.4 yards.Did you get that??Do you need a minute to let it soak in?Do me a favor and stop mentioning players that nobody has heard of and comparing them to what Tyrone Prothro did in less than half a season.You mentioned the teams that Bama played while Prothro was in there last year.In the 5th game of the season Alabama played a team called Florida.You might have heard of them.I'm not sure.Don't care if you have.Florida was ranked 4th in the nation when they came into Tuscaloosa and got thumped 31-3.BTW-In case you didn't know.Prothro was having a career day until he got his lower leg jacked up.I'm getting sick of talking about this,but I will say it 1 more time.Go to ROLLTIDE.COM and all the statistics are right there bro.Don't post back with some B/S about some player that nobody has heard of.It is an insult to my intelligence bro.I also never said to give Bama anything.That's crazy.I will say this though.I think this is shaping up to be a great year for the SEC.Teams like LSU,AUBURN,ALABAMA,and FLORIDA should be strong.TENN,USC, and Georgia should be good as well.So Cal USMC don't hate because Southern Cal lost all their playmakers.Be happy for the teams that have playmakers.It make's the game GREAT!!Jealousy is not cool bro.I'll leave you with this then I'll bounce.TEXAS looked good in the National Title game didn't they?Post me back and tell me what you think about Vince Young throwing bombs and running down field all night during that game and don't use any EXCUSES!!!AS YOU LIKE TO SAY.Oh i almost forgot.When Vince Young ran the ball in for a touchdown it didn't count because we only count his passing statistics!I'm out.HOLLA AT YA BOY
Tomcat said:
posted on June 17, 2006 12:19 AM — 70.244.248.197 — link — abuse?
I cant wait for the season to start.Sounds like yall have alot of time on your hands.All this crap about SEC and PAC 10 is pretty funny.The BIG XII is definetly the best conference in college football.Look at the bowl games Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri,Kansas, and Nebraska all won their Bowl games.Texas Tech lost to Alabama a close one.Colorado lost to Clemson another close one.Iowa State lost to TCU.
Lets look at this Texas Tech lost to Texas, Iowa State lost to Baylor and Colorado Lost twice to Texas, once to Iowa State and Nebraska. TCU beat Iowa State and lost to SMU. Baylor beat SMU.
The BIG XII is the dominate conference.
Hookem-Horns Sic-em Bears
Texas Beat USC Oklahoma beat Oregon Nebraska beat Michigan
Reminder : The TCU vs Oklahoma game was just as close and contraversial as the USC vs Notre Dame game. Auburn got shafted in 04
Hookem-Horns Sic-em Bearsbrownsrodeo88 said:
posted on June 17, 2006 11:23 AM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
LOL OU lost to USC HUGELY 2 yrs ago, Missouri lost to TROY STATE on ESPN one or two back, Nebraska wasnt ranked, and Texas was good.
Half the teams in the country go to bowl games, and as a result, winning one doesnt necessarily mean much.
So Cal USMCr Clippers said:
posted on June 17, 2006 6:34 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
MOOKA, Im FUGGIN ASKING YOU - its not an accusation! Any you still really havent answered; why be vague about it "Homefield? well, it has some affect but in the end the better team always wins". Thats a P@ssy response. Yes or no?
TEXAS beat USC )))DESPITE((( the homefield advantage! West Virginia beat Georgia DESPITE the homefield adv, USC beat ND despite the Homefield, Georgia TECH beat Auburn despite the HFA, etc... (and btw, its not purely about number of fans in the "crowd" - its the travel, the surroundings, familiaraity, its a mentality, etc)
Who the hell am I dealing with here?! Hey the rest of you SEC fans, set this kid straight. Forget all the rest for now, can we reach common ground on this HomeField Advantage issue (I truely am thrown by the idea that a so-called CFB fan cant ~ADMITt~ that the dynamic of "Homefield-advantage" exists! holy shet, hey SEC-ers, police your own)
And YOU are tell ME to "pay attention"?!... HA-larious
--- Previous post, notice Im "asking", not "accussing" ---
So Cal USMCr says:posted on June 14, 2006 06:25 PM
Mooka, you silly fool.
IS THERE SUCH A THING AS HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE???
Does that dynamic exist?! (in your squishy brain)
And as for the Hypothetical... IM ASKING YOU of YOUR interpretation - Im NOT giving you what I think "shoulda, coulda, woulda" happend, sort of thing. Its just that, a hypothetical - trying to understand your logic, etc.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 17, 2006 6:56 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
I agree with So Cal in his last post on the big Xll.Tomcat,it's not that we have a lot of time on our hands.I sure work pretty long hours some days of the week.This is called a FAN BLOG.That is what you do.You post your opinion on various subjects.It's not crap as you put it about the SEC and the PAC 10.They are 2 GREAT conferences.I'm an SEC fan,but I'm also honest and fair!!!If a college FB game is on and I have a chance to watch it I try to.I noticed in your post when you were talking about the BIG X11 bowl games that you say when Texas Tech lost to Bama it was a close one and the same thing when Colorado lost to Clemson.Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades!!I will say this though is that Texas was great last year.I will also say that Southern Cal would have Destroyed any other team in the BIG X11.Another thing to is that I didn't think the USC and Notre Dame game was controversial at all last year.USC won the game bro.The 3 best conferences are the Big 10,PAC 10,and the SEC.BTW- Texas Tech found out what DEFENSE is when they played Alabama in the Cotton Bowl!!!I'm out.HOLLA AT YA BOY
So Cal USMCr Clippers said:
posted on June 17, 2006 7:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac. You say it was "fairly brazen" of me to even reply to youre Prothro comment... come on dude, relax. But I will say, Re-reading the past few posts on this Bama/Prothro issue, I missed that you did say "Check all his stats.Not just his receiving stats" back when I first responded. But even back then I said, hey okay I'll buy it, LETS go by the All-Purpose Stats. Aaaand Looking at Prothro's AP-Yards/Game, his project TDs scored, etc... the Point Still Stands! Way too much is made of Prothro's Injury, by Bammers.
All-Purpose Production:
Prothro = Terry Richardson (ASU 2nd-string WR)
As a WR only:
Prothro = Clinton Soloman (Iowa WR)
As a KR:
Prothro = Jakiri Wallace (Minn WR/KR)
As a PR = anyone who avg 7.4 Yds, Vernell "who" Brown (Florida PR)
His "Decoy value", subjectively speaking:
Prothro Steve Breaston (Michigan WR/KR)Following the Posts: 115, 121, 127, 133
So Cal USMCr Clippers said:
posted on June 17, 2006 8:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac. We're straight on using the All-P stats right? And Prothro avgeraged a ~scary~ 138 yards per game (like THATS supposed to settle the issue)... Terry Richardson averaged 138 yards per game... now who the hell is "Terry Richardson"? Arizona St's 2ND-STRING WR (the team's No. 3 WR overall). So remind me of whats so "brazen" about me responding to the Prothro AP-Yds stats? (Im almost chuckling over here)
Reggie Bush averaged 222 AP Yds... DeAngelo Williams avgeraged 188 AP Yds (and wasnt a KR)!!!
Both of those guys scored 19 Touchdowns. 138 is supposed to impress? And what was Prothro's 12-Game TD projections??? 7 TDs. (Terry Richardson & Clinton Soloman-level)And if you wanna get really in-depth, 229 Yards of Prothro's 274 Total Return Yards came against Middle Tenn State and Southern Miss! LSU and Auburn ?
Any btw, you dont go by the "at the time" rankings... its always the Final Rankings that you go by; was Tennessee EVER ACTUALLY THE THRID BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY?! 'memeber UAB was a hunt-cair away from sending Tenny to OT the first game of the season!?
Like I said at the begining of this (when you jumped in a discussion and took-off on a tangent issue), Im NOT hating on Bama. Simply put, the Prothro Injury-Excuse was and still is, WAAAAY over blown by Bammers. Or should I bring up Oregon, Georgia, Cal, etc, again? Iowa(04), etc
USC lost FOUR All-Americans from their Defensive Front-Seven going into 2005, thats 4 of 7! and then lost their TEAM CAPTIAN on Defense (most experienced) only 2 games into the season!... Aaaaan USC was STILL only a hunt-cair away from the National Title. So you could understand why I'm not sweating the personell losses too much.
Mooka said:
posted on June 17, 2006 10:54 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal,
If you don't uderstand my angle after all my post what else can I say? Of course I know you are a bone head and things that make sense don't really dawn on you at the beginning stages, so I will repeat. Her we go, Of course there is such a thing as Home Field Advantage ohterwise people wouldn't call it that. DUUUUHH, football coach, DUUUUUHH. My only point was simply this, and it is simple, the better team will still win 9 outa ten times. So what's your point by bringing all that BS up Fooo? To try and prove why SEC is the best Conference? Well, thank you, but I don't need any more tips on why SEC is the best. Thanks for your thoughts and ideas though.
Mooka said:
posted on June 17, 2006 11:22 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
I hope you understand my position on home field advantage. Okay, good let's move onto this Prothro thing.
First of all have you even watched Alabama play last year? Anyone who has ever seen them play with Prothro knows that those measly 138 yrds you keep refering to were all capital yrds that put points on the board. They weren't just some of the yrds you would see in stats with some of them ending up getting punted away. That guy was clutch and it showed when they lost him be/c their defense was loaded even more so than USC, but their Big O couldn't capitalize. That small boost in Prothro was a huge loss that would've changed the outlook and point spread on any game. Yea, I know your point that other teams can say the same thing about their losses, and that's why I say the best teams have to have depth. That's my view too. But the issue is this, you are not even giving Prothro props which does make you look as T-Mac put it jealous. Look at yourself. Trying so hard to convince everybody that the SEC is hyped up even to go so far as to say Prothro was as good as a second string. I am laughing at loud at you because I truly see you are a hater, and you don't know what you are talking about.
Franko G said:
posted on June 18, 2006 10:28 AM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
Hey people,
I think Tyrone Prothro is a great player, but his injury has been blown way out of proportion. He's definitely a playmaker/gamechanger. However, many teams have lost big time players, especially last year. So Cal is right this time, USC had a ton of injuries to their defense last year...and it didnt play very well without them- giving up tons of points to notre dame and fresno state...but they played well enough to win, although it was USC's offense that won those games not its defense- which is what defines Pac10 football.
Back to Prothro- People really have made too big a deal of him. Florida lost their #1 receiver last year- Andre Caldwell, but you dont hear the Gator fans crying about it.(and no I'm not a Gator fan, but I know that the gators didnt blow that injury way out of proportion). Bama fans have gone as far to say that they coulda beat Auburn if they had Prothro??????? Auburn absolutely DOMINATED the line of scrimmage that day! Croyle got sacked countless times! Please tell me how he was gonna get the ball to Prothro when his O-Line couldnt even hold off the Auburn defense....Bama got dominated and the Bama fans who say that are just trying to make excuses and justify another loss in the Iron Bowl.
We'll see how Bama does with Prothro back this year....I dont think theyre gonna do very well, but thats just me. We'll see how it plays out. Bama's gonna have a tough time beating Florida in the Swamp, LSU, and Auburn next year. All those three teams are far superior as far as talent is concerned...but I dont have a problem rooting for Bama cuz I have a friend who plays for them, and my team doesnt play u guys-Georgia- so good luck to Bama next year and Go Dawgs!!
The Dawgs are also inferior in talent to Florida, LSU, and Auburn. BUT- Mark Richt has the best coaching staff in the SEC and it shows. Simply by coaching alone UGA will seriously contend for the SEC EAST Title, and if UGA can decide on a quarterback early in the year- and that situation pans out...WATCH OUT! UGA is very close to exploding!- The way FSU's offense used to explode when Richt was their Offensive Coordinator. Richt may have the receivers he needs this year to run his offense...not to mention the best trio of running backs IN THE NATION! Kregg Lumpkin, Thomas Brown, and Danny Ware...and I'm tellin ya- watch out for Danny Ware- he's defintely 3rd on that list right now- but he has the potential to be an Adrian Peterson type back...he definitely is the dark horse of the three who could emerge as the star, but he's also unmotivated at times and he played horrible last year so we will see.
I'm gonna say it now without fear. IF UGA settles the quarterback position early in the season and Richt gets solid play from whoever it is(most likely Joe Tereshinski but it could be Matt Stafford- Richt isnt afraid to play a freshman quarterback if he needs to- remember David Greene?! The winningest quarterback in College Football History!!)..UGA WILL WIN ANOTHER SEC CHAMPIONSHIP!!...but if UGA's quarterbacks struggle then I'm afraid UF will take the East in 2006, and earning a berth in Atlanta to play for the SEC Championship game. But it is a definite possibility that UGA will go into the UF game undefeated again this year..if the Dawgs can just beat South Carolina(on the road) and Tennessee(at home). The rest of the schedule is managable.
Watch out for the Dawgs! Theyre rated 13-15th in all the Preview Magazines I've read so far, but they have finished in the Top 10 for 4 straight years...and a 5th straight is definitely on the horizon!
Go Dawgs! Get Ready for the Explosion!
So Cal USA Ties! said:
posted on June 18, 2006 4:21 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Texas = National Champs.
Rose Bowl 2006 = one of the Greatest games the sport has ever seen.
Rose Bowl 2006 = one of the Best Matchups of 2 teams ever.
Texas beat USC. USC lost to Texas.I dont know what you "thought" or "assumed" I would say regarding that. Here, I'll give you this, squeeze whatever drop of "jealously" youd like out of this: I take a micro-speck of Solace in knowing that it took one of the greatest performances, in one of the greatest games, to finally beat USC (gained some perspective after being in mourning for a couple of weeks after the loss).
Now, about "excuses", I not gonna say that I dont Wonder what "woulda happend if" such-n-such happend differently... but like I said (and have no problem saying, nor should anyone), Texas beat USC, Texas is the National Champ.
Oh yeah, more reason why you should understand that I aint hating/jealous/worried because of USC's personell losses, is...
- USC's 2003 Backfield = No Returning Starters, Replacing their ENTIRE BACKFIELD only a guy with 1 Career TD, and added a trio of TRUE Freshman (Bush, LenDale, Chauency).
- USC's 2003 Returning Star Player = SOPH WR Mike Williams (PAC Freshman of the Year '02).
- USC's 2003 QB = Replacing some guy named Carson "HEISMAN" Palmer was up for grabs for a Purdue-Transfer, two guys named "Matt", and a kid that shoulda still been in High School.
USC 2003 = Ended with USC being National Champs (AP)2006 USC = David Booty is a 4th-YEAR JUNIOR with more experience than 2003-Leinart(backed up by an equally talented Sanchez). At RB, that 3rd RB in that 2003-freshman-trio is now a JR (Chauncey), two RBs with 3 Career TD returning, another crop of talented Freshman RBs (Stafon, Moody, Gable, Havaili). The team's Returning Star Players is JUNIOR Dwayne Jarrett (Consensus 1st Team All-AMERICAN WR '05).
So Cal USA Ties! said:
posted on June 18, 2006 4:35 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko G - more proof, so-to-speak, of what Im talking about: Your increduleous attitude that someone even suggests that the SEC is not "Dominant".
~How dare I~Dope, you feed the "hype" that Im refering to with ever post.
brownsrodeo88 said:
posted on June 18, 2006 5:18 PM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
Wow people Projected Florida to finish top 10 and Chris Leak to win the Heisman.... oh brother.
OH NO!!! Brownie, these projections are based off stats!Just like the BCS who f's almost everything up to the tenth power.
Projections dont compensate for a) a hike in the level of play, b) the leadership Prothro brought on the field which heightened other receivers play c) big play, game changing ability.
So Cal USMC, your excellent at googling up stats, but you evidently arent terrible plugged into what really makes college football the greatest sport in the world.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 18, 2006 7:26 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,
You seem to know a lot about stats.Snoop Dogg needs an assistant coach to help out with the pee wee league in Compton.I can hook you up with a job bro!Hey G,if you project it out to 12 games you might make a little money!!I'm out!
Holla At Ya BoyT-Mac said:
posted on June 18, 2006 10:06 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,
Seriously,all joking aside.I'm not hatin on ya G.Let's put the Prothro thing to rest.Post me back though and give me your honest opinion of Bama and the SEC overall this season.I'm curious to see what you think.Be honest and fair.I'm out!
Holla At Ya BoyMooka said:
posted on June 18, 2006 10:24 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal says,
"The SEC has more good teams than other conferences (generally speaking). I havent said any different."
Then goes on to say SEC is overhyped!!!It doesn't get any more twisted than that ladies and gentlemen! Would you want a guy like that doing stats for your company?
Franko G,See what you get for agreeing with Socal? You get called a dope by Socal. HAHA
AU03 said:
posted on June 19, 2006 9:42 AM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
The computers have biases, too. One may rank a team's schedule 30th in the nation , while another computer ranking may rank them 50th, while still another may rank them 65th. You wonder why the creator's of these rankings do not have to reveal their formulas (and most do not)? Because doing so would reveal the criteria which make them up, thus exposing potential biases.
College football is like Economics- it's not an a priori science, meaning that it is impossible to predict future outcomes from past outcomes. Why?- because but football contests involve human action, and it is impossible to know how 11 humans working together are going to act in a given before they actually do, given the prospect of the 1000's of stimuli that affect how the athletes perform. Even if you knew all of those stimuli, it would still be impossible to assign the apporpriate weights to each of them to accurately forast an outcome. The computer rankings you speak of treat football as an a priori science, in that they are designed to predict future outcomes(ie. higher-ranked teams should always win, unless a possible "handicap" is given to the away teams causes their ranking to fall below their opponent), with the input in predicting these "future ouctomes" are past results.
SoCal, you say, When NONE of the reputable Rankings/Ratings/Selection Orgs name you the Champs... you dont have much to stand on. But its gonna take more than "Well they were the only undefeated and untied team."
Your are forgetting the prospect that people and things can be wrong, even in a consensus. There was a time when virtually everyone thought the world was flat. There was a time when everyone thought that smoking WASN'T bad for your health. To say that a major organzation not picking a team as the best in the nation does not mean that they are not. It just means that the organizations that pick the best teams in the nation THINK they are not. When the organization contains human voters, you can say nothing more than they are making an informed opinion, but an opinion nonetheless. Above, I demonstrated the way that computer rankings can be just as guilty (if not more) of being incorrect. In 2004, unless Auburn and USC played- there is no way any one person could have known who is better. The same goes for BAMA, ND, and MSU in 1966, Auburn and Miami in 1983, LSU and USC in 2003, and every other year in which multiple teams finished with the same record who did not meet head-to-head.
Until that gets corrected (playoff), there will contunue to be discussions like this. To think you are correct in anything you are arguing which cotains any element of opinion (ie. the 1966 NC), or in the case of the stats you keep throwing out, think that any of them matter at all (ie. comparing total offense stats of the SEC to the PAC-10) is complete ignorance.
Franko G said:
posted on June 19, 2006 10:31 AM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
So Cal's statement from post #155-
"Franko G - more proof, so-to-speak, of what Im talking about: Your increduleous attitude that someone even suggests that the SEC is not "Dominant".
~How dare I~Dope, you feed the "hype" that Im refering to with ever(every?) post."
I tell it how it is. We all know how YOU feel and where YOU stand. I see that you have taken it upon yourself to stand alone against the most loyal, hardcore fans in football. For some reason you feel like you have to do this...not sure why...???...
This discussion will never be solved or worked out...But its obvious that you want to sit here and babble on about how the SEC is "overhyped" day after day.
So Cal, how much longer we gonna do this??? When are you gonna be content that your "Quest" has failed???.....Honestly...
Tomcat said:
posted on June 19, 2006 12:58 PM — 70.249.42.101 — link — abuse?
Hey T-mac and So-Cal I agree with yall to a certain extent, However you both realize that we are all both prejudace and objective in our opinions concerning one conference or another.
so-cal you said the Big ten was the best in 05?
Iowa State Beat Iowa Baylor beat Iowa State
Texas beat Ohio State Ohio Stae beat Notre Dame
Nebraska beat Michigan
Lets see Big XII against big 10 3-0
stats are statsTexas Beat USC Oklahoma beat Oregon
Big XII against pac 10 2-0In The Big Twelve conference every game is a potential upset.Anybody can beat anybody on a given day.Just because Nebraska and Oklahoma are not dominating as in years before, shows that the conference is tougher and more competitive than in years past.
The Big Twelve is the dominate conference now.
Hookem-Horns Sic-em Bears OU-sucksOU Fan said:
posted on June 19, 2006 2:27 PM — 69.179.198.28 — link — abuse?
The SEC is overhyped. I don't care what anyone says. The Big 12 and ACC don't get the respect they deserve, and the Big East especially doesn't get any respect. Every year, SEC fans are all about how tough the SEC is, but when I look at their bowl game results, I see different. And Alabama being dominant next year? Please, give me a break. Thats a team that based the outcome of their whole season on losing one reciever, I'm sorry, thats pathetic. What happened to mighty Georgia, losing to West Virginia? What about Auburn? USC would have beaten any SEC team last season, and Texas would have for sure beaten any team also. Go Sooners baby, wwwwhhhhhooooo
So Cal, SECers help Mooka said:
posted on June 19, 2006 8:01 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mook - The Hypothetical question, again...
If two evenly matched teams, I say again EVENLY MATCHED TEAMS, face eachother 10 times were one team has 7 Home Games and the other only has 3... what would you say is the "likely" outcome (generally speaking, obviously)?
E-V-E-N-L-Y... M-A-T-C-H-E-D... hypothetically speaking.
A 2nd hypothetical...
Two evenly matched teams face eachother 10 times on a clearly "Neutral" field; what do you say would be the "likely" outcome?
Or if they met 20 times... or even 108 timesSo Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 19, 2006 8:36 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko G, you tell it like it Aint (as do most SECentric snobs)... Thats why my "SEC is Over-Rated. 'Perception' dont match 'reality'" razzing continues. I temper the Hype.
The crux of this issue often seems to be that the "Have-n-Have Nots" dynamic that is more pronouced in the SEC, gives a Distorted view of the C-o-n-f-e-r-e-n-c-e Comparison/Rankings debate. (past 6 years only 8 SEC teams have finished 4-4... PAC, BTEN each have had about 15).
The SEC does produce more "good teams", if you will, but also more "bad/horrible teams" than the other major confs (generally)... And THAT plainly just doesnt "prove" strength, same as it doenst "prove" weakness, of a C-o-n-f-e-r-e-n-c-e on its own! Ya gotzta look at OOC results; not just the Record, but SOS too. Treat a Conference as you would a Team, who did they beat, who did they lose to, etc... and remember, what teams do against other teams in THEIR OWN CONFERENCE says NOTHING about the conference's "strength" (on its own).Whatever amount of "strength" or "value" that Auburn GAINED by beating Arkansas, is the same amount/value that Arkansas LOST by losing to Auburn... AS INDIVIDUAL TEAMS, Auburn deserves to be rewarded for it (higher ranking/rating, etc), as Arkansas deserves to be penelized for it (lower rating, etc) and That on its own DOES NOT affect the strength/value of the SEC as a C-O-N-F-E-R-E-N-C-E. Re-arranging deck-chairs.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 19, 2006 9:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko, USC finished 8-0 in the PAC; No SEC team finished unbeaten in-conf. The PAC had three 4-4 teams (Cal, ASU, Stanford), the SEC had NONE.
Strictly leaving OOC results the same, lets re-arrange some deck-chairs...If USC was a bit WEAKER and Arizona St was a bit stronger (seemed closer than 38-28) then USC woulda been 7-1 (11-2 overall). If O State was a bit WEAKER, and/or Cal a bit stronger (also a close game, 23-20) Cal woulda been 5-3 (9-3 overall). Stanford(4-4) a bit WEAKER, then Arizona St jumps up to 6-2 (9-3 overall).
PAC would have no dominant team, no 4-4 teams, 5 teams Ranked in the almighty Top 25 (woulda "Looked" more like the SEC):
11-2 USC
10-2 Oregon
10-2 FUCLA
9-3 Arizona St
9-3 Cal
4-7 O State
4-7 Wazzu
4-7 Stanford
3-8 Arizona
2-9 WashingtonIts a give and take, but its all just re-arranging deck chairs! (when its within a conference). The "crappy teams" in the SEC are just Tooooo "crappy" (generally speaking) to beat the "good teams", so those teams end up with a "prettier record" and the crappiness of the crappy SEC teams is Ignored, swept under the proverbial rug... whereas in other Conferences (generally), those crappy teams are more competative and the result is more "middle teams". NONE OF THAT ILLUSTRATES A CONFERENCE'S STRENGTH OVERALL COMPARED TO OTHER CONFERENCES.
Say Georgia WAS as dominant as USC...
Georgia woulda been 8-0 (plus 1-0/CCG), 12-1 overall.
Auburn would then be 8-4 (6-2)
Florida would then be 8-4 (4-4)If crappy SEC teams werent soooo crappy...
Alabama 13 - 10 Old Miss(1-7)
Florida 48 - 42(2OTs) Vandy (3-5)
LSU 19 - 17 Arkansas (2-6)
so-on and so-on...... its re-arranging Deck-Chairs on the Titanic... it wouldnt affect the "strength" of the conference (in-it of itself).
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 19, 2006 9:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, about the Prothro thing. I LIKE PROTHRO! I see him as of the top 5 Returners in the Coutnry this season - just a notch below the elite; Ted Ginn, Steve Breaston, Darrell Blackmon(NCSt) types.
The whole thing got started with T-Mac going off on a Tangent, off-of another Tangent (the 1966 Alabama Non-Title thing)... EVERY Fugking time a dicussion even comes close to "Alabama's 2005 season", the Injury to Prothro-excuse is brought up. Every fugkin time! Other teams/other KEY injuries DONT, Not to the Degree of Prothro/bama
T-Mac says: posted on June 14, 2006 03:17 AM
Everyone out there needs to quit drinking the Haterade!Alabama is on the way back to national prominence and people are hatin on them.The last 8 or 9 years have been tough for Bama,but they are coming back around.The probation is over and the other teams are nervous.They should be.We have been down basically since the mid 90's and are storming back.The 2005 season was good,but it could have been great.Tyrone Prothro doesn't go down and we go undefeated.I challenge anyone on that.Bring it on.Look up stats or do whatever it is you all do.Reggie Bush goes down and USC doesn't go to play Texas.I'm pretty good on stats,
So Cal Pete Carroll Defense said:
posted on June 19, 2006 10:32 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Pete Carroll/USC:
2001 = No. 11 Scoring-Defense (even as a rebuilding 6-6 team)
2002 = No. 6 Rush-Defense (facing the No. 1 Rated SOS)
2003 = No. 1 Rush-Defense
2004 = No. 1 Rush-Defense
2005 = Hella injuries on D, still only 19 secs away from the National Title.And looking at Turnover Margin, an under-appreciated Defensive Stat:
USC 2005 = No. 2
USC 2004 = No. 1
USC 2003 = No. 2
USC 2002 = No. 5
USC 2001 = No. 5
USC 2000 under Paul Hackett = No. 113 out-of 114 teams!
So Cal Pete Carroll Defense said:
posted on June 19, 2006 10:57 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, UCLA beat Oklahoma, it was 2-1.
But anyway, when talking about Conference Comparisons/Rankings, you take the results in their ENTIRETY, its not as simple as head-up records. The SEC went 1-1 versus Wyoming, so what?
I'll take it even futher, the XII finished with THE BEST RECORD (85.7%) of any conference in 2005. That still doesnt tell the whole story. The Big TEN had the 2nd best Record, but faced an overall Tougher SOS. The XII faced the Weakest SOS (faced an embarassing amount of teams rated in the "Bottom 30"; XII faced more SunBelt & Non-D1A opponents than even the SEC did!). Accounting for the entire season, the Big TEN ended up Rated No. 1 overall for 2005.
Again, the only input that goes into these Ratings are Wins & Losses! Theres no computer Geek entering anti-SEC data in some dark room; the formulas for these Ratings are made Public (the majority of them, anyway).
T-Mac said:
posted on June 19, 2006 11:22 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,
All I was doing was comparing a Reggie Bush-type player to Prothro in that post.Most teams have a multi-purpose GO-TO-GUY!That is what he is to Bama.BTW-You never did answer my question G.If Reggie Bush goes down for the season does USC go to play Texas???Enough on Prothro.Squash It bro.Also,at the end of my post where it says(I'm pretty good on stats,)that is a comma not a period.I said I DON'T SIT AROUND AND MEMORIZE THEM!.It's really funny how you said that you like Prothro and you see him as one of the top 5 Returners in the country this season-just a notch below the elite.Call me crazy,but if he is in the top 5 this season I would call that IN the elite and not-just a notch below it.You have a real passive-aggressive way in how you post.You don't like Prothro either.You expect everybody to believe that after all the crap you been sayin?Comparing him to 2nd and 3rd string players.I never wen't off on a tangent either as you put it.I sure as hell can though if you wan't me to.You act like you own this bitch.I don't think you do.Check yourself G.I'm out!Holla At Ya BoyRusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 19, 2006 11:27 PM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
So Cal u idiot, the reason USC won 9 pac games is BECAUSE THE PAC SUXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, THE BIG 12 NORTH IS MORE EXCITING AND MORE TALENTED THAN THE 9 TEAMS THAT USC BEAT!!!! THE SEC HAS AT LEAST 5 POWERHOUSES A YEAR COMPETEING FOR THE TOP 10!!
So Cal Pete Carroll Defense said:
posted on June 19, 2006 11:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac. My breakdown of the 2006 season:
Arkansas & Tennessee = a couple of the Most-Improved-Team (on the list with Arizona, Oregon St, etc)
Alabama = on of the Biggest Drop-off (along with UCLA, TCU, Wisconsin, etc). They lose to much of their relative strengths from last year, both sides of the ball. Croyle really stepped up in 05, big void to fill for '06. Bama loses 6 of its top 7 tacklers, including its two Sack-masters; they only return 4 Starters, not good. All four Road games will be Losses, plus one home-loss to Auburn (Old Miss could be dangerous too; Brent Schaeffer will have a pretty veteran O-Line to work with).
Georgia will be down a bit (Richt is one of my favorite Coaches). My Upset pick of the Year in the SEC is Georgia @ Old Miss,
T-Mac said:
posted on June 19, 2006 11:45 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Tomcat,I agree with you bro.I guess we all are a little prejudice for certain conferences.You are right.This So Cal USMCr guy acts like USC is the only College FB team on the planet.I know we all get a little excited sometimes.Congratulations to Texas!National Champs.I'm an SEC fan,but I have no problem giving credit where credit is due.I'm out!Holla At Ya Boy
Tomcat said:
posted on June 20, 2006 12:24 AM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal Pete My mistake, I was recalling from memory and overlooked that one Thanks.I never thought I would agree with an OU fan, however here I am refering to post #166. Hey So-Cal Pete I do not agree with post #172 you said weak strength of shedule for Big Twelve? As I recall from memory and not from a pile of computerized stats didn't the big twelve by your own addmission win a shocking 85.7%. The Big Twelve teams have to play each other. Thats a pretty tough schedule.
As a Longhorn fan I have to admit that while UT faces North Texas and SHSU, they also play Nebraska and Texas Tech on the road.The Dallas game vs.OU and an early season home game agaisnt Ohio State.I wouldnt call any Big XII teams schedule dismal when you consider they have to face each other.
I'll give USC credit for scheduling Arkansas and Nebraska.The Big Twelve is stronger now than the pac-ten, big-ten bias announcers give them credit.
Didn't UCLA also defeat Rice? Thanks Hookem-Horns check out Rice's schedule thats BallsMooka said:
posted on June 20, 2006 1:14 AM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
SoCal,
Good to see you giving credit where it is due. That's all I wanted to see.
OU,
Sorry to say it but Big 12 absolutely sucked last year. Seriously, I love it when people say no teams from SEC could do this or that. I remember clearly the year LSU won the Championship in 2004 people where giving OU a 30 point spread. H-A. Even last year people were expecting Miami to smash them. Yea, that's right, you know who you are haters. Stay in your hole. The only exception in Big 12 last year was Texas. Dude, look at who Texas played in your Championship. Colorado. Whoot-te-doo. Well, hey I'm not biased in my opinion, just honest, so I will tell you I think Big 12 will look a lot better next year. I think Nebraska will come back hard, Texas should be in the top ten, and if OU can get their QB on the ball I think they will be top contenders too. My true an honest opinion that I believe can be backed up if I put enough time into the research is anytime a team in the SEC can go either undefeated or even lose just one game can beat any team in any bowl. Can anyone prove me wrong? I don't judge Conferences like Socal does which is by how many OOC games they won because I see there is a major flaw in that stat. Instead I judge a Conference by how many teams compete for National Championships, or at least for their own conference Championship. That's the thing about SEC. There is consistently 6 teams going for that spot every year. Even Socal stated SEC has more good teams than other conferences. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying other Conferences don't have teams that can beat anybody, I'm just saying they don't have as many good teams. Ain't that right Socal?
Franko G said:
posted on June 20, 2006 10:49 AM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
So Cal,
Allright man, I'm gonna take you down point by point:
-------------------------------------------------
" Franko G, you tell it like it Aint (as do most SECentric snobs)... Thats why my "SEC is Over-Rated. 'Perception' dont match 'reality'" razzing continues. I temper the Hype."
-------------------------------------------------What hype?? All I have said all along is that the SEC has 6 great teams...very true! I have said that the SEC always has numerous Top 25 teams...very true! Now before you bring up the point that "having a lot of top 25 teams doesn't equate to conference strength" again, I want you to think about this...Are you just going to write that off as if it means nothing??...Cuz thats what you're doing! And!!..just because there are six great teams in the conference, doesn't necessarily mean that the other six teams are horrible!! Life is not a formula! You can't always say...oh, well if there are six awesome teams then that MUST mean that the bottom teams are horrible...Think about it...if the top 6 teams are very good(better than all the other conferences six best teams from year to year), then the bottom teams have to go up against these very good teams more often. Other bottom-of-the-conference teams dont play as many great in-conference teams in a season. Bottom line is- You can't just say that 'since the top teams are great; the bottom teams are that much more horrible; so overall it all cancels out and the conference is overhyped.' You can't just pass that as law. You don't know how bottom-of-the-SEC teams would do in other conferences. And don't bring up the 'every conference is .500 against itself' stat. We all know that. I know how your mind works. You put everything into your little formula, and if it doesnt compute in your mind then you take issue with it. But your little 'formula' isnt the key to the football universe!...Moving on!
-------------------------------------------------
"Franko, USC finished 8-0 in the PAC; No SEC team finished unbeaten in-conf. The PAC had three 4-4 teams (Cal, ASU, Stanford), the SEC had NONE.
Strictly leaving OOC results the same, lets re-arrange some deck-chairs..."
-------------------------------------------------Are you trying to say that 'since no team in the SEC finished undefeated in-conference(like USC); This makes the SEC weaker than percepted'?...I hope not, because my logic goes like this: Since no team in the SEC went undefeated in-conference; this shows the competitiveness between the top teams. Nobody dominated because there were so many teams fighting for the top. Whereas, in the Pac10, USC dominated everyone in-conference...that shows that the rest of the conference was far inferior to USC..your little scenario in an alternate universe doesnt mean much. Because USC dominated everyone in the Pac the last few years. I don't see much comptetition at all at the top of that conference...USC beat their biggest competitor(UCLA) by like 50 points...wow...now thats competition....
-------------------------------------------------
"Its a give and take, but its all just re-arranging deck chairs! (when its within a conference). The "crappy teams" in the SEC are just Tooooo "crappy" (generally speaking) to beat the "good teams", so those teams end up with a "prettier record" and the crappiness of the crappy SEC teams is Ignored, swept under the proverbial rug... whereas in other Conferences (generally), those crappy teams are more competative and the result is more "middle teams". NONE OF THAT ILLUSTRATES A CONFERENCE'S STRENGTH OVERALL COMPARED TO OTHER CONFERENCES."
-------------------------------------------------Your "re-arranging deck chairs" theory does not pass as law just because you think it does. See my statement above regarding in-conference play between top and bottom teams.
-------------------------------------------------
"Georgia will be down a bit (Richt is one of my favorite Coaches). My Upset pick of the Year in the SEC is Georgia @ Old Miss,"
-------------------------------------------------Yea...we'll see about that...Mark Richt has fielded a top 10 team 4 straight seasons. Georgia also has the most favorable schedule in Mark Richt's tenure in Athens. It's Tennessee and Georgia Tech at home, Auburn and South Carolina away, and Florida in Jacksonville, then the rest are games UGA will win as long as nothing crazy happens.
Yes, many people foresee a slight drop-off from Georgia. But this is the same thing we heard last year. Nobody thought DJ Shockley would be any good, well he proved them wrong! How bout Shockley as the MVP of the SEC Championship game! Yeah, Richt knows how to coach quarterbacks. He will field another very solid team that will contend for the SEC East title again. There's only one thing that's holding Georgia back from exploding. That's the offense. Richt has been running a very systematic, conservative style of offense that really doesn't blow anybody away. That's what Georgia's gonna need to take the next step. They're already a Top 5 program since Richt came to town, but that's what's holding UGA back from a bid at a National Title. The defense will be very strong again. Georgia's defensive front will be scary. This D-Line and Linebacker Corps is going to be tough to go up against. I say that Georgia comes into the Florida game undefeated once again. That game will be HUGE if that's the case! Cuz it will probly decide the SEC East race, and it will show what this UGA team is made of. Well, now that I just checked the date, we're still 2 and a half months from the kick-off to the season so I'll stop there.
OU Fan said:
posted on June 20, 2006 3:31 PM — 72.161.165.156 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, I absolutely hate Texas, but I'm with you on the Big 12 being tough next year. However, you as well as I both know that OU is looking like they're going to win in Big D this year. Texas is good, but OU is looking stronger, with a much improved QB, healthy RB, and a very strong defense. I don't know about the freshman QB situation in Austin, but that will be a factor against OU, and OU will capitalize on it. And So Cal, I will have to say that I think the Pac 10 is not as weak as everyone thinks in my opinion. USC, UCLA, Oregon, Cal, Arizona State are good teams.But you as well as I know that the Big 12 is more tough, and will especially be tough this season. Go Sooners.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 20, 2006 5:31 PM — 204.62.104.208 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, yeah sure XII teams have to play other XII teams... 12 teams, 8 games each, plus a CCG. Add em up...
XII ends up with a 48-48 record against itself, and 1-1 in the CCG - Woah, what an impressive .500 record!
Guess what... Every Conf ends up .500 against itself. With every "Win" that Texas, Oklahoma, TexTech had against other XII teams, there was a XII team that added a "LOSS". The in-conference play is a Closed Curcuit, so-to-speak.Thats why...
The ONLY way to even TRY to ATTEMPT to have a CONFERENCE COMPARISON (ei, a Conf Ranking) that is founded on What-Happens-on-the-Field is by looking at how a Conference did against teams from OTHER Conferences (overall, collectively).The XII's SOS was simply weaker in 2005, COMPARED TO the other Confs. This is only a conceptual example here; TCU finished with a "Better Record"(11-1) than Ohio St, V Tech, but was still "Rated Lower" and also "Ranked Lower" than those teams.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 20, 2006 5:57 PM — 204.62.104.208 — link — abuse?
Rusty, College Football is NOT played on PAPER!
T-Mac, Mooka, everyone...Conferences dont exist in a BUBBLE!
Everything is Relative.
The SEC isnt "the best conference" Just Because wind blows from your ash.
These games are NOT played on PAPER!
The SEC, just like every other Muther-Fuggin Conference, has to PROVE THEMSELVES against teams from OTHER CONFS! Even the freakin Sun Belt has to PLAY THE GAMES first to prove that they are the Weakest Conference. And guess what, it changes form year to year, no Conference is Guaranteed Anything.IT SO HAPPENS THAT THIS PAST SEASON... pay attention... BASED ON THE RESULTS!!! WINS AND LOSSES, ON TOP OF WINS AND LOSSES, SO-ON AND SO-ON... THE SEC FINISHED WITH THE 5th RECORD, AND WAS ALSO "RATED" 5th OVERALL.
Rusty, this might Surprise you (it has the affect on 'Tards)... the SEC, after playing against other SEC teams ENDS UP 48-48, plus 1-1/CCG, thats a whopping .500 record! Whatever "greatness" you think LSU gains from beating Old Miss, Arkansas, Florida, Bama(etc), an equivelant amount of "greatness" is taken away from those teams by the Loss.
Conferences dont exist in a bubble. You look to the OOC result to get any kind of comprehensive "conference ranking" sorta thing. Every thing is relative.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 20, 2006 6:16 PM — 204.62.104.208 — link — abuse?
Rust, USC won 8 PAC games not 9.
Rust, refer to post 169, seriously do you not understand? Are you that obtuse?So if Arizona State beats USC, ASU would be 8-4 and USC 11-2, it would mean USC was a bit WEAKER same as ASU would be a bit STRONGER. The SEC had ZERO 4-4 teams, Stanford was 4-4, if they were a bit WEAKER then ASU woulda beat them too, ASU is then 9-3. Cal(4-4) lost to Oregon St 23-20, if Oregon State was as Sh!tty as a team like Mississippi State then Cal would be 9-3.
NONE OF THOSE CHANGES WOULD AFFECT THE PAC'S "STRENGTH" (in-to of itself), the fact that the SEC did NOT have any Elite teams and that more of their "bad teams" were HORRIBLY "bad" compared to other Confs, does NOT determine the SEC's Strength.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 20, 2006 6:32 PM — 204.62.104.208 — link — abuse?
Thats right Mooka, and "Good" dont mean "Great".
And "Horrible" is worse than "Bad".The 2005 SEC "champs" had 3 losses.
Auburn 7-1, best record vs the SEC!
Auburn 2-2 vs Ball St, West Kentucky, G Tech, Wiscy... Auburn LOST 23-14 to a 5-3 ACC team and LOST 24-10 to a 5-3 Big TEN team (that didnt even face Ohio St) that had the 100th Ranked Defense.
LSU lost to a 5-6 team.Now how do YOU define a true Title Contender exactly? Cause the SEC had ZERO in 2005.
Mooka said:
posted on June 20, 2006 9:24 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Well, okay, maybe I can agree that the SEC wasn't packed with all great teams, but just for the fact that they were loaded with more good teams than any other should say something, right? I'll even stick to my, "If the SEC team can walk out with one loss," theory when I say last year not one team in the SEC only lost one game, therefore I don't believe any of them belonged in the National Championship game last year. So yea, maybe the SEC wasn't all that great last year, but even on their off year they still got 5 or 6 teams in top notch bowl games. And when I say they're on a off year that means their top 6 teams only lost 2 or 3 games. That's on an off year. That's pretty impressive you have to admit. Man, believe me when I say I wish their wasn't so much talent in the SEC be/c then the Tigers woulda been cruizin in the NCs for the past few years. Other conferences don't have that problem.
Tomcat said:
posted on June 20, 2006 11:01 PM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Hey Mooka In reference to post #178 you said the Big XII sucked last year.Ask Michigan, Ohio State, Oregon, USC, and Iowa if the Big XII sucked. I have nothing against SEC and I certainly wouldnt say that they sucked.Alabama beat Texas Tech by what 3 points.The same Texas Tech team that barely squeezed past OU.The same Texas Tech team that Texas hammered in Austin .I dont recall the exact score,but it was like 30 points difference. Give the Arkansas Razorbacks
credit for scheduling big time opponents like USC in 05 & 06 and Texas in 07 and 08. The SEC is a great conference with great opponents and I'd like to see more of them play big XII teams in the future.
As for conference championships I dont think they are necessary at all. Texas should have played Iowa State or Nebrasksa, they both beat CU.
Texas plays Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, Kansas State and Texas A&M during the regular season. Its a way to generate revenue for the schools and the host cities.We had to whup CU twice in 05 and scored 118 points against them.
The last time Texas played LSU Texas Won
Hookem-Horns Sic-em Bears OU-suxT-Mac said:
posted on June 21, 2006 12:16 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
This is for So Cal in regards to your post #175.I do agree with you that Bama has lost some strength from last year,but what you are telling me is that the best they do is 7-5 this year?I wouldn't roll the dice on that.John Parker Wilson threw for 244 yds and 2TDS in the spring game.He wen't 21 of 31 which is 68% completion.We are loaded at tailback.Our fullbacks are Bulls.Our tightends avg 6'4" 250 pounds and have soft hands and great stiff arms.The returning defense has some holes,but not as green as you might think.11 sacks between them and speed in the secondary and at LB as they saw much playing time last season.Bobby Greenwood had 3 sacks last year and he wasn't a starter.He's back.More of a rush end.They have more depth on defense than you realize.The probation is over.This isn't the late 1990's anymore!I'm also not saying Bama will go to the SEC championship or anything,but for you to project them to go 7-5 at best is whack!You say all 4 road games will be losses.At LSU and at Florida will be very tough games.What makes you think that Arkansas and Tenn are definite losses bro?Fill me in on that one.I agree with you on Auburn.They should be tough.You say that Brent Schaeffer and Ole Miss could be dangerous too.The only thing Brent Schaeffer will be this year is picking himself up off the ground after he gets drilled.Actually,now that I think about it,the first good hit he took at Tennessee he got a season ending shoulder injury.He got kicked out of Tenn for a reason bro.Just a smaller version of Marcus Vick.There's a good posterboy for College FB!!!You have your upset pick of the year as Georgia @ Ole Miss.Your insane if you think that will happen.Georgia has a lot of weapons this year.Alabama will go 10-2 probably 9-3 with losses to Florida,LSU,and Auburn although I hate to say it,but I'm honest.Oh,I almost forgot to tell ya G.TEXAS GAVE USC A BEATDOWN!!!I'm out!Holla At Ya Boy
Tomcat said:
posted on June 21, 2006 7:10 AM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Hey T-Mac & Mooka Yall are obviously SEC fans and are So-Cal usmc, So-Cal pete and So-cal clip
the same pro pac-10 person? Its kinda funny him running down yalls conference on this SEC leads attendance blog. Hopefully Arkansas and Nebraska will win over USC and then Later on Notre Dame, Maybe that will cut em down a knotch.Hes been listening to too much Keith Jackson and Dan Fouts pac-10 propaganda. Hookem-Horns Sic-em Bears
Roll Tide Pig Soowey OU-SuxMooka said:
posted on June 21, 2006 10:10 AM — 138.145.219.3 — link — abuse?
Last time Tex played LSU, LSU had a pretty weak QB too. Well, whatever don't get all uptight about it. You have to admit Big 12 wasn't up to their normal standards last year. I would expect more out of a conference like that. In my honest opinion and based on some facts I think the Big 12 is the only conference that can hang with SEC and in some periods have been better than SEC. There, are you happy?
Mooka said:
posted on June 21, 2006 2:42 PM — 138.145.219.3 — link — abuse?
Socal,
FYI yes Auburn lost to Georgia T, Georgia beat Georgia T and Auburn beat Georgia. We can keep going in circles you know. The point is, so what? SEC still had more good teams than other Conferences, just like YOU said. One more thing, what was the point in bringing up Ball St and W. Kentucky for 2005? Auburn beat both of those teams by more than 30 points! Ball St. by 60!! Seriously, once again, WHAT IN THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? YOU ARE THE HYPSTER MY FRIEND. You truly define a rebel without a cause and no purpose in life.
So Cal Most Objective Person Youll find on these Blogs/Boards said:
posted on June 21, 2006 7:08 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, stop with the Trolling. Im anything but a "homer". This "Attendance" thing is nothing I would comment on... but then there were some of these SEC-ers equating IT with conference "strength" -- So because I make an admonishment to those Hypsters, then Im a "Homer"? a PAC propaganda-ist-er? Come on, take a step back and look at what Ive said:
- The general "perception" of the SEC's strength as a conference doesnt match "reality", relatively speaking. The SEC is Over-Hyped, moreso than other confs, and heres why... bla, bla.
- Prothro is a quality WR/KR (a bad PR, btw). And his injury 5 games into the season was a blow to Bama. But way too much is made about this one guy, by these Bama fans. Georgia was missing their QB (No. 1 in the SEC) in the Florida LOSS, you dont hear about DJ Shockley EVERY FUGKIN TIME Georgia's 2005 record is brought up. Oregon (10-2) lost their QB who was on a Vince-Young-pace in Total Offense before his injury, is Kellen Clemens ever brought up? - rarely. Arguably, as QBs, Shockley and Clemens were BIGGER LOSSES to their teams than Prothro was to Bama. And on top of that, WRs Keith Brown, DJ Hall and KR/PR Brandon Brooks did fine in-place of Prothro.
USC lost their TEAM CAPTIN on Defense, the most experience player on the D-front-7, only 2 games into the Season!@# (and had sh!t-load more injures thru-out; USC LBs were down to 1 starting LB in the lineup vs Fresno St, UCLA, Texas). In all of the ESPN/Media OVER-HYPE of USC towards the end of the year, How often did you hear about Those Injuries?Tomcat, Im probably one of the most Objective people you'll find on these CFB blogs & boards. Ei, Vince Young was my Heisman Pick, and Im talking about BEFORE THE Rose Bowl game (Elite-level Passing Ratings, coupled with being as productive as some of the Best RBs when running the ball; a bit too much was made of Reggie's AP-Yards - not very productive as a KR in 05; 0 TDs, 17.6 Yds/KR)
So Cal, Most Objective said:
posted on June 21, 2006 8:12 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac's version of a "Beatdown":
One team with 574 total yds - 38 Pts
Another with 556 total yds - 41 Pts
Where it was Decided in the final :20 seconds of the game.Try to maintain some realism in your posts T-Mac... "beatdown"???.
Old Miss over Geo... Thats why its called an "Upset Special" but ya still gotta have a logic behind the pick. For me its, Ed Orgeron - Coaching, from yr 1 to yr 2 usually means a big improvement (if its a good Coach). But Im not too strong on that pick, though I do expect Geo to drop a bit. I dont know too much about Kentucky (havent even seen Rafael Little), but Georgia @ Kentucky is SANDWICHED between Florida and @ Auburn. Kentucky returns the 2nd MOST Staters in the SEC, they just might catch a break; it smells like a Trap game for Geo, but Im not confident in that one.
I dont see Arkansas over Alabama as a huge upset. Like I said, Bama loses it "relative strength" on both sides. And head-to-head L/Y Arkansas put up their 2nd highest Rush Total & highest R-Yds/Carry (in-SEC) on BAMA! And on the flip-side the most Rushing that Alabama gave-up was to Arkansas! Ark returns 19 STARTERS! Like I say, EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE. Its NOT that I thinke Bama will be much, much worse... only that they will be worse than l/y, and Arkansas will be a lot better, aaaand it was @ Bama LY, its @ Ark this Yr... ya know, come to think of it, a 4-7 team over a 10-2 team (previous season)... that probably should qualify as an "Upset Special".
Tennessee @ Bama 2005: 6-3 Bama (+3 TOs)
What, you think its a "stretch" to pencil-in a Bama LOSS @ Tenny this season?
Bama, 7-5. Yeah, thats about right (Bowl matches are YTBD). Bama, Wiscy, UCLA, TCU... maybe Penn State, Fresno State, are my picks to have major drop-offs.
So Cal, the Ratings said:
posted on June 21, 2006 9:01 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
AU, they all have their flaws... but the "Polls" are not with-out flaws themselves.
Massey Ratings
http://www.masseyratings.com/theory/massey.htm#overviewColley Matrix
http://www.colleyrankings.com/#advan
http://www.colleyrankings.com/matrate.pdfWolfe
http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/descrip.htm#threeBillingsley Report
http://www.cfrc.com/Archives/Search_of_NC.htmSagarin ?
Anderson & Hester ?So Cal, the Ratings said:
posted on June 21, 2006 9:25 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
AU03, its not an exact science, its not supposed to be, no one has made a claim that it is.
Ive said this VERY THING MYSELF.
And You contridict yourself. This is no unequivacle (spell check) "Wrong" or "Right".
What we do have are Ratings, Polls, Rankings that have more legitimacy than others, historicall, etc.
Disputed Titles happen! 1966 wasnt one of them.T-Mac said:
posted on June 22, 2006 12:21 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal, whoever you are tonight: In your post 191 you told me to maintain some realism in my posts.No sweat G.Here is some realism for You.Every time you refer to the Texas/USC game you always manage to say (Where it was decided in the final :20 seconds of the game.)You can't get over those last 20 seconds can you bro???Do you grind your teeth at the thought of it???Let me break it down for you.It doesn't matter if a game comes down to 1 second on the clock.The better team will win.You were bragging on Pete Carroll.Look to him for CLOCK MANAGEMENT in those last 20 seconds as you always put it.Well,him or Matt Leinart.Whoever you choose.Also,you always find a way to point out the ending score of a game.Examples-Texas/USC 41-38,Bama/Ole Miss 13-10 etc.That must irritate the hell out of you.1 POINT is as good as 50 POINTS.BTW-Have you ever played football?I'm just curious bro.I'm out!HOLLA AT YA BOY
Tomcat said:
posted on June 22, 2006 2:08 AM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal the most objective,
Would you not agree that the pro-pac 10 announcers claimed that USC was the greatest team of all time.That teams like Texas are the Rodney Dangerfeilds of college football-no respect.
I never said you were a homer and I've enjoyed reading your commentary, however one must agree that everything is relative.
Every team loses players each year and every team has players out with injuries.
In a previous comment you mentioned something about if some QB had played 12 games bla bla bla.
The numbers are all relative to your perception of those numbers based upon you obvious bias and prejuduce concerning those numbers.
I watched every game that UT played last year and in most games V.Y. sat out most of the second half.The second team players pounded it out on the ground while Vince watched from the sidelines.
You like stats 652 points a NCAA record theres a stat.
Face it man you are a Trojan fan and a pac 10 fan
Hookem-Horns Sic-em Bears Pig Sooie Roll Tide
Geux Tigers Gig-em Aggies War Eagle
The Big XII and the SEC two great football conferences Adios
Mooka said:
posted on June 22, 2006 12:39 PM — 138.145.219.3 — link — abuse?
Big 12 and SEC are no doubt the 2 best football conferences ever. I'm not taking talent away from other conferences as Big 10 is solid too with Michigan, Ohio, Penn, Iowa. I'm just saying SEC and Big 12 have a couple more balanced programs. Hopefully Big 12 will pick up their programs more next year and we can see more competition. I would like to see Colorado and Neb make more of a come back.
AU03 said:
posted on June 22, 2006 2:28 PM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
And You contridict yourself. This is no unequivacle (spell check) "Wrong" or "Right".
You misunderstood me- I didn't say that all of those NC picking organizations WERE wrong in'66, I was merely saying that they COULD be wrong- just because they all agreed that year does not make them correct. Unless ND and BAMA played, there is no sure answer.
Let me guess, "Most Objective" is a title you threw upon yourself- based on your SUBJECTIVE opinion.
Diggs the Mountie said:
posted on June 22, 2006 2:51 PM — 68.55.116.210 — link — abuse?
Ole missy might win 1 game this year, that'll be against memphis,since De'Angelo is gone. The ole Colonel Sanders puppet mascot has gotten sick of the programs poor performance over the years and retired. I don't blame him.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 22, 2006 3:24 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,
You still haven't answered my question.Since you are into (if situations).IF REGGIE BUSH goes down last year like another-type(Bama Player)does USC go to play TEXAS???Just waiting on an answer.AN HONEST ANSWER!I'm out.Holla At Ya BoySo Cal USMCr (yes its the same "So Cal") said:
posted on June 22, 2006 8:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, Its the Butterfly Effect. If Reggie goes down, the game-plan changes. LenDale, Jarrett, Smith, David Kirtman, etc would pick up the slack Offensively. Its not as simple as "well he was difference in this or that game, without him then this and that would definately happen"
And by the way, USC already HAAAAD a "missing Star Player" - their Team Captain on Defense (missed 10 games!). An 11-1 USC team heading into the Bowls... USC would still be a possibility to GET TO the Rose Bowl... Penn St? 10-1?Mooka said:
posted on June 22, 2006 9:57 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Ummm, Let me answer that T-Mac...IF Reggie Bush got hurt like Prothro USC goes on to lose at least three games and a sure lost against Fresno St. The answer is NO. NO, Socal, they would not have advanced. There you have it...the most hyped up team of all time because they did make it to the NC WITH Reggie Bush and still got waxed. Talk about HYPE. That's all the last 3 years of CFB have been. 1 year with OU being nothing but hype and the next 2 years USC being nothing but hype. I would love, I mean love to see USC play a SEC team even a hair better than Arkansas. How 'bout them Tigers though? Scheduling a 15 ranked PAC-10 team for the first game of the season last year (played in their own yard too). When USC gets nuts like that, then you can come and talk to me SOcal.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 22, 2006 10:37 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
AU03, there isnt even the Possiblity of "Wrong" or "Right" based on what YOU've described CBF Champ-Selections to be. Youre tripping yourself up with that existentialism crap. *Caution, Im being facetious here* Texas never played New Mexico St, how do we "know" that NM State wouldnt have beaten Texas?
Yes, it IS a matter of opinion - Thats the thing. That's what CFB National Championships have been since, oh, always. But there are degrees to with on is more valid than others, wouldnt you say? As it happens, Alabama was not/is not recognized the National Champ of 1966 by any of the reputable CFB Title Selection Orgs.
1973, Penn State was 12-0 and didnt even get one of these 3rd-Rated Selection orgs to name them Champs - though some 10-0-1 teams got some recognition; Ohio St, Michigan a NCF-split, Oklahoma the CFRA. Notre Dame was the "ture-est" Champ... were-as that 1973 Alabama (11-1) Champ-team was one of the phoney-est Champs ever.AU03, you go ahead and "count" that one. But then you might have to count Arizona St 1970, Penn St and Miami-Oh 1973, Toledo in 1971, Marshall 1999, Tulane 1998... 1996, BYU 14-1 had a better record than FSU 12-1, but its just an ~Opinion~ that FSU was the ~Correctly~ chosen Champ right?
The Bushman in Africa are of the 'opinion' that they are born from a tree. There are degrees to the Value of opinions. Its NOT even a matter of "consensus" necessarily.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 22, 2006 11:33 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,this is in response to your post #207.You better leave the Bushman in Africa alone bro.Angelina Jolie and Bono from U2 will come for your head.I am of the 'opinion' that I wasn't born from a tree.I am of the 'opinion' that I came from my MOMMA!WORD TO YA MUTHA!Vanilla Ice-1991 I'm out!HOLLA AT YA BOY
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 22, 2006 11:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Frankooooo G!
Franko G - posted on June 8, 2006 10:46 PM - says:
Here's to you So Cal Clippers...you have tried valiantly... This is my last comment to anything connected to "The SEC is overhyped." And yes, apparently the SEC had the 5th best record against out of conference opponents in 2005...if your stats are true...Ill assume they are just because I dont care enough to go check and validate them...[bla, bla, then finishes with]... Go SEC Baby!!----------------------------------------
The guy seriously didnt even know what he was argueing - didnt even know that the SEC had the Worst Record among the 5 major confs all along!
-----------------------------------------
T-Mac - June 14 - says:
Alabama is on the way back..people are hatin... The 2005 season was good,but it could have been great.Tyrone Prothro doesn't go down and we go undefeated.I challenge anyone on that.So Cal USMCr says:
T-Mac no one's "hating" on Bama. It just happens to be Bama that has these dubious National Titles [bla, bla... then...] holy shet, please, enough with the Prothro Injury-excuse. The guy made a truely spectacular catch, but the way some of you build him up... you're wacky. [Teams like Oregon, Cal, USC had KEY injuries too, the Bama/Prothro-injury excuse is made too much of].T-Mac says: All those teams you mentioned didn't end their season playing LSU and AUBURN either. Go back and check Tyrone Prothro's stats in those first 5 games of 2005.Check all his stats.Not just his receiving stats.
So Cal USMCr: T-Mac, and I have looked at Prothro's Stats, back when the Excuse-making first began... otherwise I wouldnt be saying anything! [I did mis-read T-Mac say "all his stats", but I claified it later]
3 whole TDs, 325 Rec Yds, 19 Yds/Rec(nice), 65 Red Yds/Game (5 Games)...
Projected-out to 12 games, Prothro's closest equivelant is Clinton Soloman... "who?"... some Iowa WR.
Prothro is solid, can make the big play, but some of you go way over board with his value to the team's success (compared to other teams with significant injuries).T-Mac says: So Cal USMCr you obviously haven't looked up the correct stats on Tyrone Prothro... His stats are... [325 yds rec, 19.1 yard avg per Rec, 10.2 rushYds/carry, 27.6 Yds/KR, 7.4Yds/PR... I told you to look up ALL his stats...ALL PURPOSE YARDS...138.2 Yards Per Game. In your post you said you looked at Prothro's stats.You forgot to do 1 important thing bro!ADD THEM UP!If you are going to pop off and makeup false statistics than you need to do something else with your time...I think any team in the country would love to have a player putting out 138.2 yards per game.
Franko G - posted on June 16, 2006 11:42 AM - says:
You tell him T-Mac, I'm sure SoCal will come up with some excuse...he loves to pick and choose his stats as best suits him. I just can't believe he still hates on the SEC. People should know better, they really should. I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall when I try and reason with SoCal...... Just two days later.....
Franko G - posted on June 18, 2006 10:28 AM - says:
Hey people, think Tyrone Prothro is a great player, but his injury has been blown way out of proportion. So Cal is right this time, USC had a ton of injuries to their defense last year...Tomcat said:
posted on June 23, 2006 6:05 AM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Hey Mooka on post # 191 you said that the Big XII was not playing up to their standard? I have to agree with Frank G. on post # 179.
When you face real tough in conference competition, and no one team goes undefeated does that mean you have a weaker conference-Hell No that means your conference is more competitive.
Hey Mooka would you not agree with that? You would like to see more competetion from the Big XII.Check this out
05 Season
Missouri 27 Iowa State 24 OT
Iowa State 37 Oklahoma State 10
Oklahoma State 24 Texas Tech 17
Kansas 40 Nebraska 15
Baylor 23 Iowa State 13
Texas Tech 23 Oklahoma 21
Kansas State 36 Missouri 28
Missouri 41 Nebraska 24
Texas A&M 16 Baylor 13
Iowa State 42 Texas A&M 14
Nebraska 27 Iowa State 20
Kansas State 12 Kansas 3
Kansas 13 Missouri 3
Just an Example of some Big XII conference games
Very Competitive-simular to the SEC's competition
Just for So_Cal some OCC scores
Iowa State 23 Iowa 3
TCU 27 Iowa State 24
TCU 17 Oklahoma 10
Baylor 28 SMU 23
Clemson 25 Texas A&M 24
Missouri 38 South Carolina 31
Alabama 13 Texas Tech 10
Oklahoma 17 Oregon 14
Texas 25 Ohio State 22
Texas A&M 66 SMU 8
Colorado 39 New Mexico State 0
Nebraska 7 Pittsburg 6
UCLA 41 Oklahoma 24
Texas 41 USC 38
The Big XII is probably stronger than ever.The competition is feirce and every game is important and just because a few teams are not dominating as in the years past shows that the conference is stronger not weaker.
HEY SEC fans we both have strong competition
Sorry Diggs I do not beleive that WV could go
11-1 in ThE Big XII or SEC
Hookem Horns Sicem Bears Gigem Aggies
Geux Tigers Roll Tide Pig Sooie War EagleRusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 23, 2006 10:14 AM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
No football conference can be dominating every year. The SEC has dominated consistantly for over a century. Just because we had a bad year in 2005 doesn't mean the conference is worse now. If USC wouldn't have went on their streak and supposedly won 2 strait titles(that's wrong, USC got lucky and didn't have to play the SEC champ in 03 and 04) there wouldn't be near as many PAC fans on this blog. Good for the pac, yall had one team that won all their games for 2 1/2 years....
AU03 said:
posted on June 23, 2006 10:23 AM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
AU03, there isnt even the Possiblity of "Wrong" or "Right" based on what YOU've described CBF Champ-Selections to be. Youre tripping yourself up with that existentialism crap. *Caution, Im being facetious here* Texas never played New Mexico St, how do we "know" that NM State wouldnt have beaten Texas?
You are right, but NM State wasn't tied for the best record in college football. Since the one desirable outcome of every team in every game is to win- only the teams that win all of their games (or are tied for the best record overall) need be considered in the system we have.
Again ,you keep thinking I am saying there is a concrete "wrong" or "right" in any the selection groups of any national champion. I invite to find one instance of me doing so in this chain. I can't help it if you're taking what I say in a different way- that's allowing personal feelings, opinions, etc. to cloud what the author is saying- ie. being "subjective," oh, "Most Objective." If you read my post #162, you will see that I clearly believe that there can be no "right" or "wrong" without a playoff system, where everything is decided on the field- I reiterate the fact that there can be no "right" or "wrong" in #203. Are there problems with even a playoff system?- yes, especially deciding who gets to play in it, but since you have more than 2 teams with an equal shot of winning it all, instead of just 2 that are picked by agenda-ridden, subjective voters and opaque computer scores that rely on only 11-13 games to create their data, there will be less potential "outrage."
But there are degrees to with on is more valid than others, wouldnt you say? As it happens, Alabama was not/is not recognized the National Champ of 1966 by any of the reputable CFB Title Selection Orgs.
Back then, some of those organizations picked the NC BEFORE bowl games, so they didn't even take into account BAMA's thrashing of Nebraska. Again, you're following the logic of saying, "Everyone says A is the best, so A must the best," which is fallacious- the fact that some of those organizations picked before bowl games, makes your point even less valid. Most everyone was picking OU to beat USC in the 2004 NC game (I knew better than that), and they were left with egg in their face. What if OU was like ND in '66, and didn't go to bowl games, while the NC is being picked before games?- OU would have been NC.
Lastly, bringing up the "bushmen?" Come on, let's be resonable here. I was demonstrating that there are things that have been taken for granted in this world that have been proved wrong over time- while '66 ND & BAMA will never face each other, there is no way that you can, with any degree of accuracy, say that ND was the better team that year- there is no "valid" or "invalid" about it. In years where multiple teams finish without losing a game (or with the best record), when all organizations agree on one choice, it does nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to add to the "validity" of their pick- they are still trying to predict the future, by saying "A&B didn't play, but I THINK A will win." The key word is THINK, they don't KNOW, and unless they DO know, their guess is just as good as yours, mine, or anyone else's.
Franko G said:
posted on June 23, 2006 12:47 PM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
It appears Mr. Moooooomentum..is changing his address. You aint got nothin' So Cal. You're theories aren't law, and that has been exposed. You claim to be objective...
haaa
haaaaaa
haaahahahahahariiiight. awesome man!...awesome!
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 23, 2006 4:22 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty Shack - What a fugkin break-thru, someone ~"admitting"~ that the SEC wasnt the best in 2005.
But Rusty Shack, how does the PAC enter-in here with you? Hmmm, strange, if I were a XII-guy would you bring up USC/PAC? I guess thats just your style of debate. BTW, the PAC has had 7 different teams represented in BCS Bowls. That's 7 of 10 (and 2 of the remaining 3 havent, have atleast finished Top 10 at some point in that span). USC is "one" team.
But anyway Rust, how about Regulating your Own... Rusty set these people Straight...- LSU #1 says: Proof that the SEC is the best football conference in the nation.
Is this goof-ball is equating Attendace figures to the greatness of a Conference? Having the 'best tailgaiting' and 'rooting the loudest' showing your "school spirit!" and other Sappy Sh!t like that dont interest me. Rusty, remind these fools that its about F-o-o-t-b-a-l-l.
----------------------------------------
- goooodawgssicem says: ok SEC is obviously the best conference year after year...
- Franko G says: Once again...another testament to the greatest conference... the South is the greatest part of the country... And of course, we got the best football, but that's always been a given
- Reed4AU says: Not gonna say the SEC was the best conference last year, but 5th?Rusty, you should probably let them down gentlely. You did say SEC had a "bad year in 2005"...
-----------------------------------------
- Mooka says: SoCal... Don't make me copy and paste Rusty's post from the Michigan [on the Brink thread].
Rusty, show Mooka the man behind the curtin; tell em where you got that list of Selection orgs. Whats it call - Winipegafilepedia or something.
----------------------------------- Rusty Shackleford says: The SEC has dominated consistantly for over a century
Rust, find a mirror, find a dictionary (dominate?), and realize whats what here. Hype is "perception" not meeting "reality".
National Championships, historically - from two 3rd-party sources...
The Sports Illustrated Almanac:
1 BTEN - 11-teams, 26 Titles = 2.36
2 PAC - 10-teams, 15 Titles = 1.50
2 XII - 12-teams, 18 Titles = 1.50
4 SEC - 12-teams, 16 Titles = 1.33
5 ACC - 12-teams, 11 Titles = 0.92The ESPN Almanac:
1 BTEN - 11-teams, 33 Titles = 3.00
2 SEC - 12-teams, 20 Titles = 1.67
3 PAC - 10-teams, 16 Titles = 1.60
4 XII - 12-teams, 18 Titles = 1.50
5 ACC - 12-teams, 13 Titles = 1.08So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 23, 2006 4:38 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac 205 & Mooka 207
Incase you missed 206... to make the Prothro-injury EXCUSE comparison, USC went thru the 2005 season without their DEFENSIVE TEAM CAPTAIN (missed 10 or 11 games!).
T-Mac dont try and be cute, I only bring this up when there are comparisons to be made. I wasnt the One who brought up this Injury-Excuse issue, REMEMBER!?! Your comment "Bama goes undefeated if Prothro doesnt get injured" paraphrasing.So now you wanna make a direct comparison with "Play-Makers"... Reggie for USC and Prothro for Bama... Okay, was Bama missing 2/3rds of their Staring LB corps for the last 3 games of the season Too? (Fresno St, UCLA, Texas). Again, remember Im not the one the BROUGHT UP THE INJURY EXCUSE ISSUE!... Soooo, if Reggie was OUT INJURED but USC had its Defense HEALTHY, without hesitation I'd say USC doesnt lose ANY More games than they did.
T-Mac, Mooka, here listen to Franko G...
Franko G - posted on June 18, 2006 10:28 AM - says: Hey people, think Tyrone Prothro is a great player, but his injury has been blown way out of proportion. So Cal is right this time, USC had a ton of injuries to their defense last year...
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 23, 2006 5:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka be fair about this (refering to 192). Its wasnt that silly circle-jerk of logic that some dopes play - You should know, I always say we gotta look at CFB in its entirety.
The point I made about Auburn being 7-1 in the SEC but only 2-2 OOC, and Georgia/SEC Champs having 3 Losses, and the highest Ranked SEC teams (LSU) having a Loss to a 5-6 team, was in regards to THAT particular discussion/issue which was about true "Title Contenders" in a conference.And it seemed like you agreed only a few post before...
Mooka says in 186: Well, okay, maybe I can agree that the SEC wasn't packed with all great teams...Franko G said:
posted on June 23, 2006 5:27 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
So Cal,
Your arguement is that perception doesn't meet reality when regarding the SEC.
Everyone here disagrees with you...
Can you find one person to rally to your cause??
You're basing your entire arguement on one year??? So one year, 2005, you're saying the SEC wasn't dominant. I say the SEC was still very strong, regardless of the fact that they had the 5th best OOC record. That OOC stat doesnt put an end to the arguement just b/c you try and set it up that way.
The stats you have thrown in from the past show that the SEC is definitely a top conference.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 23, 2006 5:28 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko G - I cant believe I missed post 179.
The SEC having "6 great teams" - I let that slide earlier (wasnt germaine to that issue), but its not 6 teams and its not "great". Its more like 5 Good teams. But we basically agree that, generally speaking and/or recently, the SEC produces more "good teams", er, Top 25 teams than other conferences. We differ beyond this point.
A prominant aspect to my point (that the SEC is over-hyped) has been that mis-guided, mis-informed "fans" treat Top 25 lists as some sort-of Conference Ranking charts, when theyre NOT. And I specified that the SEC is Top & Bottom heavy... IM THE ONE thats been telling YOU people NOT TO IGNORE that OTHER portion of the issue (Bottom teams in the Conf) or as you put it "write that off as if it means nothing".
LOOK FOR YOURSELF at the bottom of Div-1A, no there is no "Poll" that ranks all 119 teams, Look at the consensus ratings! The SEC had the "Most" teams Rated in the Bottom Half (61st or worse), the SEC had the most Bottom 30 (90th to 119th).What do you think youre telling ME NOW?!@
Im the one thats LOOKED AT BOTH SIDES, Im the one Tell YOU not to "writing off" an entire half of a confernece! When you take the entire CFB landscape into consideration, esp for 2005, the SEC had a "cluster-effect" going, more-so than other confs. And Conference "STRENGTH" is not determined by that dynamic, one way or the other.T-Mac said:
posted on June 23, 2006 6:38 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,I played Tailback for 7 years between High school and College so let me speak on this for a minute.Yes,I was making a direct comparison between Reggie and Pro.Reggie was to USC as what Pro was to BAMA!We have all seen what Reggie can do.We haven't even scratched the surface of what Pro is capable of!!!You take Reggie out of that offense last year and there isn't a chance in Hell USC goes to play TEXAS bro!!You know it,BE HONEST.BTW-I wasn't trying to be cute.I am cute.Ask the ladies.Whatever happened to TONE-LOC.Remember the song FUNKY COLD MEDINA??Iwas told you could hook me up with a cd bro!I'm out.HOLLA AT YA BOY
The Mayor said:
posted on June 23, 2006 6:55 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Franko G,
"Can you find one person to rally to your cause??"
I tend to stand by So Cal and his extensive research. I may not always agree with him but he does present a lot of facts that you and Mooka tend to blow off.
It reminds of a school yard argument..."So?"..."So What, that's what!" On and on it goes.
70 days left, that's all that matters.
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 23, 2006 7:07 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
http://www.answers.com/topic/ncaa-division-i-a-national-football-championship There's the list of national champions, so cal
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 23, 2006 7:33 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
So Cal: Have you ever played for an SEC team? How many SEC games do u watch a year? Obviously not, or maybe u could come up with something besides paper stats to prove us to be over hyped.
Big 12: Texas was the dominant team, won the national championship. Who was number 2? texas tech? oklahoma? What about the big 12 north? that side of the conference almost makes me laugh.
ACC: Florida State had a good year, but they lost to florida. Miami had a good year, got murdered by LSU. Virginia Tech Was doing good until the accident with miami. The ACC title game was a joke with that weak attendence.
Big 10: Penn State was 10 seconds away from an undefeated season. Michigan was a disapointment. Ohio State had a good year. Iowa didn't do as good as they were supposed to either.
Pac 10: USC. There's the entire conference. UCLA? they were the closest to USC. California was disapointing.
SEC: Alabama had a good year, only lost to LSU and Auburn. Auburn had a good year for starting a sophmore quarterback, and it was his 1st start. Only lost 3 games. Florida had a good year, and LSU only lost to SEC schools, and killed miami without their starting quarterback. Georgia were the SEC champs, only lost to Florida(without shockley) and auburn, and west virginia in the sugar bowl. Tennessee had a crappy year, they were the most over-rated team in the country.
SEC: 5 schools that were good.
ACC: 3 schools that were good.
Big 10: 2 schools that were good.
Pac Ten: 2 schools that were good.
Big 12: 1 team that was good, won national championship.That's where the, as you call "Hype" is from, the SEC has top notch football teams competing every year, even if they play in the conference with the best defense, which makes it even harder to go undefeated. That's the kind of thing that makes a conference good is the amount of teams THAT KNOW HOW TO PLAY SOME FOOTBALL.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 23, 2006 7:58 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko what do you think I mean?
- Thats what Im TALKING ABOUT, the general "perception" that YOU (mis-guided) CFB fans have about the SEC in particular are largely UNFOUNDED, and at times straight-up contradictory to actual RESULTS ON THE FIELD.
I showed you/everyone the Conf Comparisons in terms of National Titles, historically - NO SEC "DOMINANCE" TO SPEAK OF in that respect.
This 2005 season just so happens to be a ideal example. It shows a clear disparity between "perception" and reality; SEC having no 4-4 teams, nor any Great teams, having 5 teams in the top 25... and/but at the same time being the Worst Rated major confs with the Worst Record.
I hear words like "Dominant" being thrown around, and phrases like "bigger attendances is PROOF that the SEC is the greatest" and people citing "top 25 polls" as some sort of ruler in the Conf Comparison issue. That these people think that THATs "Conference Strength" is what Im talking aobut. THAT is the Perception in question. You say that people on this board dont "rally to my cause"... They've believe this Hype for years (Id imagine) it might take some time for it to sink in.Im reminding the Board/Blog of reality. Some of you didnt even KNOW (nor even cared) that the SEC had the 5th best record! My first post on this Thread:
So Cal Clippers - May 26, 2006:
SEC over-hype? lest anyone take "attendance figures" to make any kind of direct coorelation or substantive claim about the "Best Conference" issue.
2005 - SEC, worst record among the 5 major conferneces. Rated 5th overall.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 23, 2006 8:26 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Hey Everyone!! here's the SEC-Hype already being laid out for this coming season...
Franko G - posted on June 14: Hey Everyone!! Check out the Conference Rankings in any of Athlon Sports Pre-Season Magazines!!! SEC #1 baby!!!That's ~awesome~
Just remember, as the SEC is puffing up their chest, they start this season sitting on a Booster-Seat, Hitting of the Women's Tee, Hiding behind their Attendance... compared to, oh lets say the PAC...
SEC - 31% of OOC are vs BCS opponents
PAC - 42% of OOC are vs BCS opponentsSEC - 33% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl Teams
PAC - 55% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl TeamsSEC - 17 percent of all of their OOC games are on the Road
PAC - 39 percent of all of their OOC games are on the RoadT-Mac said:
posted on June 23, 2006 8:42 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,in you post on June 10th you say(The SEC is swinging from the Women's Tee-the "reason why is irrelevant.When I played tailback I had the misfortune of being on the receiving end of being crushed in the shoulder by a 235# outside LB and a 4.4 speedy DB in my thigh.I sat out 3 plays and had to go back in for the last quarter and a half of play.That's just a tiny example of playing TB.Have you ever heard of a separated shoulder and a deep thigh bruise???Do you know what that feels like??Things you experience in a game or in practice.In games the hits are Vicious.Do you know what it feels like to take damn near an hour to get outta bed in the morning cause you can't move???I DO BROTHER.The SEC is swinging from the MEN'S TEE!Where are you swinging,out in the public park?Poppin off with some shit like that.Go on and bring some whack stats.I know you can't wait to go and see ROCKY 6.I'm out.HOLLA AT YA BOY
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 23, 2006 8:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Major, what do you have to say about this? He says "not even close" - Kellen Clemens was on pace to how many Total Yards?! MORE THAN VINCE YOUNG. The Major, tell this guy who Clemens was - he seems to know who the 5th QB NFL draft choice was (Croyle), but doesnt know Clemens.
brownsrodeo88 (123) says: Losing an all-star is much worse than losing whoever the heck is QB for Oregon. Was he good? Heck yeah. Was he as good as Croyle, or as big a playmaker as Prothro? Not even close.
------------------------------
Mooka, get with Tomcat he's clear about it.
Tomcat says: Hey Mooka... homefeild advantage does make a difference.
-------------------------------
Tomcat, get with T-Mac on the XII's 2005 SOS...
T-Mac says: I agree with So Cal in his last post on the big Xll.Tomcat...
-------------------------------
T-Mac get with Franko G on the Prothro-Injury-Excuse. Franko G get with... Yourself (ya sure "no one" agrees with me?)
Franko G says: Hey people, I think Tyrone Prothro is a great player, but his injury has been blown way out of proportion... So Cal is right this time, USC had a ton of injuries to their defense last year
-------------
even mooka has accepted the fact that the SEC didnt have "great" teams lyT-Mac said:
posted on June 23, 2006 10:36 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
This post is for everyone on this blog except this So Cal bitch.I challenge people to not respond to anymore of his posts.This guy is a terrible excuse for a Pac-10 fan.He is on an SEC FANBLOG and STARTIN STATIC.That's all he is about.I've got a ton of friends who played in the Pac-10 and who are fans.Don't let this one bitch be a representative of all Pac-10 fans.Anyone who want's to talk College FB(SEC or in general)hit me up.I miss playin it,but I like to watch it.I wish this So Cal guy was on the field when I was totin the rock.I would've knocked his dick in the dirt!Believe that.People on this site,tell me what you think about the polls,teams,players,and predictions etc.I will talk to anyone who is a fan of any CONF,including the Pac-10,just not this So Cal.Who cares about what happened in 1966 or 1973 with this team or that team??I wasn't alive back then.I'm interested in the upcoming season 2006 baby.I will probably be going into coaching soon so I like to talk football.This So Cal want's to live in the past cause he knows his team will see a decline this season.See how I did that.I wasn't insulting to the Pac-10 or anything.Peace Fellas.I'm Out.HOLLA AT YA BOY
T-Mac said:
posted on June 24, 2006 12:32 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
This So Cal USMCr telling people get with this person and get with that person.Don't you ever tell me to get with this or that.If you need to address me then do it.I don't really care.You're a joke G and everybody knows it.I might have agreed with you on something in the past,but I'm sure you didn't include everything I said.You need to get with my foot up your ass.I'll get with whatever I feel like.You aint the top dog so stay on the porch Homie.Take all your stats and wipe your ass with em.THE GAME IS PLAYED ON THE FIELD.Don't anybody respond to this guy.He's a PUNK.Anybody who want's to talk about college FB and the 2006 upcoming season hit me up.I'm out.HOLLA AT YA BOY
Tomcat said:
posted on June 24, 2006 12:41 AM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
I'm still laughing, Is this post 224? Hey AU03 I agree that there are flaws with the current system. The BCS was developed as an improvement over the existing system.Auburn got shafted in 04 no doubt.Without some sort of playoffs there will always be contraversy, co-champs and remember the year we went undefeated and got sc#ewed.
The traditional bowls could still be played with the top four bowls being the first round.The undefeated against undefeated, and one loss teams against one loss teams.Example #1 vs #3 #2 vs #4 and if anybody survives The Big Nat Title game between whoever is left.Win-Win situation for everybody.Guess it makes too much sense.
Tomcat said:
posted on June 24, 2006 4:12 AM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal the most objective? On post #215 you said "best tailgating and rooting the loudest, showing your school spirit and other sappy sh!t like that dont interest me." I feel sorry for you So-Cal That is a big part of the whole CBF experience.Here it is come early, wear orange, be loud and stay late.
In 04 Baylor beat A&M in Waco, they tore down the goal post and carried it across town to the campus, they hadnt done that since they defeated UT in 97.
The fight songs, the mascots, the cheerleaders, the school colors and the tailgating are part of the college football total experience.
I assume you are one of those folks that are content to sit at home and watch it on T.V.
Here in Texas football is not a sport, it is a religion. I'm sure those SEC fans Know what I'm talking about.
The Pac-10 aint about nothing-just media hype
WE will see the Baylor Bears defeat Washington State. Hookem-Horns Sicem-BearsTomcat said:
posted on June 24, 2006 6:28 AM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal just striring it up a bid.Enjoyed reading your post #195. You are very knowlegable about CFB, however as for the most objective.
Football is a game with alot of different varible factors deciding the outcome.
One of the most important parts of any sucessful program is to have alot of depth at every position.All this crying about injuries and this team woulda done this and that if so and so hadn't got hurt is Bullsh!T.
Its real easy as an after thought to suguest that if we didnt have so many injuries on defense bla bla bla.
The fact remains that The Texas Longhorns program has alot of depth at all positions and that rotating players keeps them fresh and ready for action.If a starter goes down no problem there are several other guys already trained in that position that are fired up and ready to go.
As far as SOS I hope that you understand that as objective as you think you are that the Big XII's SOS is far more tougher than you are able to admit. As ones perception is usually influenced by different contributing factors that inhibit ones objectability.
Study post #211 carefully and try to understand
Missu beat Iowa State Iowa State Beat Iowa
a BIg Ten school Baylor beat Iowa State
Baylor beat SMU SMU beat TCU TCU beat Iowa State Oklahoma State beat Texas Tech
Baylor beat Oklahoma State Texas Tech beat Oklahoma Oklahoma beat Oregon pac-ten school
Texas Tech beat Baylor and lost to Alabama a SEC school
Missu beat Nebraska Nebraska beat Michigan a big ten school
Kansas beat Missu and Nebraska
Kansas State beat Missu and lost to Nebraska
Kansas State beat Kansas and lost to CU and Iowa State This shows that the Big XII is the best conference.
Big XII agaisnt Big Ten 3-0
Big XII against Pac-Ten 2-1
Big XII against SEC 1-1
Big XII against CUSA 5-0
Big XII against ACC 0-3
Big XII against Big East 2-0
The Pac-Tens OCC was dismal
The Mayor said:
posted on June 24, 2006 1:59 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
So Cal,
Clemens is a winner, tough as nails and a extremely well rounded individual. I'm not sure how he will fare with the Jets but I see him as a great coach some day.
I don't fault the SEC guys for not being familiar with Clemens. Most of our games are regional broadcasts or they are on too late in the East for them to watch. Our one national spotlight game was the USC game, we were awesome for about a quarter that day.
I was in Florida last year on business, I was trying to catch a Duck night game at a "sports" bar that started at 10:05PM EST...fat chance.
On the West Coast, we get to watch Big-10, ACC, SEC and Big East games over breakfast.
Franko G said:
posted on June 24, 2006 6:15 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
Hey T-Mac and others,
I agree. I've had enough of this So Cal guy. Lets get back to what makes talking about football fun. He tries to say that tailgating doesnt concern him?? Come on man...its college football. Its just cuz those Pac10 fans dont know how to get crazy on the same scale as the SEC, Big10, BigXII, and ACC.
Ive been to FSU games. Ive been to Georgia Tech games. Ive been to Georgia games. Ive been to Florida games. Ive been to a Auburn game, and Ive been to a Tennessee game. All those places are nuts. To tell you the truth, the worst stadium of those five is FSU's. Not to take anything away from the team, but that stadium is not too loud- as compared to the others ive been to. The stands are in a circular shape around the field, making the fans further away from the game. And the stands dont stack like in Athens and Gainesville. Tennessee's stadium is HUUUUUGE...I was there when UGA dominated them this year 27-14! Freakin amazing to watch all that nasty burnt orange watching silently all game!!! Georgia Tech's stadium is awesome as well. I was there for their game against Georgia Tech a few years ago when the Jackets won 17-3. That place was crazy...I felt like I was on top of the field cuz those stands are right there. Sanford Stadium in Athens in AWESOME! I was there for UGA vs. LSU two years ago- when UGA won 45-16- and it was the loudest game Ive ever been to. That was Georgia's best game in Mark Richt's tenure. I also went to UGA vs. Auburn this year...that was painful...but the place was nuts all night long. But that ending sucked...
Anyways, just trying to start a new topic. Im sick of So Cal and hope he doesnt continue this arguement. I dont think anybody wants to hear from him anymore. At first it was kinda fun to challenge the guy and his view point, but after a while it has just gotten old.
and sorry So Cal, it has nothing to do with the fact that you have "-'-"-'-proved-'-"-'- that the SEC is overhyped when comparing pereception to reality...." Im just sick of the conversation. I dont feel you have gotten anywhere with your arguement, and as much as we have tried- neither have we gotten anywhere to persuade you that the SEC truly is strong. So Im done. Im sick of it. Its not even fun anymore.
My next post will be about predictions and new 'talk' about the 2006 season. T-Mac, Rusty, whoever else,..even So Cal if he feels so inclined- as long as he doesnt turn every post into an anti-SEC banter..is invited. Just please dont waste our time as you HAVE been doing. If you cant do this...just leave us alone. yes, this is a playground discussion, and So Cal is in timeout until he can control his mouth and stop being so dagumm annoying. Peace out ninjas!
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 24, 2006 6:37 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rust, the issue is c-o-n-f-e-r-e-n-c-e comparison, if you have a Different claim such as: "the SEC had a cluster of good teams up at the top of their conf (none of which were great) and the makes me feel better about having the Worst Record among the major conferences"... then thats another discussion, and I might not disagree with you.
And your break-down of good teams in each conference IS MORE SEC-hype Rhetoric!...
BTEN had 2 Great teams, 2 good (11-team-Conf)
XII had 1 Great team, 3 good
PAC had 1 Great teams, 3 good (10-team-Conf)
ACC had 5 good teams
SEC had 5 good teamsXII had ZERO "Horrible" teams (rated in the "Bottom 30" of 119 D1A teams), 1 that was just "bad" (rated in the Bottom Half of D1A; 61st to 89th)
ACC had 1 Horrible team, zero just bad
BTEN had 1 Horrible team, 1 just bad
PAC had 1 Horrible team, 2 just bad
SEC had 3 Horrible teams, 2 just bad (thats 5 teams below Mediocre... thats how many the WAC had!)And by the way, not to play the One-Up-ing game with websites but, wikepedia and answers.com doesnt exactly settle anything; have you looked at an ESPN almanac or Sports Illustrated? And please Remember The POINT to all of this: the SEC is not "Dominant" (in that respect). No one is trying to say that "its weak" or "it sucks" or any B.S. like that.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 24, 2006 7:18 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, Im saying leave that "Sappy Sh!t" OUT of this discussion. If there's a discussion about: Which conference has the best game-day atmosphere... or some other thing like that, then it a different discussion. "Its like a religion" you say... yeah Im aware of that it says A LOT, thus the dogmatic nature of this hypsters.
But when goof-balls want to include that sorta thing into a debate of "better conference" in terms of strength, then that's unfounded, unadulterated H-y-p-e. Then is when you gotta get checked on that.Responding to 232, Tomcat if you didnt realize that what you said about the Injury-excuses has been MY POINT all along then I suggest you re-read some of the posts...
- 121: "holy shet, please, enough with the Prothro Injury-excuse.
-133: Im responding to T-Mac's Prothro Injury-Excuse where he says other Injured-teams didnt face LSU and Auburn... "Come on bro.
Cal Berkeley [faced & lost to 12-1 USC, 10-2 Oregon, 10-2 UCLA without their Starting QB], Oregon [faced & lost to Oklahoma w/o their Starting QB], USC [faced & lost to Texas w/o their Defensive Team Captain]
- 156: Showing other injured player's value to their team "Kellen Clemens, Oregon QB, projected out to 12 games, woulda finished ahead of Vince Young in Total Offense.
Prothro [projects out to be] Terry Richardson [who?]
- 195: brought up DJ Shockley, Kellen Clemens, Dallas Sartz missing the Florida, Oklahoma, Texas games again to help demonstrate the lame-osity of the Prothro-injury-Excuse!Im not giving support to injury-excuses Tomcat, at the very least get that straight.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 24, 2006 7:28 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, Gezus you really gotta pay closer attention. You dont have to list the XII's schedule I was the one who posted the XII's winning % (highest in 2005)... and I corrected you (or someone) about the UCLA-OK game... and I told you then, that its not as simple as heads up matchups that determines which conference rates where you take the ENTIRE season, every team, every RESULT. The XII had the weakest SOS, ended up 2nd to the Big TEN overall. Whats the issue here? 1 Big TEN, 2 XII, 3 ACC, 4 PAC, 5 SEC, 6 BEast, 7 MtWest... as per the consensus ratings 2005 (www.bcsfootball.org/index2.cfm?page=rankings)
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 24, 2006 7:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Mayor its not about "faulting" a guy, if he's not a true fooball fan, hes not a true football fan, who cares. But if That Guy happens to be making CLAIMS about this and that, and DOENST EVEN KNOW about what the thing is that he's talking about... its a different story. To that Guy; dont pretend to KNOW when you dont, goofball.
And I dont make the NFL or NFL-draft-status comparisons when it comes to a college football players "greatness" (or what have you), but this was about "noteriety". He hadnt 'heard' of Kellen Clemens!!?! He mentioned Brodie Croyle. Clemens was picked ahead of Croyle in the NFL draft... I wonder if he knows who Haloti Ngata is (1st Team Consensus AA!, 1st DT taken in the NFL draft), or Aaron Gipson (NCAA leader in Interceptions), or Jonathan Stewart (NCAA leading 33.7 yds/KR, 2TDs on only 12 returns!) etc.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 24, 2006 7:56 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac has morphed into "Al Bundy" all of a sudden (post 226).
So in a discussion about C-O-N-F-E-R-E-N-C-E Comparisions, the SEC having the WORST RECORD among the major conferences are called "whack stats"? Is this what youre telling me? So what is "the SEC has 5 teams in the Top 25" supposed to be?
SEC 2005 was RATED 5th
SEC 2005 had the 5th Best Record
SEC 2005 hypsters go right-on Stroking each others D.T-Mac, btw I just gotta say, with every "Holla At Ya Boy" that you post, you lose a little bit of credibility (that is, aside from the actual content in your posts).
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 24, 2006 8:09 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, refute this:
SEC - 31% of OOC are vs BCS opponents
PAC - 42% of OOC are vs BCS opponentsSEC - 33% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl Teams
PAC - 55% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl TeamsSEC - 17 percent of all of their OOC games are on the Road
PAC - 39 percent of all of their OOC games are on the Road
Its probably been for MOST of their history that the SEC has been hitting off the Women's Tee, sitting on Booster-Seats, being the biggest Road Pu**ies.
Just since 1980 alone, USC faced about 39 opponents on the Road, UCLA 38, Cal 34, Stanford 30, Washington 24... Auburn 13, Florida 23, Alabama 22, Tennessee 21, LSU 24.
Who's gonna sit there and tell me thats Not an advantage?! What Clown will have the numb-nuts to repond?So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 24, 2006 8:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac Bundy had morphed again... He's Coach T-Knute Rockne now... and also turned into a Pisser. It looks like T-Al Bundy-Mac is after the Pissing-Conetest Championship.
Listen fool, the "bitch" comments do Nothing to strength your arguement. Get a grip on "logic" and loosen the grip on your di...
Im fugken laughing at you making these little-boy pleas for help "I challenge people to not respond to anymore of [So Cal's] posts"Crying about gettin hit when he played, Al Bundy never cried (joke): T-Mas says "When I played tailback... crushed in the shoulder.. and.. in my thigh. Have you ever heard of a separated shoulder and a deep thigh bruise?...Do you know what it feels like to take damn near an hour to get outta bed in the morning cause you can't move"
Listen to this noise, the guy is gone, hes got no reason to stand on... he heads for the trash-talk, pissing contest, personal bullsh!t. T-Mac says: "I wish this So Cal guy was on the field when I was totin the rock.I would've knocked his dick in the dirt!Believe that."
Negga Please. You ever been to War muthafugka, I mean bullets flyin fugkin War? Marine Corp Infantry, from Kuwait to Tikrit! You ever hump a 60-lbs pack and a 50-Cal system for 25 miles (multiple times)... and you talking about a "thigh bruise", negga please? Dont come with that punk-ass sh!t... you got nothing, "reason" done left you, so you revert to 8th-grade-level name-calling?! You Punk-ass fool.Back to F-o-o-t-b-a-l-l.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 24, 2006 8:54 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Once again this guy has badmouthed the SEC saying they are the Biggest ROAD PU**IES, but I've reverted to 8th grade level name-calling.I have many PAC-10 friends and respect for them.I have much RESPECT for the US MILITARY.This is the best country in the world.This is a FOOTBALL FAN BLOG.NOT A WAR BLOG.BTW-I buried one of my best friends in April from IRAQ!!!I'm out.Holla At Ya Boy!!
T-Mac said:
posted on June 24, 2006 9:04 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Yes, I do know what it is like to have bullets flyin at me.It's called Atlanta,GA.The inner-city.Growing up there.I'm one of the lucky ones though.I made it out.Everyday bullets and people dying.Burying friends when you are 12,13,14 years old.I'm out.Holla At Ya Boy
T-Mac said:
posted on June 24, 2006 11:46 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,if you have done those things I respect you as a person bro!!!Thanks for your service to this great country.I wasn't crying about getting hit when I played in college.That was just 1 tiny example of what you go through all the time whether it be in practice or during a game.I get out of bed fine for the most part now.I was talking about a few years ago bro.This is a FOOTBALL FAN BLOG.Not a WAR BLOG.My career ended the summer before my senior year of college.I tore my left knee to pieces.My medial collateral ligament and the anterior cruciate ligament.I got a double-whammy.MCL/ACL at the same time.I was never the same runner.The reason I bring these things up is because they pertain to FOOTBALL.That is what we are talking about on this blog right?They are all football injuries.Some not too severe and others career-ending.If people wan't to comment on your posts it is a free country.I just can't seem to understand why you continue to sling mud on the SEC.Saying that they hit off the womens tee and that the SEC are the BIGGEST ROAD PU**IES.Why do you make remarks like that???Yet you say that I revert to 8th grade level name-calling.If that's not 2-FACED than I don't know what is G.You are one to bring up trash-talk.That's all you do as I just demonstrated.I might have JOKED around with you a time or two,but I never got personal.I wouldv'e knocked your dick in the dirt on the FB field.It's not PERSONAL,it's a SPORT!!!I have a firm grip on logic.I don't go on a PAC-10 blog and sling mud at them.I'm not jealous of the PAC-10.You took it to a whole other level talking about the WAR.The same war in which I've lost friends.I just buried one in April bro so don't act like I don't know what the hell is going on in the world.I didn't sign up for it,I was born into it in the inner-city in Atlanta,GA.I won't call you a bitch anymore.For someone who has done all the things you say you sure don't have a very thick skin.The Al Bundy thing was funny though.I was a little kid when it was on tv.As far as I remember,AL BUNDY NEVER HAD A COLLEGE CAREER.Much Respect for your service,but don't act like you are the only person who has been through hell in life.All this Negga Please stuff you are sayin.I'll bring you back to my neighborhood and you can say that.You wouldn't last 5 minutes G.I'm Out.HOLLA AT YA BOY
T-Mac said:
posted on June 25, 2006 12:30 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
This is for THE MAYOR,Thanks for saying some things that are very valid.The game times and things.You are right.You are a great PAC-10 fan.I appreciate that.A few USC games didn't start until 11:00pm or 11:15pm last year.It's nice to hear a voice of reason for a change.I love College FB.I played in the SEC,but I love the PAC-10 as well.How do you see the PAC shaping up this year.Oregon,UCLA,USC.I apologize for not knowing who Kellen Clemens was.Someone said that Clemens was picked ahead of Croyle in the draft.That makes perfect sense to me.The PAC-10 is known for offense and putting up a lot of points.They are fun games to watch.In the SEC you very rarely see a game get into the 40-point range.Much less into the 50 and 60 point-range.The defense is too fast and tough.BTW-I like Oregon's uniforms.They are cool and different.College FB isn't a fashion show anyway.It's what you do while wearing the uniform that matters!!!If all the teams looked the same it would be boring wouldn't it.I would love to see an Oregon game this year.They just don't have them on unless you get ESPN College ON Demand.I'll have to do that this fall.The PAC-10 and SEC.Two GREAT conferences!Alright Mayor.I'm out.Holla At Ya Boy
Franko G said:
posted on June 25, 2006 1:18 AM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
So Cal,
You are a total doosh bag. When u feel somebody is disrespecting u, u have to bring up that you were a soldier. Thats very honorable if true, but why do u feel the need to bring that into a football discussion? He said he would lay you out on the football field...that has nothing to do with fighting in a war. Come on dude...and I hardly believe that you have fought in a war just by the way you act...if im wrong I apologize, but thats just the impression I get.
Stop being so freakin annoying.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 25, 2006 1:30 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
To all SEC fans.This So Cal USMCr says that the SEC is hitting off the WOMENS TEE,sitting on BOOSTER-SEATS,and being the biggest ROAD PU**IES in their history!What does everyone think about that???He has the NERVE to say that I head for the TRASH-TALK,PISSING CONTEST,and PERSONAL BULLSH!T.Come On.He talks out of both sides of his face.Someone said that he is very knowledgeable in stats.He might be.I don't study stats all the time.He brings War into it.Asking me if I've done this and that.I had friends dyin when I was only 12 years old.To gang warfare.Sayin Negga Please.If you came to the city where I live in my neighborhood it would be considered a wrong turn area.People say(oh don't go in there you'll get shot or jacked).You say I got nothin,you say I'm a punk-ass fool.I say I know a lot of men who have served this country,but are still scared to come in my neighborhood.Yet you bring up the war.We are quick to go overseas and help people,but we won't do anything here at home.LOOK AT NEW ORLEANS.If that was in another country we would have been there in 36-48 hours.You ask(Have you been to war?)YES,I HAVE.I just didn't get the BENEFITS and HAZARD PAY that come along with it.I made it out though.HOLLA AT YA BOY
Mooka said:
posted on June 25, 2006 5:02 AM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Mayor,
Common man, cut the nonsense PLEASE>post 221
Once again to make it clear, I'm not arguing with any of the stats, I just think they're irrelevant to the main point that the SEC is more loaded than any other Conference right now. In case you didn't see the post where your Daddy even agreed with me I will repeat...SOCAL says,"SEC has more good teams than any other Conference (generally speaking). I haven't said any different." End friking quote. What are we arguing about?
Mooka said:
posted on June 25, 2006 3:22 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
T-Mac,
You know, I never got a response from Socal when I brought up LSU scheduling a 15 ranked football team for the first game of the season last year. The supposed "greatest football team of all time," didn't even have nuts like that last year. Talk about road cupcakes.
Anyway--Post 247--I think the hardest football Conference to predict next year will be Big 12. I like Nebraska to be the biggest come back team next year. You know the SEC will be up to the same ole, same ole, only South Carolina should be better with Spurrier, and I think Tenn will pick back up along with Ark. Their should actually be more competition in the SEC this year. Who has the strongest backfield? LSU all the way!! Russell at QB (the college Culpepper), back up in Flynn and Perileaux(spelling?). The best thing about that is the third string is supposed to be the best one. Now onto RBs--Vincent, Ally Broussard will be back, and another top rated Freshman will be there. Now onto WRs--three of the fastest receivers in College football. The only question is can they contain Russell's heat? LSU by far has the strongest backfield in my opinion. Does anyone know of a stronger backfield than that? I'm all ears.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 25, 2006 5:06 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko, First of all Im not a soldier, never been a soldier... Im a Marine.
Secondly, I only followed T-Mac's lead. The guy went Grade-Schooler with the VAIN insults "this So Cal bitch...terrible excuse for a Pac-10 fan...this one bitch...I wish this So Cal guy was on the field when I was totin the rock.I would've knocked his dick in the dirt!Believe that..."
... then he went to "When I played tailback..." - What the Fugk does that have to do with the issue I brought up about the SEC sitting on a Booster-Seat/being Road-Puzziness? And he comes out with "you know what it feels like [playing thru pain, and such]?" - Now, what Relevance does him playing-thru-a-thigh-bruise-&-seperated-shoulder-back-in-his-day, have with the issue of the SEC being Road-Feggs? As much relevance as me "playing" through pain in the USMC. Should I just have answered with a simply: "Yes, I do know how it feels" Is that what I shoulda responded Franko?
Crumbling the SEC's hype makes me "annoying"?
To SEC-centric hypsters maybe.Leaving the Pissing-contest/grade-school Bull-Shet behind us, talking Football... Is anyone gonna Refute that claim? - about the SEC's home/road dynamic.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 25, 2006 5:25 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko, didnt you say you call it as you see it? You hear T-Mac making his plea?
The SEC is/are Road Puzzies (generally speaking). How do you "see it"? Ya gotta call it bro. Integrity.
You can hardly believe? Shee, I can hardly believe myself. 1st Mar Div, up the gut of Iraq, Route 7, from Kuwait to Tikrit.
brownsrodeo88 said:
posted on June 25, 2006 5:51 PM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
Well if you were a Marine, it'd be typical for your first action to be clarifying the fact you arent or werent a soldier, you were allegedly a Marine. Big difference.
T-Mac, shut the hell up. 3,000 dead and thousands more injured freeing a suppressed and downtroddend people in Iraq, another couple hundred dead in Afghanistan. Dont come in here and try and act like you life is harder than taking on an enemy whod half twice as much "street cred" as anyone you ever met. You fell into the same trap SoCal did and by claiming youve gone through the same stuff our men and women in combat have, you have disrespected them. Nothing in America is as bad as it is in Iraq.
And even in those cities that you claim to live in, why are they fighting? For drgus? What? Something stupid im sure. Gangs and that crap. Theres no honor in where you claim to come from. AT least our armed forces can claim theyve done some good by the violence theyve been involved with.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on June 25, 2006 6:02 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko, Its never been "anti-SEC". Its anti-"Hype".
I had Bama (6-6) & Arkansas (5-6) on my own little Most Improve list for 2005... Im taking a mulligan on Arkansas for 2006 btw. I was pounding-the-drum for DJ Shockley/Georgia all offseason last year; a lot of people expected a drop-off from David Greene, it didnt happen (just like I said a year ago) DJ led the SEC in Pass-Rating Efficiency, Geo won the SEC.
Danny Wuerffel (2nd all-time Pass-Eff) is guy I bring up practically every time College Football Greatness is compared/perverted with NFL Greatness - one has nothing to do with the other.Everything Ive posted has been with an objective eye. The SEC is just not as "dominant" as people/general fans/media make it out to be. Honest question Franko, what have I said that's been so outlandish and/or unfounded ?
Mooka said:
posted on June 25, 2006 6:14 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
SOCAL,
If it's only hype we're talking about then why don't we talk about USC in 05-- being the greatest football team of all time going for a 3-peat....hahaha. Oh yea, and then they lost to the only legitimate team they played that year--Texas. Don't tell ND was all that great either. Ohio St. smacked them all over the field. Let's talk about that hype. Really, I would like to know what you think about the 05 USC team going for a 3 peat and being the best football team of all time. Do you really think they were that good, or do you think they just hyped up a little? Honestly.
Franko G said:
posted on June 25, 2006 6:47 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
The only thing thats been outlandish to me is the way you interpret stats. I just cant believe you cant give credit to the SEC...all this coming from a freakin Pac10 fan...it just makes me laugh, thats all.
One thing you need to remember about your earlier post:
-------------------------------------------------
"SEC - 31% of OOC are vs BCS opponents
PAC - 42% of OOC are vs BCS opponentsSEC - 33% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl Teams
PAC - 55% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl TeamsSEC - 17 percent of all of their OOC games are on the Road
PAC - 39 percent of all of their OOC games are on the Road"
-------------------------------------------------This is what I want you to think about:
Now look at the caliber of in-conference teams between the two conferences. The Pac10 has to schedule better OOC opponents b/c their in conference teams are not enough to make a difficult schedule.
On the flip side:
The SEC teams have to go up against monsters in conference. Florida has to go up against Alabama, LSU, Auburn, and Georgia 4 weeks in a row next season. That's 4 of the best defenses in the country 4 weeks in a row. And all those teams have better than average offenses as well- exculding Bama.
Please, now you be honest with me, So Cal. Is it not quite obvious to figure out that since the SEC has such tough in conference games- that they must take a bit of a step back in OOC games? Florida already plays FSU OOC. Do you want teams like Georgia to add Notre Dame and Ohio State to their schedules??...So they can play all the tough in conference teams and then go up against the other OOC top teams as well???
Look, its easy for USC fans to sit back and talk about OOC opponents...yall scheduled Notre Dame and Fresno State. Notre Dame had a solid offense and no defense- sets up perfectly for the Pac's style of play. And Notre Dame had been weak for several years until Charlie Weis showed up. (By the way, you wanna talk about hype, THERE IS NO HYPE THAT EVEN COMES CLOSE TO NOTRE DAME! NO MATTER HOW OVERRATED THEY MIGHT BE THEY WILL ALWAYS BE OVERHYPED!)
You gotta give these SEC teams a break. If you expect them to schedule top OOC teams to go along with their BRUTAL in conference schedule you are simply crazy.
Easy for the USC fans to talk about OOC when they obliterate their two biggest in conference competitors a combined 111-32(UCLA and Oregon). Thats just pitiful competition.
Tomcat said:
posted on June 25, 2006 10:41 PM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Rankings,Polls,ESPN, Sports Illustrated,UPi,AP
Whatever. The fact remains that while some folks like the Duck fan live in the West.Alot of sports writers and annaylis live in different parts of the country.To be the "most Objective" you must come to the realization that we are all influenced by our own enviroment.
You said the BIG XII had 1 great and 2 good?
Which two? What bad teams? I didn't see any bad teams in the BIG XII.
The Baylor Bears went 5-6 on the season in 05
I've been to their camp.Guy Morris and his staff do an outstanding job with these kids.The big XII had 1 outstanding team and 11 good teams.
The dogs of the big XII OK State 1-7 in conference played U.T. a hell of a game and defeated T.T.U.
I'm looking foward to September TCU at Baylor
Can you say the word upset?
Any kid that makes it on a team in Division 1-A has accomplished alot.You cannot tell those kids that they are on a bad team,sorry it doesnt exist.
For Example The Rice Owls 1-11 for the year. This year they face Texas, UCLA, and Florida State.They are not a bad team and their SOS is one of the toughest in my opinion.
Hookem-Horns Sicem-Bears ou-sux
The BIG XII 12 good teamsMooka said:
posted on June 25, 2006 11:32 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
Good post 265 franko G. I'm putting myself in Socal's shoes, and yep, I can see how he should be able to understand how that actually makes SEC a stronger Conference. I think you might have to put it into a stat for him to understand it though. Logic doesn't come easily for him.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 26, 2006 12:20 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Brownsrodeo88,I never said there was honor in the violence that I've been through in my life.If you go back and read my posts to So Cal what I said was that I'm lucky I MADE IT OUT!!I have nothing but the utmost respect for our Armed Forces.This is the greatest country in the world.If I met So Cal today I'd shake his hand.I haven't come this far in my life because I'm an idiot as you put it.I've had to bury some good friends from in Iraq so who the hell are you to tell me to shut up.I support our troops 100% bro.Yes,you are right the violence and death on the streets is drug-related and it is senseless.I think you need to check yourself and relax.You don't know me.Don't judge me til you've walked a mile in my shoes.For the last time.This isn't a WAR BLOG.It is a COLLEGE FB FAN BLOG.So CAL lets squash it and get on discussing some football.I don't need this BROWNSRODEO CLOWN going on like that.BTW-BROWNSRODEO CLOWN You ever hear of the 278th RCOMBAT TEAM in Camp Caldwell,Iraq???I know a hell of a lot about what's going on over there.So don't tell me to shut the hell up.Let's talk some 2006 football.I'm out.HOLLA
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 26, 2006 12:28 AM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
There cannot possibly be more hype about the SEC than there was about USC's greatness the past few years.
If anything the hype was against the SEC those years because ESPN could only talk about USC and talk about going for "3" in a row without even mentioning that they failed to play LSU in 03 and Auburn in 04. They even ran this thing about USC being the greatest team ever adn how they would match up against other national championship winners.
Then there was the love affair with Reggie Bush last year. I mean i actually got to see his dang high school tapes 50 times in one day. Fans are the only people who call the SEC the best conference. Everybody else(ESPN and sportswriters)may say it sometimes, but just because they want to say somethin like this: "And West Virginia beat Georgia, the champions from the so-called "best conference." Like I said before, the SEC's top 6 teams are kind of like the NFL, really good defenses, and nobody can predict who will win the game. The Alabama-Auburn game can never be predicted, neither can the Alabama-Tennessee game.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 26, 2006 12:42 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,let's squash this stuff G.My hat is off to you for your service to our country.I sincerely appreciate that.I haven't made it to this point in my life by being an asshole to people.I can't say that for when I was younger.I respect what our Armed Forces are doing and have done 100%.You are right.War is hell.If I knew you I'd shake your hand and buy you a beer.Lets not talk anymore war or gang-bangin.I was very lucky and made it out of all that B/S.LETS GET BACK TO FOOTBALL BRO.The Al Bundy thing was funny though.I was a kid when that show was on.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on June 26, 2006 1:01 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Mooka,I'll have to agree with you all the way on the strongest backfield being LSU.They should win the west this year.The LSU/AUBURN game and the LSU/BAMA games should be battles this year.I can't foresee anyone beating LSU from the west this year.Auburn could,but I doubt it.Bama will probably go 9-3 if John Parker Wilson can get settled in.Losses to Florida,LSU, and Auburn.Florida should win the east this year,but I think South Carolina will make some strong waves.Tennessee,who knows?Arkansas should also come on strong this year as well.With Houston Nutt though you just never know.I'm not a huge fan of his coaching.It just seems like with the talent that he has to work with each year that he could do more you know.Alright.I'm out.HOLLA
Tomcat said:
posted on June 26, 2006 6:04 AM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Thanks Frank G. post #265 The most ojective fails to understand.As for SOS and OOC most of his arguement is hazed by some statistical media outlet.To even suggest that any conference is weak or not up to the standard of the mighty pac-10 is just ridiculous.
Hey OU fan I don't hate any particular team. OU sux
Hey Mayor we realize that all PAC-10 fans are not like the ones in L.A. Go Ducks
Hey So-Cal not to Aknowledge that the Sun Belt and C-USA probably have the toughest OOC is pretty funny. The dogs from the BIG XII would go undefeated in PAC-10 Who Knows? I'm of the opinion that SOS is as follows
#1 BIg XII
#2 SEC
#3 Big Ten
#4 ACC
#5 SUn Belt
#6 C-USA
#7 Big East
#8 WAC
#9 Mt West
#10 PAc-10 Thats the way I see itHookem-Horns Sicem-Bears GiGem-Aggies
Pig Sooie War Eagle Roll Tide Geux Tigers
Mooka said:
posted on June 26, 2006 5:01 PM — 138.163.0.37 — link — abuse?
SEC championship for '06 I think will mos def be Florida vs. LSU. God, please, anybody but Georgia in the East. It's bad enough they have outstanding coaching, but the noise factor for the Bulldogs can make it tough in Atlanta. Regardless, the better team will still win. Geaux Tigers!
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 26, 2006 7:07 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
AU03, Ive feely admitted that the Ratings each have their flaws (as do the polls)... Yes it is largely a matter of "opinion" how CFB selects its Champion. If Im missing something, then be specific - refering to:
SoCal says: Everything Ive posted has been with an objective eye.
AU03 says: I have shown otherwise.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 26, 2006 8:18 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko, Franko, Franko. How many times...
How about this way; Point by point, Agree or Disagree...
- College Football is NOT played on Paper (even if its SEC recruits vs Sun Belt recruits).
- Attendance figures dont determine "Strength"
- Every Conference ends up with a .500 record against itself (Do you understand what I mean by that?)
- Thus, every Conference, AS A CONFERENCE, has to PROVE themselves against teams from OTHER conferences to have any kind of comprehensive Conference Comparison, er Rankings.
- Every Conference starts each new season at the same starting point (even the Sun Belts, the MACs, etc). As teams beat other teams in the OOC matchups, the Conferences begin to distinguish themselves from each other. Its not until the LAST GAME OF THE SEASON is played that we get the most "complete view" of where each Conference rates.Understand this, EVERYTHING is Relative - Conceptually speaking, We wouldnt "know" that the Sun Belt is "the Sun Belt"... or that a power conference is a power conference if we didnt have the OOC matchups/results to go by.
These Conferences dont exist in a Bubble. In 2005 the SEC "proved" that they were the 5th Rated Conference OVERALLL! SEC Teams dont get any Extra Strength~Value~ if you will, just for being in "the SEC".
THAT RIGHT THERE is the ESSENCE OF THE HYPE Im talking about!
Bama beating Old Miss and losing to Auburn, Georgia beating LSU and losing to Florida, etc, all that that happens in-Conference, also happens in the WAC, the ACC, the BTEN, etc... for 2005, the WAC was Rated 8th or 9th, the ACC was 3rd, the Big TEN was 1st, the SEC was 5th.The SEC is not playing "monsters in-conference"... Seriously DO you NOT understand the concept that SEC teams end up with a 48-48 record agianst othe SEC teams (plus 1-1 in the CCG)? The SEC is Rate FIFTH!
If Auburn (7-1) lost to Kentucky, Old Miss, and Georgia, that would mean Kentucky, Old Miss, and Georgia would all have one more Win & rated higher (accordingly), but the SEC would still end up 48-48. Auburn would be a 6-6 team. Would Georgia's win over Auburn be a win over "a monster of the SEC"?
Ask yourself, WHAT AFFECT WOULD THAT HAVE ON THE SEC'S STRENGTH?!?! Then ask yourself what affect would it have if Auburn woulda beat GTech, Geo woulda beat West V, Old Miss woulda beat Wyoming, etc... those Wins by SEC teams would come without Losses to other SEC teams. Then is when the SEC's Rating would be Stronger.
Franko G said:
posted on June 26, 2006 8:21 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
Well Mooka, Tomcat, AU03, T-Mac, Rusty- its been nice doing business with you in this conversation. I think we may finally have given So Cal something he cant yap his mouth about anymore...so moving on to better things...
How about a prediction on the turnout of the SEC in the upcoming season? It should be a very tough race, first I'll focus on the SEC West:
The Favorites- Auburn and LSU
Drop-off year- Alabama
Darkhorse- Arkansas
Bottom of the Division- Ole Miss and Miss. St.My Pick- LSU. The reason I pick LSU over Auburn is simply this- Auburn had some great veteran receivers last year, Brandon Cox was able to lean on these guys in the passing game. He also had the luxury that is Kenny Irons. Although Irons returns, it is yet to be seen how Brandon Cox will fare without those veteran wideouts. I think they will still be very good..but I feel LSU will get by them once again this year. LSU is still very talented on both sides of the ball.
Now for the SEC East-
The Favorites- Florida and Georgia
The Decliner- Vanderbuilt
The Darkhorses- South Carolina and Tennessee
Cellar Dwellers- Kentucky and VandyMy Pick- Georgia. The reasons I pick UGA over Florida starts with this: It is yet to be seen if Chris Leak can lead the Gators to the SEC title. Now is his last chance to prove he can. The problem is- Florida also has a far more difficult in conference schedule than Georgia. Say Florida is able to beat 3 of the big 5.(say they beat Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia- and lose to Auburn and LSU) Georgia could still take the East over Florida as long as they take care of South Carolina early in the season, Tennessee at home, and Auburn away. I stand firm that UGA will win 3 of those 4 games at the least. People say that UGA is the Decliner in the East, but I disagree. UGA has the best coaching staff in the SEC led by Mark Richt. He has coached the Dawgs to compete every year for the Division Title, 4 straight seasons in the top 10, and has brought great consistency to the football program. This year will be no different in my eyes- even with the quarterback ordeal.
Once again, I dont believe any teams will come out of the SEC undefeated. If one does, they will win the national title- and I will stand by that prediction, as well.
I see another UGA vs. LSU matchup in Atlanta on the horizon. Since these teams dont meet once again in the SEC regular season, I think that sets up for another head to head matchup. UGA has dominated LSU on both sides of the ball in their last two matchups- Mark Richt outcoached Les Miles to perfection last year in Atlanta.
Any other SEC Championship predictions?
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 26, 2006 8:56 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko, youre heading the wrong way on a dead-end street if youre gonna call-out USC specifically on their OOC. I mean holy shet, of all the Major Programs, USC balls it up with anybody in the country. Its the Last team you wanna call-out in that respect; look into it.
What did you say about Notre Dame?!
How is it that you can say ND's over-hyped and not acknowlege that the SEC (as a conf) is over-hyped?! 2005, ND finished "Ranked" 9th (3-way-tied) by the "Polls"... based on the consensus ratings, taking into account who they beat, who they lost to, etc without PERSONAL BIASES, Notre Dame was "Rated" 19th!!! Thats much like the case with most SEC teams that are "poll-ranked", ei, 13th Ranked Auburn was Rated 20th.And btw, ND was 9-3 in 1998, 9-3 in 2000, 10-3 in 2002, 9-3 in 2005.
USC doesnt just "schedule" Notre Dame. Its the most Significant Rivalry in the Sport - 13 National Titles vs 11 National Titles. But thats besides the point.So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 26, 2006 9:11 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, 263, I guess you missed post 195... I made mention of the USC 2005 Over-Hype myself: "In all of the ESPN/Media OVER-HYPE of USC towards the end of the year, [bla, blah...]"
USC got beat. USC was not the Best team ever. USC didnt prove that they were even the best team that Season!
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 26, 2006 9:42 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
2004 USC:
29-24 vs UCLA (6-6)
23-17 vs Cal (10-2)
28-20 vs O State (7-5)
55-19 vs Oklahoma (12-1)
24-13 vs V Tech (10-3)
41-10 vs ND (6-6)2005 USC:
66-19 vs UCLA (10-2)
35-10 vs Cal (8-4)
45-13 vs Oregon (10-2)
34-31 vs ND (9-3)
38-41 vs Texas (13-0)So what's what Franko?
Oh and while youre on that, decifer this for me...
USC 70-17 vs Ark
Geo 23-20 vs Ark
LSU 19-17 vs Ark
Bama 24-13 vs ArkSo Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 26, 2006 10:56 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, like I said its not about being "anti-SEC" its anti-"hype".
After the BCS's 2nd week Rankings came out, there was somewhat of an uproar from the Media types complaining about the fact that Texas jumped USC for the No. 1 spot. A lot of them had this ingredulous attitude about it... That is wasnt right for Texas to jump USC... they used goof-ball reasoning like a "win-streak" that crossed over 3 seasons. I dissented - USC's accomplishments in 2003, 2004, had NOTHING TO DO with where a team should be Rated in mid-season of 2005! (or "shouldnt" anyway).
I myself tempered the "Reggie Bush-Hype" a bit, to be honest... He had HORRIBLE production as a Kick Retruner for the 2005 season. His 17.6 yds/KR was abysmal. And was only decent as a Punt Returner (9.9, 1 TD) - too much was made of that aspect of his game for '05.
USC's Special Teams defense was Baaad too; 71st in KR-D and 118th in PR-D! Which nobody (media, fans, etc) seemed to notice. I felt that that was an exploitible weakness that a smart team could take advantage of. That, and the Massive amounts of injuries on D, was worrisome going into the later games in the season... All of that "ESPN/Best Ever" non-sense was premature.But see, I make those acknowlegements about USC, Reggie, etc... the way SEC fans Dont about their conference.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 26, 2006 11:02 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,in your post talking to Franko about USC/Notre Dame game you mention 13 National Titles vs 11 National Titles.This is a very fun game to watch.This game was one of the best in 2005.My question to you is this.Who has 13 National Titles?The research I've done this is what I've got.
Notre Dame-12
Alabama -12
USC -11
Oklahoma - 9
Michigan - 7
Ohio State- 7
Minnesota - 6
Miami - 5
Nebraska - 5
Tennessee - 4
Texas - 4
You are correct in that USC has 11 National Titles.All the research I've done points to Alabama & Notre Dame tied with 12 National Titles each.Was the 13 in your post a misprint?If you go all the way back to the mid-1800s you can say that they both would have a few more each.Since the official records have been kept on D-1 schools they both have 12 each.I'm out.HOLLASo Cal: THINK PEOPLE! said:
posted on June 26, 2006 11:20 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty, Mooka, Franko, you gotta EARN IT.
The SEC teams areNT just automatically stronger teams. You gotta PROVE it each and every individual season. The SEC is not in a Bubble.
I made a comparison some time ago... the top half of the SEC 2005 was essentially Michigan, UCLA, Wisconsin, West Virginia, Texas Tech, Georgia Tech... None really "great" but each capable of matching Geo, Auburn, LSU, So Carl, Bama, Florida in what they accomplished against the crappy teams in the SEC... nothing special (Rated 5th O-v-e-r-a-l-l).So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 26, 2006 11:33 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty, Mooka, Franko...
- dont know if my previous post went thru -
The SEC doesnt exist in a bubble. Each confernece has to PROVE themselves each and every individual season.
The SEC's sh!tty teams are just that much Sh!ttier that that of other conferences. The result is Auburn, Bama, Geo, etc have "Prettier" Records. Arkansas 20 - Georgia 23... Old Miss 10 - Bama 13... in double-OT, Vandy 42 - Florida 48... so-on and so-on. They aint "monsters"; Im pretty sure teams like Oregon St, North Carolina, Oklahoma St would cause a mess in the SEC's "Cluster-Dynamic" of have-and-have nots.T-Mac said:
posted on June 26, 2006 11:54 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,speaking of National Titles.It will be interesting to see who gets that 13th Title.I think Charlie Weis has ND going in the right direction.As far as Bama goes,if they can keep Shula around for a while their chances are pretty good as well.They are finally getting all the scholarship players back that they missed for so long.Their last 3 years of recruiting have been great.Although,I do see a drop off this season with their defense.If John Parker Wilson can get settled in this year they should do alright.Their offensive line should be much improved and they are loaded at every position on offense.The only other SEC team that has a better tandem of running backs is LSU.This might be a year for Bama where they have to get 250-270 rushing ypg to break in a new QB.In the next 2 to 3 years they should be right back in there in the hunt for another National Title.If Shula sticks around.We all know his fathers legacy.Can anybody smell Shula replacing Jeff Fisher for the Titans in a few years???If things keep going the way they have been for the Titans Fisher won't be around much longer.I've talked to some pretty reliable sources and they have said that Shula has gotten some pretty high profile offers from the NFL this summer already.Not head-coaching jobs,yet.It's only a matter of time though.I hope he sticks around for a long time.He truly is a (Players Coach).A genuine nice guy.I know what everyone is thinking.What about his contract extension?That is what lawyers are for.To find loopholes.I sure hope he is at Bama for a long time.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on June 27, 2006 12:05 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Rusty,Mooka,Franko...
If anyone want's to vote for Tyrone Prothro for PLAY OF THE YEAR IN 2005 just go to rolltide.com and go to football and follow the links.The guy sure deserves it.He might never play again.He is up for an ESPY so everyone please show him support.GO SEC 2006!!!I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on June 27, 2006 12:43 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,You are right about 1 thing.Teams like Oregon St,North Carolina,Oklahoma St would cause a mess in the SEC.They would stink the place up after the DEFENSE of the SEC got through with em.I tried being nice to you,but you continue to SLING MUD AT THE SEC.Why do you feel the need bro?So Cal,I would love to see a game at LSU,Auburn,or Alabama against USC,Oregon,Ucla or anybody else from the Pac-10.The defense from these schools would MANHANDLE the Pac-10.They sure wouldn't be scoring 40,50,or 60 points here in our"Cluster-Dynamic" of have-and-have nots as you put it.Once again,you feel the need to bring up scores such as Bama 13-Ole Miss 10 in double-OT.Georgia 23-Arkansas 20.Dude,it doesn't matter if a game goes to 8 overtimes or if a team wins by 1 POINT.The better team will win.Let me clue you in on a little something(DEFENSE)!!!As So Cal puts it,the SEC's sh!tty teams are just that much sh!ttier than that of other conferences.That's hilarious.So Cal,do you not realize that every conference has BOTTOM FEEDERS???Rusty,Mooka,Franko,lets not forget that the SEC doesn't exist in a bubble guys!lol,lol,lol,lol,lol This is really funny.I love it.I'm out.HOLLA AT YA BOY
T-Mac said:
posted on June 27, 2006 1:22 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Rusty,Mooka,Franko,and myself.Let's not forget that the SEC doesn't exist in a bubble!THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT.WE SHOULDN'T FORGET THAT.lol,lol,lol,lol.I can't stop laughing at that one.What So Cal can't seem to remember about the SEC is that we have 1 thing the PAC-10 doesn't have.DEFENSE,DEFENSE,AND MORE DEFENSE.Why is this guy so jealous of the SEC???According to him we are ROAD PUZZIES and hitting off the WOMENS TEE.His posts about the SEC are COMICAL.After work it is very entertaining.So Cal says (Each conference has to PROVE themselves each and every individual season).T-Mac says (Each SEC team has to PROVE themselves each and every Saturday).Did you hear that So Cal or do I need to wake your ass up?WELCOME to the SEC!LEARN IT-LIVE IT-LOVE IT.SEC FOOTBALL I'm out.HOLLA AT YA BOY
The Mayor said:
posted on June 27, 2006 1:42 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,Rusty, Mooka, Franko and T-Mac.
Why don't you guys draw up an armistice? This thread has run it's course and nobody is going to change their minds.
Let's put our nutsacks on the line and "bet" our pride on the SEC vs. Pac-10 games this year. Forget history and hype, let's go all in on 2006...can anyone figure out an exciting gentleman's bet for 2006?
..but I have had a few drinks and just got my clock cleaned on on-line poker. Logic is a little fuzzy. Wife's pissed...you guys are my only on-line pals.
By the way, I guarantee that the SEC Pre-game experience is the best in the nation...and I have never even been to an SEC conference game. I did see the FSU v. Tennessee Fiesta Bowl though...very impressive fan base for both teams.
Pac-10 pre-games lack verve and heart. Our attendance is dismal as a conference. Our fan base is probably more culturally diverse however than any other conference.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 27, 2006 2:14 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Rusty,Mooka,Franko,does this So Cal guy understand the meaning of bullshit?WHY DOES HE CONTINUE TO SLING MUD AT THE SEC???First,he tells us we are hittin off the womens tee,sittin on booster seats,and the biggest road puzzies in college football.Now,he says the SEC's sh!tty teams are just that much sh!ttier than that of any other conference.Does he realize that the SEC doesn't have sh!tty teams?I played SEC FB for 3 years and would have been proud to have attended any SEC school in the conference!He can bring any of his teams he want's to challenge the SEC.PAC-10 or anybody else and they'll get schooled in FOOTBALL 101 SON.He mentions teams that would cause a mess in the SEC as he puts it.I'd like to see a PAC-10 team play a team like SOUTHERN MISS every year.The fact of the matter is this.You put the PAC-10 teams in the SEC and let them square off every week and the best they will do is 7-5 maybe.You let Matt Leinart get crushed by a couple of ENDS from Alabama,LSU,or Auburn last year and he would've cried like a baby!!!Coach,please take me out.I wanna go back to the west coast where it's sunny and not humid.I can't breathe out here coach.Now that I think about it,didn't Reggie Bush have to push Matt Leinart in for a score against Notre Dame last year??Correct me if I'm wrong,but I do remember that.That really defines TOUGHNESS in a quarterback.Having your tailback have to push his QB in the endzone.lol.Alright guys.I'm out.HOLLA
Tomcat said:
posted on June 27, 2006 4:29 AM — 70.243.66.19 — link — abuse?
Hey man welcome back. The fact remains that the pac-10 is overated. The big XII is #1 and the SEC is #2 the big 10 is #3 and the pac- ten aint shit
Hookem Horns Sic-em Bears Roll Tide Pig Soowie
War Eagle GiGem-Aggies Guex Tigers.
This guy doesnt understand- pro - pac ten B.S,
If you are in the USMC keep your head down and come home safe. Hookem-Horns Sic-em BearsAU03 said:
posted on June 27, 2006 10:10 AM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
opinion=subjective
Stats work the same way, as I have shown that they cannot predict future outcomes. In addition, you can have stats paint whatever picture you want (you are obviously partial towards one that make the PAC-10 look good- thus subjectivity), but as long as your comparing teams that haven't played each other in that season, you're wasting your time.
Pac-10 pre-games lack verve and heart. Our attendance is dismal as a conference. Our fan base is probably more culturally diverse however than any other conference.
I went to AU/USC in LA- the redeeming thing about it was the fact that beer can be sold there (which is a great one). The experience lacked the intensity and noise of an SEC game.
The Mayor said:
posted on June 27, 2006 11:16 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
AU03
Those beer sales at The Coliseum got me through more than one drubbing by the Trojans in the 80's and 90's.
Hopefully, I won't need many on Novemeber 11th this season.
By the way, Duck games at home have had a great atmosphere since the early 90's (easy to do when you're succesful on the field). During the lean years we were pretty dismal fans.
I admire those college teams that sell out year after year without regard to the success on the field...that's what the college game is all about!!
Mooka said:
posted on June 27, 2006 1:34 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
Let the record show also that those games won by PAC over SEC were the bottom half of the SEC with the exception of two losses of Auburn vs. USC.
T-Mac,
I quit paying attention to Socal a long time ago. I usually just read the first few sentences and get bored, so I move on to the next post. Sometimes when he's not twisting shhhh I'll try to read whatever it is he has to say. I do like the fact that he actually acknowledged USC as an overhyped team last year. Though you don't hear him bash them as much as SEC. The only thing worthy of hype last year and the year before was Reggie Bush. Can't wait to see him play for the Saints.
Franko,
I think your SEC prediction is pretty close. However, LSU doesn't play well in Florida and guess where they will play. They did win in the final seconds last time they played there, but Saban was the coach then. I think there may be an upset there and up goes the Gators confidence to take the East. The biggest challenge for them will be Mark Richt's bulldogs, but I can see how the Gator's might have a better game plan (offensively) with a more experienced QB. You said if an SEC team goes undefeated they will go on to win the NC...I say if one can even go on to lose even 1 game that team will go on to win the National Championship.
Franko G said:
posted on June 27, 2006 2:27 PM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
Everyone check out post #278..for some reason my posts take forever to show up...its kinda annoying
By the way, stop talking to So Cal, the poor guy. He just doesnt understand that we dont care what he has to say. Lets move on and talk about the SEC and the upcoming season. Just ignore the guy and he will have no choice but to stop yapping all day and spouting out huge posts that waste my time.
SEC, to the top of the class!
The Mayor said:
posted on June 27, 2006 3:52 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Mooka,
"Let the record show also that those games won by PAC over SEC were the bottom half of the SEC with the exception of two losses of Auburn vs. USC."
The three SEC victories were all by LSU over lower to middle Pac 10 teams...two of which could have gome either way...so what?
I was just responding to T-Mac's rant ("Does he realize that the SEC doesn't have sh!tty teams?) about SEC superiority over the Pac-10. The recent record indicates otherwise.
But again we have 2006 to look forward to:
Sept 2nd:
California at Tennessee
Washington State at Auburn
USC at ArkansasSept 9th
Arizona at LSU
I predict a 2-2 draw in the regular season with maybe a rubber match Bowl game?
AU03 said:
posted on June 27, 2006 4:04 PM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
Franko,
Auburn/UGAWhile Auburn did lose receivers, they still have Courtney Taylor, the leading receiver from 2004, and Prechae (or is it Perchae?) Rodriguiez, who had a decent year last year when he was used. Also, watch out for true freshman WR Tim Hawthorne. Cox will be fine- perhaps the best QB in the SEC. Auburn has all of their RB's coming back, not just Irons- look for an offense w/o a FB on most plays, not unlike through much of 2004 when Cadillac and Ronnie Brown were playing at the same time.
I pick Georgia for the same reasons you do- I don't buy that they're on the decline, although they have QB ?'s. I think Florida is going to be a flop. Tennessee will improve a ton from last year (as if they could've gotten any worse).
Mooka said:
posted on June 27, 2006 4:15 PM — 138.163.0.46 — link — abuse?
I think these match-ups look alot more balanced then the previous years. California vs Tenn should be one of the best matches. I think USC will get disappointed. I will hold true to my wager stated long ago that SEC will not lose more than 2 of those games. Or did I say 1 of 'em? Hell, I think SEC will sweep PAC this year. How bout that?
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 27, 2006 8:47 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T, Im with you, Back to Football.
But quickly, reponding to post 251, 269...
- The "Road Puzzies... Womens' Tee" comment: The SEC, for whatever reason, plays notice-ibly less Road Games in comparision to the PAC (atleast since as far as Ive looked; 1980).
- You may have taken it as me slinging vain insults at the SEC, but it was Not.
- I guess you were offended, so you go on to tell us about your playing days, playing thru pain, explaining your "toughness", and that Im wacked-out for refering to anything-related-to-the-SEC as "Puzzy"... Heres the thing, Im NOT now, NOR was I when I first made those comments, making insults just for the F of it!
- I went to my experience in the Corps, since it seemed to me that you were tryin to flex your 'toughness', tryin to compare dix size or someshee when you went to "you know what it feels like..." playing thru pain, this and that. When really, none of that had to do with the SEC having an advantage (womens tee) because they play fewer Road games (road puzzies).... the way the "women's tee" is a few yards closer to the green, its a slight advantage... over 18 holes... over decades and decades (If its the case)... it builds up. And then when someone points to "All-Time" Records, they simply IGNORE that aspect of the results - a team, or conference may have had a slight advantage in that regard that puffs-up those "records".
I go back to my theoretical question: If two "evenly match" teams play 10 games, where one team has 7 Home games and the other only 3, what is the likely result/record breakdown? Or if its 100 games played, with one team having 70 Home games, etc.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 27, 2006 9:18 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty, post 270, Im with you on the USC 2005/Reggie Hype. But... the hype around USC 2005, is similar to the hype that the SEC gets year in year out.
And to clarify, USC in 2003 was NOT highly Hyped. Oklahoma was the Team de`joir back then: preseason everything, greatest offense this-&-that. USC started preseason No. 8 in 2003. They were replacing Carson 'Heisman' Palmer and the rest of the Staring Backfield with very inexperienced players. Freshmen Reggie & LenDale were just "names" on recruit-lists back then... RS-Soph Matt Leinart hadnt even ATTEMPTED A PASS! USC couldnt have been All That "highly hyped" if it wasnt until after OK lost in the XII CCG that USC was finally Ranked No. 1, could it?As for 2004, USC lived up to "the Hype". They won the Title - When its Validated, er 55-19, "hype" is no longer hype. SECers, thats v-a-l-i-d-a-t-e-d.
Now, USC 2005, the media went nuts. They were tripping over themselves tryin to S on USC's D. Now... not to spill any sour grapes but... there were some reasonable "what ifs" and a quite a few "coulda, woulda, shouldas" leading up-to, and within the Rose Bowl that makes one wonder.
But reality is reality, USC lost, USC 2005 was OVER-HYPED.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 27, 2006 9:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat, the friggin genius of the blog.
Truthfully, I didnt look into the conf OOC comparisons as deep as to look at the Sub Belt or MAC, but I did go as far as the 2 mid-major conferneces; Mt West and Big East.
BEast: 45% of OOC vs BCS opponents
PAC: 42% of OOC vs BCS opponents
MtWest: 36% of OOC vs BCS opponents
XII: 23% of OOC vs BCS opponents (worst overall)PAC: 55% vs Bowl Teams of 05/06
MtWest: 50% vs Bowl Teams of 05/06
XII: 33% vs Bowl Teams of 05/06
BEast: 30% vs Bowl Teams of 05/06MtWest: 47% on the Road
BEast: 40% on the Road
PAC: 39% on the Road
XII: 25% on the RoadBEast: 15% vs Non-Div 1A
PAC: 16% vs Non-Div 1A
MtWest: 17% vs Non-Div 1A
XII: 23% vs Non-Div 1A (worst overall)Yeeeah, you know what, the xii shouldnt be talking so loud about SOS. Pay attention tomcat.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 27, 2006 10:29 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, Arkansas's Defense would have been Ranked Top 10 statistically in the COUNTRY if they hadnt played one PAC team... USC.
Arkansas was tied with Auburn in the SEC (vs SEC) in Total Defense, No. 4... Arkansas was No. 3 in the SEC in Rushing Yds/Carry Defense... Arkansas was No. 4 in the SEC in Rushing Yds/Game Defense... Arkansas as No. 3 in the SEC in Pass % Defense... Arkansas ranked in the TOP HALF of the SEC in virtually every DEVENSIVE Category (vs other SEC teams)!!!
USC 70 - Ark 17... No team gave up more Points, and I think only Washington State gave up more Yards, to USC than Arkansas' Big Bad defense did. Wazzu's defense was one of the Worst in the PAC (a bunch of 8th and 10th places in the Defensive categories - missing their Stud LB most of the yr).T-Mac, a 5-3 ACC team, Georgia Tech, slapped around arguably the SEC's "best" team the first game of the season. Then in the last game of the season it was a 5-3 Big TEN team that slapped Auburn around, 24-10... Wisconsin had the 100th Ranked Defense!
Yeah I am being selective using those examples, but its only to make you re-think your incredulous attitude about the SEC, and how other teams would fair in that conference. And about it being Rated 5th, and how the SEC's "cluster-effect" does NOT prove/determine the conference's Strength overall.
If those bad teams in the SEC were as good as the bad teams in other conferneces (generally speaking) then you woulndt have a 'top cluster' of teams with such "pretty", puffed-up records, er team in the Top 25. This year specifically, the SEC had bad offenses, which produced better "looking" defenses, statistically.So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 27, 2006 10:51 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
You still dont understand... Yes I know it doesnt matter if a team wins by 1 point, overtime, or in a blow-out. What Im sayin is, even if Bama woulda LOST to Old Miss, LSU would LOST to Arkansas, Florida LOST to Vandy, etc...
... It would NOT, NOT, NOT CHANGE the "Strength" Rating of the SEC !!! (in-it of itself).
The SEC would be less "top heavy" and would likely "look" less "impressive" with lower Poll rankings, etc. Boobs would mis-guidely "perceive" that the SEC wouldnt be as strong. When all that happend was that the SEC re-arranged a couple of deck chairs; it wouldnt have an affect (direct affect, that is) on the SEC's relative Strength!The bottom feeder in the SEC are just that much worse than those of the other Confs (generally)... and THAT RIGHT THERE is what gives Forida, Bama, etc their "Shinny" records and Poll position... which then is wrongly percieved as strength... which becomes "Hype", as its mostly unfounded, ei SEC is Rated 5th. Its a vicious circle, ya just gotta make a break-thru once to see whats what - ya only need a peek of the man behind the curtin to realized the farce (esp 2005).
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 27, 2006 11:05 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
The Mayor, ITS NOT ABOUT THE PAC VS THE SEC!
T-Mac, Im not "slinging mud" at the SEC.The SEC is simply over-hyped.
In 2005, especially...
Year-to-year, generally...
And in terms of National Titles, historically.The SEC is solid conference, right in amongst the XII, the PAC, the new ACC (how is that "mud slinging"?). The BTEN's got a definite edge on the rest, historically/Titles, but specifically in the BCS era, there hasnt been a Stand-Out conference (seemingly).
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 27, 2006 11:33 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Drop the Bravado!
Listen to reason. The SEC doesnt exist in a bubble - if none of the Conferences faced teams from OTHER Conferences we wouldnt "know" where the Conferences Rank in terms of strength.
Again, they aint Played On Paper, right?
... I'll make the most extreme example... If the Sun Belt went Undefeated in OOC play this year, would it be the Strongest Rated Conference? I bet some of you right now are thinking: "its not the same thing, they would be facing most other crappy Sun Belt teams in conference play, so it wouldnt be as tough". Am I right? Whos thinking that? Respond if youre thinking that.
(btw, heres some of the Belt's 2006 OOC schedule: Oklahoma, LSU, Maryland, FSU, McNeese St, GTech, Texas, Tulsa, Auburn, OK St, Army, USF, Miami, Bama, Bama, K St, etc)
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 27, 2006 11:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko G -posted on June 27- says:
... stop talking to So Cal... Just ignore the guy
... SEC, to the top of the class!-------------------
That's all it is with these SEC-centric hypster, bravado. Theyre pompous snobs. And this one inparticular is just weak.
Tomcat said:
posted on June 28, 2006 12:34 AM — 70.245.223.0 — link — abuse?
Wow the last lines of post #309- alright
Hey Mayor sorry about the Pac-10 bashing
Watched the USC vs Fresno State game this morning.That was a good game
Thanks for recognizing my genius, I sincerely appreciate it.
The only Pac-10 games that I've attended were back during the old SWC days.
I understand why alot of schools schedule games against as So-cal calls them"non-bcs" opponents.
Sun Belt and C-USA teams play tough OOC games, so we are in agreement.
Looking foward to the upcoming season.
Baylor vs Washington State TCU at Baylor
Arkansas vs USC
Nebraska vs USC
Texas vs Ohio State,Baylor,Nebraska, A&M,Oklahoma,Kansas State and Texas Tech
and any SEC game that is televised here.
Hey Frank,T-mac,Mooka Adios Hookem
Mooka said:
posted on June 28, 2006 10:31 AM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
Here you go. Try this out:
www.cfbdatawarehouse.com.
But, all time conference strength = 1. SEC 2. Big 10 3. Big 12 4. Pac 10 5. ACC1975-1999 it was: 1. Big 12 2. SEC 3. Big 10 4. Big East 5. Pac 10.
1990-1999 it was: 1. Big 12 2. SEC 3. ACC 4. Big 10 5. Pac 10 6. Big East.
So, clearly, according to all of these assembled stats - the SEC is clearly a better conference than the Pac-10 is. The 2000- onward stats have not been compiled as of yet. But, it looks as if over the last (25) years or so that the Big 12 and SEC lead the way.
SOCAL, Shut the hell up.
Mooka said:
posted on June 28, 2006 12:45 PM — 138.163.0.44 — link — abuse?
Mayor,
Another interesting thing to look at from post 302, was that LSU was the only team that was ranked higher than the PAC-10 opponents. The rest of the PAC-10 teams were ranked higher than the SEC opponents, by a big margin. Hey, I'm just saying, if I were you I wouldn't be too proud of that PAC over SEC since 2000 stat. I do think the competition will be a hell of a lot more balanced this year and I am looking forward to it.
The Mayor said:
posted on June 28, 2006 1:28 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
Tomcat,
The USC v. Fresno State and the USC v. Arkansas games are on every damn day, multiple times, on cable out here on the West Coast.
We get it, they won the games but can't we see something else? I think the Comcast CEO is a closet USC Alumni..
Franko G said:
posted on June 28, 2006 6:05 PM — 71.48.232.25 — link — abuse?
So,
UGA vs. LSU in the SEC title game...any more predictions?
How about National Title predictions?? The popular prediction will probably be rematch of last year's fiesta bowl..Ohio State vs. Notre Dame...however, I think Notre Dame is getting too much credit. Ohio State should be solid though.
I think the title is wide open this year...many schools will be competing..with USC losing their proven winners, it wont be as easy for them to roll through their weak Pac10 schedule as they have the past few years...but just b/c USC has such dominant talent compared to the other Pac schools, they may compete for the national title again...unfortunately...Im hoping Im proven wrong with that...cuz if I have to go through another year where all I hear about is 'Pete Carroll and USC' I think I will puke.
There is no clear cut favorite to win the title this year...Oklahoma will be solid, LSU, Ohio State, and Notre Dame...and USC is there as well. But there are a lot more darkhorses who could surprise people.
Hey So Cal, say hey to your gerbil for me...I know you will try and reply to this...but Im not even gonna read ur sorry asss crapp.
Mooka said:
posted on June 28, 2006 6:15 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Mayor,
There is no doubt LSU has a Championship football team. My only concern is the coaching staff. I don't know if I fully trust Les Miles' decision making ability. I know he is a good coach, but you have to be a great coach to make it to a Championship. This year we will see.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 28, 2006 6:34 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, all of a sudden a website's "ratings" are the definitive "opinion" huh???
does datahouse.com take into consideration the Home/Road disparity? Look into it.Mook, remember this exchange....
- The Mayor says: T Mac... the fact is the Pac-10 is 7-3 against the SEC since 2000.
- Mooka says: Let the record show also that those games won by PAC over SEC were the bottom half of the SEC with the exception of two losses of Auburn vs. USC.Interesting insight, why did you choose to make that qualification/clarification about the "bottom half" teams, and so on?
Oregon State, and Wazzu faced LSU, Tennessee, Georgia, Auburn about 14 times (12-1-1, or something), no difference?So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 28, 2006 6:49 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Oregon St = 10th in the PAC, all-time record
Wazzu = 9th in the PACActually its 12-1-1 for SEC teams, not including Auburn.
Tennessee = 2nd in the SEC?
Georgia = 3rd?
LSU = 4th?Is that worth mentioning Mooka?
What about the fact that they were ALL SEC Home games, worth mentioning?
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 28, 2006 7:33 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, post 317 the SEC is .606 vs the PAC (all-time)... SEC has had Homefield advantage 63.9 percent of the time (60.2, if not-so-neutral Bowls are accounted for)... should YOU be "proud" of that?!
2006:
Wazzu (1-7) @ Auburn (7-1)
Arizona (2-6) @ LSU (7-1, 0-1)
Cal (4-4) @ Tenn (3-5)
USC (8-0) @ Ark (2-6)... the @s sure arent "a hell of a lot more balanced this year" as you put it.
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 28, 2006 7:37 PM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
As an auburn fan I have to break the SEC down into 2 catagories for this year: either auburn wins all their games and plays Florida in the SEC championship like I hope, or auburn loses to Florida and LSU and LSU plays Florida in the SEC championship.
If auburn runs the table: even though Florida and Georgia would have both got SEC losses to auburn, I think that Florida will win the head to head vs. georgia, but will lose to LSU. Then auburn beats florida again in atlanta and goes on to play Ohio State in the national championship.
If auburn don't run the table: Basically the same thing happens but this time auburn loses to both LSU and Florida. I think the SEC champ will be undefeated this year. It will be hard, though, auburn has 12 straight games, so tuberville better have everything together. We'll have to watch out for arkansas, who i think is most improved in the SEC, and South Carolina. But whoever wins the SEC championship i think will play Ohio State in the national championship. It was either Oklahoma or Ohio State who i wanted playing in the N.C. vs. and SEC team, but i think Texas will beat oklahoma but lose to ohio state.
WAR EAGLE 2006
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 28, 2006 8:27 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko, bottom of your post 265... explain 281.
As far as post 278...
Tennessee wins the East - gets LSU & Florida at HOME, Geo will be slightly 'down', Cutcliffe makes it a quick turn-around on Offense (1-of-most improved Offenses), the personel losses on in the trenches are filled in by an outstanding level of talent/depth (esp on the DL).
Arkansas was in a 12-point proximity from being 6-2 insted of 2-6 in the SEC. Arkansas is my Darkhorse for virtually everything... Most Improved, Best Running game, making a BCS bowl, pull-off the biggest Upset, McFadden as a Heisman contender... but I'm going with the odds, Auburn wins the West.LSU's got too many questions as RB (who's fully recovered?) and relatively inexperienced up-the-gut of the defense. Dont count on LSU being the SEC's best Rush-D this year.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 28, 2006 9:01 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Big TEN...
This will be Tressel's best Offense, and one of the best in the country. Everyone's on Troy Smith's jock but he's earned it, so-to-speak. Ted Ginn still has to live up to his billing... no more Santonio Holmes, no more Talking-Up his potential, theres no reason why he shouldnt lead the BTEN in Rec-Yds, Rec-TDs, etc, this season. The Defense isnt getting no 44 SACKS this year! very inexperienced, but still 8-0 is fairly reasonable: @ Iowa will be its toughest in-conf game, gets Michigan at Home... @ Texas might be their only loss.
Michigan/Lloyd Carr, its strange to say but Michigan lacks certian intangibles, they dont carry any momentum - they're consitantly "good not great".
Penn State is the wild card, lots of personell losses but legit talent replacementing em... but playing the odds, I see Wisconsin making the biggest "drop-off team": Lost Se~n~ior Barry Alvarez! Bielema become the youngest HC, Stocco's got practically NOBODY back on Offense, Calhoun is Gone, every WR is Gone. The D is more experienced/improved but was really bad last year - Wiscy, biggest drop-off team in the Country.T-Mac said:
posted on June 28, 2006 9:48 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
As far as all this homefield advantage stuff goes,it doesn't matter if your playing at Tenn 107,000 fans or at Vandy 39,000 fans.The better team will win.Death Valley(LSU) is one of the toughest,if not the toughest place to play in the entire country.Not taking a thing away from LSU,but many teams have gone in there and won.I don't think many will win there this year.If any do at all.I've played in Neyland and in Death Valley.They are both deafening,but LSU is more intimidating by far!Talk about tailgating.They do it up!!I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on June 28, 2006 10:02 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Mooka,having a 61% winning average over another conference is something YOU should be very proud of.Or as So Cal puts it .606 The 6 rounds the zero up to a one.Where you arrive at 61%.He also says the SEC has had homefield advantage 63.9 percent of the time.That would actually be 64 percent of the time.Yes,Mooka,that is something we should be very proud of.SEC 2006 BABY.I'm out.HOLLA
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 28, 2006 10:07 PM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
The SEC will go (3-1) vs. the Pac next year. If arkansas don't win, they don't deserve to play football. They gave up last year and let their conference down by letting USC run over them, and now they get USC at their home stadium with a much improved team. I don't what direction the Tennessee/Cal game will go, though.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 28, 2006 10:49 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,you mention Arkansas being in a 12- point proximity from being 6-2 instead of 2-6 in the SEC.Alabama was in a 13-point proximity of being 8-0 instead of 6-2 in the SEC.You can apply that to any team in the country on any given year.USC was in a 3-point proximity of winning the National Title game.You see,that hold's no water.BTW-You always mention Bama beating Ole Miss 13-10 in OT.Bama lost to the #5 LSU Tigers 16-13 in OT.Strange how you never bring up games like that.It seems to me like you pick and choose what best suits you.As far as Tennessee winning the east,don't roll the dice on that one.You are right they do get LSU and Florida at home.Those are 2 SEC losses right there.You do recall this is a team that wen't 5-6 last year.So now all of a sudden Coach Cut is back and he saves the world and they win the east???Come on.Tenn should improve this year,but they won't win the east.Arkansas is a darkhorse this year.BCS Bowl though?You do realize they have to play LSU,Auburn and Bama right.They lose to LSU and Auburn.The Bama game this year?Who knows?They should be much better this year.8-4 possibly 9-3.LSU wins the west this year.Too many weapons.Auburn will be stout though.I'm out.HOLLA
Roll Tide said:
posted on June 28, 2006 10:58 PM — 71.101.121.240 — link — abuse?
1. Arkansas defense didnt get their shiz together until later in the season and they became pretty salty.
2. Alabama has 12, there is no denying that
3. Trying to win an argument online is like participating in the special olympics. Your still a tard at the end of the day
T-Mac said:
posted on June 28, 2006 11:38 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Is there anybody on this blog who disputes these numbers?
National Titles:Notre Dame -12
Alabama -12
USC -11
Oklahoma - 9
Michigan - 7
Ohio State - 7
Minnesota - 6
Miami - 5
Nebraska - 5
Tennessee - 4
Texas - 4
I'm just curious because all the research I've done has these legitimate numbers on Nat'l Titles.Besides that fact,I thought everybody knew Notre Dame and Alabama are tied with 12 each.I would appreciate everyone's input on this.These are well-known Rock Solid facts although I've been told otherwise by a person on this blog.I'm out.HOLLAT-Mac said:
posted on June 29, 2006 1:23 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
What is with this home game/road game crap?Out Of Conference Games?Who in the hell cares about that stuff?It's part of playing football.Whether you play pee wee,junior high,high school,College,or in the GAME(NFL).I guess I'll throw in the CFL,NFL-EUROPE,and the Arena League too.When I played,you wen't to dinner and got your ass back to the hotel on Friday night by curfew.If you weren't back by curfew you were sure to run sprints the next week til your legs and lungs were on fire.PUKING WAS OPTIONAL.You had to MAN-UP when it was time to go roading.Balls out,grind it out,can't hear a damn thing,piss ass environment,smash-mouth football.Not to mention,all the nice thing's that are thrown at you, or on you at anytime during a game.Now we have people bitchin about OOC schedules.BOO HOO.MAN THE FUCK UP.Texas had a very important Road Game.The National Title Game and won.BTW-Something that has been bothering me for a little bit.So Cal,you referred to me as NEGGA in one of your posts.You were saying NEGGA please.I took the high road and told you how much I respect what you have done for our Great country because I mean't it sincerely.I would never disgrace you like that bro.I had talked about FOOTBALL injuries and playin through pain and than the next thing I know you bring war into it and start calling me NEGGA.That tells me alot about your character.If you are a marine,I told you what I think of that and your service to our great country.You never did apologize for that though and that tells me a lot about you.The post I'm referring to is post 244,45,46 or something like that.They change from day to day.So Cal,you know the one I'm talkin about.You like the NEGGA as long as he is Throwin,Totin,or Catching the Rock.Most of my friends are white and would never say that.Hell,we live together,cook for each other,clean up etc.WE ARE BROTHERS TIL THE END.I would think you of all people would know something about that if you were a Marine!!What do you think Reggie Bush,LenDale White,or all the other black athletes would think about that comment???I'm out.HOLLA
Mooka said:
posted on June 29, 2006 10:45 AM — 138.163.0.36 — link — abuse?
Socal says,"Mooka, all of a sudden a website's "ratings" are the definitive "opinion" huh???"
Those aren't opinions from some PAC-10 or SEC fan buddy. Those are facts. Read 'em and weep.
All Time Conference Strength =
1. SEC
2. Big 10
3. Big 12
4. Pac 10
5. ACCAin't much hype bout that there hunh? You know what this means right? It means you wasted countless hours trying to show something that was never reality. You were trying to hype false info and you are an exposed mofo. haha. Anyway, if you want to talk about something else I can respect your OPINION, but FACTS are in on this one buddy.
Mooka said:
posted on June 29, 2006 4:40 PM — 138.162.5.10 — link — abuse?
T-
Yea, you know, I could care less about homefield advantage. I've watched my team play crappy games in other stadiums and I've watched them kick ass in other stadiums. Did the crowd have anything to do with it? Maybe, but how do you explain the games that they went in there and kicked ass? When you go to another stadium and dominate you will shut them the hell up, agreed? The bottom line is they need to go in their with their heads on their shoulders and boot up. If they don't then them getting their ass kicked is all part of the game. A championship football team will be ready for whatever, whenever, wherever. It's all part of the test; part of the game. No excuses (what Socal needs).
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 29, 2006 6:47 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, thats in two games! Auburn beat Bama 28-18, thats atleast two scores, come on... not a good comparision to start with T. And on top of that, Arkansas returns 20 Starters! Bama Loses its ALL-TIME PASSING LEADER, and a lot of their Defense (only 4 Rtn Sts)... When a team loses its "strength" and the replacements arent as talented/less experienced, ya gotta expected a drop-off.
Arkansas is on the Up-swing. The one quasi-concern is that new OC; Mitch Mustain's H.S. head Coach. But I dont think he'll get in the way too much.So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 29, 2006 7:10 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac that good that you did some research, but Bama doesnt have 12 Titles (first one was in 1925 NCF & CFRA's retro-active selection, none in the "mid" 1800s; USC's was 1928 Dickinson's selection; Notre Dame's was 1919, NCF's retro-active selection)... remember, to be consistant...
Based on all AP, all BCS/Coaches, all Dickinson, pre-1936 Helms, pre-1936 CFRA, pre-1936 NCF (the 6 most legit/widely recognized Championship Selection Orgs)...SEC Titles breakdown:
Bama - 10
LSU - 3
Tenn - 2
Auburn - 1
Geo - 1
Florida - 1PAC Titles breakdown:
USC - 11
Cal - 3
Stanford - 1
Wash - 1
F.UCLA - 1XII Titles breakdown:
OK - 7
Nebraska - 5
Texas - 4
aTm - 2
Colorado - 1BTEN Titles breakdown:
Michigan - 10 (or 9, conflicting data)
Minn - 6
Ohio St - 5
Penn St - 4
Illy - 3
Mich St - 2By the way, according to either the ESPN or SI almanac, Bama only has 9 Titles.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 29, 2006 7:23 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Roll Tide, USC (11-2) was named the 2002 National Champs by three Selection Orgs... Are we supposed to "count" that one?
You have to acknowlege that there are degrees to the legitimacy/validity of the various selection orgs. Bama's got 10.AAAAAND, THATS 10 "COUNTING" ALABAMA'S 1973 FARCE-OF-A-TITLE... and ALABAMA'S 1964 FARCE-OF-A-TITLE, er Bureaucratic-Red-Tape Titles, er Type-O-Titles, er Bastard Titles, errr.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 29, 2006 7:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac whadafuk are you talking about (in 335)? youve delved back into Bundy-land; the Home/Road thing has to do with that slight Advantage the SEC has, like hitting off the Women's Tee. That's all, just the acknowlegement that it IS an advantage. Looking at the OOC matchups/results is the ONLY Way to comprehensively/legitamitely have a Conference Ranking comparison/discussion. We wouldnt have anything to go by as far as "which conf is stronger" if teams from DIFFERENT conferneces DIDNT face eachother.
Now about that comment I made in 246: no one was calling anyone anything - you mean to tell me that vernacular isnt used in the mean streets of Hotlanta? If thats truely offensive, I apologize, but you should know I meant it as nothing more than a point of emphasis.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 29, 2006 8:29 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, So there are two points to your issue about me being selective with the "close" wins/losses thing...
- LSU over Bama in OT (post 332), I think I did mention that, back in the Prothro discussion as a matter o fact - You said Bama woulda gone "undefeated" if not for the Prothro injury... I some point I said something like "not undefeated, but with Prothro Bama woulda probably beat LSU but not Auburn".
[And just to strengthen that point, lemme ask You, who was JB Closner? Was he any good? Auburn got 11 Sacks on Bama with him out of the lineup, Prothro probably wouldnt have made as much of a difference].- As for the 12-Pts poximity of Ark, thats over 4 Games. Its a more significant pattern if you will, than just one or two in Alabama's case (and I already explained the personell losses on top of that). Arizona & Wazzu share a similar pattern to Ark 2005; with Arizona returning pleanty of Starters (along with other criteria) I peg Arizona as an improved team too... Wazzu (4-7) was in a 16-point proximity of being 9-2!!! but they lose their 1st Team All-American Running Back!!! so its a bit tougher to make the call to put them on the "Most Improved" list.
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 29, 2006 10:58 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
Maybe this will help some.
25 Total Major College National Championship Year(s)
This gives:
Number
Year
Record
Selector
1
1925
10-0-0
1st-N-GoalAngelo Louisa
Bill Libby
Billingsley Report
Boand System
Century Football Index
Cliff Morgan
College Football Researchers Association
David Wilson
Harry Frye
Helms Athletic Foundation
Houlgate System
James Howell
Jim Koger
Mel Smith
National Championship Foundation
Nutshell Sports Football Ratings
Patrick Premo
Poling System
Ray Bryne
2
1926
9-0-1
1st-N-GoalBillingsley Report
Century Football Index
College Football Researchers Association
Helms Athletic Foundation
James Howell
Loren Maxwell
Mel Smith
National Championship Foundation
Nutshell Sports Football Ratings
Patrick Premo
Poling System
Ray Bryne
3
1930
10-0-0
Bob KirlinCollege Football Researchers Association
David Wilson
Mel Smith
Parke Davis
Ray Bryne
Sagarin Ratings
4
1934
10-0-0
1st-N-GoalBill Libby
Century Football Index
Cliff Morgan
Dunkel System
Houlgate System
James Howell
Mel Smith
Poling System
Ray Bryne
Williamson System
5
1936
8-0-1
Cliff MorganMel Smith
Ray Bryne
6
1937
9-1-0
Ray Bryne7
1941
9-2-0
Houlgate System8
1945
10-0-0
Cliff MorganNational Championship Foundation
Ray Bryne
9
1950
9-2-0
Bob Kirlin10
1961
11-0-0
1st-N-GoalAngelo Louisa
Associated Press
Bill Libby
Billingsley Report
Bob Royce
Century Football Index
Cliff Morgan
Clyde Berryman
College Football Researchers Association
College Football USA
David Wilson
Dunkel System
Earl Jessen
Edward Litkenhous
Football News
Harry DeVold
Harry Frye
Helms Athletic Foundation
James Howell
Jeff Self
Jim Koger
Massy Ratings
Mel Smith
Montgomery Full Season Championship
National Championship Foundation
National Football Foundation and Hall of Fame
Nutshell Sports Football Ratings
Patrick Premo
Sagarin Ratings
Soren Sorensen
The Fleming System
United Press International
Washington Touchdown Club
Williamson System
11
1962
10-1-0
Loren MaxwellMontgomery Full Season Championship
12
1963
9-2-0
Jim Koger13
1964
10-1-0
Angelo LouisaAssociated Press
Bob Royce
Clyde Berryman
College Football USA
Edward Litkenhous
Montgomery Full Season Championship
United Press International
Washington Touchdown Club
14
1965
9-1-1
1st-N-GoalAssociated Press
Bob Kirlin
Century Football Index
College Football Researchers Association
David Wilson
Football Writers Association of America
Jim Koger
Massy Ratings
National Championship Foundation
Patrick Premo
15
1966
11-0-0
ARGH Power RatingsCliff Morgan
Clyde Berryman
Earl Jessen
National Championship Foundation
Soren Sorensen
16
1973
11-1-0
Bob RoyceClyde Berryman
Edward Litkenhous
United Press International
Washington Touchdown Club
17
1974
11-1-0
Washington Touchdown Club18
1975
11-1-0
ARGH Power RatingsBob Kirlin
Matthews Grid Ratings
19
1977
11-1-0
Bob KirlinCollege Football Researchers Association
20
1978
11-1-0
1st-N-GoalAnnual Football Predictions
Associated Press
Century Football Index
College Football Researchers Association
David Wilson
Football Writers Association of America
Foundation for the Analysis of Competitions and Tournaments
Helms Athletic Foundation
National Championship Foundation
National Football Foundation and Hall of Fame
New York Daily News
Nutshell Sports Football Ratings
21
1979
12-0-0
ARGH Power RatingsAnnual Football Predictions
Associated Press
Billingsley Report
Bob Kirlin
Bob Royce
Century Football Index
Cliff Morgan
Clyde Berryman
College and Pro Football Newsweekly
David Wilson
Dunkel System
Football News
Football Writers Association of America
Foundation for the Analysis of Competitions and Tournaments
Harry DeVold
Harry Frye
Helms Athletic Foundation
James Howell
Jeff Self
Loren Maxwell
Massy Ratings
Matthews Grid Ratings
Mel Smith
Montgomery Full Season Championship
National Championship Foundation
National Football Foundation and Hall of Fame
New York Times
Nutshell Sports Football Ratings
Patrick Premo
Poling System
Sagarin Ratings
The Sporting News
United Press International
22
1980
10-2-0
Annual Football PredictionsMontgomery Full Season Championship
23
1991
11-1-0
Annual Football Predictions24
1992
13-0-0
1st-N-GoalAngelo Louisa
Annual Football Predictions
ARGH Power Ratings
Associated Press
Billingsley Report
Century Football Index
Clyde Berryman
College Football Researchers Association
David Wilson
DKC Ratings
Dunkel System
Football News
Football Writers Association of America
Foundation for the Analysis of Competitions and Tournaments
Gupta Power Ratings
Harry DeVold
Harry Frye
James Howell
James Whalen
Jeff Self
Massy Ratings
Matthews Grid Ratings
National Championship Foundation
New York Times
Nutshell Sports Football Ratings
Patrick Premo
Peter Wolfe
Soren Sorensen
Sparks Achievement Ratings
Sports Illustrated
Steve Eck
SW!-TECH Computer Ratings
The College Football Statistics Quarterly
The Fleming System
The Sporting News
United Press International/National Football Foundation
USA Today/CNN
Washington Touchdown Club
25
1994
12-1-0
Annual Football Predictions
But here is their supposed "recognized" titles.
11 Major College National Championship Year(s)
No
Year
Record
Selector
1
1925
10-0-0
CFBDW Recognized National Champions2
1926
9-0-1
CFBDW Recognized National Champions3
1930
10-0-0
CFBDW Recognized National Champions4
1934
10-0-0
CFBDW Recognized National Champions5
1961
11-0-0
CFBDW Recognized National Champions6
1964
10-1-0
CFBDW Recognized National Champions7
1965
9-1-1
CFBDW Recognized National Champions8
1973
11-1-0
CFBDW Recognized National Champions9
1978
11-1-0
CFBDW Recognized National Champions10
1979
12-0-0
CFBDW Recognized National Champions11
1992
13-0-0
CFBDW Recognized National Champions
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on June 29, 2006 11:10 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
The SEC has a winning record vs. every conference except the Independents and the big 10.
Against big 10: (86-91-7) with a 0.486 winning pct.
Against Independents: (46-47-4) with a 0.495 winning pct.
It won't be long until the SEC owns every conference.
Mooka said:
posted on June 29, 2006 11:51 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Sofullocrap,
I'm the moron? HAHA. At least I post facts. I never had a problem with stats. What I have a problem with is your OPINIONATED Stats; Your TWISTED stats. Now you are exposed. You are done. One thing I find about your stats is they are all questionable. Every time I actually waste my time and research your stats I find you take from SEC and give to the weak PAC. Are you on some kinda Robin Hood trip? Well, if you would quit being so damn stubborn you would see what I'm trying to show is not your OPINIONS twisted into stats and it's not my OPINIONS twisted into stats. THESE ARE FACTS DUMMY> Check it out:
All Time Conference Strength =
1. SEC
2. Big 10
3. Big 12
4. Pac 10
5. ACCADMIT IT!!!!!! ACCEPT IT!!!!!! And to think all this time you are talking so much crap on every blog saying SEC is overhyped, when I know you know damn good and well SEC can't be Fukd with. The more you take from SEC the dumber you look. If you were smart you would stay away from that topic cause you get slammed everytime. BIG BODY SLAM BABY> Take THAT SHHHH MUTHA FUUUERR. BOOOOMMM! Gettin facts slapped all on your faaace. Lightin you up like the 4th o JULY! Pow! Alright that's enough, I'm done now.
Oh yea, Have a good 4th everybody.
T-Mac said:
posted on June 30, 2006 12:00 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,some of your numbers are incorrect from post 339 regarding the Titles breakdown.First,you don't mention Notre Dame and it's 12 National Titles.They are tied with Bama at 12.Second,Oklahoma has 9 National Titles not 7.Michigan has 7 National Titles not 10 or 9.Ohio State has 7 National Titles not 5.The rest appear to be correct.Last,what jumps out at me is that you got USC correct at 11 National Titles.Funny how you came through on USC.11 is correct though.
Quick question,why is there an F in front of UCLA in your PAC Titles breakdown???Just Curious.I'm out.HOLLAT-Mac said:
posted on June 30, 2006 12:19 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,yes that vernacular is used every second on the streets of Atlanta.I never say it and don't think people should at all.It is truly offensive.I'm not the type of person who gets offended easy either.I've got a pretty thick skin.I'm not one to bitch and whine about stupid stuff you know?I accept your apology,but you should know even though you say you mean't it as a point of emphasis you shouldn't stoop to that level.It's 2006 not 1956.I'm out.HOLLA
The Mayor said:
posted on June 30, 2006 1:09 AM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr
Actually according to ESPN College Football Encylcopedia (2005):
Alabama has 12 National Championship titles!
"Alabama can claim all or part of 12 national championships and a good argument that it was unfairly denied a couple of others.."
Roll Tide
Go Ducks
Trojans blow!
T-Mac said:
posted on June 30, 2006 1:09 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Rusty,I'll have to agree with you on your picks for the SEC this season.It will be Auburn or LSU vs Florida in the SEC Champ Game.Everybody better watch out for Arkansas and South Carolina this season.Arkansas should be a better team this year.They have the talent.I'm just not sold on Houston Nutt yet.With Spurrier and SC you just never know what he will do.Spurrier will roll the dice when you least expect it.Ohio State should be stout this year.You are right about Auburn playing 12 straight this season.That will be tough.Hard enough playing 11 straight.Many rough Sunday mornings for the players this season.I'm going with LSU & Florida,but it could just as well be Auburn.I've got it as a toss up right now.SEC 2006 I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on June 30, 2006 1:22 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
The Mayor,thanks a lot.I appreciate that.You are a fine example of a true College FB Fan.The Pac-10 is a great conference.I have family in Los Angeles and I'm going out there in the fall.I'll have to look you up and we can go to a Ducks game.A few of my crazy ass friends will be with me,but they are ex-ballers so it's all good in the hood.Food and Drinks are on me!!!Alright Mayor,I'm out.HOLLA
Franko G said:
posted on June 30, 2006 9:54 AM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
So Cal,
-------------------------------------------------
- "As for the 12-Pts poximity of Ark, thats over 4 Games. Its a more significant pattern if you will, than just one or two in Alabama's case (and I already explained the personell losses on top of that). Arizona & Wazzu share a similar pattern to Ark 2005; with Arizona returning pleanty of Starters (along with other criteria) I peg Arizona as an improved team too... Wazzu (4-7) was in a 16-point proximity of being 9-2!!! but they lose their 1st Team All-American Running Back!!! so its a bit tougher to make the call to put them on the "Most Improved" list."
-------------------------------------------------Just to point it out, Georgia was 8 points from an undefeated season. Yea, 8 points from being 13-0. The Dawgs lost by 4 to Florida without MVP of the SEC Championship and co-All SEC 1st Team QB, DJ Shockley. Georgia lost to Auburn by 1 on a miracle 4th and 10 play..then West Virginia jumped off to a 28-0 lead in the Sugar Bowl...Only for the Dawgs to fight back despite the turnover margin and make it a game at the end...losing by 3.
8 points from being 13-0, but thats not what its about...its about stepping up in the key moments. Thats what Georgia didnt do, that what the teams you mentioned above didnt do. So your point you're trying to make there is insignificant. Did USC step up in the final minutes of the Rose Bowl?? Nope, it was the Texas defense that stepped up and stuffed LenDale White on 4th down(woulda loved to see Snoop Dawg's ugly face after that play), and it was Vince Young who stepped up on 4th down and brought down the Ultimate Team of Hype, USC. Its not about how close you come, buddy. Its about stepping up.
You have much to learn my young apprentice.
Franko G said:
posted on June 30, 2006 10:37 AM — 216.173.167.111 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, and whoever else predicted Florida to go to the SEC Championship,
So you guys really think Chris Leak can lead that team there?? Especially with that schedule..There are certain teams that are always hyped up pre-season..and one of them is Florida. Of course LSU and Auburn are gonna be favorites in the West, but I love how the pres-season hypsters project the SEC..I really do.
The teams that are hyped almost always underperform. Just hear me out-
2003- Auburn was Preseason #1...all the hypsters said Auburn would dominate the SEC and have a spot in the national title game...except Auburn lost their two opening games of the season to USC and Georgia Tech, and went on to lose a total of 5 games...the team that actually did that was LSU, who outplayed Oklahoma in the National Title and took home the BCS National Championship.
2004- Georgia was predicted to make a national title run behind the leadership of seniors David Greene and David Pollack. Georgia owned LSU 45-16 early in the season, things looked better than ever. But the very next week Tennessee beat the Dawgs 19-14...and Georgia lost one more game, to Auburn. In 2004, the hypsters picked Georgia, but it was Auburn who rolled through the SEC..the hypsters were simply a year early. You will find this trend continue...
2005- Tennessee was supposed to be a national Title contender. All the pre-season magazines had them top 5. Well, needless to say, after losing 6 games and not even being bowl-eligible, the hypsters were wrong again. In 2005, it was Georgia who came out of the smoke of the SEC to make a BCS Bowl appearance. Georgia came very close to a very memorable season, but thats all insignificant...the excuses are- 'Shockley injured for the Florida game', 'Auburn with a 4th down miracle.' If Shockley wasnt injured and Georgia's defense didnt crumble on their biggest play of the season, then we coulda been looking at a whole 'nother ball game for the Dawgs. But that didnt happen so the speculation is meaningless. The fact is, the hypsters were once again a year late. Georgia won the SEC and was the most solid team in the conference, although they didnt blow anybody away(except LSU in the SEC title game!)
2006- All things point to a Tennessee resurgence, according to history. Watch out for the Vols, they will be a VERY VERY dangerous team. Florida is the team that is being hyped, with a top 5 ranking in all the preseason magazines...that is a curse for this season, 2006. But it could be a foretelling of success for 2007. I look into my crystal ball and I see Tennessee and Georgia as the top teams in the SEC east in 2006. Florida wont beat Spurrier. He owns the Gators and he's inside all the Gators' heads. Heck, even the Florida basketball team suffered from the Spurrier curse.(the almighty Gators lost to South Carolina twice in the regular season, and beat the Gamecocks by 1 single point in the SEC Champ Game- before going on to manhandle everyone in the tourney).
Here are my predictions for Florida in 2006:
-Florida will lose to South Carolina at the Swamp. I mean come on...Spurrier made the swamp what it is..he owns that place, he named it!...you think his players are gonna come in their intimidated??? Puuuuhlease!
-Florida will lose to either LSU or Auburn. No way they come out of those 2 games with less than 1 loss.
-Florida will lose to either Georgia or Tennessee.
Quote me on it, and I will stand by it until the Gators prove me wrong. As far as Im concerned thats 3 in-conference losses in the books for Urban Meyer and his gang. The hypsters picked the wrong year to hype up these Gators. With three losses, they will have no chance of making it to Atlanta.
The SEC East will come down to Georgia and Tennessee. Decided in Georgia's 6th game of the season on October 7th in Athens. UGA vs. Tennessee. Dawgs vs Vols.
The SEC West will come down to Auburn vs. LSU. That game will once again crown the West Champs.
Florida wont technically be knocked out of it until they lose to South Carolina in their own territory...seriously this is like if Napoleon had switched sides and become General of the English army..he would sweep through France like nobody's business. Thats gonna be one heck of a game and Im gonna be there. I just cant wait to see how the Gator faithful greet their maker.
If The SEC title in Atlanta doesnt come down to either Georgia/Tennessee vs. Auburn/LSU I will be greatly surprised and will renounce all my pride.
AU03 said:
posted on June 30, 2006 10:52 AM — 205.255.224.10 — link — abuse?
The SEC has a winning record vs. every conference except the Independents and the big 10.
Let's look at why the Big 10 can claim this
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georiga, Tennessee, and LSU are a combined 49-26-3 vs. the Big 10 (all with winning records), whereas Michigan (18-5-1, with 9 wins vs Vandy), Indiana (26-21-1, with 18 wins vs. Kentucky), and Iowa (4-3) are the only Big 10 teams with winning records vs. the SEC.
Iowa (4-3) are the only Big 10 teams with winning records against the SEC.So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 30, 2006 7:11 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty, you goofball, are you TRYING to miss the point? Are we supposed to count USC's 2002 "Title"???!!! If so, then USC was going for "Quat-Row" cause the "3-Peat" was already done.
2002 Nation Champs (ncaasports.com)
- Ohio State: AP, BCS, Berryman, Billingsley, Colley, DeVold, Eck, FACT, FB News, FW, Massey, NFF, NY Times, Seattle Times, Sporting News, Wolfe
- Southern California: Dunkel, Matthews, Sagarin
No, obviously not. Bama 1934 - No Helms, No NCF, No CFRA, No Dickinson... none of the more reputable/widely recognized Selection Orgs named Bama the Champs! Not 1941, not 1962, not 1966,The "Bob Kirlin" Selection Organization is ~World Reknown~ right? That's embarrassing. Bama already has TWO OF THE MOST SHAMEFUL so-called Titles (1973 & 1964) in History, why would you wanna embarass yourself even further with these weak-ass/Mickey Mouse claims?
Goofball, stop lying to yourself, stop pretending.
ESPN almanac - Bama = 10 Titles
Sports Ill almanac - Bama = 9 Titles
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 30, 2006 7:20 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka youre all tangled up. Now youre citing "ratings" and voodoo "Stats" ?!? Hello McFly...
And youre pointing out the disparity in matchups between PAC and SEC teams to The Mayor???What a flip. Mooka; the Al Gore of the Blog.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 30, 2006 7:56 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac do more research. We all know theres no official tally, but there are some more reputable/long-standing Seltion Orgs that carry a bit more weight than others wouldnt you say?
If you delve deep into the history, consider the various the references, some of the "superfluous" selections fall by the way-side(spell check) and the legit ones strengthen their position.Now if you wanna argue that the 4 or 5 so-called "National" Titles that Michigan Won in the 1901's shouldnt be "Counted", I might agree with you (CFB wasnt truely a 'national' sport, arguably, til around 1920). But as far as Michigan's 1901, 02, 03 teams, etc, they were chosen as the Best Team (Quasi-national Champs) by those reputable Selection Orgs that go back that far.
How does Oklahoma have 9 ?!
Remember, in whatever criteria you may be using, based on what ever research, you Have to be CONSISTANT! Washington was the 1960 Helms Champ Title and split the 1984 NCF Title... are you counting those for Washington the way Oklahoma counts those 2 extra ones - base on your research? Or Arizona State's 1975 and 1970, for that matter? USC 1979, 1976? shee, USC 2002 if ya wanna go really nuts !?!!!?
Ohio State 1998(sagarin)? FSU 1992 (sagarin)?
The 1980 Title - FSU, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Pittsburgh, along with Georgia, were all named "champs" by some Selection Org or another... the point is ya gotta draw the line at some point, AND be sure to be consistant in your reasoning.The Mayor said:
posted on June 30, 2006 7:57 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr
Well I'll be, we're both right.
I provided the exact quote from the 2005 ESPN College Football Encyclopedia. It's on page 76:
"Alabama can claim all or part of 12 national championships and a good argument that it was unfairly denied a couple of others.."
Further down on the same page, as you pointed out, it lists the "7 Consensus Titles Since 1936"
1961, 1964, 1065, 1973, 1978, 1979 and 1992
I don't know enough about Alabama football to identify the disparity in the number of titles, I'll leave that up to our SEC friends.
I remove myself from this argument.
So Cal USMCr said:
posted on June 30, 2006 8:36 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac,
ESPN almanac:
Notre Dame = 13
USC = 10
Bama = 10
Oklahoma = 7
Michigan = 7
Ohio St = 7 (2 were non-AP/Coaches Titles, post 1936/1950)SI almanac:
Notre Dame = 13
USC = 11
Michigan = 9 (4 in/Dark Ages, pre-1920)
Bama = 9
Oklahoma = 7
Ohio St = 5Combining all the research (not just ESPN & SI btw), decifering which Selc Org are most widely reguarded, historic relavence, etc:
Notre Dame = 13* (inlc 1 in 1919)
USC = 11
Bama = 10
Michigan = 10* (only 5, using Dark Ages arguement)
Oklahoma = 7
Ohio State = 5T-Mac said:
posted on July 1, 2006 3:26 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,Alabama has 12 National Titles.Get over it,Get a life,and Get on another blog.All your MUD SLINGING at the SEC doesn't do a thing to reinforce your stats!lol,lol,lol,lol Your Jealousy is so Hilarious it's Comical!!!!!!!!!
We all got a Great Idea for you.Why don't you go play golf and get the hell out of the house.They have a WOMENS TEE with your name on it.HOLLASo Cal Clippers said:
posted on July 1, 2006 7:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac tell it to Sports Illustrated and ESPN.
take a look in the mirror... You Are Hype.
Like a little kid with his fingers in his ears screaming "na, na, na..."And the fact that you STILLL dont understand the Women's Tee reference to the SEC's relative Home/Road disparity goes to show the degree of your obtuseness.
Now go ahead and tell me more about how tough you were playing back in the day - more mindless drivel.
So Cal Clippers said:
posted on July 1, 2006 7:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Drivel, The Mayor's comment... what about it?
USC 11 Titles (2nd All-Time).
Pete Carroll 2 Titles in 5 years - highest ratio among any Coach EVER! to date (min 5-years)This aint bragging, btw, only putting things in perspective. Now, what about The Major's comment? I'll let you "decifer" that one, T-Freud.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 1, 2006 9:12 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,your definition of Jealous is very impressive!See,I had a feeling you knew how to read.BTW-Your comment about me telling you how tough I was playing back in the day-more mindless drivel.My comments about my playing day's pertain to playing in the SEC and college football in general.That's all.You call it mindless drivel.Man,I gotta hand it to ya bro.Your vocabulary is very impressive.lol.lol.I'm sure everyone on this blog are amazed at all your BIG WORDS-B/S.BTW-My name is T-Mac.Unlike you,I use the same name everyday.You change your name every other day.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 1, 2006 9:23 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,or whoever you go by these days.I got a great new name for you.It's what everyone on this blog thinks of you anyway.Try this new name next time you can't come up with one.So Cal SO WHAT.
Although with your VAST KNOWLEDGE of the ENGLISH LANGUAGE I'm sure you'll come up with something.You and all the big words and rhetoric over and over.You remind me of an English Comp professor I had in college.You have the same effect.Just kind of puts you to sleep.Alright,I'm snoring now.I'm out.HOLLAT-Mac said:
posted on July 1, 2006 9:31 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Happy 4th of July everyone.Our thoughts and prayers are with all of our men and women in uniform who make the ultimate sacrifice so we can be safe and free.Say it with me.Say it Loud,Say it Proud.I'M PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm out.HOLLA
The Mayor said:
posted on July 1, 2006 11:41 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
T Mac and So Cal,
As a former USAF ground pounder, I echo T-Mac's Independence day wishes. I wish that all of our guys in Iraq and Afghanistan could be home for the August 31st (Thursday night) opener...god speed to all of them.
Go Ducks
T-Mac said:
posted on July 2, 2006 12:29 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal and The Mayor,thank you for your service to this great nation.We live in the best country in the world.My hat is off to both of you.This 4th lets all take some time and really think about what is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan and support our troops who are there.I'm not real familiar with country music,but one of my roommates has a cd by a guy named Darryl Worley.He has a song called(Have you forgotten?).It is a great song to play on this 4th of July.God Bless Our Troops.I'm out.HOLLA
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 2, 2006 7:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
t-mac, You telling me about your playing days (when you mentioned it the first time), had NOTHING to do with what the discussion was about! My reference of the SEC being "Road P*ssies" was directed at the fact that they generally play LESS Road Games (by % compared to, namely, the PAC). I can only assume that you mistakenly took THAT as me calling YOU a P*ssy, or calling SEC players P*ssies - cause after that, thats when you went on your Al Bundy-like jag... It had No Relevance to the Road/Home disparity issue!!, er No Relevance to the "Road P#ssies" reference.
and btw, "big words?... vast knowledge of the language"?... Bro, what "drivel"? Its six letters. Im just a Grunt (a ground pounder just like The Mayor). Should I stick to stuff like "they suck"... "that blows"... "ur hype".
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 2, 2006 7:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Opening Day Upset!
San Diego St over Texas.... -El Paso.
Not a huge upset but NMike Price has quickly turned Texas-El Paso into a solid lil Mid-Major program. But I think new HC, Chuck Long, is gonna do better with SD State.
Less than two months? damn.The Northwestern @ Miami OH Thursday game is gonna be a bit somber though.
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 2, 2006 8:26 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Franko G, Georgia = 5 Points from 8-5.
If you stretch it to "within a TD-proximity", Joe-Jah was conceivibly 12-Points from being 7-6!!! - but thats ingnoring the fact that they would not have played in the CCG as a 4-4 SEC team, and that they would have faced someone other than West Virginia in their Bowl.The point is, Franko, go a bit deeper, consider both sides of the matter (and it goes for everyone)...
Joe-jah sorta evens out in that respect, wouldnt you say?
GTech +7
So Car +2
Arkansas +3
Florida -4
Auburn -1
WVU -3Arkansas didnt have any "Close Wins" only 4 close Losses... AZ had 1 close win, but 5 close losses!... etc...
T-Mac said:
posted on July 2, 2006 10:10 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Franko G,you are absolutely right in discussing this 12 point 13 point or however many points proximity as it is called.This logic is ridiculous.People saying this team was within this proximity of going 9-2 or this team was within a TD of going 7-6.This logic holds no water at all.The fact of the matter is this.When the final seconds are off the clock whatever the scoreboard says-GOES!This SCENARIO (because thats all it is) can be applyed to any team in the country on any year.We are in total agreement on this Franko.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 2, 2006 10:48 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal Slippers,you are right bro.You told me to take a look in the mirror that I was Hype.This morning after I took a shower I started to shave and looked in the mirror and I had HYPE written all over me.It was scary G.I wen't to the doctor and he wrote me a prescription for some ANTI-HYPE pills.I feel 100% better now.Thanks for the advice and your quick thinking bro.You saved me.I don't know what would've happened without you.I'm out.SEC 2006.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 3, 2006 12:05 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,much respect to USC and their 11 National Titles.I give credit where credit is due.Pete Carroll 2 National Titles in 5 years.That is impressive.Honestly it is.Before you puff your chest out for Pete Carroll let me refresh your memory.The (4 BEST) coaches to ever walk a sideline are,Knute Rockne,Paul (Bear) Bryant,Bobby Bowden,and Joe Paterno.Not in that particular order in certain cases.You say you weren't bragging on USC and Pete Carroll.Of course you were bro.Let's all not forget that College FB is a what have you done for me lately sport.So,as of right now Pete Carroll looks pretty darn good.In the end whether Carroll can walk the sideline with the other 4 Great's is yet to be seen.I'll leave you with this G.Let's all see where Carroll is in 20 years of coaching College FB.Just putting things in perspective for you.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 3, 2006 1:58 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
To everyone and The Mayor,Mayor I'm glad and thankful that you served in the USAF and that you have the courtesy to acknowledge our troops on this 4th of July.I find it very disrespectful that So Cal or whoever he goes by can't even mention Independence Day in his latest blogs.For someone who is supposedly a Marine this is surprising.To say the least.Yet,he continues to sling mud on the SEC calling us Road P*ssies.This So Cal guy calls the SEC and players Road P*ssies,P*ssies in just 4 sentences.I have thanked So Cal for his service over and over,but all he comes back with is mud-slinging and more rants.It's juvenile.I have relatives and close friends stationed in Iraq and here in the US.Stationed at Norfolk,VA Virginia Beach,VA Jacksonville,FL and San Diego,CA.We can JOKE around and stuff,but there is a time and place for it.My cousin leaves soon for Special Forces(USAF).This So Cal has repeatedly gotten personal saying NEGGA a few times.Then goes on to call my home town of Atlanta- Hotlanta as if that will make him sound tough.Then calls where I come from the Mean Streets of Hotlanta.Saying I'm sure they use the word NEGGA there.This isn't a time for that shit.It is a time where we come together as one and be thankful.I believe The Mayor was in the USAF.I wonder about our boy So Cal though.You can post back with all the Kuwait to Tikrit and 50cal 25 mile runs all day long bro.Your not telling me anything that I don't know about.The Mayor has 1 thing you don't have-CLASS.If you are a Marine you have a weird way of showing it.I'm done with that.God Bless our Troops,Our Men & Women in Uniform,and our Great Country!!!Happy 4th everybody.I'm out.HOLLA
Mooka said:
posted on July 3, 2006 11:53 AM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Franko,
To under estimate Chris Leak is a BIG mistake; HUGE. Not only that, but this will be the second year for the new coach; normally the time improvement starts to show. To top it off didn't Florida have the number 1 or 2 recruiting class this year? Florida will smoke South Carolina. Spurrier is improving the SC program, but struggling. Meyers isn't really struggling to improve an already decent football team as shown with his recruiting class. I like your picks for Tennessee, Georgia to the top of the class, but I would throw Florida in the mix. Also, Tenn HAS to beat CAL to get any respect this year and that is a big ?. I can agree with you that the SEC is hard to predict. I would never bet on a SEC game. It's wide open. That's what makes the Conference great. It is fun to try to predict it though.
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 3, 2006 8:08 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Master Franko & T-MAC...
T-Mac, I already gave Franko G the "answer" - post 375, no prompting necessary. Its 13 for ND, and I gave him the list. (btw, correction: the actual SI count is 12 for ND - I forgot to correct a type-o).As for the Point-Proximity trend "thing"...
Franko you gotta pay attention if youre gonna make comments. To be Clear, that logic is NOT applied in the sense of what "woulda, shoulda, coulda" happened for THAT SEASON. No ones deminishing Bama's or Georgia's 2005 accomplishments, or upgrading Arkansas' or Arizona's. That trend-dynamic is used as a guide, a sign, a predictor(so to speak), about whats to come for the Following season, the FOLLOWING season.
Though, I cant take credit for it... ITS DOCUMENTED in one of the publications! Obviously there is no "Guarantee" or a "true Predictor" but with these trends we're talking about, there's atleast a documented "Propensity" for improvement(or atleast not getting worse) attatched to those certian teams.... and combined with other criteria, other reasons to expect improvement, certain teams Stand Out - make my "Most Improved" list.
~Master~egg-on-the-face-Franko, too much Star Wars huh? or is it Kung Fu Hustle?Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 3, 2006 8:47 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Gezus, T-MAC...
The Mayor says USC "blows"...
I pay no mind to his feeble dig...
You re-itterate to me what he said, instigating a response from me...
Then I respond, "11 Titles. Pete Carroll. What."And thats me "Bragging" ???
I mean, whadafugk. What are you doing T-Mac? Snap out of it. And as it were, thru-out this particular thread/discussion Ive actually Not brought-up USC much. Ive replied with USC-stuff when appropriate.
Mooka said:
posted on July 3, 2006 9:01 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal,
What part of, "Alabama can claim all of their 12 titles," don't you understand? I'm just wondering be/c that seems to be the saying in the book you are going off, yet you are still not giving Alabama their props. Whatever, I know you will never give in be/c someone maybe connected to a SEC team probably did something to you (possibly abused you?) and you will forever hold a grudge on all SEC teams now. I just want to let you know it's okay and you can let the past go now. If you need a psychiatrist or need some money to get one let me know and I will try to start up a, HELP SOCAL DRIVE.
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 3, 2006 9:13 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-MAC on a side note, I dont know about Joe Pa or Bobby Bowden being so highly regarded. I'll grant you that Longevity has its virtues, but Im from the U.S.A. - show me National Titles. I might put Tom Osborne (3 Titles/25Yrs, Nebraska), Darrell Royal (3 Titles/20Yrs, Texas), among others, above either one of those guys. But I am with you in that Pete Carroll (or any current coach) still has time to build on his accomplishments, to improve on his standing as an All-Time Coach. And he's had a great start...
National Titles/Years Coaching with one team (5 yrs min) as it stands now:
1 Pete Carroll (USC) - 2 Titles in 5 Yrs
2 Wallace Wade (Bama) - 3 Titles in 8 Yrs
3 Frank Leahy (ND) - 4 Titles in 11 Yrs
4 Dennis Erickson (Miami) - 2 Titles in 6 Yrs
5 Bernie Bierman (Minnesota) - 5 Titles in 16 Yrs
6 Knute Rockne (ND) - 4 Titles in 13 Yrs
7 Andy Smith (Cal) - 3 Titles in 10 Yrs
8 Howard Jones (USC) - 4 Titles in 16 Yrs
8 John McKay (USC) - 4 Titles in 16 Yrs
10 Paul Bryant (Bama) - 6 Titles in 25 YrsGo Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 3, 2006 10:01 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, you are a fuhken joke.
Post 385.Is anyone else trackin here?
In post 376, I RE-clarify to T-Mac: My reference of the SEC being "Road P*ssies" was directed at the fact that they generally play LESS Road Games (by % compared to, namely, the PAC). I can only assume that you mistakenly took THAT as me calling YOU a P*ssy, or calling SEC players P*ssies...How does this kid not understand?
And Then! he ~tries~ to ridicual me?! when He was the guy who initially went on his "when I played ball"-Im-Tough-Jag based on something he mis-interpreted in the first place!@!!#!@!
T, whats the matter, you okay brah?
Explain to me how I got "personal" with the use of the word negga? And be careful with YOUR OWN assumptions T. I dont know you from Snow White. I already clarified that it was used as a point of emphasis, NOT directed at anyone.T-Mac said:
posted on July 3, 2006 10:47 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,you don't need to clarify or re-clarify anything.I'm pretty quick on the uptake.We have all read your continuous comments on the SEC being Road P*ssies as you put it.In a passive aggressive way your Trump Card to this statement is according to you,SEC plays LESS Road games compared to ,namely,the PAC.True or not,I don't know.I'm honest.I couldn't care less about stuff like that.I understand quite well.I know what you are saying.I didn't mistake the comment for anything.Every time you say it you are calling SEC players P*ssies.Whether you admit it or not,you are.I'm not trying to ridicule you at all.I make a joke here and there,but it's all in fun.I never went on a when I played ball I'm tough jag as you put it.I made some comments about my playing days in the SEC after you continued to call the SEC Road P*ssies.You said it before and you continue to call the SEC Road P*ssies.You are insulting every SEC player and ex-player every time you say that whether you admit it or not.You ask,(T,what's the matter,you okay brah?)Yes, I couldn't be better!The question is So Cal,what's the matter,you okay bro?Something is wrong with you because you continue to sling mud at the SEC for whatever reason.Jealousy,Envy maybe?I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 3, 2006 11:17 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,you're use of the word NEGGA was directed at me.You know it and I know it.You wen't off on a rant about war in haste and proceeded to ask me if I've done this or that using the word NEGGA.Then to cover your own ass you say it wasn't directed at anyone.You said it in the heat of the moment than realized what you said later.I don't assume anything about you.When we assume we make an ass out of you and me.I don't know you from Snow White either.I don't know what ethnicity you are.I don't care.I show love to everybody.I certainly wouldn't call someone NEGGA being that I am Black.If you can't understand how you got personal with the use of that word to a Black man than you need to quit studying all your football stats and pick up a HISTORY BOOK!!!I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 4, 2006 12:31 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,in my post 384 I congratulated USC on their 11 National Titles and Pete Carroll on his 2.I guess I was talking more about winning percentage than anything else.I just mentioned the National Title thing because USC has been dominant the last few years.The National Title thing is a big part of the big picture as well.I completely agree with you on Tom Osborne at Nebraska.He was dominating in the early-mid 90's.Do you remember a tailback named Lawrence Phillips?When I was coming up he was my idol.When I played I used to try and emulate what he did.I used to piss my coaches off because if I was going in for a score I would do that highstep that he would do.He really could have been a great one in the NFL I think,but he kept getting into trouble.That really makes me think because this guy had it all at his fingertips and just let it all go for stupid reasons.I used to dream about playing in the GAME in college until I tore my knee to pieces.Eventually,I got my 40 time back.4.47 seconds,but I was never the same runner you know.Exploding with that burst going straight has never been a problem for me.Playing tailback/runningback you can't run straight.You'll get drilled every time.I still can't plant,slant,and explode like I could before.I'm not trying to sound tough or anything like that about my playing days.I guess it just feels good sometimes to talk about it instead of leaving it all unsaid as my friends and family put it.It's very hard for me to watch any NFL game to this day.I start thinking about how thing's would have been different had I not gotten seriously injured.It's always on my mind every single day.Watching College FB is fun though.Don't get me wrong though,a Masters in Psychology is great,but my shot in the GAME was my dream.Happy 4th everybody.I'm out.HOLLA
Tomcat said:
posted on July 4, 2006 1:26 PM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Happy 4th
To anyone who uses the n word or refers to football conferences as road pssies,and considers themselves the most objective?
please don't pee on my leg and tell me its raining.
We have a saying down here, that is you cant walk across the lot without getting some on you boots.
Mooka thanks for post#336 & # 347
T-Mac post # 335
Franko post # 321 you realize that the only way that Ohio State or Oklahoma can play in the Nat.game is with wins against Texas.
Ohio State lost alot of players including three linebackers.Mr. Charles will probably break 200 yards on the ground.Ought to be one heck of a game in Austin. Franko you were correct in saying that it is totally up for grabs.
Rusty # 326 I disagree, however I am not disagreeable
Mayor # 319 Thanks I understand that we are all influenced by our geographical regions in respect to coverage of events.I agree that USC-Blows
The Big XII and The SEC two great football conferencesHookem-Horns Gigem Aggies Sicem-Bears
Roll-Tide Geaux Tigers Pig Sooie War Eagle
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on July 5, 2006 1:37 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
T-Mac how can anyone seriously say that Lawrence Phillips was his idol??? He was a decent player on the field, but everyone knew that Nebraska was trying to hid what type of person he was off the field. He didn't have the size or speed to be a great back in the NFL, it was college sized talent. Everyone knew that he was going to be praying that he didn't drop the soap in prison after leaving Nebraska!
Go Navy. Beat Army said:
posted on July 5, 2006 9:38 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, you lame-ass... why do you think that guy said "or part of" 12 Titles? and why would you ommit that from your quote?... hmm...
Mooka, Everything is Relative (always keep that in mind, always). Lets say you would like to extend the criteria, use Selection Orgs that are less reknown, etc, and "allow" Bama to claim 12 Titles, then you have to be aware of how that Expanded Logic affects OTHER TEAMS.
Bama isnt the only team affected (from 10 Titles to 12), other teams would "pick-up" Claim to more Titles themselves; conceivably...
Notre Dame would go from 13 to 16
USC from 11 to 13
Oklahoma from 7 to 12... And that sh!t can Really get Silly, just ask Rusty Shack (post 344). Its not only ESPN that I reference, its various of sources:
Espn Encyclopedia
Espn Almanac
SI Almanac
NCAA College Football Record Book 2005
cfbdatawarehouse.com
ncaasports.com
collegefootballpoll.com
among others...The SEC is Over-Hyped, is the extent of what Ive said about the SEC. And there are legit arguements backing that claim... is that so Damning?! What, you sayin that there's a "Grudge"-prerequisite for someone to take an objective stance?
Mooka and Everyone, Remember, that my first post in this thread was a simple admonishment to SEC fans that may have been getting carried away in early posts in this thread:SEC over-hype? lest anyone take "attendance figures" to make any kind of direct coorelation or substantive claim about the "Best Conference" issue. 2005 - SEC, worst record among the 5 major conferneces. Rated 5th overall.
Go Navy. Beat Army said:
posted on July 5, 2006 9:55 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac's conception of "Mud Slinging"...
Me, saying this:Making the SEC-PAC comparison - not my issue, but Mooka... Do you "believe in" something called homefield advantage?....
SEC vs PAC all-time = 60.6 winning percentage
62-39-7 (including Bowls)SEC's Home/Road ratio advantage = 63.9 percent
58 @ SEC, 28 @ PAC (22 Bowls divided evenly)[something like 67% if you ignore the Bowls altogether; something like 60% if you consider not-so-neutral Bowls, ei USC vs Bama in the Rose Bowl]
-------------------
and...
-------------------SEC - 31% of OOC are vs BCS opponents
PAC - 42% of OOC are vs BCS opponentsSEC - 33% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl Teams
PAC - 55% of 2006 OOC opponents were 2005/06 Bowl TeamsSEC - 17 percent of all of their OOC games are on the Road
PAC - 39 percent of all of their OOC games are on the Road
Its probably been for MOST of their history that the SEC has been hitting off the Women's Tee, sitting on Booster-Seats, being the biggest Road Pu**ies.
Just since 1980 alone, USC faced about 39 opponents on the Road, UCLA 38, Cal 34, Stanford 30, Washington 24... Auburn 13, Florida 23, Alabama 22, Tennessee 21, LSU 24.
Who's gonna sit there and tell me thats Not an advantage?!
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 5, 2006 10:56 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac I told you "I dont know you from Snow White"... did that fully register with you or not? You seem to understand what I meant when you replied back to me "I don't know you from Snow White either. I don't know what ethnicity you are. I don't care"... But it seems as though you DONT make the connection that I! DIDNT Know what ethnicity YOU were, and DIDNT care! So how could I have "made it Personal" ???
I told you to be careful with Your Own assumptions Dr. T-Freud - didnt I?
You say "If you can't understand how you got personal with the use of that word to a Black man than you need to quit studying all your football stats and pick up a HISTORY BOOK" - did you ever give you ethnicity before Post 246?...???... How did I make it "personal", goofball? I didnt wanna get into this but... lets put it this way, I dont need a map to find the Watts Towers - "Negga, please" is part of a vernacular, sure of course some people find that insulting, but its not exclusively used in a derogatory way. So T-Mac youre right, you DONT know me from Snow White either.
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 5, 2006 11:40 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat - the SEC, scheduling Road Games - am I wrong?
Yeah thats right, objective.
As opposed to...Tomcat -posted on June 12- says:
Want to see a tough schedule check out the Rice Owls, TCU Horned Frogs and The Baylor Bears These teams have really tough schedules. The Baylor Bears in 05 went 5-6 which is pretty darn good, considering vicorties over Iowa State, SMU and Oklahoma State. They took A&M and Oklahoma into O.T. Guy Morris and The Bears are on the right track...
Hookem Horns Sic-em Bears
Mooka said:
posted on July 5, 2006 11:47 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal,
What you have to realize is that all fans get carried away with their team, and hype them up a little bit. Relatively speaking, USC fans and other fans who have something to be proud of do too. This blog is about SEC leading attendance in the Nation of college football and there is a reason for that. It's not be/c there are alot of shiity teams in the SEC either. You are just so proud of your little stat from 2005 that you completly miss the entire scale of things. And that is this:
All Time Conference Strength:
1) SEC
2) Big-10
3) Big-12
4) PAC-10
5) ACCnot to mention the distribution of Championships within the Conference, and the constant competition going for the Championship every single year.
I know you lose sight of the big picture every once in a while, so I will gladly remind you. There is no hype in these accomplishments and SEC fans should be proud.Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on July 6, 2006 9:24 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Mooka...Where did you get your lame ass tainted stats for the All-Time Conference Strength rankings? The stats prove that the SEC is not going for the Championship every year.
Since the BCS started in the 1998 season, here is a listing of the title games:
1998 Tennessee vs. FSU
1999 FSU vs. Virginia Tech
2000 Oklahoma vs. FSU
2001 Miami vs. Nebraska
2002 Ohio State vs. Miami
2003 LSU vs. Oklahoma
2004 Oklahoma vs USC
2005 Texas vs USCUsing current conference memberships, the break down of the 16 teams are:
ACC - 6 (37.5%)
SEC - 2 (12.5%)
Big 10 - 1 (6.25%)
Big 12 - 5 (31.25%)
PAC 10 - 2 (12.5%)As you can see 12.5% of the time can hardly be considered playing for the national championship every year!
Mooka said:
posted on July 6, 2006 12:49 PM — 138.163.0.38 — link — abuse?
Tampa Hurricane,
Whooaa, are you Socal's long lost son? Go to www.cfbdatawarehouse.com, and come back correct. What I'm talking about is all time here. And yes, every single year there are SEC teams that go for the National Championship, but the problem is they knock each other off be/c they are all talented enough to be there. ACC doesn't have that competition. Sorry dude, your Conference comes in LAST for all time strength. Nothing personal, it's not my stats. Also, there is more to all time Conference strength than just Championships, and what Socal likes to use-OOC, and you will understand it all after visiting the site. Thanks for breaking down the Championships for me though. I didn't realize how many teams from ACC actually been in Championship games during the recent years. Props to ACC for that.
Tomcat said:
posted on July 6, 2006 5:51 PM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
Hey So-Cal or Navy beat Army
I cant help but pull for the underdogs on occasion.Thats part of what makes CFB so exciting.
Although I was raised in the Austin area and have been a lifelong Longhorn Fan,I still like to pull for old SWC teams at times.
Pre-season polls are all just opinion and really dont mean much unless you are an 04 Aurburn fan.
I'd like to see the teams that some would consider mid-major pull huge upsets over traditional powerhouses.
Hookem-HornsGo Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 6, 2006 8:57 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka thats one source - one of many. And like I said, they All have their Flaws.
You never responded, in your vast research how does HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE factor in? Another thing it seems that it deals in Amounts as opposed to percentages. The PAC and Big TEN have less teams than the other Confs... that gotta be accounted for, its not as pedestrian as "total number" of Titles, or so forth. Also, they have some wacky "Big Bowl Quotient"... Ill let You explain That to me.
Go Navy. Beat Army. said:
posted on July 6, 2006 10:12 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, I got discussions going on all over the place... someone says that I focus to much on the past, and youre telling me Im hung-up on the 2005 season. Which is it? I'll let you decide among yourselves.
The SEC is not "Dominant", and there is a perception that it Is. Me saying so, is Not me bashing the SEC, or "mud slinging", or any other disparaging effect.
The SEC being average in terms of National Titles (relatively), the SEC bennefitting from a greater percentage of Homefields (relatively), and to a lesser degree, the SEC facing a greater percentage of Non-D1A opponents (historically/relatively), are all factors that most people/fans/media dont pay much attention to, But, which are inherent to the isssue.
The Media and the SEC fandom feed off of each other, and that snowball affect makes it a bit artificial, a bit contrived... and with SECers yappin about attendance figures and seemingly attributing that to the actual conf 'Strength', its just more Huff-n-Puff...
... Someone had to 'remind' them of it.So Cal USMCr said:
posted on July 6, 2006 11:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Am I confusing some people with the SN changes
- Rusty -
did you get the USC & ND list of Titles? post 375- Franko -
Georgia was also 5 points from 8-5... the Point-Proximity trend is in regards to the following season, its propensity is Documented. Did you get that? Posts 378 and 389. Ya wipe the egg off your face yet "Master" Franko?- T-Mac -
Busy inctigating stuff, and falling on the wrong side; The Mayor's weak insult, Rusty's USC/ND question, agreeing with Franko's mis-guided take on the point-proximity thing.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 7, 2006 12:18 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMCr,in your reference to me.I guess none of my posts from July 5th wen't through.Yeah,you got me with the SN changes bro.Don't insult my intelligence.Your posts seem to be on here all night,every night for some reason.Your the only one who is mis-guided.Your a Light-Weight.BTW-you need to learn how to spell or do a spellcheck before you post MR BIGTIME!Mr I go by 5 or 6 different names.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 7, 2006 12:26 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,get off the OOC schedule and the Point-Proximity b/s.It's old G.That's your TRUMP CARD.It's all you got.You can apply the point proximity thing to ANY TEAM IN THE COUNTRY ON ANY GIVEN YEAR.Let it go.That dog can't hunt no more!!!I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 7, 2006 12:38 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,since you are so into this whole POINT-PROXIMITY thing and messing with Franko about it I have an idea for you G.Excluding the 41-38 loss to TEXAS in the Natl Title Game,why don't you fill us all in on the POINT-PROXIMITY that USC was in last year from going 10-2 instead of 12-0.OH,I almost forgot.You can't do that.IT ONLY APPLIES TO THE SEC!!!!!!!!I'm Out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 7, 2006 12:48 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Hey Everybody,So Cal has a TRUMP CARD that he's been playing for way too long.This Out Of Conference thing is a complete joke.In each conf it doesn't matter until you get to the meat of your schedule which are your IN CONFERENCE games.Did you hear that So Cal???Don't get me started on his POINT-PROXIMITY thing.We can make this case for any team in the country on any given year.On this blog acting like your bad.Your an AMATEUR bro!!This is his TRUMP CARD.All he has.BRO,Hit me up when you got something worth bringing to the table!I'm Out.HOLLA
Mooka said:
posted on July 7, 2006 1:02 AM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal,
You have nothing that shows SEC is not dominant. Your only claim is homefield advantage, and if you want to see my opinion on that re-read post 337. SEC owns every conference except Big-10 and we are catching up to them fast. After we get up on them ina bout 10 games I will come back on here and say SEC owns every conference PERIOD. And guess what...it won't be hype either.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 7, 2006 1:05 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Hey Everybody,I'm So Cal USMCr,So Cal Clippers,So Cal Most Objective,Go Navy Beat Army or just plain old So Cal.I'm confused about my name.I'm confused about a lot of things.I do have a TRUMP CARD though.It is Out Of Conference schedules and Point-Proximity in games.I know my TRUMP CARD doesn't amount to crap,but I will keep on playing that card because it's all I got.My TRUMP CARD!!!No other conference even comes close to the PAC-10 especially that SEC.They are all HYPE.Did I mention they are also ROAD P*SSIES?
T-Mac said:
posted on July 7, 2006 1:38 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Alright guys,lets talk some football.The 2006 season is about 7 or 7 1/2 weeks away give or take.Here is what I wan't from everybody.Let's all take a good look at week #1.Every Conference.Everybody.Every Game.Put all the games out there with each persons projected ending score!Pick the winner & loser.I know the week 1 games are cupcakes for most teams,but lets do it anyway alright!Pick all games or just pick games that are important to you.It doesn't matter.We can do this all season long.During the season if you wan't to throw in stats of what you might think a team or player will get,than go for it.It makes it fun.We did this the last 2 years where I work and in college.It's a trip when you get into it.This is a PETE ROSE friendly game!!!I'm out.2006 HOLLA
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 7, 2006 8:21 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, how is it "old" this is the first reply back about the matter; the point-proximity trend is Documented. Teams that have a TREND of "close games" (net total of 4 or 5, not just 1 or 2) one season have the PROPENSITY to improve their win/loss record the NEXT season. Its been Documented, over the past few years anyway.
The inverse of that holds true too. If a team has a bunch of "close wins" one season, theres a propensity for that team to have Less Wins the next season - Look for a drop in Record from UCLA, LSU, West Virginia, TCU for 2006, though like I said its not a guarantee, only a propensity.So, No. It DOESNT apply for any team in the country, any given year, dopey.
And as a matta-o-fac, in 2004 USC (13-0) was 14 points from 10-3, three games within 7 pts... the following season, USC ended up 12-1, a WORSE RECORD.
The propenisty is higher the More net "close" wins or losses a team had the previous year; 5 more than 4, 4 more than 3...So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 7, 2006 8:37 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac do you even remotely fathom the meaning of OOC matchups in regards to the Conf comparison/ranking issue? - Honestly.
If none of the teams from any conference faced teams outside their own confernece (lets ignore the INDs for now) would you be "able" to make a qualitative, comphrehensive determination on which conference is better than another?
If you dont understand the question, please say so.
er, Every team in the country ONLY plays against teams from their OWN conference - who, what, where, why, how would you be able to find out which conference is the best, or worst, etc...?
T, remember they aint played on paper.truwareglfn said:
posted on July 7, 2006 11:07 PM — 24.162.81.239 — link — abuse?
What you have to remember about SEC fans is that for the most part - College Football is the only thing that MOST of us have. Compared to other regions, we don't have as much professional baseball, hockey, pro basketball, or pro football teams (although more in the football area). It's been that way for over 200 years, so yes, we literally live and breath college football down here. You'll see that all year long in our local papers, in the break rooms, and at the dinner table. That's why we have more fans - not because year end year out we have the best teams. Hands down we have the best fans - until you've gone to one of our tailgatings for 3 straight days in anticipation of the game, don't talk. I've been to a USC "tailgating" - I've seen more anticipation at a high school game.
truwareglfn said:
posted on July 7, 2006 11:22 PM — 24.162.81.239 — link — abuse?
By the way - for all of you USC fans - not one of your championships were true. LSU would've whooped your tails on the "first" one, and Auburn was undefeated without a chance to play you guys on the "second". I know cry, cry, right? Wrong, a win is a win for the trophy - I'll admit that. It's the NCAA's fault on those -not yours. PLAYOFFS PLEEEEEEEASE!!!!!!! That would end every piece of posted remarks on this page.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 7, 2006 11:41 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Tomcat,I like your Sept 3rd pick.Throw as many out there as you want to.Pick some scores too.It makes it fun.To everybody,it isn't a win or lose deal.It's just fun to get peoples picks on games and scores etc.At work we graph them out with our own projected winners/losers and scores.Whoever comes closest has to buy lunch on Monday!It's a trip when you get into it.Last year one of my co-workers hit the score right on the money of a certain Miami game!When you factor in all the intangibles it gets interesting.We usually do around 20-22 games each week.Games from any conference we decide.In this instance though the games can be any that each person wants to pick.It was really funny last year because the bosses got in on it and would actually give us certain times of the day to work on our picks.Well,I think if everybody gives it a shot it will turn out great.Something else to make watching the games even more fun because you have your picks in front of you as the games are being played.This is a PETE ROSE friendly game.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 8, 2006 12:08 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal.Go Navy,1 more instance to reinforce my stance that your whole POINT-PROXIMITY holds no water and doesn't mean a thing.You say in 2004 USC went 13-0.In 2005 USC went 12-1 a WORSE RECORD.Bro,let me clue you in on a little something.When you are UNDEFEATED you have nowhere to go but DOWN!!!!!!!!!This logic,if you can call it that is ridiculous at best.It means nothing.Play another TRUMP CARD please.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 8, 2006 12:27 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal says (T,remember they aint played on paper.)Thanks for the info bro!I've got a knee that will never be the same and lost out on a shot at the NFL.I shed blood,sweat,and tears for the SEC for 3 seasons so I think I know the game isn't played on paper.Hell,I would give you my numbers(stats) from when I played,but the way you are with stats you would be telling everybody who I am by tomorrow night.Don't post back with that Al Bundy crap.I deserve way better than that.He never had a college career anyway.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 8, 2006 1:08 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,get in on the predictions for the upcoming season.Make your picks for week 1.Winners and the scores of any games you so choose.PAC-10,SEC,BIG XII,BIG TEN or any conf you so choose.Pick upsets of the week or any game you want.We can even go so far as to pick what we think intangibles will be for each game.Whatever everybody is cool with.You don't have to pick right away if you don't want to.Take some time and think about your picks.This is a PETE ROSE friendly game.I'm out.HOLLA
Tomcat said:
posted on July 8, 2006 11:05 AM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
So-Cal Inreference to post #427 If I understand correctly
The 05 Horns were 6 points from 11-2 instead of 13-0 The 04 Horns were 12 points from 12-0 instead of 11-1 or just 1 point from 10-2?
If thats the case Than were the 05 Bears only 11 points from 8-3 instead of 5-6 ?
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts weed all have a merry Christmas.If this woulda shoulda bla bla bla.
These analysist of gone beyond the point of no return.They are coming to take you away Ha Ha Hee Hee.
06 predictions
Arkansas over USC and Alabama
Oklahoma over Oregon
Baylor over Washington State, TCU, and A&M
Texas over Ohio State, Oklahoma, Nebraska,So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 8, 2006 3:13 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Rusty, well then look at post 375...
posted on July 2, 2006 06:54 PM:
Rust,
All Associated Press Poll
All Bowl Championship Series/Coaches Poll
All Dickinson System
Pre-1936 Helms Foundation
Pre-1936 College Football Research Association
Pre-1936 National Championship FoundationSo Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 8, 2006 3:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox' delusion... Tampa setting em straight... and just to add to it...
2005, ZERO SEC teams turely contended for the Title, Z-e-r-o.
2004, the SEC team that actually went UNDEFEATED didnt even get a sniff of the Title!
2003, with USC winning the AP, that makes the SEC 4th in that regard - Title contenders/conference in the BCS era.Moox, Go ahead and list all of the "oh! so many times" when One SEC team has spoiled another SEC team's chances of a National Title, er, "knocked each other off" (legit chances, that is)... and remember EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE! You have to Know about the times its happened with the Big TEN, the PAC, the XII, etc, too, in order for your claim to have any merit, kid.
My guess is that you DONT KNOW off-hand... and youre making a base-less (hype-inspired) claim.
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 8, 2006 4:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, post 420, the SEC finished 5th this past season. And thats playing from Booster Seat/hitting from the Women's Tee, er, hiding behind the attendance, er, having a greater percentage of Home games. And THATS been the case for as long back as I've researched (SEC teams compared to PAC teams, particularly).
BTW, youre the only college football fan I know of that says Homefield doesnt matter.
I'll give you that most dont tend to Account for it in these such discussions... but thats not to say they're right for ommitting it; Its an integral factor when you get down to it. For you to say it doesnt matter... its kinda funny, but sad at the same time. Hey, other SEC fans, police your own.So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 8, 2006 4:07 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
And Moox, The Mayor mentioned that the PAC was 7-3 vs the SEC in the past so-n-so-many years... and wasnt it You that made it a point to Point-Out which SEC teams they were that lost to which PAC teams? - the disparty between the teams that were matched up seemed to be a Concern for you in that case... Do you KNOW or do you Think that datahouse.com Accounted for that kinda stuff in their ratings?
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 9, 2006 7:10 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Holy "S". Rusty, listen to yourself.
(Moox is delusional beyond recognition, but I was sure there was hope for some of you... no?)
Fellas, THAT's the Hype. That denial~type-of mentality is what perpetuates it (particularly w/the SEC in this case; but thats the case w/any Hype). And even after all of this remember, the claim has been that the SEC is not "as Dominant as its perceived to be"... even w/the ESPN almanac reference and everything else (including datahouse.com)... that has been the extent of the claim. Its nothing disparaging about the SEC, its not about 'not liking' the SEC, and Actually, its not to say that the SEC IsNt the best conf overall/all-time necessarily (though its not saying it is either), its about not matching the general perception.
I'll leave it like this... to make the smart bet, the conference to bet Against (ATS) is the SEC. Atleast thats been the case since as far back as Ive looked. Thats the biggest "red flag" of being Over-Hyped.
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 9, 2006 8:37 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
TrueWar, thats friggin awesome, but thats sorta part of what feeds the hype. Ive said myself that the biggest disparity between the PAC and the SEC is with their fandoms and not on the field (in the general sense). But none this has been about dispelling the true devotion of the SEC fandom, its about the Strength of the conferences. "3 day-tailgating" thats all you, Black... Im a college football fan first-&-foremost (Fugk the NFL), but thats not something Im doing in anticipation for 3 days.
And I wouldnt matter if every SEC fan "Tailgated" all week before a game, that doesnt say a thing about which conference is rated Stronger/Weaker or what have you, its about results.Oh here we go with LSU again (post 431), people down there still hung-up on that?...
L.S.U. was L.U.C.K.Y to even be in that BCS game - if you wanna start getting into that kinda S-talking logic. The Redundent "quality wins quotient" of the BCS rating system has since been Eliminated... if not for that bureaucratic oversite, LSU wouldnt have even Played in the BCS game that year! it was That Close.
You say "LSU woulda whooped [USC's] tail" - the two common opponents they shared were beat by almost exactly the same margin (though it doesnt necessarily work as a direct correlation, I know), and also, its not like LSU blew away Oklahoma for you to make a projection like that; "whooped", really? Come on homie.
And anyway, Disputed Titles Happen... its nothing new.As for 2004, are you kidding? Auburn and Utah shoulda played for 2nd place.
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 9, 2006 8:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, Moron YOU BROUGHT IT UP Dipsh!t...
Dipsh!t says: "why don't you fill us all in on the POINT-PROXIMITY that USC was in last year from going 10-2 instead of 12-0.OH,I almost forgot.You can't do that.IT ONLY APPLIES TO THE SEC its documented."
What are you even argueing here?
Its Documented.
Mooka said:
posted on July 9, 2006 9:00 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
SOCAL,
Who are you to call T-MAC a dipsh!t. You tell me what's docemented is hype. YOU ARE THE BIGGEST DIPSH!T I'VE EVER SEEN BLOG ON ANY INTERNET SITE>
Let's quote,"What are you even argueing here? It's docuemented." You are one ignorant mofo. You should go by your own words, after all, IT"S DOCUMENTED. NO HYPE LOSER. Now go back to your corner and cry some more.T-Mac said:
posted on July 9, 2006 10:23 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,Moron WHAT IS YOUR POINT Dipsh!t???You ask what I'm argueing here?I'm not argueing anything bro.It's the same old crap with you day in and day out.Instead of bringing anything valid to the table you continue to sling mud on the SEC.IT'S STUPID OLD!!!!!!At one time you said that I resorted to 8th-grade-level name calling.Hell,that's ironic right there.Your on here calling me a moron,dopey,dipsh!t which is funny to me.What isn't funny is when you continually insult players and ex-players of the SEC by saying they HIT FROM THE WOMENS TEE,SIT ON BOOSTER SEATS,and are ROAD P*SSIES!You said it.IT'S DOCUMENTED.Now that's what I call 8th-grade-level name calling.Jealousy,Envy???You got nuthin G.Bring something to the table WORTH TALKING ABOUT.PLEASE FOR ONCE.SEC 2006 I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 9, 2006 10:33 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Hey Guys,has anyone noticed a trend here???Anytime people call this So Cal out on an issue and take him to task on it he starts calling people names.Especially if he knows you are right he gets p*ssed.He is only on here to start static and stir up trouble.POINT-PROXIMITY and OOC SCHEDULES.Come on.Who really cares about that B/S.No relevance whatsoever!!!You know what they say.There's one in every bunch!Holla If Ya Hear Me!I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 9, 2006 10:49 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal.Go Navy says,(Fugk the NFL).This guy's intelligence is overwhelming.lol.What in the world does he think 75% of College football players are playing towards or dream about?This guy is clueless.When I played SEC football all my teammates dreamed of a shot in the GAME(NFL).So Cal says (Fugk the NFL).Yeah you are real smart So Cal.(Fugk peoples Dreams).Without a dream you got nothing.Just because life didn't workout the way you wanted it to don't get on here and dishonor the SEC,the NFL, OR INSULT OUR INTELLIGENCE!!!!Did you hear that???I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 9, 2006 11:21 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Seriously guys,lets take this in a positive direction.Lets talk about and predict the upcoming season 2006.Certain people just sling mud on the SEC and get a rise out of us.Leave the negativity alone.It's sorta like the dog chasing his tail.At first,it's funny.Then after a while it's just f*ckin stupid!!!Upcoming season 2006.Can't wait!!!I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 10, 2006 1:22 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Just a note for everybody.I know not everyone on here is an Alabama fan,but we are all SEC fans or we wouldn't be on this blog.I have friends who attend Bama and play for the Tide.Some have gone home for the summer obviously,but some don't have a home to go back to due to Hurricane Katrina.Anyway,what I wanted to share with everybody is that they tell me that the expansion of Bryant-Denny looks amazing!They tell me the pictures on rolltide.com don't do it justice.They say in person even from a distance outside the construction perimeter that it looks a whole lot bigger and the atrium is glassed in the front looks to be about 5-7 stories tall.I'm going by what they are telling me.They haven't been inside it yet.They have seen it from day to day though.This is exciting news.Anytime a school allows for expansion is great.One school in the SEC that in my opinion needs to do this is Ole Miss.South Carolina as well.Many numbers are floating around about the Bryant-Denny seating capacity.91000 to 92300.I'm hearing closer to 93000 capacity.SEC home games should pack in about 96000.It'll be a loud one!I'm happy about it,but this is something that should have been done 3 or 4 years ago.It's harder to find an Alabama home game ticket than it is to find Dave Chappelle!Roll Tide B*tch!SEC 2006 I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 10, 2006 2:01 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
To all University of Southern California fans on this page,truwareglfn says: By the way-for all of you USC fans-not one of your championships were true.LSU would've Whooped your tails on the "first" one, and Auburn was undefeated without a chance to play you guys on the "second".Than he goes on to say that it is the NCAA's fault on those-not yours.He Says (Playoffs Please).You never mention playoffs or the BCS So Cal.I agree.We need a playoff system ASAP.WHY DON'T YOU DELVE INTO DETAIL ON THESE COMMENTS FOR US SO CAL or whatever your name is.We all know the BCS is a Crock and that USC wouldn't be where they are if we had a playoff since the BCS started in 1998.Suck Up on that Soooooooooooo Callllllllll!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Post back when you have a leg to stand on bro.I'm out.HOLLA
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on July 10, 2006 10:33 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, you can't blaim the NCAA for Auburn not playing against USC for the title. The only one to blame is Auburn! If they didn't have such a weak schedule that year, then they would have gotten the chance to play against USC.
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 10, 2006 10:29 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Mooka, did you have another delusional episode?
The guy asked... I responded... then his attitude is "so?... bla bla bla".Its like Im dealing with a loone and a 10 year-old here.
Moox, why is that particular issue, about the pts-proxy trends, so 'difficult to understand'? Im not ~making it up~; it is what it is.
Even if a Trend/Dynamic like that DIDNT exist, why is that such an issue with you?
I used its as part of the reasoning that I think Arkansas will be one of the Most Improved Teams in the country... is that simple little thing so Outrageous that it brings Franko, T, and you all together in such uniform protest? - well, you and T anyway, havent heard from Franko since he made his Georgia/pts-proxy comment.It doesnt "hold water", except for that It Does; I know you dont want me to post a list, I know facts bore you, reality brings-out your delusion, but I can if you want "proof" that there is a propensity regarding the points-proximity trend.
And Anyway, all-n-all Do You EVEN Disagree with Me, in that ARKANSAS will be one of the Most Improved Teams?????So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 10, 2006 11:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, post 448... LOL... yeah you got a real grasp on what hype means.
USC Shut-Out big bad Auburn.
USC Shut-Out itty bitty Arizona.Admittedly, this here is irrelevant to the grander issue -2003 was a disputed Championship season- but just for sh!ts...
Vs Auburn:
USC put up 315 Yds allowed 164 (+151)
LSU put up 381 Yds allowed 193 (+188)
Vs Arizona:
USC put up 587 Yds allowed 195 (+392)
LSU put up 481 Yds allowed 182 (+299)
And USC's first game of the season, vs Auburn, was Reggie's, LenDale's first game Ever... Matt Leinart hadnt even Attempted a Pass in his career; his 1st pass was a TOUCHDOWN-Pass vs Auburn... and I believe USC was missing their Starting WR, Starting TE, and a banged-up 2nd-Tm TE (was either Ronnie or Caddy hurt that game? Auburn Rushing was held to something like 1.19 Yards/Carry by USC).But enough of that, I dont wanna purpetuate it. And theres no "blaming" Auburn for 2004. They/we should be focused on getting atleast a 4-Team Playoff in the future.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 11, 2006 12:43 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
I think Arkansas SHOULD be one of the most improved teams.Whether they WILL be is yet to be seen.It seems to me like they are putting all this emphasis on highly touted QB Mitch Mustain.I'm not sure if anyone else has seen him or not.On the scouting report and such they have him listed at 205 pounds and 6'3.If everybody has seen the pictures and film of him that I have he looks like he is about 175 or 180 pounds at best.I could be wrong,but as an ex-player I know that they list us bigger than what we truly are.The guy has a rocket-arm.His stats from High School are great,but that all means nothing in the SEC.Their best bet is to start sophomore Casey Dick at QB this year.Mustain to me looks like he needs to get in the weight room and lift.The QB scenario at Arkansas is no more settled than at Alabama.Only at Bama the experience is better at wide receiver,tight end,and tailback.Yes,tailback.Ken Darby(KD) IS A HOSS.Arkansas better put all their eggs into Darren McFadden this year.What people don't realize is that KD played hurt most of the 2005 season and still almost reached 1300 yards rushing.Arkansas should be much-improved this season,but only time will tell.I'm not sold on Houston Nutt and his coaching style.It seems like he has a lot of talent each year and doesn't do a whole lot with it.He could prove me wrong this season.We'll have to wait and see.I'm out.HOLLA
Mooka said:
posted on July 11, 2006 10:19 PM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
Ken Darby is a bad ass. Ark should be much more improved this year. I still think they will lose 4 or 5 games. I look for Tenn to be the most improved. Alot will be determined in the match-up against CAL. If they win that game they should gain their confidence and should be able to shoot up in the rankings. Arkansas' match against USC will determine alot on their season as well. This is kinda weird if you think about it. 2 SEC teams have an entire season riding on games against PAC teams. Knowing how important these games are for their season, if they lose terribly under these circumstances, I will have to concede that the SEC is on a huge downward spiral compared to what they used to be. Even though those 2 teams were somewhere in the lower half of the conference last year.
OU Fan said:
posted on July 11, 2006 10:57 PM — 72.161.160.242 — link — abuse?
SEC fans face it. There are other conferences that are just as good and if not better than the SEC. Everyones excuse is always "well the SEC always beat up on eachother, and thats why they can not make it to the championship. I also hear how there are so many tough teams in the SEC. Give me a break. What happened to Georgia and Auburn last season? Just like the 04-05 season, even though OU got wooped, they deserved to be in the championship game more than Auburn, and they proved that throughtout the season. That just shows that the rest of the country, coaches, BCS, and AP do not think SEC is the most dominant conference. The SEC doesn't even have the most national championship titles as a conference, and on top of that, a Big 12 team has been in the national championship game 5 times out of the past 6 years. 5 out of the past 6. The SEC once, being LSU. And I guess the reason of only 1 team is because the "SEC teams pound eachother throughout the season." Yea right. Look at this past seasons bowl game results and the number of teams per conference compared to lets say the ACC and Big 12. They did hell of a lot better than the SEC. Go Sooners.
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 12, 2006 2:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, youre warped.
Arkansas will be one of the most improved teams; and I mention that they were in a 12-pt proxy from 6-2/SEC instead of 2-6 last year (a good sign for this yr). T-Mac you bring up that Bama was 13-pts from 8-0 instead of 6-2. I then sorta clarify a couple of points to you 1) that its a stronger trend with 4 "close losses" than it is with 2, and 2) that while Bama was indeed 13 pts from 8-0, the game vs Auburn was a TWO-Score game 3) Bama was also 6 pts from being 4-4, there is no trend with Bama in the pts-proxy thing...
T-Mac says: So Cal,since you are so into this whole POINT-PROXIMITY thing and messing with Franko about it I have an idea for you G.Excluding the 41-38 loss to TEXAS in the Natl Title Game,why don't you fill us all in on the POINT-PROXIMITY that USC was in last year from going 10-2 instead of 12-0.OH,I almost forgot.You can't do that.IT ONLY APPLIES TO THE SEC!!!!!!!!I'm Out.HOLLA
So Cal. Go Navy said:
posted on July 12, 2006 3:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
There is no "strong" Pts-Proxy trend with USC 2005 to 2006, meaning 5 or 4 "close wins" (within 7 pts) or even a "medium" trend (3 "close wins"). Same as there's none with Bama 2005 to 2006, or Georgia for that matter (refering to Franko's comment).
Excluding USC's close loss to Texas... You dont "exclude" this game, or that game, at a whim. Accouting for BOTH the close wins AND close losses combined, is sorta the premise to the Pts-proxy trend - How do you knock the concept/theory when you dont even fully graps it.Even if you did ingnore the Texas game, USC would have One or Two "Close Wins" (F State was within a TD and a 2pt-conv)... even being as liberal as you are, thats NOT a very strong Trend anyway - teams with 2 close wins, it registers a relatively tepid propensity for an improved record the next season.
By the way this is just one of many things I look at when making my 2006 season projections, and Ive said, its only a propensity, no guarantee. I dont know how/why youre claiming that thats my "trump card", explain.
So Cal. Go Navy said:
posted on July 12, 2006 3:59 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, notice I mentioned other reasoning for my Arkansas/Most Improved pick, besides the pts-proxy, previous-yr trend.
So Cal USMCr says: T-Mac, thats in two games! Auburn beat Bama 28-18, thats atleast two scores, come on... not a good comparision to start with T. And on top of that, Arkansas returns 20 Starters! Bama Loses its ALL-TIME PASSING LEADER, and a lot of their Defense (only 4 Rtn Sts)... When a team loses its "strength" and the replacements arent as talented/less experienced, ya gotta expected a drop-off.
Arkansas is on the Up-swing. The one quasi-concern is that new OC; Mitch Mustain's H.S. head Coach. But I dont think he'll get in the way too much.... You seem to agree with me that Arkansas "should be" one of the most improved teams (your post 459). If Arkansas messes too much with their Run oriented offense (that new Off Coord better not), they might undermind their own Strength! Bama and Ark are pretty much in the same boat as far as QBs, "no more settled", but Arkansas had a good/decent Offense even without a Quality QB... where as Bama's "relative strength" on offense was Croyle (even without Prothro).
So Cal. Go Navy. said:
posted on July 12, 2006 4:45 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, thats the point; posts 465 and 464.
You may not find Value in that pts-proximity trend propensity, wrong or right, but youre not even following the logic of it.By the way, with me its "hey Moron" or "hey Dopey, this than and the other..." etc, I then go on with my point. Whereas Your grade-school insults were just that; insults for the sake of insults, misguided anger.
"this So Cal bitch...terrible excuse for a Pac-10 fan...this one bitch...I wish this So Cal guy was on the field when I was totin the rock.I would've knocked his dick in the dirt!Believe that..."Mooka said:
posted on July 12, 2006 4:53 PM — 138.163.0.46 — link — abuse?
Do you feel better now that you got that outa your system OU FAN? First of all, I don't think anyone ever disputed the fact that the Big 12 has been the leading Conference for the past 25 years. Those are the facts and SEC is right behind them. Now for all time strength SEC is on top. Also, SEC owns (not by much) the Big 12. You can just sit back down and thank God OU didn't have to face Auburn in 04 be/c it probably woulda been a worst embarrassment than what USC did to them, oh, and while your at it thank God that OU even got a shot against LSU in 03 when everybody knows it shoulda been USC there in that match up.
You wanna talk about gimme a break? Texas last year was the only worthy Championship team I've seen come outa Big 12 for the past 5 or 6 years. This is for Tomcat--SEC and BIG 12 RULE COLLEGE FOOTBALL>Mooka said:
posted on July 12, 2006 5:09 PM — 138.163.0.41 — link — abuse?
SOCAL,
I am impressed. You seem to know some things about SEC teams. Of course I didn't take the time to research, so I don't know if you made anything up, but I have a feeling you are slowly becoming your worst fear...a SEC FAN! My only question is who is your favorite SEC team?
T-Mac said:
posted on July 12, 2006 5:20 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,I agree with you on Arkansas.We can't say they WILL be,but they SHOULD be much-improved.By the way,it's not personal or misguided anger as you put it.It's a Sport.I would've knocked your block off on the football field bro!It's not personal.I would've helped you up G.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 12, 2006 5:36 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
OU Fan,I for one never said the SEC is the best conference.I'm biased I guess because I played SEC football 3 years.If you wan't to talk about the last 6 years regarding the BIG XII and 5 out of the last 6 years a BIG XII team being in the National Title game than you are right about that.Before you go off on a rant about the SEC just don't forget 1 thing.USC treated your Sooners like a rented mule in that game.USC destroyed your Sooners!!!I wouldn't even bring that up if I was you.I'm out.HOLLA
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 13, 2006 2:50 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, see, that post 469 is funny, strange, and also very telling...
You admit to not knowing too much about the SEC yourself, er, didnt research, even as a self-porclaimed SEC fan... and you say that you dont know if Im making things up, but yet you're "impressed"? Huh~?
Also (strangely), you seem to think that for someone to be knowledgable about a different conference other than their own team's conference, is significant enough to make mention of it... incinuating that someone is only knowledgable of the Conference that theyre a fan of, implicating yourself to the crime of SEC Hypery. Youre showing your cards Moox - "blind" devotion to the SEC.An In-depth look at the Psyche of a SEC hypster:
"I dont know if its true, but it sounds about right, so I'll go with it."Please dont treat me like You treat the Media (hype), if you agree with me on something/anthing, agree with the reasoning/data that supports the logic.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 13, 2006 3:12 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, where does that leave you?
But anyway, Im a fan of USC, then maybe NAVY and UNLV. Im "backing" Arkansas from the SEC this season (taking a mulligan from last season), not as a "fan" of the team, but from a prognosticator's stand-point (Tenny as a pick, Im a bit more wary of). From a larger percpective, I like Mark Richt the most, so I guess Georgia is the SEC team that Im closest to being a "fan" of.
The biggest SEC-related thing that Im a fan of is the blue Auburn Unie (minus the helmet).
Mooka said:
posted on July 13, 2006 3:26 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
SOCAL,
This isn't Matlock buddy, the court is already adjourned and facts proving you guilty of negative hyping are already in, so drop the suit Mason. I think you may have a disorder called something like over analysis paralysis. I can still find a psychiatrist for you if you feel you may need one. All I can do is reccomend a chill pill. I was only making a sportsman suggestion. How's this coming from an SEC--LSU Tiger--fan, my favorite PAC team is,ummmm, well I don't have a favorite PAC team, but I do like the Wolverines, ND, Florida State outside of SEC. So let's get back to the question...Who is your favorite SEC team? I know you have one. Everybody has a favorite SEC team. Quite being a closet freak.
Mooka said:
posted on July 13, 2006 3:33 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal, disregard my last. Just caught your 473. OHHHH, Shhhhh, call Franko G back in here. Bulldogs are his team. So you have something in common after all. Bulldogs have the best coaching staff in the SEC by far. It won't be long til their in the NC title game. What's your opinion on a playoff which will invite only the Championship team from each Conference?
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 13, 2006 3:34 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, Wow, just now read your 451 post... to say "youre slippen" doesnt quite cut it. From post 421 (his wacky rant), to post 434 (hilarious quote: "dont post Al Bundy crap... I deserve way better than that"), to post 449 (still refusing to understand The Point to a variety of issue), to T-Mac's finest moment...
... Post 451:
"So Cal says (Fugk the NFL).Yeah you are real smart So Cal.(Fugk peoples Dreams).Without a dream you got nothing..."T-Mac said:
posted on July 13, 2006 4:02 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,for some reason you find a need to go back and point out peoples posts.I know what I've said.I stand by it 100%.SO CAL,YOU DID SAY(Fugk the NFL).I took you to task on it and as usual you got p*ssed and are making fun of people.Also,quit with this calling Mooka crazy crap.Just because his opinion varies from yours you call him delusional.The only thing I'm SLIPPEN ON IS YOUR BULLSH*T G!!!I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 13, 2006 4:09 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,one more thing.Next time you go back and pull up peoples posts.Make sure you type EXACTLY what they say and don't edit out the things you don't want G.You called me Al Bundy which is funny.For the last time I told you Al Bundy never played in College,LET ALONE 3 YEARS IN THE SEC bro.You said (Fugk the NFL).You are a real winner buddy with comments like that.Some Character you got.I'm out.HOLLA
College Scrub Caps said:
posted on July 13, 2006 4:12 PM — 65.103.153.115 — link — abuse?
Well I'm a Pac 10 fan and don't think the conference gets the respect it deserves, SEC is good, but you usually have 3 to 4 Pac 10 teams ranking in the top 25, but... You'd think the Trojans were the only college team on the west coast. It's discouraging seeing many of the top prospects head to USC. Not sure how long I want to see them dominate. Better than having the Huskies rank at the top of the pole I guess.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 13, 2006 4:39 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal USMC,what is you problem with the NFL son???Not only are you on this blog saying Fugk the NFL,but now you are on another blog saying it too.I couldn't give a sh*t what you think of me,but I would like you to explain what YOUR BEEF IS WITH THE NFL???You keep saying (Fugk the NFL).Explain that.I'm out.HOLLA
Mooka said:
posted on July 13, 2006 5:17 PM — 138.163.0.46 — link — abuse?
Socal,
Since you admitted to liking some SEc teams I guess I will now admit I kinda like CAL Berkely out of the PAC. They are usually an underestimated team. Mostly be/c they do it to themselves sorta like Tenn last year. Tenn vs. CAL will probably be one of the best match-ups in reg season. Even though I like CAL more than Tenn I will still pull for Tenn in this one since I gotta nice wager going.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 13, 2006 10:47 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal's finest moment,the SEC is hitting from the Womens Tee,sitting in Booster Seats,and are Road P*ssies.Another fine moment from our Wealth of Knowledge So Cal,(Fugk the NFL).This has been another installment of the classless guy called So Cal.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 13, 2006 11:38 PM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Congrats to Tyrone Prothro and Shaun Alexander for winning ESPY Awards.Shaun Alexander is gettin it done every year and Much Love to Pro.I truly hope we can all see what Pro's real potential is,but the fact of the matter is that he may never play again.I know what it is like to go through a career-ending injury.I hope he makes it through.If not,than he will finish his degree and possibly go into coaching.I will be doing it part-time this fall.2 Great Alabama players gettin it done.Go SEC 2006 I'm out.HOLLA
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 13, 2006 11:44 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, I just read post 454. Dont know if you missed it but I had already responded to TruWar's comments. But T-Mac... so youre asking/commenting specifically about my views on Playoffs in the BCS system. You say I never mention "Playoffs or the BCS"... sure I have, whenever its germane to do so, ei...
------------------
A June 15 Post - So Cal USMCr Clippers says:
"...The "formula" for the RPI in Collge B-Ball is NOT even made public! The issue we have with the BCS is NOT about the Ratings System, its about NOT having Playoffs!"
------------------And I was speaking for all of Us as CFB fans, the fact that theres no true Playoffs is "the issue" we have with the BCS system (not so much about the use of the Ratings in the system). Im sure Ive said this on one of these threads, probably on the USC 2006 Schedule thread, that:
a 4-team Playoff would be enough, as opposed to an 8 or 16-team Playoff, the regular season still retains most of its "meaning", and Deserving Teams dont get assed-out of their chance at the Title.
And... If the BCS had been a 4-team Playoff, Washington, Oregon, USC, woulda all got a shot a Titles 2000, 2001, 2002
And Tennessee likely gets dropped by Ohio State in 1998.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 14, 2006 12:50 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
So Cal,I actually went back and read the posts you bring up regarding (truwareglfn).Or TruWar as you put it.His original post on this was post #431 where he tells you that USC titles aren't TRUE.What REALLY stands out to me is you always point out certain teams and DISPUTED NATIONAL TITLES.Hey EVERYBODY,go to post #445.The EXACT WORDS OF So Cal----Disputed Titles Happen.You got schooled bro.Fell right in the trap G.IT'S SOOOOOOOO EASY!Ha Ha Ha I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 14, 2006 1:05 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
Everybody,go to post #445.So Cal is always bashing Alabama saying their National Titles aren't valid.Regarding USC,His Exact words are as follows--- And anyway,Disputed Titles Happen.See how he is.He applies everything to suit himself and his Trojans.Bama this year or that year don't count,but when it comes to USC, Disputed Titles Happen.CHECK OUT POST #445.Just like a Mouse in a Trap.Got Caught G.You just choked bro.Your an Amateur.Ha Ha I'm out.HOLLA
Mooka said:
posted on July 14, 2006 12:11 PM — 138.163.0.38 — link — abuse?
T-Mac,
You shouldn't apologize for humiliating Socal. He usually does it to himself. Anyway, I wouldn't bet on these pics, but this is what I got for the first week:
Alabama v Hawaii-- 31-17
Ark v USC-- 100-0
Georgia v Kentucky-- 31-0
Fla v So Miss-- 31-17
SC v Miss St.-- 31-17
Tenn v CAL-- 31-28
Van v Mich-- 7-45
LSU v ULL-- 58-17
Aub v Wash St.-- 45-7
Ole Miss v Memphis-- 28-24Not bad for the first week of football for the SEC. Only 1 OOC loss. I'm giving ULL some points against LSU for a much improved offense(ULL) and an unproven defense(LSU). However, there is no way they could stop the LSU offense.
College Football Scrub,
Who is your team in the PAC?So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 14, 2006 7:20 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
SEC fans, its not just you. The hype surrounds others too; for example Philadelphia Fans in general:
ESPN.com:
"Fans in Philadelphia are loyal, passionate and ... on the verge of a meltdown. In his latest mailbag, the Sports Guy dives into the psyche of the Philly fan and the imminent Allen Iverson fiasco."
..... Meanwhile the 76ers ranked 21st in the League in average Home Attendance this past season. 20 other teams had more "loyal, passionate" fans than the Big Bad Basketball City of Philadelphia, the 2nd Largest Market on the Eastern Seaboard! Slowly but surely those ~Great~ Philadelphia Sports fans DROPPPED their TEAM - 76ers have missed 2 of the last 3 playoffs, the people have realized that A.I. infact is Not "The Answer"... ))) Drop (((
Dont even mention Philadelphia "Baseball fans"So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 14, 2006 8:17 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, seasons with Disputed Title DO happen.
1966 was Not one of those seasons (none for Bama).
2003 USC/LSU was.
There are degrees to the validity of Selection Orgs (benneath it all, thats what is at debate here) other-wise, USC can claim a Championship in 2002! or Bama can claim one for 1966, etc, goofiness would run rampent.This dude TruWar says that "not one of [USC's] championships were true". Even Moox knows thats a silly statement.
Alabama's 1973 Coaches' Title IS ACCOUNTED FOR!
Same for Bama's 1964 Titles AP & Coaches... they're Reputable/Well-Known/Widely-Regarded Selection Orgs that Named them Champs those seasons... the fact Bama actually went on to LOSE in their Bowl game but still "Split" the Title with the team that BEAT THEM one season... and also won both AP/Coaches even though a turely "deserving" undefeated team got Neither (Arkansas) the other season,... only makes those two Selections a couple of the most "egregious Title Selection" by a reputable Org of all-time! But they ARE Accounted for.
The reasoning behind the mentioning the egregiousness of those Bama Titles (spec) was that if someone wanted to "count" 1964 as a Titles season for Arkansas, that would Open-Up the Questioning of the validity of the AP and/or Coaches Polls. In turn, Bama's 1964 and 1973 Titles would be some of the FIRST on the Chopping block (and by the way, from an all-time stand-point, LSU or USC 2003 season wouldnt even be on the radar).So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 14, 2006 8:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
lil' T-Mac youre not just "slippin" anymore, youre "free-falling"...
----------------
T-Mac says: "Just like a Mouse in a Trap.Got Caught G.You just choked bro.Your an Amateur.Ha Ha... So Cal,sorry to humiliate you..."
----------------Where is the contridiction T? LOL, go back and read those other post about Bama/Disputed Titles, In There Entirety... or just refer to post 490. I "count" Bama's 1964, 1973 AP and/or Coaches Titles... Where's the contridiction?
Mooka said:
posted on July 14, 2006 9:28 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
SOCAL,
Once again, what are you talking about? You are in another world. I think you got gun fire ringing in your head and you can't think straight. Philly and SEC is no where near a comparison. You are really digging for garbage now. And quit twisting what T-Mac is saying. I think you understood perfectly clear that he is suggesting you apply your same "disputes do happen" to Alabama too. BTW, there is no dispute over 2003 Championship. LSU played in the NC game and won the title. USC was merely voted #1 at the end of the season. That doesn't make them Champions.
T-Mac said:
posted on July 15, 2006 1:31 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
As far as So Cal goes,I got him onpoint and schooled him on what he always says regarding National Titles in College FB.All he has to revert to is (lil'T-Mac youre not just"slippin" anymore,youre "free-falling"...Thats outstanding.GOLF CLAP EVERYBODY!!!GOLF CLAP FOR So Cal!!!This guy is classless beyond belief.After I make him eat CROW he goes on to insult and sling mud on the Philadelphia 76ers basketball fans,baseball fans,and the city of Philly in general.THIS IS A COLLEGE FB BLOG.NOT AN NBA BLOG!!!Why do you bring the NBA into this and 76ers fans???If you need to stoop to the level of bashing NBA 76ers fans and Philly MLB fans on a college football fanblog then that shows how bright you are.Do you have anything good to say???You are a very Negative person.I'm out.HOLLA
T-Mac said:
posted on July 15, 2006 1:55 AM — 66.78.161.35 — link — abuse?
lil'So Cal,you got anything to say about College FB or are you just going to bash a little bit more on Philadelphia 76ers fans,Philly MLB fans,and the people of Philly in general???Do you ever say anything upbeat?You seem like a really jaded and negative person G.I got the REMEDY for you.You need some P*SSY bro!!!A shot of p*ssy a day keeps the doctor away!!!I'm out.HOLLA
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 15, 2006 8:05 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Fugk the NFL - thats right. Its all about College Football. For me its CFB No. 1, then the NBA and College Basketball... then Boxing and MMA (though Im not extremely knowledgeable of)... Baseball(the playoffs mainly), College Baseball, Women's Tennis, the Little League Baseball Tourney... then maybe the NFL, tied with World Cup Football every fourth yr. Im sorta joking but the NFL is at about No. 7 on my list. And it doesnt help that the NFL takes on the role of "spoiler" so often for teams in College Football, luring players away before their Senior season; imagine Vince Young and Reggie Bush BACK for 2006... hell yeah 'Fugk the NFL'! It also take away coverage from CFB, Id rather see the entire weekend devoted to CFB than for it to split time with the F-the-NFL.
That remindes me, you asked about "FUCLA" some time ago, it means F UCLA... "Eff" UCLA... get it? pronounced FOOK-lah.Anyway, how bout we come to an agreement... Im just catching up on the posts from about # 470, thers lots of Yappin where CFB is superfluous (from both sides)... lets leave it at this:
- You put more effort in trying to Understand my points in the future (not just read-into things that you wanna see).
- And I be more considerate of other people's, eh hem, sensabilities in my posts; but expect me to still speak frankly (Tact was never my strong-suit as a Grunt, savvy?)So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 15, 2006 8:39 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, the Playoffs should ))))) NOT ((((( invite only the Conference Champs.
First off, some of the Confs have Conf Championship Games. If that were the format, its conceivable that the Playoffs WOULDNT be getting the "Best Teams". CCGs are useless/meaningless - Well they make money, but I'm speaking from a CFB stand-point. This past season Florida State "won" the ACC, yea right, when THREE other teams in the ACC were rated better. In 2003 Kansas St "won" the XII... Oklahoma ended up in the BCS Title game. In 2001 Nebraska didnt even PLAY IN the XII's CCG, Colorado won the XII... Nebraska ended up playing in the BCS Title game.
And another thing, its concieveable (and actually likely) that a 2nd team from one particular conf is "more deserving" to make a playoff, than another conf's Champion. 2005 serves as a good example, Penn State won the BTEN and Ohio State was probably the next most "deserving" team if there were a playoff last season; moreso than West Virgina, Georgia, TCU and definately more than Florida St.
But I look at it from a CFB pure-ist's stance (for lack of a more appropriate term). I dont consider the practicalities of CFB as a business; TV ratings (inequitable Bowl selection pratices), Media markets (inclusion of the Big East in the BCS), etc.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 16, 2006 7:47 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox & T-Mac
Okay, scratch what I said about Mooka in post 492... He actually IS delusional enough to agree with TruWar on that. (Some extra posts are poping up after Ive replied).
I thought we were heading towards having more... objective, football-specific, type of discussions... thought we were finally getting thru/past the muck. Anyway, I'll ask again, wheres the contradiction in what Ive said all along (disputed titles, USC/LSU 2003, the validity of certain Selction Orgs compared to others, etc), what exactly was supposed to humiliate me? Moox, maybe if you explain T-Mac's point, I'll understand why/how.
Fellas, its called consistency.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 16, 2006 8:09 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Philly fans as a group are Over-Hyped.
In case I didnt make my self clear/you misunderstood, I wasNT comparing Philly fans to SEC fans (probably my mistake)... SEC fans are UN-like Philadelphia fans (in general) in that Philly fans are NOT as devoted/loyal/passionate as they CLAIM to be, SECer are. They live up to their billing, whereas Philadelphia fans DONT.
The comparision Im making is between the Hype that tends to surround "Philly Fan" as being so Great... and the Hype that tends to surround the SEC as a Conference in terms of strength (not the SEC fans themselves, get it?).They get all kinds of 'credit' for being great sports fans (by the media, general fans, etc), when in reality when push comes to shove, they are Fair-Weather fans as much as any other place - MLB Phillies fan support is the obvious example (why is that over-looked, btw, if anything they're one of the WORST fans, when it comes to Baseball!), and recently NBA 76er fans in Philly are showing their ture colors, 21st in Home Attendance! (New York Knicks fans, Chicago Bulls fans, even Utah Jazz fans support their NBA teams even when they "suck" - Phila 76er fans are proving they do NOT belong in that class of NBA fans)
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 16, 2006 8:32 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, which is it with you? Do disputed Titles happen, how say you?
Drop the S-talking mentality; USC/LSU 2003 was a disputed Title, the AP is one of those Reputable/well-reknown/legit Selection Orgs, thats the point.
And Im not twisting anything, if anything, T-Mac is just not fully understanding the different issues. Or pretending not to. And maybe you are too.Bama 1966 was not named Champs by either the AP or the Coaches Poll, only by some two-bit Berryman list.
USC 2002 (the year Ohio St was 14-0) was not named Champs by either the AP or the Coaches, but were "named" Champs by about 3 other superfluous Selection Orgs.
THOSE KIND ARE NOT COUNTED.Bama lost to Notre Dame in 1973 in the Sugar Bowl... but Bama had already been named Champs by the Coaches Poll. Bama's 1973 Title is COUNTED - Now, everything else Ive said about it being one of the most egregious Title selections ever is in response to others who have come to Question the validity/authority (so-to-speak) of the AP and Coaches... Arkansas fan who want to count 1964 as a Title opens up pandora's box, it opens up Bama's 1973 Title, Tennessee's 1951 Title, Minnesota's 1960 Title, and obviously Bama's 1964 Title to questioning/scrutiny (among others).
The 2003 Disputed Title, is relatively a "mild" split Title looking at it from a historical sense.Seriously explain where the contridition is, what was supposed to be so humiliating?
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 16, 2006 8:43 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
T-Mac, the 76ers thing... It was on ESPN.com's opening page!
Remember Im anti-hype, the hype about "Philly Fan" being so wonderful is largely over blown (simliar to the SEC as a conference in terms of top to bottom strength, which has been the topic on this tread). You call it mud-slinging, I call it hype-control.
Mooka said:
posted on July 16, 2006 11:08 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
Socal,
We've already acknowledged the SEC's top to bottom strength. Not argueing with that. The issue is that you fail to recognize the SEC still has more successful programs than any other Conference. You over shadow that truth with negative hype talk. That is the only issue with you.
Now onto the disputed titles. Do they happen? Yes, I suppose when you have an undefeated team that doesn't get a shot, sure. I believe USC should've been in the Championship game in 03 against LSU since OU failed to win their conference. There is no excuse for that, but that doesn't mean LSU didn't deserve to be there and didn't deserve to win and be crowned the NCs. I wish USC would've been in that game, but then, would that have caused a dispute with OU being called the Champions? So, in my opinion the BCS is the only recoginzed National Championship system, so dispute the fact that USC didn't get to play, but don't dispute the fact that LSU were the Champs that year.Tomcat said:
posted on July 17, 2006 2:55 AM — 70.249.42.120 — link — abuse?
Hey SEC Fans over 450 post and this west coast guy wont shut up . emigen that? Big XII is #1
The TEXAS LONGHORNS #1 Hey Sol_Cal Whatever your name is WHY IN THE HELL ARE YOU POSTING ON A SEC BLOG? You fail to realize that we are real sports fans and you sir are fucged up. Go Back to California you fuc%er, Hookem- Horns
Sicem-Bears Pig-sooie Roll Tide War EagleTampa Hurricane said:
posted on July 17, 2006 10:35 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Just wondering why there is no article about Auburn giving away grades to students that have to do little or no work? Is it that the people who write the SEC posts are so tainted with their incorrect beliefs that the SEC can do no wrong, that when news breaks showing an SEC team committed NCAA violations they can't write about it???
Bama2006 said:
posted on July 17, 2006 11:30 AM — 71.8.83.204 — link — abuse?
Yeah... i live in birmingham alabama and the whole auburn thing.. i would love to see the ncaa take away their 2004 season! They have no respect whatsoever.. my uncle is an au fan and was talking about how they might be national champions this upcoming season and i told him hell, auburn tried that in 2004 and with a 13-0 record they still couldnt make it. If it was alabama giving grades away we would be so screwed we wouldnt see the end of it.. but then again everyone hates us because we are Alabama..
ColReb said:
posted on July 17, 2006 11:54 AM — 68.19.220.125 — link — abuse?
The whole Auburn thing is blown WAY out of proportion. Every school has easy classes that all the students know about, just like they all have easy majors. 66% of the kids in those classes were not athletes, just students looking for A's. This thing is getting blown up by the media because they had a few slow news days.
Mooka said:
posted on July 17, 2006 12:06 PM — 138.163.0.36 — link — abuse?
Ummm, sorry Tampa. I think you got this blog mixed up with something else. This one isa bout SEC leading attendance and being the best football Conference ever. Maybe that's why you don't see anyone comment on your breaking news story. Just curious, where have you seen news on that? I haven't heard anything like that. I'm sure this matter is unheard of in the ACC too right? Don't make me do some digging.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 1:33 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox dont think that Im saying that LSU didnt deserve to be this or that... what I said about LSU 2003 was in response to TruWar, who wants to start that silly 'USC wasnt a tru Champs' talk. IIIFFF someone's gonna get into that sorta crap of "well LSU woulda, shoulda, could" done this or that, bla, blah, they have to be set staright. Disputed Titles happen.
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 2:12 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox the AP Poll has been Naming a Champion for over 70 YEARS Carlito, Seventy Years (flaws n'all)... 2003 was no different.
To be clear, there's no discrediting LSU's Title from me. But if, If anyone is gonna try to make "shoulda/woulda" claims about 2003, ya gotta understand it cuts both ways.So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 3:00 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tomcat (and to gatorhippy, sorta), originally I posted on here to admonish the SEC fans who may have been mis-guidedly projecting the SEC's "attendance figures" to the actual "strength" as a conference, of their hypery.
And as it happens, a couple of days ago ESPN.com's front page had a Philadephia 76ers Fans-related topic - the 'greatness' of "Philadephia Fans" as an whole is more Hypery. I made that association with the hype that surrounds the SEC's perceived 'dominance.'
I dont dislike the SEC, per`sa~, its the Over-Hype. That's in sports in general, not only w/the SEC.
So Tomcat, You say Im knowledgeable about CFB, but naive CFB fans, how/why is that exactly? Why shouldnt I be posting on a SEC-related thread/blog? And why are you?
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 3:26 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Tampa you cant post on this thread/blog about that stuff, youre not a SEC-guy -- so says Tomcat.
How say Auburn fans?
So does that mean Utah fans are gonna start claiming that the undefeated Utes are the 'real' Champions of 2004 ???!
So Cal USMC said:
posted on July 17, 2006 3:45 PM — 204.62.68.23 — link — abuse?
Moox, lol, post 511: ~~sorry Tampa, wrong blog bla, bla~~
Thats funny.And you havent Heard it yet?!?! Its been out for days. Cadilac Williams is included.
- The AP -
AUBURN, Ala. -- The one-on-one coursework an Auburn professor provided to dozens of students, including a number of football players during the Tigers' unbeaten 2004 season, is typically granted only under special circumstances, a professor said.The university is investigating claims that the athletes were able to maintain eligibility and help boost the program's academic rankings by taking what are known as "directed-reading" classes by Dr. Thomas Petee, interim director of Auburn's sociology department.
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on July 17, 2006 9:58 PM — 205.188.116.133 — link — abuse?
Cadilac said that all his work was real, and i believe it was 2, but what national championship could they take away in 2004? We got screwed over bad and didn't get one, so heck, take all the easy classes you want to.
Mooka said:
posted on July 17, 2006 10:10 PM — 68.107.102.29 — link — abuse?
You ever notice ESPN doesn't ever hype up any SEC team? ESPN is the Hype Master Station. They don't hype up SEC teams be/c they don't have too. Everybody knows the SEC kicks a___. As for Philly, Philly fans are true in football. I lived in Philly for awhile and they back the Eagles just as much, if not more than Raider fans back their Raiders. I didn't really notice their enthusiasm for the other sports. Maybe a little bit in hockey too, but not as much as football. That is the truth.
As for the AU issue I think the professor should be punished. Not the students. If it's in his syllabus to give grades, then he should not be allowed to teach (maybe just tutor. As for punishing the students...no, Sociology is a gimme grade anyway.poz4ua said:
posted on July 17, 2006 10:30 PM — 63.233.119.170 — link — abuse?
reply to comment 510: you must be an auburn fan. overhyped???????????? please if it was alabama this blog would be lit up with auburn fans and bama haters. why does auburn talk so much trash about everybody esle but when something they do is wrong and comes out intio the public it's "overhyped". this is the reason i hate auburn more than anybody on the face of Gods green earth. i'm not trying to cover for bama. i'm a student there and a lifetime fan. i was very ashamed of what we did. it was wrong. face up to your mistakes auburn. i hope ya'll have fun eating all of the crap ya'll threw at us. so much for auburns so called "perfect" 2004 season.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
LSU #1 said:
posted on December 13, 2005 1:52 PM — 65.0.109.204 — link — abuse?Proof that the SEC is the best football conference in the nation.