T1B

Spinach Genie wrote:

SoCalTrjn wrote:Funny how SEC fans try to say that a CCG makes teams good, try playing better games OOC or playing on the road once in a while

ASU...probably the best team the Pac has to offer outside of USC or maybe Oregon...

SEC squads are facing the top defenses and some of the top ranked teams in the nation while the PAC's top tier is getting fat on the Arizonas, Stanfords and Washingtons of the world.

Don't tell Spinach Genie... Stanfurd had a 45-7 lead over ASU before they called off the Wolves...





m2

See You Next Wednesday wrote:The SEC's premiere out-of-conference victory for the entire conference is Arizona St. And just barely so.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh wait, I forgot Georgia's epic roasting of Boise St.

Better throw in LSU's character-building game against Appalachian State. At home, of course.

Keep running it. Bowl season will come, the Pac will prove out once again that they are a one team league just like they did last bowl season, and the SEC will continue to show why even in their down years, they are by far the premiere conference in the country.

Van, USC plays a patty-cake conference schedule in the least physical football conference in the country. Put them in a tough, physical conference and their record would be great, but they would also have to get up for games repeatedly instead of once every three or four games. They would have to deal with injuries, their depth would be tested, they would be faced with more intimidating road environs...there's a lot more to football than just two or three OOC games. You Pac nutters get back to me when you have a schedule that isn't half full of Kentucky equivalents.

Spinach Genie wrote:Keep running it. Bowl season will come, the Pac will prove out once again that they are a one team league just like they did last bowl season, and the SEC will continue to show why even in their down years, they are by far the premiere conference in the country.

Van, USC plays a patty-cake conference schedule in the least physical football conference in the country. Put them in a tough, physical conference and their record would be great, but they would also have to get up for games repeatedly instead of once every three or four games. They would have to deal with injuries, their depth would be tested, they would be faced with more intimidating road environs...there's a lot more to football than just two or three OOC games. You Pac nutters get back to me when you have a schedule that isn't half full of Kentucky equivalents.

And what you don't get is how you can't argue how good the SEC is when all they can rely on is how good they are against themselves. LSU beat Bama who beat South Carolina who beat Florida who beat Tennessee who beat LSU etc. It's like a dog chasing it's own tail. You think you are all so god because well you all think you are so good and you all beat each other and look at the quality of teams we beat and you look and those are all other SEC teams and that is bullshit. You have to play OOC to prove a point.

Buc, get back to me when you aren't still predicating your entire SEC Honkitude on the very flawed basis that the SEC is so great simply because they play each other.

The SEC is good, but overrated. Like the Big XII, all they do is fatten up on each other. Their entire rep is built on the notion that beating Tennessee or 'Bama is an enormous accomplishment.

Let Tennessee or 'Bama or, gawd forbid, Georgia or LSU, let 'em actually leave their friendly SEC confines and then we'll see what happens.

What I love is that it never matters which SEC team goes on the road and gets their ass kicked in an OOC game, the SEC Honk answer is always the same: Yeah, well, that wasn't a GOOD SEC team, not this year!

Funny, that. See, the reason we know they're not good is because they actually went out and tested themselves against something other than their same ol' overrated cousins.

You think 'Bama would've gone undefeated this late in the season if they'd actually played anybody? Think LSU would only have one loss if they scheduled like Notre Dame?

North Texas....Appalachian State? Are you fucking kidding me?

Think the team that beat LSU in their own house would be able to handle going out of conference to a place like, oh, I dunno, Notre Dame?

Oh, wait...

Buc, all this shit, all these conference arguments, it's all so much bullshit. Nobody knows for certain what each conference would do if they were faced with a steady diet of another conference. Individual conference "personalities" aside all we really know is that the SEC and the Big XII almost literally refuse to schedule anybody, they load their OOC schedule with home games against sacrificial lamb paycheck seeking directional schools and that on those rare occasions when SEC teams accidentally do schedule good OOC games they often as not lose those games.

They had to deal with depth issues this year, losing about 35 cornerbacks to injuries. I think the bad dorks that sit in front of Jimmy were playing. They also lost one of their top DE's and their starting center before the season started.

And they have to get up every week because they are the #1 team in college football, and have been for the last 3-4 years. IF they were in the SEC, you wouldn't see any of the slow starts they've had.

Van wrote: Think LSU would only have one loss if they scheduled like Notre Dame?

North Texas....Appalachian State? Are you fucking kidding me?

I too, got a good chuckle out of this, but are you sure LSU is the team you want to use as an example? They beat one of your conference's top dogs in their stadium.

Excellent points, Killian.

It's conveniently overlooked by so many, the notion of how difficult a task it is to maintain this winning streak when every single game you play is the other team's Armageddon Game.

These are just college kids. It's pretty amazing that Carroll and his staff have managed to keep their players' heads on straight during this run. It'd be so easy for twenty year old kids to get The Big Head and then fall prey to basic human nature somewhere along this road...

That's Carroll's single greatest achievement. Forget the dominance and the records and the awards. It's the simple fact that in what might be the toughest environment of all to maintain one's composure, humility and perspective (being a 20 year old celebrity in the temptation filled Gomorrah that is L.A.) Pete Carroll has somehow managed to instill focus, consistency and maturity into a bunch of kids who very likely had very little of any of these things when they first enrolled at USC.

Maybe one you SEC suckasses can post how their teams did against Arkansas.

USC only beat them by 53.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Van wrote: Think LSU would only have one loss if they scheduled like Notre Dame?

North Texas....Appalachian State? Are you fucking kidding me?

I too, got a good chuckle out of this, but are you sure LSU is the team you want to use as an example? They beat one of your conference's top dogs in their stadium.

LSU is the current standard bearer of the SEC and they gave up 570 yards and should've lost to what amounts to a mid tier Pac 10 team that managed to get destroyed by Stanford.

Arkansas gives up 70 to USC yet they nearly beat 'Bama.

Tennessee beats LSU in Death Valley yet they lose by 87 to Notre Dame.

Mgo, it's pretty clear that the SEC's rep is based on little but....the SEC's rep. All their glory, it's nearly all based on infighting.

Sorry, but I just can't take seriously a team like Georgia, a team that hasn't left the southeastern part of the country for forty years. I also find it hard to take teams like LSU seriously when every damn year their schedule is littered with seven or eight home games, including a steady diet of home games against teams that absolutely have no business playing a D-1 powerhouse.

USC...Penn State...Notre Dame....

These programs do not/never have/never will schedule automatic home wins against pathetically overmatched directional schools, and LSU is usually good for not just one but often two or even three of these gems per season. Then they beat a similarly cushy and overrated Alabama squad and that's supposed to validate their greatness?

Change the team from year to year but that's how it seems to go just about every season in the SEC.

Give me a team like ND or a pre Big 10 Penn State, ie, teams who'll schedule anybody...any time...any stadium. USC is tied to a conference affiliation so much of their schedule is set in stone but nobody can deny that USC goes out of their way to schedule quality OOC opponents, including both home and home series and opening day "Pigskin Classic" type roadies. Unlike the SEC teams USC most certainly does NOT go out of its way to pad its record with automatic home wins against the Louisiana Monroes of the world.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:They beat one of your conference's top dogs in their stadium.

ASU is 5-5. Carry on.

if USC was in the SEC they would have only played 3 road games right about now.
Which SEC team would have beaten USC? Arkansas? they lost to the Trojans by 53, Ole Miss, Miss St? Allbarn? they couldnt cross midfield vs USC, Alabama has no offense, Tennessee got plunger fucked by a Notre Dame team USC beat....

The SEC has only 1 game they can hang their hat on this year and thats a win at ASU who is the Pacs 5th or 6th best team, and the Tigers needed ASU to give them the game on special teams after an average Pac 10 QB smoked them for 460 yards

Arkansas lost to
Vandy by 4
Bama by 11
Albarn by 17
Georgia by 3
So Carolina by 4
or a combined total thats still 2 TDs less than USC beat them by

I just thought it was funny that you were so quick to point out the embarrassment that was scheduling N Texas and App st, but completely ignored the win over your conference's preason #2 team...at their house. I don't find it the least bit strange that you A) ignored this fact, and when called upon it B) tried to completely invalidate it. So, ASU is sucking down the stretch in their conference, so that of course invalidates the LSU win, according to you.

How does ASU falling apart help make your conference look better in this scenario?

Jimmy Medalions wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:They beat one of your conference's top dogs in their stadium.

ASU is 5-5. Carry on.

Fine. Your conference's projected 2nd best team is 5-5. Don't see how this is making Pac 10 apologist look good.

when was ASU projected as the conferences #2 team? Most people knew that ASU would have a hard time replacing Andrew Walter who has all the schools passing records.
Didnt SEC homers try to devalue USC's handling of Auburn in 2003 by pointing out that Auburn didnt win the SEC west? Auburn was projected by some as the best in the country.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Jimmy Medalions wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:They beat one of your conference's top dogs in their stadium.

ASU is 5-5. Carry on.

Fine. Your conference's projected 2nd best team is 5-5. Don't see how this is making Pac 10 apologist look good.

I guess they should have projected ASU's starting QB would be knocked out for the season.

Oregons starting QB has missed as many games as Keller... just sayin





and feCals starting QB was knocked out in the first game of the season

So all qb's for all teams are interchangeable?

Sirfindafold wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Jimmy Medalions wrote: ASU is 5-5. Carry on.

Fine. Your conference's projected 2nd best team is 5-5. Don't see how this is making Pac 10 apologist look good.

I guess they should have projected ASU's starting QB would be knocked out for the season.

Big fucking deal, they couldn't beat LSU with Keller, at home no less.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:How does ASU falling apart help make your conference look better in this scenario?

It doesn't. That said, not sure if you watched the game but it is true that ASU handed LSU the victory with their special teams mistakes. The game was over. It was a JONesque melt job by ETCU.

You gotta throw out the preseason P10 #2 argument though- we've all agreed that preseason rankings of any kind are bs.

True enough, ASU was playing their best ball early and should have beaten LSU. I think there's a lot of truth to the argument that the SEC doesn't help itself with their scheduling outside the conference. Remove ASU and what's left? Arkansas scheduled us and you know how that went. The Vols went to South Bend and got butcher-raped. Not sure about the others.

I love SEC football. It's a lot of fun to watch and the officials let 'em play. I also think they have one of the strongest fanbases/markets, so you see them get lots of love by the journalists. Nothing wrong with that, 'cept I'm not sure that the respect they get is necessarily what they deserve.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Jimmy Medalions wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:They beat one of your conference's top dogs in their stadium.

ASU is 5-5. Carry on.

Fine. Your conference's projected 2nd best team is 5-5. Don't see how this is making Pac 10 apologist look good.

Pre-season projections are practically worthless.

^^^^^
I agree.

Sin,
Last years BCS Championship Game. #1 vs #2

Jimmy Medalions wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:How does ASU falling apart help make your conference look better in this scenario?

It doesn't. That said, not sure if you watched the game but it is true that ASU handed LSU the victory with their special teams mistakes. The game was over. It was a JONesque melt job by ETCU.

You gotta throw out the preseason P10 #2 argument though- we've all agreed that preseason rankings of any kind are bs.

True enough, ASU was playing their best ball early and should have beaten LSU. I think there's a lot of truth to the argument that the SEC doesn't help itself with their scheduling outside the conference. Remove ASU and what's left? Arkansas scheduled us and you know how that went. The Vols went to South Bend and got butcher-raped. Not sure about the others.

I love SEC football. It's a lot of fun to watch and the officials let 'em play. I also think they have one of the strongest fanbases/markets, so you see them get lots of love by the journalists. Nothing wrong with that, 'cept I'm not sure that the respect they get is necessarily what they deserve.

I saw your post earlier showing the Arkansas-USC score.

Don't ANY of you Pac 10 BSH (ballsucking homers) find it even remotely funny that you're using that game to claim bode, yet you completely invalidate the ASU loss to LSU because ASU is 5-5? What about Arkansas? They weren't even supposed to be good! Why is there legitmacy in the SC-Ark game, yet none in the ASU/LSU game? Let the spin ensue...

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Don't ANY of you Pac 10 BSH (ballsucking homers) find it even remotely funny that you're using that game to claim bode, yet you completely invalidate ASU loss to LSU because ASU is 5-5? What about Arkansas? They weren't even supposed to be good! Let the spin ensue...

Well, the thing is, you see, ASU is THE ONLY win of note by the SEC out of conference.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Don't ANY of you Pac 10 BSH (ballsucking homers) find it even remotely funny that you're using that game to claim bode, yet you completely invalidate the ASU loss to LSU because ASU is 5-5? What about Arkansas? They weren't even supposed to be good! Why is there legitmacy in the SC-Ark game, yet none in the ASU/LSU game? Let the spin ensue...

I see you on that. The argument is that ASU nearly won that game, save for a few mental mistakes late which turned into points for LSU.

The only other game we had with you was Arky, which was a classic beatdown.

Weigh the two together, throw in a little Appalachian State and the Vols getting pwn3d by the Irish and a theme emerges.

LSU scheduling App St is not nearly as unimpressive as Stanford not only scheduling, but losing to UC Davis.

Without looking into it, I'm going to guess the Pac 10 is over .500 against BCS teams, so I will give them some respect. All I've been saying is, if you're going to ridicule other conferences/teams, at least recognize your own blunders. Haven't seen too much of that in this thread, or elsewhere.

The OOC argument still doesn't hold water, because come bowl season the SEC typically dominates relative to the other major conferences. The SEC has the most national championships, annually have the most ranked teams both beginning and ending the season, have the top defenses and put more players in the NFL than any other conference. That, Pac nutters, does not equal overrated. What IS overrated is a team that literally plays maybe 3 or 4 games a year against anything even considerable as top competition. Playing Va Tech once in a blue moon, an annual game with a Notre Dame team who has only recently been worth a damn and the BYUs and Hawaiis of the world doesn't make your schedule "tough". You can brag on it all you like, but beating one of the worst Arkansas teams in recent memory and the worst Auburn offense I've seen in 15 years doesn't erase the fact that USC is getting fat on a majority of poor and typically below .500 competition. This doesn't erase the fact they are a great team, but to say playing in a conference as dependably strong as the SEC wouldn't effect their numbers in the long run is just ridiculous.

Spinach Genie wrote:The SEC has the most national championships

No, they don't.

Spinach Genie wrote:The OOC argument still doesn't hold water, because come bowl season the SEC typically dominates relative to the other major conferences. The SEC has the most national championships, annually have the most ranked teams both beginning and ending the season, have the top defenses and put more players in the NFL than any other conference. That, Pac nutters, does not equal overrated. What IS overrated is a team that literally plays maybe 3 or 4 games a year against anything even considerable as top competition. Playing Va Tech once in a blue moon, an annual game with a Notre Dame team who has only recently been worth a damn and the BYUs and Hawaiis of the world doesn't make your schedule "tough". You can brag on it all you like, but beating one of the worst Arkansas teams in recent memory and the worst Auburn offense I've seen in 15 years doesn't erase the fact that USC is getting fat on a majority of poor and typically below .500 competition. This doesn't erase the fact they are a great team, but to say playing in a conference as dependably strong as the SEC wouldn't effect their numbers in the long run is just ridiculous.

Are you offering for sale what you've been smoking? That Sesame St. coloring book IS NOT the NCAA records book. The Pac-10 leads the entire nation in championships like 5/1.

Seer is correct, but even if Myopia Genie is referring to football MNCs he is wrong.

The SEC doesnt even lead the nation in mythological national titles in football (NCAA doesnt recognize titles in sports without playoffs)

but in National championships in Mens Sports (for shits and giggles)
USC 72
UCLA 69
Stanford 57
Cal 22
ASU 10
Oregon 10
Zona 5
Wazoo 2
OSU 1
Udub 0
total 248

Arkansas 42
LSU 16
Kentucky 7
Georgia 7
Florida 6
Tennessee 6
Auburn 5
Alabama 0
South Carolina 0
Ole Miss 0
Miss St 0
Vanderbilt 0
total 89

Ole Miss, Miss State and Vandy didnt have a national title in mens or womens sports

As far as I can tell, the SEC went 3-3 in bowl games last year. That seems so...average.

:?

Buc, nothing is as ridiculous as your "guaranteeing" what USC would or wouldn't do in the SEC.

You have NO WAY of backing up such a guarantee and in fact all the empirical evidence indicates that USC would handle each and every SEC team these past few seasons.

I simply haven't seen an SEC team in recent years that had enough offense to scare USC and nobody with the possible exception of the '72 Trojans ever had a defense good enough to shut down USC.

Maybe USC would've still ran the table, maybe they wouldn't have...There's simply no way for anybody to guarantee anything there, the way you did. (Way out of character for you, btw, to go off half cocked like that...)

That's it, bottom line.

Jimmy Medalions wrote:Seer is correct, but even if Myopia Genie is referring to football MNCs he is wrong.

Major conferences, football mncs and shares of...which holds the most?

Van wrote:Buc, nothing is as ridiculous as your "guaranteeing" what USC would or wouldn't do in the SEC.

Ridiculous? No more ridiculous than claiming playing Notre Dame and Hawaii somehow makes USC's patty-cake schedule tougher than an SEC schedule. Ask FSU how much difference a tough conference schedule makes.

Spinach Genie wrote:

Jimmy Medalions wrote:Seer is correct, but even if Myopia Genie is referring to football MNCs he is wrong.

Major conferences, football mncs and shares of...which holds the most?

The SEC doesn't

Buc, USC has played Notre Dame every year since before either of us were even born. Many years, that meant USC was playing the best team in the country. Most years, it means they're playing a damn good team. Only rarely does it mean they're playing a mediocre team and even then don't even try to compare Notre Dame to the creampuffs the SEC schedules OOC.

Even Hawaii (at Hawaii) is a tougher match up than most of what the SEC schedules.

USC's recent OCC schedule has included opening games against Va Tech, Auburn, Penn State and Florida State and they've also played K-State (back when they were good) and OU a couple times. Hell, even BYU is occasionally decent, and they did win a national championship.

Compare that list to anything LSU, Georgia or Alabama has scheduled and while you're at it see if you can locate the likes of Louisiana Monroe, North Texas or Appalachian State on any USC schedule.

Not a lot of Vanderbilts or Kentuckys on USC's schedule either, plus USC actually plays road games, including opening game roadies against Top 10 teams. Their schedule never includes 7 to 8 home games, including a few designed in wins against "payday" programs.

Even OOC, USC always plays a home and home series.

Besides, quit changing the subject. The point here is the ridiculousness of your guarantee that USC couldn't do what Auburn did just last year. Since Auburn already did it how on earth can you guarantee that USC couldn't have also done it?? How can you even begin to make any guarantees abou things that could never be proven?

If you wanna say, "Van, I really don't think USC could do what Auburn did last year.", hey, I'd disagree with you but at least there'd be room for discussion.

To guarantee it though, as if there's NO chance of it, even though it was just accomplished last season? That's insane.

I hate SuC with passion. But their next opponent, (Fresno St), is ranked and would probably perform admirably against any team in the Sec....

That hurts, seer

You wanna start this shit early?