You SEC homers think this was bad...

[EveryGamblersDream]

you are a fawkin idiot, plain and simple. When you play in the SEC it would be MURDER for a Florida to schedule ohio state, usc, Ou, etc. We play in the SEC, we already play 2-3 TOP TEN teams a year and another 2-3 top 25 teams. SC has to schedule tough games b/c one the Pac-10 BLOWS and as a result of scheduling a tough OOC team they can still afford to lose one game and go to the NC. All I know is, put an SEC team in a game that matters(BCS and NC games) and the SEC doesn't lose!

No, you are the idiot who is using rankings & name value to make an excuse as to why they don't play top OOC teams. So with your theory Alabama must be a great team for dominating a top 10 team who anyone with knowledge of the game knew was not a top 10 team.

He is right, the difference between the two conferences is not as huge as it once was. Anyone with a clue about football knows this is true. I mean LSU a much superior team has had trouble with middle of the road Pac 10 teams in the last # of years. If the difference between the two conferences was as huge as many believe, those games would have played out as the so called mismatches many perceived them to be.

People are quick to rag on USC for losing to Stanford but once again, people with knowledge of the game understand a basic concept that reigns supreme in all sports. What better team to knock off the cream of the crop but a conference foe who knows your strengths & weaknesses from the year round battles on the recruiting trail as well as the playing field.

Lets look at the facts for the USC haters.

Since the 2002-2003 season, USC has only lost 8 times & only 2 were to OOC opponents. Of the 2 losses, only 1 was during the regular season & that was back on September 21, 2002 when they lost 27-20 to Kansas State in Manhattan.

Lets look deeper at the losses:

2002-2003:

Kansas State 27-20 (Road)

Washington State 30-27 OT (Road)

2003-2004:

California 34-31 3 OT (Road)

2005-2006:

Texas 41-38 (Rose Bowl)

2006-2007:

Oregon State 33-31 (Road)

UCLA 13-9 (Road)

2007-2008:

Stanford 24-23 (Home)

Oregon 24-17 (Road)


Now lets take a look at their OOC wins over those same seasons:

2002-2003:

Auburn 24-17 (Home)

Colorado 40-3 (Road)

Notre Dame 44-13 (Home)

Iowa 38-17 (Orange Bowl)


2003-2004:

Auburn 23-0 (Road)

BYU 35-18 (Home)

Hawaii 61-32 (Home)

Notre Dame 45-14 (Road)

Michigan 28-14 (Rose Bowl)


2004-2005:

Virginia Tech 24-13 (Neutral although in Maryland so closer to VT)

Colorado State 49-0 (Home)

BYU 42-10 (Road)

Notre Dame 41-10 (Home)

Oklahoma 55-19 (Orange Bowl; remember this game well as I lost 5 figures on Oklahoma!)


2005-2006:

Hawaii 63-17 (Road)

Arkansas 70-0 (Home)

Notre Dame 34-31 (Road)

Fresno State 50-42 (Home)


2006-2007:

Arkansas 50-14 (Road)

Nebraska 28-10 (Home)

Notre Dame 44-24 (Home)

Michigan 32-18 (Rose Bowl)


2007-2008:

Idaho 38-10 (Home)

Nebraska 49-31 (Road)

Notre Dame 38-0 (Road)

Illinois 49-17 (Rose Bowl)


No one & I mean no one in the SEC has come close to playing the OOC USC has. USC would be better off with more OOC opponents as clearly their bugaboo is the missteps versus conference foes. They beat a team from 5 of the 6 BCS conferences with the lone exception being the Big East as no games have been played between the two.

In the 8 losses they had, not one of them were they blown out or outclassed. In every single one they played subpar games & still almost won. These are facts, not opinions. I'd invite anyone to go watch the tapes of every single game & prove otherwise.

So if you are going to trash a team or a conference, at least get your facts straight.

 

[Conan]

yes, we do know... the SEC is something like 12-4 since the BCS inception in BCS games. Again, why the hell would LSU shedule SC or somebody like that when they play top 25 teams practically every week.

Listen guy. If you want to be the best, you have to beat the best. It's sooooo lame for your season to hinge solely on a schedule quirk here or there when you are always a short plane ride or even a bus trip to play a tough opponent. You have control over your schedules more than that. Everyone else is willing to travel 1000's of miles to make a good game happen around the country. For the sake of CFB, get yourselves out of that rut. Win the games and nobody will argue that you are the best when you do everything you can to prove it.

 

[EasyMoney]

Um ok... Again, the SEC doesn't have to do all this. Our Strength of schedules are the toughest year in and year out. We prove ourselves in the BCS, games that matter my friend. I can't wait for the UGA/ASU game! Maybe once UGA comes in there and physically manhandles this poser team, people's tunes will change... but probably not.

that funny because no matter where you look you will see that there is 4 pac 10 teams in the top 10 or 12 of this years SOS. Now in all fairness there is also the same for the SEC but that hardly shows that the SEC plays the toughest. Looks close to the same to me

 

[Conan]

Did you stop and think about the point he was trying to make before namecalling, or are you not capable of such a thing? The argument here is that the SEC has "2-3 TOP TEN teams" BECAUSE of their typical cupcake OOC scheduling, which of course pads their overall records and puts them at the top of rankings. Whereas the Pac-10 typically has FAR more difficult OOC schedules, not to mention each team plays one another each season in the Pac, which even further diminishes their overall records individually yielding fewer top-ranked teams. Until the SEC changes their OOC scheduling patterns, we won't know just how far the two conferences are separated.

HK, it's not only the 3-4 OOC patsies... None will admit that they also get the Miss. St.'s, Ole Miss. and Vandy's to pad their W/L total with. Seriously, every top ranked SEC team begins the year with at least 6-7 pushover wins. No wonder they are always ranked.

 

[Flsunman]

Listen guy. If you want to be the best, you have to beat the best. It's sooooo lame for your season to hinge solely on a schedule quirk here or there when you are always a short plane ride or even a bus trip to play a tough opponent. You have control over your schedules more than that. Everyone else is willing to travel 1000's of miles to make a good game happen around the country. For the sake of CFB, get yourselves out of that rut. Win the games and nobody will argue that you are the best when you do everything you can to prove it.

Exactly, UGA plays LSU, UF, South Carolina, Auburn and ASU on the road. I think most people would say that's about the best of the best. Nice try

 

[SECcapper]

Ill say it again and again and again...and props to Box for pointing this out already...but it was mentioned again in this thread but
in 2002 and 2003 nobody in their right mind considered Auburn to be "Elite SEC"...what where they 8-4 and 7-5 regular season.....average at best so USC didnt dominate an Elite SEC team..thats like SEC fans claiming that Auburn thrashing of Washington State shows that SEC dominates elite Pac10 programs..but I will agree with Box that USC would be a elite team year in and year out in the SEC....Oregon, no.....ASU, no....Trojans, yes

 

[silver7]

Conan An Edge Never Mentioned

The ungodly weather in Miss., Ga., Fl., La., 100 deg w/ 95% humidity. Play some games in Ann Arbor or Lincoln in Nov.!

 

[guitarjosh]

The problem with the SEC logic that they shouldn't have to play a tough OOCS because their conference schedule is so tough is that it is a circular argument. Of course the conference looks tougher when they play 8 home games, 4 against the Sun Belt and 1-AA teams! Look, if they played an extra conference game like the Pac-10, half the SEC teams would get an extra loss. Secondly, if they played tougher OOC teams, like teams out of the Big-10 or Big-12, they could have extra losses as well. So a SEC team going 8-4 under the current schedule could easily end up 6-6 with a Pac-10 type schedule.

 

[Boxslayer]

So then get your asses in gear and play out west for some of those big dollars. I doubt that the revenues for any big matchup out west would send any of you guys home broke. USC is a guaranteed 92000 sellout and 1/4 million dollar spot commercials on TV and everyone would be watching. UCLA netted over 80,000 fans. ASU will do the same. That's big enough money, way big considering that the ticket prices are higher across the board. I see no reason to keep dodging Pac-10 OOC games if money is at the heart of the issue. But let's face it. You don't play here vs any of the top teams (most of the time) because of the possibility of what happened to Tennessee. So it's with good cause that you keep on playing all of those D1-AA and Sun Belt teams. (The Pac is 10-5 vs SEC since '01.) Your paper thin image would creah and burn and then you'd have nothing left to brag about. The money angle doesn't hold water. Best to just play it safe.

No, the truth is you dont know the budgets for any of these schools and there is absolutely, positively no debating whatsoever that home games net way more money than road games. Its not a money "angle". Its fact. Its the reason why teams want more home games, its the reason the BCS is still in place, its the reason why the SEC signed major TV deals with CBS and ESPN. MONEY MONEY MONEY.

You can continue to get way too worked up over a stupid win last night, but I am not getting into an sort of a conversation with a person who doesnt even know or admit to the basics because this is going to become a superfan, homer conversation like it already has begun to turn into. You are blinded by your hatred of the SEC and love of the Pac-10 to admit the simple truth that everything in modern sports revolves around money.

 

[Boxslayer]

I ignored your claim that USC couldn't beat an SEC team anywhere but at home. It wasn't worth bringing up again because it's aleady been proven once vs your "elite" Auburn team a few years ago. Nobody but Arky has had the gonads to even think of scheduling another home/home vs the Trojans.

By the way, did you notice that USC is now #1 in the polls this week?
So much for the Bulldogs claim to immorality... but they would have gone down sooner or later anyway. They might not even survive ASU. No need to react to that one... we'll get a RARE chance to see what one of your "elite" can REALLY do above and beyond all the bragging and bullshit for a change. Just keep in mind that they are playing one of the Pac-zero teams. (So far Pac-zero 1, SEC 0)

Dude, Auburn was very average the years USC beat them. Doesnt matter anyway, USC is an elite football team no matter what conference they play in.

 

[Boxslayer]

Lets take into account only 2 teams have 2 titles within the last decade & one of them is USC, a FACT recognized by everyone including the NCAA which all teams fall under.

ENOUGH SAID....

I recognize all of USC's titles.

But a conference is only as strong is the teamS that compose it.

Pac-10 is a VERY good conference. In my opinion, they are easily a top 3, and a very good case can be made they are a top 2 conference.

But if you take USC out, I think it loses a lot of steam from their top 2 conference talk and I think they would be a top 3 conference at that point with a very weak case for a top 2 conference. If that makes any sense.

 

[Boxslayer]

'03 was a split NC between LSU and USC. The NCAA even says so. I'm sure you know better than them.

And whatever level that puts the Pac10 on, where does that put your overrated SEC if the Pac-10 has beaten them twice for every time they've lost to them since '01. The Pac-10 is 10-5 vs SEC since '01. So much for your logic. Typical SEC blowing smoke up everyone's ass. You are a mindless clone.

Why stop at 2001? Is that convenient for your case? You can spin stats any way you want to.

How about this stat since you love talking head to head:

The SEC leads the Pac-10 59-37-5 (.609) all time.

The above calculation is based on "historical conference affiliation." If you run the same SEC vs Pac-10 numbers based on "current conference affiliation" you find out that the SEC leads 62-39-6 (.607).

Why not talk all-time? Pac-10 has always recruited west coast guys, SEC has always recruited SE guys. Not much has changed.

If you want to know which conference produces more NFL players, that would also be the SEC. If the conference was such a myth, if the teams were really as bad as you make it out to be, NFL teams would not come calling more than the Pac-10. There is no media bias, no east coast bias when NFL scouts are out there working.

 

[Boxslayer]

Conan, I think you'll find the more this message board exists that I am not some rabid moronic SEC homer like there are on this board and in this world. Some of the bullshit that comes out of their mouth makes me cringe.

But some of your points have been spinned, skewed and based on emotion just like some of the SEC guys on this board.

 

[Boxslayer]

But like I said, the difference is dwindling.

AGREED!

I think everyone will agree this is going to be a down year for the SEC. More than half the teams are breaking in new QBs. Other teams see and hear all of the SEC talk, they are recruiting better they are out there hiring coaches, paying big bucks, shuffling coordinators and bringing great coaches like Neuheisel back into college.

 

[Boxslayer]

I'm not saying they don't play anybody. I realize that Florida regularly plays Miami and FSU. All I'm saying is games are alot harder to win when you travel a few thousand miles. Tenn has realized this first hand in the last two years. Basically what I'm saying is teams in other conferances travel accross the country every year. Mich goes to Oregon, USC goes to OSU, OSU goes to USC, Texas goes to OSU. MSU goes to Cal, ILL goes to Mizzu. You rarely ever see a SEC team do this. Tenn has and they have lost to inferior opponents. Why do you thing teams like the Arizona Cardinals have a much better home record than road record. Because its a pain in the ass for teams to travel to Arizona for the weekend. UF literally havsn't played a game outside the southeast since the 1960's. Just saying it's a different world when you leave your timezone.

I agree with your point, but as a thorn in your side sidenote: Gators did beat OSU in Arizona! :drink:

 

[SwoleBonds]

ASU will Beat Georgia and I will be there to witness it!

ASU cant hold a candle to Georgia :lol::lol:

 

[Boxslayer]

Dude, look at the facts! If one team(ie UGA) is playing 5-7 teams in THE TOP 25... why the hell would they schedule somebody else? It's already unfair, look at OU's schedule, a Ron Zook coached UF team would go undefeated with that bullshit schedule. Why should OU ever go to the NC with such a bullshit schedule? Maybe this explains why they get blown up in BCS games, they play nobody all year and aren't battle tested when they get there. This is also why SEC reams are something like 12-4 in BCS games since it's inception, they are battle tested. Again, the SEC plays in the SEC and the best 2-3 teams that come out of there every year usually take care of business in the bowl games. The SEC is actually undefeated in NC games since the BCS implementation.

I dont agree with a lot of your points, but I do with this one.

If people really want to know how the conferences stack up, then let's look at how they stack up when the shit is on the line:

Since the BCS' inception:
Conference record in bowl games (best teams from each conference going at it)

SEC: 11-4
Pac-10: 8-4
Big 10: 8-9
Big 12: 6-8
ACC: 1-9

Now, most BCS GAME APPEARANCES:

Most BCS Games
<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="left">Florida State
</td> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="center">6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="left">Oklahoma
</td> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="center">6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="left">Ohio State
</td> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="center">6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="left">USC
</td> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="center">6
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="left">Florida
</td> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="center">4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="left">Miami (FL)
</td> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="center">4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="left">LSU
</td> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="center">4
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="left">Michigan
</td> <td class="tablebg1" valign="middle" align="center">4</td></tr></tbody></table>
All these schools coming into the BCS from other conferences. Every team that leads the BCS appearances comes from every conference but the SEC, but the conference that produces the best results in BCS Games is the SEC.

Shows first hand that the SEC teams are beating up on each other, not making it into the BCS games, and all of these other teams appear to be waltzing through their schedules making BCS games and then not winning because they are overrated.

SEC is also undefeated in title games since the BCS inception.

 

[EveryGamblersDream]

AGREED!

I think everyone will agree this is going to be a down year for the SEC. More than half the teams are breaking in new QBs. Other teams see and hear all of the SEC talk, they are recruiting better they are out there hiring coaches, paying big bucks, shuffling coordinators and bringing great coaches like Neuheisel back into college.

This is why I love to debate you as you are not blinded & are respectful when posting your opinion. Many SEC fans would never agree to what Conan posted but someone with obvious knowledge of the game such as yourself realizes the statement is true.

 

[Boxslayer]

BCS appearances by conference:

SEC
15 appearances
(Take out LSU and it is 11)

*SEC most appearances yet doesnt have a team in the leader in appearances. Shows conference balance and that new teams can emerge. When those new teams emerge to get into the BCS, they post an 11-4 overall BCS record and beat these OOC teams when the shit is on the line.

Pac-10
12 appearances
(Take out USC and it is 6)

*Does not lead in overall appearances as a conference, yet does have a team in the top appearances (USC). Shows it is a top heavy conference relying on USC to post appearances.


Conference BCS Record:

SEC (Take out LSU)
7-4 record

Pac-10 (Take out USC)
3-3 record

 

[guitarjosh]

Why stop at 2001? Is that convenient for your case? You can spin stats any way you want to.

How about this stat since you love talking head to head:

The SEC leads the Pac-10 59-37-5 (.609) all time.

The above calculation is based on "historical conference affiliation." If you run the same SEC vs Pac-10 numbers based on "current conference affiliation" you find out that the SEC leads 62-39-6 (.607).

Why not talk all-time? Pac-10 has always recruited west coast guys, SEC has always recruited SE guys. Not much has changed.

If you want to know which conference produces more NFL players, that would also be the SEC. If the conference was such a myth, if the teams were really as bad as you make it out to be, NFL teams would not come calling more than the Pac-10. There is no media bias, no east coast bias when NFL scouts are out there working.

But look at where the games have played, and who played them! A couple years ago, WSU did a 1 and done with Auburn. When was the last time Vandy or Miss St played a top Pac-10 school?

Well, I looked. MSU has played the Pac-10 3 times and is 0-3. Miss never played the Pac-10. Vandy is 0-1. SC is 1-1, but that was before they joined the SEC. UK is 2-0, beating OSU in 1968 and 1976. Arky is 4-6-1. LSU is 12-3, 7-0 against OSU and Arizona. Auburn is 5-3, 4-1 vs Arizona, OSU, WSU. Vols are 14-12, 5-1 vs WSU and OSU. UG is 8-4, 6-0 vs OSU, UO, Cal. All 6 games were in Athens. So it looks like the way the SEC got such a good record vs the Pac-10 was to have the top tier SEC teams play home games vs the lower tier Pac-10 teams. About the only SEC team that has a legit record vs the Pac-10 is Alabama.