After hearing how dominant the SEC is from it's non stop TV network/PR machine (ESPN) just is nice to see them eat some crow. Was pretty shocked to see all the pregame smack talked by the Alabama players to be honest....
How about the Big 10?
- Thread starter EdgyTim
- Start date
I am an SEC fan and I do like the new playoff format. I am sure the guys from Alabama learned a valuable lesson last night. Games are won and lost on the fleld.
If Alabama couldn't beat the 4th highest ranked team then they don't desreve to be number one or play for the championship. I will be cheering very hard for Oregon, however.
If Alabama couldn't beat the 4th highest ranked team then they don't desreve to be number one or play for the championship. I will be cheering very hard for Oregon, however.
Ohio State is a lot better than people gave them credit for. Alabama isn't as good as people made them out to be. The playoff format is the best thing that happened to college football. Now all they have to do is increase the number of teams to 8. Provide a lot more meaning to bowl games and I am sure it will increase attendance at 4 of the early December bowl games.
I used to want more than 4, but now that I have seen it, I think that I like 4. I 100% do not want any byes.
Regarding the SEC....what SEC apologist seem to brush aside is that even haters like myself, believe top to bottom, most years, they have been the best conference. What they cannot accept, is the the word most...and what is most mind boggoling of all is how they seem to ignore the arguments that shine bright on on why their apologists live in an echo chamber of self-fulfillment.
This is the one I like to the apologists right, what's en vogue for me: FL has not played an out of state non-conference game since 1994! Just think about that. Then consider how that works with rankings...think about how a team that travels puts themselves out there...Alabama is actually a worse culprit in the grand scheme of things. I don't believe they have played a true non-conference road game in 12 years! That is absurd! Way to put yourself out there...
My other favorite is to use the success of Mizzu and A&M...who suddenly got faster when they joined the SEC....
Regarding the SEC....what SEC apologist seem to brush aside is that even haters like myself, believe top to bottom, most years, they have been the best conference. What they cannot accept, is the the word most...and what is most mind boggoling of all is how they seem to ignore the arguments that shine bright on on why their apologists live in an echo chamber of self-fulfillment.
This is the one I like to the apologists right, what's en vogue for me: FL has not played an out of state non-conference game since 1994! Just think about that. Then consider how that works with rankings...think about how a team that travels puts themselves out there...Alabama is actually a worse culprit in the grand scheme of things. I don't believe they have played a true non-conference road game in 12 years! That is absurd! Way to put yourself out there...
My other favorite is to use the success of Mizzu and A&M...who suddenly got faster when they joined the SEC....
I hope they don't change the number of 4 making it to the playoffs either. But eventually we saw it with the IHSA and they get $$ hungry and increase the number of games by changing a 6-class playoff to a 8-class playoff system. I'm sure the NCAA will eventually get $$ hungry and increase the number of teams in the playoffs also. It happened in the NFL, MLB and NBA and I blame the NHL for it because they always included practically every team to go to the playoffs.
I'm glad the NCAA does not use geographical regions to pick the final 4 teams. Would like to see the IHSA pick up on that. I did like that fact we did not see a representative from the east coast (ESPN country).
I also think by Ohio State getting in the top 4 that they did pick the best 4 teams to make the playoffs. I don't think that will happen to often.
Wassup
This post was edited on 1/3 11:25 AM by Wassup13
I'm glad the NCAA does not use geographical regions to pick the final 4 teams. Would like to see the IHSA pick up on that. I did like that fact we did not see a representative from the east coast (ESPN country).
I also think by Ohio State getting in the top 4 that they did pick the best 4 teams to make the playoffs. I don't think that will happen to often.
Wassup
This post was edited on 1/3 11:25 AM by Wassup13
JCHill I thought you were smarter than this. Maybe not. The fact is, Missouri was a middle of the road team with a few good years before joining the SEC. It definitely makes a difference to a recruit which conference a team plays in. I would think you'd know that, maybe not.
I like the SEC best, so there is no reason for me to apologize for anything. It is the best conference in college football, period, end of story. Jealousy is an ugly thing and there is TON of it coming from Big Ten fans every year. OK Ohio State beat Alabama. It happens and all it proves is that one team had a better game than the other. However, I do like the playoff format as I said before. And four teams is enough.
And it is comical that you say the SEC doesn't put itself out there. You kidding me? They put themselves out there every single week when conference play starts. It is pretty much impossible for any team to go undefeated in SEC play. The competition is simply too good. You have to be good every single week or you get beat. Go ahead and compare Ohio State's schedule to Alabama's. The first five game on the Ohio State schedule are a joke. Then of the next eight, three, maybe four were against tough opponents.
Fact is, there are always more SEC teams in the top 25 and top 10 than any other conference. But this year the Big Ten has bragging rights. So be it. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.
I am smart. I promise. That is why I see distractions in your first paragraph..."I thought you were smarter...I would think you would know...maybe not" What are you trying to hide with these distractions? Typically so eloquent ...
Let's see:
Seems right...to (to an SEC person I suppose) that by joining the SEC - BOOM - you get better recruits. Well, let's see what the experts say:
Mizzus first year in the SEC was in 2012: Let's see what their Yahoo rankings looked like for the last ten years. Something tells me it won't be what is suspected:
2004 - 46
2005 - 39
2006 - 47
2007 - 33
2008 - 25
2009 - 40
2010 - 21
2011 - 48
2012 - 31
2013 - 41
2014 - 34
Ok...that is the data. Interestingly, by far, Mizzu's two best years were in 2010 and 2008...years before they were glimmer in the SEC's eye's...Next bolded, one year after being in the SEC, Mizzu's class ranking fell ten spots. According to your argument, the opposite should have happened. I think you should know that simply changing conference has little, if any effect on your recruiting class...or at least in Mizzu's case, but maybe not?
Any explanation as to why Mizzu's most recent class, after now being in the SEC since 2012 now, ranks as its 5th best in the last 11? Why after already bearing the SEC insignia on their jerseys, their 2013 class ranks 8th in the last 11?
It's curious.
I propose two thoughts to this statement. You can pick which you like better.
A. Maybe, before immediately joining the SEC, Mizzu's 8-5 record was better than you suspected, and perhaps they were't such a "middle of the road team.
Alternatively
B. Maybe, since joining the SEC, you have realized the SEC was not as superior as you suspected, given that a perceived "middle of the road team" found it's way to the SEC championship game, with the only change in its stature being worse recruiting classes than it had while in the Big 12.
I like the SEC, too. Typically, it is the best conference.
I never considered you an apologist - and simply liking a conference does not make you an apologist. Being an apologist means making statements like "if we did not fumble, we would have won." Well, you lost because you fumbled...not sure you are in that category. But there is a lot of "the sec is disinterested" when playing in non NY/E bowl games..
As to your comment that the SEC is the best...period...end of story... etc etc... I mean, how do you want someone to respond to that? Historically? Not sure. this season? No. Over some period, which and when? Over the last several years, yep, no question. A few decades ago? No. Some time before that? Maybe.
IMO, even when the SEC is not the best, it is near the best, which is not always true for the other conferences, and in recent history is what makes them the best. This is a much different statement, however, than simply saying they are the best conference with out any caveats.
I went to western illinois, I root for michigan, I hate ohio state. The most fun i ever had at a football game was at LSU, followed by Tennessee. I think USC had two of the best two teams in recent history. I think oregon is the funnest team to watch and that they will beat Ohio State. I wish oklahoma, texas, and ND would become powers again. I think TCU could play with anyone this season, but got the ranking they deserved.
I have no allegiance - I carry no jealously. That said, the Big Ten was an underdog in all ten of their games, went 5-5, defeated the SEC champ in a classic game. The SEC was overrated, but mostly because too much credit was given to three schools: MsSt, Ole Miss, and Tex A&M. MsSt climbed to #1 without beating a top 10 team; Ole Miss was a schizophrenic that had no business in the top 4; and maybe most annoyingly, A&M who because they defeated an overrated South Carolina team week one, remained in the top 25 after an OT win to Arkansas then two straight losses. Finally, they HAD to be removed after losing 51-0 to alabama.
In the end, the SEC's seven ranked teams went 2-5...Their three highest ranked teams lost respectively to a lowley big 10 team, and then 42-3 to TCU and 49-34 to G. Tech.
That does not sound like the best to me.
Wow. that was easy wasn't it? When you don't have to prove it.
When it is time to see what happens when these teams that make up such an unreal conference...like in the bowl games..it becomes a lot less clear.
Again, there were a lot of overrated teams in the SEC this year...
And sorry, the SEC does not put it self out there. The big news this season is that FL will play Colorado State in Denver in two years... that is the BIG SEC out of conference road game...How about go play Oregon or Arizona State...
So are you admitting that the SEC was not the best conference this season?
If you simply argue that the SEC has been the best over the last several years, no one is going to argue with you - no one. If you are going to argue that they have been the best every single year for the last etc..you are going to get arguments.
JC
The SEC is the best conference but does not have the best
team this year. I am hoping the PAC 12 will have the
National Championship this year. Although I am not a real Oregon
fan! I am a fan of USC. The PAC 12 is in my opinion better
than the Big 10 but you never know what team is the best. It
Just might be the Buckeyes! And I will tread that!
The SEC is the best conference but does not have the best
team this year. I am hoping the PAC 12 will have the
National Championship this year. Although I am not a real Oregon
fan! I am a fan of USC. The PAC 12 is in my opinion better
than the Big 10 but you never know what team is the best. It
Just might be the Buckeyes! And I will tread that!
In regards to the SEC and playing ASU. The Sun Devils play Texas A&M next year... in Houston. They played LSU in 2005 @ Tempe, and played a home and home with UGA in 2008 and 2009. Their most recent "SEC" foe was a pre-SEC Mizzou in 2011 and 2012.
Honestly JCHill I have no idea where you get the time to post something so long and drawn out. It would be painful for me to have to read all of this because of the time involved. It must have taken forever for you to come up with all this.
The fact remains the SEC is the best conference and has been for years. But this was not their best year. I believe they were 7-5 in bowl games this year. And they didn't play well against ranked teams. That is true, but top to bottom it's still the best conference, period, end of story. If it doesn't get any worse than this, and it won't, things will be fine.
I will say for the third time Alabama got beat and that's the way it goes sometimes. But, we'll see how this goes over the long haul.
The fact remains the SEC is the best conference and has been for years. But this was not their best year. I believe they were 7-5 in bowl games this year. And they didn't play well against ranked teams. That is true, but top to bottom it's still the best conference, period, end of story. If it doesn't get any worse than this, and it won't, things will be fine.
I will say for the third time Alabama got beat and that's the way it goes sometimes. But, we'll see how this goes over the long haul.
it did not take too long. The only thing i had to look up was the recruiting class ranks, and i have a link to that.
I could not let your incorrect statement about their recruiting classes go unanswered.
It is so funny that you won't admit - just have not come to say it - that the SEC was not the best this year. You just can't bring yourself to actually saying that for some reason, and it is for that reason that you lose credability on the argument.
I will say it, the Pac 12 was the best this season, top to bottom...and I hate the pac 12.
But most important to me in your response - I found the apologist statement: "...they were 7-5 in bowl games this year. And they didn't play well against ranked teams." A classic tautalogy.
JCHill:
So many thoughts for me, so little time.
First of all I don't want to appear rude, but honestly...if you really think I worry about my credibility on this board where you are concerned, nothing could be further from the truth. As a matter of fact it has never even crossed my mind till you brought it up. Now that it has crossed my mind, it's still meaningless. You don't know me so I really don't care what you think of me or my "credibility" here.
Second, I did say the SEC didn't have a typical good year, but it doesn't mean it isn't the best conference in my opinion. Don't try to come off as being objective, please. You're just as subjective as everyone else here. Your stuff is opinion too.
Third, the definition of an apologist is someone offering a defense of something controversial. I don't see the controversy. As far as I am concerned there isn't one. The SEC is the best conference and that's the end of it, period, end of story. Another angle is to say the SEC produces more of the top 200 ranked players in the NFL than any other conference. I would think, more talent means a better conference, but what do I know? I am sure you will find a way to argue that too.
The other conferences may have had a better year bowl-wise, but it's like saying the Kansas City Royals were the second best team in baseball in 2014 and anyone who follows baseball knows that isn't true either.
Fourth, the true apologists are the Catholic school boys who come here and say the privates are at a disadvantage because they have to charge tuition to attend. Are you part of that group?
This post was edited on 1/5 1:31 PM by Dr. Mirakle
College Conference producing most NFL talent
So many thoughts for me, so little time.
First of all I don't want to appear rude, but honestly...if you really think I worry about my credibility on this board where you are concerned, nothing could be further from the truth. As a matter of fact it has never even crossed my mind till you brought it up. Now that it has crossed my mind, it's still meaningless. You don't know me so I really don't care what you think of me or my "credibility" here.
Second, I did say the SEC didn't have a typical good year, but it doesn't mean it isn't the best conference in my opinion. Don't try to come off as being objective, please. You're just as subjective as everyone else here. Your stuff is opinion too.
Third, the definition of an apologist is someone offering a defense of something controversial. I don't see the controversy. As far as I am concerned there isn't one. The SEC is the best conference and that's the end of it, period, end of story. Another angle is to say the SEC produces more of the top 200 ranked players in the NFL than any other conference. I would think, more talent means a better conference, but what do I know? I am sure you will find a way to argue that too.
The other conferences may have had a better year bowl-wise, but it's like saying the Kansas City Royals were the second best team in baseball in 2014 and anyone who follows baseball knows that isn't true either.
Fourth, the true apologists are the Catholic school boys who come here and say the privates are at a disadvantage because they have to charge tuition to attend. Are you part of that group?
This post was edited on 1/5 1:31 PM by Dr. Mirakle
College Conference producing most NFL talent
JCHill try to be a little objective anyway. Look at the number of ranked teams the SEC teams play as compared to any other conference. Pac12. Oregon played 5 ranked teams on their regular schedule, one was top 10. Arizona played 6 ranked teams. Then they lost to Boise State. Does the mean Boise State is better than Arizona? Boise State played one other ranked team in Mississippi and got their asses kicked. UCLA played five ranked teams. Utah played five ranked teams. Arizona State played four ranked teams.
SEC - Alabama played five ranked teams, two were top 10. Mississippi State played four ranked teams, two top 10. Ole Miss played five ranked teams, two top 10. Georgia played four ranked teams. Missouri played two ranked teams including the number one team. Auburn played six ranked teams including 3 top 10 teams. LSU played five ranked teams including 3 top 10 teams.
All these teams in the SEC I mentioned were ranked. Wisconsin. three ranked teams. Ohio State, two ranked teams. Michigan State, three ranked teams including two top 10 teams. Nebraska, two ranked teams.
I would mention more Big 10 teams but there were only four in the top 25 rankings.
The SEC put the most teams in the rankings, like every year. But, that is only part of the equation.
SEC - Alabama played five ranked teams, two were top 10. Mississippi State played four ranked teams, two top 10. Ole Miss played five ranked teams, two top 10. Georgia played four ranked teams. Missouri played two ranked teams including the number one team. Auburn played six ranked teams including 3 top 10 teams. LSU played five ranked teams including 3 top 10 teams.
All these teams in the SEC I mentioned were ranked. Wisconsin. three ranked teams. Ohio State, two ranked teams. Michigan State, three ranked teams including two top 10 teams. Nebraska, two ranked teams.
I would mention more Big 10 teams but there were only four in the top 25 rankings.
The SEC put the most teams in the rankings, like every year. But, that is only part of the equation.
It's a no brainer that the SEC play the most ranked opponents. They play the most only because everybody would like to rank SEC above all. As a person that love SEC football, I will Alabama, Auburn, LSU and Florida (When Urban was there) are top football schools. Any given year, one of those schools will be playing for a National title. Exception is this year. The rest of the school are average. You put those school in any other conference, their record will be the same. Georgia, Mizzou, Miss State, Ole Miss, Tenn will all lose to the top teams in ACC, Big 10, Pac 12 and Big 12. This is no different than those teams losing to one of the big 4.
Now here is a different way to look at it. If the conference is so good, how does schools like Missouri get into the championship game two years in a row? This years Missouri team offense was just terrible however, they played for the SEC title two years in a row. The same school that struggled to get to the Big12 title game for years. Results are results. If the SEC was so great, there is absolutely no way that a team that lose to Indiana play for the championship.
Now here is a different way to look at it. If the conference is so good, how does schools like Missouri get into the championship game two years in a row? This years Missouri team offense was just terrible however, they played for the SEC title two years in a row. The same school that struggled to get to the Big12 title game for years. Results are results. If the SEC was so great, there is absolutely no way that a team that lose to Indiana play for the championship.
I don't think there is any question that the SEC has been the best conference in football over the last decade. Alabama, Auburn and LSU leading the way of course.
But much like other conferences, its all about trends. If you take the top off of any conference is where you then find out the best true conference.
The SEC still wins out here but the Pac 12 is awfully close. UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Stanford is as good a group as any conference has.
The Big 10 has a very long way to go to compete with that. the SEC second tier right now is Georgia, texas A&M, Tennessee, Missouri.
the second tier int he Big 10 after Wisconsin, Ohio State and Michigan State starts with Iowa? Penn State? Michigan? Ugh....
It was a very nice run in the big bowl games for the big ten, but to prove that they are among the elite, it has to happen over and over again. Time will tell.
Right now the Big 10 is a distant third to the SEC and Pac 12.
But much like other conferences, its all about trends. If you take the top off of any conference is where you then find out the best true conference.
The SEC still wins out here but the Pac 12 is awfully close. UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Stanford is as good a group as any conference has.
The Big 10 has a very long way to go to compete with that. the SEC second tier right now is Georgia, texas A&M, Tennessee, Missouri.
the second tier int he Big 10 after Wisconsin, Ohio State and Michigan State starts with Iowa? Penn State? Michigan? Ugh....
It was a very nice run in the big bowl games for the big ten, but to prove that they are among the elite, it has to happen over and over again. Time will tell.
Right now the Big 10 is a distant third to the SEC and Pac 12.
Well I gotta tell you. It has been quite a while since I laughed this hard. This is some of the most ridiculuously ignorant stuff I have read in a while. I will just bet you are a Cub fan too. Gotta be.
You take Georgia, Mississippi, Miss State, and even Arkansas and throw them into the Big 10 and more often than not they would challenge for a Big 10 title. SC would do better in the Big 10 than they do in the SEC. Sure some top teams could beat them and they could also beat some top teams as well. All those teams I named would do better in the Big 10.
Your last sentence says it all. Talk about ignorant and stupid. I gotta say you must not be playing with a full deck, or maybe the elevator doesn't go to the top, or all the sand isn't on the beach, or you aren't the sharpest tool in the shed because only a person playing with an extra chromosome would write it.
Would you consider the Denver Broncos and Seattle Seahawks to be good teams? Of course you would. Right now you have to say that they are both odds on favorites to play in their respective conference championship games. Yet both of those teams lost this year to the St. Louis Rams. The Rams won 6 games this year...only one more than the lowly Bears. So, by your logic, absolutely no way those teams should be playing for a championship. See how stupid that really is. I'll let you in on a secret. Upsets happen in football...it's been going on for years.
Once again and for the umpteenth time. No one has more teams in the top 25 than the SEC year in and year out.
No conference puts more top players in the NFL than the SEC. No conference plays more ranked teams than the SEC.
And no conference is better than the SEC.
An aside on Arkansas...they played eight teams that were ranked this year. I don't know if anyone else played that many. They also played six games against top 10 teams and I know no one played that many top 10 teams. Some of those games were close games too. No doubt in my mind they would have had a better record in the Big 10.
Hey Dr.
The SEC also has more busts in the NFL! More Violation of team rules in the NFL! And more guys that dropped out of school before they finished their degree to pursue their NFL career and went Bankrupt within two years than any other conference. Lets get the priorities in order and mandate some education along with the football "supremacy" YOU claim in the SEC!
The SEC also has more busts in the NFL! More Violation of team rules in the NFL! And more guys that dropped out of school before they finished their degree to pursue their NFL career and went Bankrupt within two years than any other conference. Lets get the priorities in order and mandate some education along with the football "supremacy" YOU claim in the SEC!
Huh?
LOL!
Having an opinion and being objective are completely different things. Mine is mostly opinion...not sure the two are mutually exclusive in the least
For someone who is not concerned about whether I am concerned about their credibility...you seem awfully concerned about mine ("on't try to come off as being objective, please") kind of creepy.
Yes...it is an opinion, based on facts - not incorrect assertions about recruiting classes etc.
The SEC puts the most players in college. that is a fact. Well done this time. If the discussion was which conference puts the most players in the NFL, the SEC would be the answer, but it's not the discussion.
So is the team that puts the most players in the NFL the best team? Or is it the one that wins the games on the field?
Does the team that has the most NFL-laden roster win all of its games? Or is the tone that plays better as a team?
I'm not sure this counts as "finding a way to argue" since it was really an incredibly obvious response.
NFL talent is a factor, but when the three best teams in your conference lose on the field, it's outweighed...what was the best SEC win this season again? What was the SEC record against other Power conferences again this season? I know the answer to both. You don't. But facts don't matter when your mind is made up before the analysis is final...
I have no idea. Sure. If real results don't matter, only hypotheticals.
I've argued for a long time - as a future parent of a public school boy, mind you, that the system works in all kinds of weird ways. That some privates have advantages over some publics, that some publics have advantages over some privates, that some privates have advantages over other privates (for example: MC has a lot more kids in its jurisdiction than JCA, but they get multipled the same), and that some publics have advantages over some publics (for example, I am sure the kids that go to Morton are as interested in football as the kids that go to Stevenson...but they end up in the same class).
Is this really where you have wandered off to? It's an argument I really don't care much about and rarely get involved in. IL, as a whole, is not a good football sport, there are about 15 schools every year total, that have a chance of winning a state tile in 4 classes...some public, some private, so to me, it's a pointless debate.
Why are you going here?
Accept it, the SEC, the best conference over the last few years, was not the best conference this season. They will be again, perhaps as soon as next season. But oh man, USC's scholarships are back to normal next season and the Pac 12 shows no signs of getting worse.
I think the math adds up - more drafted players - greater likelihood that more busts occur.
LSU, Alabama have dominated the draft of late and some of those guys have done quite well in the league.
Seems to me Odell Beckham and Julio Jones are pretty good.
The Big 10 certainly has had its share of busters in the first round of the draft too.
The greater the number picked from the conference the greater chance of more busts. Numbers just add up.
LSU, Alabama have dominated the draft of late and some of those guys have done quite well in the league.
Seems to me Odell Beckham and Julio Jones are pretty good.
The Big 10 certainly has had its share of busters in the first round of the draft too.
The greater the number picked from the conference the greater chance of more busts. Numbers just add up.
LCN,
I will agree with your statement regarding busts and statistics, but now address the rest of the post because at the end of the day its time for the players to realize that football is a vehicle to get an education many would never get. Get the damn degree so that the degree is plan A and Football is plan B, not the other way around!
I will agree with your statement regarding busts and statistics, but now address the rest of the post because at the end of the day its time for the players to realize that football is a vehicle to get an education many would never get. Get the damn degree so that the degree is plan A and Football is plan B, not the other way around!
Hey JC---YOU ARE THE "MAN"
I want you in my corner!! I got your back!!!!! I am a B1G Ten guy and drink way to much orange Kool-Aide. BAM BAM you kicked the good Dr and he doesn't know what hit him! Hey- Dr-dont go to a gun fight with only a knife!
I will only add two things. ESPN has a vested interest making sure everyone believes SEC is the best damn football across America! ESPN owns the SEC network! They want everyone to believe that nonsense because it all about $$$$$!
Do you really think any SEC team could beat a B1G Ten team in November in a B1G Ten Venue???? They are too soft to play in the cold!
But at the end of the day. jwarigaku summed it up perfectly- Where are the priorities in SEC football???? Are these really college athletes?????
I want you in my corner!! I got your back!!!!! I am a B1G Ten guy and drink way to much orange Kool-Aide. BAM BAM you kicked the good Dr and he doesn't know what hit him! Hey- Dr-dont go to a gun fight with only a knife!
I will only add two things. ESPN has a vested interest making sure everyone believes SEC is the best damn football across America! ESPN owns the SEC network! They want everyone to believe that nonsense because it all about $$$$$!
Do you really think any SEC team could beat a B1G Ten team in November in a B1G Ten Venue???? They are too soft to play in the cold!
But at the end of the day. jwarigaku summed it up perfectly- Where are the priorities in SEC football???? Are these really college athletes?????
Re: How about the Big 10?[/URL]Dr. Mirakle posted on 1/5/2015...
You take Georgia, Mississippi, Miss State, and even Arkansas and throw them into the Big 10 and more often than not they would challenge for a Big 10 title. SC would do better in the Big 10 than they do in the SEC. Sure some top teams could beat them and they could also beat some top teams as well. All those teams I named would do better in the Big 10.
Your last sentence says it all. Talk about ignorant and stupid. I gotta say you must not be playing with a full deck, or maybe the elevator doesn't go to the top, or all the sand isn't on the beach, or you aren't the sharpest tool in the shed because only a person playing with an extra chromosome would write it.
Would you consider the Denver Broncos and Seattle Seahawks to be good teams? Of course you would. Right now you have to say that they are both odds on favorites to play in their respective conference championship games. Yet both of those teams lost this year to the St. Louis Rams. The Rams won 6 games this year...only one more than the lowly Bears. So, by your logic, absolutely no way those teams should be playing for a championship. See how stupid that really is. I'll let you in on a secret. Upsets happen in football...it's been going on for years.
Once again and for the umpteenth time. No one has more teams in the top 25 than the SEC year in and year out.
No conference puts more top players in the NFL than the SEC. No conference plays more ranked teams than the SEC.
And no conference is better than the SEC.
An aside on Arkansas...they played eight teams that were ranked this year. I don't know if anyone else played that many. They also played six games against top 10 teams and I know no one played that many top 10 teams. Some of those games were close games too. No doubt in my mind they would have had a better record in the Big 10.
Since you are throwing out brain statements, I find it hard for a smart person like yourself to grasp the FACT that the teams that are rank shouldn't always be ranked. Miss State as well as Ole Miss were top 5 THIS year. Are you saying they deserve that ranking? laughable at best.
Yes upsets happened however it is very obvious you don't keep up with the teams in the conference you love so much. This was arguably the worst output from a Missouri offense over the last decade or so and they played in the SEC championship. The REALITY is Mizzou had absolutely no business playing in the SEC championship game this year. The reason they played in the game is because over hyped Georgia chocked like always against Florida. These are things that happens in an average conference. It would be one thing is Florida was at least decent however ECU playing them to a close ball game proves my point. Good teams don't lose to scrubs in COLLEGE Football. I have to emphasis college because only a pure DUMMY would compare college to the NFL. Bringing up the Rams beating Seattle and Denver is something a 9 year old would do on the playground during play time.
If Miss State was so great, why did they get waxed by Georgia Tech? Who also beat Georgia. Let's see Georgia Tech beat two SEC teams that was ranked top 10 this year but you want me to crown this conference the KING as well as respect the BS rankings people give to the SEC. Georgia Tech didn't win the ACC this year. Wisconsin who got embarrassed in the Big 10 Championship defeats the runner up from last year and what most would consider the second best team in the SEC this year. If certain people treated other conferences the same, Mich State, Wisc should have had stints in the top 5 this year.
Actual I am wasting my time. There isn't a need to chat with you. Enjoy your SEC kool aid.
Well I gotta tell you. It has been quite a while since I laughed this hard. This is some of the most ridiculuously ignorant stuff I have read in a while. I will just bet you are a Cub fan too. Gotta be.
You take Georgia, Mississippi, Miss State, and even Arkansas and throw them into the Big 10 and more often than not they would challenge for a Big 10 title. SC would do better in the Big 10 than they do in the SEC. Sure some top teams could beat them and they could also beat some top teams as well. All those teams I named would do better in the Big 10.
Your last sentence says it all. Talk about ignorant and stupid. I gotta say you must not be playing with a full deck, or maybe the elevator doesn't go to the top, or all the sand isn't on the beach, or you aren't the sharpest tool in the shed because only a person playing with an extra chromosome would write it.
Would you consider the Denver Broncos and Seattle Seahawks to be good teams? Of course you would. Right now you have to say that they are both odds on favorites to play in their respective conference championship games. Yet both of those teams lost this year to the St. Louis Rams. The Rams won 6 games this year...only one more than the lowly Bears. So, by your logic, absolutely no way those teams should be playing for a championship. See how stupid that really is. I'll let you in on a secret. Upsets happen in football...it's been going on for years.
Once again and for the umpteenth time. No one has more teams in the top 25 than the SEC year in and year out.
No conference puts more top players in the NFL than the SEC. No conference plays more ranked teams than the SEC.
And no conference is better than the SEC.
An aside on Arkansas...they played eight teams that were ranked this year. I don't know if anyone else played that many. They also played six games against top 10 teams and I know no one played that many top 10 teams. Some of those games were close games too. No doubt in my mind they would have had a better record in the Big 10.
Since you are throwing out brain statements, I find it hard for a smart person like yourself to grasp the FACT that the teams that are rank shouldn't always be ranked. Miss State as well as Ole Miss were top 5 THIS year. Are you saying they deserve that ranking? laughable at best.
Yes upsets happened however it is very obvious you don't keep up with the teams in the conference you love so much. This was arguably the worst output from a Missouri offense over the last decade or so and they played in the SEC championship. The REALITY is Mizzou had absolutely no business playing in the SEC championship game this year. The reason they played in the game is because over hyped Georgia chocked like always against Florida. These are things that happens in an average conference. It would be one thing is Florida was at least decent however ECU playing them to a close ball game proves my point. Good teams don't lose to scrubs in COLLEGE Football. I have to emphasis college because only a pure DUMMY would compare college to the NFL. Bringing up the Rams beating Seattle and Denver is something a 9 year old would do on the playground during play time.
If Miss State was so great, why did they get waxed by Georgia Tech? Who also beat Georgia. Let's see Georgia Tech beat two SEC teams that was ranked top 10 this year but you want me to crown this conference the KING as well as respect the BS rankings people give to the SEC. Georgia Tech didn't win the ACC this year. Wisconsin who got embarrassed in the Big 10 Championship defeats the runner up from last year and what most would consider the second best team in the SEC this year. If certain people treated other conferences the same, Mich State, Wisc should have had stints in the top 5 this year.
Actual I am wasting my time. There isn't a need to chat with you. Enjoy your SEC kool aid.
This thread has actually become laughable for me. The Big 10 actually wins as many bowl games as they lose in one season and some of you guys are creaming your jeans. Laughable.
OK let's look at bowl games since you make a big deal of it JCHill.
Bowl games played SEC 406, Big 10 257, Pac 12 249. Records in bowl games SEC 227-170-9 .570 winning percentage. Big 10 116-140-1 .453 winning percentage. Pac 12 132-112-5 .540 winning percentage.
I don't think these numbers count this season but no matter. You get the picture. The Big 10 is going to have to win for a lot of years to get over .500 and it won't happen in your lifetime or anyone else's here. Actually the Cubs may win a World Series before it happens for the Big 10. Not good.
These are facts that simply can't be argued. Just like the SEC putting more good players in the NFL than any other conference and the SEC always having more teams ranked than any other conference. It can't be argued no matter how you spin it. The SEC also puts more teams in bowl games than any other conference as well.
This was not a good year for the SEC in top bowl games to be sure. But they still went 7-5. And we are talking about the whole conference.
But it's funny JC that you want to discount rankings when they don't favor your argument. I will just bet you felt like Notre Dame's high ranking from a couple of years ago was justified. Check the coaches poll for rankings too. It is pretty much the same. I will take the word of coaches who are actually on the field and see these teams over your subjective opinion.
You compare some of these SEC teams to Big 10 teams. Arkansas and Iowa were both 7-6 this year. Do you honestly think Iowa was as good as Arkanses? Arkansas would kick their ass. Tennessee was 7-6 also. Nebraska was 9-4 and Auburn was 8-5 and I'd take Auburn over the "Huskers" any day. Minnesota was 8-5 and got drilled by that "weak" Missouri team. Illioois was 6-7 and Tennessee was 7-6. Do you honestly think that would even be a competitive game between the two? Neither do I.
With that said I will also say that I think Michigan State, Wisconsin and Ohio State are good teams. MS won their game by one point over Baylor, who pretty much played no one most of the way. Wisconsin won by 3 over Auburn and Ohio State won by 7 over Alabama. But a win is a win. However, three good teams does not a good conference make. You can have the rest of the teams in the Big 10. Michigan will improve. But they pretty much have nowhere else to go but up.
We are talking about the entire conference, not just three teams. You have conveniently forgotten that. And there is no doubt in my mind that the SEC is far more solid than the Big 10 top to bottom. The SEC is still the best conference in college football. The PAC 12 is second and has made some strides. A win by Oregon will be big for them. But if Ohio State wins it will be the first national championship for a Big 10 team since 2002 I think. This is the first one the SEC isn't playing in since 2005.
This post was edited on 1/6 12:24 PM by Dr. Mirakle
OK let's look at bowl games since you make a big deal of it JCHill.
Bowl games played SEC 406, Big 10 257, Pac 12 249. Records in bowl games SEC 227-170-9 .570 winning percentage. Big 10 116-140-1 .453 winning percentage. Pac 12 132-112-5 .540 winning percentage.
I don't think these numbers count this season but no matter. You get the picture. The Big 10 is going to have to win for a lot of years to get over .500 and it won't happen in your lifetime or anyone else's here. Actually the Cubs may win a World Series before it happens for the Big 10. Not good.
These are facts that simply can't be argued. Just like the SEC putting more good players in the NFL than any other conference and the SEC always having more teams ranked than any other conference. It can't be argued no matter how you spin it. The SEC also puts more teams in bowl games than any other conference as well.
This was not a good year for the SEC in top bowl games to be sure. But they still went 7-5. And we are talking about the whole conference.
But it's funny JC that you want to discount rankings when they don't favor your argument. I will just bet you felt like Notre Dame's high ranking from a couple of years ago was justified. Check the coaches poll for rankings too. It is pretty much the same. I will take the word of coaches who are actually on the field and see these teams over your subjective opinion.
You compare some of these SEC teams to Big 10 teams. Arkansas and Iowa were both 7-6 this year. Do you honestly think Iowa was as good as Arkanses? Arkansas would kick their ass. Tennessee was 7-6 also. Nebraska was 9-4 and Auburn was 8-5 and I'd take Auburn over the "Huskers" any day. Minnesota was 8-5 and got drilled by that "weak" Missouri team. Illioois was 6-7 and Tennessee was 7-6. Do you honestly think that would even be a competitive game between the two? Neither do I.
With that said I will also say that I think Michigan State, Wisconsin and Ohio State are good teams. MS won their game by one point over Baylor, who pretty much played no one most of the way. Wisconsin won by 3 over Auburn and Ohio State won by 7 over Alabama. But a win is a win. However, three good teams does not a good conference make. You can have the rest of the teams in the Big 10. Michigan will improve. But they pretty much have nowhere else to go but up.
We are talking about the entire conference, not just three teams. You have conveniently forgotten that. And there is no doubt in my mind that the SEC is far more solid than the Big 10 top to bottom. The SEC is still the best conference in college football. The PAC 12 is second and has made some strides. A win by Oregon will be big for them. But if Ohio State wins it will be the first national championship for a Big 10 team since 2002 I think. This is the first one the SEC isn't playing in since 2005.
This post was edited on 1/6 12:24 PM by Dr. Mirakle
I gotta tell you Richie. You are a real clown. Are you President of the JCHill fan club. I would think you are with the verbal BJ you are giving him. Wipe your mouth off, it's foaming.
Just the idea that you admit to drinking too much orange kool-aid lets you out of any intelligent college football conversation.
Can you explain to me what the hell Illinois was even doing in a bowl game? Who kicked their asses? Was that some high school team or something? Louisiana Tech? Hahaha. Real tough customer there. LA Tech got their change to play in the big leagues and got smoked by Auburn and Oklahoma, then turned around and Kicked Illinois' asses.
Priorities in SEC football. Was it or was it not the QB from Ohio State who said they shouldn't have to go to class? "We are playing football ,not school." What kind of priorities are those?
I am sure it has been ESPN's fault that the SEC has been winning more national championships than any other conference. Damned ESPN!
And finally your dumbest statement. Are you actually comparing this discussion to a gun fight? Because if you really are you have no clue. If you need to be educated on an actual gun fight take a trip into one of the worse neighborhoods in the city and open your big mouth there. You'll find out the difference in the blink of an eye. Crawl back into your shitty Illini hole.
I am just going to say now, if any of you guys want to respond to my latest posts have at it. I have not been trying to change anyone's mind on this subject. I know better than that. Minds don't get changed here.
I feel like I have beaten this horse enough as has everyone else. I am done talking about the subject. I have provided enough information and I am not going to waste any more time. If you want to respond, then respond.
I feel like I have beaten this horse enough as has everyone else. I am done talking about the subject. I have provided enough information and I am not going to waste any more time. If you want to respond, then respond.
I understand what you're saying SIU. However, he has tried to spin this every which way he can. I simply said I feel like the SEC is the best conference in college football. I still say that and no one was talking about the last few weeks. I was talking overall and in general. I provided enough evidence for the argument.
But how can you have a debate with someone who, in his first post says he's an SEC hater and then in the very next says he likes the SEC? He attempted to make himself a moving target while trying to change what the debate was actually about. I didn't plan on taking any shots at any other conference and didn't plan on saying anything about how I felt regarding the SEC. Then he took the first shot at the SEC. Then a few others thought they would join in and that's fine. I think I answered them all.
With some of these guys it is simply a Big 10 jealousy of a better conference. I thought LHS' head was going to explode.
They just can't handle the fact that the SEC and the Big 12 are far and away better conferences than the Big 10. They especially hate the SEC. The Big 10 is boring football and always has been. But if watching boring college football is your thing, then you'll like the Big 10.
This post was edited on 1/6 1:38 PM by Dr. Mirakle
I don't know if the SEC is the best conference in the land this year. I know they usually are but I think they might have been propped up a little this year by rankings and prestige...still doesn't mean they were not the best though. I think they certainly were down compared to recent history but I think all of college football was down a little this year.
For what it is worth I don't put a whole lot of stock in bowl games, weird things happen in bowl games. I will contradict myself and say I put a more stock in the playoff games though.
For what it is worth I don't put a whole lot of stock in bowl games, weird things happen in bowl games. I will contradict myself and say I put a more stock in the playoff games though.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Which game this weekend has you excited?
- Latest: Sterling Warrior
