# How will Texas A&M and Missouri do in the SEC?



## Georgia Hard Hunter (Aug 17, 2012)

I feel Texas A&M will be a middle of the pack team in the SEC west but the Aggies will quickly learn a #22 ranking doesn't even qualify as a second tier team in this conference. I don't have a good read on Mizzu The gut feeling I have is the are too big-12 in not enough defense and a lack of physical play.


----------



## country boy (Aug 17, 2012)

Missouri will end up with records like Kentucky and Vanderbilt while a&m will be better than ol miss but worse than Arkansas


----------



## sleeze (Aug 18, 2012)

country boy said:


> Missouri will end up with records like Kentucky and Vanderbilt while a&m will be better than ol miss but worse than Arkansas



I agree with this.

I thank texas a&m will start snatching more recruits out from under the Texas longhorns. And a&m will end up being a solid team in the next few years.


----------



## Jetjockey (Aug 18, 2012)

Georgia Hard Hunter said:


> I feel Texas A&M will be a middle of the pack team in the SEC west but the Aggies will quickly learn a #22 ranking doesn't even qualify as a second tier team in this conference. I don't have a good read on Mizzu The gut feeling I have is the are too big-12 in not enough defense and a lack of physical play.



Why would A&M be any different in the SEC then they would the Big-12?  For the most part, A&M hasnt even had winning records in the Big-12 the last couple years, and Missouri has had their way with them.  It's not like they were a football powerhouse in their old conference.  I actually think they will do exactly the same in the SEC as they did the Big-12.  And that won't win them any recruits away from UT.

Missouri has consistently been a much better team then A&M in the Big-12 and I would expect that to stay the same in the SEC.  They will be a middle tier SEC team that typically wins a little more then half their conference games, just like they did in the Big-12.


----------



## greene_dawg (Aug 18, 2012)

A&M will be fine. Much Like Arky... Missouri will be ok. Much like UK.


----------



## Jetjockey (Aug 18, 2012)

Just out of curiosity, why do you guys seem to thin A&M will do better than Mizzu?  Mizzu is in the easier division and they have been a much better football team over the last several years.  At best A&M will be the 4th best team in the west. Mizzu could mix it up with anyone in the east right now.


----------



## country boy (Aug 18, 2012)

A&M will be battling Ark for 3rd in the west while the east is going to be tougher than people are giving them credit. Now I'm not saying the east is going to win the sec, but you're not looking at is Fl is going to have one of if not the best D in college, and if their O has any life at all they are going to be a contender. Ga is a solid team and can beat anybody out there ( hate to say it). South Carolina is still a good team that should go 9-3 or 8-4 and that include beating Missouri. And if anybody over looks Tenn they will be scratching their head wondering what just happened cause tenn is just about back and should be fighting SC for 3rd in east putting Missouri 5th if they can beat Vanderbilt. East final standing Fl or Ga all depends on who wins in Jacksonville, Tenn 3rd, Sc, Mizzu, Vandy, Kentucky.


----------



## Jetjockey (Aug 18, 2012)

A&M hasn't proved they could beat Arky the last two years in a row, and I don't see that changing.  4th or maybe 5th in the west.  Mizzu will finish 3rd or 4th.


----------



## Matthew6 (Aug 18, 2012)

I see both as middle tier. Ky, ole miss, and Tennessee continue to be bottom feeders.


----------



## country boy (Aug 18, 2012)

No way mizzu 3rd 4th at best and thats if tenn continues to play bad


----------



## BowChilling (Aug 18, 2012)

Hope they both have good dental plans 'cause they are not used to being punched in the mouth like they will be this year!


----------



## biggdogg (Aug 18, 2012)

i agree with jetjockey. mizz is in the east. and they have been a fairly good team with a high powered o for a while now. the fast sec teams won't like going north in the late season too much either. a&m might get a couple of texas' better recruits, but not enough to hang with bama, lsu and the hogs.


----------



## garnede (Aug 19, 2012)

Missouri will be in the top 3 in the east and A&M will be 5th best in the west this year.  I do think being in the SEC will help A&M get better talent in the near future.


----------



## country boy (Oct 5, 2012)

Well it's looking like a&m could possibly wind up 2nd in the west if they continue to play like they have. Manzell has been playing lights out, and their D has been pretty dang good as well. Mizzu on the other hand has realized sec football is a little more serious than the big 12. The only sec game I see mizzu winning is against Kentucky.


----------



## Catdaddy SC (Oct 5, 2012)

Everybody is the SEC west better be concerned about A&M next year. Manzell is the real deal.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Aug 29, 2014)

Rather than post links for my friend, I'll just bring this back to the top.


----------



## greene_dawg (Aug 29, 2014)

Well... I think several of us were spot on. TAMU has a couple of nice wins but they have yet to finish better than middle of the pack in the west. Cotton and Peach bowls. Mizzou did win the East last year so I tip my hat to them but they will have to do it when there isn't a freakish amount of injuries to UF and UGA for me to totally buy in.


----------



## Matthew6 (Aug 29, 2014)

greene_dawg said:


> Well... I think several of us were spot on. TAMU has a couple of nice wins but they have yet to finish better than middle of the pack in the west. Cotton and Peach bowls. Mizzou did win the East last year so I tip my hat to them but they will have to do it when there isn't a freakish amount of injuries to UF and UGA for me to totally buy in.



Yep. And thanks for bumping country boys avatar.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 29, 2014)

Boy no respect at all for A&M. Nobody here expected them to have the season they did their first year in the SEC. Beat Alabama, went 11-2, and the two losses were by 3 and 5 points. Not to mention that freshman QB that won the Heisman. NOBODY here was spot on. Not even close.

Last year the defense stunk but the offense looked great and it looks like they are still strong this year. If they tighten it up on defense the rest of the SEC better watch out.


----------



## greene_dawg (Aug 29, 2014)

atlashunter said:


> Boy no respect at all for A&M. Nobody here expected them to have the season they did their first year in the SEC. Beat Alabama, went 11-2, and the two losses were by 3 and 5 points. Not to mention that freshman QB that won the Heisman. NOBODY here was spot on. Not even close.
> 
> Last year the defense stunk but the offense looked great and it looks like they are still strong this year. If they tighten it up on defense the rest of the SEC better watch out.



No matter how much respect we give them the fact is that they have been nothing more than middle of the pack in their division. That's not an opinion.


----------



## Jetjockey (Aug 29, 2014)

Yet, they were barely a middle of the pack Big-12 team.  I've said it all along, the SEC gets rolled by good QB's.  I'm surprised how well A&M is doing in the SEC.  Not because I think A&M is that good, but because it makes me realize how average the SEC D's are against great college QB's who can throw a football.  I've said for a long time that SEC D's aren't that great, but their weak offenses make them look much better than they are.  Its not hard to put up lots of points against SEC D's.  Look what FSU did to Auburn last year, OU to Bama, and look what A&M has done while in the SEC.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 29, 2014)

There is no comparison between where that program was in the Big 12 and where it is today. We will see how their defense looks this year but my suspicion is that Sumlin is going to build on the success he has already had at A&M.


----------



## greene_dawg (Aug 29, 2014)

I think Sumlin will continue as well.


----------



## greene_dawg (Aug 29, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Yet, they were barely a middle of the pack Big-12 team.  I've said it all along, the SEC gets rolled by good QB's.  I'm surprised how well A&M is doing in the SEC.  Not because I think A&M is that good, but because it makes me realize how average the SEC D's are against great college QB's who can throw a football.  I've said for a long time that SEC D's aren't that great, but their weak offenses make them look much better than they are.  Its not hard to put up lots of points against SEC D's.  Look what FSU did to Auburn last year, OU to Bama, and look what A&M has done while in the SEC.



The NFL, you know those guys that get paid to evaluate talent, wholeheartedly disagree with you. But I am sure you know more than they do. If anyone doesn't believe that they can just ask you.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Aug 29, 2014)

greene_dawg said:


> The NFL, you know those guys that get paid to evaluate talent, wholeheartedly disagree with you. But I am sure you know more than they do. If anyone doesn't believe that they can just ask you.



What he forgets is that a great qb will shred nearly every college defense.

I don't care about the rest of the ACC, but guess what conference had the most players go in the first 150 picks in last years draft.


----------



## Jetjockey (Aug 29, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> What he forgets is that a great qb will shred nearly every college defense.
> 
> I don't care about the rest of the ACC, but guess what conference had the most players go in the first 150 picks in last years draft.



Who cares how many NFL players teams produce.  UGA produces tons of NFL players, and they suck.  Oregon produces nearly none, and they are one of the best college teams year in and year out.  SEC D's are not set up to defend high power dual threat QB offenses. They are set up to play smash mouth boring stop the run defense.  That works great if your playing old fashion smash mouth runing offenses. But those D's get shredded against teams that can run and throw, with a QB who can do the same.  Conferences like the Big-12 and PAC-12 have learned how to play, and defend against those offenses.  That's why A&M is having so much success in the SEC, where they had very little in the Big-12.


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 30, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Who cares how many NFL players teams produce.  UGA produces tons of NFL players, and they suck.  Oregon produces nearly none, and they are one of the best college teams year in and year out.  SEC D's are not set up to defend high power dual threat QB offenses. They are set up to play smash mouth boring stop the run defense.  That works great if your playing old fashion smash mouth runing offenses. But those D's get shredded against teams that can run and throw, with a QB who can do the same.  Conferences like the Big-12 and PAC-12 have learned how to play, and defend against those offenses.  That's why A&M is having so much success in the SEC, where they had very little in the Big-12.





Stanford....


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 30, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Who cares how many NFL players teams produce.  UGA produces tons of NFL players, and they suck.  Oregon produces nearly none, and they are one of the best college teams year in and year out.  SEC D's are not set up to defend high power dual threat QB offenses. They are set up to play smash mouth boring stop the run defense.  That works great if your playing old fashion smash mouth runing offenses. But those D's get shredded against teams that can run and throw, with a QB who can do the same.  Conferences like the Big-12 and PAC-12 have learned how to play, and defend against those offenses.  That's why A&M is having so much success in the SEC, where they had very little in the Big-12.






Jetjockey said:


> A&M hasn't proved they could beat Arky the last two years in a row, and I don't see that changing.  4th or maybe 5th in the west.  Mizzu will finish 3rd or 4th.


----------



## fish hawk (Aug 30, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Who cares how many NFL players teams produce.  UGA produces tons of NFL players, and they suck.  Oregon produces nearly none, and they are one of the best college teams year in and year out.  SEC D's are not set up to defend high power dual threat QB offenses. They are set up to play smash mouth boring stop the run defense.  That works great if your playing old fashion smash mouth runing offenses. But those D's get shredded against teams that can run and throw, with a QB who can do the same.  Conferences like the Big-12 and PAC-12 have learned how to play, and defend against those offenses.  That's why A&M is having so much success in the SEC, where they had very little in the Big-12.



Oregon suxs.....Year in and year out they are constantly ranked in the top ten but year in and year out they always blow it against Stanford,a team that plays smash mouth football..........Also, the Big 12 and Pac 12 sux.How many national champions have these conferences produced over the last ten years?
Jockitchjocky?


----------



## emusmacker (Aug 30, 2014)

Jetjockey doesn't care about National titles.   What's funny is how he tries soooo hard to convince us that the SEC ain't as good as every EXPERT says they are.  

But he will constantly ramble on about how awesome the Pac 10 or Big 12 is, based on a 1 game scenario.  How bout letting Oklahoma play 3 teams from the SEC then run that trap.

What happened when that awesome Oregon offense played that smash mouth Defense of LSU?  

I'd love to Okie play Bama for 5 yrs straight then let Jetster try to spin his the losses of Okie.


Dude, I get your homerism and nothing wrong with loving a conference, but please dude come back to reality.  A team from the ACC won the NAt Championship last yr, and even the ACC folks will tell you that the SEC is stronger.

Just because the ACC finally won doesn't mean their conference is better, it means that FSU(the team) could consistently play in the SEC. Do you think Tech could win there consistently?  How bout BC, Maryland, NC?


----------



## greene_dawg (Aug 30, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> Stanford....



Owned. Discussion over.


----------



## SpotandStalk (Aug 30, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> Stanford....



The thorn in Oregon's side.


----------



## Jetjockey (Aug 30, 2014)

Didn't both Mizzu and A&M come from the Big-12 and do BETTER in the SEC than they ever did in the Big-12?


----------



## greene_dawg (Aug 30, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Didn't both Mizzu and A&M come from the Big-12 and do BETTER in the SEC than they ever did in the Big-12?



Nope. But A/M did finish in the middle of the pack and match up with Oklahoma in a bowl in their first SEC season. Beat them like a drum to the tune of 41-13. Mizzou did the same to Ok st last year. Next?


----------



## Jetjockey (Aug 30, 2014)

greene_dawg said:


> Nope. But A/M did finish in the middle of the pack and match up with Oklahoma in a bowl in their first SEC season. Beat them like a drum to the tune of 41-13. Mizzou did the same to Ok st last year. Next?



Yes, they have done better!  Who cares what one bowl game says. OU blasted Bama last season in their bowl game as well!  Mizzu did beat Ok St.  But they also played in the SEC championship game, which is something they almost never did in the Big-12.


----------



## greene_dawg (Sep 1, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Yes, they have done better!  Who cares what one bowl game says. OU blasted Bama last season in their bowl game as well!  Mizzu did beat Ok St.  But they also played in the SEC championship game, which is something they almost never did in the Big-12.



Whatever makes you feel better.


----------



## RipperIII (Sep 1, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Yes, they have done better!  Who cares what one bowl game says. OU blasted Bama last season in their bowl game as well!  Mizzu did beat Ok St.  But they also played in the SEC championship game, which is something they almost never did in the Big-12.



How do you define "blasted"?
BAMA out rushed, out passed and lead OU in every meaningful category...including 5 turnovers, 3 deep in OU territory.
OU won...they did not "blast"


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 2, 2014)

They put up 45 points on a vaunted SEC D, and beat Bama by 2 TD's.  Saban then went crying to the NCAA to try and stop high speed offenses, because he can. Figure out how to stop them.  Bama's offense doesn't have the fire power to keep up with teams with fast paced offenses.  A&M lost those shoot outs in the Big-12.

As far as Stanford goes, they have a very high powered offense, along with a pretty darn good D.  They are 2-2 against Oregon in their last 4 meetings.  About what you'd expect from two of the top teams in a conference.


----------



## skeeter24 (Sep 2, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Mizzu did beat Ok St.  But they also played in the SEC championship game, which is something they almost never did in the Big-12.



If you look at the last 5 years that Mizzu was in the Big 12 they played in the title game as the north division champion twice.


----------



## greene_dawg (Sep 2, 2014)

skeeter24 said:


> If you look at the last 5 years that Mizzu was in the Big 12 they played in the title game as the north division champion twice.



You can't reason with this dude. He is clueless and is so bitter about his Pac 12 not getting the love he think that it deserves that he is incapable of being objective. 

His rants would be like USC, Oregon, Stanford, and Cal winning the next 8 NC's and one of us calling them overrated.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 2, 2014)

skeeter24 said:


> If you look at the last 5 years that Mizzu was in the Big 12 they played in the title game as the north division champion twice.



If you go back 15 years, they still only played in it twice, and it took them over 10 years to play in their first one.  It took 3 to play in their first SEC Championship game.  Like I said, they almost never played in the Big-12 Championship game.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 2, 2014)

greene_dawg said:


> You can't reason with this dude. He is clueless and is so bitter about his Pac 12 not getting the love he think that it deserves that he is incapable of being objective.
> 
> His rants would be like USC, Oregon, Stanford, and Cal winning the next 8 NC's and one of us calling them overrated.



If the rest of the conference didn't pick up the slack, I would call them overrated.  Especially if they played in a skewed system such as the BCS.  You guys make all the excuses in the world on why Mizzu and A&M do as good, if not better in the SEC then they did in the Big-12.  You also can't explain why the SEC is 13-12 in head to head games agains the PAC-12 in the BCS era, and only because they had a 5 game run recently.  Last year, Auburn barely beat one of the worst PAC-12 teams at home, while Oregon destroyed one of the worst SEC teams.  How is that possible?


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 2, 2014)

greene_dawg said:


> You can't reason with this dude. He is clueless and is so bitter



Ding ding ding... Ol Jockey will disappear about 3/4 through the season and we'll see him troll through here next August crying about how no ones loves the PAC12... 

I got news for ya Jockey... I live in PAC 12 country and it's a joke! Even the fans here say the SEC is the best in the country and everyone else is in the passenger seat.. They just look at STATS and Facts! You look at your delusional nonsense and NEVER look at Facts.. I've shown you actual facts, stats and you go around them..


----------



## greene_dawg (Sep 2, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> If the rest of the conference didn't pick up the slack, I would call them overrated.  Especially if they played in a skewed system such as the BCS.  You guys make all the excuses in the world on why Mizzu and A&M do as good, if not better in the SEC then they did in the Big-12.  You also can't explain why the SEC is 13-12 in head to head games agains the PAC-12 in the BCS era, and only because they had a 5 game run recently.  Last year, Auburn barely beat one of the worst PAC-12 teams at home, while Oregon destroyed one of the worst SEC teams.  How is that possible?



You're right. The PAC-12 is the best conference in not only CFB but all of football. The only reason they have ever lost a game and haven't won every NC in history is because of Fox News. There. Now go away.


----------



## RipperIII (Sep 2, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> They put up 45 points on a vaunted SEC D, and beat Bama by 2 TD's.  Saban then went crying to the NCAA to try and stop high speed offenses, because he can. Figure out how to stop them.  Bama's offense doesn't have the fire power to keep up with teams with fast paced offenses.  A&M lost those shoot outs in the Big-12.
> 
> As far as Stanford goes, they have a very high powered offense, along with a pretty darn good D.  They are 2-2 against Oregon in their last 4 meetings.  About what you'd expect from two of the top teams in a conference.





I know ya'll will find this hard to believe,....but JJ is WRONG...OU offense put up 38 on BAMA.

and as usual, JJ did not answer the question.

As to TAMU and shoot outs?...who won the last shoot out between BAMA and TAMU?

as to BAMA's "lack of firepower",...in both losses BAMA missed numerous FG's and fumbled the ball 5 times in the red zone of either AU or OU...and lost by a freak play to Auburn, and really  7pts. to OU. not counting the scoop and score.
so JJ are you going to answer the question?


----------



## riprap (Sep 2, 2014)

Both A&M and Mizzou have done much better than I have thought, but to say that they wouldn't have been the leaders in their old conference is delusional.

 IMO, they stepped up their game with the move expecting to have to play their best ball to compete and it worked.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 2, 2014)

greene_dawg said:


> You're right. The PAC-12 is the best conference in not only CFB but all of football. The only reason they have ever lost a game and haven't won every NC in history is because of Fox News. There. Now go away.



Don't cop out.  Why is the SEC 13-12 against the PAC-12 in the BCS era if they are so much better?  Why did the #1 SEC team struggle to beat WSU last year at home, while the #2 PAC-12 team pummeled Tennesee?



RipperIII said:


> I know ya'll will find this hard to believe,....but JJ is WRONG...OU offense put up 38 on BAMA.
> 
> and as usual, JJ did not answer the question.
> 
> ...



Your right, you got me.  OU did score a defensive TD.  And Bama is 1-1 in shoot outs against A&M.  The top Big-12 teams ha a heck of a lot better winning percentage against A&M in the Big-12.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 2, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Why did the #1 SEC team struggle to beat WSU last year at home, while the #2 PAC-12 team pummeled Tennesee?



Why does the #1 GON fourm troll continue to come into the Sports Forum to talk about the same junk he always talk about.. No one ever sides with you on ANYTHING you say but yet you come in here spewing it anyway with no FACTS... Speculation, you are good at!

We've all argued with you on this. SHOWN REAL FACTS! And yet you still bend those facts. 

You should really find a PAC 12 forum and you might find some support for your lack of FACTS!...


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 2, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Don't cop out.  Why is the SEC 13-12 against the PAC-12 in the BCS era if they are so much better?



Why does it have to be the BCS era?? How about since we started playing each other?? Oh wait, again, those facts would not help your argument so you won't use them. You just like to pick and choose certain facts to fit your argument.. 

Here is the REAL facts!

The SEC has an all-time record of 111-76-10 (152-107-13 when you add MU-CU) and a winning percentage of .589 in head-to-head matchups against Pac-12 teams.


----------



## Matthew6 (Sep 2, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> Why does the #1 GON fourm troll continue to come into the Sports Forum to talk about the same junk he always talk about.. No one ever sides with you on ANYTHING you say but yet you come in here spewing it anyway with no FACTS... Speculation, you are good at!
> 
> We've all argued with you on this. SHOWN REAL FACTS! And yet you still bend those facts.
> 
> You should really find a PAC 12 forum and you might find some support for your lack of FACTS!...



This all year long ^^^^^


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 2, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> Why does the #1 GON fourm troll continue to come into the Sports Forum to talk about the same junk he always talk about.. No one ever sides with you on ANYTHING you say but yet you come in here spewing it anyway with no FACTS... Speculation, you are good at!
> 
> We've all argued with you on this. SHOWN REAL FACTS! And yet you still bend those facts.
> 
> You should really find a PAC 12 forum and you might find some support for your lack of FACTS!...



I'm pretty sure 13-12 in the BCS era is a fact!  So is the 1-1 record against the PAC-12 last year!  Those are FACTS!  I have never claimed that all time the PAC-12 had a better record, but the BCS era is a pretty relevant time frame since you guys use that era to boast about the 7 NC's during that era.  The only FACTS that matter , are the facts that are told on the field in actual head to head games in the modern era.  Those FACTS don't show that the SEC is a superior conference!



Browning Slayer said:


> Why does it have to be the BCS era?? How about since we started playing each other?? Oh wait, again, those facts would not help your argument so you won't use them. You just like to pick and choose certain facts to fit your argument..
> 
> Here is the REAL facts!
> 
> The SEC has an all-time record of 111-76-10 (152-107-13 when you add MU-CU) and a winning percentage of .589 in head-to-head matchups against Pac-12 teams.



See my above post!


----------



## greene_dawg (Sep 2, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> I'm pretty sure 13-12 in the BCS era is a fact!  So is the 1-1 record against the PAC-12 last year!  Those are FACTS!  I have never claimed that all time the PAC-12 had a better record, but the BCS era is a pretty relevant time frame since you guys use that era to boast about the 7 NC's during that era.  The only FACTS that matter , are the facts that are told on the field in actual head to head games in the modern era.  Those FACTS don't show that the SEC is a superior conference!



You know as well as I do that that record means very little unless you stack the teams against each other 1-12 and play in that order. The tenth best team playing against the second best team or vice versa means nothing. I know it gets your knickers in bunches but no conference has the accolades that the SEC does in the time frame you are specifying. 

Also, the coaches and AP poll came out today. How did the two conferences stack up there?


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 2, 2014)

greene_dawg said:


> You know as well as I do that that record means very little unless you stack the teams against each other 1-12 and play in that order. The tenth best team playing against the second best team or vice versa means nothing. I know it gets your knickers in bunches but no conference has the accolades that the SEC does in the time frame you are specifying.
> 
> Also, the coaches and AP poll came out today. How did the two conferences stack up there?



Let me get this straight.  The actual records of teams now doent matter?  Head to head games that occur on the field don't matter?  Your kidding right?  That's the most pathetic argument I've ever hear!


----------



## flowingwell (Sep 2, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Let me get this straight.  The actual records of teams now doent matter?  Head to head games that occur on the field don't matter?  Your kidding right?  That's the most pathetic argument I've ever hear!



I disagree, the most pathetic argument I've ever hear has been pretty clear throughout this thread.


----------



## greene_dawg (Sep 2, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Let me get this straight.  The actual records of teams now doent matter?  Head to head games that occur on the field don't matter?  Your kidding right?  That's the most pathetic argument I've ever hear!



How did you ever get a pilots license??? Let me type this very very slowly for you... 

Head to head records of teams that are not in the same standing of their respective conferences mean very little. For example, Bama playing Cal this year would prove very little as would Oregon vs UK. 

So, once again, unless you line up 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, then the records have very little meaning. But I get the feeling that you already know that.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 2, 2014)

greene_dawg said:


> How did you ever get a pilots license??? Let me type this very very slowly for you...
> 
> Head to head records of teams that are not in the same standing of their respective conferences mean very little. For example, Bama playing Cal this year would prove very little as would Oregon vs UK.
> 
> So, once again, unless you line up 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, then the records have very little meaning. But I get the feeling that you already know that.



After 26 games, are you really trying to use that argument?  Would you like to know the record vs the spread?  True me, you probably don't!




SEC: "We're the best -- look at the scoreboard."
Fact: SEC commissioner Mike Slive's office resembles a Tiffany & Co. showroom after SEC teams won an unprecedented seven consecutive BCS national championships from 2006 to 2012. FSU ended the SEC's reign last season, but two of its teams (Alabama and Auburn) probably would have ended up in a four-team playoff. Starting with Florida's 41-14 upset of No. 1 Ohio State in the 2006 title game, no league has flexed its muscle in the postseason as much as the SEC over the past eight seasons.

Propaganda: As good as the SEC has been at winning national championships, it wasn't that much better than everybody else during the BCS era. From the start of the BCS era in 1998 to its end in 2013, SEC teams went .500 against Pac-12 teams during the regular season (13-13), were only slightly better than the Big Ten in bowl games (23-21) and had a losing record against Big 12 teams during the regular season (8-12).

In fact, the best thing to happen to the SEC during conference realignment might have been the dissolution of the Big East. During the BCS era, Big East teams went 20-17 against SEC teams in the regular season and 8-5 in bowl games. For whatever reason, Big East schools seemed to have the SEC's number more than anyone else.

Sure, SEC teams hoisted the most crystal football trophies during the BCS era, but are you really that dominant when you can't beat the mediocre Big East on a regular basis?

And if the SEC is really that good, how did Missouri win the SEC East in its second season in the league? The Tigers were an above-average team in the Big 12, but few people expected them to contend in the SEC so quickly.

Four teams largely carried the SEC's flag during its recent dominance: Alabama, Auburn, LSU and Florida. Under coach Steve Spurrier, South Carolina has been better than it ever was, but the Gamecocks still haven't won an SEC championship. Florida and Tennessee have been sinking ships, and Georgia can't seem to get over the hump.

The SEC's best teams might be great every season, but its overall record against the other Power Five conferences suggests it might not be as dominant as we believed.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 2, 2014)

And those are the facts!


----------



## greene_dawg (Sep 2, 2014)

Like I said, if it makes your inferiority complex hurt just a little less, keep rubbing that Pac-12 lotion on it.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 2, 2014)

greene_dawg said:


> Like I said, if it makes your inferiority complex hurt just a little less, keep rubbing that Pac-12 lotion on it.



I guess you have no retort to actual facts and head to head meetings.


----------



## greene_dawg (Sep 2, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> I guess you have no retort to actual facts and head to head meetings.



Honestly, you're just not worth arguing with.  I'm not going to go round and round comparing a conference that won one BCS title and was busted for cheating to one that won 9 by 5 programs, including 7 straight. It's beyond silly.


----------



## Madsnooker (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> After 26 games, are you really trying to use that argument?  Would you like to know the record vs the spread?  True me, you probably don't!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm going to have to jump in here. JJ, this was your best post as it was not your thoughts but cut and paste. It did show some very good facts that sec fans simply can't argue? I also went back and looked and over half of those games were played by teams evenly matched as far as pecking order in conference.

With that said, it does show what I have always argued here, that conferences are much closer in strength than fans want to believe. The sec/big head to head bowl record since the BCS started proves just that. What the sec did with the NC streak was impressive although many of those games could have went the other way. Still impressive and I tip my hat to that accomplishment!!!

What Missou and A&M have done is bust the myth so many sec fans spewed forever about how other good teams would get killed in the "grind" of the sec week in and week out. Really, there is nothing special about the team Missou has had the last few years. I would say the teams they fielded 5 and 6 years ago were better. It was said that Johnny football was the only reason A&M did as good as they did. Well, what happened last week with a rebuilding team, against the team many said, would win the East? Now, what's the excuse this year? Bottom line is, 2 middle of the road BIG 12 teams came into the sec and have shown they are very capable of not only just surviving the "grind" of the sec but actually won a division, as well as, exposed defenses with a style of offense that made sec fans make fun of Big 12 defenses for years? It appears the joke is on the sec now, as some of the best defenses the sec had to offer, have fared no better than big 12 defenses, and in some cases, look even worse. Those are just simply facts no mater how you want to argue them away? And please stop with the, "well, they knew they would have to play harder and step it up in the sec so that's what they have done". That's the most asinine thing I've heard yet!!!!

Again, not saying the sec is not the best overall and I'm not defending JJ, as I think a lot of what he says contradicts other things he says. I will say he makes some good points, but then loses credibility with other, not so good points.

Again, just wanted to jump in because some of the stuff posted in this thread is just down right laughable, and it's not all Jockey by far.

Very entertaining thread though!!! Ya'll keep it up.


----------



## RipperIII (Sep 4, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> I'm going to have to jump in here. JJ, this was your best post as it was not your thoughts but cut and paste. It did show some very good facts that sec fans simply can't argue? I also went back and looked and over half of those games were played by teams evenly matched as far as pecking order in conference.
> 
> With that said, it does show what I have always argued here, that conferences are much closer in strength than fans want to believe. The sec/big head to head bowl record since the BCS started proves just that. What the sec did with the NC streak was impressive although many of those games could have went the other way. Still impressive and I tip my hat to that accomplishment!!!
> 
> ...



TAMU has a new coach since they joined the SEC...and he's pretty good, Mizzou was the beneficiary of a depleted East division....and got bombed by Auburn.

TAMU and MIZZOU have done nothing so far.

"since the BCS era"...The SEC definitely had a down spell after UT won the inaugural BCSNCG,...but the last 7 years have been dominant in both BCSNC's and bowl wins even head to heads. Pac -12 got the benefit of beating up on UT multiple times.
So why don't ya'll talk about recent history?


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> TAMU has a new coach since they joined the SEC...and he's pretty good, Mizzou was the beneficiary of a depleted East division....and got bombed by Auburn.
> 
> TAMU and MIZZOU have done nothing so far.
> 
> ...




What you forget is that in that time frame, UT still had a better record against the SEC then they did against The PAC-12.   And UT wasn't always getting beat by Oregon.  They got beat by UCLA when UCLA SUCKED!  They got beat by CAL, and CAL has never been anything other then average.  When they played Oregon, they got CRUSHED!  Here's an interesting point.  UT, AU, FL, BAMA, and LSU have all won NC's during the BCS.  During that same time frame, LSU is the only one of those teams with a winin. record against the PA-12, and I dont believe FL has played any PAC-12 team during the BCS.


----------



## RipperIII (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> What you forget is that in that time frame, UT still had a better record against the SEC then they did against The PAC-12.   And UT wasn't always getting beat by Oregon.  They got beat by UCLA when UCLA SUCKED!  They got beat by CAL, and CAL has never been anything other then average.  When they played Oregon, they got CRUSHED!  Here's an interesting point.  UT, AU, FL, BAMA, and LSU have all won NC's during the BCS.  During that same time frame, LSU is the only one of those teams with a winin. record against the PA-12, and I dont believe FL has played any PAC-12 team during the BCS.



In that era, UT still had a weak Vandy, UK, pathetic Ole miss and mediocre Miss St to pad the Sec record...as well as a BAMA team that had severly restricted schollys for 8 of the first 10 years of the BCS.
BAMA's record vs. the PAC-12 includes a loss to UCLA when BAMA was fresh off of probation,...but in fairness was supposed to be ready to play...so kudos to UCLA, and I don't recall playing anyother pac-12 team in that era


----------



## Madsnooker (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> TAMU has a new coach since they joined the SEC...and he's pretty good, Mizzou was the beneficiary of a depleted East division....and got bombed by Auburn.
> 
> TAMU and MIZZOU have done nothing so far.
> 
> ...



Those are good points and I generally agree. My post was from 10'000 feet if you will. In other words, yes, there are reasons why they have done what they have done but it still happened. No matter what anyone gives as an excuse, Missou won the east last year. You can't say teams that don't play in the sec have no idea of the "grind" it is, and then when they do join and do good, make excuses why, no matter how legit they are. Those same, ups and downs, happen in every conference.

To me, it just shows the grind is probably no harder in the top 5 conferences (maybe not the ACC?) to get thru a schedule. It doesn't mean a conference may have 2 or 3 better teams in a given year. The problem is they don't all play every year. My point is, over the last 2 years, has Bama's schedule been any tougher in the sec than it would have been in the Pac 12 playing all those spread teams. I say no? Has nothing to do with how good bama actually was.

I think USC was a perfect example of this. They had a heck of a coach, recruited better than anyone and they generally smoked any top 20 team they played, including every sec team willing to play them during the era I'm talking about. Yet, every year, because they played EVERY team in the pac 12, and playing all those spread, hurry you up teams, they would always lose a game they shouldn't. I think over a 5 or 6 year period they were, BY FAR, the best team in college football, but yet didn't play in the NC game very much because of that one lose to an inferior team.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> TAMU has a new coach since they joined the SEC...and he's pretty good



But they still had Big12 talent.  The knock on every other conference has always been that they don't have SEC strength and speed.  Musberger was still touting that during last year NCG, even though FSU had outrecruited Auburn for the last few years in the same geographic footprint.

The SEC is the best conference in the nation for a decade now, no one in their right mind can argue that.  But the myth that no other team could come into the SEC and compete has been shattered by aTm and Mizzou.  Do I think either of those teams will win their division this year?  No, but they will be middle of the pack teams, just like they were in the BIG12.


----------



## bruiserbuckgrower (Sep 4, 2014)

Sumlin is a qb guru, everywhere he has been the qbs have done very good, had it been the old staff aTm wouldn't have done near as well the past few years, mizzou surely benefitted from an ungodly amount of injuries to uf and uga, pinkel is a great coach also. They'll do well but time will tell they will be a mid range sec team losing several games a year.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Head to head games that occur on the field don't matter?  Your kidding right?  That's the most pathetic argument I've ever hear!



Here is your head to head recap that "were" played on the field... These are the only facts that matter... Wins vs losses.. 

111-76-10

To make it easier, that would be 35 more wins for the SEC..


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> And if the SEC is really that good, how did Missouri win the SEC East in its second season in the league? The Tigers were an above-average team in the Big 12, but few people expected them to contend in the SEC so quickly.
> 
> 
> The SEC's best teams might be great every season, but its overall record against the other Power Five conferences suggests it might not be as dominant as we believed.



1. Do you even listen or anything??? The ONLY reason Mizzou won the east is because all of the main East contenders had so many injuries. 

2. You realize how much sense this makes right? 

3.If the Pac 12 is so good why in the BCS era has the SEC  won 9 NC and Pac 12 1??


----------



## Madsnooker (Sep 4, 2014)

bruiserbuckgrower said:


> Sumlin is a qb guru, everywhere he has been the qbs have done very good, had it been the old staff aTm wouldn't have done near as well the past few years, mizzou surely benefitted from an ungodly amount of injuries to uf and uga, pinkel is a great coach also. They'll do well but time will tell they will be a mid range sec team losing several games a year.



With all due respect, these are lame arguments. The bottom line is, Big 12 talent came into the sec and did very well. Who cares why. If Bama still had the "old staff", they would suck just like they did before saban. There are always reasons.

The problem is, NOW sec fan is making "reasons" why little ole missou won the east.

The bottom line is, if expansion didn't happen in the sec, A&M & Missou would have the same exact coaches and players the last 2 years and nobody in the sec would be giving them any credit for anything. As a matter of fact, all we would hear is, the defenses in the Big 12 suck and no way, the little girly johnny football could have won the Heisman, he would have been killed by those big ole scary lineman week in and week out!!. And, there is no way that missou team, could have won the sec east no matter how down it was. EVERY single person posting in this thread knows THAT is a fact!!!!!!!!!!

I think what wears on fans of other conferences is, sec fans are always quick to hassle others for "excuses" as why this or that. Then, one of the MAJOR arguments sec fan has made for years, about the mighty sec schedule gauntlet, gets turned on its head, not by OSU or Oklahoma or USC or any other "big time" opponent, but by A&M and Missou, the excuses have been flying???? No one cares what the "excuses" are, at the end of the day, within 24 months of joining, missou wins the east (are you kidding me) and little johnny football wins the hesiman running around in a gimmick offense making the mighty sec defenses look foolish just as he would have done in the big 12. 

That's the crux of the argument among all college football fans.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

Buck Roar said:


> 1. Do you even listen or anything??? The ONLY reason Mizzou won the east is because all of the main East contenders had so many injuries.
> 
> 2. You realize how much sense this makes right?
> 
> 3.If the Pac 12 is so good why in the BCS era has the SEC  won 9 NC and Pac 12 1??



Now your making excuses on why Mizzu won the East?  Why weren't those Mizzu players getting hurt?  You guys always said that Big-12 teams couldn't handle the rigor of week in and week out play in the SEC!  Sounds to me like Mizzu handled it just fine while the SEC teams were getting hurt.  Maybe it's the SEC teams who cant handle the week in and week out speed and wide open offenses in the Big-12 or PAC-12. 

The reason the SEC has done so well is because the system is a joke, its skewed to favor the SEC, they have played pretty well in NC games, and lots of luck!  For one, The SEC rarely played the other "best" team in the Nation.  There was almost always an argument who should play in the NC game.  #2.  When you put two SEC teams in the NC game, one is sure to win.  3.  The SEC was the benefactor of some ridiculously good luck!  Colt McCoy going down, playing OU when UT should have been in the NC game, and - I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH -- I AM A POTTY MOUTH - poor referring against Oregon.  Would you like me to repost the videos showing the refs costing Oregon at least 7 points, while absolutely botching calls that would have cost AU big plays?  Now that there is at least some sort of playoff, the SEC's run is over.  Besides, should Auburn even have been in the NC game last year?  Michigan St had the same exact record only to get left out of the NC game.  They beat a VERY good Stanford team in the Rose bowl, yet AU played in the NC because of SEC bias.  Michigan St didn't even get to go head to head with AU, who I think they would have easily beat last year.  This year, that changes.  Those teams that were left out in the past due to SEC bias, will get there chance in the new system.


----------



## Catdaddy SC (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> The SEC rarely played the other "best" team in the Nation.



So the SEC didn't belong there and their opponent didn't belong either?

Is that what you are saying?


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

Catdaddy SC said:


> So the SEC didn't belong there and their opponent didn't belong either?
> 
> Is that what you are saying?



Last year FSU was the only undefeated team.  They had every tight to go to the NC game.  But why did Auburn go instead of Michigan St?  Both were 1 loss teams.  Michigan won their BCS bowl game against Stanford, and AU lost to FSU.  So, did Auburn really belong in the NC game?  Nobody knows for sure, but they played because of SEC bias!  That happens nearly every year!


----------



## spinefish (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Last year FSU was the only undefeated team.  They had every tight to go to the NC game.  But why did Auburn go instead of Michigan St?  Both were 1 loss teams.  Michigan won their BCS bowl game against Stanford, and AU lost to FSU.  So, did Auburn really belong in the NC game?  Nobody knows for sure, but they played because of SEC bias!  That happens nearly every year!



How about in 2010 when Oregon lost to Auburn? Any SEC bias?
How about in 2009 when Texas lost to Bama? SEC bias?
How about in 2008 when Oklahoma lost to Florida? Anyone?
Keep going?
2007? LSU over Ohio state? Bias?
2006? Florida over Ohio state? Bias must have beaten Ohio state those 2 years.


----------



## RipperIII (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Last year FSU was the only undefeated team.  They had every tight to go to the NC game.  But why did Auburn go instead of Michigan St?  Both were 1 loss teams.  Michigan won their BCS bowl game against Stanford, and AU lost to FSU.  So, did Auburn really belong in the NC game?  Nobody knows for sure, but they played because of SEC bias!  That happens nearly every year!



Auburn beat the #1 team in the nation last year, MSU did not.
you call that bias?


----------



## Madsnooker (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> Auburn beat the #1 team in the nation last year, MSU did not.
> you call that bias?



I agree with JJ's thought that we really didn't know, but I agree with you, with the current system in place at the time, I had no issue with Auburn going over MSU because they beat Bama as a number 1. It was not until after the rose bowl that I really realized how good MSU was.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> Auburn beat the #1 team in the nation last year, MSU did not.
> you call that bias?



Auburn also beat 6 ranked teams last year with 4 of them in the top 7 before playing the #1 team.. 

MSU beat 1 team in the top 10 and only played 3 (2 of which were barely in the top 25) ranked teams before the Rose Bowl...


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> I agree with JJ's thought that we really didn't know,.



That is all JJ has to go on... What IF.... WHAT IF..... If Oregon wasn't always choking he would have KNOWN!


----------



## Atchafalaya (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Last year FSU was the only undefeated team.  They had every tight to go to the NC game.  But why did Auburn go instead of Michigan St?  Both were 1 loss teams.  Michigan won their BCS bowl game against Stanford, and AU lost to FSU.  So, did Auburn really belong in the NC game?  Nobody knows for sure, but they played because of SEC bias!  That happens nearly every year!



Auburn only lost because of FSU's last minute drive to win the game. It wasn't like Auburn was blown-out by the Seminoles. Your logic is dumb.


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Atchafalaya said:


> Auburn only lost because of FSU's last minute drive to win the game. It wasn't like Auburn was blown-out by the Seminoles. Your logic is dumb.


This^^^


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> Auburn beat the #1 team in the nation last year, MSU did not.
> you call that bias?



No they didn't!  They beat Bama, who then went on to lose convincingly to OU!  Bama was the #1 ranked team in the media, but obviously not the #1 team on the field.  The two best teams on the field were MSU and FSU, but they never got to play because of the BCS Bias!


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

Atchafalaya said:


> Your logic is dumb.





People in EVERY forum on this board has been telling him that for YEARS!


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

Atchafalaya said:


> Auburn only lost because of FSU's last minute drive to win the game. It wasn't like Auburn was blown-out by the Seminoles. Your logic is dumb.



Couldn't the same thing be said for Oregon vs Auburn?  And that doesn't even count for the 7 points the refs TOOK from Oregon!


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> This year, that changes.  Those teams that were left out in the past due to SEC bias, will get there chance in the new system.


Ok. I will go ahead and apologize for IF a pac 12 team gets in the play off this year and then gets beat by the better teams like the ones in the SEC.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> The two best teams on the field were MSU and FSU, but they never got to play because of the BCS Bias!



Out of curiosity... What put MSU as the 2nd best team?? It wasn't strength of schedule.. Was it losing to Notre Dame??


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Couldn't the same thing be said for Oregon vs Auburn?  And that doesn't even count for the 7 points the refs TOOK from Oregon!



Yup... I'm convinced now... The ref's only make bad calls against Oregon...


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> People in EVERY forum on this board has been telling him that for YEARS!



I use actual results of games played on the field.  Not some pre conceived notion that just because a team is ranked #1 by computers and human beings, that it means they are #1 on the football field!


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> No they didn't!  They beat Bama, who then went on to lose convincingly to OU!  Bama was the #1 ranked team in the media, but obviously not the #1 team on the field.  The two best teams on the field were MSU and FSU, but they never got to play because of the BCS Bias!


They were the #1 ranked team by everybody. Auburn beat #1.  Bama was undefeated until the LAST game of the season.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> Yup... I'm convinced now... The ref's only make bad calls against Oregon...



You want me to post it AGAIN?  The evidence is pretty undisputable!


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> Yup... I'm convinced now... The ref's only make bad calls against Oregon...


Well of course. They aren't part of the biased SEC conference.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> You want me to post it AGAIN?  The evidence is pretty undisputable!



Like I said... Only Oregon gets BAD calls... It's never cost ANY other team a 1st down... Turnover.. Touchdown... Or a win.. 

You are right... EVERY one is out to get the PAC12...


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Atchafalaya said:


> Your logic is dumb.


What logic?? All I see is crazy rambling??


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> Like I said... Only Oregon gets BAD calls... It's never cost ANY other team a 1st down... Turnover.. Touchdown... Or a win..
> 
> You are right... EVERY one is out to get the PAC12...


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

Buck Roar said:


> What logic?? All I see is crazy rambling??



That's what makes JJ's posts so comical... I can see his face getting red and his blood pressure going up right now..


----------



## Atchafalaya (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Couldn't the same thing be said for Oregon vs Auburn?  And that doesn't even count for the 7 points the refs TOOK from Oregon!



Yes the same could be said for the Oregon vs Auburn championship game. But no one from the SEC is on here whining about how much our conference is being wronged in the national scheme of things. 

9 of 16 BCS Championships were won by 5 different SEC teams

1 of 16 won by Pac-10 USC and that championship was vacated due to cheating.

Bottom line is that your conference hasn't won anything meaningful lately and no amount of crying or dumb logic explanations will change that.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

Atchafalaya said:


> Yes the same could be said for the Oregon vs Auburn championship game. But no one from the SEC is on here whining about how much our conference is being wronged in the national scheme of things.
> 
> 9 of 16 BCS Championships were won by 5 different SEC teams
> 
> ...



Of course they dont complain.  The BCS works in their favor!  Why would you complain?  

Wanna make a bet that the SEC doesn't win 9 of the next 16 NC's? And that their streak of winning multiple NC's is over?  The BCS no longer favors the SEC the way it once did!  Top teams that get left out of the NC game, will now get their chance!  Teams like MSU last year, OR a few years before that, USC, Boise St, Texas, etc.  Those are all teams that had legitimate arguments to play in the NC game but got left out over the years. The SEC will now have to prove they can beat even the teams that the computers don't like.  Its not going to happen.  They will win a few, don't get me wrong, but so will the PAC-12, The Big-12, and gasp, even the Big-10.  The dominance is over.


----------



## Atchafalaya (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Of course they dont complain.  The BCS works in their favor!  Why would you complain?
> 
> Wanna make a bet that the SEC doesn't win 9 of the next 16 NC's? And that their streak of winning multiple NC's is over?  The BCS no longer favors the SEC the way it once did!  Top teams that get left out of the NC game, will now get their chance!  Teams like MSU last year, OR a few years before that, USC, Boise St, Texas, etc.  Those are all teams that had legitimate arguments to play in the NC game but got left out over the years. The SEC will now have to prove they can beat even the teams that the computers don't like.  Its not going to happen.  They will win a few, don't get me wrong, but so will the PAC-12, The Big-12, and gasp, even the Big-10.  The dominance is over.



Okay, I took the time to read your dribble. 

Here's your consolation prize. Now go away.


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 4, 2014)

It's not fair, it's not fair.  Distribute the titles amongst all conferences...Obama style!


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Of course they dont complain.  The BCS works in their favor!  Why would you complain?
> 
> Wanna make a bet that the SEC doesn't win 9 of the next 16 NC's? And that their streak of winning multiple NC's is over?  The BCS no longer favors the SEC the way it once did!  Top teams that get left out of the NC game, will now get their chance!  Teams like MSU last year, OR a few years before that, USC, Boise St, Texas, etc.  Those are all teams that had legitimate arguments to play in the NC game but got left out over the years. The SEC will now have to prove they can beat even the teams that the computers don't like.  Its not going to happen.  They will win a few, don't get me wrong, but so will the PAC-12, The Big-12, and gasp, even the Big-10.  The dominance is over.


The only conferences I can even think are going to win NC in the next couple years is SEC and ACC.


----------



## Throwback (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Last year FSU was the only undefeated team.  They had every tight to go to the NC game.  But why did Auburn go instead of Michigan St?  Both were 1 loss teams.  Michigan won their BCS bowl game against Stanford, and AU lost to FSU.  So, did Auburn really belong in the NC game?  Nobody knows for sure, but they played because of SEC bias!  That happens nearly every year!







T


----------



## RipperIII (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> You want me to post it AGAIN?  The evidence is pretty undisputable!




where'd you come up with this one?

indisputable,...just like your left leaning, pac-12 bias,wagon riding, fire bomb throwing rants....


----------



## RipperIII (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> No they didn't!  They beat Bama, who then went on to lose convincingly to OU!  Bama was the #1 ranked team in the media, but obviously not the #1 team on the field.  The two best teams on the field were MSU and FSU, but they never got to play because of the BCS Bias!



BAMA was #1 at the time, lost on a fluke to Auburn, and pitched it in to OU....
YOU STILL HAVE NOT ANSWERED MY PREVIOUS QUESTION>>>How do you define "blasted",..I see you've softened your position, from "blasted" to "convincingly"
yet you still refuse to admit the truth,...BAMA shot itself in the foot with 5 turnovers, 3 inside the OU red zone,...BAMA blew the game, and OU won the game.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Last year FSU was the only undefeated team.  They had every tight to go to the NC game.  But why did Auburn go instead of Michigan St?  Both were 1 loss teams.  Michigan won their BCS bowl game against Stanford, and AU lost to FSU.  So, did Auburn really belong in the NC game?  Nobody knows for sure, but they played because of SEC bias!  That happens nearly every year!



I explained your question in a different post but you must have missed it so I'll re-post it..

Auburn played 6 ranked teams last year with 4 of them in the top 7 before playing the #1 team.. Their 1 loss came to the #7 team in the country. 

MSU beat 1 team in the top 10 and only played 3 (2 of which were barely in the top 25) ranked teams before the Rose Bowl... MSU's 1 loss came to a team barely in the top 25.

Does strength of schedule mean anything to you??


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> indisputable,...just like your left leaning, pac-12 bias,wagon riding, fire bomb throwing rants....




Come on Rip.... He's not bias...


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> where'd you come up with this one?
> 
> indisputable,...just like your left leaning, pac-12 bias,wagon riding, fire bomb throwing rants....


----------



## Madsnooker (Sep 4, 2014)

Buck Roar said:


> The only conferences I can even think are going to win NC in the next couple years is SEC and ACC.



I'm sure your looking at it objectively based on recruiting and the ability of the head coach's involved?

OSU ranked number 2 in recruiting over the last 3 years and many of those players being "seasoned" by next year, with Braxton getting another year, and Meyer as the coach, yea, there is no way they would have a chance to win a title.


----------



## Madsnooker (Sep 4, 2014)

This thread reminds me of the poor, goofy, lonely wildebeest, willingly jumping into a croc filled river, thinking he's just going to swim to the other side unharmed???? 

As I read reply after reply, I scratch my head and wonder why JJ keeps jumping in the river, thinking he will finally get to the other side???


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> I'm sure your looking at it objectively based on recruiting and the ability of the head coach's involved?
> 
> OSU ranked number 2 in recruiting over the last 3 years and many of those players being "seasoned" by next year, with Braxton getting another year, and Meyer as the coach, yea, there is no way they would have a chance to win a title.



OSU did have a very rough time against Navy, and no I really don't think they can win a title even with Braxton.


----------



## Matthew6 (Sep 4, 2014)

Buck Roar said:


> OSU did have a very rough time against Navy, and no I really don't think they can win a title even with Braxton.



Have you visited vol land lately?


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Matthew6 said:


> Have you visited vol land lately?


haha no. Never got approved for another account.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

Buck Roar said:


> The only conferences I can even think are going to win NC in the next couple years is SEC and ACC.



Who does the ACC have besides FSU, who just struggled against Ok St?



RipperIII said:


> where'd you come up with this one?
> 
> indisputable,...just like your left leaning, pac-12 bias,wagon riding, fire bomb throwing rants....



Would you like to see the videos of the obvious botched calls?  The one where the Oregon D lit up Newton and forced a fumble, that would have led to an easy TD, but the refs magically called Newton down?



RipperIII said:


> BAMA was #1 at the time, lost on a fluke to Auburn, and pitched it in to OU....
> YOU STILL HAVE NOT ANSWERED MY PREVIOUS QUESTION>>>How do you define "blasted",..I see you've softened your position, from "blasted" to "convincingly"
> yet you still refuse to admit the truth,...BAMA shot itself in the foot with 5 turnovers, 3 inside the OU red zone,...BAMA blew the game, and OU won the game.



Why is it when Bama loses a BCS game you guys always use the excuse that they did. Try because it wasn't the NC game?  Why didn't USC use that excuse when they deserved a shot at the NC but got left out?  Oh ya, because they WON their BCS games.



Browning Slayer said:


> I explained your question in a different post but you must have missed it so I'll re-post it..
> 
> Auburn played 6 ranked teams last year with 4 of them in the top 7 before playing the #1 team.. Their 1 loss came to the #7 team in the country.
> 
> ...



Not really!  SOS is nothing more than a popularity contest as well.  Bama was ranked #1, but they were know where near the #1 team in the country.  Their game against OU proved it!


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Who does the ACC have besides FSU, who just struggled against Ok St?
> 
> 
> I think Clemson is going to be good in a couple years.
> ...


Them and FSu were the only undefeated teams left that far in the season. If they wouldn't have been #1 they would have been #2. Where do you get any of this logic.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> BAMA was #1 at the time, lost on a fluke to Auburn, and pitched it in to OU....
> YOU STILL HAVE NOT ANSWERED MY PREVIOUS QUESTION>>>How do you define "blasted",..I see you've softened your position, from "blasted" to "convincingly"
> yet you still refuse to admit the truth,...BAMA shot itself in the foot with 5 turnovers, 3 inside the OU red zone,...BAMA blew the game, and OU won the game.



A game that was over in the second quarter.  Every time the Tide got within 7 OU scored and easily kept their 14 point lead.  Their was never a momentum swing, a close call, or even a serious chance of the Tide beating OU in the second half!


----------



## bruiserbuckgrower (Sep 4, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> With all due respect, these are lame arguments. The bottom line is, Big 12 talent came into the sec and did very well. Who cares why. If Bama still had the "old staff", they would suck just like they did before saban. There are always reasons.
> 
> The problem is, NOW sec fan is making "reasons" why little ole missou won the east.
> 
> ...



Several things wrong with this, first I'd love for you to dig thru and show where I have ever said sec fan, I'm a dawg thru and thru, second my "argument" is further validated with some of what you said sumlin and co thrashed oklahoma in a bowl where in previous years would have lost it big, second the gauntlet in the sec east wasn't that bad last year due to the injuries to uf and uga, and don't say well mizzou was injured in 2012 because they were but not week 2 when they played uga. Now most every sec team fan I know will say there a teams scattered across the country that could compete in the sec, fsu, Ohio st, oregon, Stanford, mich st, to name a few. But time will tell they aTm mizz will probably be a 2 or 3 loss sec team


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 4, 2014)

If they are 2-3 loss SEC teams, that will be a step up from their records in the Big-12!


----------



## RipperIII (Sep 4, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> A game that was over in the second quarter.  Every time the Tide got within 7 OU scored and easily kept their 14 point lead.  Their was never a momentum swing, a close call, or even a serious chance of the Tide beating OU in the second half!



3 turnovers inside the redzone is not a "close call"?


----------



## Throwback (Sep 4, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> 3 turnovers inside the redzone is not a "close call"?



it is in PAC 12 football

T


----------



## atlashunter (Sep 5, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> I'm going to have to jump in here. JJ, this was your best post as it was not your thoughts but cut and paste. It did show some very good facts that sec fans simply can't argue? I also went back and looked and over half of those games were played by teams evenly matched as far as pecking order in conference.
> 
> With that said, it does show what I have always argued here, that conferences are much closer in strength than fans want to believe. The sec/big head to head bowl record since the BCS started proves just that. What the sec did with the NC streak was impressive although many of those games could have went the other way. Still impressive and I tip my hat to that accomplishment!!!
> 
> ...



Unless those programs were the same after going into the SEC as they were before we really can't claim that 2 middle of the road Big 12 teams competed with the SEC. I know in the case of A&M from the first year in the SEC it was a different team. Without Manziel and Sumlin and Kingsbury they wouldn't have had the success they did. With Manziel and Sumlin and Kingsbury they wouldn't have been a middle of the pack team in the Big 12. I think those who suggest that their success reflects poorly on the SEC aren't seeing the full picture.


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 5, 2014)

Wow, Arizona squeaked out a win over UTsa...


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Not really!  SOS is nothing more than a popularity contest as well.  Bama was ranked #1, but they were know where near the #1 team in the country.  Their game against OU proved it!



So, how would you judge it or rank a team?? A lot of these rankings come out of recruiting classes, the talent that goes to the NFL.. I guess the NFL is Bias to the SEC and has it out for anyone that plays in the PAC12 and will only pick those players in later rounds.. I guess Rivals and the ranking of recruiting classes are bias to the SEC also.. Dude, do you actually read the crap you type?? 

With your logic, BYU and Boise should play for the National Title every year.. 

And you say "WE" SEC fans are bias.. The Networks are bias.. ESPN is Bias... EVERYONE is bias towards the SEC cause we are??? Do you really think everyone is out to get the PAC12.. I think you have trumped everyone of us with your left leaning, PAC12 blinders.... You should seek help for that..


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> Wow, Arizona squeaked out a win over UTsa...




UTsa is a powerhouse Rex.. Arizona should be proud with that Win.. Arizona would dominate UGA if they played tomorrow... Just ask JJ... He'll tell you!


----------



## BrotherBadger (Sep 5, 2014)

Is this thread gonna be revived every fall? It's starting to become quite the tradition.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> This thread reminds me of the poor, goofy, lonely wildebeest, willingly jumping into a croc filled river, thinking he's just going to swim to the other side unharmed????
> 
> As I read reply after reply, I scratch my head and wonder why JJ keeps jumping in the river, thinking he will finally get to the other side???



Actually Snook... It's more like a game of Frogger.. Except JJ found a secret game code that gives him unlimited lives so he keeps jumping in front of the cars..


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

BrotherBadger said:


> It's starting to become quite the tradition.



Just like the "EVERY" year tradition of JJ coming in here at the beginning of the season and pounding his chest about the PAC12.. Until Oregon has a loss, it will continue..


----------



## Rebel Yell (Sep 5, 2014)

bruiserbuckgrower said:


> the gauntlet in the sec east wasn't that bad last year due to the injuries



Can we qualify UGA's Est title this year?  The East is weaker this season, healthy than it was last year.

The East is very comparable to the ACC Atlantic.  Actually, the Atlantic is probably a little better.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> Actually, the Atlantic is probably a little better.



Tell that to Clemson...


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 5, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> So, how would you judge it or rank a team?? A lot of these rankings come out of recruiting classes, the talent that goes to the NFL.. I guess the NFL is Bias to the SEC and has it out for anyone that plays in the PAC12 and will only pick those players in later rounds.. I guess Rivals and the ranking of recruiting classes are bias to the SEC also.. Dude, do you actually read the crap you type??
> 
> With your logic, BYU and Boise should play for the National Title every year..
> 
> And you say "WE" SEC fans are bias.. The Networks are bias.. ESPN is Bias... EVERYONE is bias towards the SEC cause we are??? Do you really think everyone is out to get the PAC12.. I think you have trumped everyone of us with your left leaning, PAC12 blinders.... You should seek help for that..



Are we talking about the same BSU team that walked into UGA's back yard and thumped them with far less talented recruits?  How did UGA's top ranked recruiting class fair against BSU's bottom level recruits?  Do you guys remember when you bashed BSU because of their schedule?  You bashed them right up until the point where BSU bashed the mighty UGA on the field.

But again, I don't care about human polls, recruiting polls, or any other factor decided by HUMAN beliefs!  I care about what happens on the field.  ACTUAL win loss records!  Actual facts, like the top SEC last year barely escaping bottom of the PAC-12 barrel WSU at home!  Why is it that the SEC's head to head record against the PAC-12 is .500 during the regular season?  If they are the best conference, why doesn't their record show it?  Why are two middle of the pack Big-12 teams having so much success in the SEC?  Why did the SEC go 0-2 in BCS bowl games last year?



Browning Slayer said:


> UTsa is a powerhouse Rex.. Arizona should be proud with that Win.. Arizona would dominate UGA if they played tomorrow... Just ask JJ... He'll tell you!



Arizona has never dominated anyone!  They have never even won the PAC-10 or 12 championship.  When UGA Ayer ASU recently however, they struggled against them, and were a missed ASU field goal away from losing.


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 5, 2014)

JJ, did you watch the Arizona vs UTsa game last night?  Thoughts?


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 5, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> JJ, did you watch the Arizona vs UTsa game last night?  Thoughts?



Nope.  But it's Arizona!


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Nope.  But it's Arizona!



Didn't they beat Oregon last year?


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 5, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> Didn't they beat Oregon last year?


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Nope.  But it's Arizona!





rex upshaw said:


> Didn't they beat Oregon last year?



But... But... But....

he only cares about what happens on the field... 

You know Rex, results....


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> JJ, did you watch the Arizona vs UTsa game last night?  Thoughts?



I don't think he watches any games... Just looks at the scoreboard on Sunday...


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 5, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> I don't think he watches any games... Just looks at the scoreboard on Sunday...



Sounds about right.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 5, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> Didn't they beat Oregon last year?



Yep!  Welcome to the grind of a 9 game conference schedule!  All the Oregon games got a lot close after Marriota got hurt.   Didn't Oregon destroy Tenn last year?  Isn't Tenn from the SEC?



Browning Slayer said:


> But... But... But....
> 
> he only cares about what happens on the field...
> 
> You know Rex, results....



Exactly!  Oregon destroyed Tennesse last year, and Auburn squeaked by WSU!  Those are exactly the results I'm talking about. Besides, didn't Bama lose to a DII school a couple years ago?


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Yep!  Welcome to the grind of a 9 game conference schedule!  All the Oregon games got a lot close after Marriota got hurt.   Didn't Oregon destroy Tenn last year?  Isn't Tenn from the SEC?
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly!  Oregon destroyed Tennesse last year, and Auburn squeaked by WSU!  Those are exactly the results I'm talking about. Besides, didn't Bama lose to a DII school a couple years ago?



Now your blaming an injury. Did you team self destruct after they lost there best player and got beat by......ARIZONA.


----------



## Matthew6 (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Yep!  Welcome to the grind of a 9 game conference schedule!  All the Oregon games got a lot close after Marriota got hurt.   Didn't Oregon destroy Tenn last year?  Isn't Tenn from the SEC?
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly!  Oregon destroyed Tennesse last year, and Auburn squeaked by WSU!  Those are exactly the results I'm talking about. Besides, didn't Bama lose to a DII school a couple years ago?


No bama losses to d2 school in the last couple of years, idjit.  nice lie though.


----------



## rhbama3 (Sep 5, 2014)

No matter what the topic of a thread starts out as, it always ends up like this.


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 5, 2014)

Matthew6 said:


> No bama losses to d2 school in the last couple of years, idjit.  nice lie though.



: He gone.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

rhbama3 said:


> No matter what the topic of a thread starts out as, it always ends up like this.


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 5, 2014)

rhbama3 said:


> No matter what the topic of a thread starts out as, it always ends up like this.



hahahahaha


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Didn't Oregon destroy Tenn last year?  Isn't Tenn from the SEC?
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly!  Oregon destroyed Tennesse last year,?



You must not watch football at all....

Do you realize Tennessee went 5-7 the last three seasons and finished last in the SEC... If that is the ONLY thing you can grab on to then you should really be quiet.. You are really making yourself look SILLY!!

And the Auburn WIN... Well, chalk it up as a win.. As WE all know, anything can happen on ANY given Sunday. The top teams are the ones that find a way to win!


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

Matthew6 said:


> No bama losses to d2 school in the last couple of years, idjit.  nice lie though.



JJ, is always full of himself... 

Nice signature!!


----------



## Throwback (Sep 5, 2014)

Good grief! He's worse here than in the political forum



T


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 5, 2014)

Throwback said:


> Good grief! He's worse here than in the political forum
> 
> 
> 
> T




Please take him back!!!


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 5, 2014)

browning slayer said:


> please take him back!!!



please.....


----------



## Unicoidawg (Sep 5, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> Nice signature!!


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 5, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> You must not watch football at all....
> 
> Do you realize Tennessee went 5-7 the last three seasons and finished last in the SEC... If that is the ONLY thing you can grab on to then you should really be quiet.. You are really making yourself look SILLY!!
> 
> And the Auburn WIN... Well, chalk it up as a win.. As WE all know, anything can happen on ANY given Sunday. The top teams are the ones that find a way to win!



A WIN?  It was against WSU AT HOME!!!!!   And they beat them by a TD!  WSU SUCKS!  Yet Auburn, the #1 SEC team, beat them by only 1 TD!  WSU is a horrible PAC-12 team, why didn't Auburn CRUSH them the way Oregon Crushed Tenn?


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> A WIN?  It was against WSU AT HOME!!!!!   And they beat them by a TD!  WSU SUCKS!  Yet Auburn, the #1 SEC team, beat them by only 1 TD!  WSU is a horrible PAC-12 team, why didn't Auburn CRUSH them the way Oregon Crushed Tenn?


Not good with PAc 12 teams because I only watch the good conferences but who is WSU??


----------



## Throwback (Sep 5, 2014)

Buck Roar said:


> Not good with PAc 12 teams because I only watch the good conferences but who is WSU??



Wuss state university


T


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> A WIN?  It was against WSU AT HOME!!!!!   And they beat them by a TD!  WSU SUCKS!  Yet Auburn, the #1 SEC team, beat them by only 1 TD!  WSU is a horrible PAC-12 team, why didn't Auburn CRUSH them the way Oregon Crushed Tenn?



We agree that Arizona sucks.  So how did Arizona lose by 7 to WSU (who you also said "sucks") and the next week beat Oregon by 26?


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 5, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> We agree that Arizona sucks.  So how did Arizona lose by 7 to WSU (who you also said "sucks") and the next week beat Oregon by 26?



PAC-12 football and a 9 game conference schedule!


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> PAC-12 football and a 9 game conference schedule!


Is this your answer for everything?? First you beat the SEC up by saying they couldn't stand there schedule but then you use that saying the PAC 12 is the best then there best teams get there butts whooped by there worst team.  Go troll on some other forum.


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 5, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> PAC-12 football and a 9 game conference schedule!


----------



## skeeter24 (Sep 6, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> A WIN?  It was against WSU AT HOME!!!!!   And they beat them by a TD!  WSU SUCKS!  Yet Auburn, the #1 SEC team, beat them by only 1 TD!  WSU is a horrible PAC-12 team, why didn't Auburn CRUSH them the way Oregon Crushed Tenn?



Seriously?  You are using that one game to justify the Pac 12 strength.  AU had a new qb that had only been on campus a few weeks and a totally new coaching staff.  AU's defense was one of the worst in the SEC even at the end of the season.  No surprise that a pass attack like WSU would put points on the board....AU's offense starting clickng latter on in the season.  bottom line is a win is a win right?  You said it was all about wins.


----------



## Atchafalaya (Sep 6, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Why would A&M be any different in the SEC then they would the Big-12?  For the most part, A&M hasnt even had winning records in the Big-12 the last couple years, and Missouri has had their way with them.  It's not like they were a football powerhouse in their old conference.  I actually think they will do exactly the same in the SEC as they did the Big-12.  And that won't win them any recruits away from UT.
> 
> Missouri has consistently been a much better team then A&M in the Big-12 and I would expect that to stay the same in the SEC.  They will be a middle tier SEC team that typically wins a little more then half their conference games, just like they did in the Big-12.



I went back and read the whole thread from the beginning and found this little jewel from 2 years ago.
First off your prediction about A&M is dead wrong. They went 11-2 and 9-4 the last 2 seasons. And those losses came from Florida & LSU in their first season and Bama, Auburn, LSU & Mizzou in the second season. Along the way the destroyed #15 ranked Oklahoma of the Big-12 in a bowl game.

Second, their recruiting rankings rose from #17 in 2010 and #27 in 2011 to #15 in 2012, #11 in 2013, #6 in 2014, #5 currently for 2015. They are killing Texas in the recruiting battle based on the lure of kids wanting to play in the SEC.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 6, 2014)

Your right!  I was wrong.   They've done better in the SEC than I predicted.  So what's that say about the SEC?  They even lost to Mizzu, who I said was a better team.  So, as far as that goes, the only thing I was wrong about was them doing better in the SEC than the Big-12.  That isn't helping your argument!


----------



## Throwback (Sep 6, 2014)

What is the overall win/loss record of sec vs PAC 12 schools?


What is the win/loss record of Oregon ducks vs sec teams?
T


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 6, 2014)

Throwback said:


> What is the overall win/loss record of sec vs PAC 12 schools?
> 
> 
> What is the win/loss record of Oregon ducks vs sec teams?
> T



Who cares?  This argument isn't about all time , it's about the BCS era.  The era where the SEC claims dominance.  And why to you keep bringing up Oregon?  They didn't even win the PAC-12 last year.


----------



## Atchafalaya (Sep 6, 2014)

Throwback said:


> What is the overall win/loss record of sec vs PAC 12 schools?
> 
> 
> What is the win/loss record of Oregon ducks vs sec teams?
> T



The SEC has an all-time record of 111-76-10 and a winning percentage of .589 in head-to-head matchups against Pac-12 teams.

Oregon is 5-6 vs SEC Teams with 4 of those wins against a Tennessee team in crisis and the bottom dweller of the SEC West - Miss. State. Real impressive.  

 Individual Game Results of Oregon (vs SEC)
Date 	  	Opponent (record) 	Result 	Score 	Site
9/14/2013	vs.	Tennessee (5-7)	W	59	14
9/3/2011	vs.	Louisiana State (13-1)	L	27	40	@ Arlington, TX
9/11/2010	@	Tennessee (6-7)	W	48	13
1/10/2011	vs.	Auburn (14-0)	L	19	22	@ Glendale, AZ	BCS Championship
8/30/2003	@	Mississippi State (2-10)	W	42	34
8/31/2002	vs.	Mississippi State (3-9)	W	36	13
9/10/1977	@	Georgia (5-6)	L	16	27
10/22/1977	@	Louisiana State (8-4)	L	17	56
12/15/1934	@	Louisiana State (7-2-2)	L	13	14
12/17/1932	@	Louisiana State (6-3-1)	W	12	0
12/7/1929	vs.	Florida (8-2)	L	6	20	@ Miami, FL


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 6, 2014)

Atchafalaya said:


> The SEC has an all-time record of 111-76-10 and a winning percentage of .589 in head-to-head matchups against Pac-12 teams.
> 
> Oregon is 5-6 vs SEC Teams with 4 of those wins against a Tennessee team in crisis and the bottom dweller of the SEC West - Miss. State. Real impressive.
> 
> ...



What's the all time bowl record?


----------



## Atchafalaya (Sep 6, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> What's the all time bowl record?



Who cares? The numbers speak for themselves.


----------



## flowingwell (Sep 6, 2014)

Jockey,

Here is where I think this argument goes off the rails for all sides.  You and others keep taking one game examples or a head to head match up as defining the strength or weakness of a conference.  I personally agree that all SEC teams are not stronger than all PAC 12, ACC, Big 10, or Big 12 teams.  In fact, in my opinion historically Kentucky and Vandy would finish in the bottom of most of the other conferences  and teams such as Oregon, Stanford, and USC would compete well and and be in the mix for SEC division titles as would Florida St., Miami, Clemson, Oklahoma, Texas, Ohio St, and so on. You will hear no argument from me that all SEC teams are better than all others, that is simply wrong.  What defines the strength of the conferences in my opinion is pretty simple.  As a whole, who are the championship caliber teams and what type of success have they had.  This is what has really seperated the SEC over the BCS era and has been really hard to argue with.  People love to say that the SEC is "top heavy" or only a few teams are good.  Here is the way I see it as a realsistic look, just the BCS era.

Lets look at realistic teams that have been either champions, in the game, or in the mix:

1. ACC: 1. FSU (champs 2x) Miami (Champs and lost 1), VTECH (lost title), Clemson has been good as of late

2. Big 10 OH St (Champs and lost) Neb (lost title), Mich and recently mich st have been good

3. PAC 12 USC (Champs, I'll give them 1.5) Oregon (lost Title) Stanford lately has been close

4. Big 12 OU (Champs and lost 2 others) Tex (Champs and lost another) 

5. SEC: Tenn (Champs) LSU (Champs 2x and one loss) UF (Champs 2X) Auburn (Champs, left out once when undefeated, and one loss) Bama (Champs 3x) and I would say UGA and South Carolina have been close.

That is what makes the SEC fans so proud, granted Tennessee is not the same team as they were in 1998 but either is Stanford or Oregon. Stanford was a joke until Harbaugh showed up a few years ago.  USC was awesome during the Pete Carroll years and now have fallen back.  Over the BCS era the SEC had 5 different teams named champions and 2 others that were fairly close.  That is 7 teams in one conference that at one point were really good.  Nobody else comes close to that level of success.  It doesn't matter if Oregon beats UT by 70, that one game means as much as Georgia Tech beating USC in a bowl game or App ST beating michigan, very little in the big picture. If the SEC is "top heavy", it has more top teams than the others that really look "top heavy" when you look at the end results.  I know you will throw some bowl records or head to head regular season stats at us and that is great, but just realize that the SEC had a great run in the BCS era against the best from the other conferences and now we start the playoff era.  Maybe OU and Oregon will go on a run and win a bunch, who knows, but this was how the BCS era played out.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 6, 2014)

Atchafalaya said:


> Who cares? The numbers speak for themselves.



Your right, they do!  In the BCS era the SEC is 13-12 vs the PAC-12.    1-1 last year.  Are those the numbers you speak of?


----------



## Matthew6 (Sep 6, 2014)

The PAC 12 had no National titles in the BCS as the 2004 USC one is vacated due to cheating. The sec has 9 total of the 16. 9 is greater than 0 idjit, now slink back to your rock in the political forum. Elfii and clan miss you.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 6, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Your right, they do!  In the BCS era the SEC is 13-12 vs the PAC-12.    1-1 last year.  Are those the numbers you speak of?



You have got to lead a very lonely and boring life... All you do is troll around the different forums and start arguements with stupid logic... I kind of feel sorry for you..


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 6, 2014)

Matthew6 said:


> The PAC 12 had no National titles in the BCS as the 2004 USC one is vacated due to cheating. The sec has 9 total of the 16. 9 is greater than 0 idjit, now slink back to your rock in the political forum. Elfii and clan miss you.




That's why he is so hurt and blames everybody but the Pac 12.. Like a true Obama supporter.. Mislead and uninformed!!


----------



## Atchafalaya (Sep 6, 2014)

That Allstate Mayhem guy cracks me up.


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 6, 2014)

Eastern Washington puts up 52 against Washington.  JJ, did you watch that one?


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 6, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> Eastern Washington puts up 52 against Washington.  JJ, did you watch that one?




You don't here him mention how Stanford lost to Utah in their 6th game last year... Pac12 Schedule is brutal.. Utah also finished 5-7 and their ONLY PAC12 win was Colorado who finished 4-8....



> Welcome to the grind of a 9 game conference schedule!





> PAC-12 football and a 9 game conference schedule!



Ol JJ's logic isn't making any sense... These are on field results that he keeps talking about..


So JJ... If the PAC12 is sooooooo strong, how is it Stanford makes it to the Rose Bowl last year after losing to an unranked team???


----------



## Throwback (Sep 6, 2014)

Good grief

T


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 6, 2014)

Throwback said:


> Good grief
> 
> T



You can always take him back to the Political Forum... We won't mind!


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Who does the ACC have besides FSU, who just struggled against Ok St?




Looks like Virginia Tech just beat Ohio State... Unranked team vs #8.... 

Do you ever watch football?? 

I'm cutting you up like a block of cheese.. Not hard to do when you make yourself look like a block of swiss... Full of holes!


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 7, 2014)

Browning Slayer said:


> Looks like Virginia Tech just beat Ohio State... Unranked team vs #8....
> 
> Do you ever watch football??
> 
> I'm cutting you up like a block of cheese.. Not hard to do when you make yourself look like a block of swiss... Full of holes!



So?  It's still VT.  It's pretty obvious OSU isn't a top 10 team, or maybe even a top 15 team.  VT is hardly a powerhouse!  Who, besides FSU, does the ACC have that is a legitimate top 10 team?


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> So?  It's still VT.  It's pretty obvious OSU isn't a top 10 team, or maybe even a top 15 team.  VT is hardly a powerhouse!  Who, besides FSU, does the ACC have that is a legitimate top 10 team?



After beating Memphis by only 7 (and allowing 35 points), do you think UCLA is a top 15 team?


----------



## Throwback (Sep 7, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> After beating Memphis by only 7 (and allowing 35 points), do you think UCLA is a top 15 team?



I can't wait to hear this


T


----------



## flowingwell (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> So?  It's still VT.  It's pretty obvious OSU isn't a top 10 team, or maybe even a top 15 team.  VT is hardly a powerhouse!  Who, besides FSU, does the ACC have that is a legitimate top 10 team?



Who besides Oregon does the PAC 12 have that is a legit top 10 team?  Stanford and USC looked like 2 blind mules fighting over a turnip, UCLA has been garbage, Washington is awful...


----------



## Throwback (Sep 7, 2014)

flowingwell said:


> Who besides Oregon does the PAC 12 have that is a legit top 10 team?  Stanford and USC looked like 2 blind mules fighting over a turnip, UCLA has been garbage, Washington is awful...



That's cause they're victims of bias


T


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 7, 2014)

flowingwell said:


> Who besides Oregon does the PAC 12 have that is a legit top 10 team?  Stanford and USC looked like 2 blind mules fighting over a turnip, UCLA has been garbage, Washington is awful...



I think Stanford and USC are both legit top 10 teams.  Nobody ever gives Stanford any credit, yet they always seem to end up in the top 10 at the end of the year.  USC has come a long way under Sark, and they will only be better.   Justin Wilcox is one of the best defensive coordinators in the country!  Stanford beat themselves more than USC beat Stanford.  But again, that's what happens with a 9 game conference schedule.  In the SEC, the likeliness of those two teams even playing would be slim.  Yet Stanford has a loss to a North division team.  I'm sure they would have rather scheduled a cakewalk FCS team to pad their schedule. But when you play all but two teams in the conference every year, there is more losses to spread out.   

UCLA and UW, we will have to watch and see.  They may be junk, or the may be unmotivated.  UW didn't have their starting QB during the first game, and Eastern always seems to give them a tough time through the air.  But again, it's a completely new coaching staff and a completely new system, so it will take time to adjust .  But hey, they just might not be very good this year as well.  Right now on ESPN they have the final 4 teams being Oregon, UGA, A&M, and USC.  I'd LOVE to see that!  I'd especially love to see Oregon go against A&M.  The way Oregons D has been playing, I don't think there's any way they could keep up with Oregon.


----------



## RipperIII (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> I think Stanford and USC are both legit top 10 teams.  Nobody ever gives Stanford any credit, yet they always seem to end up in the top 10 at the end of the year.  USC has come a long way under Sark, and they will only be better.   Justin Wilcox is one of the best defensive coordinators in the country!  Stanford beat themselves more than USC beat Stanford.  But again, that's what happens with a 9 game conference schedule.  In the SEC, the likeliness of those two teams even playing would be slim.  Yet Stanford has a loss to a North division team.  I'm sure they would have rather scheduled a cakewalk FCS team to pad their schedule. But when you play all but two teams in the conference every year, there is more losses to spread out.
> 
> UCLA and UW, we will have to watch and see.  They may be junk, or the may be unmotivated.  UW didn't have their starting QB during the first game, and Eastern always seems to give them a tough time through the air.  But again, it's a completely new coaching staff and a completely new system, so it will take time to adjust .  But hey, they just might not be very good this year as well.  Right now on ESPN they have the final 4 teams being Oregon, UGA, A&M, and USC.  I'd LOVE to see that!  I'd especially love to see Oregon go against A&M.  The way Oregons D has been playing, I don't think there's any way they could keep up with Oregon.



I agree...Stanford beat themselves, or could it be that they jsut don't have the horses to score inside the red zone?


----------



## Matthew6 (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> I am an Idjit. Someone please take me back to the political forum .


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 7, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> I agree...Stanford beat themselves, or could it be that they jsut don't have the horses to score inside the red zone?



Or it could be that USC's D has drastically improved under Justin Wilcox.  Stanford has the horses every year.  A stupid chop block penalty cost Stanford the game.  Credit USC for hanging in there till the end though.   If USC turns out to be a great team, and Oregon continues on their current path, we could possibly see Oregon vs USC in the PAC-12 CH game as two undefeated teams.  The loser to have no chance at the NC game.  That's putting the cart before the horse though.  With a 9 game conference schedule, undefeated PAC-12 seasons are rare.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 7, 2014)

Matthew6 said:


>



Aren't you a UGA fan?  How's their OOC record the last 5 or so years?

How's Nebraska? Boise St?  Oh ya, and my favorite, Colorado?  COLORADO?   Come on, how do you lose to COLORADO?


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Aren't you a UGA fan?  How's their OOC record the last 5 or so years?
> 
> How's Nebraska? Boise St?  Oh ya, and my favorite, Colorado?  COLORADO?   Come on, how do you lose to COLORADO?



How do you lose to Arizona?  Arizona!


----------



## SpotandStalk (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Aren't you a UGA fan?  How's their OOC record the last 5 or so years?
> 
> How's Nebraska? Boise St?  Oh ya, and my favorite, Colorado?  COLORADO?   Come on, how do you lose to COLORADO?



Don't forget UCF.

Oregon looks like the real deal after putting it on Michigan St last night. Then you have USC and Stanford (top 15 at best). Not a whole lot to the rest of the conference. Washington flat out SUCKS.


----------



## flowingwell (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Aren't you a UGA fan?  How's their OOC record the last 5 or so years?
> 
> How's Nebraska? Boise St?  Oh ya, and my favorite, Colorado?  COLORADO?   Come on, how do you lose to COLORADO?



There is the same old junk, a select game here or there to prove a point. I think Oregon played Boise twice a few years back, Oregon must have been preparing too hard for that PAC 12 grind both years since they got whipped both times.  See how the single games argument is just silly?


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 7, 2014)

flowingwell said:


> There is the same old junk, a select game here or there to prove a point. I think Oregon played Boise twice a few years back, Oregon must have been preparing too hard for that PAC 12 grind both years since they got whipped both times.  See how the single games argument is just silly?



I didn't use single games.  I used multiple games.  What was UGA's OOC last year against BCS teams?  Not "single" games..  All games.  Didn't they go 1-2 against Non SEC BCS teams?  If I remember, the one win took two over times as well.  Hasn't UGA lost there last two bowl games?


----------



## flowingwell (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> I didn't use single games.  I used multiple games.  What was UGA's OOC last year against BCS teams?  Not "single" games..  All games.  Didn't they go 1-2 against Non SEC BCS teams?  If I remember, the one win took two over times as well.  Hasn't UGA lost there last two bowl games?



No, they are 1-1 in last 2,bowls?  Why is this now a Uga argument?  Uga is one of the teams that you say sucks and have not played for or won a title.  How about bama, LSU, auburn?  How have they faired?  By the way, saying a team "barely won" or "almost lost to" is really idiotic.  Using Uga as your example is like an sec fan basing the strength of the PAC 12 on Washington (who also lost to Nebraska by the way) or Arizona.


----------



## Matthew6 (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Aren't you a UGA fan?  How's their OOC record the last 5 or so years?
> 
> How's Nebraska? Boise St?  Oh ya, and my favorite, Colorado?  COLORADO?   Come on, how do you lose to COLORADO?



Bama fan idjit.


----------



## Throwback (Sep 7, 2014)

Oregon's  bowl record is 12w 15 l

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Oregon_Ducks_bowl_games


T


----------



## Throwback (Sep 7, 2014)

Matthew6 said:


> Bama fan idjit.



In 2000 Alabama lost to UCF 

How can you say Alabama is a good team?


Lol


T


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 7, 2014)

Throwback said:


> Oregon's  bowl record is 12w 15 l
> 
> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Oregon_Ducks_bowl_games
> 
> ...



Ouch


----------



## Matthew6 (Sep 7, 2014)

Throwback said:


> In 2000 Alabama lost to UCF
> 
> How can you say Alabama is a good team?
> 
> ...


please take JJ back to where he belongs.


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 7, 2014)

Matthew6 said:


> please take JJ back to where he belongs.



He belongs on the left coast with all the other tree huggin' libs.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Sep 7, 2014)

Matthew6 said:


> please take JJ back to where he belongs.





rex upshaw said:


> He belongs on the left coast with all the other tree huggin' libs.



Not quite sure how a left lib made his way to an outdoor forum. He has to be one thing... TROLL!!


----------



## SpotandStalk (Sep 7, 2014)

flowingwell said:


> By the way, saying a team "barely won" or "almost lost to" is really idiotic.



If you only knew how many SEC fans I've heard say this since last years national championship.


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Hasn't UGA lost there last two bowl games?



Hasn't Oregon lost 6 of their last 11 bowl games?


----------



## flowingwell (Sep 7, 2014)

SpotandStalk said:


> If you only knew how many SEC fans I've heard say this since last years national championship.



I agree, I am pretty sure they don't count almost losses or near wins at the end of the day.


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 7, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> Hasn't Oregon lost 6 of their last 11 bowl games?



Probably!  Oregon was nothing until not too long ago.  Nike money in the last ten years turned that around.  



flowingwell said:


> No, they are 1-1 in last 2,bowls?  Why is this now a Uga argument?  Uga is one of the teams that you say sucks and have not played for or won a title.  How about bama, LSU, auburn?  How have they faired?  By the way, saying a team "barely won" or "almost lost to" is really idiotic.  Using Uga as your example is like an sec fan basing the strength of the PAC 12 on Washington (who also lost to Nebraska by the way) or Arizona.



My bad, it was two games in a row the lost before they won a bowl game 2 years ago.  They are 2-3 in their last 5 bowl games!

The funny thing is to watch all you guys get your panties in a wad.  Face it, Mizzu and A&M proved the SEC grind you guys used to boast about is a myth, and the SEC is one game over .500 against  the PAC-12 during the BCS.  Those are actual facts of games played on the field.  That alone proves the fact the SEC is such a dominate conference is a myth.  If the SEC was so good, the Big-12 teams would have struggled in the "SEC grind", and the SEC wouldn't be 1 game over .500 in 27 games against the PAC-12.  Not to to mention the one game that out them over .500 could have gone either way.  That's not domination.  That's equally matched.  Throw in the record against the spread, and it makes me wonder how any one could argue the SEC has been better during the BCS era.  The play on the field in head to head matches just doesn't show SEC domination.  You can't argue that!


----------



## rex upshaw (Sep 7, 2014)

2~3 in their last 5 bowl games?  That's identical to Stanford's last 5.


----------



## flowingwell (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Probably!  Oregon was nothing until not too long ago.  Nike money in the last ten years turned that around.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're right, the PAC 12 has been equal to the sec over the last decade and the sec success has been a myth.  Case closed.


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Probably!  Oregon was nothing until not too long ago.  Nike money in the last ten years turned that around.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



YOU CAN ARGUE IT!!! The SEC s the dominate conference in the BCS era. There is NO denying it. If we weren't why do we have all those crystal balls??PAC 12 won one and they lost it because they were cheating. No PAC 12 teams are great. Oregon maybe but everytime they play a  good team they lose. Heck when they play bad teams they struggle and sometimes lose. If you don't think the SEC is the dominate conference who do you think is?? You already said the ACC wasn't and PAC 12 sure isn't so who is??


----------



## Jetjockey (Sep 7, 2014)

I don't think there is a dominate conference.  The crystal balls came from a flawed system, so those don't impress me either.


----------



## SpotandStalk (Sep 7, 2014)

flowingwell said:


> I agree, I am pretty sure they don't count almost losses or near wins at the end of the day.



That's right. Some folks are just hard headed.


----------



## Buck Roar (Sep 7, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> I don't think there is a dominate conference.  The crystal balls came from a flawed system, so those don't impress me either.


Oh yeah forgot. NCAA is biased to the SEC and when we play the PAC 12 in it we just win when they don't cheat.


----------

