# I am on the opposite end of the argument from JJ.



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

I simply don't understand how teams like these below, with these type schedules, can even be considered for a top 25 slot, much less a top 5. Rediculous. 

Hey, I have an idea, why doesn't Chizit, Saban, Richt, Spurrier, Meyers, Nutt and others schedule two good teams and the rest of them should be Division II teams so our team stats will be really really high and everyone in the SEC ends up undefeated at the end of the year..

<TABLE class=tablehead cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=3 sizset="33" sizcache="2"><TBODY sizset="33" sizcache="2"><TR class=stathead><TD colSpan=4>2010 TCU Horned Frogs Schedule</TD></TR><TR class=colhead><TD>DATE</TD><TD>OPPONENT</TD><TD>RESULT/TIME</TD><TD>RECORD/TICKETS</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-204" sizset="33" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Sept 4</TD><TD align=left sizset="33" sizcache="2">

vs
#24 Oregon State*
</TD><TD sizset="36" sizcache="2">

W
30-21
</TD><TD>1-0 (0-0)</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-2635" sizset="38" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Sept 11</TD><TD align=left sizset="38" sizcache="2">

vs
Tennessee Tech
</TD><TD sizset="41" sizcache="2">

W
62-7
</TD><TD>2-0 (0-0)</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-239" sizset="43" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Sept 18</TD><TD align=left sizset="43" sizcache="2">

vs
Baylor
</TD><TD sizset="46" sizcache="2">

W
45-10
</TD><TD>3-0 (0-0)</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-2567" sizset="48" sizcache="2"><TD>Fri, Sept 24</TD><TD align=left sizset="48" sizcache="2">

@
Southern Methodist
</TD><TD sizset="51" sizcache="2">

W
41-24
</TD><TD>4-0 (0-0)</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-36" sizset="53" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Oct 2</TD><TD align=left sizset="53" sizcache="2">

@
Colorado State
</TD><TD sizset="56" sizcache="2">

W
27-0
</TD><TD>5-0 (1-0)</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-2751" sizset="58" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Oct 9</TD><TD align=left sizset="58" sizcache="2">

vs
Wyoming
</TD><TD sizset="61" sizcache="2">

W
45-0
</TD><TD>6-0 (2-0)</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-252" sizset="63" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Oct 16</TD><TD align=left sizset="63" sizcache="2">

vs
Brigham Young
</TD><TD sizset="66" sizcache="2">

W
31-3
</TD><TD>7-0 (3-0)</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-2005" sizset="68" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Oct 23</TD><TD align=left sizset="68" sizcache="2">

vs
Air Force
</TD><TD sizset="71" sizcache="2">

W
38-7
</TD><TD>8-0 (4-0)</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-2439" sizset="73" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Oct 30</TD><TD align=left sizset="73" sizcache="2">

@
UNLV
</TD><TD>11:00 PM ET </TD><TD>Tickets</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-254" sizset="76" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Nov 6</TD><TD align=left sizset="76" sizcache="2">

@
#8 Utah
</TD><TD>3:30 PM ET </TD><TD>Tickets</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-21" sizset="79" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Nov 13</TD><TD align=left sizset="79" sizcache="2">

vs
San Diego State
</TD><TD>4:00 PM ET Versus</TD><TD>Tickets</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-167" sizset="82" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Nov 27</TD><TD align=left sizset="82" sizcache="2">

@
New Mexico
</TD><TD>4:00 PM ET Versus</TD><TD>Tickets
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


<TABLE class=tablehead cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=3 sizset="33" sizcache="2"><TBODY sizset="33" sizcache="2"><TR class=stathead><TD colSpan=4>2010 Boise State Broncos Schedule</TD></TR><TR class=colhead><TD>DATE</TD><TD>OPPONENT</TD><TD>RESULT/TIME</TD><TD>RECORD/TICKETS</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-259" sizset="33" sizcache="2"><TD>Mon, Sept 6</TD><TD align=left sizset="33" sizcache="2">

vs
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/259/virginia-tech-hokies
#10 Virginia Tech*
</TD><TD sizset="36" sizcache="2">

W
33-30
</TD><TD>1-0 (0-0)</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-2751" sizset="38" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Sept 18</TD><TD align=left sizset="38" sizcache="2">

@
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/2751/wyoming-cowboys
Wyoming
</TD><TD sizset="41" sizcache="2">

W
51-6
</TD><TD>2-0 (0-0)</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-204" sizset="43" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Sept 25</TD><TD align=left sizset="43" sizcache="2">

vs
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/204/oregon-state-beavers
#24 Oregon State
</TD><TD sizset="46" sizcache="2">

W
37-24
</TD><TD>3-0 (0-0)</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-166" sizset="48" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Oct 2</TD><TD align=left sizset="48" sizcache="2">

@
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/166/new-mexico-state-aggies
New Mexico State
</TD><TD sizset="51" sizcache="2">

W
59-0
</TD><TD>4-0 (1-0)</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-2649" sizset="53" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Oct 9</TD><TD align=left sizset="53" sizcache="2">

vs
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/2649/toledo-rockets
Toledo
</TD><TD sizset="56" sizcache="2">

W
57-14
</TD><TD>5-0 (1-0)</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-23" sizset="58" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Oct 16</TD><TD align=left sizset="58" sizcache="2">

@
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/23/san-jose-state-spartans
San Jose State
</TD><TD sizset="61" sizcache="2">

W
48-0
</TD><TD>6-0 (2-0)</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-2348" sizset="63" sizcache="2"><TD>Tue, Oct 26</TD><TD align=left sizset="63" sizcache="2">

vs
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/2348/louisiana-tech-bulldogs
Louisiana Tech
</TD><TD>8:00 PM ET 

 

</TD><TD>Tickets</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-62" sizset="66" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Nov 6</TD><TD align=left sizset="66" sizcache="2">

vs
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/62/hawaii-warriors
Hawaii
</TD><TD>2:00 PM ET </TD><TD>Tickets</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-70" sizset="69" sizcache="2"><TD>Fri, Nov 12</TD><TD align=left sizset="69" sizcache="2">

@
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/70/idaho-vandals
Idaho
</TD><TD>9:00 PM ET 

 

</TD><TD>Tickets</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-278" sizset="72" sizcache="2"><TD>Fri, Nov 19</TD><TD align=left sizset="72" sizcache="2">

vs
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/278/fresno-state-bulldogs
Fresno State
</TD><TD>9:30 PM ET 

 

</TD><TD>Tickets</TD></TR><TR class="oddrow team-23-2440" sizset="75" sizcache="2"><TD>Fri, Nov 26</TD><TD align=left sizset="75" sizcache="2">

@
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/2440/nevada-wolf-pack
#24 Nevada
</TD><TD>10:15 PM ET 

 

</TD><TD>Tickets</TD></TR><TR class="evenrow team-23-328" sizset="78" sizcache="2"><TD>Sat, Dec 4</TD><TD align=left sizset="78" sizcache="2">

vs
http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/328/utah-state-aggies
Utah State
</TD><TD>3:00 PM ET </TD><TD>Tickets</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel... That schedule on the top looks exactly like Utah's schedule in 2008.  Since you don't think teams with those schedules should be considered in the top 25, what do you think Bama's ranking at the end of 2008 should have been after they got plastered by a team, that you think didn't even deserve to be ranked in the top 25?


----------



## LanierSpots (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Miguel... That schedule on the top looks exactly like Utah's schedule in 2008.  Since you don't think teams with those schedules should be considered in the top 25, what do you think Bama's ranking at the end of 2008 should have been after they got plastered by a team, that you think didn't even deserve to be ranked in the top 25?



Hes got you on that one bammer.   LOL.


----------



## golffreak (Oct 25, 2010)

Ya'll don't discount TCU. There are a lot of teams that would not want to play them.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Miguel... That schedule on the top looks exactly like Utah's schedule in 2008.  Since you don't think teams with those schedules should be considered in the top 25, what do you think Bama's ranking at the end of 2008 should have been after they got plastered by a team, that you think didn't even deserve to be ranked in the top 25?




utah did look good in that game, but i think the wind was already out of bama's sails, after they lost the secg to florida.  i think this was a case of utah having a lot to play for and for bama, not so much.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> utah did look good in that game, but i think the wind was already out of bama's sails, after they lost the secg to florida.  i think this was a case of utah having a lot to play for and for bama, not so much.



Rex...  That is the biggest joke of an excuse I have ever heard.  All the years that USC didn't get to go to the BCS game because they were left out they still crushed their opponents in their bowl games.  Same thing happened to UW when they were left out in 2000.  

That is the excuse that guys tell themselves when they simply can't handle the idea that a team from a non BCS conference came in and blasted Bama at their own game.  Bama was simply outmatched by a better team.  Utah was bigger, stronger, faster, and simply kicked Bama's tail.  The only excuse Bama has for losing that game is simple.. They got beat by a better team!


----------



## Nitram4891 (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Rex...  That is the biggest joke of an excuse I have ever heard.  All the years that USC didn't get to go to the BCS game because they were left out they still crushed their opponents in their bowl games.  Same thing happened to UW when they were left out in 2000.
> 
> That is the excuse that guys tell themselves when they simply can't handle the idea that a team from a non BCS conference came in and blasted Bama at their own game.  Bama was simply outmatched by a better team.  Utah was bigger, stronger, faster, and simply kicked Bama's tail.  The only excuse Bama has for losing that game is simple.. They got beat by a better team!



Amen..on top of that if your team REALLY didnt care about the game (completely ridiculous statement to make), then they didnt deserve a BCS slot nor to be ranked period.  

YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Nitram4891 said:


> Amen..on top of that if your team REALLY didnt care about the game (completely ridiculous statement to make), then they didnt deserve a BCS slot nor to be ranked period.
> 
> YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME.



i didn't say they didn't care, but the wind was let out of their sails.  if you do not think that this was a bigger game for utah, than it was for bama, you are being silly.  prior to the secg, bama was looking at playing in the nc game.  however, they lost to florida and had to play in a far less meaningful game.


----------



## Nitram4891 (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> i didn't say they didn't care, but the wind was let out of their sails.  if you do not think that this was a bigger game for utah, than it was for bama, you are being silly.  prior to the secg, bama was looking at playing in the nc game.  however, they lost to florida and had to play in a far less meaningful game.



It's a pretty meaningfull game now that we have 2 non BCS teams in the top 5.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> utah did look good in that game, but i think the wind was already out of bama's sails, after they lost the secg to florida. i think this was a case of utah having a lot to play for and for bama, not so much.


 

I guess JJ has no reference to draw from with a team playing a brutal schedule all year long and being bruised battered and full of injuries at the end of a year vs. a team that has had a powderpuff schedule and is at 100% strength at the end of a season. Plus Saban was not working with "his" team in 2008. He was working with what he inherited; a team that didn't know how to play to the final seconds of a game, a team that took wins for granted, and a team that had zero experience in that arena. Young teams and players have to lose vital games to understand defeat and believe what a coach is trying to get across to them sometimes. I would say that they took it to heart and learned a thing or two between that loss and the 2009 season.

Now, Saban is working with a young starter defense, but these are his recruits and appear to be responding to Smart's experience, however, we are still battered, bruised, tired and some of them even broken. This is one thing that has impressed me about the depth and talent of Auburn this year. They have lost two key players on defense to season ending injuries and have still been able to fill the gap and step up. If Auburn survives the SEC schedule they will take it all.

JJ, what does the injury roster look like for BSU, TCU, Oregon, Utah and Nevada right now?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> i didn't say they didn't care, but the wind was let out of their sails.  if you do not think that this was a bigger game for utah, than it was for bama, you are being silly.  prior to the secg, bama was looking at playing in the nc game.  however, they lost to florida and had to play in a far less meaningful game.



The wind was out of USC's sail as well all those years they were left out of the NC game.  That didn't stop them from destroying the teams they played in the Rose Bowl.  From a coaching standpoint, getting a team up for a game is no different then having a good game plan, it has to be done.  Bama got out coached and outplayed by a better team.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Rex...  That is the biggest joke of an excuse I have ever heard.  All the years that USC didn't get to go to the BCS game because they were left out they still crushed their opponents in their bowl games.  Same thing happened to UW when they were left out in 2000.
> 
> That is the excuse that guys tell themselves when they simply can't handle the idea that a team from a non BCS conference came in and blasted Bama at their own game.  Bama was simply outmatched by a better team.  Utah was bigger, stronger, faster, and simply kicked Bama's tail.  The only excuse Bama has for losing that game is simple.. They got beat by a better team!



utah was better that day.  i believe if this game had been played prior to the secg, the outcome would have been different.  any team can win on any given day in college football, happens all the time.  i think that bama ran into a good utah team, that was pumped up to play a sec school.  bama, on the other hand, was still singing the blues, from their defeat against florida.  

i understand your argument about usc, but the pac 10 doesn't have a championship game at the end of the regular season.  it is much easier to get your head back on straight, if you suffer a loss early on, as you don't know what other teams are going to lose, who are now ahead of you.  essentialy, you finish strong and you can back into the nc game, or at least a bcs game.  bama was undefeated, prior to the secg.  with a win, they would be headed to the nc game.  that is the difference.  having a loss earlier in the season, i think the coaches can prepare the kids that they still have a shot at getting to a big game.  when you lose in the conference championship game and it eliminates you from the nc game, i think that is a tougher pill to swallow.

in 2008, usc lost in game 3.
in 2007, usc lost in game 5.
in 2006, usc lost in game 7.
in 2005, usc lost in the nc game.
in 2004, they went undefeated and won the nc game.
in 2003, usc lost in game 4.
in 2002, usc lost in game 3.

point being, usc never made it to the end of the year, with a chance to get to the nc game and lost a year end game, which knocked them out of the title game.  it is much easier to right the ship, with multiple games to play.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> He was working with what he inherited; a team that didn't know how to play to the final seconds of a game



The final seconds?  How about the first quarter.  That game was over by the final seconds of the first quarter.

You also don't get to use injury's as an excuse as to why you lost to Utah........    You claim that you beat Texas last year because Bama was a better football team, and it had nothing to do with Texas losing their star QB.  Then you turn around and say you lost to Utah because of Bama's injuries.    So, did Bama lose to Utah because of their injuries, or did Bama only beat Texas because of UT's injuries?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> i understand your argument about usc, but the pac 10 doesn't have a championship game at the end of the regular season.



Excuses excuses excuses.  The SEC doesn't play a 9 game conference schedule like the Pac 10 either.  Spread 6 more losses around the conference and see what happens to your rankings.  The SEC gets one extra powder puff team during the regular season to recover and boost their record and standings in the polls.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Excuses excuses excuses.  The SEC doesn't play a 9 game conference schedule like the Pac 10 either.  Spread 6 more losses around the conference and see what happens to your rankings.  The SEC gets one extra powder puff team during the regular season to recover and boost their record and standings in the polls.




the pac-10 is full of powder puff teams.

as for usc, they were the real deal, no doubt.  i enjoyed watching them play, as they always brought it.


----------



## chadair (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Excuses excuses excuses.  The SEC doesn't play a 9 game conference schedule like the Pac 10 either.  Spread 6 more losses around the conference and see what happens to your rankings.  The SEC gets one extra powder puff team during the regular season to recover and boost their record and standings in the polls.


wow, good arguement 
I wish UF played all the pac10 teams this year!! and didnt play any sec teams.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

chadair said:


> wow, good arguement
> I wish UF played all the pac10 teams this year!! and didnt play any sec teams.


 
It's a moot point arguing with JJ. In his little world every western team on the schedule is top tier. I guess that's why so many of them are ranked in the top 25..


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

chadair said:


> wow, good arguement
> I wish UF played all the pac10 teams this year!! and didnt play any sec teams.



So do I.  UF might be .500 in the Pac 10 this year.  They would lose to Oregon, Stanford, Arizona, USC, and  lose 1 game to Cal or Oregon ST.  That would put them in the bottom half of the Pac 10.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> So do I. UF might be .500 in the Pac 10 this year. They would lose to Oregon, Stanford, Arizona, USC, and lose 1 game to Cal or Oregon ST. That would put them in the bottom half of the Pac 10.


 
This year. But, but, but what about all of the past year comparisons you insist on bringing to the table to substantiate your position?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> It's a mute point arguing with JJ. In his little world every western team on the schedule is top tier. I guess that's why so many of them are ranked in the top 25..



Miguel...  Did Bama lose to Utah because of injuries or did they beat Texas because of UT's injuries?  You cant have it both ways.  Pick a game, either way.  If you think Bama was a better team then Utah and only lost because of injuries, then you are admitting that Texas was a better team then Bama, and only lost due to injuries!  But either way, you don't get it both ways.


----------



## chadair (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> So do I.  UF might be .500 in the Pac 10 this year.  They would lose to Oregon, Stanford, Arizona, USC, and  lose 1 game to Cal or Oregon ST.  That would put them in the bottom half of the Pac 10.




and you know all of this how???? just by watchin the mighty pac10 play??


----------



## SFStephens (Oct 25, 2010)

JJ, I think you've ridden Utah's 2008 coat tails long enough in this argument.  How about you address the OP's original question, how does BSU and TCU deserve to be in the top 5 when they play a pop warner football schedule? Your dancing because there's no valid argument for it.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Miguel... Did Bama lose to Utah because of injuries or did they beat Texas because of UT's injuries? You cant have it both ways. Pick a game, either way. If you think Bama was a better team then Utah and only lost because of injuries, then you are admitting that Texas was a better team then Bama, and only lost due to injuries! But either way, you don't get it both ways.


 
I put out multiple reasons for that loss. Funny that you would insist on keying on just one. Very similar to Liberal tactics in the political forum.


----------



## chadair (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Miguel...  Did Bama lose to Utah because of injuries or did they beat Texas because of UT's injuries?  You cant have it both ways.  Pick a game, either way.  If you think Bama was a better team then Utah and only lost because of injuries, then you are admitting that Texas was a better team then Bama, and only lost due to injuries!  But either way, you don't get it both ways.



so App State's conference is better then the Big 10???


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> So do I.  UF might be .500 in the Pac 10 this year.  They would lose to Oregon, Stanford, Arizona, USC, and  lose 1 game to Cal or Oregon ST.  That would put them in the bottom half of the Pac 10.



of the teams you listed, oregon is the only team that looks to be a solid team this year.  i am still uncertain about stanford, but they are pretty good.  arizona, not impressed.  cal, not impressed. oregon state, not impressed, heck, they just lost to washington.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

SFStephens said:


> JJ, I think you've ridden Utah's 2008 coat tails long enough in this argument. How about you address the OP's original question, how does BSU and TCU deserve to be in the top 5 when they play a pop warner football schedule? Your dancing because there's no valid argument for it.


 
He has yet to address my question about the injury roster for certain teams right now as well. Again I submit, typical of Liberal tactics. Avoid the primary questions, spin and divert the topic. Liberals use this tactic because they know that their records, or in this case, stats, just don't hold water.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> This year. But, but, but what about all of the past year comparisons you insist on bringing to the table to substantiate your position?



Ya, past years comparisons, like UCLA sweeping Tennessee even though UT finished much higher in the SEC then UCLA did in the Pac 10.  Same goes for UCLA sweeping Bama in 2000 and 2001 when Bama finished better in the SEC then UCLA did in the Pac 10.  Its been pretty common practice for lower tier Pac 10 teams to beat higher tier SEC teams the last 10 years.  When the higher tier Pac 10 teams play the SEC the games are blowouts.  Yet the higher tier SEC teams have struggled against lower tier Pac 10 teams (UGA vs ASU last year and LSU vs UW last year).


----------



## SFStephens (Oct 25, 2010)

Still dancing his little jig.....


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Ya, past years comparisons, like UCLA sweeping Tennessee even though UT finished much higher in the SEC then UCLA did in the Pac 10. Same goes for UCLA sweeping Bama in 2000 and 2001 when Bama finished better in the SEC then UCLA did in the Pac 10. Its been pretty common practice for lower tier Pac 10 teams to beat higher tier SEC teams the last 10 years. When the higher tier Pac 10 teams play the SEC the games are blowouts. Yet the higher tier SEC teams have struggled against lower tier Pac 10 teams (UGA vs ASU last year and LSU vs UW last year).


 
That's why UCLA has 13 national championships huh? 

Just for you JJ; Count the diamonds, they have significant meaning.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Ya, past years comparisons, like UCLA sweeping Tennessee even though UT finished much higher in the SEC then UCLA did in the Pac 10.  Same goes for UCLA sweeping Bama in 2000 and 2001 when Bama finished better in the SEC then UCLA did in the Pac 10.  Its been pretty common practice for lower tier Pac 10 teams to beat higher tier SEC teams the last 10 years.  When the higher tier Pac 10 teams play the SEC the games are blowouts.  Yet the higher tier SEC teams have struggled against lower tier Pac 10 teams (UGA vs ASU last year and LSU vs UW last year).




uga was not a good team last year, we all know that.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> uga was not a good team last year, we all know that.



This is the hypocracy Im talking about!  You claim that UGA struggled against ASU because UGA wasn't very good.  Guess what?  UGA finished 4-4 in the SEC and ASU finished 2-7 in the Pac 10.


----------



## riprap (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> The final seconds?  How about the first quarter.  That game was over by the final seconds of the first quarter.
> 
> You also don't get to use injury's as an excuse as to why you lost to Utah........    You claim that you beat Texas last year because Bama was a better football team, and it had nothing to do with Texas losing their star QB.  Then you turn around and say you lost to Utah because of Bama's injuries.    So, did Bama lose to Utah because of their injuries, or did Bama only beat Texas because of UT's injuries?



It was the fans fault. Ask Nick.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> That's why UCLA has 13 national championships huh?
> 
> Just for you JJ; Count the diamonds, they have significant meaning.
> QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> This is the hypocracy Im talking about! You claim that UGA struggled against ASU because UGA wasn't very good. Guess what? UGA finished 4-4 in the SEC and ASU finished 2-7 in the Pac 10.


 

You can spout it all you want, but it's not going to change anything. The facts are the facts and who wears the ring and takes home the crystal ball at the end of the year is the proof of the pudding. Until you become head of the BCS and change the system you are wasting your typing skills..

You're really gonna have fun when Dooley get's Tennessee up to full strength, along with Meyer and Florida, and if by some fluke chance that Nutt gets his way then it's on. However, there's no hope for LSU. Miles will never learn how to read a clock....

The only way this will ever be settled is for all conferences to play only conference games, have a split conference and championship and then the conference champions enter a playoff system.

Until then, take more xanex and enjoy the pretty lights...


----------



## riprap (Oct 25, 2010)

How does anybody in the SEC know how good the pac 10 is. We are all in the bed when their games start.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Id settle with every conference playin a 9 game conference schedule, and conferences over 10 teams having a playoff.  Give the BCS conference's and automatic qualifier for an 8 team playoff, and then have 2 other teams from outside the BCS, or inside the BCS if their is no decent non BCS team.  Play the 4 BCS bowls and narrow it down to a semi final, and then final game.  Leave the other bowl system in place just like it is... If they did that, we would know who the true National Champion is.  BSU and TCU would have to prove they are worthy of their top 5 rankings, but at least they would get a shot to do it!  But then again, if they did that, we woulnd't be able to argue about how screwed up the BCS is and who deserves what all season long.


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

sfstephens said:


> jj, i think you've ridden utah's 2008 coat tails long enough in this argument.  How about you address the op's original question, how does bsu and tcu deserve to be in the top 5 when they play a pop warner football schedule? Your dancing because there's no valid argument for it.




bsu  49-3 (06-09)
tcu 42-10 (06-09)
Utah 40-12 (06-09)

Just for fun Alabama 39-15 (06-09)


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Id settle with every conference playin a 9 game conference schedule, and conferences over 10 teams having a playoff. Give the BCS conference's and automatic qualifier for an 8 team playoff, and then have 2 other teams from outside the BCS, or inside the BCS if their is no decent non BCS team. Play the 4 BCS bowls and narrow it down to a semi final, and then final game. Leave the other bowl system in place just like it is... If they did that, we would know who the true National Champion is. BSU and TCU would have to prove they are worthy of their top 5 rankings, but at least they would get a shot to do it! But then again, if they did that, we woulnd't be able to argue about how screwed up the BCS is and who deserves what all season long.


 
You left out one small detail. Divisions must be kept separate. No Div I schools playing Div II schools in the season schedule..


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You left out one small detail. Divisions must be kept separate. No Div I schools playing Div II schools in the season schedule..



Amen to that!  Worse thing that ever came from the BCS!


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> This is the hypocracy Im talking about!  You claim that UGA struggled against ASU because UGA wasn't very good.  Guess what?  UGA finished 4-4 in the SEC and ASU finished 2-7 in the Pac 10.



asu also had close games against washington (asu won that game), california (lost by 2 points), usc (lost by 5 points) and arizona (lost by 3 points).

cal was 5-4 in conference.
usc was 5-4 in conference.
arizona was 6-3 in conference and beat asu by the same margin as uga.

so a 4-4 sec team played asu similar to a 6-3 pac-10 school, right?  6-3 in the pac-10 was tied for 2nd best record.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

and jockey, uga beat- 
a 3-5 usc team
a 3-5 arkansas team
a 0-8 vanderbilt team
a 3-5 auburn team


----------



## Mechanicaldawg (Oct 25, 2010)

riprap said:


> How does anybody in the SEC know how good the pac 10 is. We are all in the bed when their games start.



Who would watch that crap even if it was prime time?


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

hey jockey, where'd you go?  i'm anxiously awaiting your spin.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

No spin.  You are correct....  However, lets look at actual head to head games.  For grins we will compare UT, UGA, UCLA, and ASU last year since there was an onfield connection between all those teams. In head to head matches UCLA, the Pac 10#8 beat Tenn, the SEC #4 (tied).  Tenn beat UGA, but tied them with 4-4 records in the SEC.  UGA (#4 SEC) beat ASU (#9 Pac 10)  with a last second field goal to win the game.    Basically, we could say that UCLA, UT, UGA, and ASU were all very similiar football teams last year.  UGA and UT would have finished conference play somewhere between UCLA and ASU  at the bottom of the Pac 10.   However, UT and UGA finished with .500% records in the SEC while UCLA and ASU finished with a combined .277% winning percentage in the Pac 10..  UT and UGA fared much better by playing in the SEC last year then they would have if they played in the Pac 10....   This year the only comparisons we have are the Oregon and UT.  BUT, Oregon beat UT worse then any other team has all season so far, and that includes the SEC #2 and #3 teams.


----------



## SFStephens (Oct 25, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> bsu  49-3 (06-09)
> tcu 42-10 (06-09)
> Utah 40-12 (06-09)
> 
> Just for fun Alabama 39-15 (06-09)



That looks nice at face value. Are you also inferring that BSU, TCU and Utah play the same level of competition as Alabama? If so, its a little early to be hitting the bottle. If not, those nice stats don't mean alot.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

jockey-
didn't cal beat asu in a last minute field goal? actually, it was with .24 seconds left.

and if we are discounting last second victories, we need to scratch the bsu win over oklahoma, as they won on a gadget play (the hook and ladder) and scored with 7 seconds remaining.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> jockey-
> didn't cal beat asu in a last minute field goal? actually, it was with .24 seconds left.



Absolutely.. And Cal finished #6 in the Pac 10 with a 5-4 record last year.  Im not discounting last second victory's.  What Im sayin is that if the SEC is so good, why did it take a last second victory for the #4 SEC team to beat the #9 Pac 10 team?  And why did the #8 Pac 10 team beat the other #4 SEC team?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> *JJ, what does the injury roster look like for BSU, TCU, Oregon, Utah and Nevada right now*?


 
Still waiting!!


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Absolutely.. And Cal finished #6 in the Pac 10 with a 5-4 record last year.  Im not discounting last second victory's.  What Im sayin is that if the SEC is so good, why did it take a last second victory for the #4 SEC team to beat the #9 Pac 10 team?  And why did the #8 Pac 10 team beat the other #4 SEC team?



losing the turnover battle.  uga had 3 to asu's 1 and tennessee had 4, to ucla's 1.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Still waiting!!



Who cares!  You play the game every weekend with the players that are available.  If your backups can't cut it, then recruit better.  Thats the depth you SEC guys always talk about.   If the starters can't make it through a game, maybe they should hit the weights more.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> losing the turnover battle.  uga had 3 to asu's 1 and tennessee had 4, to ucla's 1.



I guess the SEC teams need to learn how to secure the football better!


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Who cares! You play the game every weekend with the players that are available. If your backups can't cut it, then recruit better. Thats the depth you SEC guys always talk about. If the starters can't make it through a game, maybe they should hit the weights more.


 
What do broken hands, ribs, ankles, collar bones, etc. have to do with weight rooms?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Everything.....  The bigger, stronger, and more limber you are the less likely you are to break something!


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> I guess the SEC teams need to learn how to secure the football better!




winning the turnover battle is not singular to the sec.  i'm sure plenty of pac-10 schools have lost games they shouldn't have, due to fumbles and or interceptions.  

you wanted to know why these games were as close as they were and i gave you your answer.


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

SFStephens said:


> That looks nice at face value. Are you also inferring that BSU, TCU and Utah play the same level of competition as Alabama? If so, its a little early to be hitting the bottle. If not, those nice stats don't mean alot.



You may want to reconsider your "Bottle" shot with me sir..

The original post was what makes anyone think they deserve to be ranked in the top 25 period....My point is they have a record of winning which includes out of conference games,played against opponents that are willing to schedule them...My use of Alabama was intended to show they have winning percentages comparable to SEC teams...Just so you know I did the same for Auburn and there record was worse then Alabama's....The point is if you compare year in and year out the records of these 3 teams are very good and that is why they deserve to be in the top 25,period as the original post requested..


----------



## SFStephens (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Who cares!  You play the game every weekend with the players that are available.  If your backups can't cut it, then recruit better.  Thats the depth you SEC guys always talk about.   If the starters can't make it through a game, maybe they should hit the weights more.



OR.....it could mean those teams need to schedule some actual competition instead of filling their schedules with soft teams. May actually get them the respect that they THINK they deserve too. If they could cut it.


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Absolutely.. And Cal finished #6 in the Pac 10 with a 5-4 record last year.  Im not discounting last second victory's.  What Im sayin is that if the SEC is so good, why did it take a last second victory for the #4 SEC team to beat the #9 Pac 10 team?  And why did the #8 Pac 10 team beat the other #4 SEC team?



Does it really matter,at least these games were played on the field and one team beat the other on a given day...My whole issue is that these 3 teams will not be given the shot to play,and I do feel sorry for the teams that have to play them as I believe these 3 teams are gonna be mad and will win the games they play just so they can put another nail in the coffin of the BCS..


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Everything..... The bigger, stronger, and more limber you are the less likely you are to break something!


 
I guess that means that Mitch Burroughs, Garett Pendergrass, Daron Mackey, D.J. Harper and Matt Kaiserman are all wusses that weren't hitting the weight room then?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Turnovers are part of the game.  Just like kicking field goals. If your team turns the ball over more then the other team, and you lose because of it, then you got beat by a better "team".  They might not have been better on offense, or defense, but they were better at taking the ball away.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> Does it really matter,at least these games were played on the field and one team beat the other on a given day...My whole issue is that these 3 teams will not be given the shot to play,and I do feel sorry for the teams that have to play them as I believe these 3 teams are gonna be mad and will win the games they play just so they can put another nail in the coffin of the BCS..


 

So let me get this straight. Non BCS conference teams beating their opponents in post season play is going to damage the stability of the BCS?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I guess that means that Mitch Burroughs, Garett Pendergrass, Daron Mackey, D.J. Harper and Matt Kaiserman are all wusses that weren't hitting the weight room then?



Maybe they need to start taking more calcium so their bones don't break so easy.


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

SFStephens said:


> OR.....it could mean those teams need to schedule some actual competition instead of filling their schedules with soft teams. May actually get them the respect that they THINK they deserve too. If they could cut it.



The respect factor you speak of will never come,as all the folks who want to say they don't belong don't want to play them in the regular season!

They should be respected for beating teams in the games that they have played ( BCS bowls),and they are always being asked to defend themselves in the rankings....This is why the whole BCS and all the haters need to man up and demand teams play on the field to settle it ( but that won't work because the excuses will be about coaches who left before the game or players who are hurt or whatever)....

Every time one of these teams beats a big school all you hear is excuses,so play them early in the year and let's stop the why why why!


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> So let me get this straight. Non BCS conference teams beating their opponents in post season play is going to damage the stability of the BCS?



Absolutely.  Lets say BSU and TCU both go undefeated and don't get to play in the BCS NC game.  Lets say BSU plays the #2 SEC team in a BCS bowl and TCU plays the #1 Big 12 team, and both teams win their bowl games easily.  You could have the NC game winner, BSU, and TCU all undefeated and all winning their BCS bowl games.  That would flip the BCS on its head!


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Turnovers are part of the game.  Just like kicking field goals. If your team turns the ball over more then the other team, and you lose because of it, then you got beat by a better "team".  They might not have been better on offense, or defense, but they were better at taking the ball away.




you wanted to know why uga had to kick a last minute field goal to win and i told you.  i'm not real sure what you are wanting to argue about now.


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> So let me get this straight. Non BCS conference teams beating their opponents in post season play is going to damage the stability of the BCS?



YES...Why because you have folks outside of the NCAA control who are going to start pushing the issues with the BCS into the forefront. Unfortunately it will be another way our goberment wastes time and money but since the NCAA cannot figure out a way to do a playoff system someone will have to do it for them.....


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Absolutely. Lets say BSU and TCU both go undefeated and don't get to play in the BCS NC game. Lets say BSU plays the #2 SEC team in a BCS bowl and TCU plays the #1 Big 12 team, and both teams win their bowl games easily. You could have the NC game winner, BSU, and TCU all undefeated and all winning their BCS bowl games. That would flip the BCS on its head!


 
Do you care to dig up how many non BCS schools went undefeated last year, and didn't get a shot at the BCS title? Looks as if the BCS is still on it's feet to me..


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> YES...Why because you have folks outside of the NCAA control who are going to start pushing the issues with the BCS into the forefront. Unfortunately it will be another way our goberment wastes time and money but since the NCAA cannot figure out a way to do a playoff system someone will have to do it for them.....


 
It's been tried already. It lasted exactly 1 1/2 minutes on the floor of congress and never even got a committee consideration.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> The respect factor you speak of will never come,as all the folks who want to say they don't belong don't want to play them in the regular season!
> 
> They should be respected for beating teams in the games that they have played ( BCS bowls),and they are always being asked to defend themselves in the rankings....This is why the whole BCS and all the haters need to man up and demand teams play on the field to settle it ( but that won't work because the excuses will be about coaches who left before the game or players who are hurt or whatever)....
> 
> Every time one of these teams beats a big school all you hear is excuses,so play them early in the year and let's stop the why why why!



it's not up to the bcs schools to schedule bsu.  if they want to joing a bcs school, they need to be the one's to take that step.  and uga did just fine when they played bsu.  oh wait, are you gonna give me the excuse that it was a different bsu team, blah blah blah?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Your missing the point.  The point is that if UGA and the SEC was so good, why was the game even that close?  If UGA was so much better then ASU the turnover margin wouldn't have been in ASU's favor, UGA wouldn't have needed to block ASU's field goal in order to get the ball back and win the game.   ASU was the #9 team in the Pac 10.  The #4 team in the SEC surely shouldn't have struggled to beat them.


----------



## DSGB (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Turnovers are part of the game.  Just like kicking field goals. If your team turns the ball over more then the other team, and you lose because of it, then you got beat by a better "team".  They might not have been better on offense, or defense, but they were better at taking the ball away.



So what does it say if your team loses the turnover battle, yet still wins?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Do you care to dig up how many non BCS schools went undefeated last year, and didn't get a shot at the BCS title? Looks as if the BCS is still on it's feet to me..



Since you mentioned it!!!!!!!  Last year it was 1...  BSU.. And that is exactly why we are arguing about it right now!

Never mess with the Zen master! 

http://espn.go.com/college-football/standings?year=2009


----------



## SFStephens (Oct 25, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> You may want to reconsider your "Bottle" shot with me sir..
> 
> The original post was what makes anyone think they deserve to be ranked in the top 25 period....My point is they have a record of winning which includes out of conference games,played against opponents that are willing to schedule them...My use of Alabama was intended to show they have winning percentages comparable to SEC teams...Just so you know I did the same for Auburn and there record was worse then Alabama's....The point is if you compare year in and year out the records of these 3 teams are very good and that is why they deserve to be in the top 25,period as the original post requested..


Again I'll ask, do they play the same level of competition as Alabama year in and year out? Answer that honestly and I'll reconsider the bottle shot.

Calling a team deserving by record alone is an awfully slippery slope to go down if you want to continue to see quality match-ups. That's my point. If you allow a team who beats up on a weak schedule into the top five and even NC discussion, why would anyone schedule tough opponents that fans may actually want to see. Heck, just fill your schedule with the Middle TN States of the world.


----------



## RipperIII (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Absolutely.  Lets say BSU and TCU both go undefeated and don't get to play in the BCS NC game.  Lets say BSU plays the #2 SEC team in a BCS bowl and TCU plays the #1 Big 12 team, and both teams win their bowl games easily.  You could have the NC game winner, BSU, and TCU all undefeated and all winning their BCS bowl games.  That would flip the BCS on its head!



Let's say we all take another big swig and make up some more ridicules hypo-theticals...

That scenario ain't playing out.

Tell me JJ,...I know that  is not in your repertoire,...but do you really believe that an undefeated Auburn, or a one loss BAMA does not deserve to be ranked either #1, or #2 ?
do you honestly think that Oregon could defeat either of those two teams?(normal game) Have you noticed how totally pedestrian The kid (Massoli) at Ol Miss looks this year as opposed to last season for Oregon,...is that because overall team speed and size is better in the SEC?
You said your self that Oregon struggles with big physical football teams,...which both Auburn and BAMA are.
BSU, TCU would be competitive for a while, maybe 3 qtrs and that's about it, discounting flukes those teams good as they are aren't at the top level in terms of #'s of top athletes, and it showed vs a mediocre VT team at the start of the season.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

SFStephens said:


> Again I'll ask, do they play the same level of competition as Alabama year in and year out? Answer that honestly and I'll reconsider the bottle shot.
> 
> Calling a team deserving by record alone is an awfully slippery slope to go down if you want to continue to see quality match-ups. That's my point. If you allow a team who beats up on a weak schedule into the top five and even NC discussion, why would anyone schedule tough opponents that fans may actually want to see. Heck, just fill your schedule with the Middle TN States of the world.



Thats whats been happening ever since the BCS has began.  Have you noticed how many schools are scheduling FCS schools now?  Heck, even the Washington Huskies, who were one of 5 BCS teams that haven't played a FCS school are jumping into the mix next year and playing Eastern Washington.   I absolutely hate it, but thats what the BCS does.  And that is exactly why BSU can't get anyone to play them in OOC games.  It just doesn't make sense to play a non BCS team in OOC games who could very easily beat you.  Just ask VT how that has affected them.  They were still shell shocked from BSU when they played James Madison.  Now they have rebounded and have won 5 straight, but you won't see VT scheduling a BSU or TCU in an OOC game anytime soon.


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> it's not up to the bcs schools to schedule bsu.  if they want to joing a bcs school, they need to be the one's to take that step.  and uga did just fine when they played bsu.  oh wait, are you gonna give me the excuse that it was a different bsu team, blah blah blah?



BSU has a neutral fled or a 1 and 1 open invitation...No takers...Nebraska is trying to make themselves look good by doing a 2 for 1 knowing BSU will not take it....Nope GA did beat them at GA....Lets see how that GA teams does going to BSU in say November or December...


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

SFStephens said:


> Again I'll ask, do they play the same level of competition as Alabama year in and year out? Answer that honestly and I'll reconsider the bottle shot.
> 
> Calling a team deserving by record alone is an awfully slippery slope to go down if you want to continue to see quality match-ups. That's my point. If you allow a team who beats up on a weak schedule into the top five and even NC discussion, why would anyone schedule tough opponents that fans may actually want to see. Heck, just fill your schedule with the Middle TN States of the world.




Here is your answer honestly...Yes they do,they play the schedule IAW the NCAA guidlines and their conference...The point is BSU,TCU and Utah have been playing at a high level for several year now,if this was an ACC or Big10 team you all would not be questioning their ranking.....

Now as far as the red I'll send you a pm and then you can reconsider.


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 25, 2010)

i dont care how many games bsu wins until they join a bcs conference and play teams that everyone has at least heard mention of. i dont care if people say nobody wants to play ooc games.....youre right....who does the sec have to prove itself to??? do the heisman winners and national championships and countless bcs bowl wins not ring throughout the country? tc"who"?? they play play "who"tah?? who cares? i say the sec gives bsu and tcu and utah a one year deal to come play in the sec. see how long that undefeated season lasts....maybe one or two games. the talent level, speed, and size is so much different...the annoucers seem to forget that every year until the bowl season and national championship games. yea utah beat bama...what has utah done since? how about bama....o just a national championship and a heisman winner if youre not an sec fan you'll never understand what it's like.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> Tell me JJ,...I know that  is not in your repertoire,...but do you really believe that an undefeated Auburn, or a one loss BAMA does not deserve to be ranked either #1, or #2 ?
> do you honestly think that Oregon could defeat either of those two teams?(normal game) Have you noticed how totally pedestrian The kid (Massoli) at Ol Miss looks this year as opposed to last season for Oregon,...is that because overall team speed and size is better in the SEC?
> You said your self that Oregon struggles with big physical football teams,...which both Auburn and BAMA are.
> BSU, TCU would be competitive for a while, maybe 3 qtrs and that's about it, discounting flukes those teams good as they are aren't at the top level in terms of #'s of top athletes, and it should vs a mediocre VT team at the start of the season.



Absolutely I think Oregon could play with Auburn or Bama.  Actually, I think AU and Bama would have a very, very tough time staying with Oregon.  Massoli looked pedestrian last year when he played against OSU as well.   Thomas adds an entirely different threat to Oregon's offense.  With Massoli, you didn't need to worry abou the deep ball, with Thomas, you do.  Thomas is almost as good a runner as Massoli was, but he is a much, much better passing QB.  I wasn't sure about Thomas in the beginning of the year, but that kid is really starting to shine.  Add LaMichael James in the backfield who is now a Sophmore, and Oregon is much more dangerous this year offensively then last year.  Originally, I though Oregon's offense was too one sided and was easy to defend becasue you knew they were going to run the ball.  Now, you don't know what they are going to do.  Is Thomas going to kill you in the air, is he going to run, or is he going to give the ball to the leading rusher in the nation?  Their D is decent, but they rotate 25 guys through the D in one game.  Thats why nobody scores on them in the second half.  Their D has fresh legs the entire game, and this is very tough on an offensive line when you constantly trying to block fresh legs........  I used to give BSU the edge over Oregon because of UO's lack of a throwing game.  However, Thomas has changed all of that.  I don't think there is a D in the country that can stop Oregon.  You might slow them down, but I don't think you can stop them.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

so let me get this straight, if you lose to a team because you had more turnovers, than that decides who is the best team?

in 2009, oregon was 8-1 in conference, with a loss to 6-3 stanford.

stanford (the 2nd best team in the pac-10, going off conference record), lost the turnover battle to wake forrest (5-7 overall and 3-5 in the acc) and lost the game.  so are we to say that wake was a better team than stanford?


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

242outdoors said:


> i dont care how many games bsu wins until they join a bcs conference and play teams that everyone has at least heard mention of. i dont care if people say nobody wants to play ooc games.....youre right....who does the sec have to prove itself to??? do the heisman winners and national championships and countless bcs bowl wins not ring throughout the country? tc"who"?? they play play "who"tah?? who cares? i say the sec gives bsu and tcu and utah a one year deal to come play in the sec. see how long that undefeated season lasts....maybe one or two games. the talent level, speed, and size is so much different...the annoucers seem to forget that every year until the bowl season and national championship games. yea utah beat bama...what has utah done since? how about bama....o just a national championship and a heisman winner if youre not an sec fan you'll never understand what it's like.



The point is that there needs to be a playoff so this is settled on the field instead of by a computer to decide who should play......Starting next year TCU and BSU are in the same conference,seems when all the leagues were expanding they lost the numbers to BSU and TCU...Utah will be in the Pac 10 and has already canceled there 3 year deal w/ BSU ( wonder why,maybe the Pac10 does not need 2 teams to lose to BSU in a year).....So you are saying Oregon State or BYU are no names.....Get off the if it ain't from the SEC it don't exist kick....


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

242outdoors said:


> .what has utah done since?



They went 10-3 last year and beat Cal in their bowl game.  Now they are 7-0 and #8 in the BCS......  Right behind Alabama!     But I know that there is no way they could beat a top SEC team in a bowl game... Their schedule is just way to easy!


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> so let me get this straight, if you lose to a team because you had more turnovers, than that decides who is the best team?
> 
> in 2009, oregon was 8-1 in conference, with a loss to 6-3 stanford.
> 
> stanford (the 2nd best team in the pac-10, going off conference record), lost the turnover battle to wake forrest (5-7 overall and 3-5 in the acc) and lost the game.  so are we to say that wake was a better team than stanford?



On that day they were!


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> BSU has a neutral fled or a 1 and 1 open invitation...No takers...Nebraska is trying to make themselves look good by doing a 2 for 1 knowing BSU will not take it....Nope GA did beat them at GA....Lets see how that GA teams does going to BSU in say November or December...




honestly, what is the benefit for uga to schedule them?  by the time the game actually would be played, we are talking several years down the road, where more than likely, petersen will be gone from bsu and the team will be back where it was a few short years ago.  everyone was hyping up bsu before they played georgia and bsu lost.  zabranksi was supposed to be a stud qb.  schools like bsu need to schedule other conferences, because their conference schedule alone, doesn't hold much weight.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> On that day they were!




really, is that all you've got?  looks like your argument is shot.  so let it be known, that wake forrest had a better football team, in 2009, the pac-10's second best school.


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

rex upshaw said:


> honestly, what is the benefit for uga to schedule them?  by the time the game actually would be played, we are talking several years down the road, where more than likely, petersen will be gone from bsu and the team will be back where it was a few short years ago.  everyone was hyping up bsu before they played georgia and bsu lost.  zabranksi was supposed to be a stud qb.  schools like bsu need to schedule other conferences, because their conference schedule alone, doesn't hold much weight.



Please see the quote where I said that GA team,that was referring to then....Right now teams that have agreed to play are dropping and or canceling the contract ( and this is not a shot at GA for doing the same w/ Oregon or Oregon State)...It's funny Dan Hawkins ( Colorado) was the coach at BSU and he is the one who floundered after leaving for the $$$$


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 25, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> The point is that there needs to be a playoff so this is settled on the field instead of by a computer to decide who should play......Starting next year TCU and BSU are in the same conference,seems when all the leagues were expanding they lost the numbers to BSU and TCU...Utah will be in the Pac 10 and has already canceled there 3 year deal w/ BSU ( wonder why,maybe the Pac10 does not need 2 teams to lose to BSU in a year).....So you are saying Oregon State or BYU are no names.....Get off the if it ain't from the SEC it don't exist kick....



oregon state got beat by washington...which is funny because osu played the holy horned frogs close and the holy broncos! what a joke! and wow....byu beat washington, wyoming, and san diego state! so yea those are no names 

everyone talked boise up when they came to athens and zabrasnki was on the bench crying like a baby. same thing with that kid from hawaii. idk what happened to bama against utah but i'll stand by an sec family member...guaranteed bama would beat them the next 5 games everytime. 

and utah almost got beat by the pitt...wow.


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> They went 10-3 last year and beat Cal in their bowl game.  Now they are 7-0 and #8 in the BCS......  Right behind Alabama!    But I know that there is no way they could beat a top SEC team in a bowl game... Their schedule is just way to easy!:cheers:



at least you've said one thing that makes sense


----------



## LanierSpots (Oct 25, 2010)

Could somebody pass me a beer.  I just go home and read this entire thread.  I may need a few.


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 25, 2010)

LanierSpots said:


> Could somebody pass me a beer.  I just go home and read this entire thread.  I may need a few.



been wondering where you were 

i dont think my picks were good this week. yours and rhbama looks better


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

242outdoors said:


> at least you've said one thing that makes sense



Ya... Except for this one itsy bitsy stat..  
UTAH 31... BAMA 17 

http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?gameId=290020333


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Ya... Except for this one itsy bitsy stat..
> UTAH 31... BAMA 17
> 
> http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?gameId=290020333



haha yea that too....blind hog finds a acorn evry once in a while.....let me know when one of your lil schools finds a nc ring


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 25, 2010)

242outdoors said:


> oregon state got beat by washington...which is funny because osu played the holy horned frogs close and the holy broncos! what a joke! and wow....byu beat washington, wyoming, and san diego state! so yea those are no names
> 
> everyone talked boise up when they came to athens and zabrasnki was on the bench crying like a baby. same thing with that kid from hawaii. idk what happened to bama against utah but i'll stand by an sec family member...guaranteed bama would beat them the next 5 games everytime.
> 
> and utah almost got beat by the pitt...wow.



Here is what happened to Bama,they got beat,just like Oklahoma did....So you want to compare teams from 4 or 5 years ago to teams from today ( some of your SEC supporters don't want to hear about Bama losing 2 yrs ago,so you can stop using the GA/BSU game from 5 yrs ago).....BSU can play with any team given they have 3 weeks to prepare like the bowl games...I would love to see teams play OOC games that matter but the BCS has made it too hard for teams with one lose to make a NC game...If you play the games on the field this issue is dead....


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Ya... Except for this one itsy bitsy stat..
> UTAH 31... BAMA 17
> 
> http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?gameId=290020333



so using the same logic about wake's win over stanford in 2009, utah's victory over alabama, only proves that utah was the better team THAT DAY.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> Here is what happened to Bama,they got beat,just like Oklahoma did....So you want to compare teams from 4 or 5 years ago to teams from today ( some of your SEC supporters don't want to hear about Bama losing 2 yrs ago,so you can stop using the GA/BSU game from 5 yrs ago).....BSU can play with any team given they have 3 weeks to prepare like the bowl games...I would love to see teams play OOC games that matter but the BCS has made it too hard for teams with one lose to make a NC game...If you play the games on the field this issue is dead....



now wait, jockey said that last second victories don't count.  so, the hook and ladder, that bsu pulled off, was a fluke and should be tossed from record.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

No Rex..  You said that, not me.. Don't twist my words around.  I said that UGA shouldn't have had to win with a last second field goal against ASU if UGA and the SEC were so much better then a lowly 2-7 Pac 10 team.  If UGA was that good, it should have been a blowout.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> No Rex..  You said that, not me.. Don't twist my words around.  I said that UGA shouldn't have had to win with a last second field goal against ASU if UGA and the SEC were so much better then a lowly 2-7 Pac 10 team.  If UGA was that good, it should have been a blowout.




and you also said that if you win the turnover battle, you are a better team.  so are we saying that wake was a better football team, in 2009, than the second best pac-10 team?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> No Rex.. You said that, not me.. Don't twist my words around. I said that UGA shouldn't have had to win with a last second field goal against ASU if UGA and the SEC were so much better then a lowly 2-7 Pac 10 team. If UGA was that good, it should have been a blowout.


 
So where is VT ranked now? That is the caliber team that Boise beat by only 3 points at the opening of this season.


----------



## Sweetwater (Oct 25, 2010)

jetjockey...
I'll give you this much...you may be right this year. Oregon may very well be capable of beating  an SEC team for the NC. THis is an odd year for the SEC with no flawless, dominating team when there's usually two every year. But I'm gonna let you in on a little secret I have learned from almost 15 years of keeping detailed spreadsheets on football trends for business(cough) reasons.
When comparing two teams who haven't played for the purposes of guessing which one will win...when one is a team that puts up gaudy numbers and stats on offense but against weaker competition to one that plays tighter games against better competition because they run the ball and play defense... 8 times out of ten the latter team wins.
1992 Sugar bowl...A miami team that blew away every team they played, throwing for mega pass yards, went against bama, who you guessed it,was the total opposite. I knew bama would win. I won a nice chunk of money because casual fans who don't know better always bet on the "Pretty boy"  passing team. 
Last years NC game....gaudy Texas loses to bama. And oh yeah, that's the game you blame Texas losing due to losing Colt McCoy yet claim on this thread good teams have depth..nevermind.
The SB when the giants beat the bills. 
THe SB when the giants beat the pats with it's record setting passing game.
The Hawaii-UGA Sugar bowl.
You get the picture. Football history is littered with these examples. It ain't my opinion, it's the truth.
Therefore, while Oregon may be putting some fat numbers on the scoreboard, Auburn just put up 500 yards rushing against the nations 6th best run defense...and coulda got 50 more if Auburn's coach hadn't of choose to throttle back.
While their pass defense is spotty, mostly mental mistakes on deep balls, there's nothing wrong with Auburn's front seven. They play physical, hit hard, and are fast. They are a typical SEC defense that year after year gets underestimated. Folks never learn the fact that we play defense here in the SEC and the never understand exactly what that means. They don't learn defense is why the SEC has been dominant in the NC game for years.
So you can point to Oregon and their point margins and claim they are #1, but history and facts don't back you up.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> So where is VT ranked now? That is the caliber team that Boise beat by only 3 points at the opening of this season.



#23... And climbing fast!


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Sweetwater...  Didn't Oregon already play one of those SEC teams this year?  Howd they do?  Oh ya, they put up more points on that SEC defense then any other SEC offense has all year, AND they allowed less points then any SEC defense except for one........  If you don't think USC could have beat any of the SEC teams when they made their run then you don't watch very much football.   Besides the fact that USC went 4-0 against the SEC, they also lost only 1 bowl game.  I guarantee the SEC wouldnt have all of those trophy's if it wasn't for the BCS computers love affair with the SEC, Oklahoma, and OSU.  The fact that the computers have LSU and Oklahoma ahead of Oregon right now only proves that point!


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> #23... And climbing fast!


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> #23... And climbing fast!



i don't know about fast, as they moved up from 25th.  that jmu loss is gonna sting.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Sweetwater... Didn't Oregon already play one of those SEC teams this year? Howd they do? Oh ya, they put up more points on that SEC defense then any other SEC offense has all year, AND they allowed less points then any SEC defense except for one........ If you don't think USC could have beat any of the SEC teams when they made their run then you don't watch very much football. Besides the fact that USC went 4-0 against the SEC, they also lost only 1 bowl game. I guarantee the SEC wouldnt have all of those trophy's if it wasn't for the BCS computers love affair with the SEC, Oklahoma, and OSU. The fact that the computers have LSU and Oklahoma ahead of Oregon right now only proves that point!


 
Oregon played their 1st string the entire game. In the SEC, when we get a good lead, the 2nd string gets some ball practice. It's good OJT for next year.. If SEC coaches left the 1st string in the numbers would be bigger. Much much bigger.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Sweetwater...  Didn't Oregon already play one of those SEC teams this year?  Howd they do?  Oh ya, they put up more points on that SEC defense then any other SEC offense has all year, AND they allowed less points then any SEC defense except for one........  If you don't think USC could have beat any of the SEC teams when they made their run then you don't watch very much football.   Besides the fact that USC went 4-0 against the SEC, they also lost only 1 bowl game.  I guarantee the SEC wouldnt have all of those trophy's if it wasn't for the BCS computers love affair with the SEC, Oklahoma, and OSU.  The fact that the computers have LSU and Oklahoma ahead of Oregon right now only proves that point!



it was just one game, right?  as you would say, they were the better team THAT day.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 25, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Oregon played their 1st string the entire game. In the SEC, when we get a good lead, the 2nd string gets some ball practice. It's good OJT for next year.. If SEC coaches left the 1st string in the numbers would be bigger. Much much bigger.



Something tells me that LSU had their first string in the game when they were down by 4 with 10 seconds left in the game.


----------



## riprap (Oct 25, 2010)

You'll never get your point across JJ. The bammers know more than you and have the NC rings to prove it. You know the Utah/Bama game doesn't count, they didn't win. All games the bammers lose don't count.

 Even some of the wins don't count some years.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 25, 2010)

riprap said:


> You'll never get your point across JJ. The bammers know more than you and have the NC rings to prove it. You know the Utah/Bama game doesn't count, they didn't win. All games the bammers lose don't count.
> 
> Even some of the wins don't count some years.



according to jj, the utah/bama game only proves that utah was the better team that day.  just like wake was the better team THAT day, when they beat stanford last year.


----------



## Sweetwater (Oct 25, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Sweetwater...  Didn't Oregon already play one of those SEC teams this year?  Howd they do?  Oh ya, they put up more points on that SEC defense then any other SEC offense has all year, AND they allowed less points then any SEC defense except for one........  If you don't think USC could have beat any of the SEC teams when they made their run then you don't watch very much football.   Besides the fact that USC went 4-0 against the SEC, they also lost only 1 bowl game.  I guarantee the SEC wouldnt have all of those trophy's if it wasn't for the BCS computers love affair with the SEC, Oklahoma, and OSU.  The fact that the computers have LSU and Oklahoma ahead of Oregon right now only proves that point!



jetjockey...
I'll give you this much...you may be right this year. Oregon may very well be capable of beating  an SEC team for the NC. THis is an odd year for the SEC with no flawless, dominating team when there's usually two every year. But I'm gonna let you in on a little secret I have learned from almost 15 years of keeping detailed spreadsheets on football trends for business(cough) reasons.
When comparing two teams who haven't played for the purposes of guessing which one will win...when one is a team that puts up gaudy numbers and stats on offense but against weaker competition to one that plays tighter games against better competition because they run the ball and play defense... 8 times out of ten the latter team wins.
1992 Sugar bowl...A miami team that blew away every team they played, throwing for mega pass yards, went against bama, who you guessed it,was the total opposite. I knew bama would win. I won a nice chunk of money because casual fans who don't know better always bet on the "Pretty boy"  passing team. 
Last years NC game....gaudy Texas loses to bama. And oh yeah, that's the game you blame Texas losing due to losing Colt McCoy yet claim on this thread good teams have depth..nevermind.
The SB when the giants beat the bills. 
THe SB when the giants beat the pats with it's record setting passing game.
Comparing Oregon to one game against an SEC opponent does not a statiscal base make. Auburn just hung 500 rushing yards on them. Neither point proves or disproves anything if Auburn and Oregon meet up in the NC game.
Bringing up USC is irrelevant. They aren't competing for the title this year. They are 1 out of 2 in the NC game, and the one just got took away and the rightful team that was also undefeated which got screwed by USC's cheating happens to be Auburn. While both points are also irrelevant to this year's nc game, I thought mine might offer some historical perspective on your whole "Oregon or Boise st is gonna get screwed by an underserving SEC team" position. The SEC has been screwed before, but do realize the polls might lend a little more weight to teams whose conference has dominated the NC game the last few years.
If things stand as they are and Auburn, Oregon, and Boise st. are unbeaten, there's no argument you could possibly make that Auburn doesn't deserve to be in the game. IMO Oregon will deserve it over Boise st. That's all you can ask for.  Neither team should go over Auburn who will have to beat last year's national champion and win the SEC title game to get there.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 25, 2010)

riprap said:


> You'll never get your point across JJ. The bammers know more than you and have the NC rings to prove it. You know the Utah/Bama game doesn't count, they didn't win. All games the bammers lose don't count.
> 
> Even some of the wins don't count some years.


 
Hey Marcus Welby MD, he's been slammin UGA just as much, if not more. What fuels your hatred for Saban so much? the fact that he has actually succeeded in his life? That would explain the class envy that is so obviously projected from each and everyone of your brilliant posts.


----------



## Jay Hughes (Oct 26, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Hey Marcus Welby MD, he's been slammin UGA just as much, if not more. What fuels your hatred for Saban so much? the fact that he has actually succeeded in his life? That would explain the class envy that is so obviously projected from each and everyone of your brilliant posts.



I love the way that, pretty much, he just gets ignored by everyone.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 26, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Hey Marcus Welby MD, he's been slammin UGA just as much, if not more. What fuels your hatred for Saban so much? the fact that he has actually succeeded in his life? That would explain the class envy that is so obviously projected from each and everyone of your brilliant posts.



I didn't bash UGA anymore then I did Bama.  And I didn't really bash either team.  What I tried to do was point out three things.. 
#1.  Just because the SEC has the championships doesn't mean the SEC is the best conference.  The SEC has the most championships because they win the popularity contest and get to play OSU and Choklahoma in the NC game every year.  You have to look no further then the computer rankings.  Oregon is currently #8 in the computer rankings behind Auburn, LSU, and Oklahoma among others.  LSU and Oklahoma are 1 loss teams, yet the computers still have them above Oregon.  Amazing.  You can also look at the Split NC year beatween LSU and USC.  USC didn't even get to play in the BCS game because of computers, yet they still split the NC because the human polls had them at #1.. Sound familiar?

#2.  In head to head matches the SEC hasn't proven its the dominate conference in college football.  All I hear is that the SEC has been so dominate the last 10 years, yet they have a losing record against the Pac 10 in the same time frame.  Many of the games they did win, were only because top SEC teams beat bottom tier Pac 10 teams.  Thats why I used UGA as an arguement because of their play against ASU.  I also use Tennessee because they have been OWNED by Pac 10 teams over the last 6 years, yet the teams that have been owning them (with the exception of this year) all finished much lower in the Pac 10standings then UT did in the SEC.  If the SEC is so much better then all the other conferences, then the #5 SEC team should be able to easily beat the #5 team from other conferences.   Unfortunatly for the SEC, the #7, 8, and 9 Pac 10 teams have fared very well against the middle and upper teams in the SEC..  They have fared much better against the SEC then they have their own conference.. Thats not the way its supposed to be if the SEC is so dominate..

#3.  Just because a team doesn't play in a BCS conference doesn't mean they can't be the best team in the country.  I know the Bama fans would love to forget the Utah game, but Utah was the best team in college football in 2008.  They had the only undefeated record and they crushed Bama in their BCS bowl game.  Unfortunatly, Florida got to play Choklahoma for the title.   Utah  had a chip on their shoulder and could have easily beat any team in the country, yet they were left out of the BCS game.    BSU is no different this year.  Yes, their competition sucks, but they haven't lost a game in two seasons.  BSU is easily as good as anyone in the country.  I don't care about who deserves what and who does or doesn't play in BCS conferences.  At the end of the season, I want to see the best two teams in the country play for the NC.  I don't care what conference they come from.   Until we get a playoff however, watching the two best teams in the country play for the NC is only a pipe dream!


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 26, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> I didn't bash UGA anymore then I did Bama.  And I didn't really bash either team.  What I tried to do was point out three things..
> #1.  Just because the SEC has the championships doesn't mean the SEC is the best conference.  The SEC has the most championships because they win the popularity contest and get to play OSU and Choklahoma in the NC game every year.  You have to look no further then the computer rankings.  Oregon is currently #8 in the computer rankings behind Auburn, LSU, and Oklahoma among others.  LSU and Oklahoma are 1 loss teams, yet the computers still have them above Oregon.  Amazing.  You can also look at the Split NC year beatween LSU and USC.  USC didn't even get to play in the BCS game because of computers, yet they still split the NC because the human polls had them at #1.. Sound familiar?
> 
> #2.  In head to head matches the SEC hasn't proven its the dominate conference in college football.  All I hear is that the SEC has been so dominate the last 10 years, yet they have a losing record against the Pac 10 in the same time frame.  Many of the games they did win, were only because top SEC teams beat bottom tier Pac 10 teams.  Thats why I used UGA as an arguement because of their play against ASU.  I also use Tennessee because they have been OWNED by Pac 10 teams over the last 6 years, yet the teams that have been owning them (with the exception of this year) all finished much lower in the Pac 10standings then UT did in the SEC.  If the SEC is so much better then all the other conferences, then the #5 SEC team should be able to easily beat the #5 team from other conferences.   Unfortunatly for the SEC, the #7, 8, and 9 Pac 10 teams have fared very well against the middle and upper teams in the SEC..  They have fared much better against the SEC then they have their own conference.. Thats not the way its supposed to be if the SEC is so dominate..
> #3.  Just because a team doesn't play in a BCS conference doesn't mean they can't be the best team in the country.  I know the Bama fans would love to forget the Utah game, but Utah was the best team in college football in 2008.  They had the only undefeated record and they crushed Bama in their BCS bowl game.  Unfortunatly, Florida got to play Choklahoma for the title.   Utah  had a chip on their shoulder and could have easily beat any team in the country, yet they were left out of the BCS game.    BSU is no different this year.  Yes, their competition sucks, but they haven't lost a game in two seasons.  BSU is easily as good as anyone in the country.  I don't care about who deserves what and who does or doesn't play in BCS conferences.  At the end of the season, I want to see the best two teams in the country play for the NC.  I don't care what conference they come from.   Until we get a playoff however, watching the two best teams in the country play for the NC is only a pipe dream!



#1. who did usc beat in 2004, to give them the national championship?  oh, it was choklahoma.  and i'm not sure what you argument is, about usc not playing in the nc game in 2003.  usc, lsu and oklahoma, were all 1 loss teams, at the conclusion of the regular season.  usc's loss, was to california, who was a 6 loss (regular season) team.  the same cal team, that beat usc, is the same cal team, that lost to kansas state, to open the season.  lsu's loss, was to a 4 loss florida team.  and oklahoma's 1 loss, was in the conference championship game, to a 3 loss kasas state team.  the human element was able to forgive the early loss, at the hands of a 6 loss cal team, but the computers didn't.  don't think you have much of an argument here.

#2. so i guess all the analyst, who discuss sports for a living, have it wrong.     herbstreet, robert smith, mark may and on and on...all say that the sec is the strongest conference, year in and out.  and none of the above mentioned people, played in the sec, so it's not like they are being biased.

#3. since you keep avoiding this question, i'll ask it one more time.  since wake beat stanford, in 2009, does that mean that wake, who was 3-5 in the acc, was a better team than stanford, who finished #2 in the pac-10?  you keep wanting to point out that utah's victory over bama, proves that utah was the better team, yet when we discuss the wake victory over stanford, you seem to say that wake was the better team THAT day.  so which is it?


----------



## BBQBOSS (Oct 26, 2010)

This thread is the likes of knowing there is a smiling nekkid granny behind door #1... You dont really want to look but you have to open it for no other reason than to get a good laugh...


----------



## SFStephens (Oct 26, 2010)

I'd like to extend this question to the rest of the thread, does BSU, TCU or Utah play the same level of competition as Alabama?


----------



## riprap (Oct 26, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Hey Marcus Welby MD, he's been slammin UGA just as much, if not more. What fuels your hatred for Saban so much? the fact that he has actually succeeded in his life? That would explain the class envy that is so obviously projected from each and everyone of your brilliant posts.



Whatever. You started this thread to start an argument so......

 You guys can argue til your blue in the face but at the end of the day you can only go by head to head matchups. How can you say a team was better THAT day? If you win the game , you must have been a better team over all. If the team that lost wasn't ready to play then you need to blame the coach. 

Several years ago Fla. State beat UF, then during the NC game UF beat Florida State. Must have been both teams were better THAT day. Shouldn't they have played a third game to see who was better THAT day too?

I go overboard with the bama crap but I just love how yall yake it so personal. We just have too many wishy washy fans around thewest side here. The crimson tags and flags have changed to orange and blue all of a sudden. I fish and hunt near and in Ala. a bunch and I have never seen the support like those teams are getting now. Where were they 10 yrs ago?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 26, 2010)

riprap said:


> I have never seen the support like those teams are getting now. Where were they 10 yrs ago?


 
Probably the same place the UGA fans were 6 weeks ago. Walmart couldn't give away a piece of UGA fan garb. Now it's running off of the shelf. Funny how that works.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 26, 2010)

riprap said:


> How can you say a team was better THAT day? If you win the game , you must have been a better team over all.



Its just like baseball and basketball.  How many times has a team won the first two games of a series only to get swept the last 4 games?  

Rex asked me if I thought that Wake was better then Stanford.  I replyed that on "that day" they were.  Stanford didn't show up for the second half and Wake beat them with a last second TD.  However, Stanford is a better football team overall and they proved it this year by destroying Wake to return the favor.


----------



## riprap (Oct 26, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Its just like baseball and basketball.  How many times has a team won the first two games of a series only to get swept the last 4 games?
> 
> Rex asked me if I thought that Wake was better then Stanford.  I replyed that on "that day" they were.  Stanford didn't show up for the second half and Wake beat them with a last second TD.  However, Stanford is a better football team overall and they proved it this year by destroying Wake to return the favor.



"That season" would be a better term. THAT day just means you got lucky. A win is a win, no matter who was at fault.


----------



## yellowduckdog (Oct 26, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Probably the same place the UGA fans were 6 weeks ago. Walmart couldn't give away a piece of UGA fan garb. Now it's running off of the shelf. Funny how that works.


----------



## riprap (Oct 26, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Probably the same place the UGA fans were 6 weeks ago. Walmart couldn't give away a piece of UGA fan garb. Now it's running off of the shelf. Funny how that works.



Enjoy your purchase. I saw you having trouble at the self checkout line though. That's a high tech piece of equipment.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 26, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Its just like baseball and basketball.  How many times has a team won the first two games of a series only to get swept the last 4 games?
> 
> Rex asked me if I thought that Wake was better then Stanford.  I replyed that on "that day" they were.  Stanford didn't show up for the second half and Wake beat them with a last second TD.  However, Stanford is a better football team overall and they proved it this year by destroying Wake to return the favor.



well, i feel certain that bama would have beaten utah easily, if they had played in 2009, thus proving that they were a better team.


----------



## MCBUCK (Oct 26, 2010)

JJ...is this what you were looking for anyway?

Tennessee (1998), LSU (2003, 2007), Florida (2006, 2008), Alabama (2009)

USC (2004)


And App State owns Michigan.


----------



## Les Miles (Oct 26, 2010)

MCBUCK said:


> JJ...is this what you were looking for anyway?
> 
> Tennessee (1998), LSU (2003, 2007), Florida (2006, 2008), Alabama (2009)
> 
> ...



JJ doesn't want to face the truth. He wants to cherry pick certain games and statistics to try and bolster his weak argument.

Besides, the history books will show the real facts of SEC dominance. Not some Pac-10 homer's conspiracy theory.


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 26, 2010)

Comeaux said:


> JJ doesn't want to face the truth. He wants to cherry pick certain games and statistics to try and bolster his weak argument.
> 
> Besides, the history books will show the real facts of SEC dominance. Not some Pac-10 homer's conspiracy theory.



exactly

pac 10 had a good run but sec is the dominant conference and it shows year in and year out. i'm a uga fan since birth but i cheered on lsu, bama, uf, and tenn when they were playing for nc. i wouldnt mind is auburn won out and newton won the heisman just to keep it in the sec.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 26, 2010)

riprap said:


> Enjoy your purchase. I saw you having trouble at the self checkout line though. That's a high tech piece of equipment.


 
Yeah, I hate those things. Full price for something that is saving the company the cost of an employee, what a scam. Glad you saw me buying my halloween costume though. I figured a UGA fan outfit was about as scary as it could get...


----------



## riprap (Oct 26, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Yeah, I hate those things. Full price for something that is saving the company the cost of an employee, what a scam. Glad you saw me buying my halloween costume though. I figured a UGA fan outfit was about as scary as it could get...



I hope you don't have any outstanding parking tickets. I might make bail for ya.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 26, 2010)

riprap said:


> I hope you don't have any outstanding parking tickets. I might make bail for ya.


 
I stay out of downtown Atl where the parking scam is happening. Not because of that, but just because anything inside 285 is just too close to Ga. Tech...


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 27, 2010)

242outdoors said:


> exactly
> 
> pac 10 had a good run but sec is the dominant conference and it shows year in and year out. i'm a uga fan since birth but i cheered on lsu, bama, uf, and tenn when they were playing for nc. i wouldnt mind is auburn won out and newton won the heisman just to keep it in the sec.



From what I saw on Saturday the second part is done,the first part is a little rough but very likely...


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 27, 2010)

riprap said:


> "That season" would be a better term. THAT day just means you got lucky. A win is a win, no matter who was at fault.



The only problem with " that season" is if they play 2 games and split.....


----------



## LanierSpots (Oct 27, 2010)

IF we are going to use these old recoreds, head to head matches, bull crap,  Why would anyone want to see Boise play a SEC team in the championship?

Boise is 0-4 against the SEC.  All since 2000 as well.   

Why bother?

See how stupid that is?


----------



## MudDucker (Oct 27, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Yeah, I hate those things. Full price for something that is saving the company the cost of an employee, what a scam. Glad you saw me buying my halloween costume though. I figured a UGA fan outfit was about as scary as it could get...



Thats funny, you told the lady at the checkout that you were buying that outfit for a job interview.  You wanted to appear smart instead of backwards.  Everyone knows if something bad happens, head to Alabama, because it is 20 years behind the times.


----------



## benellisbe (Oct 27, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> bsu  49-3 (06-09)
> tcu 42-10 (06-09)
> Utah 40-12 (06-09)
> 
> Just for fun Alabama 39-15 (06-09)



Add in 2005 and it looks like this:

BSU 58 - 7 (65 Total Games - 89%)
Bama 49 - 17 (66 Total Games - 74.24%)
Utah 47 - 17 (64 Total Games - 73.44%)
TCU 43 - 11 (54 Total Games - 79.63%)

To further bring light to the subject JJ brought up, here are the ranked teams played (Wins/Loss) by year for each school JJ identified:

BSU  - Total Ranked Teams (05 - 09) - 14 Total:
2005 - L #13 UGA, L #19 Boston Coll, L #20 Fresno (3 total)
2006 - W #10 Chokelahoma (1 total)
2007 - W #23 Webber (I forgot they were ever ranked), W #21 San Jose, W #19 Utah State, Win #15 Idaho (same comment as webber), L #13 Hawaii, L #20 Washington (6 total)
2008 - W #12 Oregon, L #11 Texas Christian (2 Total)
2009 - W #14 Oregon, W #3 TCU (2 total)

Utah - Total Ranked Teams (05 - 09) - 10 Total:
2005 (Urban Meyer's last year) - W #24 GA Tech (1 total)
2006 - L #22 BSU (1 total)
2007 - W #11 UCLA, L #23 BYU (2 Total)
2008 - W #24Michigan, W #11 TCU, W #14 BYU, W #4 Bama (4 total)
2009 - L #4 TCU, L #18 BYU (2 Total)

TCU - Total Ranked Teams (05 - 09) - 10 Total:
2005 - W #7 Chokelahoma (1 Total)
2006 - W #24 Texas Tech (1 Total)
2007 - L #7 Texas (1 Total)
2008 - L #2 Chokelahoma, L #10 Utah, W #8 BYU, W #9 BSU (4 total)
2009 - W #16 BYU, W #16 Utah, L #6 BSU (3 Total)

Alabama - Total Ranked Teams (05 - 09) - *25 Total*:
2005 - W #5 Florida, W #17 Tenn, W #16 Tex Tech, L #5 LSU, L #11 Auburn (5 Total)
2006 - L #5 Florida, L #7 Tenn , L #12 LSU, L #15 Auburn (4 Total)
2007 - W #16 Arkansas, W #20 Tenn, L #22 UGA, L #3 LSU, L #25 Auburn (5 Total - Those keeping track Bama has already played more ranked teams then Utah and TCU and is tied with BSU's Totals for 05 - 09)
2008 - W #9 Clemson, W #3 UGA, W #15 LSU, L #2 Florida, L #7 Utah (5 Total)
2009 - W #7 VA Tech, W  #20 Ole Miss, W #22 USCe, W #9 LSU, W #1 Florida, W #2 Texas (6 Total)

I absolutely hate the BCS and would love a playoff.  There is no way TCU, Utah, BSU would go undefeated more then 1 time every 5 years.  I don't think any of the teams, including Bama, can keep up with the level of competition in the SEC or Pac-10.  Any given saturday a team can lose, I totally agree with JJ that bama got blown out in 08 and I don't care about the Wind in their sails argument.  Until there is a playoff, we will never know. I don't think BSU gets a shot this year either...


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

MCBUCK said:


> JJ...is this what you were looking for anyway?
> 
> Tennessee (1998), LSU (2003, 2007), Florida (2006, 2008), Alabama (2009)
> 
> ...



Sure.  Unfortunatly you can see why the BCS is a joke!  Three of those years the SEC won championships the best team of the decade was left out of the BCS NC game!  I can also tell you that in 1 NC game, USC scored more points, and allowed less points against OU, then LSU and UF COMBINED!  ...............USC vs OU .. Points for 55, points against 19.  LSU and UF combined against OU.  Points for 45, points against 28...  


2003
LSU 12-1
OU 12-1 (didn't even win their conference)
USC 12-1   (Left out, but split the NC with LSU)

2007
LSU 11-2
Ohio St 11-1 (lost to LSU)
USC 11-2 (Left out again, beat Illinois in Rose Bowl 49-17)

2008
Florida 11-1
OU  11-1 (woulnd't have been in the game in any other conference except with the Big 12's tie breaker rules)
USC 11-1 (Left out yet again, Beat Penn state 38-24 in Rose Bowl)

If USC would have played in those 3 NC games the Pac 10 would have 4 BCS NC's, and the SEC would have 3!  The BCS is a joke!


----------



## benellisbe (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Sure.  Unfortunatly you can see why the BCS is a joke!  Three of those years the SEC won championships the best team of the decade was left out of the BCS NC game!  I can also tell you that in 1 NC game, USC scored more points, and allowed less points against OU, then LSU and UF COMBINED!  ...............USC vs OU .. Points for 55, points against 19.  LSU and UF combined against OU.  Points for 45, points against 28...
> 
> 
> 2003
> ...



In 2004 Auburn was left out and USC was found to have cheated with Bush in 05 and probably was before 04 as well.....  If the 50 year NCAA investigation of Bush hadn't taken as long (slight exaggeration) maybe the Pac-10 would look a little different in 04 - 07.


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 27, 2010)

Too many IF'S!!! if usc would have just gone undefeated and not choked then they would have played in the nc and not left it up to the computers.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 27, 2010)

I guess we'll find out in 4 or 5 weeks. If "If's" and "But's" were candy and nuts it'd be Christmas all year long..


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

242outdoors said:


> Too many IF'S!!! if usc would have just gone undefeated and not choked then they would have played in the nc and not left it up to the computers.



Let me get this straight..  In 2003 USC lost in 3 overtimes by a last second field goal against CAL(8-6) early in the season, OU got killed in the Big 12 Championship game by Kansas State 35-7, and LSU got totally shut down by UF (8-5) 7-19......   LSU and OU had the worst losses of the three teams , yet they get to play in the BCS NC game!   Now your going to tell me that USC is the team that choked?  The only thing LSU and OU had in their favor was the computers.  Thats it.  Thats why LSU split the NC with USC.


----------



## benellisbe (Oct 27, 2010)

And why didn't Auburn split it with USC in 04?


----------



## DSGB (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Let me get this straight..  In 2003 USC lost in 3 overtimes by a last second field goal against CAL(8-6) early in the season, OU got killed in the Big 12 Championship game by Kansas State 35-7, and LSU got totally shut down by UF (8-5) 7-19......   LSU and OU had the worst losses of the three teams , yet they get to play in the BCS NC game!   Now your going to tell me that USC is the team that choked?  The only thing LSU and OU had in their favor was the computers.  Thats it.  Thats why LSU split the NC with USC.



LSU beat #11 GA twice, beat #18 Miss, and lost to #17 FLA.

OU beat #5 Texas, beat #22 OK St, and lost to #10 Kansas.

USC beat #14 Wash St, and lost to UNRANKED Cal.

That's why USC was left out.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

benellisbe said:


> And why didn't Auburn split it with USC in 04?



Because they got pummeld by USC the previous two years and struggled to beat a 2 loss VT in the Sugar Bowl.  USC went undefeated and crushed another undefeated team in their bowl game........  You could also look at USC's and Auburns 1 common opponent that year, VT.  USC beat them the first game of the season  by 11, and ran up 373 yards compared to VT's 294.  Auburn beat them the last game of the season by 3 while giving up 375 yards and only gaining 299.  You do the math!


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 27, 2010)

DSGB said:


> LSU beat #11 GA twice, beat #18 Miss, and lost to #17 FLA.
> 
> OU beat #5 Texas, beat #22 OK St, and lost to #10 Kansas.
> 
> ...



thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jj, you just dont get it. there is no competition over in the west.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

DSGB said:


> OU beat #5 Texas, beat #22 OK St, and lost to #10 Kansas.



First off, OK St didn't finish in the top 25.  USC and OU both beat 1 team who finished in the top 25 that year. Secondly, shouldn't you at least have to win your conference to be considered for the BCS NC game?  You guys brag about having a conference championship game every year.  Whats the point if you don't even have to win your conference to play in the NC game??


----------



## DSGB (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Shouldn't you at least have to win your conference to be considered for the BCS NC game?



Shouldn't you have a conference championship game to determine a conference champion?


----------



## chadair (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> First off, OK St didn't finish in the top 25.  USC and OU both beat 1 team who finished in the top 25 that year. Secondly, shouldn't you at least have to win your conference to be considered for the BCS NC game?  You guys brag about having a conference championship game every year.  Whats the point if you don't even have to win your conference to play in the NC game??


yes u should have to win your conference. as far as beatin top 25 teams comment goes, thats exactly the point all of us here have tried to make about BSU


----------



## benellisbe (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Because they got pummeld by USC the previous two years and struggled to beat a 2 loss VT in the Sugar Bowl.  USC went undefeated and crushed another undefeated team in their bowl game........  You could also look at USC's and Auburns 1 common opponent that year, VT.  USC beat them the first game of the season  by 11, and ran up 373 yards compared to VT's 294.  Auburn beat them the last game of the season by 3 while giving up 375 yards and only gaining 299.  You do the math!



That is a typical USC Pac-10 type response, same arguments for BSU and those other fluff teams on the west coast.  I suppose you are going to continue to ignore post 132...


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

DSGB said:


> Shouldn't you have a conference championship game to determine a conference champion?



Not when you play a 9 game conference schedule, play everyone in your conference, and already know who the conference champion is.  

Heres how sad the BCS is.

In 2003 when the first BCS standings came out OU was #1 and Miami was #2.  It stayed that way for 2 weeks until Miami lost.  USC moved to #2 until the 5th week when OSU moved to the #2 spot, even though USC hadn't lost.  It stayed that way for 1 week because OSU lost immediatly.  USC was then again put into the #2 spot, and stayed that way until the final BCS standings.  Oklahoma, even though they got killed in the Big 12 Championship game, stayed #1 and LSU moved to #2, even though USC still hadn't lost.  Explain to me how you get killed in your conference championship game and remain #1.   Not only did USC not move up to #1 after OU got creamed in the Big 12 Championship  game, LSU knocked them out of the #2 BCS spot.   Yet you guys complain that Auburn was treated unfairly!  What a crock!

OCT 20 Oklahoma #1 Miami #2
OCT 27 Oklahoma #1 Miami  #2(Virginia Tech 31, Miami 7) 
NOV 3 Oklahoma #1 USC  #2
NOV 10 Oklahoma#1 USC #2  
NOV 17 Oklahoma#1 Ohio State#2  (Michigan 35, Ohio State 21) 
NOV 24 Oklahoma #1 USC#2  
DEC 1 Oklahoma#1 USC  #2(LSU 34, Georgia 13) 
Dec 6  Kansas St 35- Oklahoma 7
FINAL Oklahoma#1 LSU#2 

I can't fathom how you guys are going to try and defend that one!


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

benellisbe said:


> That is a typical USC Pac-10 type response, same arguments for BSU and those other fluff teams on the west coast.  I suppose you are going to continue to ignore post 132...



Really?  Give me 1 good excuse why Auburn should have beat USC out of the BCS game in 2004?


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Really?  Give me 1 good excuse why Auburn should have beat USC out of the BCS game in 2004?



no excuses but i'll give reasons....they beat #5 lsu, #10 tenn, #8 uga, #15 tenn(again) in the sec championship.

auburn was a more deserving team by just who they beat.


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 27, 2010)

usc beat #7 cal and #15 asu.....watch out!


----------



## DSGB (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Not when you play a 9 game conference schedule, play everyone in your conference, and already know who the conference champion is.
> 
> Heres how sad the BCS is.
> 
> ...



That was OUs only loss and it was to a ranked team. I guess you think USC should have jumped them, since their loss came earlier in the season, even though it was to an unranked team?
USC did not play and LSU beat a ranked team, so they jumped USC. It should have been LSU #1 and Oklahoma #2.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

242outdoors said:


> no excuses but i'll give reasons....they beat #5 lsu, #10 tenn, #8 uga, #15 tenn(again) in the sec championship.
> 
> auburn was a more deserving team by just who they beat.



Doesn't Auburn have to beat VT worse then USC did to have a legitimate arguement?   Oh ya.. Those pesky head to head results!  I love it how you guys think Auburn deserved to play in the NC over USC, even though USC crushed them the two previous years, and then you turn around and claim how BSU couldn't play in the SEC because they lost to UGA 6 years ago.


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Doesn't Auburn have to beat VT worse then USC did to have a legitimate arguement?   Oh ya.. Those pesky head to head results!  I love it how you guys think Auburn deserved to play in the NC over USC, even though USC crushed them the two previous years, and then you turn around and claim how BSU couldn't play in the SEC because they lost to UGA 6 years ago.



auburn shouldn't have had to play vatech in the first place....thats my point silly. i dont believe the computers look at the previous years wins and losses does it? if bama goes 0-12 one year and then 12-0 the next they dont deserve a shot in the nc? come on now. bsu needs to schedule some real teams and join a real conference and then the computers will recognize them for something other than a blue field and dII opponents.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

DSGB said:


> That was OUs only loss and it was to a ranked team. I guess you think USC should have jumped them, since their loss came earlier in the season, even though it was to an unranked team?
> USC did not play and LSU beat a ranked team, so they jumped USC. It should have been LSU #1 and Oklahoma #2.



You don't honestly believe that do you?  I believe OU should have dropped because they weren't even the best team in their conference, and they got destroyed!  It wasn't a last second loss, or a close game.  They got KILLED!


----------



## benellisbe (Oct 27, 2010)

242outdoors said:


> auburn shouldn't have had to play vatech in the first place....thats my point silly. i dont believe the computers look at the previous years wins and losses does it? if bama goes 0-12 one year and then 12-0 the next they dont deserve a shot in the nc? come on now. bsu needs to schedule some real teams and join a real conference and then the computers will recognize them for something other than a blue field and dII opponents.



JJ, see post 132 for a better explanation of strength of schedule for your beloved TCU, UTAH, BSU.  BTW, 242 is correct and the computers don't care about last year.


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 27, 2010)

benellisbe said:


> JJ, see post 132 for a better explanation of strength of schedule for your beloved TCU, UTAH, BSU.  BTW, 242 is correct and the computers don't care about last year.



he wont learn benelli.....he's overflowing with pac10 and bronco love...must be a west coast fad..


----------



## benellisbe (Oct 27, 2010)

Very True.  I will say that the PAC-10 is a well rounded conference, but they need a conference championship same with the Big 11...


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

benellisbe said:


> Very True.  I will say that the PAC-10 is a well rounded conference, but they need a conference championship same with the Big 11...



Now that they are a 12 team conference, they have one.  When is the SEC going to start playing a 9 game conference schedule like the Pac 10?


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Now that they are a 12 team conference, they have one.  When is the SEC going to start playing a 9 game conference schedule like the Pac 10?



when we feel the need to....but with all these national championshops i think we'll stick with what's working


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

242outdoors said:


> auburn shouldn't have had to play vatech in the first place....thats my point silly. i dont believe the computers look at the previous years wins and losses does it? if bama goes 0-12 one year and then 12-0 the next they dont deserve a shot in the nc? come on now. bsu needs to schedule some real teams and join a real conference and then the computers will recognize them for something other than a blue field and dII opponents.



If Auburn could barely beat VT, do you really think they were going to beat USC?    Just for the record.   BSU doesn't play a single DII FCS team this year!


----------



## 242outdoors (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> If Auburn could barely beat VT, do you really think they were going to beat USC?    Just for the record.   BSU doesn't play a single DII FCS team this year!



they might not have a true dII school on the schedule but i guarantee the teams they play wouldnt compete with alot of dII schools over here.

hard to say who would have won the game between auburn and usc but i like auburn in that one. they played tougher competition all season and would have had plenty of time to prepare for cheating reggie bush. didnt usc get that championship vacated?


----------



## benellisbe (Oct 27, 2010)

Last news I saw the Pac-12 was going to transition to a traditional 12 team conference.  They never said anything about staying in a 9-game "conference" play....

JJ are you still avoiding Post 132  about your mighty BSU, TCU and Utah schedules (05 - 09)?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

benellisbe said:


> Last news I saw the Pac-12 was going to transition to a traditional 12 team conference.  They never said anything about staying in a 9-game "conference" play....
> 
> JJ are you still avoiding Post 132  about your mighty BSU, TCU and Utah schedules (05 - 09)?



Benellisbe... Try and keep up.  The world moves pretty fast these days!

"USC and UCLA will not be in the same division as Cal and Stanford in the new Pac-12 Conference, but the Southern California schools will face their Northern California rivals in football every year. 

Commissioner Larry Scott announced the divisional alignment and other details of the expanded conference at a news conference in San Francisco this morning.

The South Division will consist of USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State and conference newcomers Colorado and Utah. The North will consist of Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State.

Each team will play nine conference games: five against divisional rivals and four against schools from the other division. The new scheduling format locks in annual inter-divisional games between the Northern and Southern California teams.

The annual Pac-12 championship game will take place in December at the home site of the conference’s highest-seeded team."


Im not ignoring post 132.  This isn't about what conference is the toughest, its about who the best team in the country is.  In the NFL, even the team who wins the worst division  gets a shot at playing for the Super Bowl.  Why should it be any different in college football?  If BSU is the best team in the country, they should get to play in the BCS game.  Simple as that.  If BSU was winning games by the skin of their teeth, then ya, Id say they don't deserve it.  But BSU has been crushing everyone they play.  They have the longest winning streak in college football, they have the best record over the last 5 years, and they are 2-0 in BCS bowl games.  They are 3-0 against teams that were ranked in the top 10 as well.  Yes, they play in a week confernce, but that doesn't mean they are a weak team.  And lets face it, how often do teams really go undefeated in any conference play?  Its pretty rare.


----------



## benellisbe (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Benellisbe... Try and keep up.  The world moves pretty fast these days!
> 
> "USC and UCLA will not be in the same division as Cal and Stanford in the new Pac-12 Conference, but the Southern California schools will face their Northern California rivals in football every year.
> 
> ...



I can agree with some of your post above, but most of your previous posts, regarding BSU, are about how they are the best in the country. Their schedule just doesn't support that ASSUMPTION.  I agree they are handling their business but they don't compete against 5+ ranked teams every year and that is really the problem with BSU, Utah, TCU, ECU, etc.  They are great teams, I am not taking anything away from them, especially BSU, but until they play a schedule worthy of a #3 ranked team and a shot at the NC, they are just table fodder for the rest of the AQ schools.  Do I think they can beat any team on any given saturday, sure in a single game.  Could they compete week in and week out against a stronger schedule (not talking conference) and still go Undefeated, highly unlikely.  Just a side note, I am an Almost Competitive Conference fan myself. Plus, if the BCS goes playoff what will we have to post about...


----------



## riprap (Oct 27, 2010)

Until there is a playoff the BCS is the best thing going to determine a NC. There is no one person to blame for voting and the system the computer uses are all in place before the season starts. The mind of the computer cannot be changed if the school has made more improvements. Boise is getting the love from the voters, but not the computer. The computer doesn't care or take sides.


----------



## benellisbe (Oct 27, 2010)

Agreed.  I think the voters want to see BSU get in.  If they do get a chance at Auburn, Bama or Oregon and win, it is a strong argument for a playoff isn't it?


----------



## MCBUCK (Oct 27, 2010)

So JJ....are you a BSU fan or a USC fan?  I am still trying to figure that out.

You know...I bet you could reason that App State should have played for the BCS NC the year they beat Michigan, just because Michigan was ranked #3 when App beat em.
One more thing JJ: see if you can shorten your reasonings some too.  These "Margret Mitchell" posts of yours are putting me to sleep.


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 27, 2010)

MCBUCK said:


> So JJ....are you a BSU fan or a USC fan?  I am still trying to figure that out.
> 
> You know...I bet you could reason that App State should have played for the BCS NC the year they beat Michigan, just because Michigan was ranked #3 when App beat em.
> One more thing JJ: see if you can shorten your reasonings some too.  These "Margret Mitchell" posts of yours are putting me to sleep.



Then don't read them!


----------



## riprap (Oct 27, 2010)

LanierSpots said:


> IF we are going to use these old recoreds, head to head matches, bull crap,  Why would anyone want to see Boise play a SEC team in the championship?
> 
> Boise is 0-4 against the SEC.  All since 2000 as well.
> 
> ...



Good point. 

The head to head matchups should be for each team, not a conference. You will never know just how good a conference is by the in conference record. 

We all know the SEC east is a little down this year, but outside looking in how can you tell? Since there are no undefeated teams in the east does that mean they are strong and beating each other up? How about the west, since Auburn is undefeated and a couple of 1 loss teams, that must mean the west is weak. Now we all know the west is stronger over all, but unless you really follow the SEC you could never know. 

Same could be said by the PAC 10 but they are on the west coast and real football fans are too tired from watching good football on the east coast.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 27, 2010)

riprap said:


> Good point.
> 
> The head to head matchups should be for each team, not a conference. You will never know just how good a conference is by the in conference record.
> 
> ...


 I've watched a couple of them. It's sort of like watching highschool football. Doesn't compare to the SEC football games..


----------



## LanierSpots (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> If Auburn could barely beat VT, do you really think they were going to beat USC?    Just for the record.   BSU doesn't play a single DII FCS team this year!



No but half the teams Boise plays this year are in the 100's in rankings.  

I wont get into the Auburn/USC deal.  You know how I feel and it would be useless.


----------



## Sweetwater (Oct 27, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I've watched a couple of them. It's sort of like watching highschool football. Doesn't compare to the SEC football games..



Me too, but in all honesty, and you know I'm an SEC guy, so did Utah the 3 hours of game tape, actual game tape, I watched them before dropping a couple bills against them when they played bama in the Sugar bowl. And I gave 8 points.

I think Auburn and bama would beat either Oregon or B state on a neutral field, but film can be deceiving.


----------



## MCBUCK (Oct 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Then don't read them!



I skim over them somewhat.  It could be likened to catching a few minutes of a Chris Matthews commentary;  uses up a lot of space, and sounds really loud, but not any real content there.


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 28, 2010)

benellisbe said:


> JJ, see post 132 for a better explanation of strength of schedule for your beloved TCU, UTAH, BSU.  BTW, 242 is correct and the computers don't care about last year.



And the computer should not care about last year....



242outdoors said:


> he wont learn benelli.....he's overflowing with pac10 and bronco love...must be a west coast fad..



It may be Pac10 love for him ,but for me it is pure hatred of the BCS and how teams are getting stiffed year after year....It does not matter if it is BSU,TCU,Utah or yes Auburn,until we play the game on the field and keep a computer ( that can be manipulated)out of the debate....


----------



## LanierSpots (Oct 28, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> And the computer should not care about last year....
> 
> 
> 
> It may be Pac10 love for him ,but for me it is pure hatred of the BCS and how teams are getting stiffed year after year....It does not matter if it is BSU,TCU,Utah or yes Auburn,until we play the game on the field and keep a computer ( that can be manipulated)out of the debate....




You do realize that the computer is just a calculation of the personal polls right?   All the computer does is calculate and sort all the data from the HUMAN POLLS and uses a algorithm to determine who has played the best competition.   It cant possibly tell what team has played the best competition without knowing where those teams rank.

Its just doing something that a person could do with a pencil and paper in a few months


----------



## jmfauver (Oct 28, 2010)

LanierSpots said:


> You do realize that the computer is just a calculation of the personal polls right?   All the computer does is calculate and sort all the data from the HUMAN POLLS and uses a algorithm to determine who has played the best competition.   It cant possibly tell what team has played the best competition without knowing where those teams rank.
> 
> Its just doing something that a person could do with a pencil and paper in a few months



The computer is something that can be manipulated no different then a person...My point is playoff system...then the whole we got stiffed on playing for a NC is over,at least then it would be played on a field....


----------



## SFStephens (Oct 28, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> bsu  49-3 (06-09)
> tcu 42-10 (06-09)
> Utah 40-12 (06-09)
> 
> Just for fun Alabama 39-15 (06-09)



Just for fun and I had time to kill.......

The combined win-loss record for scheduled opponents from 2006 till 2009 (bowls excluded):

BSU  --  267-326
TCU  --  271-305
Utah --  282-295

BAMA -- 326-279

Yep, guess they do play the same level of competition...


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 28, 2010)

SFStephens said:


> Just for fun and I had time to kill.......
> 
> The combined win-loss record for scheduled opponents from 2006 till 2009 (bowls excluded):
> 
> ...



Just for fun, and I have time to kil.....

Combined win loss record for Texas's American League West opponents.

222-264

Combine win loss record for Tampa Bays AL East opponents.

335-313

Guess who's playing in the world series?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 28, 2010)

This is like watching Ol' Red have an arguement with himself. He has thrown so many irrelevent stats out that even he doesn't know what to believe....


----------



## Les Miles (Oct 28, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> This is like watching Ol' Red have an arguement with himself. He has thrown so many irrelevent stats out that even he doesn't know what to believe....



But their field is blue and they are proven - bawahahaha


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 28, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> This is like watching Ol' Red have an arguement with himself. He has thrown so many irrelevent stats out that even he doesn't know what to believe....



Kinda throws the entire strength of schedule arguement out the windown now doesn't it!  How did the team in the worst division of the American league with the worst competition beat the teams from the so called "power division" to make it to the World Series?


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 28, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Kinda throws the entire strength of schedule arguement out the windown now doesn't it! How did the team in the worst division of the American league with the worst competition beat the teams from the so called "power division" to make it to the World Series?


 
You just can't accept it can you?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 28, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You just can't accept it can you?



If I was wrong I could.. But Im not!


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Oct 28, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> If I was wrong I could.. But Im not!


 
Of course..........you are proven!!


----------



## SFStephens (Oct 28, 2010)

As I see it, you've been wrong the entire thread.  All you have to do is look at BSU, TCU, and Utah's schedules.  They sprinkle in a couple recognizable teams then take turns passing around the same powder puffs.  It's not that I don't like any of these teams, it's just that they don't deserve jack by beating up on high school teams.


----------



## SFStephens (Oct 28, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Of course..........you are proven!!



.....and he'd like to play on a blue field......


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 4, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> It's a moot point arguing with JJ. In his little world every western team on the schedule is top tier. I guess that's why so many of them are ranked in the top 25..



Only 3 at last count. Oregon, Stanford, and Arizona.

But the SEC has 6.


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 4, 2010)

Comeaux said:


> Only 3 at last count. Oregon, Stanford, and Arizona.
> 
> But the SEC has 6.



If the Pac 10 played the same SOS as the SEC teams did, they would have 6 as well.   But the boys out west don't run from tough games.


----------



## dmathis20 (Nov 4, 2010)

JJ, dont dodge the truth. You know they don't deserve to be in the top 25, just admit it. It doesn't matter if our backups can or cannot cut it. It matters that we play a tough schedule. That's why we have people injured, tired, beat up. But hey, like where your schedule is? Well don't get an NC. For college football, I pray they get a tougher schedule. Until then.. no respect. Sorry.


----------



## dmathis20 (Nov 4, 2010)

Alabama plays a top 25, usually a top 10 team at the start of every year. THEN the sec schedule. Whatever you are on, I want 2!!


----------



## dmathis20 (Nov 4, 2010)

Sorry, I am a little behind


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 4, 2010)

I love you SEC guys.  Living life in a complete haze!  I wish I could live in your world.  Unfortunately, reality always sets in.

http://www.teamrankings.com/college-...hedule-by-team

1 Wash State (0-8) 39.0 1 61 2 
2 Oregon St (4-3) 38.8 1 35 3 
3 USC (5-3) 38.0 3 85 13 
4 Washington (3-5) 37.8 4 86 8 
5 California (3-4) 37.4 2 49 4 
6 Arizona St (2-4) 36.4 1 62 1 
7 Missouri (6-1) 36.3 7 103 22 
8 Oregon (7-0) 36.2 4 60 27 
9 Stanford (6-1) 35.4 1 32 6 
10 UCLA (3-5) 35.4 5 74 9 
11 Wisconsin (6-1) 34.8 10 103 10 
12 Tennessee (1-6) 34.7 2 88 20 
13 Nebraska (6-1) 34.3 12 95 26 
14 LSU (6-1) 33.2 2 68 17 
15 NC State (5-2) 32.9 15 68 30 
16 Air Force (4-4) 32.7 9 65 28 
17 Arizona (6-1) 32.6 3 73 24 
18 Iowa (5-2) 32.5 2 51 18 
19 Florida St (5-2) 32.1 9 91 37 
20 Kansas St (4-3) 32.1 7 82 36 
21 Michigan St (7-1) 31.9 21 102 50 
22 Colorado (3-5) 31.8 21 98 23 
23 Oklahoma (7-1) 31.7 5 63 5 
24 Miami (FL) (4-3) 31.7 1 25 12 
25 Florida (5-3) 31.6 2 96 32 
29 Auburn


Sagarins ratings 

http://www.tima.com/~jsagarin/sports/cfsend.htm


1 Oregon State
2 Washington State
3 Washington
4 UCLA
5 Colorado
6 Tennessee
7 California
8 Wyoming
9 Arizona State
10 Southern Cal
11 Iowa St
12 BYU
13 San Jose St
14 UNLV
15 Texas
16 Missouri
17 Texas Tech
18 Oklahoma
19 Florida
20 Vanderbilt
21 Arizona
22 Miami
23 Kansas State
24 Georgia
25 Stanford
29 Auburn
42 Oregon

And just for good measure.  Heres one that one of your SEC guys posted just for reference..

GBE rankings
1 Washington 5.01649
2 Colorado 5.09359
3 Oregon State 5.10737
4 Illinois 5.16557
5 Wyoming 5.19921
6 Tennessee 5.21139
7 Washington State 5.24178
8 UCLA 5.24981
9 Auburn 5.3111310 BYU 5.34105
11 Missouri 5.35240
12 Florida 5.35722
13 Notre Dame 5.36696
14 UNLV 5.37506
15 Iowa State 5.39509


Reality sucks doesn't it!


----------



## MCBUCK (Nov 4, 2010)

Find some more JJ.  There are all kinds of SOS's out there.
Here is the BCS's, and how they score a SOS.

Rank Team Score Tie Breaker 
1T Oregon State Beavers 3.500
28 21.04 

1T Iowa State Cyclones 3.500 86.96 

3 Mississippi State Bulldogs 3.375
27  

4 Texas A&M Aggies 3.250
26  

5T South Carolina Gamecocks 3.125
25 35.88 
5T Vanderbilt Commodores 3.125 71.83 
5T Colorado Buffaloes 3.125 74.50 

8T Tennessee Vols 3.000
24 34.17 
8T USF Bulls 3.000 36.63 
8T Pittsburgh Panthers 3.000 41.04 
8T Minnesota Golden Gophers 3.000 65.67 

12T LSU Tigers 2.875
23 16.08 
12T Alabama Crimson Tide 2.875 27.38 
12T Baylor Bears 2.875 81.21 

15T Penn State Nittany Lions 2.750
22 20.88 

15T Florida St. Seminoles 2.750 36.67 
15T UCLA Bruins 2.750 47.83 
15T Michigan Wolverines 2.750 50.46 
15T Stanford Cardinal 2.750 61.46 

20T Washington Huskies 2.625
21 67.79 
20T Indiana Hoosiers 2.625 77.29 

22T USC Trojans 2.500
20 10.08 
22T Auburn Tigers 2.500 33.17 
22T Arizona Wildcats 2.500 41.25 
22T Iowa Hawkeyes
 2.500 42.33 


Here is a list of the schedule points for each team.

7 point teams: None
6 point teams: Florida
5 point teams: Alabama, LSU, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, USC
4 point teams: Boise State, Cincinnati, Georgia, Louisville, Michigan, Missouri, TCU, Utah, Virginia Tech
3 point teams: Arkansas, ASU, Auburn, Georgia Tech, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Notre Dame, Oregon, Penn State, Texas Tech, West Virginia, Wisconsin
2 point teams: Boston College, BYU, California, Clemson, Illinois, Miami (FL), Michigan State, Oklahoma State, Oregon State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Tennessee, Wake Forest
1 point teams: Arizona, Ball State, Connecticut, Mississippi, Nebraska, Northwestern, Stanford, UCLA, USF, Texas A&M, Virginia

It boils down to who you ar eplaing, and BSU, TCU, etc...play one or two teams that are as strong as USCe, AU, UF, Bama.


----------



## MCBUCK (Nov 4, 2010)

BTW...Here is UGA's...along with Oregons.

48: 2.125 17 Florida, Georgia, NC State, Ohio State, Oregon, Texas Tech

and look who rolled in at 81st

81: 1.125 9 Boise State, Hawaii


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 5, 2010)

JJ likes to cherry pick the same old obscure ratings from the local treehugger newsrag up there in the backwoods of Washington. 

Funny how he's a Washington Huskies fan but never wants to talk about that 3-5 team. Instead he's a bandwagon rider that jumps between Oregon and Boise State. 

What a sad life it must be to be a Pac-10 fan...


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 5, 2010)

Cherry pick?  Whats to cherry pick.  In all 4 polls a Pac 10 team sits at #1.  Pretty much proves my point..


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 5, 2010)

I'm talking about those lame and obscure strength of schedule rankings you used in post #191. Why not use a mainstream source such as ESPN or Sports Illustrated?


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 5, 2010)

Now your saying that the Sagarin Ratings aren't a mainstream source?


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 5, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Now your saying that the Sagarin Ratings aren't a mainstream source?



Sagarin's ratings have been know for years to wildly fluctuate each week. That's why his rankings on carried the last page of the USA Today Sports section and not by ESPN or Sports Illustrated. Also his rankings only make up 1/6 of the computer rankings and they drop the high and low.

What else you got that's credible besides Sagarin?


----------



## MCBUCK (Nov 5, 2010)

Sagarin...they're proven.


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 6, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Now your saying that the Sagarin Ratings aren't a mainstream source?





Comeaux said:


> What else you got that's credible besides Sagarin?



Hey JJ, what else you got? Besides the latest poll from the local Boise feed store.


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 6, 2010)

Comeaux..  In all the polls that have been posted, whats the 1 thing all of them have in common?

BTW.. Three different polls have been posted that have the Pac 10 filling at least half of the top 10 spots.  You have 1 that shows differently, and even then the Pac 10 fills the #1 spot.   Don't ever become a lawyer!


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 6, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Comeaux..  In all the polls that have been posted, whats the 1 thing all of them have in common?



Other polls don't matter. Like it or not, the BCS is the only poll that matters at this point. And that poll has 3 SEC teams ranked in the top 10 versus 1 Pac-10 team.

Spin that!


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 6, 2010)

Comeaux....  Whos the #1 team in that poll that your refering to?

BTW.. In the BCS poll the SEC has 7 teams ranked in the top 25, the Pac 10 has 6.  The SEC has 12 teams, the Pac 10 has 10.  As a percentage wise, the Pac 10 has 60% of their teams in the top 25 SOS, the SEC has 58% ranked in the top 25.  That is per your wonderful BCS poll.  Not to mention the Pac 10 also occupies the #1 spot for SOS in the BCS poll.


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 6, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Comeaux....  Whos the #1 team in that poll that your referring to?



Oregon. What's your point? My team, LSU is #10. Your team, the Washington Huskies is unranked. 



Jetjockey said:


> BTW.. In the BCS poll the SEC has 7 teams ranked in the top 25, the Pac 10 has 6.  The SEC has 12 teams, the Pac 10 has 10.  As a percentage wise, the Pac 10 has 60% of their teams in the top 25 SOS, the SEC has 58% ranked in the top 25.  That is per your wonderful BCS poll.  Not to mention the Pac 10 also occupies the #1 spot for SOS in the BCS poll.



According to the latest BCS poll on ESPN.com http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcs, the SEC has 6 teams listed:
#2 Auburn
#6 Bama
#10 LSU
#18 Arkansas
#19 South Carolina
#20 Miss State

and only 3 Pac-10 teams listed:
#1 Oregon
#13 Stanford
#15 Arizona

So I'm not really sure where you are getting your numbers but perhaps you should either lay down the crack pipe or reattach your oxygen mask. Either way, your numbers are flawed.


----------



## jmfauver (Nov 6, 2010)

Comeaux said:


> Other polls don't matter. Like it or not, the BCS is the only poll that matters at this point. And that poll has 3 SEC teams ranked in the top 10 versus 1 Pac-10 team.
> 
> Spin that!



And the BCS also has 3 non automatic teams in the top 5.


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 6, 2010)

Comeaux said:


> Oregon. What's your point? My team, LSU is #10. Your team, the Washington Huskies is unranked.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I love how you suddently changed the conversation from SOS to ranked BCS teams.  And you call me the spin master!

Find some more JJ. There are all kinds of SOS's out there.
Here is the BCS's, and how they score a SOS.

Rank Team Score Tie Breaker 
1T Oregon State Beavers 3.500
28 21.04 

1T Iowa State Cyclones 3.500 86.96 

3 Mississippi State Bulldogs 3.375
27 

4 Texas A&M Aggies 3.250
26 

5T South Carolina Gamecocks 3.125
25 35.88 
5T Vanderbilt Commodores 3.125 71.83 
5T Colorado Buffaloes 3.125 74.50 

8T Tennessee Vols 3.000
24 34.17 
8T USF Bulls 3.000 36.63 
8T Pittsburgh Panthers 3.000 41.04 
8T Minnesota Golden Gophers 3.000 65.67 

12T LSU Tigers 2.875
23 16.08 
12T Alabama Crimson Tide 2.875 27.38 
12T Baylor Bears 2.875 81.21 

15T Penn State Nittany Lions 2.750
22 20.88 

15T Florida St. Seminoles 2.750 36.67 
15T UCLA Bruins 2.750 47.83 
15T Michigan Wolverines 2.750 50.46 
15T Stanford Cardinal 2.750 61.46 

20T Washington Huskies 2.625
21 67.79 
20T Indiana Hoosiers 2.625 77.29 

22T USC Trojans 2.500
20 10.08 
22T Auburn Tigers 2.500 33.17 
22T Arizona Wildcats 2.500 41.25 
22T Iowa Hawkeyes
2.500 42.33


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 6, 2010)

Hey genius, you don't win conference and national championships based solely on strength-of-schedule. 

You win them by winning and the BCS poll ranking. 

You can argue all you want, but all that matters is: 

1.) Being ranked either #1 or #2 in the BCS poll and making it into the national title game.

2.)  Winning the national title game.

All your other stats and spin are useless. Winning the BCSNCG is what counts in the record book.


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 6, 2010)

Arguing with you is pointless.  We were talking about SOS, not overall BCS standings.  I stated that the Pac 10 would be ranked much higher if they had the same SOS as the SEC.  You then proceeded to try and tell me that the SEC had a much higher SOS then the Pac 10.  I then showed you 3 different SOS polls that proved you were wrong.  You then tried to tell me that the 3 polls I showed you were bunk, and that the BCS SOS poll was the one that mattered.  Well guess what, even in the BCS, the Pac 10 has a higher SOS then the SEC.  Try to spin it all you want.  But guess what, the Pac 10 plays a much tougher schedule then the SEC.  I really hope Oregon gets to play Auburn or LSU, or any other SEC team for that matter, in the BCS NC game.  Trust me, Im praying for it every night.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Nov 6, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Arguing with you is pointless. We were talking about SOS, not overall BCS standings. I stated that the Pac 10 would be ranked much higher if they had the same SOS as the SEC. You then proceeded to try and tell me that the SEC had a much higher SOS then the Pac 10. I then showed you 3 different SOS polls that proved you were wrong. You then tried to tell me that the 3 polls I showed you were bunk, and that the BCS SOS poll was the one that mattered. Well guess what, even in the BCS, the Pac 10 has a higher SOS then the SEC. Try to spin it all you want. But guess what, the Pac 10 plays a much tougher schedule then the SEC. I really hope Oregon gets to play Auburn or LSU, or any other SEC team for that matter, in the BCS NC game. Trust me, Im praying for it every night.


 
Be careful what you wish for.


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 6, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Arguing with you is pointless.  We were talking about SOS, not overall BCS standings.  I stated that the Pac 10 would be ranked much higher if they had the same SOS as the SEC.  You then proceeded to try and tell me that the SEC had a much higher SOS then the Pac 10.  I then showed you 3 different SOS polls that proved you were wrong.  You then tried to tell me that the 3 polls I showed you were bunk, and that the BCS SOS poll was the one that mattered.  Well guess what, even in the BCS, the Pac 10 has a higher SOS then the SEC.  Try to spin it all you want.  But guess what, the Pac 10 plays a much tougher schedule then the SEC.  I really hope Oregon gets to play Auburn or LSU, or any other SEC team for that matter, in the BCS NC game.  Trust me, Im praying for it every night.



Tell you what Travis... you continue to blow in the wind about strength of schedule and your obvious jealousy of the SEC.

I'm gonna sit back and watch the SEC try to win #7 of the 12 BCS trophies in existence. That would be 5 years straight that a SEC team has won the national championship.

Stats are for sore losers Travis. They don't pay Meyers, Miles, and Saban millions of dollars each year because they have tough strength of schedules. They pay them to win those crystal footballs.


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 7, 2010)

Like I said above.  I pray that one of the SEC teams, and Oregon make it to the BCS game!


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 8, 2010)

*Hey JetJockey*

The SEC is # 1 again this week! 

The Big Ten has overtaken the Pac-10 once again for the number two spot in our conference rankings. 

The Big Ten's top four (Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan State and Iowa) all increased their AP vote total and are now all inside the AP top 13. 

The Pac-10, on the other hand, only has two schools inside the AP top 17. It does have a small advantage with the computers, but will need one or two of its schools to rise in the human polls to challenge the Big Ten. 

Source: http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/11613/conference-power-rankings-week-10


----------



## Jetjockey (Nov 9, 2010)

Iowa...  You mean the team that Arizona beat?  How about Wisconsisn, the team that beat ASU because ASU missed a field goal?    Oh ya, the Big 10 is great!


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Nov 9, 2010)

Comeaux said:


> The SEC is # 1 again thid week!
> 
> The Big Ten has overtaken the Pac-10 once again for the number two spot in our conference rankings.
> 
> ...


 

I've always found it intriguing as to how a conference can consistantly be ranked #1, but not the team leading the conference. Just goes to show how jacked up the ranking system is.


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 10, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I've always found it intriguing as to how a conference can consistantly be ranked #1, but not the team leading the conference. Just goes to show how jacked up the ranking system is.



When you have powerhouse teams like Washington State (1-9) and half of your conference is at .500 or below, then one could legitimately say that the Pac-10 really does suck.


----------



## Les Miles (Nov 27, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> I guess the SEC teams need to learn how to secure the football better!



I guess Boise State needs to learn how to kick field goals.


----------



## gin house (Nov 27, 2010)

Les Miles said:


> I guess Boise State needs to learn how to kick field goals.



  what kind of junk are you talkin como?????  boise can play with anybody, anytime!!!!!  they just ran into a powerhouse in nevada   thank you nevada for silencing the crap about the little blue people.................boise is a joke, they proved it last night and UGA will next year.............


----------



## jmfauver (Nov 28, 2010)

gin house said:


> what kind of junk are you talkin como?????  boise can play with anybody, anytime!!!!!  they just ran into a powerhouse in nevada   thank you nevada for silencing the crap about the little blue people.................boise is a joke, they proved it last night and UGA will next year.............





 Lets see they have 1 lose in 2 years,yup sounds like a joke....Now ya'll can focus on TCU and see if you can keep them out of the NC....But if they do not get in I suggest the BCS have TCU play OSU,then TCU can shut the trash talking by the OSU chancellor....


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Nov 28, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> Lets see they have 1 lose in 2 years,yup sounds like a joke....Now ya'll can focus on TCU and see if you can keep them out of the NC....But if they do not get in I suggest the BCS have TCU play OSU,then TCU can shut the trash talking by the OSU chancellor....


 
You're kidding right? Now you're sounding like JJ. If a team plays a schedule full of highschool teams year in and year out they shouldn't have any losses. They finally play a moderate team and they get shut down...

The best we can hope for is that the Beavers pluck the Ducks next week and displace Oregons BCS slot that has already been assigned. Then TCU has an argument for a shot at Auburn, but that is it. OSU isn't even a consideration.


----------



## jmfauver (Nov 28, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> You're kidding right? Now you're sounding like JJ. If a team plays a schedule full of highschool teams year in and year out they shouldn't have any losses. They finally play a moderate team and they get shut down...
> 
> The best we can hope for is that the Beavers pluck the Ducks next week and displace Oregons BCS slot that has already been assigned. Then TCU has an argument for a shot at Auburn, but that is it. OSU isn't even a consideration.




High school teams,you really need to watch someone play other then the SEC..So VT is a no body ( no problem)..Now you want The Beavers to beat Oregon ( The Beavers got smashed by BSU)...My deal is if TCU does not make it to the NC, I would love to see them play OSU just so they can smack the Buckeyes out of the stadium( especially when the Chancellor who knows nothing about football calls them out)...BSU lost to a ranked team on the road,no different then Bama losing to LSU on the road,thats right no different,and to those who thought Neveada's ranking was a setup....HAHA....But you are okay with Pitt or Conn getting into the BCS from the big East right?...The BCS is a joke and is based on MONEY....


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Nov 28, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> The BCS is a joke and is based on MONEY....


 
Can't argue with that fact. I would like to see division exclusive play, ie; no division II teams allowed on a division I schedule, then have all conferences have a conference championship game just as the SEC does, then the playoffs can begin.


----------



## LanierSpots (Nov 28, 2010)

Jetjockey said:


> Arguing with you is pointless.  We were talking about SOS, not overall BCS standings.  I stated that the Pac 10 would be ranked much higher if they had the same SOS as the SEC.  You then proceeded to try and tell me that the SEC had a much higher SOS then the Pac 10.  I then showed you 3 different SOS polls that proved you were wrong.  You then tried to tell me that the 3 polls I showed you were bunk, and that the BCS SOS poll was the one that mattered.  Well guess what, even in the BCS, the Pac 10 has a higher SOS then the SEC.  Try to spin it all you want.  But guess what, the Pac 10 plays a much tougher schedule then the SEC.  I really hope Oregon gets to play Auburn or LSU, or any other SEC team for that matter, in the BCS NC game.  Trust me, Im praying for it every night.





Jockey, I am not going to get in the middle of your cat fight with Les but can you honestly tell me that you think Oregons strength of schedule is tougher than Auburns...


----------



## Arrow3 (Nov 28, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> High school teams,you really need to watch someone play other then the SEC..So VT is a no body ( no problem)..Now you want The Ducks to beat Oregon ( The Ducks got smashed by BSU)...My deal is if TCU does not make it to the NC, I would love to see them play OSU just so they can smack the Buckeyes out of the stadium( especially when the Chancellor who knows nothing about football calls them out)...BSU lost to a ranked team on the road,no different then Bama losing to LSU on the road,thats right no different,and to those who thought Neveada's ranking was a setup....HAHA....But you are okay with Pitt or Conn getting into the BCS from the big East right?...The BCS is a joke and is based on MONEY....



I thought Oregon WAS the ducks??


----------



## jmfauver (Nov 28, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Can't argue with that fact. I would like to see division exclusive play, ie; no division II teams allowed on a division I schedule, then have all conferences have a conference championship game just as the SEC does, then the playoffs can begin.




At  least we can agree on this...Have say 32 conferences( I think there is 23 or so now),and let them have at it!!


----------



## jmfauver (Nov 28, 2010)

Arrow3 said:


> I thought Oregon WAS the ducks??



Sorry the beavers,Who cares it's the pac10


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Nov 28, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> At least we can agree on this...Have say 32 conferences( I think there is 23 or so now),and let them have at it!!


 
Once all of the D II schools are dropped from the various conference schedules 16 conferences would suffice. That only leaves 3 weeks of playoffs, which is very managable.


----------



## LanierSpots (Nov 28, 2010)

http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2010/Internet/toughest schedule/fbs_9games_cumm.pdf


----------



## Wacenturion (Nov 28, 2010)

jmfauver said:


> High school teams,you really need to watch someone play other then the SEC..So VT is a no body ( no problem)..Now you want The Beavers to beat Oregon ( The Beavers got smashed by BSU)...My deal is if TCU does not make it to the NC, I would love to see them play OSU just so they can smack the Buckeyes out of the stadium( especially when the Chancellor who knows nothing about football calls them out)...BSU lost to a ranked team on the road,no different then Bama losing to LSU on the road,thats right no different,and to those who thought Neveada's ranking was a setup....HAHA....But you are okay with Pitt or Conn getting into the BCS from the big East right?...The BCS is a joke and is based on MONEY....




Exactly.....


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Nov 28, 2010)

LanierSpots said:


> http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2010/Internet/toughest schedule/fbs_9games_cumm.pdf


 
Quite telling isn't it?


----------



## jmfauver (Nov 29, 2010)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Once all of the D II schools are dropped from the various conference schedules 16 conferences would suffice. That only leaves 3 weeks of playoffs, which is very managable.



The issue no matter what happens is someone will whine about not making it into the playoffs or who whey have to play or whatever...32 divisions still only adds 1 week to a playoff,since we start bowl games on the 18th of Dec , you could still be done by Jan 10( this yrs NC game)...All conference championships and the last games of the yr played on the 1st Saturday of Dec,2 weeks later 1st round,then each of the next 4 weeks,the last week is the NC game....have it Primetime on Saturday night,maybe have a game between the final 4 losers in the early afternoon,then a true NC game....


----------



## Les Miles (Feb 23, 2011)

Wonder where the media will place Boise State in the preseason polls this year???


----------



## coggins (Feb 23, 2011)

I just wonder if they'll put my Dawgs in the top 25 so they can market the game better. I hope we are top 25 material but based on last season we should have to earn our way in. We'll see..............GATA


----------



## Jetjockey (Feb 23, 2011)

Im just curious.. Does Miguel still think that TCU didn't deserve a top 5 spot last season?


----------



## Jetjockey (Feb 23, 2011)

Les Miles said:


> Wonder where the media will place Boise State in the preseason polls this year???



Probably #8-13.  They lose more guys this year then last year when almost everyone returned.  However, they might have the best QB in the country for 2011, and possibly the best coach in all of college football.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Feb 23, 2011)

Jetjockey said:


> Im just curious.. Does Miguel still think that TCU didn't deserve a top 5 spot last season?


 
Yup, he does. Next year's schedule will prove it for them.


----------



## Jetjockey (Feb 23, 2011)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> Yup, he does. Next year's schedule will prove it for them.



Were not talking about next years team.  We are talking about LAST years team.   The team that went undefeated and physically outplayed Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl.  The team that you said didn't deserve to be ranked in the top 5 who ended up ranked #2 in the country!......  I don't care about next season......     Its OK.. Its good to admit when you are wrong.  You can even cry if you want to.


----------



## LanierSpots (Feb 24, 2011)

Jetjockey said:


> I really hope Oregon gets to play Auburn or LSU, or any other SEC team for that matter, in the BCS NC game.  Trust me, Im praying for it every night.





Howd that work out for ya bro?    


Love those cheerleaders though...


----------



## Les Miles (Feb 24, 2011)

Jetjockey said:


> I really hope Oregon gets to play Auburn or LSU, or any other SEC team for that matter, in the BCS NC game.  Trust me, I'm praying for it every night.



Funny how words can come back to haunt you... 

JJ is already might scarce in the sports forum these days.  After Oregon losing to Auburn, if they lose to LSU in September we may never see him again.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Feb 24, 2011)

Les Miles said:


> Funny how words can come back to haunt you...
> 
> JJ is already might scarce in the sports forum these days. After Oregon losing to Auburn, if they lose to LSU in September we may never see him again.


 
He doesn't even want to talk about the coming season. He want's to cling dearly to TCU's lame schedule from last year and relish in it's B-grade victories..


----------



## Jetjockey (Feb 25, 2011)

LanierSpots said:


> Howd that work out for ya bro?
> 
> 
> Love those cheerleaders though...



Worked out just fine.  Oregon lost on a last second field goal and beat themselves with stupid play.  They didn't get beat by a mighty SEC defense, they got beat by bad Oregon decisions, and a couple bad calls.  It wasn't Oregon's QB who went limping off the field, it was Cam Newton.  Im still glad Oregon got to play Auburn.  It was a heck of a game.  But a last second field goal win is not exactly bragging rights, especailly after some of the play calling.  All I was hearing about from you guys was how Cam Newton was going to run over Oregon.    Oregon's D held AU to two field goals in the second half, and punished Cam Newton.   But then again, you guys don't want to see this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_U8An333hc&feature=related

Or how about this one!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n9LgGf_Iko&feature=related

Notice how fast Newton got up?  I thought he was supposed to be able to run over those Oregon guys?

God I hate video cameras!!!  :

Auburn beat Oregon, simple as that.  But it was hardly a convincing win, and didn't prove any SEC superiority over the Pac 10.


----------



## LanierSpots (Feb 25, 2011)

I see your still bitter JJ. 

In the SEC, we dont do moral victories.   Heck, we dont even count them.  Just wins.   

Anything else is 

Im glad you got what you wanted.  Cause we did too








a moral victory is a good thing.  Sorry the refs cheated you out of it.


----------



## Jetjockey (Feb 25, 2011)

Im not bitter.  Not at all.  That game is exactly what I wanted in a NC game.  I was sick of the blowouts.  My point is simple.  It would be one thing if Auburn had beat Oregon by 14 points and calls had gone in Oregons favor.  Heck, if that was the outcome, we wouldn't even be able to have this conversation.   Its totally different when Auburn wins with a last second field goal, and calls obviously went in their favor.  It cracks me up when some of you guys pump your chests and claim SEC superiority when Auburn won by a last second field goal in a game that had very questionable calls that mostly fell in Auburns favor.    Questionable calls are part of the game, and thats one of the big reasons Oregon lost. But don't start claiming Auburn won because they were superior to Oregon, because they weren't.  They were as evenly matched as you could ask for in a NC game.


----------



## LanierSpots (Feb 25, 2011)

Jetjockey said:


> Questionable calls are part of the game, and thats one of the big reasons Oregon lost.




I wont do the Stats thing with you again.  That was stupid the first 10 times we did it.  But this statement by you, lost any credibility you had.

Cool story bro.  

I know you dont like the SEC superiority, as you call it, but 5 National championships in a row is pretty superior.


----------



## Jetjockey (Feb 25, 2011)

You wanna do stats?  Lets do em.  What part of 519 total yards vs 449 total yards don't you understand?  Auburn got the football last, and they won the game because of a 75 yard drive.  Its that simple.   Take away that drive, and their stats are almost exactly the same.  Oregon actually had more yards per play then Auburn through the entire game, but Im sure you don't want to remember that.  Auburn had the ball one more time then Oregon in the second half, and they won because of it.  (oh ya, that and a play where everyone thought Dyer was down, and Oregon stopped play)..    Like Ive said before, Auburn won, but it wasn't the dominating performance that the SEC guys would like to believe it was.  The game will be remembered as Auburn shutting Oregon's run game down, but people will forget the fact that Oregon threw on Auburn at will for 374 yards.  Play the game 10 times and its split 5-5 between OU and AU.  Possibly 6-4 OU with decent refs..............  Oh ya, play the game 10 times and there is no way Cam Newton makes it through all 10 games.  Oregon's physical play would have put him out in game 3 or 4.  But then again, it was Oregon's QB who was going to get hurt and manhandled in the game, not Cam Newton... Remember.


----------



## LanierSpots (Feb 26, 2011)

Jetjockey said:


> You wanna do stats?  Lets do em.  What part of 519 total yards vs 449 total yards don't you understand?  Auburn got the football last, and they won the game because of a 75 yard drive.  Its that simple.   Take away that drive, and their stats are almost exactly the same.  Oregon actually had more yards per play then Auburn through the entire game, but Im sure you don't want to remember that.  Auburn had the ball one more time then Oregon in the second half, and they won because of it.  (oh ya, that and a play where everyone thought Dyer was down, and Oregon stopped play)..    Like Ive said before, Auburn won, but it wasn't the dominating performance that the SEC guys would like to believe it was.  The game will be remembered as Auburn shutting Oregon's run game down, but people will forget the fact that Oregon threw on Auburn at will for 374 yards.  Play the game 10 times and its split 5-5 between OU and AU.  Possibly 6-4 OU with decent refs..............  Oh ya, play the game 10 times and there is no way Cam Newton makes it through all 10 games.  Oregon's physical play would have put him out in game 3 or 4.  But then again, it was Oregon's QB who was going to get hurt and manhandled in the game, not Cam Newton... Remember.




Cool story man.   Its basically too stupid to even respond to that post above.  You are grabbing at straws.

You dont get points for yards.  You get points for scoring.  I never said anything at all about dominating.  

In case you didnt learn any math in flight school

22>19

And it always will be.   

And the SEC will always be superior to the Pac-12

Learn to love it bro.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Feb 26, 2011)

LanierSpots said:


> Cool story man. Its basically too stupid to even respond to that post above. You are grabbing at straws.
> 
> You dont get points for yards. You get points for scoring. I never said anything at all about dominating.
> 
> ...


 
JJ's a Union loving Obama supporter. What else do you expect from him other than manipulating stats to support his narrow view of reality... Actual reality has always eluded his type.

The bottom line is, who owns the NC trophy at present? Who owned it before them, and before them, and so on and so on. Football Championships are not won with collective bargaining, they are won by the final score, and that cannot be manipulated.


----------



## Les Miles (Feb 26, 2011)

1.) 1998 Tennessee
2.) 2003 LSU
3.) 2006 Florida
4.) 2007 LSU
5.) 2008 Florida
6.) 2009 Alabama
7.) 2010 Auburn

The SEC is a perfect 7-0 and the Pac-10 is 1-1 with the one victory vacated due to USC cheating per the NCAA Reggie Bush investigation.

JJ, you must really hate life knowing that the SEC has won every BCS title that they have played for.

That's domination that even the dumbest tree-hugger could comprehend. Or a low-rate airline pilot.


----------



## Jetjockey (Feb 27, 2011)

Les Miles said:


> 1.) 1998 Tennessee
> 2.) 2003 LSU
> 3.) 2006 Florida
> 4.) 2007 LSU
> ...



Yep.. And 10-12!  It must suck knowing that the only reason AU won that game was because of the refs!    Or do I need to replay Cam Newton's botched fumble call that cost  Oregon 7 points.  What the score have been if the refs didn't blow that call?   Oh ya, thats what I though.  Just incase you forgot!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_U8An333hc&feature=related


----------



## emusmacker (Feb 27, 2011)

I'm going to refrain from further comment due to my beliefs in not picking on the mentally challenged. SEC is waaaayyy better than the Pac 10.


However I feel it's only fair to have a playoff, if it's good enough for high school and pro, then why not college.


----------



## Les Miles (Mar 2, 2011)

Jetjockey said:


> Yep.. And 10-12!  It must suck knowing that the only reason AU won that game was because of the refs!    Or do I need to replay Cam Newton's botched fumble call that cost  Oregon 7 points.  What the score have been if the refs didn't blow that call?   Oh ya, thats what I though.  Just incase you forgot!



Sore Loser - definitions from Urban Dictionary	

1. A sore loser is someone who loses in a fair competition but whines about it on a constant basis, blaming everyone around them for their loss except themselves.

2. Someone who can't simply be honorable by accepting defeat and/or trying again. On the contrary, said individual engages in childish behavior;  constantly complaining about how it's not fair and the other side cheated, etc.

3. Tree-hugging, liberal Pac-10 fans who demonstrate extreme jealousy of real football conferences such as the SEC...


----------



## Jetjockey (Mar 3, 2011)

Sore Loser?  What are you talking about?  I was fine with Oregon losing the game, it was a great game between two evenly matched teams.  HOWEVER, when some of you guys started blabing off how that game proved AU's superiority over Oregon then I felt the need to bring you back to reality. A last second field goal with time remaning doesn't prove a thing, especially when the play calling was usually in AU's favore.  Oregon lost, simple as that.  But Auburn did not "win" that football game.  Nearly every close call went their way.  But hey, thats football.  Don't tell me that AU was a better team then Oregon though, because they weren't.  3 plays, made that football game.  One of those plays, cost Oregon 7 points.  Oregon didn't play well enough to overcome those plays, and Auburn got lucky they went their way.


----------



## Les Miles (Mar 3, 2011)

Jetjockey said:


> Sore Loser?  What are you talking about?  I was fine with Oregon losing the game, it was a great game between two evenly matched teams.  HOWEVER, when some of you guys started blabing off how that game proved AU's superiority over Oregon then I felt the need to bring you back to reality. A last second field goal with time remaning doesn't prove a thing, especially when the play calling was usually in AU's favore.  Oregon lost, simple as that.  But Auburn did not "win" that football game.  Nearly every close call went their way.  But hey, thats football.  Don't tell me that AU was a better team then Oregon though, because they weren't.  3 plays, made that football game.  One of those plays, cost Oregon 7 points.  Oregon didn't play well enough to overcome those plays, and Auburn got lucky they went their way.



Like I said.... a sore loser.


----------



## Madsnooker (Mar 3, 2011)

WOW, I thought this game was over 2 months ago.

Anyway, from an unbiased fan of the game, this game was pretty evenly matched. Could have easily went Oregons way but it didn't. I will say AU got the benifit of most all the questionable calls. How they got away with the obvious fumble which would have easily been a td for Oregon is perplexing? They didn't even review it which is even more perplexing? I have a hard time believing that if Fairly dishraged Oregons qb the way Cam was clown stomped on that play, and the ball went flying out, that it would not have been reviewed and AU given the td. I'm not suggesting conspiracy, but any unbiased observer had to be scrathing their head after that play ended and the game just went on like nothing happened. I place more fualt on Oregons coach for not throwing the red flag.

BBUUTT, thats football though and AU won end of story. JJ, time to move on or you are going to drive yourself crazy worring about any sec fans opinion of that game or their conference. You are wasting your time just as they are wasting their time arguing woth you.


----------

