And were off!

Mott the Hoople said:
Let's change that a little. Instead of ranked teams let's go with top 20 teams.

Boise State plays 1
USC plays 2
Ohio State plays 4
Florida plays 3 (and I'm betting that by the end of the season Florida will not be a top 20 team).
LSU plays 3
Alabama plays 3

I'd also wager a bet that by the end of the season Michigan will be a top 20 team...so.... by the end of the season I bet it looks more like these teams will have played this # of top 20 teams

Boise St - None
USC - 1
Ohio State - 4
Florida - 2
LSU - 2
Bama - 2

This is a down year for the SEC. All the major programs but Bama are rebuilding. My bet is only one SEC Team will have less then 3 losses (Bama). That means there should only be 3 SEC teams in the top 20 at the end of the year. (I'll eat crow on that if PSU upsets Bama).

As for Ohio State I'm betting that Miami, Wisconsin and Iowa will be top 20 teams at the years end. I'm also thinking that PSU will drop out of the top 20 but that Michigan will end the season in the top 20.

Bama is the only SEC team that deserves props for not pussying out on non-conf play. LSWho did schedule a BCS team from a basketball conference so though that is a step up, it aint exactly impressed anyone outside of the SEC.
Click to expand...

Mott, the only problem with your claims of 4 team is that Michigan is not currently ranked, and Penn State won't be ranked when ya'll play them.

So OSU is down to 2 ranked in the top 20.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
by the end of the seasn that will pretty much be the case. I think it's a pretty safe assumption that only one, maybe two SEC teams will have less then 3 losses.
Click to expand...

By the end of the season, several of the teams now ranked will be out of the rankings.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
by the end of the seasn that will pretty much be the case. I think it's a pretty safe assumption that only one, maybe two SEC teams will have less then 3 losses.
Click to expand...

wow don't let facts get in the way of your SEC hate
we face 6 teams that are ranked now, how bout ohio slow. LOFL
crystal envy at it's finest
 
WinterBorn said:
Tell us all, which of USC's OOC games would you consider powerhouse teams?

Hawaii? They are the only one with a winning record over the last 3 years.

VA? They went 3-9 last year. And they are 17-20 for the last 3 years, and 29-32 for the last 5.

Minnesota? They went 6-7 last year. But that is the 2nd best record for USC's OOC opponents this year. Otherwise the Gophers are 14-24 for the last 3 years and 27-36 for the last 5.

Notre Dame always sounds like a tough game. But they actually haven't done much in a long, long time. They finished the 2009 season 6-6, have a 16-21 record for the last 3 years, and are 35-27 for the last 5 years.


So which OOC team is the tough one?
Click to expand...

No question this is definitely one of the weakest OOC schedules USC has played in a long time. Go look at their schedule over the past 8 years though. You are right about Notre Dame in the 2000's they have been hit or miss. USC has played no DIV II teams and most opponents are in a BCS conference.
 
WinterBorn said:
I spent a little time looking at wins and loses for the SEC & the PAC-10 for the last 5 years. (since scheduling is easily done inside that range and I don't have the time to track wins & losses for that many teams for 10 years)

The three teams you said sucked, Vandy, Kentucky, and Miss State have 5 year winning percentages of 38%, 52% and 38% repectively. Although, Ole Miss has a 5 year winning percentage of 46%, so lets use them as part of the bottom 3.

The three bottom teams in the PAC-10, Stanford, Washington St, and Washington have 5 year winning percentages of 39%, 30% and 27% respectively.

Bottom 3 in the SEC have 5 year win rates of 46%, 38%, and 38%.
Bottom 3 in the PAC-10 have 5 year win rates of 39%, 30% and 27%.
So the bottom 3 teams in the SEC have better 5 year records than the bottom 3 in the PAC-10.

South Carolina, Arkansas, and Auburn have 5 year winning percentages of 56%, 56%, and 67% respectively.

Six of the 10 teams in the PAC-10 cannot boast a 5 year win rate of 56% or better.



Which leaves us FL, LSU, AL, and GA. Their 5 year winning percentages are 85%, 77%, 74%, and 74% respectively.

The PAC-10 has only one team with a 5 year winning percentage of 74% or above, and that is USC.

Add in the fact that LSU, FL, and AL have won BCS Championships, and Auburn was snubbed for one, while the PAC-10 has only USC to offer up as a BCS Championship winner.
Click to expand...

WB, even winning percentages don't tell the whole story. One as I stated the Pac 10 conference are idiots and play 9 conference games as opposed to 8 played by the SEC and Big 12. Therefore Pac 10 teams are guaranteed five more losses a year than the other two conferences. And Mississippi St. can schedule four cupcakes as well in which they usually win at least 3 and maybe pull out a conference game or two so even in last place it doesn't look so bad 5 wins.

Look the last four years the SEC has been the dominate conference in college football. There is no denying that and I'm not trying to. I'm pointing out how the SEC plays the system with their scheduling to their advantage basically out of jealousy because I wish the Pac 10 would do the same.
 
your full of horseshit cawacko, the sec beats up on each other. PAC 10 conf games are cupcakes for the most part. SEC has dominated for at least a decade, as long as we have had the BCS.
LOL @ SEC envy
 
Topspin said:
your full of horseshit cawacko, the sec beats up on each other. PAC 10 conf games are cupcakes for the most part. SEC has dominated for at least a decade, as long as we have had the BCS.
LOL @ SEC envy
Click to expand...

Yeah the SEC was dominating in the early 2000's with Ron Zook and David Shula and probation.

Tennesse won the first BCS title game. Then Florida St. Then Oklahoma. Then Miami. Then Ohio State. Then LSU (when USC was ranked #1), then USC and then Texas.

So the SEC won one title in seven years and that's when the number one team was kept out of the game. Even the guys on ESECPN say the SEC wasn't the dominate conference at the begining of the decade. As you said to Mott, "facts"
 
Topspin said:
your full of horseshit cawacko, the sec beats up on each other. PAC 10 conf games are cupcakes for the most part. SEC has dominated for at least a decade, as long as we have had the BCS.
LOL @ SEC envy
Click to expand...

and dude every conference beats up each other. It doesn't even take a GED to realize if you play 8 conference games rather 9 you are going to beat up on each other less.
 
And no Topspin I don't hate the SEC. I lived in the South in my youth. Half my family is from the South. I love the passion people have their for college football. Me stating the facts about how the SEC schedules is not me hating on the SEC.
 
cawacko said:
And no Topspin I don't hate the SEC. I lived in the South in my youth. Half my family is from the South. I love the passion people have their for college football. Me stating the facts about how the SEC schedules is not me hating on the SEC.
Click to expand...
It's ok to hate on the SEC....they hate on you! ;)
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Bull shit. They could easily do a 16 game playoff where each conference champ gets an automatic bid and you'd still have 5 at large bids for the power conferences. The polls would be used for seeding the tournament.
Click to expand...

There are all kinds of logistical problems with any kind of playoff system. Let me be clear, I would welcome a playoff, especially since every sport in college or pros, have a playoff or tournament of some kind, to determine the champions. But if this were an "easy" thing to do, don't you imagine they would have done it by now?

Here's how I see it, the big deal is the bowls. Whatever they come up with, will have to include all the major bowls, there is just too much money at stake to abandon the bowl system. It's feasible to use the bowls as venues in the playoffs, but that opens up the second problem... Attendance. Pro teams can pack a stadium each week to root for the home team, colleges can fill their stadiums for home games as well, but no bowl game is ever a "home" game, the fans would have to travel. Currently, fans can take time off work, and plan a vacation around a bowl game far away, but how could they manage 4 or 5 playoff games at various destinations around the country? So, now you have these bowls who once packed the house, barely able to keep the lights on, because no one is following their team all over the country on the road to the championship. Lets say the Sugar Bowl ends up with Boise St. vs. Michigan in the semi-finals.. where will the fan base come from to fill the stadium, book the hotel rooms, etc.? Generally speaking, they now have a somewhat "local" team, who they know will make the trip and spend money. And this is ALL about the money! TV contracts are not a problem, they would make money there, but the local economies of the bowl cities, would take a hit, in my opinion.
 
your conference, I mean your high school conference has zero bcs championships. Tenn won and Lsu won in 03. And in those years the sec was dominating the top 20 as usual.

trojans are small and they break easy
 
Topspin said:
your conference, I mean your high school conference has zero bcs championships. Tenn won and Lsu won in 03. And in those years the sec was dominating the top 20 as usual.

trojans are small and they break easy
Click to expand...

11 National Championships and 7 Heisman Winners

What does LSU have? 3 National Championships and 1 Heisman Winner?
 
ancient history, you have zero in the last decade since you got stripped for blatent cheating in a high school conference. Lane kiffin will get his ass kicked 3x this year.
 
Topspin said:
ancient history, you have zero in the last decade since you got stripped for blatent cheating in a high school conference. Lane kiffin will get his ass kicked 3x this year.
Click to expand...

lol... alright that did make me laugh.

We won in 2003 and Reggie's "cheating" didn't take place until 2005 so the 2004 title (which we won) will technically be returned.

And oh the irony of someone in the SEC calling out others for cheating.
 
cawacko said:
lol... alright that did make me laugh.

We won in 2003 and Reggie's "cheating" didn't take place until 2005 so the 2004 title (which we won) will technically be returned.

And oh the irony of someone in the SEC calling out others for cheating.
Click to expand...

Reggie got paid prior to going to school Pete cheated every game Reggie played in and more. You have zero crystals and won't be getting one soon. I do think Utah was an upgrade for you high school conference co was not.:clink:
 
Topspin said:
Reggie got paid prior to going to school Pete cheated every game Reggie played in and more. You have zero crystals and won't be getting one soon. I do think Utah was an upgrade for you high school conference co was not.:clink:
Click to expand...

Pass me some of that Cali chronic you are smoking my brother!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top