October 10, 200619 yr You want to see an overrated, bad team, look no further than the Iowa Hawkeyes. But they look really sharp at times. I have yet to see that from Alabama...
October 10, 200619 yr Say it with me now....OVER-RATED!!! I agree, I think that they have been very fortunate to get the TO's that they have yet. I truly feel that they will lose, if not before, when they play Micigan.
October 10, 200619 yr I agree, I think that they have been very fortunate to get the TO's that they have yet. I truly feel that they will lose, if not before, when they play Micigan. I had been thinking that too, however with Super Mario (yeah, the real Super Mario:D ) hurt, I just hope the Wolverines can get to tO$U undefeated.
October 10, 200619 yr Those twenty six teams Texas State Cen. Mich Memphis WKU Colorado UAB (twice) Wofford FAU Washington St Buffalo Lou Lafeyette Arizona Tulane Sou Miss UCF Hawaii Duke Lou Monroe Cal Air Force Marshall Memphis Tenn St Temple Utah State The seven losses Louisville West Virgina USC Missouri Wake Forest Michigan Tulane Other than Tenn over Cal, I don't see the proof that the SEC teams would be so dominate in any other conference. I agree with you on the thought that the SEC doesn't have anyone that would dominate in the other conferences. In fact, if I took the top team from every conference (USC, Texas, Ohio State or Michigan, Louisville or West Virginia, Clemson?), the ACC is the only one I would favor the best team from the SEC to win. Where the SEC is better, IMO, is 2 or 3 (depending on the conference) through 6. What I don't agree with is your argument. Citing these out-of-conference records is a moot point on both sides, IMO. Sure, the 26 wins aren't very impressive, but the seven losses aren't either. They break down like this... 1 by UK (Louisville) 1 by Vandy (Michigan) 1 by Arkansas (USC) 2 by Mississippi State (West Virginia, Tulane) 2 by Ole Miss (Missouri, Wake Forest) The only one that is of any significance is Arkansas losing to USC and I think that can easily be offset by Tennessee's massacre of California. In fact, those are probably the only two games that should bear any weight in any discussion. The rest of those are virtually meaningless. Michigan beating up on Vandy is virtually the same as Georgia beating up on Western Kentucky. These records against other conferences don't bear much weight when you have a powerhouse in one conference scheduling a bottom feeder in the other...they may as well be scheduling Louisiana Monroe, IMO. Example: Louisville beats Kentucky and West Virginia beats Mississippi State. The Big East is 2-0 vs. the SEC. Does that mean that it's a stronger conference?
October 10, 200619 yr I agree with you on the thought that the SEC doesn't have anyone that would dominate in the other conferences. In fact, if I took the top team from every conference (USC, Texas, Ohio State or Michigan, Louisville or West Virginia, Clemson?), the ACC is the only one I would favor the best team from the SEC to win. Where the SEC is better, IMO, is 2 or 3 (depending on the conference) through 6. What I don't agree with is your argument. Citing these out-of-conference records is a moot point on both sides, IMO. Sure, the 26 wins aren't very impressive, but the seven losses aren't either. They break down like this... 1 by UK (Louisville) 1 by Vandy (Michigan) 1 by Arkansas (USC) 2 by Mississippi State (West Virginia, Tulane) 2 by Ole Miss (Missouri, Wake Forest) The only one that is of any significance is Arkansas losing to USC and I think that can easily be offset by Tennessee's massacre of California. In fact, those are probably the only two games that should bear any weight in any discussion. The rest of those are virtually meaningless. Michigan beating up on Vandy is virtually the same as Georgia beating up on Western Kentucky. These records against other conferences don't bear much weight when you have a powerhouse in one conference scheduling a bottom feeder in the other...they may as well be scheduling Louisiana Monroe, IMO. Example: Louisville beats Kentucky and West Virginia beats Mississippi State. The Big East is 2-0 vs. the SEC. Does that mean that it's a stronger conference? I could be wrong, but I think RRR's point in posting that list was the fact that someone wanted to use that 26-7 record as a measuring tool to put the SEC above the rest of the nation, when out of those 26 wins only one, maybe two was a quality win...JMO.
October 10, 200619 yr I could be wrong, but I think RRR's point in posting that list was the fact that someone wanted to use that 26-7 record as a measuring tool to put the SEC above the rest of the nation, when out of those 26 wins only one, maybe two was a quality win...JMO. Right. It was posted that the $EC had the best OOC winning %...
October 10, 200619 yr ^^ ...which is why I said the OOC records is a moot point for both sides of the argument. I didn't miss his point. I get tired of all these OOC arguments by citing records. And there are plenty of them. They are next to meaningless because almost all of the wins are against inferior opponents whether they be I-AA, Mid-major, or BCS Conference Bottom dwellers, and virtually all of the losses the conference takes from outside can be attributed to it's bottom feeders playing superior competition. This goes for any conference, not just the SEC. How can that be a valid measuring stick? My post wasn't really directed at RRR, but at anyone who tries to use that argument.
October 10, 200619 yr ^^ ...which is why I said the OOC records is a moot point for both sides of the argument. I didn't miss his point. I get tired of all these OOC arguments by citing records. And there are plenty of them. They are next to meaningless because almost all of the wins are against inferior opponents whether they be I-AA, Mid-major, or BCS Conference Bottom dwellers, and virtually all of the losses the conference takes from outside can be attributed to it's bottom feeders playing superior competition. This goes for any conference, not just the SEC. How can that be a valid measuring stick? My post wasn't really directed at RRR, but at anyone who tries to use that argument. :thumb: :thumb: My argument gets to keep Texas and ND...
October 10, 200619 yr Say it with me now....OVER-RATED!!! If Tressel is OVER-RATED.......what doe that make Carr.:sssh: :sssh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Check Tressel's record vs. Ol' Carr boy.:eek: ...... Nuff Said!
October 10, 200619 yr Division I National Championships Tressel = 1 Carr = 1 I'd say they're pretty close.
October 10, 200619 yr Say it with me now....OVER-RATED!!! If Tressel is OVER-RATED, what does that make Carr??:eek: :lol: Check his record vs. "the vest"! :sssh: :sssh: .............Nuff Said.
October 10, 200619 yr Author Could a mod please delete post #117? Thank you, it was posted in error. Error in judgment or duplicate post?
October 10, 200619 yr Division I National Championships Tressel = 1 Carr = 1 I'd say they're pretty close. Both with 1 D-1 title, now.....how many years for Carr in D-1 and how many years for Tressel in D-1? What is the record of head to head meetings between the two? :confused:
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.