Where would you rank UK if they played in the Big East?

[letabrotherspeak]

Louisville could win the SEC, I don't think UK could win the Big East.

Vandy could win the SEC and UConn could win the Big East. Will they? Highly doubtful.

UL would be a good team in the SEC, but they are not real road juggernaughts. They would go into a many a hostile environments. Only 3 exist in the Big East and UL is one of them. Pitt is so-so, USF has a nice team but play in an oversized environment, Syracuse can be but they havent been good for a while, UC's program deserves fans but their football fanbase is rather pathetic.

[ram95]

He is right all of you laughing have no reason to do so, Louisville COULD compete for the SEC title the last few years, Georgia won it and was beat by WVU in 2005, and Louisville won the Orange Bowl last year, and if they had not lost a close game in Rutgers, the Cards could have had Floridas spot in the NC game. Louisville could win a SEC title, but it would seem to me more of a stretch that Kentucky could win the Big East title.

It is a given to the majority of UK fans that winning the SEC is nigh on impossible for UK. They probably would finish higher in the Big East then they would in the SEC, but there is still a tier to cross that would seem to stop them from winning the Big East, namely Louisville, WVU, and now Rutgers. Louisville could compete for a SEC spot and though I am not convinced that they would win, they could win the SEC and the fans of Louisville all but expect a first or second place finish in the Big East.

 

The SEC has twelve teams, and the top half is tough, the Big east has 8 teams and the top half is tough. To me that means that the SEC is two teams deeper then you divide by two because of the SEC east and SEC west and then you basically have on average one tougher team per schedule on an SEC schedule compared to a Big East, and then when you consider that most SEC teams play an OOC schedule that is pretty weak then that makes the difference between the toughness of conference not as great as it might seem on face value. Basically yeah the SEC is tougher, but not so much so that a middling team in the SEC could walk in to the Big East and claim automatic rights to a top half finish. Nor does winning the Big East make a team a lock to win the SEC but they could compete, which is what RRR said that Louisville could win (not that the Cards would win) the SEC.

[RowdyRedRam]

So a top ten team, with a potential #1 draft pick at QB, possibly the best receiving core in college football, a defense that allowed fewer ppg than all but three SEC teams would not be considered a leading contender for the conference?

C'mon gentlemen your hate has overcome your reasoning.

[TheDeuce]

Actually, you haven't said where you think they would finish. All you've done is insult other people's posts.

 

So realistically, where do you think they'd finish?

 

Most UK fans are saying 3rd to 5th depending on the schedule. So if you think these comments are "optimistic" then you must think UK would be 6th to 8th, and if you think that, you ARE crazy.

 

Also, you're the one with an avatar and location insulting UK, so we'll assume you're the one being a jerk.

 

#1. The optimistic comment came replying to a post made that UK would only lose to UL and WVU. IMHO, UK would lose to UL, WVU, USF, UC, and it would be a toss-up against Rutgers. UK would for sure beat UConn, and Syracuse. That said, I see UK finishing 5th, and 4th at best.

 

#2. Who said anything about being a jerk? Let's stick to the topic, and not resort to name calling. If you don't like the avatar, don't look at it. :thumb:

[TheDeuce]

UK would certainly finish higher in the Big East the Louisville would finish in the SEC

 

So you don't think UL could finish better than 4th in the SEC East?

[Original Rookie]

So you don't think UL could finish better than 4th in the SEC East?

SEC East? I don't follow that part.

 

 

I think UL would probably be around the same spot in the SEC as UK would be in the Big East. If you're going to give an edge to one though it is certainly the Cards IMO.

[Original Rookie]

C'mon gentlemen your hate has overcome your reasoning.

Oh the irony.

[C-A-T-S]

So a top ten team, with a potential #1 draft pick at QB, possibly the best receiving core in college football, a defense that allowed fewer ppg than all but three SEC teams would not be considered a leading contender for the conference?

C'mon gentlemen your hate has overcome your reasoning.

Yea UK could shutout UCONN and UC also...

[Original Rookie]

Yea UK could shutout UCONN and UC also...

Are we talking about the same UK?? :lol:

 

I think the soccer team may have put up double digits against us last year.

 

I do see your point though and agree with it.

[letabrotherspeak]

So a top ten team, with a potential #1 draft pick at QB, possibly the best receiving core in college football, a defense that allowed fewer ppg than all but three SEC teams would not be considered a leading contender for the conference?

C'mon gentlemen your hate has overcome your reasoning.

I base it on Louisville having to go on the road and play in the SEC.

What is Louisville's best road victory in the last 5 years? A win at Pitt?

[letabrotherspeak]

He is right all of you laughing have no reason to do so, Louisville COULD compete for the SEC title the last few years, Georgia won it and was beat by WVU in 2005, and Louisville won the Orange Bowl last year, and if they had not lost a close game in Rutgers, the Cards could have had Floridas spot in the NC game. Louisville could win a SEC title, but it would seem to me more of a stretch that Kentucky could win the Big East title.

It is a given to the majority of UK fans that winning the SEC is nigh on impossible for UK. They probably would finish higher in the Big East then they would in the SEC, but there is still a tier to cross that would seem to stop them from winning the Big East, namely Louisville, WVU, and now Rutgers. Louisville could compete for a SEC spot and though I am not convinced that they would win, they could win the SEC and the fans of Louisville all but expect a first or second place finish in the Big East.

 

The SEC has twelve teams, and the top half is tough, the Big east has 8 teams and the top half is tough. To me that means that the SEC is two teams deeper then you divide by two because of the SEC east and SEC west and then you basically have on average one tougher team per schedule on an SEC schedule compared to a Big East, and then when you consider that most SEC teams play an OOC schedule that is pretty weak then that makes the difference between the toughness of conference not as great as it might seem on face value. Basically yeah the SEC is tougher, but not so much so that a middling team in the SEC could walk in to the Big East and claim automatic rights to a top half finish. Nor does winning the Big East make a team a lock to win the SEC but they could compete, which is what RRR said that Louisville could win (not that the Cards would win) the SEC.

Traditionally the SEC's non-con portion has not been strong, but they easily have a tougher non-con than the Big East teams this year.

I think there are 8 really good teams in the SEC this year and none of those 8 are UK.

 

What is funny a few years ago people on here wondered why UK rooted for teams in their conference to do well, now UL fans do the same for teams in the Big East.

[Booge]

He is right all of you laughing have no reason to do so, Louisville COULD compete for the SEC title the last few years, Georgia won it and was beat by WVU in 2005, and Louisville won the Orange Bowl last year, and if they had not lost a close game in Rutgers, the Cards could have had Floridas spot in the NC game. Louisville could win a SEC title, but it would seem to me more of a stretch that Kentucky could win the Big East title.

It is a given to the majority of UK fans that winning the SEC is nigh on impossible for UK. They probably would finish higher in the Big East then they would in the SEC, but there is still a tier to cross that would seem to stop them from winning the Big East, namely Louisville, WVU, and now Rutgers. Louisville could compete for a SEC spot and though I am not convinced that they would win, they could win the SEC and the fans of Louisville all but expect a first or second place finish in the Big East.

 

The SEC has twelve teams, and the top half is tough, the Big east has 8 teams and the top half is tough. To me that means that the SEC is two teams deeper then you divide by two because of the SEC east and SEC west and then you basically have on average one tougher team per schedule on an SEC schedule compared to a Big East, and then when you consider that most SEC teams play an OOC schedule that is pretty weak then that makes the difference between the toughness of conference not as great as it might seem on face value. Basically yeah the SEC is tougher, but not so much so that a middling team in the SEC could walk in to the Big East and claim automatic rights to a top half finish. Nor does winning the Big East make a team a lock to win the SEC but they could compete, which is what RRR said that Louisville could win (not that the Cards would win) the SEC.

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

EVERY SINGLE SEC game on UK's schedule is tougher than the corresponding team in the Big East that Louisville faces now...

 

Florida is tougher than WV

LSU is MUCH tougher than Rutgers

UGA/UT is MUCH tougher than USF/whoever

UT/UGA is MUCH tougher than whoever/USF

South Carolina is tougher than whoever

etc...

 

The fact is Louisville has never had a team in their history that would have won the SEC...Could they some day? Sure, but it would be a longshot...

[RowdyRedRam]

Yea UK could shutout UCONN and UC also...

Probably not, remember you had the worst defense in college football for part of the year.

[5wide]

So you consider Arkansas 1st tier SEC???

 

OK, so there are exceptions...I'm not buying the Arkansas hype either for what it's worth. I think they'll come back down to earth and finish 4th in the west this year....and certainly no higher than 3rd.

 

But surely you're not going to try and argue the point that it would be more difficult for a lower team to make headway in the SEC than the Big East.

 

Are you?

[5wide]

I base it on Louisville having to go on the road and play in the SEC.

What is Louisville's best road victory in the last 5 years? A win at Pitt?

 

That's where I have a hangup. On paper and talent-wise, I think U of L would certainly be in the picture. I don't think they'd be favored in either the east or west. But, there are two things that I think U of L would have to adjust to and overcome.

 

1. They'd have to improve their performances on the road against big opponents.

 

2. They'd have to get used to playing elite competition and in hostile environments on a more regular basis. I know the Big East is better than many of us expected it to be, but it's not the SEC. Not even close. I look at how U of L laid at an egg in a road game against Rutgers the week after winning their much anticipated showdown with West Virginia. Maybe it's related, maybe not. Did they have a letdown? I can't help but wonder, and in an SEC schedule, they'd face that scenario more often.

 

That's just my take. Hypothetically, if U of L joined the SEC and continued on their current arc, I think it would take them a little time to adapt to the SEC and then they'd be a major player. But, since that isn't going to happen, it doesn't matter what I think.