10 Aug 08
Originally posted by PinkFloydThe SEC may just be the best overall conference. I played in and root for the Big 12 and while I would take our top 6 teams and match them against anyone, the lower tier teams in the SEC are better than the Pac10, the Big 10, the ACC, the Big East and every other conference, IMO.
Well, they pick Georgia as Number One, and as usual, they sure tend to believe the SEC is superior to every other conference. Isn't that getting tiresome?
That being said, this is just some pre-season picks and they don't mean much except where the bragging rights begin. Let's see how the season shakes out.
11 Aug 08
Originally posted by PinkFloydSince the SEC's been proving it on the field every year lately, no. What is tiresome is people in the Midwest continuing to pretend that the Big Ten is an elite conference when they lose most of their bowl games and their top teams are routinely smashed by the top SEC and Pac-10 schools.
Well, they pick Georgia as Number One, and as usual, they sure tend to believe the SEC is superior to every other conference. Isn't that getting tiresome?
11 Aug 08
Originally posted by no1marauderNow THAT is truth!
Since the SEC's been proving it on the field every year lately, no. What is tiresome is people in the Midwest continuing to pretend that the Big Ten is an elite conference when they lose most of their bowl games and their top teams are routinely smashed by the top SEC and Pac-10 schools.
11 Aug 08
Originally posted by no1marauderIt doesn't matter. We are the Big Ten; the SEC and PAC 10 aren't. Sucks for them.
Since the SEC's been proving it on the field every year lately, no. What is tiresome is people in the Midwest continuing to pretend that the Big Ten is an elite conference when they lose most of their bowl games and their top teams are routinely smashed by the top SEC and Pac-10 schools.
11 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by vacostnerFlorida lost in Florida to a big 10 team in its bowl game. SEC fans conveniently ignore certain facts.
Florida and LSU both want their cleats back, that is of course if OSU has removed them from their backsides yet.
The SEC is the best conference but to say the Big 10 sucks because it goes about .500 in bowl games (all road games) despite playing in pleanty of mismatches (Michigan State vs. BC or Illinois at USC) is ridiculous. If Ohio State (big 10 #1) played USC (Pac 10 #1) and Illinois BIG 10 #2 played Arizona State Pac 10 #2 on neutral fields the results might be completely different.
- Joined
- 28 Jun 01
- Moves
- 36847
11 Aug 08
Originally posted by myteamtrulystinksCheck out my avatar, I am anything but an SEC fan. It's hard to argue the SEC isn't the best conference in the country when it comes to football. I was just pointing out when the Big 10's best played the SEC's best the last two years for the BCS Championship, the SEC won both times. Can't argue LSU had a "home" game playing in the Sugar Bowl, but the Gators beat the Bucks in the Fiesta Bowl. Moreover, OSU is 0-8 lifetime against the SEC in bowl games. 6 of their 7 wins against SEC schools came against Kentucky and Vandy pre-1940. Top to bottom SEC is stronger than the Big 10 year in and year out.
Florida lost in Florida to a big 10 team in its bowl game. SEC fans conveniently ignore certain facts.
The SEC is the best conference but to say the Big 10 sucks because it goes about .500 in bowl games (all road games) despite playing in pleanty of mismatches (Michigan State vs. BC or Illinois at USC) is ridiculous. If Ohio State (big 10 #1) ...[text shortened]... 0 #2 played Arizona State Pac 10 #2 on neutral fields the results might be completely different.
11 Aug 08
Originally posted by vacostnerThe Sugar Bowl is not a neutral site fro an LSU- Ohio State game. Just like if Ohio State played an SEC in Ann Arbor or in Chicago it would not be a neutral site. Weather and fans play a big part.
Check out my avatar, I am anything but an SEC fan. It's hard to argue the SEC isn't the best conference in the country when it comes to football. I was just pointing out when the Big 10's best played the SEC's best the last two years for the BCS Championship, the SEC won both times. Can't argue LSU had a "home" game playing in the Sugar Bowl, but the Gator ...[text shortened]... y and Vandy pre-1940. Top to bottom SEC is stronger than the Big 10 year in and year out.
In the last six years the Big 10 is 9-8 vs. SEC team in bowl games. I think that shows that when matches are even the Big 10 can hold their own. The Big 10 certainly is not that good that their 7th best team will beat a team that was a top team in the polls earlier in the season (MSU-BC) or win in the Rose Bowl with (an at best best tied for second Illinois vs. USC).
All I am saying is Ohio State's 0-8 record is not indicative of what the Big 10 has done in bowl games and to say the conference sucks (even if it is not the best) is just not accurate.
11 Aug 08
Originally posted by myteamtrulystinksTell me what Big 10 team has fared well in major bowl games in the last 10 years? Not OSU, not Michigan. Who are you going to hang your hat on...Wisconsin or Penn State? How many National Championships have the Big 10 generated in the last 10 years?
The Sugar Bowl is not a neutral site fro an LSU- Ohio State game. Just like if Ohio State played an SEC in Ann Arbor or in Chicago it would not be a neutral site. Weather and fans play a big part.
In the last six years the Big 10 is 9-8 vs. SEC team in bowl games. I think that shows that when matches are even the Big 10 can hold their own. T ...[text shortened]... n bowl games and to say the conference sucks (even if it is not the best) is just not accurate.
Regarding the home field advantage...How many years has the Pac 10 had the Rose Bowl advantage. The SEC generally has the Sugar and the florida schools have the Orange. The National Championship game site is pre-determined before the season starts, so you can't say they planned a stacked deck.
Regarding the fans, if the school has a strong team, or if the team does well or an extended period of time, the fans will travel to the games. OSU had a ton of fans in the Sugar Bowl.
OSU is the best team in the conference, why shouldn't their record be indicative of the conference sucking? Michigan sucks just about as badly, and they are the second best team in the conference. Again, who are you going to claim as the poster child school of the conference?
11 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by shortcircuitI am not saying the Big 10 was dominant but if you go game by game you can conclude they are no longer the top conference (as they were 5- 10 years ago but they do not suck.
Tell me what Big 10 team has fared well in major bowl games in the last 10 years? Not OSU, not Michigan. Who are you going to hang your hat on...Wisconsin or Penn State? How many National Championships have the Big 10 generated in the last 10 years?
Regarding the home field advantage...How many years has the Pac 10 had the Rose Bowl advantage. The S he conference. Again, who are you going to claim as the poster child school of the conference?
(1) Ohio State had a terrible performance. They certainly did not deserve a national championship. But just because your top team gets blown out in a National Championship game does not mean the whole conference stinks, right?
(2) Michigan beat the defending champs Florida in Orlando. A big win and a good showing for the conference.
(3) USC at home kills Illinois (although it was a bit closer than the score). A terrible performance but also a terrible match up. There is no way the third best team in a conference can be expected on the road to beat the PAC 10's number one team. It is a bad showing but wouldn't the score be reversed in the PAC 10's #3 team Oregon State played Ohio State in a bowl game in Colombus?
(4) To me the rest of the games are basically a wash; Wisconsin lost by 4 to Tennesee but Penn State won by a touchdown over Texas A & M in San Antonio. Iowa did not make a bowl. Purdue won the Motor City Bowl (probably very little significance). Michigan State (7th in the big ten lost by a field goal against the #14 team in the nation Boston College.
I think looking at record only makes sense when the teams are evenly matched. As I think this shown the Big 10 did fine in games where they were evenly matched and lost in games where they were heavy underdogs. You aren't the best conference, but it is not an embarssment to go 3-4 on the road when your 7th best team is playing a top 15 team.
The fact that the site of the bowl game is pre-determined does not at all adress the issue of fairness.
11 Aug 08
Originally posted by myteamtrulystinksYour first four points basically prove that the Big 10 was far inferior to the SEC whcih is where all of this began.
I am not saying the Big 10 was dominant but if you go game by game you can conclude they are no longer the top conference (as they were 5- 10 years ago but they do not suck.
(1) Ohio State had a terrible performance. They certainly did not deserve a national championship. But just because your top team gets blown out in a National Championship g ...[text shortened]... at the site of the bowl game is pre-determined does not at all adress the issue of fairness.
The fact that the site of the bowl game is pre-determined does not at all adress the issue of fairness. I am not sure what you can do to handle your "fairness" issue. Are you suggesting that if LSU is undefeated and # 1 in the nation, and the Sugar Bowl is the site of the National Championship game, LSU should not be allowed to play there because it would be unfair to the other team? Or for that matter USC when the Rose Bowl is the title site, or Florida/Florida State/Miami when the Orange Bowl is host? That is ridiculous. I guess the only bowl site that is safe is the Fiesta Bowl because Arizona or Arizona State may never play for the title. 😉
11 Aug 08
In football (both pro and college) by only using warm weather sites for its bowl/ championship puts certain teams at a disadvantage. It sort of amazes me that the whole country cries as if it is a great American tragedy that the Yankees use the perceived advantage of spending more money on ball players but it is perfectly OK, for North cities to be denied the opportunity to host Superbowls/ Bowl games.
Top conferences (SEC included) would (who never play anyone out of conference anyway so this might be theoretical) would do worse if they played against good teams in cold weather environments. The Big 10 for example, is always forced to take a trip to a different regions of the country while Florida teams, the SEC, USC in the Rose Bowl are not.
11 Aug 08
Originally posted by myteamtrulystinksNorthern cities should be allowed to host bowl games...in DOMED STADIUMS!!! You forget that these sports are called revenue generators. You will pack many more butts in the stands in better climates than you do in blizzards. Furthermore, who in the hell wants to see a snow covered field with no footing for a football championship game? You, of all people, would have to agree that this would be a HUGE unfair advantage for the teams from the north who play in the snow? You can't play it both ways. Play the game when both teams are at their best and on equal footing in a playable atmosphere.
In football (both pro and college) by only using warm weather sites for its bowl/ championship puts certain teams at a disadvantage. It sort of amazes me that the whole country cries as if it is a great American tragedy that the Yankees use the perceived advantage of spending more money on ball players but it is perfectly OK, for North cities to b ...[text shortened]... o a different regions of the country while Florida teams, the SEC, USC in the Rose Bowl are not.
Your analogy with the Yankees spending compared to the bowl site selection process is apples and oranges. You probably can't see that through those rose colored glasses you are wearing.