Pac-10 Facts

[wareagle]

there is only one fair way to do this....

to get a true gauge of the two conferences one must do this statistically. You all know that to get an accurate answer here we must throw out the top and bottom team of each conference since 1959. So we will throw out Alabama and USC and Vandy and Cal...Now lets run these numbers and see what comes up :clap: :scared :clap:

 

[gjn23]

well the pac 10 was created in 1978 so you can throw out ole miss title in 1960...who could forget that one!

if you want to throw out vandy and cal.....none of the BCS bowl records change from the pac-10 or the sec.....next question.

 

[wareagle]

well the pac 10 was created in 1978 so you can throw out ole miss title in 1960...who could forget that one!

if you want to throw out vandy and cal.....none of the BCS bowl records change from the pac-10 or the sec.....next question.

ok then, lets do this from 1978 to present tossing out Bama, Southern Cal, Vandy, and Cal. Run those and let me know what you come up with

 

[gjn23]

i think sc has 3-4 wins and bama has 2-3 wins...what's your point??

how about this one...throw out the pac-10's wins and the sec losses and now compare bowl records!

 

[dalygolfer20]

How many PAC 10 teams are in the top 20 this year, 2005?
How many last year 2004?

How many SEC teams in 2005?
How many in 2004?

Keep doing this lets say, the past 20 YEARS. Can some one find those stats.

Over the past 20 years, can we find who has the most Champions?

Can we find the records of head to head football within the leagues, not counting the scrub games, like SDGA, Wyoming, Byu, West Carolina, MTSU, Lee, or whom ever, weed out those guys and give me head to head play between conference play, year after year and lets see who has a consistant power house program and who has the most power house programs.

Someone tell me who is the mo0st consistant???

Someone tell me who has the most players in the NFL,,and then who has the most in the !st round, year after year? Find those stats please. I do not know these things, but I have a hunch, but I could be wrong. Do not claim to be right, we all have our opinions, I just dont think it is the same calibur, PAC 10 vs. SEC.... THere are two different mind sets.

 

[gjn23]

look at nfl rosters...my guess is that there are just as many players from the pac-10 as the sec....and there are 20% more players/teams in the sec.....as far as more wins vs each other, didn't scotts stats above address that?????.....as far as scrub opponents, the sec plays far more scrub opponents year in and year out.....and they have more scrub teams in the conf.....what else do you want??????

YOU think the sec is VASTLY superior
i think there is, at best, a small difference in the conf.

 

[flapjack]

The reason the SEC has only one more victory in BCS games is because every BCS conference (5)gets one automatic bowl bid. Which means teams like Pitt and Oregon State sometimes get in a BCS bowl. So, even if the SEC has four teams that are better than anyone else from other conferences, they will only get two BCS bids at most. If you want, you can look at overall bowl records and see what you find. Especially if you TAKE USC OUT OF THE EQUATION!!! You will find that the Pac-10 is terrible...

That does not make much sense for several reasons.

1) SEC does not have that many wins because of automatic bids? A win is a win. How many Pac 10 teams have gone to BCS Bowls and how many SEC teams? If the SEC has sent more teams and only has 1 more win, that is not a good stat for the SEC. If they have sent an equal amount of teams and only have one more win, that is not too impressive either. Help me out with that logic.


2) You are equating a 7-4 Pitt team from last year w/the 11-1 2000 Oregon State team that I believe might still be in the Fiesta Bowl scoring points on ND as I type? They did not win the Pac that year and did not receive an automatic bid. So how are those 2 teams similar in any way? In fact aren't they the exact opposite of each other in that regard?

3) Finally, take USC out of the equation? Last time I checked they have been in the Pac for quite a while. That's like saying take Michael Jordan out of the equation and the Bulls of '90's were not very good.

Once again, as I mentioned somewhere in one of these many threads, I am not the one saying the Pac 10 is better than the SEC in football. (Overall sports programs, academics - another story but not germane to this). However, to say that they are soo, soo far superior is a joke. And, to say the Pac 10 is shitty is comical. With scholarship limits, sharing bowl winnings, the best players leaving after 2 or 3 years of playing not to mention coaches, there is a lot of parity in CFB at the major conf level. Every conference has great years and sub-par years.

Also, I can't figure out what Ole Miss going 10-1 in 1960 has to do with anything.

 

[gjn23]

flapjack:

your post sounds too logical....too much based on reality...too much pro pac-10....

you obviously are ignorant and know nothing about football!!!!

the sec is VASTLY superior...end of story!

 

[DIRTY Diapers]

look at nfl rosters...my guess is that there are just as many players from the pac-10 as the sec....and there are 20% more players/teams in the sec.....as far as more wins vs each other, didn't scotts stats above address that?????.....as far as scrub opponents, the sec plays far more scrub opponents year in and year out.....and they have more scrub teams in the conf.....what else do you want??????

Your GUESS is wrong cowboy. Look at the below FACTS regarding current players in the NFL:

PAC 10 is horrible besides USC ? PAC 10 continuously comes up on the short end of the stick when it comes to current NFL rosters. Just look at the stats homeboys. These are FACTS ? not theories Scott tries to bore us all with.



SEC Football Players in the 2005 NFL Draft
04/24/2005
SEC IN THE 2005 NFL DRAFT
April 23-24
New York City
37 SEC Players Selected
? The SEC led all conferences this season in the most first round draft selections (10), first day selections (20) and most overall draft selections (37).
? Since the 1993 NFL Draft, the SEC has either tied or led the nation in most overall draft selections every year except four (1993, 1995, 1997 and 2004).
? The SEC's 10 first round selections tied a high for the league, also set in 1998. Since conference expansion in 1992, the SEC has had at least four first round selections every year with the exception of 1995 (3).
? The 37 total draft selections is the least for the SEC since 1997, when the league had 25 players selected. The SEC also had 37 players selected in the 1999 NFL Draft.
? For the first time since the 1998 NFL Draft, every SEC team had at least one player selected.
? It is the first time since the 1994 NFL Draft that every SEC team had at least one player selected by the end of the sixth round.

Number of Players Selected by Conference (Top 5)
1st Round
SEC - 10
ACC - 5
Big 12 - 5
Big Ten - 4
Pac 10 - 3
1st Day
SEC - 20
Big 12 - 17
ACC - 15
Big Ten - 13
Pac 10 - 13
Overall
SEC - 37
ACC - 36
Big 12 - 34
Pac 10 - 33
Big Ten - 30



Three teams from the SEC dominate current NFL Rosters. Here are the top 5 programs with the most CURRENT NFL players ? Still no mention of any PAC-10 Teams including USC ? Again, these are FACTS non-disputable? And I?m not even a fan of the SEC.


Former SEC players fill NFL rosters
By John Clayton
ESPN.com

Each fall, the NFL puts out a release that lists the top college schools producing NFL players.
Notre Dame had topped or shared the top spot since the mid 1990s. Florida State has been a consistent runner up or near the top. Yet those totals might be a little misleading. While it lists the schools on opening day rosters, it doesn't describe the quality of those players.
Of late, the Fighting Irish haven't been producing the top choices or the impact players. In fact, their totals have dropped from 44 in the mid 1990s to 39 last year, tied with Florida and Florida State. The hotter schools for producing players who are NFL ready follow: 1. Miami; 2. Tennessee; 3. Florida; 4. Georgia; and 5. Michigan.
Maybe it's strange not to include Florida State, but it would probably be seventh. While they match or top several of the top five schools for volume over the past five years, the Seminoles have had a few players who haven't had instant success. Defensive end Jamal Reynolds, a first-round choice in 2000, has spent more time on the Packers inactive list than on the field. High picks such as safety Derrick Gibson, wide receiver Ron Dugans, defensive tackle Larry Smith and a few others are still trying to crack the starting lineup.
It was also hard not to put Ohio State into the top five, but the Buckeyes were sixth. Their top players have been instant hits, but there just hasn't been as many of them in the past couple of years. After having 35 Ohio State players on rosters in 1997, the Buckeyes have dropped to 28 at the beginning of last season.
Still, their top prospects are instant successes. Guard LeCharles Bentley, a second-rounder last year, made a big impact on the Saints offensive line as a rookie. Cornerbacks Antoine Winfield and Nate Clements were first-round picks of the Bills and each were first-year and long-term successes.
Another school that has dropped has been Colorado. Though Colorado players are usually NFL ready coming out of college, only 25 Colorado players were on NFL rosters last year. Choices in the top rounds have been missing the past few years.
Perhaps the hardest decision was omitting Penn State. Few schools consistently put up high first-round choices than the Nittany Lions. Whether its bad luck or some other reason, the top picks have struggled. Defensive end Courtney Brown has struggled with the Browns and hasn't been the sack machine they expected. Running backs taken in the top five have turned out to be busts from Blair Thomas to Curtis Enis.
In the late 1990s, Penn State had between 33 and 36 players on NFL rosters. The totals have fallen to 28 last year. Part of that is because many of the high picks haven't lasted.
Here are the top five:


Miami: Scouts are still amazed when they watch workouts on the Miami campus. Their athletes look like the NFL elite. Year after year, the Hurricanes keep producing top NFL talent. It's surprising to think that Miami ranks fifth with 35 players on NFL rosters. Each year, the Hurricanes crack out a half-dozen to a dozen top prospects. Failures at the top of the draft are few. Look at last year's draft. Cornerback Phillip Buchanon (Oakland) and safety Ed Reed (Baltimore) were instant success stories as starters in NFL secondaries. Tight end Jeremy Shockey lost out to halfback Clinton Portis for Rookie of the Year. There is long line of linebackers headed by Ray Lewis who have come from Miami. The Hurricanes are tied with Florida State and North Carolina with the most NFL linebackers (six).
?


Tennessee: The SEC is the NFL's most consistent hotbed for talent, but the Vols have the conference championship in the past five years. Last year, 10 Vols were drafted. Three went in the first round -- defensive tackles Albert Haynesworth (Tennessee) and John Henderson (Jacksonville) and wide receiver Dont? Stallworth (New Orleans). Stallworth is one of the most exciting young deep threats in the NFL. Haynesworth should become a dominating disruptor in the middle of the Titans defensive line. What the Volunteers do best, though, is produce running backs. They lead the NFL with seven running backs. Jamal Lewis is a Ravens power back who can help carry the team to a Super Bowl. Travis Henry came on last season to become the Bills franchise halfback and just signed a contract extension this week.
?


Florida: It will be interesting to see how these numbers change with Steve Spurrier in the NFL and Ron Zook taking over as his replacement. Florida has eight receivers in the NFL, but many haven't achieved the success they had in college. Spurrier found that out last year when he tried to resurrect his offense around Florida receivers. Reche Caldwell of the Chargers and Jabar Gaffney of the Texans offered encouragement to their teams during their rookie seasons. Travis Taylor of the Ravens and Darrell Jackson of the Seahawks have been the best of the most recent crop of NFL receivers. Even though many of the receivers haven't worked out, Florida has produced the type of athletes who fit well into the increased passing aspects of the NFL. The Jaguars are counting on the mobility of linebacker Mike Peterson to turn around their defense. Lito Sheppard is the Eagles cornerback of the future. Fred Taylor was ready to become a star running back once he came into the NFL.
?


Georgia: Here's the newest addition to the top five. Because of the growth of the Atlanta area, the area is producing great raw big athlete who can be turned into quality offensive and defensive linemen. Look at the list of defensive linemen -- Charles Grant of the Saints, Richard Seymour of the Patriots and Marcus Stroud of the Jaguars. Kendrell Bell, a linebacker, became an instant star with the Steelers. This year, the Bulldogs are providing a quality group of offensive linemen. Matt Stinchcomb of the Raiders and Chris Terry were high picks from a few years ago. Of the two, Terry has become one of the highest paid right tackles. Georgia players are on the rise in the NFL. The school currently ranks tied with Miami for fifth with 35 current NFL players. This year's draft could put them in the top four or three.
?


Michigan: It's funny to have only one Big 10 school in the top five, but things have been tough in the Big 10 in recent years. The Big 10 hasn't been producing the quicker athletes compared to the SEC. The bulk numbers coming out of the Big 10 are offensive linemen. Wisconsin has four NFL centers and should add a fifth this year with Al Johnson. Still, players coming out of Michigan are usually NFL ready, particularly the offensive linemen. Charles Woodson is the best player who came out of Michigan in the past five years. He's one of the league's best cornerbacks. Ian Gold finally got a chance to show his skills as a starting linebacker for the Broncos. And the offensive linemen are usually instant successes -- Steve Hutchinson (Seahawks), Jeff Backus (Lions), Jon Jansen (Washington) and on and on. Another school to watch is Iowa. Kirk Ferentz is taking former tight ends and turning them into NFL ready offensive linemen.

 

[flapjack]

"Number of Players Selected by Conference (Top 5)
Overall
SEC - 37
ACC - 36
Big 12 - 34
Pac 10 - 33
Big Ten - 30"

Doesn't that mean that the Pac averaged 3.3 players/team while the SEC averaged 3.1/team drafted? SEC had more first day players per team, but are those stats posted to enforce the theory of SEC domination or undermine it?

Also how old is that article you pasted:

"Florida: It will be interesting to see how these numbers change with Steve Spurrier in the NFL and Ron Zook taking over as his replacement..."

 

[gjn23]

no kidding....AGAIN THE DEBATE IS THAT THE SEC IS VASTLY....VASTLY....SUPERIOR THAN THE PAC-10

Overall selections:
37-sec
33-pac 10

is that VASTLY SUPERIOR?

factor in 12 teams vs 10 teams and the avg per team favors the pac 10...IS THAT VASTLY SUPERIOR?

this is getting to be a joke.

BOTH conf are great...neither is VASTLY SUPERIOR...the SEC has more good teams at the top end and more bad teams at the bottom end (due in part to overall quantity of schools).

why is this concept so HARD for people who HATE the pac-10 to grasp?????

I do keep forgetting where these people went to school.....the sec.....a bastion of higher education.

 

[dalygolfer20]

GJN,

Come on bro,,,more scrubs in the conference,,,the scrubs in the conference = 6(SEC),,,that means that your(PAC 10 would be 9)....How do you say more scrubs???? YOu have ZERO consistantancy from any team in the conference except USC.... Give me the consistancy of the other 9 teams for the past two decades.....Not two good ones and 8 bad ones(years),,,year after year.

Next give me your National Champs besides USC... Since 1990...
Then give me the SEC Champs since 1990... Well include USC, that wouldn't be fair to your total, since their dominance... I give them big props, they definately surprised me, I had Michagan to beat them the year before, simply for the logic we are all talking about(and that is) I had Michagan to win because USC has no one to PLAY..... But I was wrong, they kicked ass and still are... Very Good, but the rest of the conference is a fly by night meaning (THEIR THINKING) I hope we have a good program this year, but I know we want next year.... But I hope....

SEC - BAMA - TN - GA - AUB- FLA- LSU - I know where they are going to be,,and then when our SEC SCRUBS have to play everyone of these teams in the SEC how do they not stay scrubs,,,where do you think they are going to be????? Vandy, KY, SC, Miss, Miss St.,,,where will they be???? Do you not think that our SEC teams would play better in your league?

No one answered how many top 20 --- PAC 10 teams are in 2005 and how many SEC teams for 2005,,,and last year as well(2004)... or since USC dominance.....

You know what else GJN - ginger - To you everyone is a idiot,,,you must have been called that your entire life because that is all you say...You call everyone an idiot or you say "that is idotic"..... Whats up,,,to many buritto's....

 

[dalygolfer20]

THE 2004 STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE as COPied AND PASTED from another source...

AND IN THE TOP 25 there are -- count them 6 from the SEC -- and there are 3 from the PAC 10....

GUess whos SECTION is sitting at #1........

Out of the 6 there are only 2 POWER HOUSEs from the SEC in this CATEGORY,,,but unlike the 3 PAC 10 that are in the top 25 there are ZERO power houses and our NATIONAL CHAMPS are ranked 64th and the final of all 12 in the SEC is ranked 49th......

Now you PAC 10 Girls go through here and tweek this into your favor, I highly expect you to,,nothing will surprise at this point...

1. Arkansas 1547
2. Georgia Tech 1483
3. Virginia Tech 1482
4. Kansas 1479
5. Texas A&M 1478
6. North Carolina State 1468
7. Notre Dame 1463
8. Oregon State 1462
9. Texas Tech 1422
10. Florida 1382
11. North Carolina 1368
12. Vanderbilt 1360
13. South Carolina 1357
14. Clemson (tie) 1350
15. Florida State (tie) 1350
16. Northwestern 1347
17. Arizona 1337
18. Wake Forest 1323
19. Georgia 1322
20. Baylor 1316
21. Kentucky 1311
22. Virginia 1307
23. Michigan State 1280
24. Arizona State 1275
25. Maryland 1264
26. Iowa 1262
27. Ohio State 1250
28. Stanford 1236
29. Miami FL 1231
30. Indiana 1228
31. Duke 1219
32. Auburn 1218
33. Tennessee 1211
34. Colorado 1210
35. Purdue (tie) 1209
36. Penn State (tie) 1209
37. Washington 1207
38. Louisiana State 1200
39. UCLA 1198
40. Houston 1196
41. Oklahoma 1172
42. Michigan (tie) 1171
43. Illinois (tie) 1171
44. Alabama 1147
45. Mississippi 1131
46. Oklahoma State 1126
47. California 1118
48. Minnesota 1114
49. Mississippi State 1108
50. Brigham Young 1093
51. Nebraska 1092
52. Wisconsin 1086
53. Louisiana Tech 1085
54. Iowa State 1081
55. Washington State 1080
56. Colorado State 1070
57. Texas 1060
58. Oregon 1053
59. Kansas State 1037
60. Syracuse 1028
61. Missouri 1010
62. Temple 984
63. Marshall 974
64. Southern Cal 944
65. UNLV 942
66. Cincinnati 939
67. Southern Miss 915
68. San Diego State 885
69. Louisville 804
70. Bowling Green 800
71. UCF 793
72. New Mexico 787
73. UAB 782
74. East Carolina 781
75. Arkansas State 773
76. Ball State 766
77. Pittsburgh 743
78. SMU 741
79. Western Michigan 725
80. Troy State 715
81. West Virginia 699
82. Miami OH 696
83. South Florida 683
84. Utah State 678
85. Ohio 673
86. Akron 668
87. Boston College 664
88. Army 658
89. Idaho (tie) 655
90. Wyoming (tie) 655
91. Rutgers 635
92. Rice 624
93. Fresno State 622
94. Toledo 617
95. Northern Illinois 612
96. Memphis 597
97. Eastern Michigan 593
98. Air Force 588
99. Kent State 577
100. Tulane 565
101. TCU 560
102. Connecticut 559
103. San Jose State 546
104. Utah 539
105. Tulsa 529
106. Buffalo 528
107. Louisiana-Monroe 527
108. Central Michigan 525
109. North Texas 507
110. New Mexico State 499
111. UTEP 493
112. Nevada 474
113. Middle Tennessee 471
114. Hawaii 467
115. Louisiana-Lafayette 428
116. Boise State 427
117. Navy 327

 

[Scott4USC]

Some good stats posted by both sides. SEC is clearly a great conference and so is the Pac 10. Remember, the debate is about whether or not the SEC is "superior" to the Pac 10. SEC may be slightly better (debatable) but they clearly are not superior. There is NO ARGUMENT supporting the SEC being superior to the Pac 10. There is a ton of evidence supporting the Pac 10 and knocking the SEC. Way too many question marks for the SEC. The stats (facts) don't lie. Remember, we are talking about conferences. 12 teams in the SEC and 10 in the Pac 10.

Got a great question for the SEC posters.

USC clearly has the respect of everyone as being a great team and the best program in CFB at the moment. Its nice to see USC getting the respect they deserve, but then SEC posters are slamming the other 9 teams in the Pac 10. Here is my question. USC is so great, rest of Pac 10 sucks, USC dominates BCS opponents 3 straight years, but someone explain to me WHY USC has such a hard time running the table in the Pac 10? PLEASSE EXPLAIN TO ME WHY USC HAS SUCH A DIFFICULT TIME RUNNING THE TABLE IN THE PAC 10?

I am a huge USC fan, watch every game etc. USC will always have 2-3 really tough Pac 10 games every year. I am just talking about conf. games. USC has trouble with Pac 10 teams, yet they have blown out and completely dominated 3 straight BCS opponents in their bowl games. Take the best teams in the Big 12, SEC etc. and how many really tough games do they have in there conf. schedule? After answering that question, then take into consideration the Pac 10 plays TOUGHER OOC competition AND plays on the ROAD!

SEC people will say in the SEC you have FL, AU, UGA, TN, and LSU. Show me where the best team in the SEC plays ALL those opponents in the same season? You can't, because the best team in the SEC is one of those teams. Remember, the SEC is a 12 team conf. and you don't play 2 conf. teams every year. Also note that in the SEC you play weak OOC competition and don't play on the road in OOC play. This creates more wins for the SEC in general, and doesn't take a toll on the teams (making them fresher for conf. play).

All in all, this has to give Pac 10 teams more credibility.

In the Pac 10 you "generally" play tough OOC teams and play on the road. WINS gets teams in the top 25 and gets teams to bowl games. This isn't helping the Pac 10 and obviously fans across the country don't take notice to this. So when USC beats a 4-4 Pac 10 team who has 2 losses in OOC play against tough competition or on the road, they don't get respect. Well listen folks. USC plays in the PAC 10, and if it was such a cakewalk, that would only hurt USC in their bowl game against BCS opponents. USC has 3 straight BCS wins and all 3 were blowouts.

USC had tough games last year against @V-Tech, @BYU, @Stanford, CAL, UCLA (sort of). 3/5 on the road. 3/5 were early in season. Tough to play tough OOC competition and on the road. This is PAC 10 football. Doesn't create top 25 teams and doesn't get the hype the SEC does. But doesn't mean it is a $hit conf. In fact, you should respect the Pac 10 more than the SEC.


Here is another interesting tidbit. College football innovation came from the Pac 10.

Take a look at Auburn this year. They hired an OC from the Pac 10 who excelled in the SEC. This guy was ran out of the Pac 10. Pac 10 offenses are MUCH more sophisticated than the offenses in the SEC. IMO, this makes Pac 10 play harder because in some games the other teams offense will be clicking or on fire. Not every team you play, but some teams you play can and will be clicking on all cylinders.

Look at OU. There defense NEVER seen such a sophisticated offense like USC before. USC made them look like lame ducks. Reason is the Big 12 doesn't have sophisticated offenses like the Pac 10. Pete Carroll says this all the time. Its very difficult to stop Pac 10 offenses each and every week. Why did the USC defense look so great against OU, Iowa, and Michigan in BCS bowl games. All 3 teams at the time were considered top 3 offenses in the country and were HOT HOT teams. USC defense struggled more against PAC 10 offense than all 3 BCS offenses they faced. This is exactly what Pete Carroll has said and the players at USC.

This isn't difficult to understand. Maybe I didn't explain it right. If you agree, disagree, or have questions, we can hash it out. This is the reason I bet THOUSANDS on USC every year in BCS Bowl games. I am 3-0 with this. If the public doesn't catch on 4th year in a row, I will bet THOUSANDS again on USC. Simple logic.

Scary thing is this will be the first year USC won't be inexperienced on offense and only 1 weakness on defense. Finally Carroll will field a complete team and this is only his 5th year. Its time to catch on. Maybe that is why AU hired a Pac 10 OC who was sorta run out of the league.

Watch some Pac 10 games and see the sophisticated offenses. Now remember what I wrote. Not every week your offense clicks. But when a Pac 10 offense clicks, its VERY hard to stop and very explosive. USC every year will face 3-4 Pac 10 teams who's offense is CLICKING even against the great USC defenses. That is one reason Pac 10 football is really tough and why there is a lot of parity in it. ANY pac 10 team can win on any day. This is a FACT!

Pac 10 has reputation of soft/bad defenses. I like to think the sophisticated offenses week in week out have something to do with this. Now there are some teams with BAD defenses but for the most part, its not an easy conf. to defense. USC IMO has one of the better defenses in the country the last 3 years and they have had BIG TIME trouble in few games stopping Pac 10 offenses in the last 3 years. Remember, Carroll is prob. one of if not the best DC in CFB. In his 5th year at USC, he pretty much now has "his" players playing who can "run" his type of defensive schemes.

Some things for you all to think about and educate yourselves.

I will tell everyone right now. USC plays AT Oregon this year. Will be a great game to bet against USC and take the pts. VERY scary game for USC, and a game they very well might lose but you will get $hit load of pts. IMO, this is a game to bet THOUSANDS (i would if i wasn't a USC fan) on if it sets up well. Key pt being setting up well. Right now it sets up well perfectly. Now i will never bet against USC but if I ever see great bets against USC, I def. will post. I never posted on MJ's saying to bet against USC because USC has always been either undervalued or USC just too dominant. This season I think will be a lot of great situations to bet against USC (even though this will be USC's best team in 3 years) and I don't have USC ego to help posters on MJ's to make big $$$. Of course I will be rooting for USC blowout meaning you posters lose.

I will repeat it again. Posters in this thread and on MJ's in general give USC a lot of props but slam rest of Pac 10. USC doesn't blow past everyone in the Pac 10 so why do they praise USC and slam the rest of the conf.? Doesn't make sense to me if you are willing to give USC respect. Respect USC has def. earned.

Damn this turned out to be a long post.
Hopefully someone reads it. :mj07
:

 

[Scott4USC]

dalygolfer20

I know where you got those SOS stats. Let me tell you they are BOGUS. Go to the site and look up how they calculate their SOS. You will agree with me it is a flawed way to calculate SOS. POST how they calculate their SOS so everyone can see how flawed it is.

 

[dalygolfer20]

Scott,

I am not sure if we are talking about the same place or not, but I got these at Natin\onal Champs.NEt... Credible or not, I do not know,,,, I am sure you would like the 2003 rankings they have where there were like 4 or 5 PAC 10 teams in the TOP 10,,,what do you think now,,and 6 or 7 in the TOP 20 with only with like 2 in the TOP 11 from SEC and 1 more in the TOP 25 from the SEC.Not much for digging around. Maybe you can help find the calculations.

If these are not credible then please someone find the SARAGIN (SP) Rankings or whom they believe to be reputable....

 

[AU2001]

"Ignorance is a voluntary misfortune."

That is all I have to say. I have grown tired of this debate. I am tired of reading posts where pac-10 backers try to scratch and claw their way into a decent argument. It's a lot like trying to talk to liberals!

Best of luck in '05 to USC and her 9 sisters!!!

 

[Scott4USC]

Scott,

I am not sure if we are talking about the same place or not, but I got these at Natin\onal Champs.NEt... Credible or not, I do not know,,,, I am sure you would like the 2003 rankings they have where there were like 4 or 5 PAC 10 teams in the TOP 10,,,what do you think now,,and 6 or 7 in the TOP 20 with only with like 2 in the TOP 11 from SEC and 1 more in the TOP 25 from the SEC.Not much for digging around. Maybe you can help find the calculations.

If these are not credible then please someone find the SARAGIN (SP) Rankings or whom they believe to be reputable....

I believe they calculate their SOS based solely on WINS/LOSSES. I think that is a "flawed" way to calculate SOS. Here is what the site says.

"This component is calculated by determining the cumulative won/loss records of the team's opponents and the cumulative won/loss records of the teams' opponents' opponents." More weight on teams opponents win/losses vs opponents opponents wins/losses.

Sounds logical but its flawed in a major way. This SOS does not reward a team for playing on the road. They feel winning on the road and at home is equal value. Simply not true.

This SOS will reward you for beating a team who is 3-0 in OOC play because they played 3 $hitty teams with a lot of wins vs a team who is 1-2 in OOC play but played 3 very hard teams and maybe 2/3 games on road. This alone makes this SOS calculation BOGUS.

Here is a MYTHICAL example, doesn't exist but proves my pt. If Auburn played Citadel, La. Monroe, La. Tech, Kentucky, @Alabama, Vandy, Ole Miss, @Miss. St., Arkansas, @FL, LSU and went 10-1 losing to FL and beating a good LSU squad and only 4 road games all year. This team would be considered a POWERHOUSE in this SOS system because they racked up 10 wins and any team playing AU will get major boost in their SOS.

Now if AU played @USC, G-Tech, and @La. Tech, LSU, @FL, Arkansas, Vandy, @Miss. St., Ole Miss, @Kentucky, and TN and went 7-4 they would be ranked WAY down on their SOS but look at what a BRUTAL schedule they played and lets say they played 5 road games/6 home games.

So a team who plays AU with schedule #1 gets rewarded and big boost. Team who plays AU with schedule #2 gets penalized. Even if its the same AU team playing both schedules. Schedule #2 is clearly harder but AU will get penalized for not having wins/losses. Wins/losses are much more important than the actual opponent and location of the game. That is wrong.

I am a big supporter of Sagarin Rankings and his calculation of SOS is very logical. Go take a look at his calculations and how he calculates them. There is not a perfect way to calculate SOS or power rankings. Some are clearly better than others.