I agree with Mcity, there are a lot of smaller schools that have rabid crowds --- BYU and Wyoming come to mind. I don't care who you are, Provo isn't an easy enviroment to play.
College Football Attendence
- Thread starter Master Capper
- Start date
Mansa
Why would the SEC leave their stadiums to play out of conf games when they can guarentee themselves and their opponets huge paydays that will support their off sports? It would really make no sense for them to go on the road, but you also fail to address why the Pac 10 schedules a large amount of games with San Jose and teams from the Big Sky?
Scott,
I know that internet posting boards tend to bring out a great many lonely freaks that have no life but you by far have to be the dumbest person I have ever stumbled across on the net! Your comments about tearing up everyones credibility are really off the wall since in order to tear up someones credibility you first must have credibility and anyone with the slightest amount of knowledge would know that you have no credibility. I use to not pay your threads any attention and I saw that you were the only one posting in the CFB forum during the spring so I was bored and decided to read a few and now I can see why they have named you Lucas after the child with downs syndrome!
Mcity,
This whole thread was posted because Lucas (Scott) had tried to criticize all the leagues except the Pac 10 and in particular the SEC and Big 12. He could not understand why SEC teams dont have to play road games out of conf, we tried to tell him that they have huge crowds and that they play a brutal in conf schedule but he insisted that everyone was wrong. Then he blamed the low attendence figures in the Pac 10 on the fact that their is alot more to do in the west than down south! Let's see vacation spot that I am thinking of should I go to Pullman or New Orleans, well Scott says theres more to do in Pullman!
ET46
You would have to go back and read the multiude of slop in numerous other threads that Scott has trashed with his garbage to see why that was posted, I am sure after you read a couple of his non-factual posts you will understand!
Avalanche,
I am booking the over and under on when Scott will tank and be banned for at least a week, the prop odds are that Scott will be banned by Oct 1., 2004 for at least a week:
Agree-200
disagree+160
Why would the SEC leave their stadiums to play out of conf games when they can guarentee themselves and their opponets huge paydays that will support their off sports? It would really make no sense for them to go on the road, but you also fail to address why the Pac 10 schedules a large amount of games with San Jose and teams from the Big Sky?
Scott,
I know that internet posting boards tend to bring out a great many lonely freaks that have no life but you by far have to be the dumbest person I have ever stumbled across on the net! Your comments about tearing up everyones credibility are really off the wall since in order to tear up someones credibility you first must have credibility and anyone with the slightest amount of knowledge would know that you have no credibility. I use to not pay your threads any attention and I saw that you were the only one posting in the CFB forum during the spring so I was bored and decided to read a few and now I can see why they have named you Lucas after the child with downs syndrome!
Mcity,
This whole thread was posted because Lucas (Scott) had tried to criticize all the leagues except the Pac 10 and in particular the SEC and Big 12. He could not understand why SEC teams dont have to play road games out of conf, we tried to tell him that they have huge crowds and that they play a brutal in conf schedule but he insisted that everyone was wrong. Then he blamed the low attendence figures in the Pac 10 on the fact that their is alot more to do in the west than down south! Let's see vacation spot that I am thinking of should I go to Pullman or New Orleans, well Scott says theres more to do in Pullman!
ET46
You would have to go back and read the multiude of slop in numerous other threads that Scott has trashed with his garbage to see why that was posted, I am sure after you read a couple of his non-factual posts you will understand!
Avalanche,
I am booking the over and under on when Scott will tank and be banned for at least a week, the prop odds are that Scott will be banned by Oct 1., 2004 for at least a week:
Agree-200
disagree+160
master capper,
I understand what you are saying....didn't mean to get too far off of topic, just thought I would add a different angle to the thread about how attendance #'s sometimes are not an indication of a school's true home field or lack there of advantage. But I do agree, $$$$ rules the day and the bigger schools can afford to schedule little schools at home because the little guys want some of the dough and that is unfortunately sometimes the only way they can get it.
I understand what you are saying....didn't mean to get too far off of topic, just thought I would add a different angle to the thread about how attendance #'s sometimes are not an indication of a school's true home field or lack there of advantage. But I do agree, $$$$ rules the day and the bigger schools can afford to schedule little schools at home because the little guys want some of the dough and that is unfortunately sometimes the only way they can get it.
I guess the information that I retrieved off of the USC website was wrong.
http://usctrojans.collegesports.com/facilities/usc-memorial-coliseum.html
I'll have to do a better job of tracking down information on that next time. But as I stated. They didn't average 80,000 in attendance last year, and I was correct.
I guess the other point that I made when I showed that Miami of Fl is a private institution, and had less than 8,000 undergraduates, and might affect their attendance figures - didn't really matter, and didn't constitute a "Large and in Charge" reply. Choose to reply to what you want to. I understand. I will remember how you chose to reply to me. But please note the difference. When I am shown that my stance may not have been what I thought it was - I'll reply and recognize it. Have you ever done the same? Maybe, but I haven't seen it. Keep it in mind in the future. Best of luck on tearing up people's posts and credibility. I wasn't aware that was your intention - but since I know that now - I have confirmed many things about you that I only wondered about in the past. I guess now is when I regret making that statement about not wanting to see you banned. I honestly didn't. I don't want to see you banned because of what you stated about my post, but for your venom, intentions, and and your myopia. Yes you are myopic, and I think that as soon as you realize that, you might come to grips with what many people on this site are saying about you. I'm done trying to help you. I've fallen into your trap way to many times. You feed off of attention, and I've given you way too much of that already.
http://usctrojans.collegesports.com/facilities/usc-memorial-coliseum.html
I'll have to do a better job of tracking down information on that next time. But as I stated. They didn't average 80,000 in attendance last year, and I was correct.
I guess the other point that I made when I showed that Miami of Fl is a private institution, and had less than 8,000 undergraduates, and might affect their attendance figures - didn't really matter, and didn't constitute a "Large and in Charge" reply. Choose to reply to what you want to. I understand. I will remember how you chose to reply to me. But please note the difference. When I am shown that my stance may not have been what I thought it was - I'll reply and recognize it. Have you ever done the same? Maybe, but I haven't seen it. Keep it in mind in the future. Best of luck on tearing up people's posts and credibility. I wasn't aware that was your intention - but since I know that now - I have confirmed many things about you that I only wondered about in the past. I guess now is when I regret making that statement about not wanting to see you banned. I honestly didn't. I don't want to see you banned because of what you stated about my post, but for your venom, intentions, and and your myopia. Yes you are myopic, and I think that as soon as you realize that, you might come to grips with what many people on this site are saying about you. I'm done trying to help you. I've fallen into your trap way to many times. You feed off of attention, and I've given you way too much of that already.
MC
2) To display their perceived strength to a broader audience than just SEC & Sun Belt fans. And, thus, to prove their "national" superiority.
3) To give their student athletes the opportunity to see different regions of this beautiful country of ours, up close!
I just cant see how you can defend a conf winning % in all games, when they invite Citadel, E Ky, Maine & W Carolina in to play. Equally huge paydays would come if they were inviting Mich, W Va or Maryland!
Now, you have failed to address why does the SEC avoid the huge paydays they would get from playing Miami or FSU or OU or Texas twice a yr? All of those teams are close enough to not be a burden travelwise. And those type of games would solidify their reputation as the strongest conf in college football. But, since they dont stick their necks out on the line, they dont get my respect. No guts, no glory!
1) To prepare themselves for the "so-called" tough environments that they will play @ in conf. The SEC as a conf doesnt play tough teams to prepare for each other. How can I believe that they think those road games in the SEC are really tough, if they dont take themselves seriously enough to prepare for the conf slate?
2) To display their perceived strength to a broader audience than just SEC & Sun Belt fans. And, thus, to prove their "national" superiority.
3) To give their student athletes the opportunity to see different regions of this beautiful country of ours, up close!
Hard to pass up on a huge payday. But, here we go again talking about things other than football! We've been thru preseason SOS, attendance & now, economics!
I just cant see how you can defend a conf winning % in all games, when they invite Citadel, E Ky, Maine & W Carolina in to play. Equally huge paydays would come if they were inviting Mich, W Va or Maryland!
The most obvious reason for this is geography. The same reason for the inordinate amt of Sun Belt matchups for the SEC. SJSU is close to the CA schools in the Pac 10 & Idaho is relatively close to the northern Pac 10 teams. The bigger schools usually foot the travel bill for the smaller schools, so why take more $ from the pot by shipping in somebody from far away! Same philosophy applies in the SEC, but w all the big time teams in the ACC, I cant see why those confs dont matchup more often.
Now, you have failed to address why does the SEC avoid the huge paydays they would get from playing Miami or FSU or OU or Texas twice a yr? All of those teams are close enough to not be a burden travelwise. And those type of games would solidify their reputation as the strongest conf in college football. But, since they dont stick their necks out on the line, they dont get my respect. No guts, no glory!
The reason attendance is worse in the PAC 10 than in the SEC, Big 10 or ACC is that the West Coast is much more atomized and individualistic, while there is much more of a sense of community in the South and the Midwest.
In the South at least, attending college football games is about group allegiance: expressing solidarity with the group, socializing with other group members, and hoping the group's representatives defeat the other group's representatives and thereby confer status on the group and its members. It has little to do with something as superficial and fleeting as entertainment.
In the South at least, attending college football games is about group allegiance: expressing solidarity with the group, socializing with other group members, and hoping the group's representatives defeat the other group's representatives and thereby confer status on the group and its members. It has little to do with something as superficial and fleeting as entertainment.
mansa_musa said:
They have played each of the teams that you have mentioned above in the past two years so I think you are beginning to sound like a playa hater that makes non-sensical silly comments without logic behind the thoughts! Why doesnt the Pac 10 schedule these teams year in and year out? When your the king of the hill like the SEC is then you dont have to put your neck on the block, the weaker leagues need to knock you off the hill first!
You talk about need an awful lot. What about desire! They dont want to schedule tough opponents on the road. Plain & simple. Spin it any way you want, but, if they wanted to schedule tougher they would & still get the same paydays.
Very disingenuous statement. 4 of those teams are only played because of geographic rivalries. Most of those games happen yearly & dont appeal to the nation as a whole. When Ole Miss schedules FSU & Arkansas schedules Clemson then maybe we'll have something.
First, bowl games arent scheduled by the AD's. Bowl games are by invite. Second, not every SEC team goes to a bowl game.
Earlier, you boasted of a winning % of 57%. SEC lost at least 5 of the 8 matchups you mentioned. That's about 37% of those matchups. That definitely hurt the SEC's winning %! And gives a glimpse into the true motivation for all those Sun Belt matchups.
How?? Please explain!
You're the same person who said attendance separates the men from the boys! Nuff said!
Miami hasnt come back since they got beat. Michigan has lost their last 3 ventures into Pac 10 territory. Auburn & Alabama have fell victim. Maybe its those teams that wont schedule the Pac 10? If Scott is to be believed, SC tried to get them all, but, those teams either flaked or had prior commitments.
SEC lost the majority of the matchups that you mentioned & is 2-10 v Pac 10 the last 12 meetings. You cant be king of the hill, when your best ball is played v W Illinois & FAMU. How long did you think about that comment before you made it?
You're starting to sound alot like Avalanche! Making bunches of stupid comments & hoping something sticks!
and how many championships have the SEC won the last 25 years.
oh yea thats right 7 of them...gee i forgot...
oh yea thats right 7 of them...gee i forgot...
Mansa:
1. When other teams can insure that they will provide as big of a payday as the larger SEC teams can garner through playing a home game then maybe the SEC will talk!
2. Your the one that said that dont play anyone and named the teams they should schedule and all I said was that they allready play the majority of teams that you mentioned who cares if they are located near each other that creates a great match-up! Ole Miss playing Clemson why does this matter it's like asking Cal to play a team other than a MWC league member whom both rolled them last year!
3. You must not grasp what the job description of a AD at a major university is: this is not the NFL they do not only have a football team to be concerned with they must also fund the lesser sports with revenue usually created through men's football and basketball. While at the same time trying to schedule the off sports in a economical fashion and this means cutting deals to allow the smaller schools in the area to get a taste of a big payday. Sort of like why the Pac 10 insists on playing San Jose State 3 or 4 times a year as they get a trade off when scheduling other sports! No not every SEC team goes to a bowl game but usually around 80% of the league!
4. They may have lost some of those games but the overall strength of the league outweighs any losses as represented by their 57% of wins in 2003! For all of your talk about the Sun BElt you still dont have a rhyme or reason why the PAC 10 plays San Jose, Sac State (do they still have a program), Idaho, Northern Az, Mont, Mont State for at least the SunBelt winner has a tie into a bowl!
6. Your defense of the Pac 10's out of conf schedule is that they play geographical rivals so whats the difference between the SEC playing geographical rivals?
7. So what your saying is that teams fear coming to the west coast to play and wont schedule Pac 10 teams? I give USC credit for beating Auburn but the rest of your examples are all home games, how has the PAC 10 fared on the road against those teams? I truly doubt that teams fear going to the west coast as long as they can work out a good trade off, Ohio State is going to Washington next year but they also got a home game in 07 and a basketball home game in the deal! Scott's word is worthless to me as I am sure you know must games are scheduled anywhere from 2 to 10 years out so Scott saying that USC tried to schedule every good team this year is a fallacy but USC has deals in place with Nebraska and Arkansas in the next three years!
8. SEC 2-10 vs PAC 10 in last 12 matchups, well your number are slightly off as the real record is 4-6 in the last ten years with 5 of the PAC 10 wins coming against the bottom 5 teams in the SEC!
9. As with any sport it comes down to rings and trophies and at this point in the past 25 years the SEC has 7 National Championships and the Pac 10 1 according to the coaches poll, which is quite amazing considering how much stronger the SEC has been in the past 25 years compared to the Pac10!
5.
3
1. When other teams can insure that they will provide as big of a payday as the larger SEC teams can garner through playing a home game then maybe the SEC will talk!
2. Your the one that said that dont play anyone and named the teams they should schedule and all I said was that they allready play the majority of teams that you mentioned who cares if they are located near each other that creates a great match-up! Ole Miss playing Clemson why does this matter it's like asking Cal to play a team other than a MWC league member whom both rolled them last year!
3. You must not grasp what the job description of a AD at a major university is: this is not the NFL they do not only have a football team to be concerned with they must also fund the lesser sports with revenue usually created through men's football and basketball. While at the same time trying to schedule the off sports in a economical fashion and this means cutting deals to allow the smaller schools in the area to get a taste of a big payday. Sort of like why the Pac 10 insists on playing San Jose State 3 or 4 times a year as they get a trade off when scheduling other sports! No not every SEC team goes to a bowl game but usually around 80% of the league!
4. They may have lost some of those games but the overall strength of the league outweighs any losses as represented by their 57% of wins in 2003! For all of your talk about the Sun BElt you still dont have a rhyme or reason why the PAC 10 plays San Jose, Sac State (do they still have a program), Idaho, Northern Az, Mont, Mont State for at least the SunBelt winner has a tie into a bowl!
6. Your defense of the Pac 10's out of conf schedule is that they play geographical rivals so whats the difference between the SEC playing geographical rivals?
7. So what your saying is that teams fear coming to the west coast to play and wont schedule Pac 10 teams? I give USC credit for beating Auburn but the rest of your examples are all home games, how has the PAC 10 fared on the road against those teams? I truly doubt that teams fear going to the west coast as long as they can work out a good trade off, Ohio State is going to Washington next year but they also got a home game in 07 and a basketball home game in the deal! Scott's word is worthless to me as I am sure you know must games are scheduled anywhere from 2 to 10 years out so Scott saying that USC tried to schedule every good team this year is a fallacy but USC has deals in place with Nebraska and Arkansas in the next three years!
8. SEC 2-10 vs PAC 10 in last 12 matchups, well your number are slightly off as the real record is 4-6 in the last ten years with 5 of the PAC 10 wins coming against the bottom 5 teams in the SEC!
9. As with any sport it comes down to rings and trophies and at this point in the past 25 years the SEC has 7 National Championships and the Pac 10 1 according to the coaches poll, which is quite amazing considering how much stronger the SEC has been in the past 25 years compared to the Pac10!
5.
3
Mansa and MC
I prefer for LSU to play 7 home games annually. Sure the $$$ is good for building better facilities and maintaining the "small" sports, but the atmosphere of gameday in Baton Rouge is something that I, and most fans that I know, wish to experience as often as possible.
I prefer for LSU to play 7 home games annually. Sure the $$$ is good for building better facilities and maintaining the "small" sports, but the atmosphere of gameday in Baton Rouge is something that I, and most fans that I know, wish to experience as often as possible.
Who Is Cie Grant?
Who Is Cie Grant?
Cie Grant, i see you are from new orleans and an LSU fan. Any knowledge on the new orleans saints Cie Grant? Let me know
Who Is Cie Grant?
Cie Grant, i see you are from new orleans and an LSU fan. Any knowledge on the new orleans saints Cie Grant? Let me know
So you're saying that Maine & E Ky have submitted written guarantees that their SEC opponent will get a huge payday from their visits! I know that's not the case. But, what kind of insurance do you need? Every SEC team would get a big payday @ Ohio St -- guaranteed! But they wont go -- guaranteed!
I never said they didnt play anybody. What I said was they play a whole lot of nobodies! I named over 20 true cupcake games (I left out UNLV & Rutgers games, too!), SEC win % should be 100% in those games.
My point about Clemson was to show how the SEC teams eschew a 2nd game v ACC teams for a 2nd game v a Sun Belt team. The MWC, also, is much better than the SBC. No shame in losing to CSU & Utah -- 2 of the best coaches in college football.
Someone who cant grasp how to spell the word "already," is challenging my mental grasp. What about my post told you I didnt know all that gibberish you ran on about already! (Yeah!)
FYI, Ohio St played SJSU during their championship season. Pac 10 no exclusive contract w SJSU.
80% of the SEC would be 10 bowl teams! That doesnt happen, ever!
I said in my post there wasnt much of a difference, other than the quantity of the games v bad teams.
I'll get into some other points later. Gotta go!
mansa_musa
Great arguments, really do enjoy reading your posts. You crack me up!
EXPLAIN THIS TO ME MASTER CAPPER OR ANY OTHER SEC FAN WHO THINKS SEC IS SO SUPERIOR!!!! Not looking for a fight, just looking for some answers to these "SEC FACTOIDS."
In 71 years of SEC football there have been 56 teams that have gone undefeated in conference play. That is an undefeated team per every 1.27 SEC seasons......and folks, that happens to be the highest rate of in-conference undefeated teams among all 1A conferences. Go ahead and research it.
So please, don't believe the silly 'MYTH' that the SEC is the toughest conference to run the table in. :142lmao:
Ya know why the SEC won't go on the road and play anybody ??????? Cause they get spanked.
That conference has built it's phony superiority 'myth' on home 'rent-a-win' games vs cupcakes.
Supporting factoid : Since 1998 the SEC is 10 -21 in regular season road games vs other BCS teams...and 4 ( 40%) of those road wins came at Indiana and Duke.
The SEC has averaged 1.66 road wins vs it's BCS peers per season since 1998. That's both cowardly and pitiful. SEC fans should never knock the PAC 10. The Pac 10 has bigger balls than the SEC.
When SEC teams go undefeated in conference play it's an indication that they are great teams.
When teams go undefeated in other conferences it's an indication of soft competition.
Good ol' SEC mythology
:clap: :clap: :clap:
Master Capper
I am not sure if the Pac 10 is 10-2 or 6-4 vs the SEC last 12 meetings but I do know that the Pac 10 is 6-1 the last 7 meetings against the SEC.
USC 24, Auburn 17
USCl 23, Auburn 0
Oregon 36, Mississippi State 13
Oregon 42, Mississippi State 34
UCLA 35, Alabama 24
UCLA 20, Alabama 17
LSU 59, Arizona 13 :sadwave:
All 4 years AU and Alabama were pre-season ranked in the nation. I think Alabama one year was ranked top 5 and AU top 5 as well.
Any way you cut it,that's PAC-10 6, SEC 1.
I am clueless to why you always bring up the Pac 10 playing San Jose St. and other teams of their caliber? OF COURSE the Pac 10 plays bad div. 1a opponents. No doubt. The difference is the Pac 10 also plays their share of elite OOC opponents as well (which you always leave out) AND Pac 10 will play on the road. I can conveniently post this years PAC 10 vs SEC OOC Schedule for you if you do not believe me!!!!
Great arguments, really do enjoy reading your posts. You crack me up!
EXPLAIN THIS TO ME MASTER CAPPER OR ANY OTHER SEC FAN WHO THINKS SEC IS SO SUPERIOR!!!! Not looking for a fight, just looking for some answers to these "SEC FACTOIDS."
In 71 years of SEC football there have been 56 teams that have gone undefeated in conference play. That is an undefeated team per every 1.27 SEC seasons......and folks, that happens to be the highest rate of in-conference undefeated teams among all 1A conferences. Go ahead and research it.
So please, don't believe the silly 'MYTH' that the SEC is the toughest conference to run the table in. :142lmao:
Ya know why the SEC won't go on the road and play anybody ??????? Cause they get spanked.
That conference has built it's phony superiority 'myth' on home 'rent-a-win' games vs cupcakes.
Supporting factoid : Since 1998 the SEC is 10 -21 in regular season road games vs other BCS teams...and 4 ( 40%) of those road wins came at Indiana and Duke.
The SEC has averaged 1.66 road wins vs it's BCS peers per season since 1998. That's both cowardly and pitiful. SEC fans should never knock the PAC 10. The Pac 10 has bigger balls than the SEC.
When SEC teams go undefeated in conference play it's an indication that they are great teams.
When teams go undefeated in other conferences it's an indication of soft competition.
Good ol' SEC mythology
:clap: :clap: :clap:
Master Capper
I am not sure if the Pac 10 is 10-2 or 6-4 vs the SEC last 12 meetings but I do know that the Pac 10 is 6-1 the last 7 meetings against the SEC.
USC 24, Auburn 17
USCl 23, Auburn 0
Oregon 36, Mississippi State 13
Oregon 42, Mississippi State 34
UCLA 35, Alabama 24
UCLA 20, Alabama 17
LSU 59, Arizona 13 :sadwave:
All 4 years AU and Alabama were pre-season ranked in the nation. I think Alabama one year was ranked top 5 and AU top 5 as well.
Any way you cut it,that's PAC-10 6, SEC 1.
I am clueless to why you always bring up the Pac 10 playing San Jose St. and other teams of their caliber? OF COURSE the Pac 10 plays bad div. 1a opponents. No doubt. The difference is the Pac 10 also plays their share of elite OOC opponents as well (which you always leave out) AND Pac 10 will play on the road. I can conveniently post this years PAC 10 vs SEC OOC Schedule for you if you do not believe me!!!!
Last edited:
Not only is the SEC a vastly superior league to the Crap 10 in football but they are better in all three of the men's major sports football, basketball and baseball! I refuse to argue any further with Lucas and the other tard when the bottom line is that the SEC has 7 National Titles and the Pac 10 has one half of a title in the last 25 years and tossing out win's against a rebuilding Bama and Miss State dont impress me! Now if someone wants to take up the cause for the other 3 big leagues as being better than the SEC (Big 12, Big 10 and ACC) then we can more than likely make a solid case for these leagues as all three are close to the level of the SEC and from a historical perspective the Big 10 could give the SEC a good run! Not until the Pac 10 can produce three top 10 contenders in one season can they even sniff the jock of the SEC, Big 10, Big 12 as each of the leagues can do this nearly every year and saying a 7-5 Cal is a top 10 team is reaching although with that weak schedule they should go 10-1! Dont bother throwing out Oregon as a top 10 team that happens once or twice a decade! Washigton State, well we saw what Okie did to them, UCLA, PLEASE! Stanford, they are top ten material once every 30 yrs, ASU alot of talent but unorganized, Zona uhh NO, Oreg State to erratic to be a perinial top 10 team usually lucky to get in top 25!
Last edited:
and how many NCAA Champs have there been from the SEC the last 25 years???
oh yea thats right 7
Pac 10???? 2
oh yea thats right 7
Pac 10???? 2
and Kdogg, the 2 Pac 10 National Championships weren't even won outright.
2003 USC sneaked in for a split
1991 Washington sneaked in for a split
other than that, NOTHING.
SCOTT4USC, can you please lurk and not post. You are a joke.
2003 USC sneaked in for a split
1991 Washington sneaked in for a split
other than that, NOTHING.
SCOTT4USC, can you please lurk and not post. You are a joke.
I can see NONE of you could explain the "factoids" I presented to you about the SEC.
You all love to showboat how many national championships the SEC has won. That is great and I agree that the SEC has a lot of "elite" teams. No argument from me.
If the SEC has won 25 National Championships in the last 25 years, that is not much of an argument for the whole conference. There are 12 teams in the SEC and National Championships talk about 1 team from the conference each year. What about the other 11 teams in each of those years? That is where you have to make your argument. NOT just the "elite" team(s). You must talk about teams 1-12 and each team carries the same weight! Right? We are talking about conferences, not individual teams.
Now if the SEC has won National Championships (which they have) AND conference championships from majority of the teams in the conf. from a sample of 10+ years (which they have not), then you have a STRONG argument for the SEC. Unfortunately, only 4 teams compete in the SEC. The facts are in the pudding!
Like I always said. SEC is a very top heavy conf. but it is not strong top to bottom on an average year. (last year SEC was the #2 conf. IMO)
Now you also have to remember that college football has 117 1a teams and there is not playoffs. The best way to get into a title game is to win out. Therefore having a tough schedule hurts you more than helping you. A 3pt loss to a TOUGH team on the road hurts you more than a win at home against a weak 1a opponent. As a result, this diminishes your argument of National Championships won to determine strengths of conferences. It also diminishes top 25 rankings and bowl appearances (since you only need 6 wins to go to bowl game)
That said, National Championships won is a criteria in determing strength of conferences, but in no way does it play a big part! I always love to use my NE Patriots example. Lets say if the NE Patriots were to go into the Big East this season and for the next 5 years they would win 5 straight National Championships. Would that make the Big East the #1 conf. in the country 5 years from now? According to you people, YES! According to me, NO! It is a classic example to put your National Championship arguments to rest. Not to mention that there is no playoff system.
You all love to showboat how many national championships the SEC has won. That is great and I agree that the SEC has a lot of "elite" teams. No argument from me.
If the SEC has won 25 National Championships in the last 25 years, that is not much of an argument for the whole conference. There are 12 teams in the SEC and National Championships talk about 1 team from the conference each year. What about the other 11 teams in each of those years? That is where you have to make your argument. NOT just the "elite" team(s). You must talk about teams 1-12 and each team carries the same weight! Right? We are talking about conferences, not individual teams.
Now if the SEC has won National Championships (which they have) AND conference championships from majority of the teams in the conf. from a sample of 10+ years (which they have not), then you have a STRONG argument for the SEC. Unfortunately, only 4 teams compete in the SEC. The facts are in the pudding!
Like I always said. SEC is a very top heavy conf. but it is not strong top to bottom on an average year. (last year SEC was the #2 conf. IMO)
Now you also have to remember that college football has 117 1a teams and there is not playoffs. The best way to get into a title game is to win out. Therefore having a tough schedule hurts you more than helping you. A 3pt loss to a TOUGH team on the road hurts you more than a win at home against a weak 1a opponent. As a result, this diminishes your argument of National Championships won to determine strengths of conferences. It also diminishes top 25 rankings and bowl appearances (since you only need 6 wins to go to bowl game)
That said, National Championships won is a criteria in determing strength of conferences, but in no way does it play a big part! I always love to use my NE Patriots example. Lets say if the NE Patriots were to go into the Big East this season and for the next 5 years they would win 5 straight National Championships. Would that make the Big East the #1 conf. in the country 5 years from now? According to you people, YES! According to me, NO! It is a classic example to put your National Championship arguments to rest. Not to mention that there is no playoff system.
Last edited:
so basically what Scott is saying Avalanche, is that he is wrong and can't prove why those teams win championships. well its quite simple. the best team wins, thats all.
Champions by conference last 30 years
big 12: 7
SEC: 7
Big East: 5
ACC: 4
Big 10: 4
Pac 10: 3
Indy's: 2
WAC: 1
now is it just me or does the Pac 10 really look pathetic now???
Champions by conference last 30 years
big 12: 7
SEC: 7
Big East: 5
ACC: 4
Big 10: 4
Pac 10: 3
Indy's: 2
WAC: 1
now is it just me or does the Pac 10 really look pathetic now???
and New England is a NFL team, come on at least compare apples to apple's, not apple's to oranges..
I see your point in a way scott, but no one was talking about how 1 team dominates a conference. the SEC has had 4 different national champions the last 12 years. no other conference can boast that. when Nebraska won 3 NC's in 4 years, did that make the Big 12 the #1 conference??? maybe, maybe not, but it shot up Oklahoma/Nebraska and Kansas St right up there in the BCS games....
I see your point in a way scott, but no one was talking about how 1 team dominates a conference. the SEC has had 4 different national champions the last 12 years. no other conference can boast that. when Nebraska won 3 NC's in 4 years, did that make the Big 12 the #1 conference??? maybe, maybe not, but it shot up Oklahoma/Nebraska and Kansas St right up there in the BCS games....
