Pure and Simple SEC is the best PAC 10 is a Joke

[bbk]

This preseason article from college football news just shows how weak the PAC 10 from top to bottom. Yea they may win a few bowl games but this just goes to show impresssive it is if you go thru the SEC and BIG XII versus the PAC 10. I think its kind of funny!!! GIVE ME A BREAK PAC 10 :moon:

http://www.collegefootballnews.com/

Just go into each conference
USC #1
the next is #30

versus the SEC and BIG XII
I guess there was a reason LSU and OU played each other
and LSU won the REAL NC!!

 

[Scott4USC]

Pac-10 vs. SEC past four years

Went back over the records of the two conferences and how they fared against BCS conference and Notre Dame over the past four years (since 2000). Here is what I found.

Pac-10 was 34-34 vs. BCS competition. SEC was 32-35. Of the 67 games against BCS conference competition, 23 were played because they were bowl games, and another 15 were played because of rivalry games (Georgia vs. Georgia Tech [ACC], Florida vs Miami and FSU [Big East, ACC] and South Carolina vs. Clemson [ACC]). That means the 12 teams of the SEC scheduled 29 games against BCS competition in four years, or a little more than one game every other year per team. The Pac-10 played 15 of its 68 games against BCS competition because of bowl games, and another four were from a rivalry game (USC vs. Notre Dame). That means the ten teams of the Pac-10 scheduled 49 games over four years, a one and a quarter games a year per team.
The SEC was 1-0 vs. Notre Dame, 16-11 vs. the ACC, 8-4 vs. the Big Ten, 4-8 vs. the Big East, 3-6 vs. Big XII and 1-6 vs. the Pac-10. That's right, the SEC's worst record against any one conference over the last four years comes against the Pac-10. Only LSU's victory against one of the worst Pac-10 teams in recent memory, this year's Arizona team, puts a W in the victory column against the Pac-10. Other losses were Auburn to USC (twice), Alabama to UCLA (twice) and Mississippi St. to Oregon (twice).

The Pac-10 was 12-12 vs. the Big Ten, 9-10 vs. the Big XII, 4-4 vs. Notre Dame, 3-4 vs. the Big East, 0-3 vs. the ACC and 6-1 vs. the SEC.

And the quality of teams the Pac-10 played was much better than the quality of teams that the SEC played. In the Big Ten, the Pac-10 played Michigan, Ohio St., Purdue and Wisconsin four times, Illinois three times, Iowa twice, and Penn St., Michigan St. and Indiana once. Only five of those games were because they met in bowl games The SEC played Michigan three times, Ohio St. twice, Penn St., Illinois and Minnesota once and Indiana four times. Eight of those games were played in bowl games. The only games scheduled against Big Ten competitition were the four times that Mississippi played Indiana, a time that Indiana went 12-34.

In the Big XII, the Pac-10 played Colorado six times, Kansas St. four times, Texas three times, Oklahoma twice, Nebraska, Oklahoma St., Baylor and Kansas once. Only five of those 19 games were the result of bowl games. The SEC played Oklahoma three times and Kansas St., Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Nebraska and Iowa St. once. Six of those nine games were bowl games.

The only BCS conference that the SEC routinely scheduled for games out of conference was against the ACC, and again, 12 of those games were rivalry games against members of that conference (South Carolina/Clemson, UGA/GTech, Florida/FSU). Throw in another six that were bowl games, and the SEC played only nine games against the ACC that weren't rivalry or bowl games.

Still, the record pretty much speaks for itself: the SEC's worst winning percentage against BCS conferences comes against the weak Pac-10. Try and spin that one away. When it comes right down to it, the Pac-10 will go out and play tough competition, and holds its own-- even its lesser teams. Arkansas has played only two BCS conference teams in the past four years, and those were both in bowl games. Mississippi St. has played only three, one of them being a victory over Texas A&M in a bowl game, and the other two losses to Oregon (Pac-10). Mississippi has also played only three BCS conference teams in the past four years, and two of those were in bowl games. Kentucky scheduled four games against Indiana, and that's the only OOC BCS teams they've played. Bama has played five OOC BCS games and is 1-4 (the victory was in a bowl game, the losses were scheduled OOC games).

In the Pac-10, Arizona (worst team in the Pac-10 the past four years) has played four OOC BCS teams, none in bowl games (Ohio St., Wisconsin, LSU and Purdue). Cal has played Illinois (twice), Rutgers, Baylor, Michigan St. and Kansas St. (no bowl games). Stanford has played Texas, Boston College (twice), Notre Dame three times and Georgia Tech (bowl game). Only Oregon St. has done what the SEC routinely does, and that is avoid BCS conference teams except in bowl games.

The fact that the Pac-10 is .500 in its out of conference BCS conference games is quite remarkable, considering that most of the games were not in bowl games. What is truly pathetic is how the SEC keeps claiming how superior they are, but against BCS conference competition, they have a losing record over the past four years. It's obvious that the conference inflates its importance by beating up on patsy OOC opponents and racking up victories that are then used to bolster its superiority claims. If every team has at least eight wins, it has to be a good conference, right? Uh-huh. Sure. The bowl record says they are 12-12, while the Pac-10 turned out to be 8-9.

NOW YOU MIGHT REPLY WITH SOME GARBAGE OPINION WITHOUT ANYTHING TO BACK IT UP. HERE IS MY REPLY BEFORE YOU MAKE IT! YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE NOT READ THE OTHER THREADS!

You do not seem to understand how the system works. TO be ranked you need WINS. SEC plays crappy OOC schedule and racks up 3-4 easy wins every year. AS I PROVED.

Pac 10 generally plays a tougher OOC schedule and racks up early losses. You cannot be ranked top 25 if you have losses, correct? AS I PROVED.

Then factor in teams in SEC do not all play each other, and almost every year, top teams might skip each other. Happens all the time because SEC big conference. Therefore get more teams ranked. Very very easy to understand, why is it so difficult for you?

So if you think a conference is superiour for playing crappy OOC schedule, then feel free to think SEC is tough. However, i then went on to prove how the SEC has had little succuss against BCS competition and little succuss in bowl games (for people to consider them tough conference). That is to prove the argument of people saying the teams in the SEC are so tough that is why why play poor OOC schedule. I proved that wrong.

THEN, you say the PAC 10 is crappy conference, but then the PAC 10 beats up on the SEC every time. PAC 10 is not afraid to go out and play tough competition. Pac 10 does beat up on each other teams 1-10. That is a fact.

So where is your argument? You have none, you just have an opinion. Your ignorant if you still think SEC is superior to any conference after reading my writings. If you still think so, prove it? YOU CAN'T. Truth hurts sometimes and sorry to break your heart, you been duped on how strong of a conference the SEC is. Keep thinking PAC 10 sucks, because I continue to make huge $$$ because of that thinking.

Have a nice day BBK!

 

[Scott4USC]

The Myth of the SEC

I think it's important for people to know that the SEC contrives its high rankings by playing a bunch of nobodies, and I'm sure some of you haven't seen this yet, so enjoy. Note: this was compiled before this year's bowl games. Also, i did not write this but another fellow trojan did to prove the SEC is not the best conference. And he certainly did.

This is to show how the SEC (or the Big XII, for that matter) inflates its rankings by playing a weak schedule, then beating up on the bad teams in the league to produce five or six top 25 teams.

The SEC has played 243 nonconference games over the past six years, includng this year (not counting bowl games). Of those 243 games, only 54 were road games (22%). That's right, 12 teams over the course of six years played a total of 54 road games against nonconference opponents. That averages out to 3/4 of a road game every year per team, meaning on average, teams in the SEC play less than one road game out of conference a year. And the majority of those road games were games played by teams who had traditional rivals in other conferences (South Carolina and Clemson, Georgia and Georgia Tech, Florida and Florida St.). To compare to the Pac-10, the Pac-10 played 72 road games out of 205 nonconference games (35%).

Even more startling is the fact that the SEC played only 68 games against BCS teams (28%) vs. the Pac-10's 85 games against BCS teams (41%). 12 teams on average played less than one game a year against BCS competition in nonconference play, while the Pac-10 played an average of one and a half BCS teams a year over the past six years. Against BCS competition, the SEC had a losing record over the past six years, going 30-38 (44%). The Pac-10 had a winning record against BCS teams, going 46-39 (54%). The majority of those 30 SEC wins came from four teams-- Tennessee (7-1), Kentucky (5-1, but played only Big Ten doormat Indiana six times), Vanderbilt (5-3, but played Duke for four of those victories), and Georgia (5-3, 3-3 against GTech). The other eight teams in the SEC could only win eight games in six years against BCS teams (going 8-30).

Here is the breakdown of the Pac-10's and SEC's nonconference records over the past six years against the other BCS conferences (does not include bowl games-- this is about scheduling):

ACC
Pac-10 2-2, SEC 14-20

Big East
Pac-10 6-2, SEC 6-7

Big Ten
Pac-10 14-13, SEC 5-1

Big XII
Pac-10 13-11, SEC 2-3

Pac-10
SEC 1-6

SEC
Pac-10 6-1

Notre Dame
Pac-10 5-10, SEC 2-1

To further illustrate the point, the SEC was 151-24 in games against nonconference teams that weren't in the BCS conferences (86%). Even the bad teams in the SEC prop up SOS for the good teams by playing horrible teams that guarantee them wins. Auburn is a good example of what the SEC does to inflate their rankings. If Auburn had played the usual cupcake schedule that they have played in the past, they would be 9-3 right now and ranked in the top 15 most likely, having "only" lost to LSU, Mississippi and Gerogia, while beating supposedly good teams like Arkansas and Tennessee. However, because they chose to play someone legitimate, they are 7-5 and look

they are 7-5 and were looking for a new coach.

This is what the rest of the SEC does, with the exception of Florida, which has to play FSU every year (and loses, by the way) and sometimes Miami (losing to them, too). The following are the SEC teams and their records against BCS opponents listed first and their record against non-BCS opponents over the past six years.

TEAM BCS record, non BCS record
Alabama 0-4, 13-5
Arkansas 1-0, 19-0 (yes, played only one BCS team over the past 6 years)
Auburn 1-5, 14-0
Florida 1-7, 12-0
Georgia 5-3, 12-0
Kentucky 5-1, 10-4
LSU 1-2, 15-2
Mississippi 0-2, 17-1
Mississippi St. 1-3, 13-3
South Carolina 3-7, 8-2
Tennessee 7-1, 12-0
Vanderbilt 5-3, 6-7

This is how the myth of the SEC is perpetuated. Since every team is guaranteed three or four wins to start the season, and then they get 3-4 more wins against the bottom half of the SEC, they have 6-8 wins before playing any of the tougher teams. With just one or two more wins, you have five or six teams with a minimum of eight wins in the "tough" conference, leading to higher rankings for all of those teams and increase SOS.

If you're wondering how the SEC did in bowl games over that time, here you go. After all, if they were truly a much better conference, their bowl record would show it, would it not. Over that same period, the SEC was 21-20 in their bowl games, certainly not dominant like they all claim to be.

Here are the nonconference schedules of both conferences so you can see how sickening the schedules of the SEC teams really are.

Fight On!

Alabama
BYU, E Carolina, S. Mississippi, Houston, Louisiana Tech, S. Mississippi, @UCLA, S. Mississippi, Central Florida, UCLA, Texas El Paso, S. Mississippi, Mid Tennessee, @Oklahoma, N Texas, S. Mississippi, @Hawaii, S Florida, Oklahoma, N Illinois, S. Mississippi, @Hawaii.

Four nonconference road games in six years. Four games against BCS teams. 0-4 r

Stupid. Here's the SEC's schedule over the past six years of nonconference opponents.

Alabama
BYU, E Carolina, S. Mississippi, Houston, Louisiana Tech, S. Mississippi, @UCLA, S. Mississippi, Central Florida, UCLA, Texas El Paso, S. Mississippi, Mid Tennessee, @Oklahoma, N Texas, S. Mississippi, @Hawaii, S Florida, Oklahoma, N Illinois, S. Mississippi, @Hawaii.

Four nonconference road games in six years. Four games against BCS teams. 0-4 record against BCS teams.

Arkansas
SW Louisiana, SMU, @Memphis, @SMU, Louisiana Monroe, Mid Tenn St., SW Missouri St., Boise St., Louisiana Monroe, UNLV, Weber St., Central FLorida, Boise St., S Florida, Troy St., Louisiana Lafayette, Tulsa, @Texas, N Texas, New Mexico St.

Three nonconference road games, ONE GAME against BCS teams. 1-0 against BCS teams.

Auburn
Virginia, Louisiana Tech, Central Florida, Appalachian St., Idaho, Central FLorida, Wyoming, N. Illinois, Louisiana Tech, Ball St., @Syracuse, Louisiana Tech, @USC, W Carolina, Syracuse, Louisiana Monroe, USC, @GTech, W Kentucky, Louisiana Monroe.

Three nonconference road games in six years. Six games against BCS teams. 1-5 against BCS teams.

Florida
The Citadel, NE Louisiana, @FSU, W Michigan, Central Florida, FSU, Ball St., Mid Tenn St., @FSU, Marshall, Louisian-Monroe, FSU, Alabama Birmingham, Miami, Ohio U, @FSU, San Jose St., @Miami, Florida A&M, FSU.

Four nonconference road games in six years, three coming from OOC rival Florida St., the other coming from in-state rival Miami. Eight games against BCS teams, all coming from traditional OOC rivals. 1-7 against BCS teams.

Georgia
Kent St., Wyoming, Georgia Tech, Utah St., Central Florida, @GTech, Georgia Southern, New Mexico St., GTech, Arkansas St., @GTech, Houston, Clemson, Northwestern St., New Mexico St., GTech, @Clemson, Middle Tennessee, Alabama Birmingham, @GTech.

Four nonconference road games in six years.

Could not do anymore, but I think this most certainly proves my point. NOBODY can argue with this. Facts are facts. Don't be duped into thinking the SEC is so tough. :lol:

 

[bbk]

scott
did not read your cut and paste crap
bottome line is everyone and i mean everyone in the free world thinks the sec; big xii and now acc are heads in shoulders top to botton better; i could care less what stupid stats about ooc play; or anything else; i am talking about conference; i read an article the other about if usc had to face lsu schedule they sincerely doubt they could go undefeated. So keep blowing smoke up your ass and getting yourself duped into thinking the pac 10 is a decent conference; just read that article the sec; big xii; big ten and acc have 6-7 teams in the top 29; pac 10 HAS ONE. Thats USC. so usc can continue to play in their pathetic conference; its not their fault. thats why they have to play good teams ooc; because they dont play anyone in the top 30 in their own conference what a joke. :moon:

 

[Scott4USC]

bbk

did not read your cut and paste crap

Then that explains why you still think the SEC is superior. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

BTW, i wrote that previously, so i did not just cut and paste it.

 

[bbk]

post whatever crap you want about ooc schedules
the bottome line is best from top to bottom and the pac 10 is 5 at best; which makes usc winning a split nc so sad when there conf has been so bad the last 2 decades :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger

 

[Marra]

post whatever crap you want about ooc schedules
the bottome line is best from top to bottom and the pac 10 is 5 at best; which makes usc winning a split nc so sad when there conf has been so bad the last 2 decades :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger

The short bus is waiting for you outside.

 

[Kdogg21]

If anything, SEC is a much more profitable conference than the Pac 10, and you can see that by TV ratings. I work for a cable company and SEC football usually has the highest ratings for games every week. The SEC is a much more profitable conference probably in the long run than the Pac 10.....

 

[Stuman]

I think its funny how Scotty boy still thinks that USC plays tougher OOC games because "USC isn't afraid to play anybody" :lol: What west coast biased sports talk shows have you been listening to?

Face it Scott, if USC didn't play the tougher OOC schedules, they would have a 0% chance of playing in the NC game, even if they had an undefeated season in the pathetic PAC 10. THAT is the REAL reason you play a tougher OOC schedule! :lol:

 

[Scott4USC]

Stuman

Sorry but your wrong. USC has always played tough OOC schedules. The pac 10 "supposedly" had down year last year but they did well in bowl games. Last year is not the point to this argument.

You said.....

Face it Scott, if USC didn't play the tougher OOC schedules, they would have a 0% chance of playing in the NC game, even if they had an undefeated season in the pathetic PAC 10. THAT is the REAL reason you play a tougher OOC schedule!

That statement is incorrect. Go research the last 50+ years and make that statement. USC program prides itself on playing anybody and anywhere. USC always believes they are the best and want to prove it by playing/beating the best. ( it is just how Trojan fans think) There is a lot of pride at USC. So if the pac 10 is strong or weak, USC has and always will "try" and schedule tough OOC competition. Why did I say try? Because many teams are afraid to play USC. Just this year, Michigan, Miami, and OU said NO to playing USC, although I think USC will be playing home and home series with OU in near future. Michigan said NO to USC even though USC offered to just play 1 game @ Michigan. Guess its not the "BIG HOUSE." (this was before the Rose Bowl)

As I have proven, the Pac 10 at the very least, the same as the SEC. I proven the MYTH OF THE SEC and the PAC 10 head to head vs the SEC (which you could argue pac 10 is tougher). I respect the SEC and think it is a tough conference. But so is the Pac 10 which is not afraid to play tough OOC opponents. Also, the Pac 10 is tougher from top to bottom. Very easy argument to support that statement is look at how many different teams have won the conference the last 10-15years. When was the last time a Pac 10 team won all their conference games????? LONG LONG TIME!!!! It is tough conference, but I never said it was the toughest.

Stuman
You make a statement/opinion with nothing to support it. Maybe because there is nothing to support your opinion. :shrug:

 

[Kdogg21]

well your boys from the AP think your wrong, other wise there wouldn't be 4 teams from the SEC in the top 25. and you even admit its a "Myth", so we know it isn't true anyways. Pac 10 had a great bowl season this year, but it didn't translate to crap, because only 2 teams were in the top 25. No matter what you say is gonna change any of our opinoins on it. but a FACT!!!!!!,is that the SEC has better teams, and if you don't belive it go look at the final polls....

 

[Scott4USC]

Kdogg21

I guess you failed to read and comprehend why the SEC has so many teams in the top 25 every year. No doubt there are good teams in the SEC, but that is not the reason why there are so many SEC teams ranked in the top 25. Read my write-up again and figure it out because you obviously didn't the first time. I am not going to spell it out to you "again" and I am going to require you to use some intelligence.

No matter what you say is gonna change any of our opinoins on it.

Your ignorant.

 

[Nosigar]

Kdogg21

I guess you failed to read and comprehend why the SEC has so many teams in the top 25 every year. No doubt there are good teams in the SEC, but that is not the reason why there are so many SEC teams ranked in the top 25. Read my write-up again and figure it out because you obviously didn't the first time. I am not going to spell it out to you "again" and I am going to require you to use some intelligence.



Your ignorant.

No, Scotty, you're ignorant.

 

[Kdogg21]

Truth hurts doesn't it scott???

 

[Scott4USC]

Kdogg21

Truth hurts doesn't it scott???

What have you written? What truth are you talking about? Your ignorance hurts me? What have you written besides your opinion supported with nothing to back it up? I guess you have nothing to back up your opinion. NOTHING!

Nosigar

You have no clue what your talking about. How can I be ignorant when nobody has supported their opinion. NOBODY. Do you know what ignorant means? Look it up.

You both crack me up.

 

[Kdogg21]

now its really hurting.......

 

[mansa_musa]

bbk

This preseason article from college football news just shows how weak the PAC 10 from top to bottom.

Are you really trying to use a preseason poll (taken in January!!) to prove the strength of the SEC (or any other conf.)!??!

You ignore all the evidence to the contrary,

Yea they may win a few bowl games but

i could care less what stupid stats about ooc play; or anything else; i am talking about conference;

& base your opinion on a preseason poll! That poll (& therefore, your opinion!) is useless in capping conf strength.

Stuman

Face it Scott, if USC didn't play the tougher OOC schedules, they would have a 0% chance of playing in the NC game,

To turn that argument on its head, if the SEC teams didnt play weaker OOC schedules, they would have 0% chance of playing in the NC. That makes their national rankings, not very national at all!

Kdogg21

No matter what you say is gonna change any of our opinoins on it. but a FACT!!!!!!,is that the SEC has better teams, and if you don't belive it go look at the final polls....

First, it's not a FACT, if it cant be proven on the field of play! The Pac 10 is 6-1 v the SEC since 2000. Second, if that SU head to head stat doesn't change your mind, then you're probably not very interested in winning wagers on college football games.

These FACTS really stand out:

--Against BCS competition, the SEC had a losing record over the past six years, going 30-38 (44%).

--Eight teams in the SEC could only win eight games in six years against BCS teams (going 8-30).

You should definitely hold onto your opinion, cause your money is probably already gone!!!:shrug:

 

[Mr Hockey]

God this is old already.

Show me how many titles the Pac 10 has won in the last 2 decades

God grow up some of you.

 

[Kdogg21]

yea....a fact is a fact though......just look at all the titles and rankings.....in the last 3 years alone, SEC teams have been in the top 25 17 times, compared to the Pac 10's measley 10 times....

 

[Scott4USC]

mansa_musa

Excellent write-up. These guys we are dealing with are very very ignorant. When I state an opinion I always back it up. They never back it up but just bash. Whenever they state an opinion, it is just that, an opinion with nothing to back it up. NO SUPPORT! We prove them wrong, and they continue to bash and have the same opinion without ever supporting it. I also find it funny how they always never reply with the data we bring present. Never have an answer to it. We should pat ourselves on the back. They all are very comical and I enjoy playing with their heads.

Kdogg21

What argument is that? Do you have any type of reading comprehension? We easily typed out why so many SEC teams are ranked in the top 25, and it is not because they "all" are worthy of being in the top 25. So using how many teams are ranked in the top 25 is a joke and shows your ignorance. Try replying to the data that is in front of you. Admit that your opinion is wrong or provide data to support it and stop being so ignorant.

Mr Hockey

What post was that? Worthless post. If you do not like the debate in this thread, do not participate. Also, try replying to the hard core data that is thrown right in your face. All your arguments have no support.