The SEC is #1 in something..........

[Scott4USC]

In scheduling!!! :spotting:

*I got this from another college football fan.

Alabama- 4 Road Games
Arkansas- 5 Road Games
Auburn- 4 Road Games
Florida- 5 Road Games
Georgia- 4 Road Games
Kentucky- 4 Road Games
LSU- 4 Road Games
Mississippi- 5 Road Games
Mississippi ST.- 4 Road Games
South Carolina- 5 Road Games
Tennessee- 4 Road Games
Vanderbilt- 5 Road Games

Arizona- 4 Road Games
Arizona St.- 5 Road Games
Cal- 6 Road Games
Oregon- 5 Road Games
Oregon St.- 6 Road Games
Stanford- 5 Road Games
UCLA- 5 Road Games
USC- 6 Road Games
Washington- 5 Road Games
Washington St.- 6 Road Games

4 teams in the Pac-10 play 6 Road Games, Nobody in the SEC plays more than 5.

The SEC only plays 6 OOC Road Games ALL SEASON. They are:

Clemson
Florida St.
Louisiana Monroe
Louisville
Navy
Wyoming

The Pac-10 plays 13 OOC Road Games. They are:

Oklahoma
LSU
Southern Miss
Virginia Tech
Notre Dame (Twice)
Air Force
Boise State
BYU
Idaho
Illinois
New Mexico
Northwestern

The SEC are the humanitarians of football, considering all of the money they are paying to the other schools to visit their humble abode. :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[Master Capper]

Scott,

Your really reaching now, if you have not figured it out yet the SEC teams do not have to play on the road out of conf it's called packed stadiums. Half the teams that you are ranting about praising about playing road games dont draw well at home and need the cash to support their football programs. If these schools drew the fans like the SEC does they would be staying at home! Also Va Tech is a neutral site game! You need to take out the conf games to make the comparison look semi intelligent!

 

[Scott4USC]

GET READY TO LAUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!! :142lmao:

Check out the SEC home games against OOC opponents!!!!!!!!!

:flush: :flush: :flush:

Utah State
Western Carolina
Southern Miss

New Mexico State
Texas

Louisiana Monroe
The Citadel
Louisiana Tech

Middle Tenn. St.
Eastern Michigan

Georgia Southern
Marshall

Indiana
Ohio

Oregon State
Arkansas State

Memphis
Arkansas State

Tulane
Maine
UAB

UNLV
Louisiana Tech

Rutgers
Eastern Kentucky

:flush: :flush: :flush:

You gotta hand it to the SEC. They know how to get their teams ranked in the top 25 and they know how to dupe you all into thinking it is a powerhouse conference. :142lmao:

LSU, Auburn, Florida, Tenn., and Georgia all should be embarassed to play these type of opponents. I am shocked the fans don't protest!!!! I certainly would not pay $30 to watch USC beat Citadel 42-0. Will the SEC schedule high school teams???? Gotta get those w's!!!

What is kinda sad is this is the majoirty of the OOC games for the SEC. They do not travel on the road too much.

 

[Avalanche]

Scott, you freaking moron, why not post the conference schedule for all the teams in the SEC and then compare it to your weak Pac 10 schedule and then let the forum decide who has the tougher conference + nonconference schedule.

You are amazingly stubborn and amazingly disfigured. You have no idea what you are talking about and you are slammed and proven wrong and you still dont get it.

The SEC has four different National Championship teams since 1990!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you think that makes the SEC easy????? That makes it a POWERHOUSE conference. ONE FOURTH of the ENTIRE SEC conference has won a National Championship since 1990 (4 out of the last 13 years) (Alabama, Florida, Tennessee and LSU).

You are the biggest moron on Madjacks. It isn't even close. Spare us your weak crap and go join the peace corps.

 

[Scott4USC]

Avalanche

I was not aware the SEC is a 4 team conference. :lol2 :lol2 :lol2

 

[Avalanche]

The Pac 10 is a 1-team conference.

 

[Scott4USC]

It has been an interesting week Avalanche. I have noticed your aggressive anti posting towards me. It is unfortunate that I am getting under your skin. We always had our disagreements but I refuse to take it to the next level and play these immature name calling games. Calling me the biggest moron on madjacks had a real nice touch at the end of your post.

I am not you, but I do not determine strength of conferences by examining 4 teams in the SEC or 1 team in the Pac 10. I look at all 12 teams in the SEC and all 10 teams in the Pac 10. That is how I judge a conference. I feel you should include every team in the conference.

I think the SEC has more elite teams than the Pac 10. I even think you "could" make an argument the SEC is a slightly stronger conference. I think the Pac 10 is a tougher conference from top to bottom and clearly has a different philosophy on how to do things. Nobody here at madjacks can make an argument telling me the SEC is superior to the Pac 10. Has not happened yet! That is my argument. I have nothing against the SEC or Big 12 etc... I enjoy watching the teams in both those conferences play.

 

[Avalanche]

Scott I agree with you this time. No need for name calling.

I guess what's irritating about you is you post this stuff and even in your rebuttals you end it (like with MC) "you have no idea what you're talking about" "you prove nothing" "no one here can prove the SEC is superior to the Pac 10"

the thing is, though, you do nothing to prove that the Pac 10 is as good (let alone "superior")as the SEC or Big 12 or the Big 10. What makes matters worse, is you are like some sort of lobbyist. You're a Pac 10 lobbyist. And, to make matters even more worse, you post numbers that are skewed only in your favor and are utterly incomplete AND THEN you tell others their arguments (well founded for the most part) prove nothing or are somehow invalid. All of these statements by you can usually be found complete with those annoying macros that shake the finger at you saying no no no. :nono etc

Even the subject matter from which you base your "numbers" on (ie SOS) is incomplete and is only one part of the puzzle. Do you think if the Pac 10 had 1/3rd of its league members win National Championships since 1990 you'd be posting that quite dominant statistic a little when you're lobbying for Pac 10 credibility (let alone "superiority" or being as good) as the SEC or Big 12? You obviously cant cling on anything like that so instead you talk about something that's really not altogether that significant like OOC SOS and stuff like that.

I guess what I find the most "irritating" though about you was when you were trying to say MCs indiv previews of teams was somehow not in a user-friendly format. I like how he does it and he's done it for awhile that way. Sometimes in capping you like to read a lot more about one team and its nice to go right to that team instead of a paragraph about each team in the conference and nothing more. Still, I personally would never dream of trying to criticize the specific manner in which someone chooses to display their voluntary (and quite helpful, thank you MC) capping info.

All combined, especially with your idea that somehow the number of views you get and replies somehow makes you a "movie star" combined w/ throwing in the fact that we cant cap much (yet) on CFB leaves us starving to atleast talk about CFB, but unfortunately you come in and just spew USC and the Pac 10 all over the gd place. It gets old... it just gets old

 

[BobbyBlueChip]

You've got SOS info from websites as solid as College Football Warehouse (tell your buddies they've got a nice site) who pick 9, yes 9 teams from one conference in their top 15 rankings as far as strength of schedule and you don't think to yourself . . . hmmmm, they might be a little biased.

You back a team that "ducks" Oregon again, plays at Corvallis once every six years, won't go to Notre Dame after mid-October and talk about how they'll play anyone anywhere. You like to debate, Scott, not caring about whether you're right or wrong, but just having a defendable position and it's tiring. The Pac 10 is obviously underrated or they wouldn't have a positive OOC ATS record, but the reason that they're underrated is that they always suck. Big XII v. SEC is the only conversation to have and now you can add the ACC into the mix.

It's unfair that the Big XII and the ACC had to merge to be a legitimate conference (much like the Pac 8 did), but that's just how the landscape is. Tell Pete to close up shop, the investigations will be staring shortly.

 

[Master Capper]

Scott,

You seemed to have evaded my point about why the SEC doesnt have to play away games and teams from the lesser leagues like the Pac 10 do, it's called attendence! Teams want to come to the south to play the SEC and rake in the bucks and let the kids play in front of a full house where the fans are rabid as a mad dog in a meat market!

 

[Kdogg21]

---in 2003, 6 SEC teams were ranked in the BCS top 25 in Schedule Strength

----for the 23rd straight season, the SEC recorded the largest total of attendence figures out of any conference

----39% of the SEC Conference games were decided by 10 pts or less

----The SEC and Big 12 have won more national championships than any other conference since 1992

----The SEC was tied with the ACC in most bowl victories last year with 5

-----during the last 7 seasons, the SEC has sent 53 teams to post season bowls, the most out of any conference. 11 of the 12 SEC teams have been to bowl games, the last 7 years.

----the SEC has had at least 4 teams ranked in the top 25 since 1989.

i can get more and more let me know....

 

[Master Capper]

Kdogg,


Great info, the sad thing is that Scott will now try and twist the information that you just submitted to justify his wacky proposition that the Pac 10 is even or better than the SEC. Here's how he will justify some of your points:

1. He will post for the tenth time his strength of schedule formula from a undisclosed source that will say that the Pac 10 has played the toughest schedules!

2. Attendence, what does that have to do with anything? People out west have better things to do than to go to a ball game. People down south have no life thats why they sell out their stadiums. Do you actually think people in Pullman Washington are going to go to a ballgame with all the alternative recreation?

3. Ten points or less, heck that proves that the conference is weak, cant they blow anyone out like the Pac 10 teams do to San Jose State five times a year?

4. Bowl victories means nadda, the reason SEC teams get bowl victories is because they fatten up on weak non conf teams and get off to a 3-0 start. I would love to see them try to do that playing Idaho Vandela or Montana Grizzlies like we do.

5. More national championships, well it's alot easier to win the SEC than it is to win the Pac 10, you dont have to run the gauntlet like teams in the Pac 10 do!

6. 53 teams to bowls, well you should you have more teams in your league than we do! If we added two more teams then I am sure we would have more than 53.

7. You should be ranked in the top 25 playing in the SEC come on now you play 3 sisters of the poor to start the season and then feast on the bottom dwellers in the conference. In the Pac10 there are no bottom dwellers to feast on and it's much more tougher to go to Palo Alto or Tuscon and win on the road then it is to go to Starksville or Baton Rogue and win!

8. No more needed you have yet to prove any points to me in regardsto the SEC being a superior conferenceto the mighty Pac 10!

 

[Kdogg21]

no, even better. he will come up with his stupid "Myth of the SEC" well this is what myth means...

a. A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society: the myth of Eros and Psyche; a creation myth. b. Such stories considered as a group: the realm of myth.

A popular belief or story that has become associated with a person, institution, or occurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal: a star whose fame turned her into a myth; the pioneer myth of suburbia.

A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology.

A fictitious story, person, or thing: "German artillery superiority on the Western Front was a myth" (Leon Wolff).

 

[markh]

Been on here lurking for over a year now and KD and MC, you all summed it best. This coming from a guy who played PAC-10 football almost 15 years ago.

MH :clap:

 

[ajoytoy]

great info Dogg

ACC is on the rise (just hoping my Pack can be up there with the big boys)

 

[Master Capper]

Scott,

I think you need to write the Seattle Times and tell them that their computer poll is focked but here are their results from last year and I believe the last time I checked the state of Washington had two Pac 10 teams so I guess this eliminates your east coast bias excuse :moon: moon1 :


LSU Wins the National Championship
LSU was the most accomplished team this season, posting 3 wins vs. the final top-10 to USC's 1, and 5 wins vs. the final top-25 to USC's 2
LSU's 3 best wins: vs. #4 Oklahoma, #7 Georgia, and #7 Georgia again
USC's 3 best wins: vs. #9 Michigan, #13 Washington St., and #31 Auburn
LSU's next 3 best wins: vs. #17 Mississippi, #19 Arkansas, and #31 Auburn
USC's next 3 best wins: vs. #37 Oregon St., #50 Notre Dame, and #52 UW
LSU lost to #26 Florida, while USC lost to #35 Cal
USC did beat 11 final top-75 teams to LSU's 8, but this does not make up for the Tigers having beaten more final top-50 (6 to 5), final top-25 (5 to 2), and final top-10 teams (3 to 1) than the Trojans
Playing one more game (between LSU and USC) would have been the perfect scenario this season, but what about last season? Why should undefeated Ohio St. and Miami have had to win play-in games to meet each other on the field? The BCS system should not be (re-)designed to cater to a year when no team emerges as clearly deserving a bid to the championship game.
LSU's .792 rating is by far the lowest for a national champion in the BCS era, as the Tigers are the first non-undefeated champions
4 of the 6 BCS conferences finished within .019 of each other, with the SEC edging the ACC, Pac-10, Big Ten and Big 12 for top honors, and with only the Big East trailing relatively far behind (.042 behind the Big 12)

 

[Scott4USC]

You posters seem to forget something. I never claimed or even attempted to argue the Pac 10 being superior to the SEC or Big 12. But I do know the SEC and BIg 12 conferences are not superior to the Pac 10 if you are looking at "recent" history, such as the last 4-5 years. Nobody here on Madjacks can come up with an argument as to why the SEC or Big 12 is superior. Only thing I keep hearing about is National Championships. I clearly have proven why and how conferences like the Big 12 and SEC get teams ranked and get teams to the NC game. It is their formula and it is not breaking the rules. Pac 10 just has different philisophy. I am able to realize and prove that in my analysis when debating strength of conferences. I do think the SEC and maybe even the Big 12 have more elite programs than the Pac 10. However, I do not just look at the elite programs, I look at the "whole" conference.

Avalanche

I am glad you agree no more name calling should be used, however you never apologized to me. You are the one who made the personal name calling and started attacking me instead of the information. I do not or try not too get into the personal name calling games but I do attack information inside the post. I sometimes have fun and play around with a users names but that is not a personal attack. I often see myself respecting you as a poster and then not respecting you. Off and on. So hopefully we can patch things up and continue to talk football. I agree it is the offseason and there only can be very little handicapping discussion. Conference debates and team debates are fun to do. At least for me. I strongly believe this forum would be "somewhat" a ghost town if I was not posting in it. Don't take it the wrong way in thinking I am being arrogant but if you look at "most" of the heavy debates and threads, they all have me participating in them and stirring them up. I see very limitied threads or other discussions being brought up in this forum. Don't you? I even tried bringing up another thread "non conference talk" where you say BUY or SELL. One posters answers the previousl posters question with BUY or SELL then asks another question and waits for another poster to say BUY or SELL. I think it be fun and interesting to see. Seems nobody wants to participate or posters don't understand it.
Buy or Sell

Master Capper

Last years Seattle Times poll was fine. It is just about last year which is just a sample of data relevant to my argument. I already stated I felt the ACC was #1 last year and SEC #2 with Pac 10/Big 10 tied for #3 and Big 12 #5.

As for East Coast Bias I still think it exists. I just does not exist when USC is involved. East coast respects and loves USC prob. because it is a top 5 all time program. East coast is biased against other teams on the west coast. Washington gets "some" respect, but I can name a ton of things that were flat out wrong and against the west coast. Not complaining about anything about USC because USC gets treated as an east coast team. As for Heisman Trophy's to National Championship selections and rankings their is an east coast bias. But I feel a huge part of that is time zones. On west coast I can see everyone play but on East coast it gets too late to watch late games of Pac 10, especially if you go out Sat. night. If you are a writer or voter, you have a duty to watch everything. As for computer polls I have mix feelings. Until computer polls differentiate between wins/losses to the opponents you play and where you play home/away games plus factoring the score (with a cap so no running it up) so I am not fan of them. I am glad BCS has pretty much thrown out the computer polls. Now if the media/polls/and fans across the nation strongly felt and can make great cases that USC/OU/LSU all were the #1 team in the country, then I am in favor of letting the computers decide.

You seemed to have evaded my point about why the SEC doesnt have to play away games and teams from the lesser leagues like the Pac 10 do, it's called attendence! Teams want to come to the south to play the SEC and rake in the bucks and let the kids play in front of a full house where the fans are rabid as a mad dog in a meat market!

That statement is incorrect IMO. USC is one of the richest universities in the country. USC received the most private donations last year and beat out Harvard. USC is building a $70,000,000-$90,000,000 basketball arena and had all the money upfront!!!!!!

Now we are talking about the whole pac 10. Well lets see. These are average attendences.
These were the 2002 attendence averages, I could not find 2003 but if anyone can post them. I think USC has risen past 70,000 and I think UW prob. went down a little bit along with UCLA. So this is prob. about right.

Top 4
Washington 71,435
USC 66,873
UCLA 65,000
Oregon 60,000

Bottom 3 (all 3 of these teams attendence levels are rising due to teams success)
CAL 37,000 (def. getting higher)
Oregon St. 36,400 (getting higher)
WSU 34,000 (def. getting higher)

These teams schedule home and home series. If they wanted money they would not schedule home and home series but rather just away series. Right? Citadel doesn't demand a home game or do they?

What is the 2002 SEC attendence level? Prob. better is my guess but a lot better???? SEC has the better fans no doubt in my mind. BUt I do not think it is a money issue as to why the SEC has to schedule these "pathetic" home opponents and unfortunately these are not teams they have played in the last 4 years, these are the teams they are playing THIS SEASON!!! In one season these are the quality of home OOC opponents.

Utah State
Western Carolina
Southern Miss
New Mexico State
Texas
Louisiana Monroe
The Citadel
Louisiana Tech
Middle Tenn. St.
Eastern Michigan
Georgia Southern
Marshall
Indiana
Ohio
Oregon State
Arkansas State
Memphis
Arkansas State
Tulane
Maine
UAB
UNLV
Louisiana Tech
Rutgers
Eastern Kentucky

:flush: :flush: :flush:

I also do not understand why fans of the SEC (who are the most passionate football fans) put up with this crap. I have a hard time understand this and it is not a SOS debate. Nodbody and argue telling me the SEC conference play is too strong to schedule quality OOC opponents. I have proven the SEC as conference has weaker SOS compared to other conferences from 1990-1999 and 2000-2003.

SOUTH = Passionate football fans but they enjoy watching their team beat Citadel 49-0???
USC vs AU was great playing @Auburn last year. Lot of excitement and it was blast talking and waiting for the game. Auburn fans were great but after their 2 game series with USC, I noticed many Auburn fans not wanting to play a team like USC again for OOC play. I just think that is the wrong attitude. Look at Auburns OOC schedule this season. Back to the SEC way. Play 3-4 easy opponents get your groove going and be fresh for conference play and get your team ranked with so many wins.

A side note: OOC top quality teams in the last 5-10 years have struggled playing out west. West coast teams seemed to not struggle so much playing on the east. The numbers don't lie!!!! I will be very interested in seeing how OU plays Oregon @Oregon. I am beting on Oregon big time. Ohio St. i think soon will be playing at Washington (they should be since UW played @OSU) and everyone knows OSU never plays away from home. Big bet on UW!!!!! I won last season betting on Oregon over Michigan with +pts and ML. So if you want to talk about handicapping this is great system to bet. Bet on HOME pac 10 team vs top team traveling west. Remember Miami when they played @ Washington. Texas and Alabama both played @UCLA and UCLA smoked both of them. List goes on and on and most of the time you get +pts and great ML value. Not saying west wins or covers all the time, just you can make a lot of $$$ in doing this because of the perception the Pac 10 is weak. No value in betting USC but other 9 teams there is great value!!!!! Take it or leave it, but this is a great money making system. I always bet ML and +pts unless the Pac 10 team is favored. Best teams to get are Oregon and Washington because both have great home field advantage especially Oregon.

 

[Avalanche]

Oh Scott, don't be looking for an apology from me for calling your arguments "jokes" etc. I still think that. You dont do anything but regurgitate the same meaningless statistics and do nothing to disprove any statements we provide.

My point is simply this, look at the title of this thread: "The SEC is #1 in something....."

Well, the SEC is #1 in just about everything.... so you are just trying to stir up trouble and cling to groundless and incomplete arguments just because you don't want to see Madjacks a "ghost town" -- you are just trying to make a stir and lobby for your weak conference and call it stronger than it is.

POST THE OOC HOME SCHEDULE FOR THE PAC 10. Show us the Idahos and Montana and Cal State Riversides.

--POST ALL THE INFO, not just the part YOU want--

 

[Scott4USC]

Avalanche

You did not attack the material, you were making personal attacks at me and calling me names. There is a difference but that is ok if you do not want to give me an apology. That is your decision.

POST THE OOC HOME SCHEDULE FOR THE PAC 10. Show us the Idahos and Montana and Cal State Riversides.

--POST ALL THE INFO, not just the part YOU want--

YOU POST IT!!! Why should I? I only need to post what pertains to MY argument and back up MY opinions. That is something YOU do not do well. YOU do not post analysis supporting YOUR opinion. I can tell YOU that the Pac 10 OOC schedule is a lot tougher than the SEC OOC schedule. And YOU would need to post the Pac 10 HOME/AWAY OOC schedule since the pac 10 plays tough opponents HOME and AWAY!!!! Pac 10 is not afraid to travel.

This post of yours cracked me up telling me to post all the info. :142lmao: I only need to post the info that supports my argument. The data I posted in this thread is HARD CORE FACTS!!!! Why do you have a problem with it?

 

[Avalanche]

Scott, quite frankly I am not the court-appointed lobbyist for the SEC or PAC 10 or anything, so I am simply responding to your pounds and pounds of outlandish and incomplete statements. YOU are the one posting how bad the SEC's OOC schedule is, the least you can do, to provide a more thorough and complete picture, is to have the decency to post the Pac 10's OOC home and away schedule.

If I were to present you numbers and not include how it affects the Pac 10, wouldn't YOU of all people want me to post the COMPLETE comparison? Of course you would!

SCOTT, BRING IT DON'T SING IT!!!!!! Don't tell ME to post the Pac 10 ooc schedule. If you're going to slam the SEC's OOC schedule, YOU show us the Pac 10 schedule!!!! Are you suddenly "lazy" or something???? No! You don't want to post the Pac 10 OOC schedule!!

Originally posted by SCOTT4USC
I can tell YOU that the Pac 10 OOC schedule is a lot tougher than the SEC OOC schedule.

Don't "tell" us this, show us this!!!!! If it's true, we'll believe ya!!!! If it was true, you'd GLADLY post it!!!! Why are you trying to hide the Montana States and the Idaho States and the Cal State Riversides????

You claim the data you post is "Hard core facts" --- but see, you don't include ALL the hard core facts. Show us the Pac 10 OOC schedule!!!!!! YOU are the one starting this thread..... provide us with some LEGITIMACY and be able to BACK IT UP by showing the full tale of the tape!