flapjack said:
You're not only an idiot, you have bad information.
Georgia played Virginia in the Oahu Classic on 12-24-2000. And the final score was:
UGA 37
UVA 14
Please do not reply unless you know what you are talking about!!!
Trev Alberts 5 most overrated teams....
- Thread starter Scott4USC
- Start date
You're not only an idiot, you have bad information.
Georgia played Virginia in the Oahu Classic on 12-24-2000. And the final score was:
UGA 37
UVA 14
Please do not reply unless you know what you are talking about!!!
flapjack said:
So Georgia is a STRONG team now? I thought they were pussies for not traveling? Thanks for proving you really don't know what you're talking about, and you only posted because you thought it would sound clever to other idiots like yourself.
flapjack said:
the annuals of UGA football?
:mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
Look, why don't you log-off whoever's computer you're on, pick up your mop, and get back to work.
Last edited:
Oahu Classic is a bowl game you idiot. Not alot of regular season games being played on Christmas Eve.
As for UGA being pussies, yes you can be a strong, talented team that schedules like a pussy - See Auburn 2004 for reference.
You are very good with grammer, very bad with actual college football knowledge.
As for UGA being pussies, yes you can be a strong, talented team that schedules like a pussy - See Auburn 2004 for reference.
You are very good with grammer, very bad with actual college football knowledge.
since 1998...when the current bcs format was created:
pac-10
6-3 (6-1 since 2000)
sec
7-3
big 12
4-6
big-10
6-5
acc
1-6 (mostly fsu)
big east
3-4
amazing how the pac-10 STILL get's railed on as a weak conference.........keep it coming.
pac-10
6-3 (6-1 since 2000)
sec
7-3
big 12
4-6
big-10
6-5
acc
1-6 (mostly fsu)
big east
3-4
amazing how the pac-10 STILL get's railed on as a weak conference.........keep it coming.
Master Capper said:
Master this will not be the same OU team. They lost a ton, and they are going to have serious problems at Qb. They couldnt find any of them to move the ball in the spring game. It is true the schedule sets up well, but they are going to lose some games this year.
Good stats gjn23!
On top of that, I think the SEC has a 500 record against teams from BCS conferences. (OOC + Bowl games)
Why would such a vastly superior conf. have a 500 record against BCS competition?
We all know the SEC has not done well at all against the Pac 10 in the last 5+ years despite the Pac 10 playing more games in the south.
On top of that, I think the SEC has a 500 record against teams from BCS conferences. (OOC + Bowl games)
Why would such a vastly superior conf. have a 500 record against BCS competition?
We all know the SEC has not done well at all against the Pac 10 in the last 5+ years despite the Pac 10 playing more games in the south.
The bottom line is clear: The SEC has been and continues to be the BEST conference of the BCS era.
the sec has played one additional game accounting for the one additional win....as for continuing to be the best...check the records since 2000...no contest, pac-10 had the most wins and the highest winning pct.....but keep telling yourself that the sec is THE dominant conference, I'll believe what i see on the field...pac and sec are the two best and slightly better than the big 10 and big 12...the acc and big east were a bit overrated (should change now that miami-va tech are in the acc).
au...thanks for the info on sc and the pac-10....here's a similar point...take away all of auburns wins last year and they end up 0-12.....your point is worthless???????
au...thanks for the info on sc and the pac-10....here's a similar point...take away all of auburns wins last year and they end up 0-12.....your point is worthless???????
gjn23 said:
What a remarkable argument. Are you asking me if my point is worthless, or did you get the question mark confused with the exclamation point? Also, Auburn went 13-0, so it would be 0-13 genius.
My point is simple. Without USC, the the pac-10 is weak. End of story.
apparently the sarcastic point was lost on you...plus has they gone 0-12...auburn wouldnt have played a 13th game....nice try.
heres the point:
since 2000
pac-10 has 4 teams accounting for its bcs wins
40% of the league
sec has 4 teams accounting for it's bcs wins
33% of the league
how is that a DOMINANT conference?
you're point (more like biased opinion) is-always has been that the SEC is THE DOMINANT conference in football......I dont't see ANY FACTS that prove that, in fact every FACT proves that it is one of the two best conf along with the Pac-10 with the Big-10 and Big 12 behind....your other point (biased opinion/hatred) is that the pac-10 is weak......how do you explain a 6-1 bcs record since 2000??????
heres the point:
since 2000
pac-10 has 4 teams accounting for its bcs wins
40% of the league
sec has 4 teams accounting for it's bcs wins
33% of the league
how is that a DOMINANT conference?
you're point (more like biased opinion) is-always has been that the SEC is THE DOMINANT conference in football......I dont't see ANY FACTS that prove that, in fact every FACT proves that it is one of the two best conf along with the Pac-10 with the Big-10 and Big 12 behind....your other point (biased opinion/hatred) is that the pac-10 is weak......how do you explain a 6-1 bcs record since 2000??????
gjn23, your new name is SCOTT4USC, Jr. because all you're doing is picking and choosing stats and time frames when they are convenient for your argument.
The BCS didn't start in 2000. It started in 1998. And since then:
The SEC has had 6 teams play in BCS bowl games. (50% of league)
The SEC's BCS record is the BEST at 7-3.
You can take any of those 6 teams out of the mix, and the SEC still has a winning record.
You take USC out of the mix for the Pac-10, and you get a mediocre 3-3. :mj10:
Now look, Scotty, Jr., if your going to throw out stats, tell the whole story. Not everyone is as clueless as you.
The BCS didn't start in 2000. It started in 1998. And since then:
The SEC has had 6 teams play in BCS bowl games. (50% of league)
The SEC's BCS record is the BEST at 7-3.
You can take any of those 6 teams out of the mix, and the SEC still has a winning record.
You take USC out of the mix for the Pac-10, and you get a mediocre 3-3. :mj10:
Now look, Scotty, Jr., if your going to throw out stats, tell the whole story. Not everyone is as clueless as you.
AU2001 said:
...And Pac 10 is 6-0 in BCS Bowl games if you just eliminate UCLA, Stanford and WSU. They should just kick those three schools out of the conference and rename it the Conference of Champions.
It is amazing what you can get stats to say if you just eliminate the stats you don't like. You are a god damn genius.
okay genious i looked up the following results to see how good you actually are. here are your records vs bcs teams during reg season games back to 98 .....i then compared that to ucla schedule/record who's about the equal of auburn (i know your laughing at that one since the pac-10 is so weak):
2004....0-0
2003....0-2 (0-1 road)
2002....1-1 (0-1 road)
2001....0-1 (0-1 road)
2000....0-0
1999....0-0
1998....0-1
7 years
6 games (out of approx 22 non conf games)
1-5 overall (1 win at home in 3 ot vs syracuse)
0-3 on the road
NICE WORK.....love the 0-0 record that got you to the sugar bowl last year.
i"ll contrast that with ucla (an above acg pac-10 team over the past 7 years):
2004....1-1 (1-0 road)
2003....1-2 (0-2 road)
2002....1-1 (1-0 road)
2001....3-0 (2-0 road)
2000....2-0 (0-0 road)
1999....0-1 (0-1 road)
1998....1-1 (0-1 road)
7 years
15 games (out of approx 22)
9-6 overall record
4-3 road record
This is most likely a typical comparison of sec occ scheduling vs pac-10 occ scheduling....the sec has a preceived advantage as the "dominanat conference" due to thier occ wins over the la monroe, la tech, of the world which boosts their overall records thus making an auburn-arkansas game seem like a matchup of two world beaters from the sec..... when in fact they just compiled an 8-0 record vs a bunch of nobodies....had they played a bcs team, they likely would have lost....as evidenced by auburns track record.
keep calling me scotty jr.....i'll just call myself (and him) correct when it comes to this point about scheduling and conf strength......the big 6 are fairly close with the pac-10 and sec the top two closely followed by the big-10 and big 12
2004....0-0
2003....0-2 (0-1 road)
2002....1-1 (0-1 road)
2001....0-1 (0-1 road)
2000....0-0
1999....0-0
1998....0-1
7 years
6 games (out of approx 22 non conf games)
1-5 overall (1 win at home in 3 ot vs syracuse)
0-3 on the road
NICE WORK.....love the 0-0 record that got you to the sugar bowl last year.
i"ll contrast that with ucla (an above acg pac-10 team over the past 7 years):
2004....1-1 (1-0 road)
2003....1-2 (0-2 road)
2002....1-1 (1-0 road)
2001....3-0 (2-0 road)
2000....2-0 (0-0 road)
1999....0-1 (0-1 road)
1998....1-1 (0-1 road)
7 years
15 games (out of approx 22)
9-6 overall record
4-3 road record
This is most likely a typical comparison of sec occ scheduling vs pac-10 occ scheduling....the sec has a preceived advantage as the "dominanat conference" due to thier occ wins over the la monroe, la tech, of the world which boosts their overall records thus making an auburn-arkansas game seem like a matchup of two world beaters from the sec..... when in fact they just compiled an 8-0 record vs a bunch of nobodies....had they played a bcs team, they likely would have lost....as evidenced by auburns track record.
keep calling me scotty jr.....i'll just call myself (and him) correct when it comes to this point about scheduling and conf strength......the big 6 are fairly close with the pac-10 and sec the top two closely followed by the big-10 and big 12
Wow, UCLA beat a 3-8 Illinois team. That's impressive.
Too bad they got embarrassed by Wyoming in their bowl game. Nice try.
Too bad they got embarrassed by Wyoming in their bowl game. Nice try.
AU2001 said:
I guess if you don't have facts on your side, might as well go for the personal insults. You are pathetic.
Any fool can see UCLA and Auburn are about equal:
past 10 years:
UCLA 69-50 Auburn 80-43
past 5 years:
UCLA 33-28 (barely .500, but they're an above average pac-10 team, right?) Auburn 46-18
To even pretend that UCLA is on Auburn's level only proves you're a delusional moron.
past 10 years:
UCLA 69-50 Auburn 80-43
past 5 years:
UCLA 33-28 (barely .500, but they're an above average pac-10 team, right?) Auburn 46-18
To even pretend that UCLA is on Auburn's level only proves you're a delusional moron.
