....you can't hijack the elephant. You can explain to us how the elephant fits with your view of the college football world - specifically that the SEC rules all and that the Big 10 sucks, but you can't hijack the elephant. You can ignore the elephant, you can dance around the elephant, you can pretend the elephant does not exist, but the elephant is there for all to see.....
MCG, I too believe the SEC to be the toughest college football conference in America but I have to call your hand at the non-conference record you so heavily tout from last season. Check out this link:http://www.fannation.com/blogs/post/107535 I think you'll see from this link, that it's hard to determine a real edge based upon the non-conference records versus BCS opponents. I think more conclusions can be drawn from the bowl results. The Big 10 had a great record versus non-con BCS opponents as a whole during the regular season, however, as indicated by their notable wins, they didn't beat any good to great non-con BCS teams. However, they had one of the worse records in the bowl games (should be noted that one of the teams they beat was an SEC team). The SEC, of course, had a very nice showing in the bowl games with a 5-2 record versus BCS conference opponents. The Pac-10 showed up nicely in both aspects with a 7-6 reg. season record (with some notable wins) vs. BCS conf. opponents and a 3-1 bowl record versus the same. I have come to the conclusion that it is difficult to find facts that resoundingly support any conference's superiority as it pertained to last season. I certainly think that the SEC had a couple of very tough, NC-worthy teams and some very good middle-tier teams as well. My opinion is still that the SEC is the toughest conference going but that's all it is-opinion. Agree or disagree, that is your prerogative.
http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20080706/OPINION01/617509449/1103/sports& Another one pertaining to conference talent on NFL rosters. I personally don't think this is a great gauge of how "good" a conference is because many players that are great in college just don't translate well in the NFL. Interesting read anyway.
years ago <r>I did a whole break down on how the SEC had more players in the NFL, but the Pac10 actually produced more NFL players per team. Anywho, I found that no one really cares about those things.. also, its cyclical. Those things show you who was good 5 to 15 years ago... not who is good now.<br/> <br/> as for this:<br/> <QUOTE><s> </e></QUOTE> I couldn't disagree more, but I have found that there is a VERY heavy bowl emphasis in the South.. You guys tend to ignore the regular season noncon games and a lot of that may have to do with the traditional lack of them in SEC country. As you're a Tennessee fan, I know that doesn't apply to your team but I've done report after report over the years to show that most all the rest of the conference doesn't.<br/> <br/> I like the whole ride.. noncon, con and bowl.. but that's me.<br/> <br/> I don't place too much emphasis on the bowls because this isn't a playoff system. You wanna make the last games count more, make them for all the marbles and then I will care.</r>
OK, as far as Pac-10 vs. SEC players in the NFL per team. If I read the article right and my math is right then the current configuration is about 11 players per team in the SEC and 7 players per team in the Pac-10. Not that important but I just wanted to point that out. As far as quality non-conference games versus BCS opponents in the SEC vs. the Pac-10, let's have a look... 2007 Pac-10=Cuse, Tenn., Wisc., Cincy, Colorado, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame (3 diff. teams), Ohio St. I think I'm leaving one out but I can't find it on the composite schedule. SEC=Oklahoma St., Kansas St., USF, Virginia Tech, Missouri, Louisville, Florida St. (2 diff. teams), North Carolina, West Virginia, Clemson, Wake, Ga. Tech Now, let's compare the teams. I'm not taking the time to look up the individual records or rankings of each team but I think we can roughly figure how the teams match up. You have some middle of the pack good teams in both groups, some bad teams in both groups, some average teams, and some teams that contended for the national title in both groups. 2008 Pac-10=Mich. St., UVA, Ok. St., Tenn., Penn St., Maryland, Purdue, Ohio St., Oklahoma, Baylor, Georgia, Notre Dame (3 diff. teams) SEC=Clemson (2 diff. teams), Texas, West Virginia, Ga. Tech (2 diff. teams), Wake (2 diff. teams), FSU, Miami, Arizona St., NC St., UCLA, Duke This year looks to be much of the same. I can readily spot 3 teams that the Pac-10 is going up against that are national title hopefuls and a pair of teams from the SEC group that have national title aspirations. Since 1 of the teams from the Pac-10 group is an SEC team, the difference is negated a bit but overall Ohio St., Oklahoma, and Georgia have more legit national title hopes than Texas and West Virginia. I'll give the nod to the Pac-10 in that category but I think it is to be noted that it's been pointed out (whether you agree or not) that the SEC has 4 national title contenders in conference. I would say that they have two very legitimate shots (which you agree with, Corey) and I personally think that's one more than the Pac-10 has. I'd say that in addition to the heavyweights there are about 6 other teams in each group with legit bowl aspirations. I just don't see the great disparity in the Pac-10 teams' out of conference schedule versus the SEC's.
.. <t>Well the 'per team' I was mentioning had to do with number of conference members.. My point is that in previous years, the Pac10 had the most. Its cyclical, and as I said... reflects more or less 'who had what' 5+ years ago more than anything.<br/> <br/> There are lots of interesting non-conference games. Historically, the SEC doesn't travel for its non-cons. Again, being a Tennessee fan you may not see this because you have. I've broken this down over and over again over the years and am not about to do it again.<br/> <br/> There are some very recent changes that should provide a lot of fun though. (for example, Georgia actually leaving the South for the first time since... what the 50s or 60s?) I hope to see an increase in the intersectional games.</t>
Yeah, that's what I meant to when I said 11 per team SEC and 7 per team Pac-10. That fact may be true but it has nothing to do with the present time. The addition of a 12th game may indeed lead to many more SEC teams leaving the South. I think the prevailing notion is that they didn't have to because there is plenty of good competition right where we're at. I, too, look forward to games like UGa-Arizona St. and hope to see many more of them.[/url]
What do we have here? No mention of either Bama losing to U-La-Monroe or M losing to Appy State? Hmmmmm.....curious. :lol:
From a conference comparison standpoint I would say that's a wash. Unless you want to wonder just a tad why App St ran up and down the field on Michigan's defense for over 35 points and 500 yards and OSU weather notwithstanding struggled to 14 points. Truth is BT that offense is OSU's weakness.....and frankly it was apparent all year and especially in the NC title game. :wink:
No, I would be thrilled if we always struggle for 14 points and beat them in Ann Arbor convincingly for the 4th straight year and 6 of the last 7 seasons....but if I were you, I'd certainly wonder why Appy State beat the same team in the Big House that beat your Gators convincingly in Florida. But that's just me.......
MCG, you will have to excuse this fellow Gator for wondering why you like to shoot yourself in the foot so often! :roll: :roll: :roll:
How is a comeback TD in the last 2 minutes fueled by a spectacular one-handed grab of a Henne pass along the way considered to be a "convincing" win?
I was convinced that Michigan won the game. My first clue was that they scored more points than their opponent.
Dude, it looked like a maize and blue track meet. Over 500 yards of total offense, in spite of 4 turnovers - 2 of which are inside the 5 on their way to certain scores. They dominated you. It looked at times as if your defense was completely outclassed by such a weak and unworthy opponent. It was convincing to anybody who watched. He ran out of feet a long time ago....at this stage, he's hitting more vital and sensitive body parts....and with amazing regularity.
On the Florida defense....see my last post in the Big Ten really that bad topic. I have readily admitted time and again that our defense last year was the achilles heel that kept Florida out of a BCS Bowl and prevented the Gators from playing for the SEC title. It was a 2007 issue only as the 2006 team was blessed with a great, physical and fast defense with NFL bound players. By contrast it was the Michigan offense when healthy that was it's stongest suit and these guys were healthy and motivated by Carr's last game as coach. Even so it was a good thing on third and long on the last drive that Arrington made that acrobatic one-handed grab or their great effort could have gone for naught. In any event I do base this coming year's prospects on returning players so while there is strong evidence UF may have the best offense returning in the nation the Gator defense still has some serious questions that I hope are answered in a positive way or an SEC Championship will again be hard to nail down. Good things will come nationally for Florida if that SEC title can be secured and only then.