the SEC remains the premier conference in college football

[Shoalzie]

The SEC has had the last three recipients of the glass football...that is the true sign of conference supremacy instead of saying their 4th place team can beat the Big Ten's 5th place team in the Whatever.com Bowl. Alabama losing to Utah doesn't mean the SEC is any less of a conference since Florida won the one game that mattered. The record in the other exhibition games are more for bragging rights and water cooler talk. Whoever is the holding the glass football and has the title of MNC...that conference can claim scoreboard for the year.

[Dinsdale]

How could that be argued?

That's so delightfully Southern, I must RACK it.


SECnology at its finest.


Use the bowl games as a specific reason why XXX was the best conference... even thought they very clearly didn't have the best bowl record of any conference... yet still use bowl records as a "we are the best" argument?



That truly is fucking priceless.


Yet they wonder why we make fun of their lack of intelligence.

[Shoalzie]

What are really talking about...the best conference top-to-bottom or which conference has the best top-tier teams? I don't think we give two craps about if you took the worst team from each conference, who would win those games. If using the bowl records is the measuring stick...I'd say limit it to the top few teams in each league.

Iowa beating South Carolina doesn't mean jack in the conference "debate". The SEC is still better but it doesn't give the Big Ten any more cred considering the Cocks are an inferior SEC team.

[Dinsdale]

Sorta like Pac 10 honks suggesting that their bowl record indicates the superiority of their conference?

More SECnology. Nice.


I see you failed to smack your own for being fucking stupid.


All's I was saying, is that article made no mention whatsoever of the regular season -- merely that their bowl records meant they were the best conference -- completely ignoring the very simple train of logic that dictates that based upon bowl records, the SEC was CLEARLY not "the best conference" using the critereon they cited.


S'all's I was saying.

[Van]

The SEC has had the last three recipients of the glass football...that is the true sign of conference supremacy

The fuck it is. All that's a sign of is that three straight years one of their teams was chosen by the beauty pageant judges to receive the opportunity to beat OSU twice and OU once.

Any number of other teams could've rightfully received those opportunities and any number of other teams could've recorded those same three wins.

What those three glass trophies represent is the fact that in recent years the SEC has always been given the beauty contest nod over other one loss/multiple loss teams. That's it.

Was the NL Central the best division in baseball when the barely .500 Cardinals won the WS a few years ago?

How about the NFC West this year, should the Cardinals win it?

The Boston Celtics and the Eastern Conference's Atlantic Division, last year?

Shoalzie, that's a completely bankrupt argument even when a sport's champion is decided on the field. When it's decided by beauty pageant judges the way it is in D1 CF that argument has even less merit.

[Dinsdale]

I will always assert that regular season games are far more indicative of conferences' strengths and weaknesses than bowl games.

Holy fuck!


Dude, I didn't save 1000 children from a burning orphanage. I've done nothing so great as to deserve the level of gut-busting laughter that SECBSH just gave me.


Yeah, it's TOOOOOTALLY shocking that SECBSH would place such weight on the regular season... since playing nothing but home games against Northwestern Namibia Polytechnic and the one other decent team in your division gives you this air of superiority.


Gee, an SEC fan disregards bowl season -- where they have to play against teams with winning records?


Yeah, color me suprised there.

[Dinsdale]

Shoalzie, that's a completely bankrupt argument even when a sport's champion is decided on the field.

Dude, I guess you've been gone a while...


Schotzy doesn't offer takes, arguments, or anything else of substance...


he whines... at length.


I rarely make it beyond his first sentence or two. I try, and I give him the benefit of the doubt, but his addiction to estrogen just never stops.

[Blueblood]

SECBSH is to College Football.... what gravity is to Supersymmetry.

[Vito Corleone]

Well, at least according to Rivals. :)

Bowls were SEC proving ground


Q From: Veto in Gautier, Miss..: How do you think the SEC did this year in bowl games? Does the conference mark of 6-2 and a national title make up for what many consider a lackluster regular season – particularly when the bowl losses were by a mediocre South Carolina team and to a veteran Utah team that was fairly good this year?


A Obviously, the SEC reaffirmed its status as college football's strongest conference with its showing in the bowl season. How could that be argued?


That said, Alabama's loss to Utah in the Sugar Bowl was one of the most startling upsets and shows that the SEC isn't overwhelmingly stronger than the other conferences.

However, a third consecutive national championship, a 2-0 record over the Big 12 South, four bowl victories with double-digit winning margins and five bowl victories over ranked opponents should settle any question of whether the SEC remains the premier conference in college football.

iF The Big 12 would stop sending its 2nd best team to the BCS finals that might have been a different story. Remember Texas beat Oklahoma by the same margin as Florida on a neutral field. I still think both Texas and USC would have beaten Florida. Ol miss beating taco tech is no big deal, anyone within the Big 12 will tell you once you get them outside of Lubbock they turn into Baylor.

Utah beating Alabama proves more than anything that the SEC is not the all-mighty conference the media wants us to believe.

Still I won't honk the Big 12's horn simply because I thought we were very much overrated as a conference, Texas was the best team in the conference followed by Oklahoma who was never as good as their wins led you to believe, when it was all said and done their best win was against TCU. Okie lite seemed to have peaked midway through the season, and Missouri was a pretender from the beginning.

All in all, I would say the Big 12 and the SEC were the two most dominating conferences with the SEC getting the slight edge because the Big 12 and their moronic rules couldn't send the right team to the BCS finals.

[Vito Corleone]

Except for that pesky fact that Texas proved they were better on a neutral field. And it wasn't even as close as the score was.

[Blueblood]

All in all, I would say the Big 12 and the SEC were the two most dominating conferences with the SEC getting the slight edge because the Big 12 and their moronic rules couldn't send the right team to the BCS finals.

You're an idiot..... on Jsc810 "the paraplegic " levels.


Don't make me do the math.


God and god... some of the dumbest posters on this board represent the College Football forum.

[King Crimson]

Except for that pesky fact that Texas proved they were better on a neutral field. And it wasn't even as close as the score was.

that's absurd. the second sentence. UT trailed most of the game.

scoreboard is scoreboard but that's just an asinine statement. The RRS was one of, if not the best, CFB games of last season.

[Van]

Sam, with all that being said I'd say it's still safe to say that in recent years the SEC has been the best overall conference, more often than not.

I simply wouldn't base much of that on winning three crystal footballs in a row. That's more a function of the flawed system and the luck of the draw.

Factors that do indicate a conference's relative strength, in no particular order...

NFL success

Sorry, CF apologists who cry that this is BTPCF and not the NFL, the fact is that BTPCF exists for three reasons, and three reasons only. It's there to provide entertainment, succor and torture for the fans and alumni. It's there to provide needed revenue for the school and the tv networks. It's there to be a farm system for the NFL.

Maybe not by design, on that last one, but in fact.

If your conference rarely sends anybody to the NFL then your conference is likely suffering a dearth of talent and therefore isn't as strong as other conferences.

If your conference is the NFL's main feeder system then rest assured that your conference is playing at a high level with well coached, superior athletes.

The NFL is nothing if not objective. They're entirely performance based. For the NFL the proof is truly in the pudding.

In this category and in recent years the SEC is always at or near the top of the conference ledger.

One might want to take this a step further and differentiate between NFL draft picks vs actual NFL productivity, and I could see that. Wouldn't matter a whole lot though, not in the SEC's case. They'll still be at or near the top of either category.

Rankings

Yeah, this is a shitty way to go about measuring the relative worth of teams who cannot be measured objectively. They don't play on a level playing field.

Still, there is some merit to using rankings. Mainly, long term rankings. Teams that are consistently highly ranked do seem to produce the most NFL talent. Lacking many other objective means of measuring a team's worth here at least is some bit of fact based corroborative evidence.

Again the SEC scores well here. It's a bit of a self perpetuating joke based on myth and well known helmets but at the end of the day those well favored SEC teams are also producing their fair share of demonstrably superior talent.

OOC records

Tough one to quantify. No level playing field here. Compare Troy's annual OOC schedule with Bama's and one would have to say that Troy is the powerhouse team in the state.

Problem there is Troy usually loses while playing a very rugged OOC slate while Bama rarely loses due to their program's very DNA, which won't allow them to test themselves very often OOC.

It's very easy to put up staggering OOC numbers when nearly all your OOC games are home game scrimmages against horribly overmatched teams.

So, while this method should be one of the most telling methods for determing a conference's relative worth it is in fact one of the least reliable methods. It simply cannot be utilized, due to the severely fucked up nature of BTPCF scheduling.

Bowl records

More reliable than OOC records, but still not entirely reliable either. So much of a conference's bowl record will be predicated on how favorable or unfavorable were their bowl game match ups?

Also, how many bowl bids will they receive? A "favored status" conference like the SEC will naturally receive more bowl bids than most other conferences, and that's before one takes into account the fact that by having twelve teams of course the SEC will naturally receive more bowl game opportunities than conferences who have fewer teams.

Then, yeah, there's the actual match ups.

Ohio St, having to play LSU in the Bayou? Illinois, having to play USC in Pasadena?

Not good match ups for the Big 10.

Ohio St, getting to play ND in Glendale, Arizona? Iowa, getting to play South Carolina anywhere on planet earth?

Much more favorable match ups for the Big 10.

Predictable results, in each instance.

The Big 10 had horrible match ups ths year. They were double digit dogs in the majority of their games. All their games involved traveling to parts of the country where they don't normally play, to play favored teams who were playing much closer to home.

They ended up going 1-7, or something like that, losing every game in which they were the underdog.

The Pac 10's situation was very different this year. Though they were in fact playing a higher ranked opponent in most of their bowl match ups, a fact which is conveniently overlooked by Pac 10 bashers who wish to mitigate their 5-0 bowl record this season, their match ups were closer to home and they weren't much of an underdog in any of 'em.

Now, the fact that the Big 10 was an underdog in nearly every game speaks to their relative lack of strength, especially compared to the Big XII. Add to this the fact that the Big 10 went ahead and confirmed all those doubts by losing each of those games. So, yeah, their bowl record probably was a somewhat reasonably accurate indication of their lack of strength this season.

Same thing with the ACC's overall horrible record in BCS bowl games. Losing a game here and there is one thing. Shit happens. Bad match ups happen.

Losing nearly every time, the way the ACC has?

That's no accident. The best team in their conference has been overmatched nearly every time when it came time to step up and play with the big boys. They only win when they're fortunate enough to not have to play a real big boy.

BCS bowl wins and crystal footballs

Sure, these things are somewhat of an indicator of conference strength. Again, look to the ACC as proof. When you almost never win one of these games then you probably don't belong in these games.

Conversely, yeah, if you always win these games then you belong in these games. A lucky match up here and there is one thing. Winning these games year in and year out does at least indicate that your conference's best team or teams match up well with the best from some other conferences.

It's hardly a conclusive category though, not when so much of it is still so subjective and so much of it is tilted in the favor of certain conferences over others.

For example, I daresay that the Big 10's horrible BCS bowl record would be significantly improved had they been fortunate enough to be paired with ACC teams the majority of the time, rather than being paired with the likes of USC, Texas, Florida and LSU seemingly all the time.

The Pac 10 and SEC BCS bowl records and crystal trophies count would also be considerably different had their best teams been allowed to play each other.

Well, okay, the SEC's BCS bowl record would be considerable different. The Pac 10's would still be the same, with only their crystal trophies count changing.

:twisted:

I hate to be the bearer of bad news here but when all is said and done the most reliable method of ranking the relative worth of each conference is the two headed monster of NFL players and consistently highly ranked teams. In the long run the cumulative OOC records and bowl records and the records of individual teams don't matter nearly as much.

Boil it all down and remove the ball sucking homerism and all the bullshit biases and scheduling favoritism and it really comes down to just one thing: Who's playing on Sunday?

There's your only truly objective answer, and there's your best answer.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Who's playing on Sunday?

There's your only truly objective answer, and there's your best answer.

Only if we're talking about the gap between say the SEC and Big East. That's telling. However the difference of NFL starters between the SEC, ACC, and Big Ten is pretty razor thin - not enough to make any clear cut conclusions. I believe the ACC is actually 2nd in current NFL starters. And I doubt many here (including you) will feel satisfied in calling the ACC the second best conference.

[Vito Corleone]

Except for that pesky fact that Texas proved they were better on a neutral field. And it wasn't even as close as the score was.

that's absurd. the second sentence. UT trailed most of the game.

scoreboard is scoreboard but that's just an asinine statement. The RRS was one of, if not the best, CFB games of last season.

By my count over the last 10:25 min of the 1st half and all the 2nd half Texas outscored Oklahoma 35-14, those numbers don't lie. So yea, when you factor in the 1st TD that shouldn't have counted that 10 pt victory was more than 10 pts. The most telling numbers were in the 4th quarter, you know, the money quarter of a football game. That was when Texas rushed for 90 yards on the Oklahoma defense and scored 2 rushing TDs. In other words, when the game was on the line Texas punched Oklahoma in the mouth and the sooners responded by curling up in the fetal position.

Oklahoma 2nd half drive chart results
Touchdown
Downs
Touchdown
Punt
Downs
Interception

Texas 2nd half drive chart results
Punt
Touchdown
Field goal
Touchdown (2pt Conversion)
Touchdown
Punt

Yea I stand by my statement.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Who's playing on Sunday?

There's your only truly objective answer, and there's your best answer.

Only if we're talking about the gap between say the SEC and Big East. That's telling. However the difference of NFL starters between the SEC, ACC, and Big Ten is pretty razor thin - not enough to make any clear cut conclusions. I believe the ACC is actually 2nd in current NFL starters. And I doubt many here (including you) will feel satisfied in calling the ACC the second best conference.

I don't know if you're correct about the ACC being 2nd in current NFL starters, but I'll take your word for it. Here, there's a huge caveat. I would suspect that many of the ACC starters come from Florida State and Miami, and played their college ball at a time when both programs were considerably better than they are now (and also, btw, before Miami joined the ACC). I suspect that if the ACC had its current alignment, say, 5-10 years ago, most of us would consider the ACC the second- or, at worst, third-best conference in the country. Of course, FSU and Miami's programs both sorta drove off a cliff in the interim.

One problem with looking at NFL starters as an indicator of conference/program strength is the fact that, at least potentially, a player's NFL career is considerably longer than his college career. Yes, the average NFL career lasts only four seasons, but we all know there are more than a handful of players who play much longer. Along that line, if you want to get a truer gauge of college program/conference strength, you would have to limit the NFL starters under consideration to those who have been in the league 5 years or less.

[Van]

Interesting numbers, Mgo. Scanning various websites offering NFL roster/college teams lists I see a pretty wide spread in numbers. Some have Miami on top, some have FSU, some have OSU, etc.

Pretty wide spread in those numbers, as well. One site listed USC with 31 players. Another site listed them with 43.

They all have the SEC on top as a conference though. Oddly enough, they also all have the Big XII doing very poorly, even with twelve teams and some huge programs.

That one surprised me. I would've expected much better NFL representation from the Big XII.

The ACC? I think what we're seeing there is the result of two main factors: twelve teams, and a legacy from FSU's and Miami's former dominance. Those two teams alone combine for close to 100 NFL players, depending on which source you use.

It'll be interesting to see if the ACC's NFL success continues, now that they no longer have any dominant teams.

Gotta wonder though about the ACC coaching, when they've had that much NFL talent filtering through their ranks. Something's obviously going wrong in the ACC and it can't be explained by any dearth of talent.

Maybe there is a little something to the coaching aspect so loudly trumpeted by SECBSH. The Pac 10 also does really well, considering they've only got ten teams and a couple/few "academic schools" among those ten teams.

I know you're always trumpeting coaching as being the big difference between relatively equally talented teams so maybe it's time to place a lot more emphasis there. Looking at the relative lack of success in CF of the ACC and even the relative lack of success in big games of a monster NFL feeder program like OSU you may be very right...

That's a bit of a chicken or the egg equation there though.

Okay, let's say we accept the premise that coaching needs to jump right up to the top of the list of things that are important in determining a conference's relative worth.

How then does one measure the quality of coaching?

Wins and losses? That's again often a function of scheduling and conference affiliations. A good coach in a bad conference might still rack up ten wins and we'll never care.

Bowl wins? OOC wins? Titles? These are all functions of talent, plus a number of subjective factors.

For example, I think we can all agree that Pete Carroll, Urban Meyer and Bob Stoops are great CF coaches.

Now stick Pete at Iowa, Meyer at Indiana and Stoops at Northwestern. They're the same people; the same coaches.

We'd barely even know their names. They certainly wouldn't receive prominent mentions when talk of CF's greatest coaches is bandied about.

Very tough to quantify, until after the fact.

Something's going right though with how the SEC is utilizing their talent. The SEC is achieving success both on the field and on draft day. The ACC and Big 10 are mostly only achieving it on draft day. The Big XII is the opposite. They're doing better on the field than their draft day results might indicate.

The Pac 10 is similar to the SEC, only on a smaller scale. Their on the field and draft day success seems to be fairly commensurate.

I might have to go with you on the coaching thing, even though it'd be so difficult to quantify before the fact.

[Van]

'Spray, San Diego is nothing like a home field advantage for Oregon. The Pac 10 has no representatives in LoCal and like you mentioned San Diego is only 442 miles closer to Eugene than to Stillwater.

No big Pac 10 advantage there.

(Wait. 442 miles. What was I thinking? How could I forget that to SECBSH the thought of traveling an additional 442 miles to play an OOC football game is akin to playing the Pittsburgh Steelers on the moon.)

Nevermind.)

Anyway, most CF "experts" and most people on this board had Okie St winning that game...before the game. Okie St of the mighty Big XII South was receiving more respect than Oregon of the shitty Pac 10, heading into that game.

You know it and I know it.

Now we're applying hindsight to say Okie St was overrated and that it was an easy and predictable match up for Oregon.

Anyway, the one thing SECBSH never wants to get into is a discussion of bowl game locales and how they inherently favor one conference over another.

Florida and OU? In Miami?

LSU and OSU? In New Orleans??

LSU and OU? Ditto.

LSU over ND? Ditto.

Georgia over Hawaii?

The fact that the vast majority of SEC bowl game tie ins involve bowl games played in warm weather locales in the southeastern U.S.?

Yes, USC has an advantage playing Big 10 teams in the Rose Bowl. No, it's not a "home game" for USC, not when the Rose Bowl is the home field for their arch rival and the actual game usually sees a 50/50 split of fans in the stadium. (It didn't this year, for some reason. Unlike the Texas-USC and Michigan-USC Rose Bowls where the fan split was very even USC fans covered 65-70% of the stadium for the PSU game. Dunno why PSU didn't show better. I fully expected PSU's crazy fanbase to take at least half that stadium, considering how big that game was for PSU's program.)

Still, yes, it is an advantage for USC to play in the Rose Bowl. No doubt there. It's no more of an advantage though than LSU playing in the Superdome or Florida teams playing in Miami.

The conference with a legitimate beef with unfavorable bowl game locales is quite obviously the Big 10. They're always playing their biggest bowl games in someone else's back yard.

Just for the fuck of it, how do you think teams from the Pac 10, mid Atlantic states and the southeast would fare if they had to play top Big 10 teams in late December and early January...at Lambeau Field and Soldier Field.

Nah, when it comes to bowl game match ups and bowl game locales SECBSH and USC fan both need to thank their lucky stars and otherwise sit quietly in the corner with their mouths shut.

The one difference though? USC fan actually wants tougher match ups in their bowl games. USC fan has long licked their chops to get at the SEC's best, in SEC Country.

USC might be the one team in the country other than maybe Texas who can honestly say this.

Sure as fuck Bama or Georgia or Auburn want NO part of USC in the Rose Bowl. Unless you send your best Gator teams out west to play USC under Pete Carroll, don't even bother. Better to try your luck with USC in New Orleans, Atlanta or Miami...

...or, nah, let's just let the SEC stick to getting OSU, OU, Hawaii and ND in New Orleans. Maybe burp up a Utah or two in the French Quarter too.

Umm, or not.

[King Crimson]

Except for that pesky fact that Texas proved they were better on a neutral field. And it wasn't even as close as the score was.

that's absurd. the second sentence. UT trailed most of the game.

scoreboard is scoreboard but that's just an asinine statement. The RRS was one of, if not the best, CFB games of last season.

By my count over the last 10:25 min of the 1st half and all the 2nd half Texas outscored Oklahoma 35-14, those numbers don't lie. So yea, when you factor in the 1st TD that shouldn't have counted that 10 pt victory was more than 10 pts. The most telling numbers were in the 4th quarter, you know, the money quarter of a football game. That was when Texas rushed for 90 yards on the Oklahoma defense and scored 2 rushing TDs. In other words, when the game was on the line Texas punched Oklahoma in the mouth and the sooners responded by curling up in the fetal position.

Oklahoma 2nd half drive chart results
Touchdown
Downs
Touchdown
Punt
Downs
Interception

Texas 2nd half drive chart results
Punt
Touchdown
Field goal
Touchdown (2pt Conversion)
Touchdown
Punt

Yea I stand by my statement.

those numbers add up to 25-14, one point more than the margin of victory. OU led in the 4th quarter. just pick and choose your minutes in the first half. so weak. a real blowout.

i said scoreboard.

[Van]

Sam...



..dontcha just love how in the Ye Olde Days you couldn't even tell one team from another unless you happened to know their colors and those colors happened to differ between the two teams on the field.

They all seemed to have pretty much the same goofy v-shaped markings on their jerseys and their pants and helmets all looked about the same too.

Whole lotta white folk, too.

And check out that eager beaver ref! Bwaaa!!

Btw, in terms of recent Bama games of major import, I always preferred this one...



The game that changed the world

Before 'SC whipped Alabama in 1970, Bear Bryant's team was all white. A year later, the Tide had turned.

By BLYTHE BERNHARD
The Orange County Register

Dick Danehe doesn't lack for good stories.

He talks about driving cross country with his dad in a Plymouth to accept a football scholarship to USC at the end of the Great Depression. He'll regale you with tales about the glory days of college, interrupted by his service in the Army Air Corps during World War II. Or living the high life, when he played professional football with the Los Angeles Dons. And the national fame he reached as a sportscaster and host of a weekly golf show.

As a radio and television personality in the 1950s, Danehe was so well-known that his name was a clue in a TV Guide crossword puzzle. The tall, strapping blond broadcaster was recognized on the street and received buckets of fan mail. President Eisenhower, a golf enthusiast, would request films of Danehe's show, "All Star Golf," before it aired Saturday nights.

Danehe's neighbors in Laguna Hills know him best for his devotion to Nayda, his wife of 62 years. The college sweethearts, now 87 and 86, write love poems to each other on birthdays and anniversaries. She bought him his first easel, and their home is decorated with his oil and watercolor landscapes. At twilight, the couple like to join the neighbors in singing "America the Beautiful" on the lawn.

There are so many stories left to tell. But this one is about the night Dick Danehe, in his last year as a college football announcer, called the game that changed the South.

THAT SEPTEMBER NIGHT

It was 1970, and Danehe was on the radio team broadcasting USC football games. The season-opening road game wasn't just a game – USC would be the first fully integrated team to play against Alabama at Legion Field in Birmingham.

Danehe remembers a feeling of trepidation on the flight to the Deep South. Nearly a third of USC's team was black, (edit: YEAH, BOYEEEEE!) including quarterback Jimmy Jones.

Although it was seven years after the National Guard was called in to escort two black students to enroll at the University of Alabama, integration had yet to reach the football field.

"It seems late, doesn't it?" Danehe says. "But Alabama had no black players."

Before the game, Danehe remembers Coach Paul "Bear" Bryant and his team marching around the stadium in their dark suits and crimson ties, Bryant wearing his trademark checkered cap. Each section of fans stood and applauded in turn.

But they wouldn't have much to cheer about after that.

The Trojans ran "through 'em, over 'em, around 'em and everything else" on that muggy September night, Danehe recalls. The final score was USC 42, Alabama 21. The Trojans dominated on the ground – 485 rushing yards to Alabama's 32.

And no one ran the football better than Trojan sophomore fullback Sam "Bam" Cunningham – 135 yards in just 12 carries.

Every USC touchdown was scored by a black player. Cunningham had two.

THE TIDE TURNS

Professional baseball, basketball and football had long since been integrated. The University of Kentucky basketball team signed its first black player the year before the USC-Alabama matchup.

But until USC crushed the Crimson Tide in 1970, college football in the South, and particularly in Alabama, remained the last major stronghold of segregation in sport.

Some say Bryant, who died in 1983, knew his fans would be won over by the clearly superior, racially diverse USC team. That could be why he invited coach John McKay's Trojans to hand him a certain loss, as told in the recent book "Turning of the Tide: How One Game Changed the South."

Whatever Bryant's motivation, it worked.

At the postgame reception at the hotel, Danehe remembers the throngs of Alabama fans and the coaching staff buzzing about the Trojans' strength.

"I never heard a derogatory remark," he says. "I must say that compliments were advanced to the entire Trojan team."

The next year, when Alabama came to the Coliseum to play USC, John Mitchell became the first black player to start for the Crimson Tide. Integration helped bring a decade of dominance for Bryant's Alabama football teams in the 1970s. Mitchell went on to become an all-American and is now the assistant head coach for the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Sometimes the most defining moments in history aren't realized until years or decades later. For the USC players, the September night in Alabama was just another season-opening victory. They'd been playing and winning together, black and white, for decades.

It was later, as the media accounts and speaking engagements piled up, that the players realized what they had done for football, for Alabama and for the country.

Cunningham spoke to the 2003 Trojan team before its season opener against Auburn University, as recounted in "Turning of the Tide." He told them how he felt before his debut in the same Southern state more than 30 years before.

"My motivation was to play well enough so that I could play the next week. That was it. It had nothing to do with changing color lines, doing anything like that.

"But you never know when you will get the chance to do something special."

TROJAN FOR LIFE

Growing up in Missouri in the 1930s, when schools were segregated, Danehe could always find the USC-Notre Dame game on the radio. Then as now, USC's championship lore attracted blue-chip athletes from across the country.

Danehe doesn't know how the coaches found him, a big center and linebacker from the Midwest, but their discovery set the course for his life.

In those days, the shops on University Avenue put up posters of the players in the windows. University President Rufus B. von KleinSmid tipped his hat to Danehe every afternoon as the student-athlete raked leaves in front of Doheny Library.

It's a lofty privilege, being a Trojan football player, and one that never goes away, Danehe says.

"I could take everything but my experience at USC out of my life, and I'd still have a full life. I made the ball club and played first string, and that's all you can ask."

Today another group of talented young men – black, white, Asian and Hispanic – will take the field for both teams when USC plays at Nebraska as the top-ranked team in the country.

Danehe will be watching and listening for the fight song. It won't make a difference who scores the touchdowns.

In the Trojan family, the only colors that matter are Cardinal and Gold.

-------------------

Sam, if it's true that Bear actually scheduled that game with the intention of forcing integration in the south by making his own fans witness his own team getting shit stomped by racially integrated USC then he was a far greater man than I ever gave him credit for...

"...and thayat's all I have to say about thayat."

[Van]

Sam, isn't it posible though that USC's and Cunningham's performance in that game blew open the door to acceptance of large scale recruiting of blacks for Bama?

Even if Bear had already signed one black player, well, c'mon, he wasn't yet on the team and black players weren't yet accepted by Bama's fans as being kosher for the Bama squad.

Bear bringing in USC to stomp Bama in front of Bama's fans might've had a great effect in blowing open the door, as opposed to Bama merely trying to sneak in one token under the radar.

I don't know if there's any truth to this line of reasoning, that Bear intentionally and altruistically set up his team for slaughter at the hands of a team loaded with star black players. I'm just saying that it definitely worked out that way. It expedited the process far more than Bear's single token signing ever could've expedited anything.

I'm also saying that if Bear did in fact schedule that game for that reason than he was a helluva big man for doing it. I've always lived under the impression that Bear actually had integration at Bama jammed down his throat, against his wishes.

If that's not true and if in fact Bear always wanted it to happen and Bear was simply unable to do it because of resistance in the state then I've had it all wrong about him.

I hope I was wrong. For whatever reason I've always been led to believe (by the media, obviously) that Bear was a dyed in the wool racist. Intentionally sacrificing his own team at the alter of racial progress would completey belie such a notion...

[Van]

Contrary to popular belief, not every southerner was/is a racist bastard.

No, but the mere fact that Bryant apparantly faced such an uphill struggle to get blacks into the program indicates that the vast majority of Bama's institutional leaders and fans were in fact racist bastards.

Because of their resistance to integration Bama was very late to the party, and they obviously had to be brought in kicking and screaming. They wouldn't accept it until it was forced down their threats and they had to admit they were going to remain losers on the gridiron until they allowed for integration.

That's embarrassing, Sam. It wasn't altruism or any sense of heightened racial enlightenment that brought about this epiphany in the south. No, as always, it was pure SECBSH-ism. They couldn't stand to lose on the football field so they grudgingly woke the fuck up.

Maybe not Bear himself; no, I'm talking about the culture of the south; Bama's people.

That's what it would've taken to force integration in Bama, and throughout much of the south: a dominant black football CF squad and/or a dominant black NASCAR racer.

Had Sam Cunningham been a visiting lecturer and had those other USC blacks been on Bama's campus as part of a debate tournament the level of integration Bama underwent immediately following that USC game would've been much slower and much less drastic.

No two ways around it, Sam. It was SECBSH-ism that forced wide spread integration on Bama's squad, not altruism.

Fuck, if Bama had won 42-21 that day? Bama's squad might've mostly continued to look a lot like this...



...for who knows how long?

[Dinsdale]

Screw it. There's no way to determine which conference is best, is there? It's simply a matter of opinion and we can all quantify how we arrive at our conclusions.

While I certainly don't believe he's the end-all, be-all, Jeff Sagarin has what I believe to be the best math-based system for determining substantial strength, although I also believe the subjective element can't be ignored.

But, Sagarin is probably going to be bashed into oblivion, since he doesn't always tell the story the Loudmouthed Idiots want to hear.

Because when you make it strictly quantitative, it tells a little different story...


Of the 6 BCS conferences, all of them were in a couple of rating points of each other... except a certain bottom-dweller...


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/bkc0809.htm



But let's not let actual statistics get in the way of the Ball-Sucking.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Sagarin must REALLY be the man if his basketball ratings can serve as evidence for football too.

[Dinsdale]

Sagarin must REALLY be the man if his basketball ratings can serve as evidence for football too.

I swear to holy fucking fuck I clicked on the FBS link, which brought up the hoops page... an error I can't repeat.


You'd think that the SEC being #6 would have caused me reason to double-check shit, huh?


But, as of early December, the computer rankings combined to have the SEC as the #3 conference... although I won't fucking link it, for fear of clowning myself with poor mouse-clicking skeelz.

[Van]

I laughed.

[SoCalTrjn]

its actually 17 miles from University Park to the Rose Bowl and not 10.

Music City Bowl
Vanderbilt (3 miles)
Boston College (937 miles)
Chik-fil-a bowl
LSU (459 miles)
Georgia Tech (2 miles) ok, I'll give ya that one
Outback Bowl
South Carolina (427 miles)
Iowa (1075 miles)
Capital One Bowl
Georgia (399 miles)
Michigan State (1000 miles)
Cotton Bowl
Mississippi (409 miles)
Texas Tech (308 miles)
Liberty Bowl
Kentucky (365 miles)
East Carolina (712 miles)
Sugar Bowl
Alabama (311 miles)
Utah (1,430 miles)
BCS Bowl
Florida (297 miles)
Choklahoma (1210 miles)

It wasnt just the Pac 10 that played a bunch of bowl games at home, no SEC team even went as far as 500 miles from campus.... just like their regular season games.

can ANYONE remember the last time Auburn won an OOC game on the road and were any of the recruits Auburn is after this year even alive yet?

[Van]

Sam, I also treat my dog really well. Doesn't mean I don't still think of him as a dog.

[Van]

Sam, here's the real question...

Bama continues to stay all white, and they continue to Roll Tide. They routinely trounce USC and any other integrated team. They go undefeated and win their third straight national title in 1970, rolling USC for a second time that season. (I realize such a bowl match up never could've occured in 1970 and I realize Bama wasn't coming off two straight national titles. Work with me here.)

The hypothetical point being, Bama is utterly white, and utterly dominant.

Bear, Bama Fan and Bama Culture...do they still call for integration of the football team or is it a case of it ain't broke so don't fix it?

Point being, minus a lack of success on the football field, which Bama was already suffering through even before that USC game, how long would it have taken before Bama would've integrated?















Don't you just love how I'm setting you up as the all knowing spokesman for all things Bama?

[buckeye_in_sc]

fucking dins...didn't you learn anything from TRIX last year that Sagarin is biased...

boy can you imagine how bad things would be if TRIX were around? HOLY FUCK

[SoCalTrjn]

its actually 17 miles from University Park to the Rose Bowl and not 10.

Music City Bowl
Vanderbilt (3 miles)
Boston College (937 miles)
Chik-fil-a bowl
LSU (459 miles)
Georgia Tech (2 miles) ok, I'll give ya that one
Outback Bowl
South Carolina (427 miles)
Iowa (1075 miles)
Capital One Bowl
Georgia (399 miles)
Michigan State (1000 miles)
Cotton Bowl
Mississippi (409 miles)
Texas Tech (308 miles)
Liberty Bowl
Kentucky (365 miles)
East Carolina (712 miles)
Sugar Bowl
Alabama (311 miles)
Utah (1,430 miles)
BCS Bowl
Florida (297 miles)
Choklahoma (1210 miles)

It wasnt just the Pac 10 that played a bunch of bowl games at home, no SEC team even went as far as 500 miles from campus.... just like their regular season games.

can ANYONE remember the last time Auburn won an OOC game on the road and were any of the recruits Auburn is after this year even alive yet?

Still bittering? :D

Just keeping your bullshit honest

[Van]

Who did you end up finally blaming for USC not winning it all this year? SEC? Auburn?

Cal.

[SoCalTrjn]

They didnt get an oppurtunity to play for the title, thats the computers fault and the BCS for giving those computer geeks any say in the matter.
They would have beat Florida, by 20

[SoCalTrjn]

I have 2 sons and if they dont stop blaring Hollywood Undead and Kottonmouth Kings on their stereos Im going to kill both of them

[Killian]

They didnt get an oppurtunity to play for the title, thats the computers fault and the BCS for giving those computer geeks any say in the matter.
They would have beat Florida, by 20

No, it's their fault for not winning all of their games and leaving it up to the computers.

[SunCoastSooner]

Except for that pesky fact that Texas proved they were better on a neutral field. And it wasn't even as close as the score was.

Yeah Oklahoma only led for 3 quarters of that game and didn't give up more than 4.2 yards a play until Ryan Reynolds went down with his injury. Texas TD drive to take the lead wasn't aided by two personal foul calls on third downs (one where it was obvious Lendy Holmes was trying hold up and keep McCoy on his feet and not shove him down), one being third and forever, and an offsides flag. Or as though the FG Texas claimed the ball wasn't intercepted in the end zone which the officials called a drop on. Texas only outgained Oklahoma by a whopping 3 yards and turned the ball over twice more than Oklahoma... but lets not let those pesky little things like facts muddle your fairy tale.

[Vito Corleone]

Except for that pesky fact that Texas proved they were better on a neutral field. And it wasn't even as close as the score was.

Yeah Oklahoma only led for 3 quarters of that game and didn't give up more than 4.2 yards a play until Ryan Reynolds went down with his injury. Texas TD drive to take the lead wasn't aided by two personal foul calls on third downs (one where it was obvious Lendy Holmes was trying hold up and keep McCoy on his feet and not shove him down), one being third and forever, and an offsides flag. Or as though the FG Texas claimed the ball wasn't intercepted in the end zone which the officials called a drop on. Texas only outgained Oklahoma by a whopping 3 yards and turned the ball over twice more than Oklahoma... but lets not let those pesky little things like facts muddle your fairy tale.

Is a spooner fan trying to talk ref screw ups in that game like we were helped?

blOwU TD #1 was not a TD, the ball never came close to crossing the goal line, not to mention that was a 3rd down play and since you didn't get dick all day in the running game, I highly doubt you score a TD on 4th.

TWO SHITTY roughing the kicker penalties that were both phantom one resulting in extending a drive that ended up being a TD.

Who gives a shit about what was happening before Reynolds went down, maybe if he wasn't such a pussy he could have finished the game, but INJURIES ARE PART OF THE GAME.

The fact is you ass biters were gifted 14 points you didn't deserve due to crappy refs. Not to mention Loadhold was holding on just about every pass play.

[Vito Corleone]

those numbers add up to 25-14, one point more than the margin of victory. OU led in the 4th quarter. just pick and choose your minutes in the first half. so weak. a real blowout.

i said scoreboard.

count again, from the 10:25 mark in the 2nd blOwU had a lead of 21-10 and it was from that point forward Texas outscored blOwU 35-14 and the last TD was a gift since the refs couldn't figure out what running into the kicker was. BTW i use the 10:25 mark because that was the point you scored your 3rd TD and it looked like your spooners had the game in hand. But looks can be deceiving.

You freaks still haven't figured out that your whole season was a scam, your best win was against TCU! The only two teams you faced with a pulse and a real defense beat your ass by double digits.

Enjoy your off season.

[SunCoastSooner]

those numbers add up to 25-14, one point more than the margin of victory. OU led in the 4th quarter. just pick and choose your minutes in the first half. so weak. a real blowout.

i said scoreboard.

count again, from the 10:25 mark in the 2nd blOwU had a lead of 21-10 and it was from that point forward Texas outscored blOwU 35-14 and the last TD was a gift since the refs couldn't figure out what running into the kicker was. BTW i use the 10:25 mark because that was the point you scored your 3rd TD and it looked like your spooners had the game in hand. But looks can be deceiving.

You freaks still haven't figured out that your whole season was a scam, your best win was against TCU! The only two teams you faced with a pulse and a real defense beat your ass by double digits.

Enjoy your off season.

I will enjoy yet another off season as Big 12 champs... you know how that feels just as much as Texas A&M and Kansas State do though.

[Mr T]

They didnt get an oppurtunity to play for the title, thats the computers fault and the BCS for giving those computer geeks any say in the matter.
They would have beat Florida, by 20

No, it's their fault for not winning all of their games and leaving it up to the computers.

Tru dat homes...

Sin,
Auburn, Utah, and Boise State