T1B

I know, right?

Van calling me a fraud pissed me off.

I didn't call you a fraud, you drunken vaginal discharge. I said Bace has been calling you one. All I did was make a joke pointing out that your malaprop was actually an unwitting admission of what Bace has been saying about you all along.

So, basically, not only are you horrible at writing words, you're equally horrible at reading and comprehending them.

And who among the shitty SEC East was going to inflict those "several" losses on 'em if the divisional champ couldn't even manage one? Boise St beat the fuck out of the Bulldogs in Atlanta, so I don't think they would've had too much problem beating awful Vandy, Kentucky, Florida or Tennessee either.

And you keep saying they wouldn't go "through it with ease" and they "wouldn't win every week." Again, they wouldn't have needed to. All they would have needed to do was finish first in the division, which their win over Georgia would've gone a long way towards ensuring. No one else besides South Carolina in that division would have posed the slightest threat, and South Carolina finished behind Georgia.

You're going to have to drop the "SEC! SEC! SEC!" bluster and take a good look at last year's SEC East. In 2011, yes, Boise St very likely comes out on top in that division.

This [redundant]douchebag and former USC football player[/redundant] is picking West Virginia to win the Big 12 this year:

Goober McTuber wrote:This [redundant]douchebag and former USC football player[/redundant] is picking West Virginia to win the Big 12 this year:

Papadakis is a very good color man for the PAC 12 games. I'm not sure if he's still going to be working with the new network.


Oh yeah, he's also a former Cal football player as well.

M2 wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:This [redundant]douchebag and former USC football player[/redundant] is picking West Virginia to win the Big 12 this year:

Papadakis is a very good color man for the PAC 12 games. I'm not sure if he's still going to be working with the new network.


Oh yeah, he's also a former Cal football player as well.

His radio show is an abomination. I read that he spent a week at Cal and got homesick. Typical California pussy.

Sudden Sam wrote:I'm not saying Boise wasn't better than several SEC teams last year. However, they would not go thru an SEC schedule with the ease they went thru Wyoming, New Mexico, Air Force, Fresno, Colorado State, et al. They would have incurred several losses.

Georgia didn't incur several losses, and Boise proved quite a bit better than them. Your argument doesn't logically follow. The only difference between Wyoming/New Mexico/Air Force and Tennessee/Florida/Vandy is likely margin of victory. South Carolina could've been an L, sure, but the net result is still SEC East Champs. I don't buy the lack of depth argument either. Boise always has solid 2-deeps, which is why they seemingly never have a down year.

Sudden Sam wrote:Boise doesn't play teams that big, fast, and strong each week. That would wear on them.

The risk of loss is higher, no doubt. They still would have been the best team in that division, and odds-on favorite to win it.

Sudden Sam wrote:Still can't believe Georgia was the best team in that mess of a division.

I think Georgia will be solid this year. They return perhaps the best QB in the SEC and a pretty nasty defense. Then again, they've been "one year away" for like 15 straight years, so who knows.

Now, though...how do you think the Broncos would have performed against either the Alabama or LSU defense?

In a pick'em I would've thrown my money on Bama and LSU, but I think Boise coulda hung either of them, and I wouldn't have been shocked to see a Bronco victory. Petersen is one hell of a big game coach. THAT guy is my biggest worry come August 31st.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
I think Georgia will be solid this year. They return perhaps the best QB in the SEC and a pretty nasty defense. Then again, they've been "one year away" for like 15 straight years, so who knows.

a good chunk of that nasty defense is suspended early in the season.

Goober McTuber wrote:This [redundant]douchebag and former USC football player[/redundant] is picking West Virginia to win the Big 12 this year:

If this wasn't WVU's first year in the conference, I'd say that's not so crazy. Underrated team. They return like 16 starters, 9 of them on a pretty potent offense that hung 70 on Clemson. Should fit right in with a league that posts basketball scores on the ticker. And they return Geno Smith, who's a lot like Braxton Miller, except good.

Bizzarofelice wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
I think Georgia will be solid this year. They return perhaps the best QB in the SEC and a pretty nasty defense. Then again, they've been "one year away" for like 15 straight years, so who knows.

a good chunk of that nasty defense is suspended early in the season.

I didn't realize you guys got them so early, and at home even. Should be a good game.

Sudden Sam wrote:Thought you Tiger fans would enjoy this guy's SEC predictions.

http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/art ... -Moon-says

Missouri (5-7, 1-7): Welcome to the SEC, boys. After listening to all the SEC coaches insist that Mizzou will be very competitive in the league, I searched the schedule hard for wins. I found one: Kentucky.

Talk amongst yourselves.

Laughable. Mizzou will be runner's up in their SEC division their first year in. With a finish like that in the "meatgrinder", you will have to start puffin Misery pickle all next summer, advising us how they were a perfect fit and had similar shit calls in the 12 to what Nebraska endured, otherwise they would have been XII champs ten years running.

Just calling my shot SECBSH

Sudden Sam wrote:Boise doesn't play teams that big, fast, and strong each week. That would wear on them.

Really, I'm tired of this discussion.

How about I just say that Boise could go 12-0 every year in the SEC or B1G or any other power conference...and we're done.

No, because that's just a cop-out. Instead, how about you stop bandwagoning the SEC against all reason, and man up and admit that yes, Boise St probably would've won the SEC East last year.

No condescension, no sarcasm...just an honest admission of that which so sorely pains you.

Sudden Sam wrote:how do you think the Broncos would have performed against either the Alabama or LSU defense?

Better than either the Bama or LSU offenses did. They sure as fuck would've done better than LSU's sorry ass excuse for an offense.

The LSU offense didn't average 50 against other teams. A good chunk of their points came from special teams and their defense, along with a ton of really short fields provided by their defense.

And now you're backpedaling to say Boise St would have finished second or, more likely, third in the SEC East last year? Which two teams would have finished ahead of them? You do recall that they shithammered Georgia head-to-head in Atlanta, right?

Teams from the SEC East usually don't play both LSU and Bama. Often times, as was the case with Georgia last year and again this season, they play neither.

So, Boise St likely suffers either one or no losses against LSU or Bama. They already smoked Georgia, giving them a full one-game lead in any divisional tiebreaker situation. That leaves S. Carolina and maybe Arkansas as the only two other teams in the entire SEC who may have beaten them, and if any of those airplanes-adverse squads had to pack up and fly to Boise, forget about it. Chalk those up as wins for the Broncos.

Kinda like all those years when the Atlanta Braves and Cincinnati Reds were in the NL West.

Hmmm...the Los Angeles Dodgers, the San Diego Padres, the San Francisco Giants...yep, I'm definitely tracking with this...and the...Atlanta Braves?

That one always baffled me.

And now we have San Diego St and Boise St playing in the Big East with teams like Connecticut, Rutgers and South Florida.

Hoooookay!

Sudden Sam wrote:Depending on who they played from the West (3 games), they'd have lost 2 or 3 games easily.

Consider they might have played Alabama, LSU, and Arkansas from the other division. 2 losses there minimum. South Carolina could be another loss.

I think they'd have been competitive, but not a power.

But, yes, the East sucked last year.

I think people are just trying to understand where you're coming from.

A) Georgia wins the East.
B) Boise handles Georgia with ease in their own backyard.
C) Boise would suffer multiple losses playing in the East.

Not sure how this is sound critical thinking in your world.

For the sake of discussion, let's give them Georgia's schedule. Since Georgia won the East, they set the bar for what needed to be done. So the schedule would've looked like this:

vs South Carolina
@ Ole Miss
vs Miss State
@ Tennessee
@ Vandy
Florida
Auburn
Kentucky

Clearly, BSU's toughest task would've come right out the gate vs South Carolina. They would have had 'em at home, so you've got to like their chances, but certainly a lose-able game. But win that game? Smooth sailing from there -- seven consecutive games against bad-to-mediocre teams. Not a single one in that bunch finished the season ranked in the Top 25. I just don't get where you see a host of losses. Would that schedule be tougher than a WAC schedule? Yes. Would BSU still have had a great chance to win the East? Yes.

I have been following the Tigers for 35 years, my first game at CoMo,i had just turned 5 years old. I've seen MU get blown out more times than i can count. And i still kept going. 70 point beat downs to OU, Nebraska, hurrigangstas, all in CoMo. Hell, there were games where the fans chanted Harpos, left at half, and about 100(so it seemed) of us were left to watch the 3rd and 4th quarters(not counting visiting fans). Just when it looks like MU is finally over the hump or ready to finally win that big game, we MU fans get kicked right in the ball sack. 5th down, kicked ball,etc.

As far as Wags, they had the 2nd oldest rivalry in CFB, in Wags hometown, and he couldn't get his ass off the couch to support it. He's a marginal fan, who has very little knowledge of the program, other than what he reads in the KC star. Watching him puff out his chest over the team has always made me laugh. He's the ultimate bandwagon fan, and he pretty much proves it, every time he posts on here about the football team. I actually wonder if he even knows where CoMo actually is.

I plan on attending many road games in the next years. Tenn, this year, Georgia, Kentucky,and Vandy, next year. Going to the SEC is a goldmine of roadies. Nothing was worse than looking at road games and seeing: @ Norman,@Waco,@Manhatten,@Ames,@Lubbock,@Stillwater,@Lowrents. Thankfully Austin and Colorado were on the schedules. And while College Station is no paradise, Kyle Field was a destination to watch games. At least for visiting fans, they could stay in St.Louis and catch a Baseball game or 2, and then take the drive to game and head back to hotel or home.

MU wins between 6-9 games, it all comes down to James Franklin at QB.

Congrats on your most cogent, well written post ever adel and let's hope you're off the meth for good now.

Sudden Sam wrote:With that schedule (Auburn, Ole Miss and MSU from the West), BSU would have been sitting pretty. I would agree with that.

Seriously, how does a team manage to play seven straight unranked teams in the mighty SEC? How does that happen?

However, the potential for a loss or 2 or 3 is much higher with that schedule than with the shit teams they played last year. Mediocre SEC teams, yes. Bigger, stronger, faster players than BSU faced regularly makes a bigdifference. I don't understand why no one seems to comprehend that. Week after week, that wears on you.

SEC schedules are harder than WAC schedules. Absolutely. No struggles in comprehension there. Just not sure how you're using this realization to definitively conclude that Boise couldn't win a division full of dog shit teams.

As to your second predictable point, Boise State always has tremendous depth. I don't know how Petersen does it, but he does it. Boise isn't New Mexico State or Troy. They are the outlier. Last year's team was loaded. There is a reason they lost pretty much all of their starters, and like six guys to the NFL draft, and still cracked the 2012 preseason top 25. So I just don't buy this mythical argument that they'd win a couple of games and then spend the rest of their time in the hospital because the physical demands of playing Vanderbilt and Kentucky would be too great.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: Boise State always has tremendous depth. I don't know how Petersen does it, but he does it.

aren't they under investigation for how they do it?

Another reason they'd fit in with the SEC.