T1B

Oregon State blew out Notre dame in the Fiesta Bowl
and Oregon blew out big 12 champ Colorado also in the Fiesta Bowl

And Arizona State lost to Arizona. Cal got ass raped by TT. UCLA got beat by Wyoming. Where is the evidence that the Pac-10 is so good? I just don't see it. Oregon lost to Indiana last year. Oregon State got plungered by Boise St. UCLA got whipped by Okie St. Top to bottom team by team the SEC is probably the best conference, then the Big-10, and then the pac 10 and big 12 can fight it out for third place.

why can Tennessee say that they lost to Notre Dame because their QB was injured yet ASU cant use that excuse in their game vs Zona and UCLA cant use it in their bowl loss to Wyoming? And Kal having lost their top 4 WR's before the holiday Bowl im sure factored in to their loss to Texas Tech


Over the last 5 years the Pac 10 has had 4 different teams win BCS bowls, take USC's last 3 seasons out and the Pac 10 is still 3-1 in BCS bowls during that time. a .750 winning percentage in BCS bowls speaks for its self, put USC back in there and its even better

the biggest problem I have with the "Analysis" is the time period and how they define dominance...dominance is defined according to this article as being

1 game better in BCS bowls than the SEC 86% Win Pct for the PAC vs 83% for the SEC...so that 3 points shows dominance or how about...the WHOPPING TWO FUCKING GAMES ahead of .500 they are in the head to head...yeah that is dominant all right...

last time I checked dominance would be something better than MARGINALLY better than .500...I also like the time period...how nice that the author picked since 2000 to coincide with SC's run...to get a purely OBJECTIVE look why not go back to 98? 95? 90?...oh yeah because that might punch serious holes in this stupid fuckers argument...

can we move onto something better than lame my conference is better than yours smack...?

SC fan be proud...what your team has done over the past couple of years is incredible...

but tOSU fan can be proud, LSU fan can be proud, OU fan can be proud, etc, etc. Each team has won BCS bowls, conference championships, and National Championships...to me the conference argument is so fucking old and beat to death...

paging shazzomatic stat spitter outer....

why can Tennessee say that they lost to Notre Dame because their QB was injured yet ASU cant use that excuse in their game vs Zona and UCLA cant use it in their bowl loss to Wyoming?

Tennessee is a much better team than Arizona. There's no way ASU should have lost that game. Arizona is horrible. There's a big difference and you know it. Wait, are you now making excuses for UCLA....oh my God, the world has stopped spinning. Condom fan defending the Ruins.

And Kal having lost their top 4 WR's before the holiday Bowl im sure factored in to their loss to Texas Tech

Cal still had a running game. Why not give the ball to Arrington and use short passes to control the clock and keep TT off the field. Besides those WR's didn't help give up 55 points.

SoCalTrjn wrote:USC had only won 3 of the 6 BCS bowls that the Pac 10 had won over the last 5 years, take the trojans out of it and the Pac has a 3-1 record in BCS bowls. Those 3 wins are still as many as the Big 12 or Big 10 could muster among all of their teams during that time and more than what the ACC and Big East had combined to win.
How do you guys not see such glaring evidence?

Homerism will often get in the way of facts.....

But keep fighting the noble fight!

^^^^^ like Jimmah...gets it...

can we move on?

No sc, we can't...we need to beat this for another year. I think we've gone over this argument every off season for the past 6 years.

Killian wrote:

JayDuck wrote: But, saying that the head to head record isn't the most important factor is simply self-serving.

Bullshit. Besides Michigan playing Oregon or Washington in '01 and '02, who has the Pac-10 played from the major confrences in the past 4 years? Not including bowl games, I can think of (excluding bowl games):

Washington vs. OSU (L) '03
Washington vs. IU (W) '04
Washington vs. UofM (W) '01
Washington vs. UofM (L) '02
Washington vs. ND (L) '04
Washington St vs. OSU (L) '02
Washington St vs. ND (L) '03
Oregon vs. UofM (W) '03
Oregon vs. IU (L) '04
Cal vs MSU (W) '02
USC vs. ND (L) '01
USC vs. ND (W) '02
USC vs. ND (W) '03
USC vs. ND (W) '04
USC vs. AU (W) '02
USC vs. AU (W) '03
SU vs. ND (W) '01
SU vs. ND (L) '02
SU vs. ND (L) '03
SU vs. ND (L) '04

I do see OSU twice, Michigan 3 times and Auburn twice. I don't see Miami, FSU, UF, OU, Texas, etc. Claiming a winning record against ND, IU, and MSU is fine, but admit you're not consistently beating the best the other confrences have to offer.

Add USC vs. VaTech last year. Oh, it was a (W). :wink:

Actually, the article, calling the Pac-10 conference "The Power Conference" is for effect. The true point the article is trying to make is summed up is in the final sentence.

So the next time you hear a commentator claim that the Pac-10 is "down" or "weak", ask yourself a question. Is the commentator making an objective, factually based statement, or is he simply giving voice to what he wants to be true?

The writer of the article doesn't neccessarily believe the Pac-10 is ta "dominant" conference over the rest of them. He is simply arguing that the numbers don't support claims that the Pac-10 is weak.

Judging by the responses in this thread, he has some of the apologists for other conferences pegged.

USC also had a couple losses to KSU and a couple of wins ve Colrado during that time

SoCalTrjn wrote:the shouldnt you have just quoted the image?
and not the post?

Giggedy giggedy!