T1B

Gah!!

Doesn't come any easier than that, man. Dude's gonna be reliving that choke for the rest of his "We coulda beat Auburn!" life...

It looks like a running QB can give Auburn fits.

Newton hurt Auburn with his legs, sure, but he really hurt him with his arm. In the second half (well, okay, the fourth quarter, since he never got to touch the freaking thing in the third quarter) he really only made one bad pass. Other than that one throw where he skipped it into the feet of his intended receiver he was dead on with just about every other throw.

He looked very good. If Jared Cook simply holds on to that absolute easter egg basket that Newton gently placed in his arms, man....

S. Carolina ties the score and there's a very good chance they go to O.T. Dude catches that ball and Auburn's looking at the distinct possibility of seeing their BCS title game hopes already gone up in smoke against an unranked team in Week 5.

Their season was hanging by a thread there. That was an incredible stroke of luck they received, Cook choking on that easy nugget.

Auburn's D simply looked susceptible to a decent passing game, as much as anything. The running of Newton helped in some third down jams, definitely, but more than anything S. Carolina's receivers were finding plenty of wide open spaces in which to operate and Newton had plenty of time to find 'em and he really wasn't missing...

looked about as easy as the one Davis missed vs Zona

CicerownRoyal: It's going to seem like I'M calling you out too, and I am because you're the biggest piece of flung monkey poo I've ever seen post on these boards.

the_ouskull

Shut the fuck up you asshat. I posted something quick before I hit the hay. All I was saying was that sideline-to-sideline, their defense isnt that good. There are a lot of defenses that could have shut him down last night. If Blake Mitchell wasnt held out, I think Auburn wins by 14+, b/c he couldnt have escaped on 3rd Down, like Newton was able to.



BtH,

I understand what you are saying.

Multiple-tool guys are dangerous.

SissyCrown is at least a double BoardBitch threat.

Anyways, I'm not afeared of him.

Believe the Heupel wrote:Every year people sit around on OU message boards and sagely agree that OU's defense can't contain a running QB and bring up Reggie McNeal in 2002, or Josh Fields in 2001, or whatever.

How about Dennis Dixon in 2006?

Who says Auburn's defense is dominant? South Carolina has had a weak offense all year and they did pretty much whatever they wanted to in the 4th quarter. If they're hanging their hat on holding a horrible offensive team, LSU, to 3 pts...that's just weak.

Auburn, another overrated SEC one-dimensional team.

comes down to playing a game on the road... theres a reason why Auburn only plays 4 road games a year

SoCalTrjn wrote:comes down to playing a game on the road... theres a reason why Auburn only plays 4 road games a year

...and there's a reason SoCal gets fat in a pussy conference.


Anyways, don't read too much into that game. Auburn was playing a three man rush all night, missing their starting CB, overcomitting on Rice as a result and a freshman safety got left alone with a fast wideout. They were giving Newton 8 yards of pad every down trying to protect that mismatch and it backfired. If you watched the LSU game (PS...that "bad offense" bitchslapped a team mighty USC was nursing a 3-0 lead on at the half) you'd see Auburn wasn't playing their defense last night. Injuries, an unknown quantity under center for SC and Spurrier being unusually methodical...it was ugly, but it was a win. Florida will be a better measure of Auburn.

Should be interesting to see how the rest of the tops perform this weekend.

Cicero wrote:I posted something quick before I hit the hay.

This is a bit interesting, Crown. Did you feel that the rest of the board would be left incomplete if you did not allow that trapped, fetid shit-bubble of an idea to travel from your overused colon to your underused cranium? Was that one-line gumpish post really important enough to delay Crown tucking you in for the night? Do you suck your thumb when he is out of town? Do you think before you hit submit?

Buc returns!! LOL!!

"Pussy conference".



Yeah, and the SEC is looking really intimidating themselves this year, or these past couple years...

Auburn nearly shit the bed last night against a mediocre at best unranked team playing with its backup QB. Auburn got torched last night. Were it not for one gawdawfully lucky drop by a wide open freshman receiver Auburn's upcoming game against Florida might not've even mattered in the big picture...

Damn, Buc, as good of a poster as you are and always have been would it kill you to just once admit that the SEC ain't always all that and that hell yeah your conference really ought to come out of the dark ages and stop with the wildly unbalanced home-away schedules and ridiculous OOC games...

Would it really kill you to just admit this shit and move on, rather than always going straight to your "The Pac 10 is a one team conference, and even that one team only gets by because of their weak conference!" nonsense?

It's pretty simple, Buc. USC is better than anybody in the SEC. They have been, for a few years now. They have been, historically. They usually have more talent. They usually have better coaching. They play...road games. They win road games, in the SEC. They don't hide from anybody and they beat just about anybody you put in front of them.

They also don't play ploddingly tentative 7-3 snoozefests that are laughably paraded around as "great defense".

Just once, Buc, just once it'd be really cool to see you just man up and admit that the SEC is one of the better conferences but they're still just another conference. Not all their teams are great just because the laundry they wear says they're supposed to be, at least according to our long duped media.

Let's really look at this shit...

The Soft Underbelly Of The SEC

-Ole Miss: Always utter dogshit

-MSU: Always utter dogshit

-Vandy: Always utter dogshit

-Kentucky: Always utter dogshit

-Arkansas: Used to be decent a lifetime ago under Frank Broyles, in the SWC. Occasionally still somewhat tough in the SEC, somehow...utter dogshit against everyone else. Bascially, utter dogshit as an SEC team.

-S. Carolina: George Rogers and...what? Nothing, that's what. They've never registered a pulse and they still don't.

So, fully half the conference is utterly horrible and nothing but pure canon fodder. Six separate Washington Generals. Always horrible, always will be horrible...never gonna have a shot.

Half!!

Moving on, we have...

The Consistently Overrated As Hell Brigade

-Alabama: Living off Bear's laurels. Bama hasn't been truly good and truly scary since, fuck, how long's it been now?? They've sure been very average to downright awful though plenty of times over the past couple of decades.

-Florida: Had a nice run under Spurrier....ten fucking years ago. They weren't shit before then and they've been better than average since then but that's it. Better than average, but nothing even remotely special.

-Tennessee: Florida, Minus Any Blue In Their Unis. Nice run a long time ago. Useless before that run, overrated as hell during the majority of that run and a national non factor ever since that run ended a long time ago. Lotsa pageantry and not a lot of significant wins...other than the occasional SEC win.

-Georgia: Okay, Herschel Walker was cool way back when. Prehistoric looking 6-3 games though, they ain't cool. Never leaving the immediate vicinity of your home region to play a game...ever?? Also not cool. They win the SEC sometimes, which is their only true calling card; a recurring theme in this here shindig.

-LSU: Nice run at the end there under Saban. Never a national player before the recent Saban run. Their total Shelf Life 0' National Significance has been less than ten years. Not exactly a Michigan/Texas/OU/Nebraska/ND/USC type of consistently top level program. Always a fast defense though, of late. Always a Jack In The Box vanilla milkshake of an offense, too. They beat a hemorrhoid ridden OU squad in '03. There it is, their lone Huge Win in any of our lifetimes. In...'03. Nothing at all before, nothing too major since.

-Auburn: LSU, plus a shitty kicker and a boatload of bad ref's calls that went their way. Long known as a choke artist of a team under Tubberville, they finally got that monkey off their back in '04, a season in which they beat nothing but these overrated SEC teams and then Va Tech in their bowl game. Very good team for the last few years now, but they've never been a program which consistently contends for a national title.

So, that's it. Auburn and LSU of late have been very good, though they've primarily built their reps and their rankings solely by beating...you guessed it...each other...and a bunch of wildly overrated SEC teams.

Other than those two teams the SEC really only has Tennessee and Georgia, both of whom are little more than short term regional wonders. In fact, take away long suffering Bama and the SEC only boasts short term regional wonders. Oh, and a whole lotta utterly horrible programs.

So, yeah, the SEC is a good conference. They have their ups and downs and one might even correctly argue that their ups and downs eventually weigh out such that overall, more often than not, they're the best conference. I'd have no problem agreeing with this, in fact.

Thing is, they aren't better than the other confernece by anywhere near enough of a margin to justify their embarrassing scheduling. In any given year the Big 10 might be better, or even some other conference. So, no, the SEC is not to be given a free pass for their scheduling in general and their unwillingness to play road games in particular.

It's very pussy of them, period.








Good to see you back though, Buc. It just doesn't truly feel like football season until you weigh in with the Auburn/SEC/Pac 10 Sucks shtick...

Yep. Tennesse was great for awhile there, during the period when USC was really down. USC was much better than Tennessee both before and after that one short era.

Besides, this isn't about USC. It's about the SEC and Buc's constant argument that the SEC doesn't need to schedule OOC because their conference is just so freaking amazing.

No, it's really not all that amazing, at least not by such a margin over the other conferences that conference play is all the SEC needs to schedule.

It's not about scheduling OOC, Van. I, like most of college football fans, would love to see the trend toward stronger OOC push forward in the SEC. I'm just countering the age old PAC argument that their playing Notre Dame, Hawaii and the ocassional Arkansas somehow constitutes them having a "tough schedule" when it is already top loaded with a conference schedule more than half full of at best .500 ball. Auburn consistently plays more top 25 competition than SC. Auburn consistently plays more top 10 competition than SC. In the SEC you have four different teams who have won national championships in the last 15 years. You have generally four or five teams consistently at the top of college football rankings in all defensive categories. It's a physical conference and we have injuries and wear and tear USC will never obtain going through the Arizonas, Stanfords, Washingtons, and Oregon States of the world. You can't compare the SEC and PAC. Is the SEC overrated? Probably. Is it still the top to bottom the strongest conference in college football? Probably. The rankings usually tell that tale at the end of the season. So far this year, the PAC and SEC have lined it up four times against each other. Their 3-1 in those matchups, the lone loss coming against USC who no one in the SEC denies is a fantastic team loaded with talent. However, to deny that playing every week against the most physical and likely strongest overall confence in the nation doesn't affect your schedule more than a couple of tough OOC games is just an opinion you SC fans are going to have to enjoy telling to the air, because I'm never going to see it as a legitimate argument.

Good to see you too, Van. G'luck against 'zou. I like that bunch.

Rack Buc. Solid post.

Buc, it's the age old argument that we'll never settle.

My contention is that the SEC is overrated by the media, nearly every year. All your rankings arguments are where we disagree. Because of their inflated reps the SEC gets preseason rankings, mid season rankings and end of season rankings that are always skewed in their favor. They obtain and then maintain these rankings by default, simply by beating each other, and nobody else. They can't fall. If one team loses, it's to another SEC team.

They can't fall. They're given an often undeserved lofty perch and the media just won't budge, ever and anon.

I don't buy it.

Because they'll never schedule fairly or competitively we'll never know for sure. Bare minimum, they need to drop the 8 home games vs 4 away games nonsense. That's not asking too much.

He didn't say the SEC wasn't overrated.

In fact he even mentioned they probably are.

His point was simply that the conference is, top to bottom, better than the Pac 10.

And it is...by just about everybody's measure.

I think Van's peestream just edged out Buc's. Must be the stones.
.
.
.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:He didn't say the SEC wasn't overrated.

In fact he even mentioned they probably are.

His point was simply that the conference is, top to bottom, better than the Pac 10.

And it is...by just about everybody's measure.

Including mine. I already granted that.

His point is that their rankings are so high that their conference schedule is enough. I say no, it's not. Their rankings are inflated beyond all reality. The SEC isn't so much better than the other conferences that they should be able to get away with playing unbalanced schedules, including a steady diet of ridiculous schedule padding OOC home games.

socal wrote:I think Van's peestream just edged out Buc's. Must be the stones.
.
.
.

One day...one day....

You need to experience a kidney stones attack. Imagine being UCLA's D coodinator. It's kinda like that.

Then let's hear your explanation of why the SEC is better than the Pac 10.

Mgo, the Pac 10 is better balanced than the SEC, top to bottom. There's more consistent change over within the conference.

The SEC has more combined strength at the top of the conference. Once you get past the very best from each conference their upper tier teams are usually a bit better than the Pac 10's.

Their lower half is every bit as horrible as anybody else's and in the case of the SEC we're talking about six teams that never compete on equal footing...at all.

Year in, year out though, the SEC is the best, but not by a wide margin. They certainly aren't so much better than the Big 10, the old ACC or Big East, the Big 12 or the Pac 10 that they should get away with scheduling an OOC diet consisting of nothing but the Buffalos and La Monroes of the world.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:His point was simply that the conference is, top to bottom, better than the Pac 10.

And it is...by just about everybody's measure.

Van wrote:Including mine. I already granted that.

then...

Van wrote:Mgo, the Pac 10 is better balanced than the SEC, top to bottom

You've got some explaining/backpedaling to do.

The SEC arguement becomes the tail wagging the dog, are SEC teams great cause they all have good records or are there good records a result of collectively playing soft schedules?
Its obvious that SEC teams are far too cowardly to ever leave the south and play anybody, when they have they get spanked, so they will continue to beat on their chests and point to all these ganmes won on SEC turf.
Let's see Auburn play at Washington State in late November when Washington state would benefit from the same advantages that Auburn had at Jordan Hare in early September
Let's see Georgia play ANYWHERE out side of the south.... they havent done so since 1965
How many SEC teams have 8 home games this year? How many teams from any other conference have 8 home games?
When a team leaves their stadium or their state, the chance of them losing increases greatly, vs a quality program it increases ten fold, all the proof of that you need is answering what year Auburn last won an OOC game on the road.
SEC teams are very good, I wont deny that, but I will not respect them just beacuase they can beat eachother people at home

Maybe the Pac 10 teams should stop leaving their states to play against the SEC, because after a bit of research, it appears the SEC absolutely OWNS the Pac10 in all-time head-to-head play.

Let me know if you want to see the damage.

Mgo, I explained the difference between being better balanced vs just plain better overall.

The Pac 10 has better balance from top to bottom but the SEC has better upper tier teams. They have more good teams. Also, c'mon, they have 20% more teams, period.

In any case, you're still attempting to turn this into a Pac 10 vs SEC debate. Nobody's arguing (well, at least I'm not) that the Pac 10 is better than the SEC, or even its overall equal.

Try to get back on point, if possible.

Also, c'mon, they have 20% more teams, period.

Which is an argument that can go both ways.

You could say the SEC has better teams because they have more teams, just as easily as you could say they have more doormat teams, because again, they have more teams.

At least you agree the Pac10 isn't better overall. But why you'd still want to entertain a debate which has you essentially saying "Yeah, I know we're not better" is beyond me.

Talk about poorly choosing your battles.

The SEC has won the majority of games vs the Pac 10 at SEC stadiums, the same goes for the Pac playing at SEC stadiums though.
So do you attribute the SEC's lead in head to head matchups to the fact that theyre better, or just not willing to play Pac 10 teams in Pac 10 stadiums?
Im not arguing that either conference is better than the other, just that one conference has the collective balls to take the high risk of a loss on the road while the other conference wants to stay at home and beat their chests while the rest of the nation knows they're a bunch of cunts.
Its kind of like the Civil War 150 years later... the South can talk a mean game and win a few battles at home, but away from home, they're not shit

Mgo, I didn't choose this battle, you did. I was never arguing the superiority of the Pac 10.

My only point is that the SEC isn't so far above the other conferences that they only need to schedule conference games. There are years where they aren't the best conference and even in those years they still have way out of kilter schedules loaded with way too many home games and way too many cupcakes.

SoCalTrjn wrote: Its obvious that SEC teams are far too cowardly to ever leave the south and play anybody, when they have they get spanked, so they will continue to beat on their chests and point to all these ganmes won on SEC turf.

All time the SEC has a winning record against every conference save the Big 10. Against the PAC, it's rather pronounced. This year, the SEC has beaten the PAC in three out of four contests. Being a fan of a team that was thumping its chest two years running for beating mid-tier at best Arkansas, let me ask you this question. How do you honestly think USC would fair against this stetch of games, rankings aside. Alabama-LSU-Auburn-UGA. Not one of those after a string of Stanfords and Arizonas. All of them. In a row. No breathers. These are some of the most physical teams in college football. They put emphasis on hitting, running, blocking and defense rather than timing patterns and route formations. Your injuries would increase. Your confidence would be affected. Your rhythm would be affected. You'd be consistently playing in hostile environments of near 100k screaming, crazy fans. You'd be making annual trips to places called swamp and death valley. You'd be recruiting in probably the most hotly contested region of the country for college football athletes there is. You'd be playing against a conference as top loaded with prior MNC winners as any. USC has a terrific program, but if you're going to act like a stetch run of Arizona, WSU, Washington, ASU, OSU and Stanford can compare to anything any SEC program has to face to get through a season you are a top class fruit loop. Is the SEC overrated? Today, probably. There are a number of programs such as Alabama, UT and Florida who are going to get much more media attention by default for yesterday...much like Notre Dame, or Michigan, or yes...USC. Several teams in the SEC have been gutted by penalties and scholarship restrictions in recent years and are still fighting back. However, why would teams in the southeast which is probably the most underrepresented national media region in the nation be getting bias from media outlets heavily centered in the northeast and west coast? Where is that bias when it counts? (*cough*2004*cough*) Do you honestly think the SEC is the only conference trying to maximize home take profits? Do you honestly think the SEC is the only conference doing one offs with the only teams that will take them these days? I don't like it. I wish Auburn would play Notre Dame. We tried. They turned us down. I wish Auburn would play Michigan. We tried. They turned us down. I wish Auburn would play home and homes with the greats of every conference. I LOVE college football. It's a money biz. Schools want bigger facilities to draw bigger name recruits. They want bigger profits to make up for increasing state budget cut-offs to athletics. All teams are doing this. SC does what they have to do to make up for an overall mediocre conference schedule. That's a fact. They do it right. They have all respect from me. I enjoyed the hell out of having a home and home with them. I wish we could do it again, but this argument that SEC teams are somehow less because they aren't playing Hawaii on the road is fairly ludicrous. From conference to conference, as the larger teams go, it all averages out. Van's right. It's a tired argument from both sides and the only real answer is who gets ranked. Until we get a playoff, that's just the way it is. Sucks, but what can we do about it? The SEC certainly didn't write the NCAA rules.

SoCalTrjn wrote:So do you attribute the SEC's lead in head to head matchups to the fact that theyre better, or just not willing to play Pac 10 teams in Pac 10 stadiums?

Well, considering the SEC has about a 30 game lead on the PAC 10, I'd comfortably lean towards "better."

And yes, a lot of these wins are in Pac 10 Stadiums, too.

'Course, we don't know "for sure," and in such cases, those who have SCOREBOARD generally get the benefit of the doubt.

Spinach Genie wrote: I wish Auburn would play Michigan. We tried. They turned us down. .

Link?

how many of the SEC v pac 10 games this year were in Pac 10 stadiums?.
Look up the location of those games on CFB Data Warehouse, I'll wait.
The 30 game lead is also due to there being more than 30 more games played in SEC stadiums than in Pac !0 stadiums.
Again, Im not arguing one conference is better than the other, just that one has the balls to take their game on the road and one only has cunt between their legs

Bottom line, I'll always enjoy CF...including debating with Buc.

One of the best things about the very best time of the year.

Just wish Mgo had a real horse in the race 'cause that'd be a very cool tradition too...

SoCalTrjn wrote:how many of the SEC v pac 10 games this year were in Pac 10 stadiums?.
Look up the location of those games on CFB Data Warehouse, I'll wait.
The 30 game lead is also due to there being more than 30 more games played in SEC stadiums than in Pac !0 stadiums.
Again, Im not arguing one conference is better than the other, just that one has the balls to take their game on the road and one only has cunt between their legs

You have no argument. You think you do. The PAC has to go on the road. No one would take them seriously otherwise. You, however, do seem to have a cunt between your legs which is begging for midol. Van is worth debating. You are boring me. Have fun.

WolverineSteve wrote:

Spinach Genie wrote: I wish Auburn would play Michigan. We tried. They turned us down. .

Link?

Came out of our AD office. Differences on the finances and dates. Don't have a link...it was last year when I read it.

1997
the last time Allbarn won an OOC game away from Jordan Hare was 1997 when they beat Virginia... no wonder they stay home

Va Tech was in 04, genius.

Nice game against WSU yesterday, btw.

WolverineSteve wrote:

Spinach Genie wrote: I wish Auburn would play Michigan. We tried. They turned us down. .

Link?

PS...here's a general article about it. Doesn't get into much detail,though.
http://www.al.com/auburnfootball/birmin ... thispage=1