T1B

Wow. All three of the SEC schools you slapped on that list are playing D1AA opponents. And of course, no roadies...

Nice.

Oregon's easiest OOC game is the same opponent as Bama's toughest.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:And of course, no roadies...

Nice.

The SEC should be ineligible for BCS Bowls.

Sudden Sam wrote:Va Tech -
09/01 East Carolina
09/08 at LSU
09/15 Ohio
09/22 William and Mary (Note: and Mary...both of 'em)

You will NEVER see me defend VT OOC scheduling. They deserve any and all OOC trash talk that is heaped on them. At least they broke from tradition and actually scheduled one good team this year and the next 2 years (Nebraska). However, after that it returns to the shitpile. They can shove DIAA W&M straight up their asses.

i like South Fla gets the highlight, but at least 5 other bowl teams (possibly 6) on other schedules don't merit the extra bold emphasis.

while i agree SF is a decent team, and the simple act of going to a bowl means what it means.....still, be consistent if you want to "argue a point".

King Crimson wrote:i like South Fla gets the highlight, but at least 5 other bowl teams (possibly 6) on other schedules don't merit the extra bold emphasis.

while i agree SF is a decent team, and the simple act of going to a bowl means what it means.....still, be consistent if you want to "argue a point".

I think the idea is that South Florida is capable of contending for a BCS bowl bid next year. The Fresno States, Houstons and East Carolinas of the college football world won't, unless they manage to shock the world somehow.

Having said that, I note that Wake Forest did qualify for a BCS bid last year, but didn't get put in bold.

stuckinia wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Va Tech -
09/01 East Carolina
09/08 at LSU
09/15 Ohio
09/22 William and Mary (Note: and Mary...both of 'em)

You will NEVER see me defend VT OOC scheduling. They deserve any and all OOC trash talk that is heaped on them. At least they broke from tradition and actually scheduled one good team this year and the next 2 years (Nebraska). However, after that it returns to the shitpile. They can shove DIAA W&M straight up their asses.

I know there's some hard feelings with West Virginia, but why not keep them on their schedule? That was developing into something of a rivalry, and it would beef up the OOC schedule a little.

If not West Virginia, then possibly another Big East school. After all, IIRC part of the outcome of the ACC-Big East lawsuit was that there would be more OOC games played between members of those conferences.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Having said that, I note that Wake Forest did qualify for a BCS bid last year, but didn't get put in bold.

I noticed that too. That would've hurt Sam's point though, so the bolding wasn't necessary.

Sudden Sam wrote:The obvious point of the listing is that no one is busting their ass playing a buncha tough OOC games.

Having two former BCS bowl teams on your schedule is pretty fucking good to me.

What exactly are you expecting? Doesn't seem like your idea of a good OOC schedule is exactly realistic. You can go around the country and cherry pick some pretty bad OOC schedules, but are you honestly arguing, top to bottom, that the SEC doesn't typically have the weakest slate of games? Especially after you factor in the lack of roadies, and all the D1AAs (that I just pointed out from the teams YOU selected)? Hell, I thought you even admitted to this after your "we need to play cupcakes because our conference is too good" rant.

I didnt see USC's OOC schedule on there

2007
Idaho
@ Nebraska
@ Notre Dame

2006
@ Arkansas
Nebraska
Notre Dame

2008
TBA
Ohio State
Notre Dame

Southern Cal sets the standard these days for OOC scheduling, and I commend them for that.

Hell, I don't even ask that the SEC teams schedue like SC. It'd be nice, but that isn't realistic. No, I just ask that they follow something of a protocol that most other schools seem to adhere to, which is to schedule...

- at least one BCS conference team
- at least one road game (and no SECHonks, neutral sites, in your own state no less, don't count as "road games")
- no D1AAS

Christ, SECers, is that really so hard?

Kansas State isn't down.

Now that Snyder's gone, they're simply out and ready to resume those epic battles against KU each season.

I've been quite displeased with PSU's OOC schedule for a number of years now. The AD cries poor, and my teeth just grind.

Florida State plays:

at UF
at Colorado
Bama in Jacksonville

Lot's of valid points in this thread...

but sam not every year does the SEC just totally dominate the power rankings if you will...just two years ago...the 2005 season I believe the SEC finished up the year as the 4th best conference...but to suggest the trend of your conference suggests that you schedule weak OOC games...again the SEC is not the nutz every year...so how do you qualify that statement when the SEC is down? But yet according to SEC honk every other conference is down every year so inherently their schedule is weak...if you looked at the preseason rankings for 2006 the SEC had what 6 teams in? Bama, and a couple others fell out within a couple weeks but that also weighs into how a conference is viewed...

the problem fellas is many of these OOC schedules are done way to far in advance...I mean tOSU has Va Tech and OU already scheduled in 2014-2017...I mean how good are tOSU, Va Tech and Oklahoma going to be then? Who the fuck knows...

I for one would like the NCAA to step in and mandate that you can only schedule out say 4 years in an OOC perspective and every school or at least the top 50 need to play 1 game against each other in a non con type of situation...can it happen who knows...but when tOSU scheduled Washington and they DID have Syracuse on the schedule but they dropped us these games were scheduled many years ago...Washington is a return game from 2003 and this was the year they put it in...

teams can't control their conference mates in terms of how good they are...all you can do is play and beat who is on your schedule...honestly this debate is pointless until we get a playoff and or some standard schedule rules from the NCAA and I don't buy this crap about leaving dates open in two years due to revenue and what not...

the NFL has done it with the flex schedule so don't tell me it can't be done...

honestly I do get sick of hearing SEC fan say our conference is the best because we say so...just my opinion...

in fact the SEC went 1-2 against the Big 10 this year in bowls...that gets lost on a lot of SEC honks...but they revert to...well Wisconsin beat Arkansas by a slim margin and UT had a key turnover which gave PSU that game...at least that's what I hear most...but you ask them about Auburn struggling with Nebraska and they go right to...you mean the Nebraska team that played in the Big 12 title game and gave Texas all they could handle...

something about cake and eating it to???

Sudden Sam wrote:I did mention USC's OOC schedule and pointed out that it was impressive.

Wake Forest is not a school known as a traditional power. One year wonders did not get the bolded treatment.

I agree with your 3 points about SEC OOC schedules, Mgo. Completely. But in glancing at other schools' OOC schedules, I failed to note a big difference in other conferences' trends. I didn't look at every schedule. Just popped some schools' names in Google, so if there's a conference that doesn't schedule lower division teams and generally has BCS conference OOC games, please point it out. I'm sure there are, but I noticed a general lack of good games on most of the teams' OOCs.

As I pointed out, as far as 2007, Bama's OOC is tougher than Ohio State's, Penn State's, Texas' and Oklahoma's. Some pretty strong programs that are taking it mighty easy.

Again, I understand your point: the SEC does tend to schedule some mighty weak OOC games, but so do other conferences.

Yes, the SEC is the ONE conference that suggests that the conference schedule forces that trend.

What you have is a Chicken or the Egg theory.... IS the SEC a conference full of great teams since so many have high rankings or are the SEC schools rankings and W-L records simply a by-product of the conference collectively scheduling shit OOC and everyone having those 3 to 4 "Gimmes" on the schedule?

While SEC fans will point at the accumulative rankings that the teams in that conference end up with, EVERYONE else will point at the fact that the records have been fluffed up by extremely soft OOC opponents and in most years the SEC's poor performance in Bowl Games, (2006/2007 being an exception)

Sudden Sam wrote:Yes, the SEC is the ONE conference that suggests that the conference schedule forces that trend.

Sincerely,

Alabama's 7 gimme games last year

What doesn't compute is how you can have such arrogance about your "greatness" and how the gap between you and everybody else is so huge, yet you readily admit it's too "risky" to play good OOC teams. That just doesn't compute. Which is it? Are you great enough to win or not?

If you admit that the risk of losing is too great, then you're essentially admitting you're on the same playing field as the other conferences. Don't you see that?

Suddenly Jtindall,

Do your own research. Oh, and nice attempt to get some help on this pile-on by linking these threads over at .net. Bitch move.

http://thetrolls.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=18239

why are you going to rely on stats over 20 years when half the roster is under 20 years old.
In college football, anything more than a 6 or 7 year run has little to do with a programs current strength.
since 2000, Bama is 2-2 in bowls missing bowl games in 3 seasons. their wins were vs Iowa State and Texas Tech, in the Independence and Cotton Bowls, their losses were to Minnesota and Oklahoma State in the Music City and Independence Bowls

IndyFrisco wrote:Oh, and nice attempt to get some help on this pile-on by linking these threads over at .net. Bitch move.

I'm a pretty good "fan" of Sam (in as much as you can be a "fan" of someone here, anyway).


But, agreed. Sam, that's pretty bitch-like in nature. And in advance: Making excuses for it won't help.

Eh...I've never had a dislike for Sam. Still don't. I won't pass on an opportunity like this though.

Oh, and Sam, you can have Fran back anytime.

IndyFrisco wrote:Eh...I've never had a dislike for Sam. Still don't.

Certainly not...on the contrary, I rather admire him for it. This board is more entertaining when the Board-Bitch role rotates, rather that staying in its normal haunts of Tampa and KC.

Sudden Sam wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Yes, the SEC is the ONE conference that suggests that the conference schedule forces that trend.

Sincerely,

Alabama's 7 gimme games last year

What doesn't compute is how you can have such arrogance about your "greatness" and how the gap between you and everybody else is so huge, yet you readily admit it's too "risky" to play good OOC teams. That just doesn't compute. Which is it? Are you great enough to win or not?

If you admit that the risk of losing is too great, then you're essentially admitting you're on the same playing field as the other conferences. Don't you see that?

Check bowl results for the last 20 years. I'll take a chance and say the SEC has one of the better records, if not the best.

What the fuck is your deal, man? It's like you have a notepad of generic takes about the SEC, and you're going down the list scratching off the ones you just used.

Listen you tough ol' leather sportin' biker dude, and I'll try to explain it one more time for you. Try to upgrade your readin' and comprehendin' skills from slack jawed dumbfuck to inner city remedial, and the light might start flickering: Since the dominance of the SEC is so universally known, and since you've had more record-breaking success than a frat boy looking to score at a Tampa-based Festivus party, I ask you this: WHY oh WHY then do you claim you "need" to play an easy OOC schedule? If you're so fucking badass, what's the risk? Shouldn't you be able to take anybody on? You know, especially since you own the best record in bowls over the last 20 years based on the zero research you did.

over the last 20 seasons, Alabama has won 8 Bowl games, lost 7 and failed to qualify 5 times. They have played in 3 of what were or are now the BCS bowls over that 20 years

over that same 20 seasons, USC has won 8 Bowl games, lost 7 and failed to qualify 5 times. They have played in 9 of what were or are now the BCS bowls over that 20 years.

did the research for you

UCLA:


BYU

At UTAH

Notre Dame



Mormons & Catholics

Cicero wrote:Florida State plays:

at UF
at Colorado
Bama in Jacksonville

that's no cupcake city. CU will either be awful (Hawkins has a screw loose, his assistants are in over their heads against BCS conference talent/coaches--looked that way last year to me, game decisions were incomprehensible at times) or they might be kind of a dangerous 6-7 win sleeper type team (everything you hear is positive about improvements--schemes, weight room stats, etc). hard to know.

You've ignored my question every single time.

Just stick to your fucking talking points, your deflections, your constant subject changes, and acting like you know what the fuck you're talking about. You've been made an utter fool of in these two threads.

Sudden Sam wrote:This addressed your complaint

No, that's called a "deflection" Sam. You've been dodging my question since page 1. It's like you're in a presidential debate, and when they ask a tough question, the candidate fails to give a direct answer and brings up a whole different point, that, in some way, still makes him look good. That's what you've been doing this entire time.

What do these statements all have in common?

Sudden Sam wrote:This was an invite to watch you guys trip all over yourselves trying to denigrate SEC football

Y'all's intense jealousy of our conference

some SEC schools play weak OOC schedules.


So do most schools in most other conferences.

Is the SEC strong every year? Of course not. This past year is a great example.


We had no dominating team in 2006.

LSU was easily our best team.

Florida looked weak as shit all year

They're all false statements.

i thought all the SEC teams had to play weak OOC schedules.....because of the 300 style Sparta rigors of the conference slate.

did you or did you not post that SS?

a simple yes or no will suffice.

BTW, I went to Vandy so i know the black hole that is SEC sports in yer part of the country. no light escapes. all you got in the papers was a boxscore from Top 25 games.

i've lived in Boston, Nashville, Denver, and Oklahoma and while the Boston media is insular.....nothing touches SEC coverage in SEC "country".

Terry in Crapchester wrote: I know there's some hard feelings with West Virginia, but why not keep them on their schedule? That was developing into something of a rivalry, and it would beef up the OOC schedule a little.

If not West Virginia, then possibly another Big East school. After all, IIRC part of the outcome of the ACC-Big East lawsuit was that there would be more OOC games played between members of those conferences.

I have never heard a compelling reason why the games with WVU were ditched. The most pussified reason I have heard is that the inbred fans were getting too unruly and making the games unsafe; therefore, a cooling off period was necessary. Sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me. I hope the Hokies get those fags back on the schedule and beat them simply to shut up their whiny ass fans and their proclamations of VT being scared.

As far as scheduling Big East teams, they do have Cincinnati and Syracuse for 2009-11. However, at the time these schedules were made, I don’t think there was much to choose from in the Big East as far a quality opponents.