T1B

If I were t.u. fan, would not concern me in the least. Why take a lateral job move to a lesser team/program?

College Football is somewhat different than a bank or an insurance company. Davis has been Mack's guy for years and has followed him three times. Further he hasn't put his name out there to even interview for other head jobs in years. The guy may realize that he is better suited as a coordinator and not for the HC gig. Plus the fact that he grew up, played and coached HS football in Texas might be a factor.

That being said, I am sure there are plenty of guys that would listen if Mack called them looking for a replacement.

No, agreed.

I don't think Davis is the most liked assistant around Austin either, but I could be wrong.

Believe the Heupel wrote:Because you're pissed off that the University has told you that you will not be given the opportunity to interview for the head coach position once Mack leaves, and that they're going to hand the job to someone who's been there for less than a year?

Not saying that he'll take the job or that his reasoning would be the same, but I know that if I were in the same position-being a direct report for a decade, then some new guy gets hired and is immediately told that he's going to be the one promoted if the boss leaves-then I'd be pretty angry.

Davis has been a HC in the past and I'm pretty sure he has no desire to be the HC of any program. He is very comfortable in his position in Austin, no matter how well he coaches or doesn't coach he seems to have a free ride as long as Brown is there. Auburn probably has a much better chance of taking Mac McWhorter than than they do Davis. BTW as much crap as I have given Davis the fact is outside of the Chris Simms years, he has been a hell of a OC.

Davis was a head coach at Tulane? and if I am not mistaken, was a total abortion as a HC. I think he is happy running the offense. With the players we have and Garret Gilbert coming in, I doubt he would go to Auburn. But if he did, there is a guy named Major Applewhite on the staff that could fill his shoes.

Papa Willie wrote:

IndyFrisco wrote:If I were t.u. fan, would not concern me in the least. Why take a lateral job move to a lesser team/program?

Lesser team/program? Other than Auburn not having the luxury of oil money buying themselves into the Top 10 at the beginning of each season, I think your theory is flawed.

Yes, Auburn is a lesser team/program than t.u.

t.u.
831-320-34
National Championships (4) - 1963, 1969, 1970, 2005

Auburn
688-395-47
National Championships (1) - 1957

Records against main rivals:
t.u. vs. OU - 58-40-5
t.u. vs. A&M - 74-36-5
allbarn vs. Bama - 33-39-1

t.u. vs. allbarn - 5-3

Ballsuck on the SEC and their defense all you want. t.u., while I hate them, is not only a better program than allbarn, it is light years ahead of them. Feel free to drop an "Oh yeah? Well A&M sucks" on me. We're 2-0 vs. allbarn, one being the Cotton Bowl where the Crew completely shut down Bo Knows Yards For Loss.

Papa Willie wrote:

IndyFrisco wrote:If I were t.u. fan, would not concern me in the least. Why take a lateral job move to a lesser team/program?

Lesser team/program? Other than Auburn not having the luxury of oil money buying themselves into the Top 10 at the beginning of each season, I think your theory is flawed.

I'm sure it isn't...

Tejass has more tradition, more award winners, more all americans, more conference titles, more national titles and to be blunt about it could buy all those farmers, law enforcement, and vets ten times over with just their oil money.

SunCoastSooner wrote:Tejass has more tradition, more award winners, more all americans, more conference titles, more national titles and to be blunt about it could buy all those farmers, law enforcement, and vets ten times over with just their oil money.

How much does it suck to have to defend t.u.?

Here we are, both rivals of t.u., stating the obvious fact that t.u. and auburn should not even be mentioned in the same breath yet get ready for another steaming pile of shutyomouth.

As an unbiased upper midwesterner, I can agree that Texas is on another level as a program. Texas is one of the few that is in the "elite" status while Auburn is in a tier below.

Spray, in the overall history of college football, you can’t possibly believe that Auburn compares to Texas. Definitely a tier or two below.

IndyFrisco wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote:Tejass has more tradition, more award winners, more all americans, more conference titles, more national titles and to be blunt about it could buy all those farmers, law enforcement, and vets ten times over with just their oil money.

How much does it suck to have to defend t.u.?

Here we are, both rivals of t.u., stating the obvious fact that t.u. and auburn should not even be mentioned in the same breath yet get ready for another steaming pile of shutyomouth.

I had to immediately go take a steaming hot shower with massive amounts of soap afterward. Dirty just doesn't even begin to describe the feeling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Are you sure that dirty feeling wasn't just penis envy

Sudden Sam wrote:Spray,

Gotta go with your protagonists on this one. There are maybe 5-6 schools in the stratosphere that Texas resides in: Notre Dame (in spite of recent troubles), USC (not South Carolina), Oklahoma, Michigan (see ND), Ohio State, and (you ain't gonna like this and the youngsters in here won't believe it) Alabama.

I think Nebraska should be on this list.. brad would be proud!

campinfool wrote:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Are you sure that dirty feeling wasn't just penis envy

I'm sure it isn't. Oklahoma has just a little bit of oil money itself. Maybe you've heard of Phillips 66/Conoco, Kerr-McGee, guys like Clay Bennett (yeah the same one that owns the Thunder), Arrowhead Energy, Cameron Specialty Inc.; as well as two members of the Walton family being alumnus, the Gaylord family, etc.

I'd never be so foolish as to say Oklahoma could go dollar for dollar in an arms race of Cold War proportions with Tejass but as far as athletic departments go both our schools have more money than they could spend at their disposal on an annual basis.

The University of Oklahoma brings a mighty hefty wallet to the table for just a little school on the prairie.

Papa Willie wrote:Probably more so back in the older days, but now AU is in that group as well - more so than even 'Bama has been since Bear died (with the exception of '92). Btw - AU is 3-2 against Texas in modern times.

Again - until this year, the Big 12 has definitely been notches below the SEC. Just sayin'.....

In modern fucking times, t.u. has won a national championship. Auburn hasn't. And don't fucking give me the 13-0 season with no invite to the BCS national championship. The SEC has always been regarded as one of the, if not the best, conference in CFB. Back in 2004, SOS was a big part of the BCS formula. Had Auburn not scheduled La Tech, U La Monroe, and The Citadel, maybe they would have been considered.

And quit trying to make this into an SEC/Big XII thread. You called me out when I said t.u. was a better team/program. Admit it or shut the fuck up. Others have spoken here too, none of which I solicited. It's just fact. Auburn < t.u * infinity.

Texas has still been a substantially better program over the course of history. That’s the point.

Big time program and elite program are two entirely different things.

Papa Willie wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote:

campinfool wrote:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Are you sure that dirty feeling wasn't just penis envy

I'm sure it isn't. Oklahoma has just a little bit of oil money itself. Maybe you've heard of Phillips 66/Conoco, Kerr-McGee, guys like Clay Bennett (yeah the same one that owns the Thunder), Arrowhead Energy, Cameron Specialty Inc.; as well as two members of the Walton family being alumnus, the Gaylord family, etc.

I'd never be so foolish as to say Oklahoma could go dollar for dollar in an arms race of Cold War proportions with Tejass but as far as athletic departments go both our schools have more money than they could spend at their disposal on an annual basis.

The University of Oklahoma brings a mighty hefty wallet to the table for just a little school on the prairie.

True - and they pay their players well. Just doesn't always work out for them.

I know an Allbarn fan who is the 5th most penalized institution in NCAA history isn't tossing stones from his glass house?

Papa Willie wrote:We've gone undefeated twice since '94 in the SEC. Enough said.

I'm in no way saying Texas isn't a great program. I'm just saying that Auburn has been in the thick of things in recent memory, and it IS a big-time football program now - whether you want to admit it or not.

Gone undefeated twice in your conference in 14 years? Enough said? Say it isn't so! t.u. went undefeated in their conference twice since 1994 as well. So fucking what? Are you saying the champ of the self-proclaimed meatgrinder is the national champ? HAHA!

Congrats to allbarn for being "in the thick of things" in recent memory. Congrats also for being a big time program. A&M is a big time program too...even though the team sucks. Still does not mean we can hold a candle to the accomplishments of t.u. I'm one of few A&M fans who knows their place when it comes to t.u. [attempt to analogize so you understand]Just because I have to eat shit don't mean I like it...but at least I know it's shit.[/attempt to analogize so you understand]

I think someone else mentioned it earlier. Why would one take a lateral move to another school? Anserw: Because it is a better team/program. Enough said.

By the way, call allbarn a big time program all you want. Elite programs, in a bad year, still bowl in their conference's top 2-3 bowls. Elite, allbarn is not. Anything suggesting otherwise is "flawed".

Now, if you make me take t.u.'s side one more fucking time, I will see this as a troll job and nothing more. Because seriously, you saying allbarn and t.u. are on the same level is the same as me saying UAB and allbarn are on the same level. At least I know the latter isn't true. In reality, allbarn is as close to t.u. as UAB is to allbarn.

IndyFrisco wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:We've gone undefeated twice since '94 in the SEC. Enough said.

I'm in no way saying Texas isn't a great program. I'm just saying that Auburn has been in the thick of things in recent memory, and it IS a big-time football program now - whether you want to admit it or not.

Gone undefeated twice in your conference in 14 years? Enough said? Say it isn't so! t.u. went undefeated in their conference twice since 1994 as well. So fucking what? Are you saying the champ of the self-proclaimed meatgrinder is the national champ? HAHA!

Congrats to allbarn for being "in the thick of things" in recent memory. Congrats also for being a big time program. A&M is a big time program too...even though the team sucks. Still does not mean we can hold a candle to the accomplishments of t.u. I'm one of few A&M fans who knows their place when it comes to t.u. [attempt to analogize so you understand]Just because I have to eat shit don't mean I like it...but at least I know it's shit.[/attempt to analogize so you understand]

I think someone else mentioned it earlier. Why would one take a lateral move to another school? Anserw: Because it is a better team/program. Enough said.

By the way, call allbarn a big time program all you want. Elite programs, in a bad year, still bowl in their conference's top 2-3 bowls. Elite, allbarn is not. Anything suggesting otherwise is "flawed".

Now, if you make me take t.u.'s side one more fucking time, I will see this as a troll job and nothing more. Because seriously, you saying allbarn and t.u. are on the same level is the same as me saying UAB and allbarn are on the same level. At least I know the latter isn't true. In reality, allbarn is as close to t.u. as UAB is to allbarn.

i almost went the 2 for 14 route earlier, props to Indy. that's a whopping 14%. i know 14% of anything is whipping ass, no matter what it is.

Elite programs also win under more than one coach as a general trait. and i mean the national championship not the premise that winning 6 games in the SEC puts you in a NFL wildcard game. and are more than the statistical category: "in the thick of things". Elite programs are more the things than the thick.

Auburn is a program to be proud of for its fans....but, it's not Texas. Texas sucks the chrome off a trailer hitch....but with the 05 NC and Mack's 4-5 top 10 finishes....Auburn isn't there. and they don't have a Darrel Royal, IMO. minus the 05 NC maybe you could try it...

Then maybe Auburn should get out of the SEC, since they aren't even elite in their conference let alone the entire NCAA.

Papa Willie wrote:

WolverineSteve wrote:Then maybe Auburn should get out of the SEC, since they aren't even elite in their conference let alone the entire NCAA.

Guess you haven't bothered to see how Auburn has played the rest of the SEC. Keep searching....

they went undefeated 2 of 14 selective years.

case closed.

Papa Willie wrote:

Again - it's much easier to end up in the Top 10 when you play in a lesser conference.

so, you admit Auburn doesn't end up in the Top 10 as much as Texas in "modern times"?

Papa Willie wrote:I don't have to tell you how fucking awful the Suck 12 is.

You hired your head coach from what school, again?

Congrats on the textbook KYOA you have just laid on yourself. You aren't a "legend" for nothing.

Papa Willie wrote:.

I just get tickled when some pussy comes in and feels that his team is an "elite" team based on his love for the team.

if you are talking me/Oklahoma fan here....and it seems like you might be. though i can't believe anyone is that stupid unless there is a new T1B star chamber troll called papa willie.

i was born in 1970, Oklahoma has won 4 national championships in my lifetime. Auburn can't even sniff the unwiped, dried up shit off my asshole hairs when it comes to "elite" programs.

King Crimson wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:.

I just get tickled when some pussy comes in and feels that his team is an "elite" team based on his love for the team.

if you are talking me/Oklahoma fan here....and it seems like you might be.

He could not possibly be talking about me since I have not said A&M is an "elite" program simply due to my love for the team. He can't be talking about you because as we all know, OU is one of the few "elite" programs in the country. Actually, I think he is talking about himself. He's the only one in here claiming to be "elite" all the while being blinded by his love for his team. I just don't understand why he called himself a pussy.

Papa Willie wrote:

IndyFrisco wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:We've gone undefeated twice since '94 in the SEC. Enough said.

I'm in no way saying Texas isn't a great program. I'm just saying that Auburn has been in the thick of things in recent memory, and it IS a big-time football program now - whether you want to admit it or not.

Gone undefeated twice in your conference in 14 years? Enough said? Say it isn't so! t.u. went undefeated in their conference twice since 1994 as well. So fucking what? Are you saying the champ of the self-proclaimed meatgrinder is the national champ? HAHA!

Congrats to allbarn for being "in the thick of things" in recent memory. Congrats also for being a big time program. A&M is a big time program too...even though the team sucks. Still does not mean we can hold a candle to the accomplishments of t.u. I'm one of few A&M fans who knows their place when it comes to t.u. [attempt to analogize so you understand]Just because I have to eat shit don't mean I like it...but at least I know it's shit.[/attempt to analogize so you understand]

I think someone else mentioned it earlier. Why would one take a lateral move to another school? Anserw: Because it is a better team/program. Enough said.

By the way, call allbarn a big time program all you want. Elite programs, in a bad year, still bowl in their conference's top 2-3 bowls. Elite, allbarn is not. Anything suggesting otherwise is "flawed".

Now, if you make me take t.u.'s side one more fucking time, I will see this as a troll job and nothing more. Because seriously, you saying allbarn and t.u. are on the same level is the same as me saying UAB and allbarn are on the same level. At least I know the latter isn't true. In reality, allbarn is as close to t.u. as UAB is to allbarn.

Keep in mind, lil' guy - it's a lot easier to look good when you hang out in a bowl of shit. I don't have to tell you how fucking awful the Suck 12 is. You can feed your inferiority complex all you want, but Texas more than likely would probably have been little more than a middle of the pack team over the last 20 years in the SEC.

The fact that you're melting over something like this only goes to prove it, too.

Texans have always displayed a general lack of security. You know you're not really the South, yet you try to speak like the rest of us. The North won't claim you. Shit - nobody will. Sorry I have to state the obvious.

Just go ahead and tell yourself that Texas has the best college program in the country. Enjoy!

OK now I'm in.

First off the worst thing that happened to the SEC is Texas joined the Big 12, by doing so we regained our status as a elite team, before that (80's early 90's) most of the best college talent went out of state because Texas was no longer in a premier conference. Once Texas joined the Big 12 all the elite Texas talent began to stay in state and go to Texas.

Right now we would be the premier team in any conference, and the reason why is because we pretty much own the state as far as recruiting, yea Oklahoma and LSU are getting some top talent but I have yet to see the year when Texas hasn't gotten the majority of the top 20 players in the state.

And along those lines there are only 2 schools that have that kind of advantage, Florida and USC, and really Florida has to fight against Miami and FSU for the instate talent as well as the other elites. Texas has no other instate elite.

Texas also has a 100 million Athletic budget name the SEC that can come close to that.

Texas has done all that while maintaining a very high academic standard, something that is completely foreign to the SEC (Vandy being the exception).

Year in and Year out there are only 2 SEC programs that can hang with Texas and they are LSU and Florida.

Don't even start with Allbarn vs Texas, all you need to know about that is that Coach Boom chose to be the Texas DC rather than become the allbarn head coach. That's all I need to know about that little wanna-be.

Even LSU is inferior to Texas, if Texas went after Les Miles we would get him plain and simple, about the only SEC program that is on par with Texas is Florida as there is really nothing Texas could offer a Florida coach that he didn't already have in Florida.

Papa Willie wrote:

IndyFrisco wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:We've gone undefeated twice since '94 in the SEC. Enough said.

I'm in no way saying Texas isn't a great program. I'm just saying that Auburn has been in the thick of things in recent memory, and it IS a big-time football program now - whether you want to admit it or not.

Gone undefeated twice in your conference in 14 years? Enough said? Say it isn't so! t.u. went undefeated in their conference twice since 1994 as well. So fucking what? Are you saying the champ of the self-proclaimed meatgrinder is the national champ? HAHA!

Congrats to allbarn for being "in the thick of things" in recent memory. Congrats also for being a big time program. A&M is a big time program too...even though the team sucks. Still does not mean we can hold a candle to the accomplishments of t.u. I'm one of few A&M fans who knows their place when it comes to t.u. [attempt to analogize so you understand]Just because I have to eat shit don't mean I like it...but at least I know it's shit.[/attempt to analogize so you understand]

I think someone else mentioned it earlier. Why would one take a lateral move to another school? Anserw: Because it is a better team/program. Enough said.

By the way, call allbarn a big time program all you want. Elite programs, in a bad year, still bowl in their conference's top 2-3 bowls. Elite, allbarn is not. Anything suggesting otherwise is "flawed".

Now, if you make me take t.u.'s side one more fucking time, I will see this as a troll job and nothing more. Because seriously, you saying allbarn and t.u. are on the same level is the same as me saying UAB and allbarn are on the same level. At least I know the latter isn't true. In reality, allbarn is as close to t.u. as UAB is to allbarn.

Keep in mind, lil' guy - it's a lot easier to look good when you hang out in a bowl of shit. I don't have to tell you how fucking awful the Suck 12 is. You can feed your inferiority complex all you want, but Texas more than likely would probably have been little more than a middle of the pack team over the last 20 years in the SEC.

The fact that you're melting over something like this only goes to prove it, too.

Texans have always displayed a general lack of security. You know you're not really the South, yet you try to speak like the rest of us. The North won't claim you. Shit - nobody will. Sorry I have to state the obvious.

Just go ahead and tell yourself that Texas has the best college program in the country. Enjoy!

You foolish little man spray. There isn't an Oklahoma fan who doesn't realize the Big 8 schools pulled Texass and A&M out of a tailspin in SWC days (we've had this thread at least 6 times since T1B opened alone). So basically you're saying at best they would have been Allbarn (a traditional middle of the pack SEC ball sucking homer) at the end of the SWC conference days but within 2 years of the exposure nationally the Big 12 provided it had already once again surpassed South Bama Barnyard University in prestige and exposure.

No where in the thread did any Tejass fan try and claim they are the best football program in the country. They simply stated the obvious in the fact that Tejass is on a whole 'nother plain than than Allbarn. There isn't a single person in the college football watching free world outside of Allbarn homer who would even attempt to make a claim that Allbarn and Tejass football programs should be mentioned in the same breath, sentence, or utterance of speech when it comes to status in the college football community. I've tried to be polite about it until now but you're starting to sound like Jonsense or M2ool in this fucking thread.

Hanging out in a Bowl of Shit? You realize that the Big 12 and it's member institutions have won more BCS titles and more overall national titles than the SEC... don't you? You do realize that in the 11 years of the BCS era a Big 12 team has represented in the designated title game SIX fucking times and the SEC five times which are pretty comparable but in none of those five fucking trips was it Barnyard U. of South Alabama doing the traveling.

Further more there isn't a self respecting native Texan, myself included, who fucking claims to be a southerner or part of the south. We're a region unto ourselves or at worst with Oklahoma and New Mexico but not with the fucking south. Texas' economic status, culture, money, and lifestyle swallows Louisiana, Pississippi, Tennessee, and Alabomba up before breakfast and shits them out before lunch. You're right about one thing in this entire thread... we're not your southern brothers we're fucking Texans!!!We don't have any desire to be claimed by your pile of crap states as regional or cultural brothers!

with all respect to my good friend SCS, count me out of the "we're Texas/Texans" chest thumping. though, i would agree that Texas and OK aren't exactly confederate states and they are both west of the Mississippi. you got your chicken fried steak and cream gravy...culture.

I'm an Oklahoman. straight up. my great, great granddad was living in the Cherokee Strip trading with the Cherokees and Osage 30 years before the land run. after the land run and statehood, he moved to northern Mexico. he wasn't really a guy made for "civil society" as we might call it.

King Crimson wrote:with all respect to my good friend SCS, count me out of the "we're Texas/Texans" chest thumping. though, i would agree that Texas and OK aren't exactly confederate states and they are both west of the Mississippi. you got your chicken fried steak and cream gravy...culture.

I'm an Oklahoman. straight up. my great, great granddad was living in the Cherokee Strip trading with the Cherokees and Osage 30 years before the land run. after the land run and statehood, he moved to northern Mexico. he wasn't really a guy made for "civil society" as we might call it.

Holy shit, your GG grandpa is Barry Switzer!!!

As for you papa you really don't have very good reading comprehension do you. Every argument I made about how superior Texas is to the SEC you have turned into an SEC vs Big 12 debate.

It's not, this is a Texas vs allbarn and SEC debate.

BTW Texas has a 4-2 record vs the SEC under Mack Brown, We are 2-2 vs Arkansas, we are 1-0 vs LSU, and 1-0 vs Mississippi State. The latter two were wins in the Cotton bowl. Texas is 2-1 in bowl games vs the SEC under Mack, with wins over Jackie Sherrill and Nick Saban.

That's right, Nick is Mack's bitch.

Next year it is shaping up to be a huge title run between Texas and Florida so Mack will get his first (should have happened this year) shot at Urban Meyer.

As for Texas being overrated. Some years they are and some they are not. This year they started outside the top 10 and will likely finish #2 in the country. There have been a number of years when we finished above our preseason rankings.

Texas is #2 in all time wins trailing only meat chicken.

I could go on and on boasting about Texas but I won't, this thread has entered troll status, your arguments are rather boring and really lack any substance. if the sec was so damn good why is it we can take your top assistants for what should be parallel jobs.

Maybe it is because by taking a job at Texas they are moving into a much more visible position at an elite program.

Good luck to Gene Chizik, I'm really looking forward to following him at Allbarn, I think he is going to make Mack proud.

Papa Willie wrote: High win totals are easy to achieve in what is normally a #4 tier conference. Understand?

i totally agree. Mississippi State would have won the Big 8 and SWC every year twice.

So Papa you've made a compelling case for the SEC, but nobody here has said that the SEC isn't a top conference. But again how can Auburn be "elite" nationwide if they're not "elite" in the SEC? If you use the SEC as reason for being great than you can't use it for reasoning as to why you haven't won more games. In other words, is Auburn great because they're in the SEC or is being in the SEC what's kept Auburn from being a top tier team?

The final link was a +/- as far as ranking and where teams finished. This is skewed imo as a) pre season rankings are a crap shoot. b) Teams that are usually ranked fairly high on a year in year out basis have little room to gain positive numbers. Take this year for example. Texas and Auburn were ranked roughly 14th and 15th pre-season (depending which poll you use). Texas is now at #3 or +11 and Auburn is, uh I dunno, outside of the top 64 bowl teams at least so maybe -50 or give or take. So in just this season Texas picks up at least 60 points on that graph. But you can use it if you'd like.

Pac 10, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, Big East...even SEC...If we took a poll, I can't imagine people in ANY of these regions recognizing Auburn as being on the same plane as Texas. I mean, it's painfully obvious to me and I have no dog in this fight. Whether it be all time wins, championships, talent/recruiting, coaching, or more immeasurable things like tradition and "national perception," Texas has AU's number in every category. Auburn is a bigtime CFB program. Texas is elite. There's a distinction.

And the "SEC is soooooooo much better than the Big 12, that makes Auburn automatically even with Texas" argument is totally hilarious.

Papa Willie wrote:No - you're not a Southerner, SCS. You're from a small part of the country that nobody really knows or gives a fuck about. Odd how you live in Florida. Texas folks' inferiority complex precedes them in most cases - it's painfully obvious.

Inferiority complex? Most everyone I know thinks Texans are arrogant.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/ra ... nkings.php
Hey - look who's 5 and 6! Far out. Auburn isn't up there with them. :(

You must not have really read this one before you posted it cause you just KYOA
3 big 12 schools in the top 10 and a 4th in the top 25. How many does the SEC have? Six so it looks like the SEC has better overall depth but with the Big 12 having 3 in the top 10 vs 1 for the SEC it is pretty obvious which one is tougher to win.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/ra ... =2000-2007
Decade team ratings.

I have yet to see where anyone didn't say that the SEC isn't the toughest conference right now, but in the top 10 you have 3 SEC schools and 2 Big 12 schools it hardly seems like its that much better now does it. It does however lend fuel to the fire that the Big 12 South is the toughest division in all of college football.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/ra ... nkings.php

Note the distance between the SEC and the Big 12. See it? See - this is why people cry about the SEC. This is why SEC teams don't usually go undefeated - they are playing tougher schedules - EVEN when they throw in the Citadel, etc... Just how it works out.

This is a stat that proves nothing without some back ground information like time frames, I mean it hardly seems conclusive since the Big 12 is only 12 years old and the BCS is only about 9 or 10 years old. It also doesn't take into account that there is no Big 4 bowl games before the BCS and conferences like the SWC were locked into the Cotton bowl. This is one of those times where stats lie and liars use stats.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/ra ... nkings.php
Big 12 in 4th there (Independents and Ivy don't count).

Again this is another case that the stats mean nothing without the backup data like time frames. How can they determine strength of schedule when that information wasn't kept before the saragin rankings (at lease as far as I can determine). It also doesn't take into account the now defunct SWC and if it does it should still mention where it fell in these rankings as well. If it did you would know that once upon a time teams like TCU and SMU were once power houses in college football.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/ra ... nkings.php
Schedule points go to the Big 10. I can believe that as well, as their OOC games are pretty tough a lot of times.

This is sounding like a broke record but stats like this mean nothing unless they are one a level playing field, and they can't be because the Big 12 is only 12 years old and the SEC as we know it has a team from the old SWC in it who in the 60's was a power house and along with Texas owned that decade. I hardly see how that makes the SEC one of the greatest when it was built on the greatness of the old SWC.

When it comes right down to it all your arguments are pretty weak since this is not a level playing field for any of those stats.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/ra ... nkings.php
More....

more stats that prove nothing without the data to show how they came up with this BS.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/ra ... =2000-2007
Again - SEC. This is really getting kind of funny, but I feel I'll have to post these links, as I don't think a few of you will have the intelligence to do as such. In fact - I'm sure you'll continue to bog yourselves down in some of your apparent insecurities. Sorry.

As I'm sure your going to continue to piss yourself thinking how great the SEC is when in fact none of the stats outside of the ones with definite time frames like 2000-2007 really mean anything.

Finally - here's a good set of stats: http://preseason.stassen.com/over-under/teams.html

Hmmmm. Where's Texas?

Hmmm.

Not good, eh?

All that really says is that the media expects more from Texas and over rates them. Take a real close look at the teams on the top and the teams on the bottom. Which group would you rather be in? the one that groups you with Nebraska, USC, Miami, Oklahoma, or the one that groups you with WSU, Boston College, Boise State and BYU?

Auburn has had a very nice record in the last decade against some of these elite SEC teams. I'm not at all saying AUBURN IS THE BEST PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY, fuckup, I'm saying that it belongs right up there with all the rest, though. And yes - they're playing in the best conference in the land. I believe I've provided substantial information to clue you in to the fact that Texas is normally overrated, and they play in what is normally a #3 or #4 conference.

You will also note that earlier in the year, I was pretty much under the assumption that the Big 12 IS the best conference THIS year, but we've certainly been fed enough media bullshit about Oklahoma in the past, haven't we? What usually happens to them when they go to a BCS game?

Again - Auburn does belong. Texas would not be nearly as high in some of those all-time rankings if they actually played in a conference that was year-in, year-out worth a fuck.

Getting through to you yet? I doubt it - but enjoy the stats!

congrats to auburn but that doesn't make them elite, hell taco tech has a good record against Texas and Oklahoma over the last few years along with some impressive bowl wins but that doesn't make them elite either. you have yet to prove that auburn belongs any more than Vandy belongs. Just because a clown fish lives in the toughest part of the pacific ocean doesn't mean it can kick a barracuda's ass that lives in a pond.

And make no mistake allbarn is the clown fish of the SEC. BTW I seem to remember a year being 2k5 when the Big 12 really sucked bad but Texas won the conference and went on to beat what was considered the greatest team of all time.

I don't know of anyone in their right mind that would think that Texas wasn't the best team in the country. When ranking the best teams on this decade it is pretty much between the 2k1 Miami team and the 2k5 Texas team as to who is the best. But I'm sure you will come up with some kind of argument to prove that Vandy was better since they played in the meat grinder.

i misread vito's post. nothing to see here.

By your logic, Texas should win the National Championship every year. You're starting to sound like m2. A lot of emotion, regardless of stats to put you in your place.

Thanks for playing - have a good day!

If you believe that is what I implied then you have really poor reading comprehension and an even worse idea of what the word logic means.

Only a true moron would gather what I typed and take it to mean that Texas should play for the MNC every year.

Though I do believe they should play more than once every 25 years to do so every year would mean they were the only elite team in college football and more over they only good team. That is not the case as I have pointed out several times.

Here is a good list of the elite teams of college football

USC
Oklahoma
Nebraska
Texas
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
FSU
Miami
Florida
Alabama
LSU
Notre Dame

Good teams - rich tradition and traditional quality team
Oregon
Washington (not this year but they have a pretty rich tradition)
BYU
UCLA
Colorado
KSU
Oklahoma State
A&M
Michigan State
Perdue
Clemson
Virgina
Virgina tech
Auburn
Georgia
Tennessee
Arkansas
Syracuse

I probably left off a few but those are the ones I consider to be on the 2nd tier of college football.

Yeah nobody pays any attention to that small little corner of Earth in Austin and San Antonio, where I am from.

Everyone knows how much more prestigeous and influencial Birmingham and Jackson are.

Damn right I live in Florida now... Nobody here wants to be associated with those places either!

Papa Willie wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote:

campinfool wrote:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Are you sure that dirty feeling wasn't just penis envy

I'm sure it isn't. Oklahoma has just a little bit of oil money itself. Maybe you've heard of Phillips 66/Conoco, Kerr-McGee, guys like Clay Bennett (yeah the same one that owns the Thunder), Arrowhead Energy, Cameron Specialty Inc.; as well as two members of the Walton family being alumnus, the Gaylord family, etc.

I'd never be so foolish as to say Oklahoma could go dollar for dollar in an arms race of Cold War proportions with Tejass but as far as athletic departments go both our schools have more money than they could spend at their disposal on an annual basis.

The University of Oklahoma brings a mighty hefty wallet to the table for just a little school on the prairie.

True - and they pay their players well. Just doesn't always work out for them.

Says the AUBURN fan...

the_ouskull

Papa Willie wrote:

the_ouskull wrote: Says the AUBURN fan...

the_ouskull

All of them do it, dawg. You know it. I know it. We all know it. Anybody stupid enough to say "my school doesn't do it" is dumber than the dark side of a pile of goat shit....

Then why do you constantly use "Texas buys the best players" as ammo against them?

And to your earlier comment where you said I said t.u. was God and allbarn was shit...I never said that. I said why would someone take a lateral move to a lesser team/program. Everyone in this thread not named Allbarn Ball Sucking Homer who have expressed their opinion on the Texas/Allbarn "debate" (though there really IS no deabte) has backed up what I said. You constantly saying everyone here has an inferiority complex simply because we do not have OUR head in the sand is funny as hell though. Inferiority complex? Gotta go with the KC Boys on this one. IKYABWAI?

Hey, at least allbarn's not A.P.

Papa Willie wrote:Texass is obviously buying good players. Why aren't they winning the NC every year? They're obviously the very best program in the land!

I'm pretty sure there's things at all schools as well that are violations. By no means do I think every school turns the blind eye on things like what happened with Mayo and Bush at USC. However, the reasons schools that "get on top" usually "stay on top" is because the best talent wants to go to the best possible place to showcase that talent on a national level so they can get their payday in the NFL.

That being said, t.u. WAS NOT pulling the best talent in the late 80s/early 90s because they hit somewhat of a down spell. That combined with the lack of national coverage of the SWC did not bode well for them. Joining the Big XII gave instant national coverage. Mack Brown and his recruiting machine began. They had some decent success in the mid/late 90s. That has since snowballed. Are they inVINCEable? Nope. They are a John Robinson (USC) or John Macovic (t.u.) or a John Blake (OU) or a John Cooper (tOSU) (note: stay away from John's) away from being a mediocre team again. All of those (elite) programs rebounded BECAUSE they are elite.

Schools like ours, A&M and Auburn (#23 and #21, respectively all time), which are NOT one of the lucky elite few, can still be proud of their program as big time CFB, but facts are facts. WE ARE NOT ELITE. Can we be? Sure. But that takes decades upon decades to accomplish. Neither A&M nor Auburn is there. THAT is the premise upon which I stated Auburn is a lesser team/program than t.u. You can try to justify it by pimping the success of other SEC programs or trying to make what I said into a XII vs. SEC debate like you have with other posters here.

Am I proud of our standing in CFB? Yeah, I'm proud of A&M all time. Am I fully satisfied? Hell no. Then again, I won't sit here and compare my school's tradition and success to that of OU or t.u. or Michigan or OSU or Alabama (etc.) and say we are equals. That, my friend, is Ball Sucking Homering...something I only do for fun. ;)