T1B

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 12:18 am**

Why automatically default to the SEC Champion? Not bashing but if you look at it without bias (I'm qualified as a true blue Sparty hater) State has had a more impressive season than Auburn. Auburn struggled with Wash St, aTm, needed miracles to beat UGA and 'bama while State was tearing through it's conference schedule with the closest game being the B1G CCG ten point win. For that matter why not take a closer look at all the 1 loss teams. Why not Ohio St? Why not Baylor? If this were next year's four team playoff why would 'bama be in the mix ahead of the other teams that won their conferences or made the CCG but suffered their only loss in a CCG? How does 'bama piss away a trip to their CCG, not even play, but benefit from losing before OSU?

I can't wait for an 8 team playoff. I'm hoping for autobids for conf championships and 2 or 3 wild cards (depending on how the super conferences end up).

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 1:44 am**

The Spurtons are right where they belong: in the Rose Bowl against the Trees. It should be a great game, too.

Auburn v the Semenholes? One of the most unremarkable MNC games in recent memory. I couldn't fucking care less and Auburn will trample them flat in a very dull game.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 1:52 am**

Jsc810 wrote:

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:11 am**

IKYABWAI?

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:43 am**

Papa Willie wrote:I didn't think that the B1G folks ever ball-suck-homered?

Translation...."I have no reasonable answers to your questions."

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:56 am**

Papa Willie wrote:I didn't think that the B1G folks ever ball-suck-homered?

I don't really have a problem with Auburn in the MNC, but to act like an argument can't even be made for MSU, or any other 1-loss team, is the very definition of being a ball-sucking homer.

I'm quite content with MSU getting back to the Rose Bowl for the first time since 1988, and the match-up with Stanford is fantastic.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:13 am**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
Papa Willie wrote:I didn't think that the B1G folks ever ball-suck-homered?
I don't really have a problem with Auburn in the MNC, but to act like an argument can't even be made for MSU, or any other 1-loss team, is the very definition of being a ball-sucking homer.

I'm quite content with MSU getting back to the Rose Bowl for the first time since 1988, and the match-up with Stanford is fantastic.

I can't disagree with any of that. But when your team has a once in a generation season you gotta get all you can. The Rose Bowl is the best venue in CFB, props to Sparty for getting there....but the big one is there this year...State deserves to be there.

P.S. Fuck Notre Dame

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 2:18 pm**

The champion of the toughest conference is not automatically one of the two best teams.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 2:53 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:The champion of the toughest conference is not automatically one of the two best teams.
Yet the champ of a perennially weak conference is?

Hell, according to oddsmakers, the 2nd place team in the SEC West would be favored over any team in the country right now.

You could easily have a very strong conference champion from a weaker conference (see Boise State). You do understand how oddsmakers operate, right? We've been over this many times.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:22 pm**

88 wrote:AUB got beat soundly @ LSU

Beat soundly?

Losing 35-21 to LSU in Louisiana is the definition of a blowout from what I've come to understand. :)

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:01 pm**

Like we’ve discussed before; in the SEC, a win is a win. And a close loss is really a win. So you really can’t lose because it’s the MEATGRINDER and you get the benefit of the doubt on almost all losses.

Alabama (as #1 last year) loses to the #15 team in the BCS? They drop to 4th. OSU (as #2 this year) loses to the #10 team in the BCS? They drop to 7th.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:10 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:Why not Michigan State?
B1G.

Pure arrogance. You act like it's the SEC and everyone else is the Sun Belt. While I admit the SEC is generally #1, there is not that great of a chasm between that conference and the other major conferences.

No offense, but the next time a good B1G team beats a good SEC team in a bowl game, let us know.

MSU beat the last "good" SEC team it played in a bowl game. But I guess this is where you'll claim Georgia wasn't a good team because it doesn't suit your argument. Then, you'll prop them up later as evidence of another tough SEC team. And round and round it goes. Besides, what do past bowl games have to do with THIS season? Every team and every season should be judged separately from everything else. And the best teams don't always reside in the best conferences.

It'd be nice as well if you had more than 2 or 3 decent teams in your conference. Try having 6 or 7 quality teams each season.

Says who? Just because the SEC gets all these over-inflated rankings doesn't necessarily mean their 8-4 teams are better than everybody else's 8-4 teams.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:18 pm**

88 wrote:MSU choked at NDM, but otherwise defeated all other opponents soundly. AUB got beat soundly @ LSU and had two fluke wins. In view of that, I don't see how AUB is such an obvious choice to play in the MNC.

MSU won every B1G game by double-digits, something that hadn't been done in the conference since 1943. The ND loss hurts, but it was by 4 points on the road in a rivalry game when they were still trying to figure out who their starting QB and RB would be. I'm not sure many units in the country have improved more than MSU's offense since the beginning of the season. Also, let's not act like ND is a bottom tier MAC school here. They beat MSU, ASU, USC, BYU and played Stanford very tough. There are definitely worse losses out there.

Again, I'm not necessarily saying MSU should be in there over Auburn, but you can't completely dismiss an argument for them.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:22 pm**

L45B wrote:Beat soundly?

Pretty much. They were down 3 TDs and got a score late in the 4th to make it appear closer than it was.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:45 pm**

The SEC is over fucking rated. The CCG was played between a middle of the road B12 castaway and a team that was winless in conference play last year....must be a real hard conference to negotiate..

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:49 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:Mgo's got a point. One thing you could do is to look at who beat the teams that beat Sparty and Auburn - being ND & LSU. ND got stomped by Michigan, as well as Pitt. That didn't help Sparty. The only loss LSU had that was "hmmmmmmm" was Ole Miss (who did dabble in the top 25 some this year).

Are you serious? ND got "stomped" by Michigan and Pitt? 9 points and 7 points. And if LSU gets credit for Ole Miss dabbling in the top 25, ND doesn't get the same leeway for UofM? Gotcha. Lemme guess, because Ole Miss is in the SEC?

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:54 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:You've got to believe this is why both teams are where they're at now.

That is definitely why.

But the why is based on bullshit overhyped preseason rankings and the fact that Johhny Douchebag made a great posterboy, and thus made Texas A&M a prime candidate for a top ten team.

Even though they did nothing all year to even validate them being a top 25 team. Iowa is 8-4 and should arguably be ahead of them.

What happened when Michigan State beat Iowa on October 5th? Nothing. MSU came into the game unranked and left Iowa City unranked.

What happened when Auburn beat A&M on October 19th? They jumped from 24th to 11th in the BCS rankings.

How is it justifiable that a win over a mediocre team like Texas A&M can generate that much movement in the rankings???

The SEC perversion of college football is the only way that kinda shit happens on a weekly basis.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:57 pm**

Being down 21 in the 4th quarter with 7 minutes to play is a pretty good ass kicking. ND had the ball in both games with a chance to tie or take the lead in the 4th quarter only to step on their dicks.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 5:15 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:

Be honest with yourself. Who in the B1G (other than OSU and Sparty) could beat A&M?

On any given day? Northwestern, Penn St, Nebraska, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Indiana.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 5:37 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:Auburn outscored, outgained, and pretty much kicked LSU's asses in the 2nd half of that game. Anybody who watched the game would tell you that, too. Keep in mind - Marshall had only been attending Auburn for 6 weeks at that point. He didn't know the offense worth a shit.

Way to go all M200l on us there, Willie.

We get it, we get it.

If LSU beats Auburn by 21 points, it's a close game, Auburn was finding its way.

If LSU beats a Big Ten team by the same score (see 2008 championship game, ouch), it's a blowout.

How can you argue with logic like that?

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 5:52 pm**

I suppose, then, that Auburn must have kicked Wisky's ass in the 2nd half of the 2006 Capital One Bowl.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 6:05 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:I suppose, then, that Auburn must have kicked Wisky's ass in the 2nd half of the 2006 Capital One Bowl.
Or like how Wisky kicked Auburn's ass on 12/31/03? :grin:

We were finding our way.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 6:08 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:
WolverineSteve wrote:
Papa Willie wrote:

Be honest with yourself. Who in the B1G (other than OSU and Sparty) could beat A&M?
On any given day? Northwestern, Penn St, Nebraska, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Indiana.
On any given day, Appalachian State could beat Michigan. :grin:

Yep, but Florida couldn't in the bowl game that season.

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 6:32 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:Be honest with yourself. Who in the B1G (other than OSU and Sparty) could beat A&M?

You mean the same A&M team who lost to every single ranked team it played all year (ranked at the time they played or now, take your pick)?

Who was .500 in conference play and whose best win in-conference was against another .500 Vanderbilt? (Or maybe you'll say they beat a qualityyy 7-5 Ole Piss team that was ranked at one point in the season.

)

Like I said, Iowa (edited: or Washington or Minnesota or Virginia Tech) has the same or slightly better qualifications. But we're supposed to be in awe of A&M because... they're not in the Big XII any more?

Posted: **Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:00 pm**

^^^^^
Bingo.

Posted: **Wed Dec 11, 2013 12:40 am**

schmick wrote:USC won the National Championship after the 2003 and 2004 seasons

So I guess you still have the AP title from 2003, but only SC fans claim that.

The 2004 title was officially vacated.

Posted: **Wed Dec 11, 2013 1:18 am**

Ok, simple question.

How many BCS titles has SC won?

Posted: **Wed Dec 11, 2013 6:22 am**

Papa Willie wrote:
schmick wrote:78 Trojans were undefeated and had more talent than any team in sec history. Thats a fact so simple even sec fans can understand it
Facts come with statistics. Please show statistics on how the '78 Toejams were better than any team ever. Thanks in advance.

Besides the fact they needed two bullshit calls by Pac-8 ref and USC homer Paul Kamanski to beat Notre Dame and UofM, I'm sure he has a ton of evidence.

Posted: **Wed Dec 11, 2013 1:56 pm**

1978 USC was undefeated? Hmm, Arizona State says your full of shit.

For such a dominate team, it's funny that they lost one game and needed two horse shit calls from a USC homer to not lose 3.

Way to make a late push for board bitch 2013.

Posted: **Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:19 pm**

schmick wrote:
Left Seater wrote:Ok, simple question.

How many BCS titles has SC won?
1

But if teblow doesnt cry like a bitch they win one in 2008 as well

Fail! SC has zero BCS titles.

Toolio feels sorry for you for claiming the vacated one.

Posted: **Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:25 pm**

schmick wrote:78 Trojans were undefeated and had more talent than any team in sec history. Thats a fact so simple even sec fans can understand it

So the best team ever lost a game? How would the team that beat them then not be the best team ever?

Kinda reminds me of the 2005 USC team that was the best ever in the history of football, except they weren't.

Posted: **Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:31 pm**

schmick wrote:I had already corrected that dickhead, now get back to fucking young boys

The lack of junior's musky jock straps making you light headed? You still haven't corrected it you fucking idiot.

Posted: **Thu Dec 12, 2013 5:30 am**

Jsc810 wrote:No you douchebag.

Whoever wins the hypothetical national championship game is the mythical national champion.

In the BCS era, there is one mythical national champion per year, and that team gets a crystal football.

FTFY@NC

Posted: **Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:16 am**

Sudden Sam wrote:The SEC's just on a run. It'll all come back around for the B1G someday.
When kids wanna go to school and play in the frigid snow.

This is normal bullshit spread by southern teams.
I just looked up the average high temperatue for Lincoln Nebraska on Nov. 30th..
It's 40 f*cking degrees!
Mind you Nebraska has NEVER played a home game in December.
That ain't cold for 210 lb. 20 year olds chasing one another!

If all these pussified kids wanna keep their littie bittie hanzies warmie, they should just skip the NFL draft!

Ya see, you watch the Bears or Packers play in a mid to late December game, and that quantifies all northern schools playing in sub-zero weather, all the time.

Posted: **Thu Dec 12, 2013 9:04 am**

Papa Willie wrote:
Cornhusker wrote:
Sudden Sam wrote:The SEC's just on a run. It'll all come back around for the B1G someday.
When kids wanna go to school and play in the frigid snow.
This is normal bullshit spread by southern teams.
I just looked up the average high temperatue for Lincoln Nebraska on Nov. 30th..
It's 40 f*cking degrees!
Mind you Nebraska has NEVER played a home game in December.
That ain't cold for 210 lb. 20 year olds chasing one another!

If all these pussified kids wanna keep their littie bittie hanzies warmie, they should just skip the NFL draft!

Ya see, you watch the Bears or Packers play in a mid to late December game, and that quantifies all northern schools playing in sub-zero weather, all the time.
Fact: Black people don't like cold weather. Fact: Most good football players are black.

This is how it is - pussies or not.

My white ass doesn't like cold weather either.
Point is, 40 degrees isn't uncomfortably cold. Its very manageable and from what I hear, most players like it. Less fatigue. The ol' football / fall thing.
Most players in the B1G will probably play in 2 or 3 cold weather games in the 40+ games of their career.

I have yet to see a black player miss the bus heading to play a December game outdoors, in any northern NFL venue.

Posted: **Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:35 pm**

I think weather can be a factor. Not so much of the how cold will it be for kickoff. Rather how many days of the school year will the coeds be walking around in shorts, skirts, bikinis, etc vs wrapped up in a parka and scarf.

Posted: **Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:54 pm**

Left Seater wrote:I think weather can be a factor. Not so much of the how cold will it be for kickoff. Rather how many days of the school year will the coeds be walking around in shorts, skirts, bikinis, etc vs wrapped up in a parka and scarf.

If that were the case, why hasn't southern dominance ravaged every sport? College basketball anyone?

Let's face it, there aren't any new weather patterns today than there were back in the 80s and 90s, when southern teams didn't exactly have a stranglehold on the sport.

It's no coincidence, there are other built-in advantages that southern teams have today that don't end in "°F." Sam's right, someday it will balance out again. Most likely, when the NCAA isn't run by SECBSHs.

Posted: **Thu Dec 12, 2013 9:34 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:Errrr - last I checked, they play most of their games inside.

You obviously missed the context of Lefty's earlier comment.

Yes, the games are indoors. But how much pancreas the co-eds are flashing-- at courtside, at the quads, at Jameis' house party-- typically depends on the weather outside.

This obviously didn't concern guys like Carmelo, Chalmers or Cleaves over the years.

Posted: **Thu Jan 02, 2014 6:36 pm**

At the risk of repeating myself....why not State?

Posted: **Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:29 pm**

Shaw's asinine play calling aside, MSU demonstrated they can play & stopped the Indians from doing what they thought they could do.

Would be fun to see MSU play the winner of the FSU/Allbarn game.

T1B

Why not Michigan State?

Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?

Re: Why not Michigan State?