T1B

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... scheduling

Kansas, Wake Forest, Indiana and Cal are gonna be awfully busy.

Jury is still out on if that does anything.

A better place to start would have been eliminating all FCS teams from the schedule. That would have stepped their game up.

Agree. My post was tongue in cheek.

This is just a lame attempt by the SEC to try and absolve the fact they are refusing to move to a 9-game schedule, and will continue to play FCS schools, unlike the other big boy conferences.

Best part of that article was Sabin saying the conf should move to a 9 game schedule and add the power conf requirement.

However, if that were to happen some SEC teams, 'sup ATM, would then schedule 2 FCS teams each season.

Will you sing the same tune when USC and Texas schedule games in Mexico City and Dubai? Or will you want some sort of Hawaii exemption then?

Papa Willie wrote: Jacksonville State, Eastern Michigan, Wyoming, Purdue & Indiana send their regards, as they're too busy having to play Sparty this season...

Did you just attempt to crack on MSU Fan for having Indiana and Purdue on their schedule?

Wanna back up and take another run at that one?

First SECBSH says something stupid, and SECBSH #2 comes along and proves himself equally stupid.

FYI -- it's not a "stereotype" -- you people really are stupid.

Uhm... take a moment and think about why MSU might have Indiana and Purdue on their schedule... take your time.

Then the rest of us can ridicule SEC teams for having Vandy and Kentucky on their slate.

Sudden Sam wrote:
At least y'all play a real conference schedule, though.

I dunno -- we have Kal and Wazzu in our division. Might as well be scheduling Southwest Northern State.


Can't wait for the Wazzu game, actually. While Helf has proven quite merciful (Longhornfan should thank him for that), and Alioti is gone, after "running-up-the-score-from-behind" (which resulted in arguably their best player going down), I think it's possible that we might see that the Feeling Lucky Zerg Rush can indeed put up 100+ in a game.

Sudden Sam wrote: South Dakota. Enough said.

Everyone does it.

No, everyone won't be doing it going forward. Except for the SEC. That's the whole point.

Which has what to do with OOC scheduling?

How does the quick brown fox jumping over the wet moose after midnight make your OOC different?

Again, it's not a stereotype if it's true.

Papa Willie wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote: South Dakota. Enough said.

Everyone does it.

No, everyone won't be doing it going forward. Except for the SEC. That's the whole point.

Is that why the SEC always sucks in bowl games?

The topic is scheduling. If you want to start a thread about bowl games, feel free to do so.

Why are you so defensive? Nobody in this thread is knocking the quality of play in the SEC.

Rack schmick!

schmick wrote:Part of the rationale for the sec and their "sits down to pee" approach to out of conference scheduling has a lot to do with the Vandys and Miss St's of the conference getting that elusive 6th win to get to the bowls. 4 cream puff victories at home vs the likes of Martin, Monroe, Citadel & Chattanooga School of Beauty and then a team just needs 2 wins in conference to go bowling and play a team from the north east whose practice field has been under 8 feet of snow since Thanksgiving.

Im not sure what is more shocking, that auburn has not won an OOC game since 1997 or that alabama has won 4 national titles since 1992 and have not won a single OOC game vs a ranked team on the road since 1989.

Spray does not have the intellectual capacity to follow specific subject matter like this. Be prepared for bowl game stats.

Doesn't Michigan State play Shartmouth, Will.I.Am and Mary, Boston Market College, and Northeast Western State?

Papa Willie wrote:Is that the reason they dominate other conferences in bowl games as well?

In the BCS era they've really only dominated the ACC and Big 12 in bowl games.

They have a lousy record against the Big East. Yes...the Big East.

They're hovering around .500 against the Big Ten, and when you consider the Big Ten travels down south to play them in their own backyards, tSEC's record looks even less impressive.

Sample size against the Pac 12 is too small to draw any conclusions.

The SEC's record against other BCS teams in regular season match ups in that same time frame is quite pedestrian as well. I guess because they occasionally have to leave their time zone.

Where the SEC can brag is their record in title games. Usually, their best is better than everybody else's best. But in terms of top-to-bottom strength, the SEC has not proven dominance over the other leagues. At least, not to the extent that teams like Ole Miss deserve to crack the top 25 every year despite the fact they've won nothing.

Go ahead, just cut the sample size down to whatever suits your argument.

In the last 6 months, Oregon is 1-0 against the Big12.

This is fun.

Dins,

You can do far better than that, no?


Like Oregon is 1.000 against the other BCS conferences in the last 6 months.

Oregon has never been a serious part of any BTPCF discussion.

Waynegro wrote:Oregon has never been a serious part of any BTPCF discussion.

Have you?

Check your facts Schmick, USC was not the winner of the 2005 or 2006 BCS title games.