Jim Harbaugh is an awkward weirdo (Colin Cowherd hangs up on him)
-
Right, they definitely have underperformed. I just don't see that as "in shambles".
Also, I don't think anyone would make the claim that the B1G is the best conference in the country. They're on the way up, but not the best.
Right, they definitely have underperformed. I just don't see that as "in shambles".
Also, I don't think anyone would make the claim that the B1G is the best conference in the country. They're on the way up, but not the best.
They just have the best team.
And FYI, the best conference in the country is probaly the Pac 12.
-
Right, they definitely have underperformed. I just don't see that as "in shambles".
Also, I don't think anyone would make the claim that the B1G is the best conference in the country. They're on the way up, but not the best.
They just have the best team.
And FYI, the best conference in the country is probaly the Pac 12.
They just have the best team.
And FYI, the best conference in the country is probaly the Pac 12.
Hahahahahaha. Ahhhh hahahahahah. Nice one, Gip.
-
They just have the best team.
And FYI, the best conference in the country is probaly the Pac 12.
Hahahahahaha. Ahhhh hahahahahah. Nice one, Gip.
Hahahahahaha. Ahhhh hahahahahah. Nice one, Gip.
Yes, it is nice....because it is true......better non conf record.....better bowl record. I didn't check but I wager they had a better record head to head with just about every other conference.
-
Aggies got suck of being second rate in an average conference. So now they latch on to the "ESS EEE SEE" thing
-
Hahahahahaha. Ahhhh hahahahahah. Nice one, Gip.
Yes, it is nice....because it is true......better non conf record.....better bowl record. I didn't check but I wager they had a better record head to head with just about every other conference.
And what about the year before? The year before that? Before that? And about 5 of the prior years before that? I already posted that info and you declined to respond.Yes, it is nice....because it is true......better non conf record.....better bowl record. I didn't check but I wager they had a better record head to head with just about every other conference.
They can have best conference for this season. But it'll be a one-year wonder.
-
And what about the year before? The year before that? Before that? And about 5 of the prior years before that? I already posted that info and you declined to respond.Yes, it is nice....because it is true......better non conf record.....better bowl record. I didn't check but I wager they had a better record head to head with just about every other conference.
They can have best conference for this season. But it'll be a one-year wonder.
And what about the year before? The year before that? Before that? And about 5 of the prior years before that? I already posted that info and you declined to respond.
They can have best conference for this season. But it'll be a one-year wonder.
I doubt it.....they may have been better all along.....you can check the records if you like. They just didn't self annoint themselves as the best the way the sec did.
-
By your own argument, better non conference record and bowl record=best conference. Ok. I'll bite. In the BCS era, Pac 12 is 141-112 against the Power 5 and the Big East (55.7%). The SEC is 185-149 (55.4%) (cue your "the SEC plays a bunch of cupcakes!" argument even though it has played 80 more games against Power 5 schools than the PAC). The SEC blows the PAC out of the water if you eliminate those Big East games and only go with true Power 5 matchups. Head to head the SEC is 14-13 against the PAC. Sure, it's close. So go to the next relevant stat. The vaunted bowl record.
2014: SEC 7-5 (58.3), PAC 6-3 (66.6)
2013: SEC 7-3 (70), PAC 6-3 (66.6)
2012: SEC 6-3 (66.6), PAC 4-4 (50)
2011: SEC 6-3 (66.6), PAC 2-5 (28.6)
2010: SEC 5-5 (50), PAC 2-2 (50)
2009: SEC 6-4 (60), PAC 2-5 (28.6)
2008: SEC 6-2 (75), PAC 5-0 (100)
2007: SEC 7-2 (77.8), PAC 4-2 (66.6)
2006: SEC 6-3 (66.6), PAC 3-3 (50)
2005: SEC 3-3 (50), PAC 3-2 (60)
2004: SEC 3-3 (50), PAC 3-2 (60)
2003: SEC 5-2 (71.4), PAC 4-2 (66.6)
Wikipedia pages on the subject only go this far back. The SEC had equal or more wins EVERY. SINGLE. YEAR. It had an equal or higher winning percentage all but 4 times (out of 12). The SEC is 8-7 in bowls head to head. That's clearly a win for the SEC. To further belabor the point, we can look at the all-time bowl records. The SEC is 227-170-9, a 57% win percentage. The PAC is 131-113-5 , 53.6%. We can go to the next stat. This time it will be my own criterion, since yours leave out a very relevant figure:
NATIONAL CHAMPIONS
Ever: SEC 29, PAC 15
BCS Era: SEC 9, PAC 1 (technically this was vacated)
Since 2006: SEC 7, PAC 0
-
By your own argument, better non conference record and bowl record=best conference. Ok. I'll bite. In the BCS era, Pac 12 is 141-112 against the Power 5 and the Big East (55.7%). The SEC is 185-149 (55.4%) (cue your "the SEC plays a bunch of cupcakes!" argument even though it has played 80 more games against Power 5 schools than the PAC). The SEC blows the PAC out of the water if you eliminate those Big East games and only go with true Power 5 matchups. Head to head the SEC is 14-13 against the PAC. Sure, it's close. So go to the next relevant stat. The vaunted bowl record.
2014: SEC 7-5 (58.3), PAC 6-3 (66.6)
2013: SEC 7-3 (70), PAC 6-3 (66.6)
2012: SEC 6-3 (66.6), PAC 4-4 (50)
2011: SEC 6-3 (66.6), PAC 2-5 (28.6)
2010: SEC 5-5 (50), PAC 2-2 (50)
2009: SEC 6-4 (60), PAC 2-5 (28.6)
2008: SEC 6-2 (75), PAC 5-0 (100)
2007: SEC 7-2 (77.8), PAC 4-2 (66.6)
2006: SEC 6-3 (66.6), PAC 3-3 (50)
2005: SEC 3-3 (50), PAC 3-2 (60)
2004: SEC 3-3 (50), PAC 3-2 (60)
2003: SEC 5-2 (71.4), PAC 4-2 (66.6)
Wikipedia pages on the subject only go this far back. The SEC had equal or more wins EVERY. SINGLE. YEAR. It had an equal or higher winning percentage all but 4 times (out of 12). The SEC is 8-7 in bowls head to head. That's clearly a win for the SEC. To further belabor the point, we can look at the all-time bowl records. The SEC is 227-170-9, a 57% win percentage. The PAC is 131-113-5 , 53.6%. We can go to the next stat. This time it will be my own criterion, since yours leave out a very relevant figure:
NATIONAL CHAMPIONS
Ever: SEC 29, PAC 15
BCS Era: SEC 9, PAC 1 (technically this was vacated)
Since 2006: SEC 7, PAC 0
By your own argument, better non conference record and bowl record=best conference. Ok. I'll bite. In the BCS era, Pac 12 is 141-112 against the Power 5 and the Big East (55.7%). The SEC is 185-149 (55.4%) (cue your "the SEC plays a bunch of cupcakes!" argument even though it has played 80 more games against Power 5 schools than the PAC).
Non-Conference games? Of course you discount the fact that there were at much of this time at least 2-4 more teams in the SEC than the P-10. I would think there would be more games.
The SEC blows the PAC out of the water if you eliminate those Big East games and only go with true Power 5 matchups.
Really? You want to eliminate games vs. Miami/BC/Pitt and others (I am sure eliminating those matchups would make the SEC look better)
Head to head the SEC is 14-13 against the PAC. Sure, it's close.
Since when?
So go to the next relevant stat. The vaunted bowl record.
2014: SEC 7-5 (58.3), PAC 6-3 (66.6)
2013: SEC 7-3 (70), PAC 6-3 (66.6)
2012: SEC 6-3 (66.6), PAC 4-4 (50)
2011: SEC 6-3 (66.6), PAC 2-5 (28.6)
2010: SEC 5-5 (50), PAC 2-2 (50)
2009: SEC 6-4 (60), PAC 2-5 (28.6)
2008: SEC 6-2 (75), PAC 5-0 (100)
2007: SEC 7-2 (77.8), PAC 4-2 (66.6)
2006: SEC 6-3 (66.6), PAC 3-3 (50)
2005: SEC 3-3 (50), PAC 3-2 (60)
2004: SEC 3-3 (50), PAC 3-2 (60)
2003: SEC 5-2 (71.4), PAC 4-2 (66.6)
I would really like to see the stats on neutral sites. That is....any game not played in the home conferece area. In other words...no SEC games played in FLa/Ga/Lou/Ala etc. No P-12 games played in Cal, Ariz.
Wikipedia pages on the subject only go this far back. The SEC had equal or more wins EVERY. SINGLE. YEAR. It had an equal or higher winning percentage all but 4 times (out of 12). The SEC is 8-7 in bowls head to head. That's clearly a win for the SEC. To further belabor the point, we can look at the all-time bowl records. The SEC is 227-170-9, a 57% win percentage. The PAC is 131-113-5 , 53.6%. We can go to the next stat. This time it will be my own criterion, since yours leave out a very relevant figure:
NATIONAL CHAMPIONS
Ever: SEC 29, PAC 15
How can going back just 44 years be "ever"?
BCS Era: SEC 9, PAC 1 (technically this was vacated)
Since 2006: SEC 7, PAC 0
Yes, I do discount titles a bit.....because that measures one team. No doubt the SEC has had the single best teams over the last decade....but not overall best.
-
Yeah you're right on that point. Slipped my mind.
Well I really want to eliminate games against teams like UCONN. That was more my point. Since they are no longer power 5 anymore.
BCS era. If you can find the numbers for earlier periods then be my guest.
And I would like to see the records of the teams that were playing each other. USC beating Vanderbilt doesn't mean much of anything and neither does Alabama beating Colorado. But alas, all you said was "bowl records." I provided them. They didn't support you.
Don't know what you mean with the 44 years comment. The article I got that from had all time national championships.
The competition in the league is what made those national champions. It doesn't happen in a vacuum although Ohio State was the closest thing.
-
I'd hope the two conferences that have the most "home" bowl games do the best in them...
-
You really do just argue for the sake of it. Gipper and I are going into stuff we haven't discussed yet and you just want to rehash stuff we spent 5 pages talking about already. What's the point? Get a life.
-
5 pages ago? You're fucking talking about bowl records right now, lol.
It takes two to argue. No one is making you respond.
I don't really care about your current SEC vs PAC argument. The SEC has been overrated, but also the best, for a while. Their dominance is falling off though. Everything comes in cycles. NCAA sanctions and investigations could have sped it up, but whatever. The only thing worse than SEC fans at its peak may be fans as they fall back to earth...
-
Yeah you're right on that point. Slipped my mind.
Well I really want to eliminate games against teams like UCONN. That was more my point. Since they are no longer power 5 anymore.
BCS era. If you can find the numbers for earlier periods then be my guest.
And I would like to see the records of the teams that were playing each other. USC beating Vanderbilt doesn't mean much of anything and neither does Alabama beating Colorado. But alas, all you said was "bowl records." I provided them. They didn't support you.
Don't know what you mean with the 44 years comment. The article I got that from had all time national championships.
The competition in the league is what made those national champions. It doesn't happen in a vacuum although Ohio State was the closest thing.
Yeah you're right on that point. Slipped my mind.
Well I really want to eliminate games against teams like UCONN. That was more my point. Since they are no longer power 5 anymore.
BCS era. If you can find the numbers for earlier periods then be my guest.
And I would like to see the records of the teams that were playing each other. USC beating Vanderbilt doesn't mean much of anything and neither does Alabama beating Colorado. But alas, all you said was "bowl records." I provided them. They didn't support you.
Don't know what you mean with the 44 years comment. The article I got that from had all time national championships.
My bad. I misread what you said. I thought you were just counting titles going back 44 years. But you were counting the titles of just the SEC and P-12....which added up to 44. I misspoke.
The competition in the league is what made those national champions. It doesn't happen in a vacuum although Ohio State was the closest thing.
I think that competition is overrated. Yes, you have to win 1 or 2 tough games.....but really, traditionally beating up on VAndy/MSU/Ole Miss does not make a team all that tough.
-
5 pages ago? You're fucking talking about bowl records right now, lol.
It takes two to argue. No one is making you respond.
I don't really care about your current SEC vs PAC argument. The SEC has been overrated, but also the best, for a while. Their dominance is falling off though. Everything comes in cycles. NCAA sanctions and investigations could have sped it up, but whatever. The only thing worse than SEC fans at its peak may be fans as they fall back to earth...
5 pages ago? You're fucking talking about bowl records right now, lol.
It takes two to argue. No one is making you respond.
I don't really care about your current SEC vs PAC argument. The SEC has been overrated, but also the best, for a while. Their dominance is falling off though. Everything comes in cycles. NCAA sanctions and investigations could have sped it up, but whatever. The only thing worse than SEC fans at its peak may be fans as they fall back to earth...
Chalk up another one: Can't argue without cursing. You and I spent like 5 pages going over stuff that you're trying to bring up again here. I never said "ago" as in it was in this thread. Pay attention.
At least you've made a major concession here.
-
Gipper, you mentioned 3 teams out of 10/12/14. All 3 aren't even in the same division so it wouldnt have been all that common for anyone to play all 3.
-
Oh, yes, I said the F word. My argument is now invalid...
I stated the two conferences with the most "home" bowl games should probably have the most wins. You then came at me. Maybe you need to learn how to not argue so much...
-
No, just knock off the "we're the classiest people ever" bs when that is clearly not a strong suit of yours.
All I said was it was pointless for you to bring it up because we've debated it before. If you insist on saying it anyway, then maybe the problem is with your requirement to post your talking points no matter how much they've been addressed.
-
And again, it takes two.
I'll end it there.
-
Gipper, you mentioned 3 teams out of 10/12/14. All 3 aren't even in the same division so it wouldnt have been all that common for anyone to play all 3.
Gipper, you mentioned 3 teams out of 10/12/14. All 3 aren't even in the same division so it wouldnt have been all that common for anyone to play all 3.
Then add in Kentucky, Arkansas and Texas A&M. (lets see what kind of a rise this will get out of you
) -
And again, it takes two.
I'll end it there.
But one to bring it up. And in fact I never really engaged your argument, I just said "why are you bringing that up again?" Had I ignored it you would have thought I had no response. That's not me engaging, that's me dismissing while acknowledging I've addressed it before. Pretty simple.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login