NCAA Football 2012 Season Catch-All

Carlbear95 wrote:

Look at Cal! I will say it again that Cal would be better than 3-9 (though probably no better than 5-7) had it played an SEC schedule. Saying Bama or LSU is better than Oregon and Stanford is irrelevant because we would have lost either way by 70, but I'd take Tennessee, Vandy, Ole Miss, Auburn and Arkansas. Cal could win 2 or 3 of those 5, make noise with one silly unexpected upset, and play a 4 game non-conf schedule vs. at least 3 cupcakes instead of the 3-game non-conf schedule we play in the Pac.

Just to clarify, 3 of those teams are in the West, and 2 are in the East. It's very unlikely that you'd play all of those teams in any one year. You might only play 2 of them.

And Vandy is solid this year. Go look at Ole Miss's record - they're on the rise under Freeze. Arkansas was a top 10 team until this year. Auburn and Arkansas will be back. So will Tennessee.

Wow, Fedaykin, you've completely converted to an SEC fan. Every team is the greatest team ever. They only lose because they play other SEC teams. They could win any other conference out there. Rah rah SEC!

Need a damn rolleyes smiley face...

Stele wrote:

Wow, Fedaykin, you've completely converted to an SEC fan. Every team is the greatest team ever. They only lose because they play other SEC teams. They could win any other conference out there. Rah rah SEC!

Need a damn rolleyes smiley face...

Why? Those are all perfectly valid points.

Badferret wrote:
Stele wrote:

Wow, Fedaykin, you've completely converted to an SEC fan. Every team is the greatest team ever. They only lose because they play other SEC teams. They could win any other conference out there. Rah rah SEC!

Need a damn rolleyes smiley face...

Why? Those are all perfectly valid points. ;)

Yeah, you obviously have no idea which teams are good and bad if you're agreeing with Carl, Stele. I didn't say Arkansas, Auburn, and Tennessee aren't terrible this year - they are. Vandy and Ole Miss are not.

Bring some facts next time, not ignorant ad hominem bullsh*t.

Excuse me I'll quote you so you know which part I'm talking about:

Fedaykin98 wrote:

And Vandy is solid this year. Go look at Ole Miss's record - they're on the rise under Freeze. Arkansas was a top 10 team until this year. Auburn and Arkansas will be back. So will Tennessee.

They can't all be good teams. You just named every loser in the SEC, except Vandy, who yes, is actually good this year, and should have beat South Carolina (who is pretty overrated) if not for a horrible missed PI call that SC got away with on the final drive. But Ole Miss, Arkansas, Auburn, and Tennessee are all terrible right now. But you're spouting the conference's usual delusion that they are all great.

Thank you for quoting what I actually said and then lying about what I said afterwards - it makes it easy for everyone else to see how you like to operate.

Stele wrote:

Excuse me I'll quote you so you know which part I'm talking about:

Fedaykin98 wrote:

And Vandy is solid this year. Go look at Ole Miss's record - they're on the rise under Freeze. Arkansas was a top 10 team until this year. Auburn and Arkansas will be back. So will Tennessee.

They can't all be good teams. You just named every loser in the SEC, except Vandy, who yes, is actually good this year, and should have beat South Carolina (who is pretty overrated) if not for a horrible missed PI call that SC got away with on the final drive. But Ole Miss, Arkansas, Auburn, and Tennessee are all terrible right now. But you're spouting the conference's usual delusion that they are all great.

Gotta disagree with one small part. Ole Miss is playing quality ball right now. They almost knocked us off in Death Valley this past Saturday! They will be a force next year for sure and I am predicting they beat Mississippi State this weekend to become bowl eligible.

Stele is taking issue with your "x will be back" statements.
Stop talking over each other and have a discussion.
It could go something like

I feel the perennial powers of the SEC that have fallen this season (Auburn, Arkansas), will eventually return to their winning ways due to the name brand of those universities in recruiting.

or even

I find the argument in favor of a strong SEC to be based on the flawed assumption that their in conference games are harder than others. I would site the recent performances of Baylor against KSU and WVU against OU to suggest that this phenomena appears in the conference formerly known as the Big 12 as well.

SEC fans have poisoned the well a bit, with regards to sane, respectful discussion. When you regard the rest of the country as playing inferior football (nevermind the century of tradition at schools like Notre Dame) it tends to make having actual discourse. I'm always happy to lay down arms if SEC fans are willing to even explore the possibility that other schools could have difficult schedules and that since the SOS argument is based on polling that favors the SEC we're in a bit of a loop here until polling is removed as a criteria.

That's what I did, Boogle. The discussion wasn't even with Stele. It was a factual, unemotional reply to Carlbear.

Then Stele did his little character assassination routine.

DSGamer wrote:

SEC fans have poisoned the well a bit, with regards to sane, respectful discussion. When you regard the rest of the country as playing inferior football (nevermind the century of tradition at schools like Notre Dame) it tends to make having actual discourse. I'm always happy to lay down arms if SEC fans are willing to even explore the possibility that other schools could have difficult schedules and that since the SOS argument is based on polling that favors the SEC we're in a bit of a loop here until polling is removed as a criteria.

If you look at the SOS stuff I posted, it's not actually weighted towards the SEC. At least, those aren't the results.

And "SEC fans" are not a fair substitute for long-time Goodjers. Grump and badferret are two of the most laid-back, even-keeled posters around. I don't believe I've said any of the typical SEC >>>> all stuff, but I welcome quotes to the contrary. I believe what I've done is to pull for the SEC.

Thanks boogle, for sounding reasonable. I'm probably extra-sensitive to the "SEC SEC SEC" mantra because I hear it from all the UK fans, who almost enjoy attacking Louisville fans more than cheering for their own team. And it's so ridiculous coming from them, who are perennial bottom feeders, and haven't had a coach with a winning career record at UK since Bear Bryant. Yet they continue to persist in the belief they are "good by association" or something. It's baffling.

Fedaykin98 wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

SEC fans have poisoned the well a bit, with regards to sane, respectful discussion. When you regard the rest of the country as playing inferior football (nevermind the century of tradition at schools like Notre Dame) it tends to make having actual discourse. I'm always happy to lay down arms if SEC fans are willing to even explore the possibility that other schools could have difficult schedules and that since the SOS argument is based on polling that favors the SEC we're in a bit of a loop here until polling is removed as a criteria.

If you look at the SOS stuff I posted, it's not actually weighted towards the SEC. At least, those aren't the results.

And "SEC fans" are not a fair substitute for long-time Goodjers. Grump and badferret are two of the most laid-back, even-keeled posters around. I don't believe I've said any of the typical SEC >>>> all stuff, but I welcome quotes to the contrary. I believe what I've done is to pull for the SEC.

Hey! I'm laid back...RIGHT?.....RIGHT?!!

DSGamer wrote:

SEC fans have poisoned the well a bit, with regards to sane, respectful discussion. When you regard the rest of the country as playing inferior football (nevermind the century of tradition at schools like Notre Dame) it tends to make having actual discourse. I'm always happy to lay down arms if SEC fans are willing to even explore the possibility that other schools could have difficult schedules and that since the SOS argument is based on polling that favors the SEC we're in a bit of a loop here until polling is removed as a criteria.

Please see my post from a couple of days ago concerning the Fighting Irish.

Coolbeans wrote:

Here in SECland, everyone is screaming about ND and they don't deserve to be #1. I am going against that and think they very much deserve it! Here is why:

1. ND consistently plays among the toughest schedules in the land and this year is no exception.
2. They have beaten every team that has been put in front of them.
3. They do not play powderpuff teams like Samford, Sam Houston State and Woffard like every other major team does every single year.
4. Who else would it be as the last undefeated major team in the land??

Folks here are saying ND would lose 4-5 games if they played in the SEC. I say that is hogwash. ND's defense is scary good and their offense is really coming into it's own. They can play with and beat anybody. But the simple fact is they aren't in the SEC. Every team can't be in the SEC. They are independent which I greatly respect which means week in and week out they can schedule anyone. If they played in the SEC, would wins over Vanderbilt, Tennessee and Arkansas really count for much? I think they are fine right where they are.

Hey, I like the SEC as much as the next guy. If it was BYU or Boise State we were talking about, I'd be screaming with the best of them as their schedules are a joke. But this is ND.

They are #1 and have earned it.

Deal with it.

Quoted for awesome discussion post.

Badferret wrote:

I really don't see what the Terps get out of this.

Cash. Md's athletic department budget is a mess, and the university has cut a bunch of sports recently. I have no idea how they'll afford the ACC's exit fee.

That said, leave it to the Big 10 to make its football conference even weaker. It's addition by subtraction for the ACC.

Enix wrote:

. I have no idea how they'll afford the ACC's exit fee.

I answered that on Sat:

Under Armor CEO Selling $60 million in shares.

Maryland alum, and on the Board of Trustees at the school.

Gumbie wrote:
Fedaykin98 wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

SEC fans have poisoned the well a bit, with regards to sane, respectful discussion. When you regard the rest of the country as playing inferior football (nevermind the century of tradition at schools like Notre Dame) it tends to make having actual discourse. I'm always happy to lay down arms if SEC fans are willing to even explore the possibility that other schools could have difficult schedules and that since the SOS argument is based on polling that favors the SEC we're in a bit of a loop here until polling is removed as a criteria.

If you look at the SOS stuff I posted, it's not actually weighted towards the SEC. At least, those aren't the results.

And "SEC fans" are not a fair substitute for long-time Goodjers. Grump and badferret are two of the most laid-back, even-keeled posters around. I don't believe I've said any of the typical SEC >>>> all stuff, but I welcome quotes to the contrary. I believe what I've done is to pull for the SEC.

Hey! I'm laid back...RIGHT?.....RIGHT?!!

I lol'ed. People I've played with online extensively always get high marks in my book, Gumbie.

Stele wrote:
Enix wrote:

. I have no idea how they'll afford the ACC's exit fee.

I answered that on Sat:

Under Armor CEO Selling $60 million in shares.

Maryland alum, and on the Board of Trustees at the school.

Thanks. I missed that earlier.

You'd think the boosters would want to spend their money on the athletic program. Guess not.

Enix wrote:

You'd think the boosters would want to spend their money on the athletic program. Guess not.

Yeah you'd think not cutting sports would be a better use of a few million donation.

It seems to be all about football tv markets and money with this realignment stuff right now though. Conferences are chasing new markets and schools are chasing BCS bowl money and tv deals. Seems to be shaping towards 14 teams being the target number at this point. But who knows if we're done yet?

i38warhawk wrote:

I wrote a long post the other day about how ND deserves to be #1 and how the SEC is down, but not for long...but I guess I just hit preview and I never posted it, oh well.

[size=48][color=#CC2233]GRUDEN!![/size][/color]

Keep dreaming. He will be decked out in orange this time next year.

Gumbie wrote:
i38warhawk wrote:

I wrote a long post the other day about how ND deserves to be #1 and how the SEC is down, but not for long...but I guess I just hit preview and I never posted it, oh well.

[size=48][color=#CC2233]GRUDEN!![/size][/color]

Keep dreaming. He will be decked out in orange this time next year. :)

[size=48][color=#F77F00] GRUDEN [/size][/color]

I wrote a long post the other day about how ND deserves to be #1 and how the SEC is down, but not for long. I guess I just hit preview and I never posted it, oh well. All I have to say today...

[size=48][color=#CC2233]GRUDEN!![/size][/color]

I would like to see Gruden at Tennessee as I think he could really turn things around there. It would be instant credibility with every recruit in the land to play for a proven successful NFL coach. However, his offensive and defensive schemes are known to be amazingly complicated and I'm not sure that incoming freshmen are going to be able to really grasp his packages. Time will tell though. Sure would be interesting!

Fedaykin98 wrote:

That's what I did, Boogle. The discussion wasn't even with Stele. It was a factual, unemotional reply to Carlbear.

I have no idea how the SEC does its scheduling, so I agree I took a make believe schedule.

Point is the SEC bad teams are just as bad as Pac-12, Big-10, and Big-12 bad teams. Is the SEC elite very good? Yes... arguably best in the country. But Alabama smashing Arkansas 52-0 doesn't make Arkansas good (or prove anything for Alabama) and Ole Miss losing to Bama by 19 doesn't suddenly make Ole Miss a good team. Cal lost to stanfurd and USC by 18 and Ohio state by 7 are we a good team? No. My argument is that Cal's 3-9 record in the Pac-12 is not worse than a 2 to 5 win season in the SEC and if Cal swapped places with Kentucky (to hop on Stele's bandwagon), its not like Kentucky would suddenly be in the rose bowl picture.

Anyways enough is enough.. only thing that matters now is if Tedford is back and if not, who our next head coach is.. Stele, can you give Charlie Strong a heads up for us? Thanks.

Stele wrote:

It seems to be all about football tv markets and money with this realignment stuff right now though. Conferences are chasing new markets and schools are chasing BCS bowl money and tv deals. Seems to be shaping towards 14 teams being the target number at this point. But who knows if we're done yet?

I get where the Big Ten is coming from -- they want a toehold in the DC/Baltimore and NYC markets. Problem is, DC is a pro town, Baltimore is an afterthought and Rutgers is ... what's lower than an afterthought?

I'm still not exactly sure what's in it for Maryland. Yeah, I know, they'll get a lot more annual cash. But they're going to drop a huge wad of cash just to leave the ACC.

The Maryland moves puts the ACC in a weird spot. The smart money was on some combination of Florida State and Clemson bolting to the SEC, but that never happened and the ACC motored on along. Besides, the ACC has been adding, not losing schools. The last departure was South Carolina, who went independent 41 years ago. I figured Rutgers was on the short list to join -- the location is on the Eastern Seaboard, and it's a research-intensive state U like the bulk of the ACC schools.

@ Carl: Cal might have been better if you had a decent QB. Maynard wasn't on anyone's radar when he played here in high school. Then all of a sudden he was starting at Buffalo, then followed his half-brother (and the Nike money train) to Cal. Tedford made his rep by developing QBs. Turns out he found the one guy he couldn't make better.

Now there's talk of Boise State, BYU, and SDSU rejoining the Mountain West. Who knows. BYU seems to be happy as an independent, and ESPN is happy with their ratings performance, so I have a hard time believing they'll go back. The problems currently for BYU are scheduling good opponents and BCS access in the future.

It all makes me wonder how good of a conference the Mountain West could have been if everyone had stayed put. Boise, TCU, Utah, and BYU would have been fun to watch. Air Force was also one of those teams that had the potential to beat most teams on any given Saturday with their triple option (which everyone else hated). And if Brady Hoke had stayed with SDSU....

And finally, a lot of sports folks here think that Gary Anderson (of Utah State, that just beat a ranked Louisiana State) is going to be poached by one of these bigger openings.

@Carl - I don't think anyone here is saying Kentucky or whoever are good, or would be in any conference. We're saying Vandy is good and Ole Miss is not bad. They are 5-6 and will likely get bowl eligible next week against a crappy team you should have included in your argument - Miss. State.

Ole Miss is getting respect in the SEC for playing LSU and A&M extremely close, and I think all of their unfortunate losses are to top 25 teams. Which doesn't make you great or anything, but they're not the cupcakes that Tenn, Arky, and Auburn have been this year.

Also: Gruden slap fight! I almost made a post about the Gruden to Arky rumor a couple weeks ago, but Gumbie went kinda quiet and I was hoping to taunt him with it.