[WeWantTheVest]

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

Oklahoma lost to Notre Dame (Badly), who almost lost to Pitt and BYU.
BYU lost to a bottom-feeder Utah and
Pitt lost to Youngstown St! Therefore the Whole Big 12 couldnt compete against Youngstown St. Wiat..... WHAT??????????????????? Maybe we should rethink our logic!

Haha, this team lost to that team who almost lost to this team who lost to that team. Good stuff.

[BamaChamps]

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

say what you will, but here are some facts. SEC plays a harder Schedule overall and thats the bottom line. No matter OOC or In conf. looking at it all the SEC plays harder games. This includes bowls, while SEC teams dont play until new year eve, Pac 12 and Big 12 are playing Pre Christmas bowls vs non bcs teams. So answer me this all you Pac12 and Big 12 fans.. WHY arnt your top teams playing more and better road games?
Top PAC 12 USC/Oregon, Big 12 Oklahoma/Texas, SEC Too many but LSU/Alabama
Since 2008(did 08 because for some reason ESPN didnt show rankings of teams on Schedules before for some reason) Ranked Teams played/Top 10 played/ Ranked OOC teams played/ Ranked away from home OOC (true road, bowls and neutral).

USC- 16 ranked teams (9-7)- top 10, 8(4-4)/ 4 top 25 ooc (4-0)-3 away
Oregon- 20 ranked teams (15-5)- top 10, 9 (5-4)/ 7 top 25 ooc(3-4)-7 away
Oklahoma- 26 ranked teams (16-10)- top 10, 9 (4-5)/ 7 top 25 ooc (3-4)-5 away
Texas-21 ranked teams (9-12)/ top 10- 11 (4-7)/ 2 ooc top 25(2bowls) (1-1)-2 away
Alabama- 29 ranked teams (22-7)/ Top 10- 17 (12-5)/ 8 ooc top 25 (7-1)- 7 away
LSU-29ranked teams (18-11)/top 10- 14 (6-8)/7 top 25 ooc (6-1)-6 away

Now lets take away Bowl games and Look at top 25 ooc games.
Alabama 5 games 5-0 vs. ranked OOC. 3 neutral, 1 road, 1 home
LSU 4 games 4-0 vs. ranked OOC. 2 neutral, 1 road, 1 home
USC 3 games 3-0 vs. ranked OOC. 1 home, 2 road
ORegon 3 games 1-2 vs. ranked OOC. 1 home, 1 road, 1 neutral
Oklahoma 6 games 3-3 vs. ranked OOC. 3 home, 2 away, 1 neutral
Texas 0 games. 0-0 vs. ranked OOC. O home, 0 away, 0 neutral

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...............

Way to break it down. I can't wait to see the haters respond to that. Which they probably wont, unless they say the same old ridiculous SEC

[WeWantTheVest]

I'm on my phone, so I won't go as in depth as I'd like. Since you went back ten years I'll do the same. Here are the OOC games the Buckeyes played since 2002:

Texas Tech
Washington State
Cincinnati x3
Washington x2
NC State x2
Texas x2
USC x2
Miami x2
Cal
Colorado

Upcoming OOC games:
Cal
Va Tech x2
Cincinnati x2
Oklahoma x2
North Carolina x2
TCU x2
Oregon x2
BC x2
Texas x2

Some of those games are less than impressive, but as you pointed out they have no way of knowing when they schedule them. Ohio State consistently finishes at the top, wins their conference and is 6-3 in BCS games. Oh, and they are undefeated so far this season. They have had some embarrassing moments, but to take anything away from what they've done is ignorant. I won't say they've been more impressive, because there are those two big losses in the NC game. They definitely deserve more respect than they get though.

I can get more in depth later, but shouldn't really need to.

[LandRun89']

I like the relevance to each and every season, this week:
#1 KSU
#2 UO
#3 ND
#4 UA
#5 UG
etc,...

[GEAUXTIGERS]

Originally Posted by WeWantTheVest

I'm on my phone, so I won't go as in depth as I'd like. Since you went back ten years I'll do the same. Here are the OOC games the Buckeyes played since 2002:

Texas Tech
Washington State
Cincinnati x3
Washington x2
NC State x2
Texas x2
USC x2
Miami x2
Cal
Colorado

Upcoming OOC games:
Cal
Va Tech x2
Cincinnati x2
Oklahoma x2
North Carolina x2
TCU x2
Oregon x2
BC x2
Texas x2

Some of those games are less than impressive, but as you pointed out they have no way of knowing when they schedule them. Ohio State consistently finishes at the top, wins their conference and is 6-3 in BCS games. Oh, and they are undefeated so far this season. They have had some embarrassing moments, but to take anything away from what they've done is ignorant. I won't say they've been more impressive, because there are those two big losses in the NC game. They definitely deserve more respect than they get though.

I can get more in depth later, but shouldn't really need to.

Thats a respectable Schedule. Thanks for posting. Waiting on the PAC 12 and Big 12 teams now, as they are the ones doing most of the attacking of the SEC schedules

[scottc]

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

say what you will, but here are some facts. SEC plays a harder Schedule overall and thats the bottom line. No matter OOC or In conf. looking at it all the SEC plays harder games. This includes bowls, while SEC teams dont play until new year eve, Pac 12 and Big 12 are playing Pre Christmas bowls vs non bcs teams. So answer me this all you Pac12 and Big 12 fans.. WHY arnt your top teams playing more and better road games?
Top PAC 12 USC/Oregon, Big 12 Oklahoma/Texas, SEC Too many but LSU/Alabama
Since 2008(did 08 because for some reason ESPN didnt show rankings of teams on Schedules before for some reason) Ranked Teams played/Top 10 played/ Ranked OOC teams played/ Ranked away from home OOC (true road, bowls and neutral).

USC- 16 ranked teams (9-7)- top 10, 8(4-4)/ 4 top 25 ooc (4-0)-3 away
Oregon- 20 ranked teams (15-5)- top 10, 9 (5-4)/ 7 top 25 ooc(3-4)-7 away
Oklahoma- 26 ranked teams (16-10)- top 10, 9 (4-5)/ 7 top 25 ooc (3-4)-5 away
Texas-21 ranked teams (9-12)/ top 10- 11 (4-7)/ 2 ooc top 25(2bowls) (1-1)-2 away
Alabama- 29 ranked teams (22-7)/ Top 10- 17 (12-5)/ 8 ooc top 25 (7-1)- 7 away
LSU-29ranked teams (18-11)/top 10- 14 (6-8)/7 top 25 ooc (6-1)-6 away

Now lets take away Bowl games and Look at top 25 ooc games.
Alabama 5 games 5-0 vs. ranked OOC. 3 neutral, 1 road, 1 home
LSU 4 games 4-0 vs. ranked OOC. 2 neutral, 1 road, 1 home
USC 3 games 3-0 vs. ranked OOC. 1 home, 2 road
ORegon 3 games 1-2 vs. ranked OOC. 1 home, 1 road, 1 neutral
Oklahoma 6 games 3-3 vs. ranked OOC. 3 home, 2 away, 1 neutral
Texas 0 games. 0-0 vs. ranked OOC. O home, 0 away, 0 neutral

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...............

Lets be honest about a couple of things....
1) your data is skewed.
2) your data is not correct.
3) your data is bias.
4) your sample is incomplete

1) Obviously the SEC would have more games OOC against ranked opponents. But thats because the Pac12 plays 9 conference games, or 25% less OOC games. And if you think about it, when you are looking at the elite SEC teams, they should have at least 1 extra game against a top10 team due to their conf champ game. The data will be skewed in the favor of the SEC, obviously.

2) your data isnt correct, because like most uninformed people, you use "ranked at the time played" instead of using final rankings. So go ahead and take credit for playing an overhyped #8 Clemson in week 1 of 2008 cause they ended unranked.

3) your data is bias. The fact that the SEC teams play MORE D1-aa / Sun Belt teams, each of the conference opponents are more likely to be ranked with their inflated records.
For example, take a look at the inflated record of Ole Miss vs a non-inflated Cal this year.I would put serious money that Cal would be a 5 or 6 win team in the SEC. Thats right, AT LEAST a 2 win difference because of the ease of schedule.
USC NEVER... NEVER plays a d1-aa.

Lets think about the typical opponent WAC>SUN Belt, MWC>ACC/BIG EAST

4) you put in your example USC, but they have not been bowl eligible, nor have they had the full 85 scholarships to compete against the 85++++ that the oversigning SEC has.


HMmmmmmmmmm........

[LandRun89']

Originally Posted by scottc

Lets be honest about a couple of things....
1) your data is skewed.
2) your data is not correct.
3) your data is bias.
4) your sample is incomplete

1) Obviously the SEC would have more games OOC against ranked opponents. But thats because the Pac12 plays 9 conference games, or 25% less OOC games. And if you think about it, when you are looking at the elite SEC teams, they should have at least 1 extra game against a top10 team due to their conf champ game. The data will be skewed in the favor of the SEC, obviously.

2) your data isnt correct, because like most uninformed people, you use "ranked at the time played" instead of using final rankings. So go ahead and take credit for playing an overhyped #8 Clemson in week 1 of 2008 cause they ended unranked.

3) your data is bias. The fact that the SEC teams play MORE D1-aa / Sun Belt teams, each of the conference opponents are more likely to be ranked with their inflated records.
For example, take a look at the inflated record of Ole Miss vs a non-inflated Cal this year.I would put serious money that Cal would be a 5 or 6 win team in the SEC. Thats right, AT LEAST a 2 win difference because of the ease of schedule.
USC NEVER... NEVER plays a d1-aa.

Lets think about the typical opponent WAC>SUN Belt, MWC>ACC/BIG EAST

4) you put in your example USC, but they have not been bowl eligible, nor have they had the full 85 scholarships to compete against the 85++++ that the oversigning SEC has.


HMmmmmmmmmm........

Kudos Scott!... Way to be on the ball!...

[GEAUXTIGERS]

Originally Posted by scottc

Lets be honest about a couple of things....
1) your data is skewed.
2) your data is not correct.
3) your data is bias.
4) your sample is incomplete

1) Obviously the SEC would have more games OOC against ranked opponents. But thats because the Pac12 plays 9 conference games, or 25% less OOC games. And if you think about it, when you are looking at the elite SEC teams, they should have at least 1 extra game against a top10 team due to their conf champ game. The data will be skewed in the favor of the SEC, obviously.

2) your data isnt correct, because like most uninformed people, you use "ranked at the time played" instead of using final rankings. So go ahead and take credit for playing an overhyped #8 Clemson in week 1 of 2008 cause they ended unranked.

3) your data is bias. The fact that the SEC teams play MORE D1-aa / Sun Belt teams, each of the conference opponents are more likely to be ranked with their inflated records.
For example, take a look at the inflated record of Ole Miss vs a non-inflated Cal this year.I would put serious money that Cal would be a 5 or 6 win team in the SEC. Thats right, AT LEAST a 2 win difference because of the ease of schedule.
USC NEVER... NEVER plays a d1-aa.

Lets think about the typical opponent WAC>SUN Belt, MWC>ACC/BIG EAST

4) you put in your example USC, but they have not been bowl eligible, nor have they had the full 85 scholarships to compete against the 85++++ that the oversigning SEC has.


HMmmmmmmmmm........

1.) the claim was the the SEC doesnt play elite OOC games. especially on the road. if this was true, would it matter that the Pansy 12 plays one less(25% less) OOC game? The Pansy 12 sould at least be even with the SEC in Elite games played, if the claim was true.. then why do you go on talking about the SECCG? thats not OOC.. What about the Big 12, they played 4 OOC games before, why are there numbers behind, and why are they not attacked for it?
2.)Again the claim was that the SEC was Unwilling to play Elite OOC games. So if a team plays the #8 ranked team they are showing WILLINGNESS to play elite teams OOC. Doesnt matter if the ranking is correct or not. Willingness Willingness. And Im sure if I did it the other way, it would look the same!
3.) Doesnt 1 and 3 contradict each other?

Originally Posted by scottc

Obviously the SEC would have more games OOC against ranked opponents. The fact that the SEC teams play MORE D1-aa / Sun Belt teams

Yeah the SEC plays the most crappy OOC teams but obviously they play the most Ranked OOC teams. Because the SEC wont schedule Elite OOC games, thats why they play the most ranked OOC teams... Get it?
4.) yes Im well aware of the fact that USC cheated and still could only win one Championship vs an Overrated(I can play that game too!) Oklahoma team. Auburn would of killed USC.

Since you didnt like my post because Im "uninformed", Lets look at Facts I cant "skew"(Im sure you will find a way to say they are Skewed) SEC vs. The PANSY 10. (No Utah,Colorado,Missouri, Texas AM) Last 10 years.
Arizona- 03Loss Home LSU, 06 Loss away LSU - 0-2
Arizona St- 05 Loss Home LSU,08 Loss Home Georgia, 09 Loss away Georgia- 0-3
Cal- 06 Loss away Tennessee, 07 Win home Tennessee- 1-1
Oregon- 03 win @Miss St., 10 win @ Tennessee, 11 loss vs. Auburn, 11 loss vs. LSU- 2-2
Oregon st.- 04 loss @ LSU- 0-1
Stanford- 0-0
UCLA- 2008 win home Tennessee, 2009 win @ Tennessee- 2-0
USC- 2003 win @ Auburn, 2005 win home Arkansas, 2006 win @ Arkansas- 3-0
Washington- 09 loss home LSU, 11 loss @ LSU- 0-2
Washington st- 06 loss @ Auburn, 0-1

PAC 10 - 8-12 vs the SEC in the last 10 years.
11 road game, 7 home, 2 neutral
SEC has 7 National Titles in the last 10 years... Pac 10 has 1.
Look lets quit the crap. I know you all are just mad that the SEC has been so good over the last few year and your pulling at anything to try to take away from what the SEC has done. I dont blame you. I would be angry too if I was in your shoes. I would be saying the same things. But what the SEC has done is amazing. You cant deny 6 N.Cs in a row. it is what it is. And now it looks like it might continue. Sorry bout it, But as for me and my house I will enjoy SEC Football. Im done on this subject.

[scottc]

You have a lot to learn oh miss-informed one.

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

1.) the claim was the the SEC doesnt play elite OOC games. especially on the road. if this was true, would it matter that the Pansy 12 plays one less(25% less) OOC game? The Pansy 12 sould at least be even with the SEC in Elite games played, if the claim was true.. then why do you go on talking about the SECCG? thats not OOC.. What about the Big 12, they played 4 OOC games before, why are there numbers behind, and why are they not attacked for it?

you are mixing up 1 stat with another and you actually failed to READ my post.

This is what I wrote:
Obviously the SEC would have more games OOC against ranked opponents. But thats because the Pac12 plays 9 conference games, or 25% less OOC games.
Pause... wait for it.
And if you think about it, when you are looking at the elite SEC teams, they should have at least 1 extra game against a top10 team due to their conf champ game. The data will be skewed in the favor of the SEC, obviously.

The chart showed 4 criteria. 2 of them being
OOC vs ranked opponents (the first 2 sentences, starting with "obviously")
Games against top10 (the next 2 sentences starting with "and if you think about it" [which you didnt think]) The 2nd bolded area has NO mention of OOC.

So in those 2 DIFFERENT criteria, the way that the SEC schedule does indeed skew the data. Hence you are wrong (or inline with SEC education).

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

2.)Again the claim was that the SEC was Unwilling to play Elite OOC games. So if a team plays the #8 ranked team they are showing WILLINGNESS to play elite teams OOC. Doesnt matter if the ranking is correct or not. Willingness Willingness. And Im sure if I did it the other way, it would look the same!

This is the biggest donkey-poop excuse ever.
Ok, by that flawed logic.... the SEC is the best conference with all of the elite teams, the fact that the SEC teams play OOC games against non-SEC teams means that they are unwilling to play elite OOC games, doesnt matter if the ranking is correct.

(if you didnt get the above, ill break it down for you... you are claiming "elite wins" against elite HYPED teams, not elite QUALITY teams).

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

3.) Doesnt 1 and 3 contradict each other? Yeah the SEC plays the most crappy OOC teams but obviously they play the most Ranked OOC teams. Because the SEC wont schedule Elite OOC games, thats why they play the most ranked OOC teams... Get it?

You would think they contradict each other, but thats what you get for thinking.
Example:
Lets say ALL SEC teams schedules a ranked opponent, and 3 sunbelt/d1-aa cupcakes. They will then meet your criteria of playing a ranked opponent and having at worst a 3-1 record. This 3-1 (or 4-0) record is a record that any team (except Washington St) can produce. This will then produce a lot of good looking records for the SEC and create an inflated record, all while satisfying the "ranked OOC" criteria.
Get it?

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

4.) yes Im well aware of the fact that USC cheated and still could only win one Championship vs an Overrated(I can play that game too!) Oklahoma team. Auburn would of killed USC.

Yes... you are so correct, Auburn would have killed USC, especially since
1) the previous year when USC and Auburn met, Auburn showed signs of being able to demolish USC
2) Auburn DEMOLISHED their opponent in a close game while USC BARELY beat Oklahoma.
3) USC was at its highest point and showed in 2005 that they were not deserving of the title the following year and Auburn had a STELLAR season.
(obviously the top 3 were sarcasm at its finest)
4) Funny how we are talking about USC cheating when SEC has been notorious for cheating.

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

Since you didnt like my post because Im "uninformed", Lets look at Facts I cant "skew"(Im sure you will find a way to say they are Skewed) SEC vs. The PANSY 10. (No Utah,Colorado,Missouri, Texas AM) Last 10 years.
Arizona- 03Loss Home LSU, 06 Loss away LSU - 0-2
Arizona St- 05 Loss Home LSU,08 Loss Home Georgia, 09 Loss away Georgia- 0-3
Cal- 06 Loss away Tennessee, 07 Win home Tennessee- 1-1
Oregon- 03 win @Miss St., 10 win @ Tennessee, 11 loss vs. Auburn, 11 loss vs. LSU- 2-2
Oregon st.- 04 loss @ LSU- 0-1
Stanford- 0-0
UCLA- 2008 win home Tennessee, 2009 win @ Tennessee- 2-0
USC- 2003 win @ Auburn, 2005 win home Arkansas, 2006 win @ Arkansas- 3-0
Washington- 09 loss home LSU, 11 loss @ LSU- 0-2
Washington st- 06 loss @ Auburn, 0-1
PAC 10 - 8-12 vs the SEC in the last 10 years.

Actually, those are once against skewed. Sure, SEC is 8-12, but out of the 20 games, how many of them were they favored? (would be an interesting comparison to see based on pre-game and post-season basis, but I guarantee that the Pac12 has more upset wins than the SEC).
And even you admit that the Pac12 has had only 7 home games.

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

SEC has 7 National Titles in the last 10 years... Pac 10 has 1.

As a result of SEC being considered first for any slot when teams have the same record due to playing against overly inflated records by other SEC teams... noted. Thanks.

Originally Posted by GEAUXTIGERS

Look lets quit the crap. I know you all are just mad that the SEC has been so good over the last few year and your pulling at anything to try to take away from what the SEC has done. I dont blame you. I would be angry too if I was in your shoes. I would be saying the same things. But what the SEC has done is amazing. You cant deny 6 N.Cs in a row. it is what it is. And now it looks like it might continue. Sorry bout it, But as for me and my house I will enjoy SEC Football. Im done on this subject.

This is the biggest flaw in SEC minds. They believe they are right because their team or conference is winning. This has nothing to do with the position of a team, it is an unbias observation.
Trust me, just because Alabama is in position to win (and even if they win the title) doesnt make that BamaFan's arguments right. His arguments are still flawed regardless of his team's performance. His college football forum arguing doesnt go up 10 points because his teams win.
Instead he is just blinded by winning and he can ignore the truth of this flawed system because he benefits from the flaw.

SEC fans should just stick to being fans because that is all they are good at.

[BamaChamps]

Originally Posted by scottc

This is the biggest flaw in SEC minds. They believe they are right because their team or conference is winning. This has nothing to do with the position of a team, it is an unbias observation.

What are you saying? Winning does makes you right. Losing certianly does not. To this point in the season none of the current ranked SEC teams has lost OOC. Notre Dame has beaten a ranked team in the Big 12 Oklahoma, Big 10 Mich, and PAC 12 Stanford.

Originally Posted by scottc

Trust me, just because Alabama is in position to win (and even if they win the title) doesnt make that BamaFan's arguments right. His arguments are still flawed regardless of his team's performance. His college football forum arguing doesnt go up 10 points because his teams win.
Instead he is just blinded by winning and he can ignore the truth of this flawed system because he benefits from the flaw.

So the only objective factor (winning on the field) doesn't matter because the SEC is destroying the competition, but your opinion does. OOC games against ranked teams, bowl games against ranked teams and teams with comparable records, and how your conference does in championships games does matter and really are the only things that matters. Everything else is opinions.

Originally Posted by scottc

SEC fans should just stick to being fans because that is all they are good at.

You sir, should stick to being a sore loser because you are so awesome at that.