i went to Purdue, but i'm a huge notre dame football fan. I hate Illinois and love Hoosier basketball!
lVlellovv
offline
offline
Originally posted by ryan_grant-25
well... at least we have a team that can make it to the championship game.... and if you thought PSU stood a chance against USC at all..... you might be mental. unfair game for them, especially 30 miles from USCs home feild....
Texas played USC in the Rose Bowl for the Championship in 06...didn't seem to matter much then.
And the Pac 10 is not better than the Big 12..by far, nor is the Big 10 even remotely close to the Big 12. SEC is dominant and will stay dominant because the best football is played in the South PERIOD. (recruiting out of high school)
And the Big 10 making it to the championship game 2 years in a row is fuckin stupid, there's 1 or 2 teams in that conference that are worth a shit, the rest are pushovers and so therefore the voters think Ohio State are A LOT better than what they are and in turn get thrown into the National Championship just to get their ass whooped.
Texas should of even beat them by more than what they did...even with Texas playing poorly like they did against Tech they still dominated 3 out of the 4 quarters. with the exception of a few big players because C.U. Brown blows at the CB position.
well... at least we have a team that can make it to the championship game.... and if you thought PSU stood a chance against USC at all..... you might be mental. unfair game for them, especially 30 miles from USCs home feild....
Texas played USC in the Rose Bowl for the Championship in 06...didn't seem to matter much then.
And the Pac 10 is not better than the Big 12..by far, nor is the Big 10 even remotely close to the Big 12. SEC is dominant and will stay dominant because the best football is played in the South PERIOD. (recruiting out of high school)
And the Big 10 making it to the championship game 2 years in a row is fuckin stupid, there's 1 or 2 teams in that conference that are worth a shit, the rest are pushovers and so therefore the voters think Ohio State are A LOT better than what they are and in turn get thrown into the National Championship just to get their ass whooped.
Texas should of even beat them by more than what they did...even with Texas playing poorly like they did against Tech they still dominated 3 out of the 4 quarters. with the exception of a few big players because C.U. Brown blows at the CB position.
Last edited Feb 13, 2009 20:45:01
jdbolick
offline
offline
The ACC actually had the best record versus the other conferences the last two seasons.
ejs1111
offline
offline
the quality of football is a silly arguement...
I'm proud of how well the Big Ten conference represents themselves- especially given the disadvantages they have compared to the SEC/Pac-10/Big-12. I'm not trying to make them sound like excuses- i'm just stating facts and information that i've learned growing up in a college town.
1 disadvantage... location- its tough to convince kids to come and play in the midwest or in the snow when they can play on the coast or in the sun... and play football ALL YEAR ROUND. Trust me- that matters.
2nd disadvantage ... the Big Ten is the only conference mentioned that doesn't play a title game- this matters because our football season ENDS 2 weeks earlier than everyone elses. Football is timing- the extra 2 weeks PLUS a game that the other conference top teams play provide a big advantage come bowl season... ask any AD or coach (I have- my uncle is an AD). Imagine having over 1 month 'off' and trying to play a game? i'm sure thats tough...
3rd disadvantage... this is the biggest reason imo- most Big Ten schools are BETTER schools for learning- and they don't have majors where you can 'hide' athletes. Not all schools of course- but alot of them. Its just flat out too difficult to get the dumb football jocks to come here- because they cannot stay eligible. Its just easier to go to an SEC school where they can play football year-round, and the education quality is lower.
i'm sorry if these comments offend anyone- I know the SEC/Pac-10/Big-12 have excellent schools... but they also have majors for athletes- thats all i'm saying
I'm proud of how well the Big Ten conference represents themselves- especially given the disadvantages they have compared to the SEC/Pac-10/Big-12. I'm not trying to make them sound like excuses- i'm just stating facts and information that i've learned growing up in a college town.
1 disadvantage... location- its tough to convince kids to come and play in the midwest or in the snow when they can play on the coast or in the sun... and play football ALL YEAR ROUND. Trust me- that matters.
2nd disadvantage ... the Big Ten is the only conference mentioned that doesn't play a title game- this matters because our football season ENDS 2 weeks earlier than everyone elses. Football is timing- the extra 2 weeks PLUS a game that the other conference top teams play provide a big advantage come bowl season... ask any AD or coach (I have- my uncle is an AD). Imagine having over 1 month 'off' and trying to play a game? i'm sure thats tough...
3rd disadvantage... this is the biggest reason imo- most Big Ten schools are BETTER schools for learning- and they don't have majors where you can 'hide' athletes. Not all schools of course- but alot of them. Its just flat out too difficult to get the dumb football jocks to come here- because they cannot stay eligible. Its just easier to go to an SEC school where they can play football year-round, and the education quality is lower.
i'm sorry if these comments offend anyone- I know the SEC/Pac-10/Big-12 have excellent schools... but they also have majors for athletes- thats all i'm saying
jdbolick
offline
offline
I don't think the academics argument holds much water. The Big 10 does have Northwestern, but the SEC has Vanderbilt. I don't think there are many guys who get into Florida that wouldn't be let into Ohio State. Plus the conference championship game makes things harder, not easier. You have to win one more game against a top opponent in order to make the national championship.
jomomma2
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
I don't think the academics argument holds much water. The Big 10 does have Northwestern, but the SEC has Vanderbilt. I don't think there are many guys who get into Florida that wouldn't be let into Ohio State. Plus the conference championship game makes things harder, not easier. You have to win one more game against a top opponent in order to make the national championship.
totally agree.
I don't think the academics argument holds much water. The Big 10 does have Northwestern, but the SEC has Vanderbilt. I don't think there are many guys who get into Florida that wouldn't be let into Ohio State. Plus the conference championship game makes things harder, not easier. You have to win one more game against a top opponent in order to make the national championship.
totally agree.
lVlellovv
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
I don't think the academics argument holds much water. The Big 10 does have Northwestern, but the SEC has Vanderbilt. I don't think there are many guys who get into Florida that wouldn't be let into Ohio State. Plus the conference championship game makes things harder, not easier. You have to win one more game against a top opponent in order to make the national championship.
one of the few things JD says that are true
but yeah in all honesty those are pretty much excuses you just used for the Big 10, the reason they lose isn't because of the 1 month off, it's because the competition they play isn't up to snuff. Like I said though it is harder for Northern/Midwest states to get top talent because all of the talent is in the South whether it be Florida, Georgia, Alabam, Texas, Louisiana and whether it's because better football is in the south because of the weather or whatever, that's just where it's at. That's why SEC schools are so good and why Texas and Oklahoma are good just about every year.
I don't think the academics argument holds much water. The Big 10 does have Northwestern, but the SEC has Vanderbilt. I don't think there are many guys who get into Florida that wouldn't be let into Ohio State. Plus the conference championship game makes things harder, not easier. You have to win one more game against a top opponent in order to make the national championship.
one of the few things JD says that are true
but yeah in all honesty those are pretty much excuses you just used for the Big 10, the reason they lose isn't because of the 1 month off, it's because the competition they play isn't up to snuff. Like I said though it is harder for Northern/Midwest states to get top talent because all of the talent is in the South whether it be Florida, Georgia, Alabam, Texas, Louisiana and whether it's because better football is in the south because of the weather or whatever, that's just where it's at. That's why SEC schools are so good and why Texas and Oklahoma are good just about every year.
lVlellovv
offline
offline
oh yeah, Pac 10 doesn't play a championship game either, but California is a great state for football as well.
jdbolick
offline
offline
I agree with Stewart Mandel of SI that it goes in cycles. The Big 10 used to be better than the SEC in football and at some point they'll be better again. No conference has ever stayed dominant for a long period of time.
ejs1111
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
I agree with Stewart Mandel of SI that it goes in cycles. The Big 10 used to be better than the SEC in football and at some point they'll be better again. No conference has ever stayed dominant for a long period of time.
those are all excellent points fellas... it does go in cycles
maybe the big 10 is just in a 'down' cycle right now compared to the other conferences listed.
I agree with Stewart Mandel of SI that it goes in cycles. The Big 10 used to be better than the SEC in football and at some point they'll be better again. No conference has ever stayed dominant for a long period of time.
those are all excellent points fellas... it does go in cycles
maybe the big 10 is just in a 'down' cycle right now compared to the other conferences listed.
Ts-Rock
offline
offline
Big Ten had Ohio State and Penn State this last season. Off the top of my head I can't remember anyone else being good. SEC had 3 separate school ranked #1 at one point in the season (Bama/UF/UGA-never should have IMO).
And this past year has been the worst year I can remember for SEC schools in over a decade. UGA, LSU, Tenn, Auburn all had disappointing seasons. Florida was the only true dominate team. Bama was overated IMO. They sure as hell beat us, but that's not saying much. I agree you see shifts in conference powers, but the SEC by far has the best Head Coaches and constantly bring in top talent. I foresee people saying and believing that the SEC as being weaker over the next couple of years, but in reality the league is soooo freaking deep that it will almost be impossible for one team to make it out undefeated. Hence you will have your weaker conferences with no championship game "slide" into a title game.
My point is if you are a top Big Ten and Pac-10 schools you only have to play one MAYBE two tough conference games. The SEC and Big XII have 3-4 games every year vs ranked schools + a conference championship game vs a top ranked team (Bama vs UF was #1 vs #2). IMO only the Big XII rivals the SEC in conference supremacy.
- updated today (http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=14&yr=2009)
Scout.com's recruiting class for 2009 has 10 of the 12 SEC schools in the Top 25!!!! 10 of the 12!!! Nobody else has more than 3.....That's pure domination!
Top 25 2009 Recruiting Class:
1. SEC - 10
2. Big XII, Big 10, Pac-10, ACC - 3
3. Big East - 2
4. Independent - 1
The SEC also have 30 of the top 100 High School players committed to their schools.
Top 100 Players:
1. SEC - 30
2. Pac-10 - 16 (10 by USC)
3. Big Ten - 13
4. Big 12 - 11
And this past year has been the worst year I can remember for SEC schools in over a decade. UGA, LSU, Tenn, Auburn all had disappointing seasons. Florida was the only true dominate team. Bama was overated IMO. They sure as hell beat us, but that's not saying much. I agree you see shifts in conference powers, but the SEC by far has the best Head Coaches and constantly bring in top talent. I foresee people saying and believing that the SEC as being weaker over the next couple of years, but in reality the league is soooo freaking deep that it will almost be impossible for one team to make it out undefeated. Hence you will have your weaker conferences with no championship game "slide" into a title game.
My point is if you are a top Big Ten and Pac-10 schools you only have to play one MAYBE two tough conference games. The SEC and Big XII have 3-4 games every year vs ranked schools + a conference championship game vs a top ranked team (Bama vs UF was #1 vs #2). IMO only the Big XII rivals the SEC in conference supremacy.
- updated today (http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=14&yr=2009)
Scout.com's recruiting class for 2009 has 10 of the 12 SEC schools in the Top 25!!!! 10 of the 12!!! Nobody else has more than 3.....That's pure domination!
Top 25 2009 Recruiting Class:
1. SEC - 10
2. Big XII, Big 10, Pac-10, ACC - 3
3. Big East - 2
4. Independent - 1
The SEC also have 30 of the top 100 High School players committed to their schools.
Top 100 Players:
1. SEC - 30
2. Pac-10 - 16 (10 by USC)
3. Big Ten - 13
4. Big 12 - 11
jdbolick
offline
offline
The SEC may dominate high school recruiting, but it and the ACC have been about equal in terms of NFL draft picks. Plus the ACC has had a winning record versus the SEC the last two seasons. Along those lines, the ACC actually has better depth in football than the SEC, but doesn't have the elite teams at the top that the SEC does.
Ts-Rock
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
The SEC may dominate high school recruiting, but it and the ACC have been about equal in terms of NFL draft picks.
High School recruiting is what makes College football, not arguing anything about which school or conference turns out better pro athletes...hell the greatest WR (Rice) and RB (Payton) in NFL didn't even play D-1 football.
Originally posted by jdbolick
Plus the ACC has had a winning record versus the SEC the last two seasons. Along those lines, the ACC actually has better depth in football than the SEC, but doesn't have the elite teams at the top that the SEC does.
I think ACC went 6-4 vs ACC this year, not sure about 2007. Like I mentioned in my OP the SEC had it's worst year I have seen in the last decade, but I would go as far as to say that the ACC has better depth. If you went down the line and played 1 vs 1 all the way down to 12 vs 12 I say the SEC wins at least 8 of the 12 games.
The SEC may dominate high school recruiting, but it and the ACC have been about equal in terms of NFL draft picks.
High School recruiting is what makes College football, not arguing anything about which school or conference turns out better pro athletes...hell the greatest WR (Rice) and RB (Payton) in NFL didn't even play D-1 football.
Originally posted by jdbolick
Plus the ACC has had a winning record versus the SEC the last two seasons. Along those lines, the ACC actually has better depth in football than the SEC, but doesn't have the elite teams at the top that the SEC does.
I think ACC went 6-4 vs ACC this year, not sure about 2007. Like I mentioned in my OP the SEC had it's worst year I have seen in the last decade, but I would go as far as to say that the ACC has better depth. If you went down the line and played 1 vs 1 all the way down to 12 vs 12 I say the SEC wins at least 8 of the 12 games.
Ts-Rock
offline
offline
Originally posted by ryan_grant-25
USC will win it all next season, just FYI...
yea, the exports have said that the last 5 years....time will tell
USC will win it all next season, just FYI...
yea, the exports have said that the last 5 years....time will tell
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
