Extra MustardSI On CampusFantasyPhoto GalleriesSwimsuitVideoFanNationSI KidsTNT
SI.com college football writer Stewart Mandel shares his commentary, analysis and random tidbits on the latest developments around the country.
1/01/2008 07:11:00 PM

More New Year's Observations

Lloyd Carr
Michigan players carried Lloyd Carr off the field following Michigan's 41-35 upset win over Florida.
AP

NEW ORLEANS -- If ever you wondered just how much the BCS has affected college football, you should have been at the Gordon Biersch down the street from my hotel here during the second half of Tuesday’s Capital One Bowl.

At tables all around me in the restaurant’s packed bar area, I watched full-fledged Georgia fans openly root for purportedly hated rival Florida to beat Michigan. Are you kidding me? This whole conference-supremacy debate has become so consuming that fans will actually root for a team they despise 364 days a year in the interest of (in this case) the SEC’s bowl record.

Of course, when Michigan ultimately stymied Tim Tebow and the Gators for the final time, they immediately turned to taking joy in watching Urban Meyer’s dejected expression. “Start crying, Urban,” yelled one of them.

No matter who you were rooting for, it had to bring a smile to your face to see the rare smile on Lloyd Carr’s face as his players carried him off the field following a surprising and impressive career sendoff victory. For all the hype over Tebow and teammate Percy Harvin -- both of whom were tremendous as always, but unfortunately, accounted for all their team’s offense -- Michigan’s Chad Henne, Mario Manningham, Adrian Arrington and Mike Hart proved more powerful.

It had to be a sweet ending what had previously been a highly disappointing season for the 9-4 Wolverines with a win. And it was a bitter defeat for a 9-4 Florida team that was hoping to use this game as a launching pad to another national-title run next season but instead showed their inexperienced defense is still littered with holes.

As for the whole Big Ten-SEC debate (which had already begun in full force under my previous blog entry before I even sat down to start writing this), the fact is, Michigan beating Florida is no more or less an indication of one league’s strength over the other than Tennessee’s win over Wisconsin or whatever happens in Ohio State-LSU. I’ve said it many times before and I’ll say it again: Individual bowl results are indicative of the teams involved, not entire conferences.

That said, I can fully understand why Big Ten fans who’ve endured 12 months of criticism are taking a little bit of delight in seeing the supposedly "slow" Wolverines knock off the supposedly "speedy" defending national champions and their reigning Heisman Trophy winner.

• Impressive comeback victory by Texas Tech against Virginia in the Gator Bowl. The Cavs’ defense had done a nice job keeping the Red Raiders’ normally explosive offense out of the end zone for most of the game, but a Graham Harrell strike to Michael Crabtree with 3:39 left and a costly turnover by Virginia backup QB Peter Lalich turned things in a hurry, ultimately setting up a game-winning field goal.

Tech finished with about the same record (9-4) as they always do, but considering their performance over the last three games of the season -- taking Texas to the wire in Austin, then knocking off Oklahoma and Virginia -- and the fact that Harrell, Crabtree and nearly the entire offense return next season, Mike Leach may finally field a team with legit BCS hopes.

• Finally, I don’t think it truly hit me that Illinois is in the Rose Bowl until I actually saw Ron Zook and Juice Williams standing on that fabled field. With all due respect, they looked about as out of place as I would at a fashion show.

Which is not to say this couldn’t still turn into a good game, but I’ve already observed at least one major mismatch: when ABC’s cameras showed consecutive shots of the USC Song Girls followed by their Illinois counterparts. Umm … yeah.
posted by Stewart Mandel | View comments |

Comments:

Posted: 10:21 PM   by Blogger Goober3516
The Rose Bowl was awful!!!! I am a big USC fan and I (along with millions) would have preferred a Georgia and USC matchup. This match up would have been a good perometer for both teams for this and next season. I am not surprise the BCS' objection considering your previous article about the VT and OU matchup. The BCS needs to do a better job at creating more interesting games. The Rose Bowl didn't do itself any favors by selecting Illinois because they had no business in this game just like Neb a few years ago.
Posted: 10:29 PM   by Blogger asdf
what's a perometer?
Posted: 10:34 PM   by Blogger Forest
SEC= Scandals - Egomaniacs - Chumps
Posted: 10:37 PM   by Blogger getz011
Congrats UM and Lloyd. I'll check this board again tomorrow morning, because I'm sure that Florida's fans will come out in droves to take back the mountains of arrogant smack they've been spewing for the last month - whoops - I mean, year.
Posted: 10:43 PM   by Blogger SECJake
Congrats to Michigan for winning their first bowl game in 5 years in what was otherwise a very disappointing season with a senior laden team. While the Michigan fans taunt about this win just remember that the team they beat all have national championship rings while the Michigan players don't even have Big 10 Championship rings. Michigan fans, please act like you have won before!!!
Posted: 10:49 PM   by Blogger rodzuky
Why is it that Illinois had to play USC in their back yard, Michigan had to play Florida in their back yard, and Ohio State has to play LSU in their back yard? How can anyone call that a level playing field?

Bring some games up north and play in the cold. I would really like to see some of that speed in single digit temps.
Posted: 10:59 PM   by Blogger Jason Foster
Ah, the BCS... ensuring that a disputed #1 faces a disputed #2 for the championship and that all the other games will be lopsided, pathetic blowouts. Thanks, college presidents!
Posted: 11:08 PM   by Blogger Mike
RE: rodzuky

Try bringing some fans to the games if you want a level playing field! And there will never be any substantial number of bowl games in the north because 1) yes it is cold and nobody wants to watch a game in single digits and 2) cities in the north aren't exactly "destination cities". These bowl games are treated as a mini vacation for the players and fans.
Posted: 11:09 PM   by Blogger sfprman
Mizzou vs. USC in the Rose Bowl would've been the best game. And the Tigers would win. The Rose Bowl either needs to let other conferences in or not be in any way a part of the BCS. Their selection of Illinois (and the selections after) is the major reason why several major bowls weren't that close. And the Orange Bowl is as relevent and interesting as that bowl in Mobile. Stupid selection committee there.
Posted: 11:09 PM   by Blogger Aron
After the Illini getting destroyed and Hawaii getting routed, I guess Mizzou should have been in a BCS bowl game.
Posted: 11:10 PM   by Blogger sdten
secjake, your congratulatory post is clearly an expression frustration. Please act like you have lost before - 4 times this season I think. This is cleary a very disappointing season for a defending national championship team.
Posted: 11:21 PM   by Blogger rodzuky
Mike,
Exactly my point. It's a whole lot easier to drive 15 min. to the stadium to watch YOUR team play, than to fly across the country, find a place to stay, eat out for 2 or 3 days and fly back. If your team wins, it was worth the 2 or 3 grand. But if they lose, ouch...

You can't tell me 9 degrees and windy in Cleveland's not a destination. lol
Posted: 11:21 PM   by Blogger Jamey
NYC, and Chicago are not prime destinations up North?..... O well I'm sure this will result in the firing of another Florida Coach.
Posted: 11:24 PM   by Blogger Chris
ha ha ha ... hahahahaha ... oh stop it ,you're killing me! haha ahahahaha

"Mizzou vs. USC in the Rose Bowl would've been the best game. And the Tigers would win. The Rose Bowl either needs to let other conferences in or not be in any way a part of the BCS. Their selection of Illinois (and the selections after) is the major reason why several major bowls weren't that close. And the Orange Bowl is as relevent and interesting as that bowl in Mobile. Stupid selection committee there."
Posted: 11:33 PM   by Blogger SECJake
sdten, I am not a Florida fan at all. I realize Michigan hasn't won a bowl game in 5 years and gets beat up on an annual basis to OSU, but please act like you are supposed to win. You were full of seniors and you beat an obviously young Florida team. Florida will be in a BCS bowl game next year, will you?
Posted: 11:42 PM   by Blogger SECJake
Frustration is a 3-4 bowl record so far for the Big 10. The SEC is 6-2. Brag if you must about the rare Michigan bowl win but say with a straight face they had a successful season with 3 home losses!
Posted: 11:43 PM   by Blogger Cleospace
USC and Oklahoma (maybe Georgia) are the best teams in the country now...the Rose Bowl does need to give up the Big 10 tradition to make New Years Day a day of real football
Posted: 11:45 PM   by Blogger The Phork
More SECuses please.
Posted: 11:45 PM   by Blogger The Patch
As if the BCS didn't need anymore criticism, two blowouts in its first two matchups this year have to raise some eyebrows. Give me USC vs GA, give me MO vs HI. Forget tradition (*cough*RoseBowl*cough*). This has to be the worst set of matchups since the BCS inception. Hopefully the next 3 won't be as such.
Posted: 11:49 PM   by Blogger Forest
Illinois vs USC? What a joke, just another easy game on USC's very soft schedule, except their lose to powerhouse STANFORD.
Oh Boy, I bet thr Trojans could beat Kansas too!
Posted: 12:03 AM   by Blogger Chief
USC is probably the best team in the country, but the Rose Bowl was probably much closer of a contest that the score indicated (Illinois had almost 500 total yards). Props to USC as they obviously won the game, but congrats to a very good Illinois team that had a great turnaround and was in this game a year early. Best part of the article was the comment about how fans from teams of the same conference will openly root for other teams of their conference that they hate every other day. I mean I saw OSU fans going crazy for Michigan just because of the BCS. Is this good for CFB??? I'm not sure. Plus the BCS's only job is to match up the top two...you can argue all you want about that, but the other bowls are not part of what the BCS was established to do.
Posted: 12:04 AM   by Blogger tripinbillie
SECjake.. get off your SEC high horse.. Florida got beat today...plain and simple.. Michigan only left them in the game because of 4 TO's..Florida is still a good team and should have a good year next year if they can get their D fixed.. Yeah its been a disappointing season for us Michigan fans, but let us enjoy this bowl win and send of Coach Carr right.. jeese...
Posted: 12:06 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Wow. SEC fans are already leaning on the "senior experience" of Michigan and ignoring their own TOP 10 RANKING? Florida was supposed to win with it's speed and toughness, and it turns out the boys up North have a little more of both...and SECJake: Has UF ever gone undefeated? Once they do, you can start acting like they've really won a championship..."act like you've won before." Oh wait, you haven't.
Posted: 12:06 AM   by Blogger Dead Parrot
Before people critize the BCS for the match ups, wait to see what the attendance and tv ratings were for the Rose and Sugar Bowls. Those numbers matter a lot more to the BCS than the results on the field.
Posted: 12:09 AM   by Blogger Charles
I recall the comment from June Jones saying the 2-pt win over Nevada without Brennan was proof Hawaii was loaded with stars. I guess he got so excited about the Sugar Bowl invite that he forgot to bring any of them with him. Hopefully the voters (and the Rose Bowl Committee) will learn something from these games.
Posted: 12:10 AM   by Blogger Andrew
And about the conference bowl records - the SEC has SQUEAKED OUT victories over inferior opponents. You see a W, I see a close game against the SEMI-noles. You see another W, I see Wisco throwing the game away at the end, Alabama barely beating a miserable Colorado team, and MSU barely beating UCF. Big 10 is mostly underdogs, SEC is mostly favored...go figure which one will have a better record.
Posted: 12:10 AM   by Blogger Chief
True enough about attendance and TV ratings...two lowest ratings of Rose Bowl were two times they didn't have Big 10 vs. Pac 10 outside of NC game.
Posted: 12:10 AM   by Blogger SECJake
Bottom line, no excuses.

SEC 6-2
Big 10 3-4


Welcome to the mainland, Hawaii!
Posted: 12:12 AM   by Blogger Chief
Sugar Bowl had a pick before the Rose Bowl as LSU was the host school and was lost due to NC game. Therefore, Sugar Bowl picked UGA first...as they are much closer to New Orleans....get your facts straight.
Posted: 12:12 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Andrew - Most Fla fans seem to be congratulating Mich on a well earned victory. I don't see much basis for your comments.
Posted: 12:13 AM   by Blogger Chief
Big Ten better record against SEC in bowl games over last 5 years...no excuses.
Posted: 12:14 AM   by Blogger SECJake
Andrew, now you are giving excuses as to WHO the SEC has beaten and by how much? Give me a break! The bowls choose the teams and a win is a win and a national championship is a national championship, period!
Again, I am glad that Michigan finally won a big game but just act like you have done it before. Nobody is bragging about the Vols win over Wisconsin. Just show a little class!
Posted: 12:18 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Andrew - You are right of course in pointing out that the six SEC victories (I am counting Hawaii) were either close games that could have gone the other way, or were played against inferior opponents, like Wisconsin and Clemson. The SEC really should be 0-8 instead of 6-2. And when you factor in the fact that the Big 10 teams were required to play much higher ranked teams instead of a fair selection it is easy to conclude that the Big 10 really is 7-0 instead of 3-4. If your thinking does not prove Big 10 superiority I don't know what does. Oh, and congrats to the Big 10 for its superior performance against highly rated non-conf teams during the regular season. I sincerely wish you more glorious seasons like this one.
Posted: 12:19 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Ironic that an SEC fan is calling for a Big 10 fan to show a little class... and Charles, I don't know which blogs you're reading, but most of the comments are actually giving excuses sprinkled with praise. And by the way SECJake, Michigan (and Ohio State) has won the big ones for YEARS (just not the past 5). Check out history (as in top 5 all-time wins, championships, Heismans, etc...)
Posted: 12:21 AM   by Blogger Chief
I've lived all over the country and just have to say SEC fans are the worst. I visit message boards every once and a while and hope to be proven wrong, but I'm not. There is no class amongst them at all. I'm not sure what the reason is, but it's true. It's CFB, these are kids....but to SEC people it's war....maybe it's a continuation of some war they lost (read Civil).
Posted: 12:21 AM   by Blogger Andrew
And a national championship when Auburn was better (hence the loss) is still a *national championship... go undefeated and then I won't be able to talk mess. P.S. I go to USC, so we all know where MY bias comes from (neither Big 10 nor SEC).
Posted: 12:21 AM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
It's pretty clear that the team who took the worst shaft from the BCS is Missouri. They almost won their conference and they destroyed an SEC team that beat LSU. What is Hawaii doing in a BCS bowl game playing an SEC team in New Orleans? As if they're not overmatched enough, they're expected to travel thousands of miles and challenge a pampered SEC team playing yet another bowl game in their virtual backyard? It won't happen. I enjoyed Boise State's win over Oklahoma last year, but I can't help but think that it's influenced this year's bowl selections in a negative way. A flash in the pan is just that, a flash in the pan. Don't go and base your selection philosophy on a clever, trickeration oriented Boise St. team defeating a so-so Oklahoma team. And Illinois? Ugh. App. St. doesn't belong in the Rose Bowl because they beat Michigan anymore than Illinois belongs there because they beat OSU.

P.S. Fire Mark May
P.P.S. Big Ten vs. the SEC in this year's bowl games? 1-1 w/ 1 to go. If OSU wins, the Big Ten will be 4-2 vs. the SEC the last 2 years, if they lose, 3-3. Big deal.
Posted: 12:23 AM   by Blogger The Patch
I'm an SEC fan and yes, i will celebrate bowl records for my conference. But I am also a fan of good bowl games. Saban's last bowl game before he went to the NFL was incredible. Iowa's late throw for a touchdown against my Tigers was yes, heartbreaking, but i loved the game. I can't argue if ratings are good for particular bowls despite the matchups, but for me, I'd want to look forward to games that i normally wouldn't be concerned about, ie Oklahoma vs VA Tech, USC vs GA, HI vs MO.
Posted: 12:24 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Nice, Charles. In one sentence you're saying the easy bowl schedule for the SEC shouldn't change our thinking, and in the next you're ragging on the easy Big 10 non-conf schedule. Great logic! One season does not a dynasty make. The SEC gets trashed every time it leaves the south (or when the Trojans come marching in), and Ohio State schedules a top-10 non-conf game every season except this one. Where are you getting your gusto?
Posted: 12:30 AM   by Blogger JL
SEC Fan -- You're clearly retarded, which is not surprising given where you went to school (e.g., Forrest Gump).

Michigan knows how to act like they expect to win -- they've done it more than any other school, including anyone in the SEC. If you ever read a book, you might realize this.

The only reason UM lost 4 games this year is because their stars were injured most of the year. Fla, on the other hand, earned every loss they had.

Instead of whining like a little girl, you should learn how to act like you expect to lose, given how often the SEC loses to Michigan in their last 10 matchups. This, of course, includes when Michigan's relatively young 1999 team, 3rd in the Big 10, beat the SEC Champs.

Arkansas, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, and Florida again... I guess it's okay to lose some bowl games as long as UM beats the SEC every time they play them. Let's keep in mind that both of Michigan's victories over Florida in the last 6 years were basically home games for Florida.

Sorry your team, and your conference, sucks. Actually, Florida is a fine team that simply got outplayed by a better team, and I'm sure that the SEC has many classy people in it. You, however, are clearly not. You're simply a sore loser that can't handle being beaten by a better team, even when that team is clearly historically dominant.

I think Florida has great things ahead of it. Wish I could say the same for you. At least in the Big 10, we know how to win, and to lose, with class.
Posted: 12:32 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Andrew - I was just trying to support your comments that the SEC bowl wins mean nothing. And you are correct in stating that in context the Big 10 bowl losses can't be held against them. The Big 10 is clearly superior once anyone digests all the intelligent comments you have made. And I am glad you set the record straight on USC. Here I thought they'd had some serious problems these past two years. Shame on anyone for thinking you are not a classy person.
Posted: 12:36 AM   by Blogger Charles
for JL - Your comments about not whining like a little girl remind me of the class Michigan fans showed after being voted out of the #2 spot last year. "We was robbed. Sob. We only loss to OSU by 3 points. Sob, Sob. Florida got beat by more by Auburn. Sob, Sob, Sob." SEC fans would be wise to follow the example you have shown in exhibiting class.
Posted: 12:39 AM   by Blogger Mike
RE: Jamey
No I would not call those destination cities, especially not NYC b/c nobody could afford a hotel (we are broke in the south)! And your comment about another UF coach being fired is unwarranted. UF has no higher expectations than any other big name school.
Posted: 12:41 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Charles, sarcasm is not an art form, and trying to make us feel as classless as the most personal-foul-flagged conference in the nation by utilizing middle-school tactics rather than fact-based arguments is not going to accomplish anything here. I'm not here to be perceived as classy by a bunch of people I would never dine with, I'm here to point out how flawed the SEC superiority argument is. And if 22-4 is a problematic couple of years, here's to problems!
Posted: 12:43 AM   by Blogger Andrew
And how has USC done against the SEC lately? Care to dust off the ol' record book and see?
Posted: 12:44 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Andrew - Your comment that you're not on this blog to be perceived as classy makes the most sense of anything you have said. Is it a stretch for you not to be classy or does it come naturally?
Posted: 12:46 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Charles, if you think repetitively pointing out that I am debasing SEC fans' recent behavior by being blunt and unkind is actually going to bring me to some epiphany that I am in fact classless and you and your sarcasm and redundancy are classy, please stop wasting our time.
Posted: 12:50 AM   by Blogger OSU_ER_DOC
If Ohio State does win, does that mean anything to you guys?
Posted: 12:51 AM   by Blogger JL
I actually want to apologize for my comment, given that after reviewing the posts here, there are clearly some classy SEC fans.

I'm just amazed that someone would react to defeat, in a great game that was the final one of a highly-respected Michigan coach, by trying to diss the team that beat them, fair and square.

Florida has an incredibly explosive offense, which only makes what Michigan accomplished today that much more impressive. They'll go on to do great things in the next few years, as Michigan hopefully will as well.

But seriously, SECfan -- the mark of a true championship, quality program is the ability to both win and lose with class. Part of that is not making excuses or throwing mud when you do lose, and are honestly beaten -- it's being gracious. (Does it really make the SEC look better than Michigan sometimes loses to OSU and other conferences, just like every other team?) That's what marks a true winner. It shouldn't take 130 years of play to achieve that.
Posted: 12:52 AM   by Blogger Chief
OSU will win against the most over rated team in the country and against the most over rated conference in LSU and the SEC.
Posted: 12:53 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Yes, doc. If OSU wins, it means that all the chest-puffing going on down south is for naught. It will probably prove finally that last year's title game was just poor execution and not sloth, and that the SEC isn't the holy bastion of superior football it thinks it is. If OSU loses, it just means Vegas is right.
Posted: 12:55 AM   by Blogger OSU_ER_DOC
I personally do not think LSU is the best team in the SEC. Even if we do beat LSU could we beat GA? USC? OK? Playoffs would be nice if for no other reason to have a true champion
Posted: 12:56 AM   by Blogger OSU_ER_DOC
OSU is only a 4 point underdog in what amounts to a home game for LSU. I don't think vegas is sure.
Posted: 12:58 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Andrew - I may be wasting your time, but I am thoroughly enjoying myself. I'll sleep better tonight after hearing you say you were not trying to show any class. I would have worried about you had you claimed that showing class was important to you.
Posted: 12:58 AM   by Blogger OSU_ER_DOC
Of course, OSU was a prohibitve favorite last year . .
Posted: 12:59 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Playoffs would be nice because of HOMEGAMES! Southern teams would have to go North in December...I'd love to see our SEC friends do that! An 8-team playoff this year would give OSU homefield advantage throughout, meaning Georgia and the like would have to go to Columbus in January! They often forget that.
Posted: 12:59 AM   by Blogger Larry
It'll sure be interesting to digest this season once everything's done (and of course the trash talking with last well into February I'm sure). My two cents:

1) Congrats to the SEC for a good year--while nothing stays the same, it seems hard to argue against them being the deepest conference this year, although others have done well also. I agree with Stewart and others that conference strength is cyclical, so I'm happy with giving the SEC credit where it's due this year, especially since I know that will change over time as it always does. That said...

2) The disparity between the major conferences isn't all that great, and speed and great players exist in all of 'em (including the Big 10).

3) For some reason, lots of us yahoos (including me) get mentally irregular around this time of year and get our egos and identities too wrapped up in what happens with our team(s).

I've found that if I step back away from #3, and enjoy the games for what they are, and take wins well and losses the same way, I don't get so bothered when it doesn't go my way, and/or when idiotic comments are made. And you know what? There ARE way more important things going on right now. It would be nice if we could--in cyberspace--do what the players do after they play...namely congratulate each other, etc. without getting into verbal fisticuffs.

My two cents, and yeah, maybe too touchy-feely but hey...

I hope everyone had a safe and enjoyable New Year's holiday, and that each of you have a great 2008!

Go Boilers! Go Bucks! Go Big 10!
Posted: 1:00 AM   by Blogger Charles
for JL - I am glad you revised your thinking. It was a great win for Michigan and anyone suggesting otherwise should be ignored. Hopefully Rodriguez will restore Michigan to its traditional place in the Big 10 next year.
Posted: 1:01 AM   by Blogger will
I'm an SEC fan and I enjoyed all of the entertaining bowl games this year. I think I'll sit out the rest of the BCS games though as FOX's coverage is pretty bland and all the commercials give me a headache (I also don't think WVU or KU will give their opponents much of a game ... LSU-OSU will probably be close because LSU can play anyone close -- I think that game's a coinflip).

I have to say though that after a season in which things like App St. over Mich., Stanford over USC and La. Monroe over Alabama how you can try to draw any kind of coherent picture of team or even conference strength from the bowl results is beyond me. (Maybe my inability to understand can partly be attributed to my perception of relative parity amongst the conferences and to the fact that I don't feel compelled to prove one conference's superiority anonymously on internet message boards).

Reading this thread though, I do wonder, how can you complain that SEC teams have faced an easy bowl schedule against lower ranked opponents and claim that the SEC is overrated at the same time?
Posted: 1:02 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Charles, I have not said anything in this comment section that reeked of a lack of class, though you seem to be hanging your hat on that. But if staying up late bothering people trying to have some actual FOOTBALL-based conversation and telling them they are clearly not classy is your idea of fun, I'm glad you found it, and Happy Holidays, friend!
Posted: 1:05 AM   by Blogger OSU_ER_DOC
Charles:
(single tear running down my cheek)

Well said, but there will never be a time when people don't look at thei wins as more significant or their losses more justified. It's just human nature.

It is important to remember that these are all college kids doing their best no matter where they are from.
Posted: 1:06 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Claiming the SEC has faced inferior opponents in what should have been easy bowl games is actually completely consistent with them being overrated: poor performance, victorious or not, over weaker teams indicates that maybe SEC teams are not of the vastly-superior quality Mark May would have you believe (hence overrated - if they were appropriately rated, they'd blow out a team like FSU). But you are right - this year's results prove little, and it's all just fun in the sun at this point.
Posted: 1:09 AM   by Blogger OSU_ER_DOC
And it is remarkable how many close games there have been(WAC teams excluded)
go red raiders! pull it on out at the wire. but it doesnt matter. 1 point or 50 points. a win is a win.
Posted: 1:11 AM   by Blogger sdten
A play-off system would end a lot of this posturing and chest thumping.
Posted: 1:13 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Andrew - There will be no playoffs in the sense that you mean. The Rose Committee's selection of Illinois was a very strong statement that they will not give up their tradition. But perhaps the embarrassment with Illinois will help. What we might hope for is a plus one game after the bowls. But it doesn't help that small schools like Hawaii have easier rules for getting into the BCS games. Maybe the Hawaii embarrassment will encourage voters to put more weight on strength of schedule. The Cotton Bowl may become a BCS bowl and I don't know if that will help clarify the picture with data from more games or just further dilute the games we already have.
A plus one game would have matched USC & Fla last year, and I think would match USC vs the winner of the NC game this year. Those would have been exciting games. I hope we can agree on that.
Posted: 1:15 AM   by Blogger OSU_ER_DOC
this seems like a rational conversation . .
Posted: 1:19 AM   by Blogger sdten
I'd think Georgia would have as strong a case as USC to play the winner of the LSU/OSU game. It will always be challenging with a plus one.
Posted: 1:23 AM   by Blogger Andrew
This post has been removed by the author.
Posted: 1:25 AM   by Blogger Andrew
Believe it or not, Charles, I think there is probably a LOT we can agree on - you seem like a good hang were we not adversaries. I'm just still salty about making the trek to Glendale, AZ last year for what I had hoped would be a great game (whoever won) and watching a boring blowout and a lack of any coaching changes to make up for it. I didn't see it as nearly as lopsided as everyone else did (though UF was certainly the better team), and I have still not lived down all the obnoxious Gators there (who ruined it for the other UF fans, and even more-so for the hapless Buckeyes.)

As for playoffs, I completely agree with both your game choices and the way it would probably play out, but I was thinking it would be tough for anyone to spend $3K on 4 successive weekend trips and not get fired so home-field seemed like a fun imaginary scenario.
Posted: 1:30 AM   by Blogger Charles
for sdten - I agree that Georgia has a strong case on the field for a plus one match but not on paper. Voters were embarrassed twice when they sent teams to the NC that did not win their conf title game. Georgia did not even qualify to play in the SEC title game. If you look at it in another light Tennessee's win over Wisc is probably a higher quality victory that the Georgia win over Hawaii. Actually if OK has a big win they would have been the competition for USC playing against the winner of the NC game, not Georgia.
Posted: 1:35 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Andrew - I was obviously turned off by some of your previous posts. I am sure that there is much we can agree on. When you judge the Fla fans last year keep in mind that we were told we didn't belong. Even Stew wrote a column about that. It doesn't excuse all of the behavior, but the old saying is that paybacks is a bitch.
It was good to see the Pac 10 regroup itself for the bowls. I can't remember a time when so many quality teams encountered so much misery during the season. I am in a minority but I would rank the Pac 10 #2 in conf rankings with the acknowledgement that it might have the #1 team in the country right now.
Posted: 1:36 AM   by Blogger sdten
For Charles - I'll be the first to admit that I shouldn't be on the selection commitee! Impractical as it may be, I like the play off system used in the lower divisions. The Appalacian State victory over Deleware left little controversy
hey, i'm a huge florida fan. we lost. and the sec teams are mortal. this whole debate is stupid. congrats to carr and michigan they earned this win.

last year we didn't win the national championship because ohio state players are inherently slow...we won because we earned it by playing better, today we didn't earn it, michigan did.
Posted: 1:40 AM   by Blogger Joe Franklin
I recently met a Univ. of Georgia graduate who was a classy SEC fan, and then I paid him for the pizza.
Posted: 1:42 AM   by Blogger ACC
"I watched full-fledged Georgia fans openly root for purportedly hated rival Florida to beat Michigan"

and this is why college football fans are the absolute lamest on the planet. Yeah the rivalries are so epic and heated yet it's cool to root for the archenemy. Have you no shame Georgia.
Posted: 1:46 AM   by Blogger OSU_ER_DOC
Nice to see a rational comment from a Florida fan
Posted: 1:47 AM   by Blogger Andrew
I can imagine last year's "Don't even bother showing up" media hype must've been annoying. Congrats again, but my undergrad roommate from UVA now attends UF Law so I had to get used to giving him the "yeah well you still lost a game!" argument to shut him up about being better than USC's title teams. Apologies for that.

In any case, I can't figure out the Pac 10 for the life of me - Cal decimates Tennessee and then implodes, USC loses to Stanford School for the Blind and then plays at a ridiculous clip at other times, and who knows what else. I still say 1.SEC 2.Big12 3.Pac10/Big10 4.BigEast, but I'm confused/indifferent this season. Next year should be entertaining.

OSU/USC should shake it up early, and UF/Auburn '08 should be a BLOODMATCH after the last 2 go-arounds! I'm also liking Tressel v. Rodriguez Round 1, Oklahoma's entire season, with a little Texas and LSU intrigue thrown in the NC picture. If only it were already August...and with that I'm off - give 'em hell, Charles!
Posted: 1:48 AM   by Blogger Charles
I cannot imagine that many of the bowl committees will give up their bowls. So any playoff will have to be run within that context. But let's say we have eight teams named to play. Does anyone think that the Rose Bowl will give up its Jan 1 tradition? So if we start with 8 teams and they play the week before Xmas that would leave four teams to play Jan 1, and the Rose Bowl would have no control over who it got. Unacceptable. And only one of the Sugar, Fiesta, or Orange Bowls would get the other elimination game. Would the other two give up their New Year's game? I doubt it.
I just see no workable format for a playoff that does not involve major bowls losing some of their lucrative games.
As for Mandel's comment about Georgia fans rooting for Florida to win it...I don't think that is a very recent development, I always root for Florida first and then the SEC teams when they play anyone else. I even sometimes go for FSU, is that really so strange? When your opponents look good it makes you look good.
Posted: 2:04 AM   by Blogger Jonathan
So...before today USC had beat TWO...count them, TWO teams with WINNING RECORDS!!!

Now, what does that mean? I mean they only beat TWO teams who were capable of winning more than half their games all season. One of those teams, Arizona State, got manhandled by a Texas team that struggled all year.

It's just really sad and transparent that the Rose Bowl can put it's darling USC into a game they are supposed to easily win (vs. Illinois) and then claim that "This is the best team in college football!" and say they should be playing for the national championship. That's just sad and really quite pathetic.

So now USC wins and have lost 2 games in a season where they only beat 3 teams with winning records! Congrats Trojans! I'm SO proud of you! At least LSU, who had injury woahs all year as well, lost to two teams who made it to bowl games...and not someone like Stanford.

Brent Musburger and the USC crowd are during college football into a giant joke.
Posted: 2:05 AM   by Blogger Hyde
How come the Big Ten, and only the Big Ten, ever gets raked over the coals as an entire conference? The ACC has lost 5 bowl games so far, and its runner-up barely squeaked by Michigan State, a second division Big Ten team. I have yet to see a single negative remark about the ACC.

We're seeing the predictable "everyone knows USC is really the best team" remarks again, which makes this the sixth straight year for this talk (1 national title in those 6 years). Maybe we should just award the national championship in August based on reporters' opinions of how good everyone is, and that way USC won't have to go through the inconvenience of actually playing teams that are totally beneath them like Stanford.
Posted: 2:08 AM   by Blogger Dead Parrot
For everyone who is criticizing the selection of Illinois to play USC - whom should the Rose Bowl Committee have selected? The Sugar Bowl had already chosen Georgia so the Bulldogs were unavailable to the Rose Bowl. Eligible teams were Illinois, West Virginia, Hawaii, Missouri, Kansas and BC. Among these schools, I think the Rose Bowl did as well as they could.
Posted: 2:11 AM   by Blogger SasQuatch
Congratulations to USC. Perhaps you can win another AP Poll. Frankly, I would give that honor to UGA.
Posted: 2:12 AM   by Blogger Jonathan
Missouri...obviously
Posted: 2:17 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Hyde - In a sense it is a compliment that the Big 10 is raked over the coals for its record. No one says anything about the ACC because no one thought they were good anyway. But the Big 10 is in a battle with its own tradition of excellence and it has clearly lost that battle these past two years.
Posted: 2:21 AM   by Blogger Charles
for dead parrott - I think you are mistaken about the Rose Committee not having Georgia or Oklahoma as choices. I read an article that efforts were made to set up a non-Big 10 foe in the Rose but the BCS voted it down. Still either Mizzou or WV would have been far better choices than Illinois.
Posted: 2:24 AM   by Blogger pelted
Between the Sugar Bowl and the Rose Bowl, it should be clear just how bad the whole BCS system is. The Ilini had no business playing USC. And the Warriors certainly had no business playing Georgia. You know what these games were like? -- it would be like saying the Red Sox were assigned to play the Orioles in the ALCS. It's like saying, forget Green Bay and Dallas and Indianapolis -- let's have the Patriots play the Dolphins in the Super Bowl b/c there are a lot of people in Florida who will watch the game! Or because of a deal between the conferences. What a great idea! No -- what a load.
Posted: 2:28 AM   by Blogger Edgar
The exuberance of youthful college fans rooting vociferously for their teams succumbs to the greed of laconic bowl barons who've extended what used to be a traditional one-day affair of games to a diluted, overhyped week of mismatches, in the eyes of this idealistic observer. Regardless (not IR-regardless, or irrelative, Mr. Gruden), USC still blows chunks. And would've lost to Mizzou or UGA. I have two words for you followers of a team whose only real redeeming quality is the pulchritude of its cheerleaders: Puh. Leez.
Posted: 2:32 AM   by Blogger Robert
The Michigan-Florida was damned exciting to watch. It was a bittersweet win no matter who won for me. I am an LSU fan (so, naturally, an SEC fan) but I also pull for the Wolverines. I would say that the game winning edge is the emotion and heart (and Hart) that UM brought into the game. They played like every down was 4th-and-goal with only seconds left. And with this senior class' history of ups and downs, as well as this being Carr's last game, what more could you have to play for? Florida was playing for a win, UM was playing for their (and Lloyd's) pride. I would say the more deserving team won. (and to be honest, it didn't hurt too bad to see Florida lose, again :)

Now as for all you yanks who keep griping about how the southern schools should have to come up and play in the snow, put a took (or whatever that head sock is called) in it. Why don't you come on down and play down south in the world's biggest sauna (the South). Its nice and balmy, if you like sweat baths. Its particularly interesting to watch players hit the turf not from injury, but from paralyzing cramps due to dehydration, even when the humidity is almost 100%. You come visit us then, and we will come visit when there is a "nip" in the air...
Posted: 2:42 AM   by Blogger Robert
One more comment/question:
Doesn't the Rose Bowl get the 1st at-large pick due to the fact that OSU was ranked #1 in the final poll and the Sugar is hosting the BCS Championship? And based on that, wouldn't that mean that The Rose Bowl was the one that snubbed an epic matchup with UGA/USC? Tradition is all well and good, but don't forget that bear baiting was a "tradition", too. That doesn't mean we should keep doing it.
Posted: 2:43 AM   by Blogger AKDAWG
To judge a team by what happened 2 months ago is somewhat ridiculous. It's akin to penalizing a student because they flunked a test the first week of school. Maybe what's fair is to see which teams are doing well right now! USC, Georgia, and Oklahoma all have reason to be disgusted with the BCS. LSU vs. Ohio Stae-who cares? LSU isn't a great team, and their coach is a broken record. I am a UGA graduate, and I feel sorry for The University of Hawai'i and their players-total mismatch. I also enjoy reading and commenting in blogs, but I am weary of generalizations about SEC or Big 10 fans. College football is so much more interesting than pro football, but it seems that the media and the fans are taking away much of what has always been fun about college football. Enough of the money plundering BCS! What will it take to get a playoff?
Posted: 2:43 AM   by Blogger Daniel
Great win for Michigan today...though personally as an SEC fan I'm disgusted by Florida.

1. UGA fan here...we played an incredible game and whoever posted the "no win situation" post earlier is right. We beat them badly...and now Hawaii is overrated. Had we lost...we were an embarrassment.

2. Illinois didn't belong...and it is sad that stupid politics kept us from UGA vs USC...man that would have been awesome.

3. I truly believe the SEC has the best OVERALL talent and deepest conference. No I don't think this means we will always win...but I think the southern states have the highest concentration of talent (Yes California you are in that conversation) and the best defenses.

4. The ACC is horrible...and an OSU win over LSU would help the Big Ten's poor showing thus far.
Posted: 2:45 AM   by Blogger AKDAWG
To judge a team by what happened 2 months ago is somewhat ridiculous. It's akin to penalizing a student because they flunked a test the first week of school. Maybe what's fair is to see which teams are doing well right now! USC, Georgia, and Oklahoma all have reason to be disgusted with the BCS. LSU vs. Ohio Stae-who cares? LSU isn't a great team, and their coach is a broken record. I am a UGA graduate, and I feel sorry for The University of Hawai'i and their players-total mismatch. I also enjoy reading and commenting in blogs, but I am weary of generalizations about SEC or Big 10 fans. College football is so much more interesting than pro football, but it seems that the media and the fans are taking away much of what has always been fun about college football. Enough of the money plundering BCS! What will it take to get a playoff?
Posted: 3:06 AM   by Blogger Jeff
We learned one thing for sure today: The USC Song Girls are waaaaay hotter than the Illini cheerleaders. That's just not a fair matchup, pitting Southern Cali girls against Midwestern girls.
Posted: 4:32 AM   by Blogger Adam
SEC Jake.
Bottom line? 6-2 and 3 -4 are not the numbers that matter. Top to bottow the SEC is the deepest conference-im willing to give you that.
The only numbers that matter in this debate-the only way we can guage this is with head to head competition. We play against eachother in 3 bowl games.
LSU OSU is the rubber match.
The debate will be clear on the 9th.
When you play teams equal in ability such as Arkansas and Mizzu, where are youre excuses now?!? Arkansass got DESTROYED.
Stop making excuses for your Number 9 team in the country and your Heisman winner who played LSU to a 3 pt loss. Just admit, like a man, that Michigan beat one of your elite teams.
Personally i wouldnt be boasting about a close win over a Florida State team who played without 35 of its players.
Georgia? Cmon. They played Hawaii!
Colorado? Miss State? Youre on crack.
You must be the only person on the world who thought Hawaii Georgia wasnt the mismatch of the year next to Illinois USC.
Now put Georgia against USC like they shouldve? And youre quickly down to 5-3.
We were out classed in the rosebowl, Mich St lost a close one
Tennesse and Wisconsin played a close one.
There are only 3 games that mean something in the SEC vs Big Ten Debate: Tenn/Wisc, Fla/Mich,and LSU/OSU.
The "rivalry is tied right now.
And once OSU beats you that will make the Big Ten 2-1 against the SECs and suddenly your victories over scrubs dont count. Becasue at the end of the day, head to head, we will have kicked your ass! And youll all be full of excuses once again
Posted: 4:46 AM   by Blogger Adam
Furthermore SEC Jake
Michigan is so terible huh?
Hell how do you explain their 7 -1 record over the past 8 games against your "FAR SUPERIOR" SEC conference?
Talk about no excuses.
Oh, but keep making excuses for the florida team who not 36 hours ago you wrote would destroy Michigan by 3 touchdowns. Typicsl fairweather bandwagon fan. Where's your confidence now for your HEISMAN WINNING defending national championship team? SECuses SECuses, SECuses.
Start preparing more excuses now for when our conference does it again on Monday. Go Blue, Go Big 10, and go to hell SEC.
Appropriate matchups of our schools
top 5 teams: OSU vs LSU (W Big Ten), Michigan vs Fla (W Big 10), Georgia vs Illinois (W SEC)Wisconsin vs Tenn (W SEC)
Tiebreaker?
PSU vs MSU, Bama,or Kentucky.
After PSU handled TAMs spread offense id be very confident against any of these teams.
But, its not a perfect world.
We only habe 3 games to go by. see you on monday-or will you be hiding?
Posted: 5:58 AM   by Blogger Kenjin
Guys theres no point in arguing with SEC fans.

USC is 4-0 against SEC teams, (including a 23-0 shutout of Tuberville's Auburn Tigers OPENING DAY in 2003...AT Auburn). You know, the same players on that team, that were on the undefeated team the next season.

Or when USC went to Arkansas and dropped 50 points on the team that played in the SEC championship game...AT Arkansas.

I mean the one thing they hold on to is that USc lost to Stanford.
Never mind the fact that Booty broke his finger and then threw 4 picks. Or that 2 of the starting O-linemen were out since the beginning.

(Yeah we know every team gets injuries, not every team loses their starting QB)

Honestly though, get over it. the bottom feeding teams of the SEC are better than the bottom feeders of all the other confrences...great.

The Rose Bowl needed to select georgia so SC could have embarrased them like they've embarrased any SEC team they've played since Pete Carroll took over.

Hopefully next season USC will play the best SEC team so they can once and for all shut them up.
Posted: 6:38 AM   by Blogger GoofNOff
Geez, some of y'all are just way to serious. I'm a USC fan so naturally I'm PAC-10 biased and would have loved to see a USC-Georgia match up or a shot at the National Championship again but this year has been completely crazy. Appalachian St over Michigan, Stanford over USC, all #2 ranked teams besides LSU lose on their first weekend with that ranking. Not to mention that #1 was held by like 9 different teams this year. If "any given Saturday" meant anything at all, it would be this year. Still, for all the smack talk going on, y'all aren't the ones on the fields actually delivering the performances you're bragging about. Yes, USC and Georgia did deliver a couple of beat downs but Illinois and Hawaii had great seasons and nobody can deny them the right to play. I also think a playoff system would be awesome but as it's been stated, some traditions would be extremely hard to break. What would New Years day be with a Rose Parade with no Rose Bowl? As for me, right now I'm just happy to be able to catch parts if not a whole game being that I'm deployed in Afghanistan right now. Yeah, we're all doing a bit of trash talkin' for our teams and conferences but we all realize it's still just a game and we're all happy to be here watching them. Happy New Year everybody and oh yeah, "USC BABY!!"
Posted: 7:03 AM   by Blogger Joe
I am so tired of all the 'conference' BS. There is never going to be any way to settle the debate, and both sides can trot out all the statistics they want to support their point of view, so here's a thought: why don't all of you guys go yell in a mirror-- it'll have the same effect, and you'll get a little more exercise than sitting at a computer for hours typing.

Congratulations to USC and UGA, both teams proved authoritatively that they belong in The Best Rose Bowl Game That Should've Happened, But Didn't.

Looks like we've got 2 of the preseason top 5 figured out, who will be the others?
Posted: 8:11 AM   by Blogger WahooElvis
I don't agree with all the people who argue that the BCS is tragically flawed. I will watch 10 blowouts like USC-Ill. and UGA-HI if I get to see one game like Boise State's upset over Oklahoma.

ESPN executives and talking heads have a vested interest in over-hyping college football(and all sports coverage) and thus they continually repeat the arguments about a national championship being necessary. In my view college football is just fine the way it is.

I love New Years Day and the ensuing week of bowl games.
Posted: 8:12 AM   by Blogger Joe
It's just my opinion, but the only games that count in college football are the ones played on the field during the season. Team A beat Team B who beat Team C does not mean that Team A would have Beat Team C if they had played. And the debate about which conference is better may be enjoyable to some but it can also be humorous at times. Especially since the "best" conference can be different each year. And let's face it, in college, the players change every year so the team that won the NC 10 years ago doesn't really exist anymore. That's like saying the Miami Dolphins of today is a premier team because they went undefeated one season long, long, long, ago.

My take on the bowls: USC played a great game and beat-up a team they should have. Georgia played a great game and beat-up a team they should have. Michigan played a great game and won against a team that at least showed up for most of the game. But the bottom line is that there is no playoff's in CFB and under the current BCS system these teams are not in the National Championship bowl. Any hype by the media about one of them laying claim to the national championship is just the media trying to make more money.
Posted: 8:15 AM   by Blogger Charles
Give the Rose Bowl Committee a break. It is the granddaddy of all bowls and the committee was trying to exhibit the senility to prove it with their selection.
Posted: 8:19 AM   by Blogger Charles
for wahooelvis - If you're so high on mismatches like Hawaii and Georgia then I assume we will hear of you watching one of them when OSU plays USC next year. Hawaii was a joke. June Jones bragged that he hadn't left Hawaii to recruit a player in three years. Now we see he meant it. The only way a team that historically ranks 70th in recruitment can go undefeated in a season is by usually playing teams ranked even worse.
Posted: 8:21 AM   by Blogger WahooElvis
Well said GoofNoff. Best wishes to you in Afghanistan. I guess being there gives you a different perspective. Happy New Year!
Posted: 8:48 AM   by Blogger GunnarHH
Hey, SECJAKE, you and the rest of the SEC should act like you've been there before. We in the Big 10 have listened to loudmouths just like you spew your conference superiority\speed crap for a year now. When you spend all that time talking garbage as you and others have done, it causes people to REALLY enjoy when you guys get taken down. Don't talk, don't respond to this or any other post, just shut up and take what you've had coming to you for a while now. And don't give me that garbage about acting like you've been there before..Michigan and Ohio State have "been there" way more than anyone in your overrated conference
Posted: 9:03 AM   by Blogger Jonathan
Just as I thought...

No one has any comeback for the fact that USC still only beat TWO teams (not including their bowl victory against the Illini) with winning records!

You know who else only had two victories against two teams with winning records??? Hawaii!

C'mon, any PAC-10 fans or USC fans have a comeback for this little fact of information? How can you really say USC has a legit claim to call themselves the best team in college football when they only beat two teams better than 0.500?

Injuries are part of the game. LSU went up against South Carolina, Florida, and Kentucky without their star receiver. Matt Flynn had a high ankle sprain most of the season taking away his ability to run the option.

Just look at the facts, USC hasn't one anything this year on par with what LSU has done. They haven't creamed a fellow BCS Top 5 team like Virginia Tech.

Winning pretty means nothing. Football is a tough sport and each week is a different story because you never get the time you need to heal. Say what you will about LSU's season and how they don't "deserve" to be at the BCS game because of their two losses, but if anyone else was REALLY better they would be in the game. Oklahoma lost two BIG games they shouldn't have. Virginia Tech got CREAMED by LSU. USC lost to STANFORD at home.

And please, please tell me how USC beating Arkansas two years ago proves anything when it comes to this season?

Thank you.
Posted: 9:05 AM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
I don't think we should heap on too many accolades for Michigan because they beat Florida. It is not a gauge as to which conference is better, as Florida is not that good, and neither is Michigan for that matter. For years I have staunchly defended the big 10 as being equally competitive as the SEC, and for years they were. This simply is not the case anymore. Anyone who thinks that the big 10 is a stronger conference than the SEC, or even an equivalent conference to the SEC, is either a total moron or a big 10 alumni. Congrats to Michigan for beating Florida, though I am not surprised. Florida is not in the top tier of the SEC teams this year. They have been over-ranked all year because of their legacy (and that legacy *is* well earned too), but they simply are not the class of the SEC this year. IMO, the SEC teams should be ranked as follows: 1)Georgia 2)LSU 3)Tennessee 4)Auburn 5)Florida. You could argue that Florida should be ranked higher than Auburn, but I still don't think they should be. And honestly, as LSU will validate come the 7th, I don't see how any big 10 team could beat Georgia, LSU, or Tennessee, and possibly even Auburn. It is time for everyone to face the truth. The college football community so staunchly opposes a playoff system because they *know* that as soon as a playoff system is implemented, the SEC will begin running the table on Nat. Championships every year, with an occasional USC or Oklahoma in the mix. The big 10, however, will not be.
Posted: 9:05 AM   by Blogger Art
Hey, is there anyone out there who actually likes the game of football itself? What is all this about SEC, Big 10, and whatever? There is no sport more challenging and more exciting to watch than college football. Can we just appreciate the beauty of the game and the talent of the kids on the field? I was born in the South and live in the South--but I would rather see Ohio State beat LSU in triple overtime than LSU will 42-0.
Let's stop fighting the Civil War again and just enjoy the game.
Posted: 9:07 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Jonathon - USC has a recent history of being a great team and consistently recruits the better players. Hawaii has not beaten a ranked BCS team in many years, based upon my research, and consistently recruits poor classes. The difference is night and day and I would be surprised if you write back to say you can't see it.
Posted: 9:11 AM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Ahem - Let me clarify something. I was born in Buffalo, NY, and have rooted for Penn State all of my life. Hence the reason I have always defended the big 10. But only a dolt could possible argue that they are a stronger conference than the SEC...
Posted: 9:16 AM   by Blogger Jonathan
To Charles: If you read...was not asking people to contrast USC and Hawaii. I was asking people who say that USC is the best team in the country and should have a shot at the National Title to defend the fact that they have only one two games all year against opponents with winning records.

How many opponents with winning records has LSU beaten? How many teams ranked in the final polls has USC beat? I mean, what you are saying is that because USC was good last year and won the title back 4 years ago we should give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the national title game this year. Riiiiiiight.

Trying to act like i was REALLY comparing USC to Hawaii is silly and dodging the REAL issue, which no one has stepped up to address yet.

I really just want an HONEST, upfront answer to my question. How does a PAC-10/USC fan defend this when LSU beat 9!!!
Posted: 9:18 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Digital Samurai - Take a closer look. Florida stomped on Tennessee, almost beat LSU at LSU and played Auburn close. Georgia won but Florida was in it all the way. Tennessee, Georgia and Auburn showed a great deal of inconsistency. Georgia closed well, but we have no way of knowing how they would have fared if they had faced a decent team in a bowl.
Rank the SEC as you wish but there seems to be no elite team. But I do think the teams above would hold their own against OKLA and USC, but not dominate them. Texas and OSU might belong in that group but with the schedules they played it is hard to know. Ditto WV.
I am an SEC fan, but in no way would the SEC totally dominate a playoff picture. Just too much inconsistency and there's always the chance a team will play at an inspired level like Michigan did.
An earlier post 'wondered' whether SEC fans were so obnoxious because of having lost the Civil War. I have lived in Atlanta for six years...people in Georgia (and I presume other southern states) actually refer to that war as "the War of Northern Aggression", and yes, I believe it is the source of the HUGE inferiority complex that still haunts the South. About their education system...SAT scores (Georgia is 2nd to last in the nation). Combine poor education with a huge inferiority complex, and you have the need to constantly look for "good news" and deny any evidence to the contrary...

But the cockroaches are HUGE down here! So they have the north beat there!...
Posted: 9:22 AM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Also - I agree completely with Jonathan about 1 thing. USC is a farce. Let's get real shall we? Please do not post your ignorance for all the world to see by stating that USC is a legit nat champ contender. And god oh god why would a big USC fan want to see USC play Georgia in the Rose bowl? Are you a glutton for punishment? Georgia is far and away the best team in the country, and would dominate and embarass USC. They are completely untouchable by anyone else, Ohio State and LSU included. That is the reason they are not in the national championship game - because all the voters out there who are out to prove that the SEC is not dominate over every other conference want OSU to play a team they might actually beat (LOL - they still won't, not even close). I am tired of political crap costing high caliber SEC teams their fair shot at the title (i.e. undefeated Auburn not even getting to play...wtf)
Posted: 9:25 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Jonathon - Okay, here's an honest upfront answer. Match USC against anybody and I would bet you would not give me great odds when you put your money on the line. Would you bet $2000 on Georgia or LSU vs my $500 on USC?
Match USC against any SEC team, OKLA, or OSU and I would not risk much of my money on even odds no matter what game you pick. USC just seems to be playing too well right now to bet much against them. But if LSU clobbers OSU then I might more easily favor LSU over USC. I don't know.
Honest enough for you?
Posted: 9:30 AM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Lol @ Charles. Florida fan =P. For the record, did you watch the GA - FLA game? Florida never had a chance...Georgia stomped them from start to finish. Also, you say SEC teams are inconsistent, but that just is not true. The only teams they ever lose to are other SEC teams...that is not inconsistency, that is competition. And they only place they get it is against each other. Case in point - look at the SEC bowl record this year.

And there is a massive inferiority complex in the south about the civil war. That much is true. However, that does not change the fact that the best college football is played there. In the past, there were equally competitive conferences, but those days are gone with the wind. The SEC simply dominates the bowls year after year. I hate this fact as much as anyone else, but I will not post ignorant remarks because I am in denial about it.
Posted: 9:34 AM   by Blogger Jonathan
To Charles:

At least you tried. But you said it all right here "...just seems..." It's easy to look dominant when you play inferior competition.

Look at Hawaii's offense, just their offense. They put up nearly 50 points on everyone this season, yet one game against an SEC defense and they can barely manage 10 points with their Heisman candidate quarterback. Obviously, just seeming like they are that good is not going to cut it, you have to prove something too, you have to have "quality wins" or "quality loses".

It doesn't matter how good USC "seems" because what they did this year was a completely different story. The national championship is handed out to the team who played the best ALL season not the last three games when you played one ranked team and everyone forgot you lost at home to a team who's mascot is a tree!

That's all I am saying...the USC crowd really has no legitimate claim that is based on records, opponents, or quality wins that compares to anyone elses. All they have is history and the hype of all the talking heads on ESPN and ABC who just love a good story!

Anyone else care to try???
Posted: 9:38 AM   by Blogger Art
Well, alrightee then. I guess my question has been answered. People here are more interested in fighting the Civil War again than the game of football itself. While you guys are placing bets, using statistics, and talking about cock roaches to "prove" which region of the country is "superior", I will be watching the world's most exciting sport and hoping for an exciting game. God, I feel sorry for those of you who only care what conference has won the most wins and forgotten what it is like just to enjoy the game itself.
Posted: 9:39 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Jonathon - There is much truth in what you have said and I would not say you are mistaken. But I did ask if you would bet big money against USC and give favorable odds to back up your comments. You did not respond to that. It's one thing for voters to say Hawaii was a team deserving of BCS inclusion. But I seriously doubt if many of those voters would have put money on Hawaii. Do you agree?
Posted: 9:41 AM   by Blogger johnboy
Who ever set up these bowl teams is a total loser. The Rose Bowl was a total mess, the the bowl that had Georgia play Ha-Ha in was a total farce. Ill and Hawaii should move to Petticoat Junction. What poor examples of football teams they are.. It will take the Big 10 or 12 years to get over being the laughing stock of college. To send Ill to represent them in the Rose Bowl!!!! Thw WAC should be totally ashamed also. Let's dump the BCS bowl pushers.
Posted: 9:44 AM   by Blogger Jonathan
To Charles:

If there is anything to be learned from this college football season is that anyone can bet. And yes, I would put money on LSU to beat USC. Hell, I would take a healthy LSU over Georgia, too.

But I also know that both teams are more than capable of beating one another on any given day. I don't deal in definites.

But like I said, hypotheticals don't matter when it comes to the bowl selection. What matters is your resume.

And USC's resume isn't as good as LSU's...hell, Missouri's resume is better than USC's! Virginia Tech has a better resume than USC.

Sadly, I just can't for the life of me see how USC gets into this national title talk? Honestly, can someone else man up and try to explain this weird logic because I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!?
Posted: 9:46 AM   by Blogger Charles
for johnboy - it is not the BCS primarily at fault for what has happened. The Rose Committee has insisted on the Big 10/Pac 10 match, not the BCS. And the small pond frog schools threatened to sue the BCS if they didn't have special rules set up for their inclusion.
Posted: 9:58 AM   by Blogger Quentin
Ok, to put some points out there for those who seem to forget stuff year to year.

1. When USC came and hung 50 on ARK, the pigs were without their starting quarterback and McFadden was still suffering from an injury (gun shot to the foot)incurred in the off season. Funny, USC loses to Stanford because Booty breaks his finger and throws 4 picks is ok, but somehow ARK was supposed to overcome that no problem. USC had a backup quarterback. Use him.

2. Anyone who thought ARK belonged on the field with Mizzou was crazy. LOOK AT THE RANKINGS!!! Mizzou was ranked #1 before they lost to OK in the Big-12 Championship and ARK was unranked and had all of 1 signature win... unless you are going to give them credit for beating South Carolina. This was not a good barometer for either team. You had the class of one conference playing a middle of the road from another. Add in the coaching change and this was a recipe for disaster.

3. The Rose had the first selection , and as slaves to tradition and perhaps USC, the committee chose Illinois. Why? USC needed someone they knew they could beat and Georgia wasn't it. I'm not saying USC wouldn't have beaten GA, just that the outcome wouldn't have been guaranteed. Additionally, there was talk, around time of bowl selection, that USC may move their games to the Rose Bowl. The Rose Bowl, in the ultimate show of compassion, made sure to court USC by providing a sacrificial lamb, not an opponent. To bad, since 2 days afterwards, UCLA said they had the legal authority to block the move. Poor Rose Bowl, they could have had the AP title game, but came up short.

4. Auburn was mediocre in 2002 and terrible to start 2003, but if I remember right, Auburn lost 24-17 AT SC in 2002. They even lost to GaTech! Hmm..guess the SEC can play'em close. Now, if we could get USC to play UF of last year or GA this year or, hell, any TOP tier SEC school, then maybe we'd have some REAL information. I know the schedules are made out 3-5 years in advance, sometimes farther, but come on, Arkansas? You guys can do better.

5. Congrats UM on your victory over Florida. It was well deserved and, though SEC pride was hurt a little, it is ALWAYS nice to see Tebow and Meyer cry. There are, however, contrary to what some have said, not big injury issues for Michigan's losses, at least the first 2. Y'all lost to App State game 1 and Oregon in game 2. The injuries at that point were not substantial. Florida on the other hand, was dialed up a bowl game because GA being selected to the BCS and TN losing in the SECCG. The true matchups should have been...
#1OSU-#1LSU
#2MICH-#1USC
#2TN-#3Ill
#3GA-#4WISC
#4-5 UF or Auburn??
This would have been better matchups, albeit it would have meant screwing the BCS out of a deserving GA team. Your loss to APP State really threw the seedings out of wack. Remember, FL was 3rd on their side of the division, and lost to both #1 and #2 on the other, so they were #4 from the conference at best...maybe 5th. The win wasn't that hard to see coming.

Now, on to the only game that we, as a league, even care about. The BCS title game. Congrats to the rest of the SEC on a fine bowl performance thus far under some pretty strange coaching circumstances, but,as we ALL know, all our games were meaningless except to our own pride. The title game means more to each of us, and to the conference. It is our opportunity to put this idea we are soft to rest, once and for all. I'm a Dawg fan by the way, so this hurts me to say, but Geaux Tigers!!!!!!!

SEC!SEC!SEC!SEC!SEC!SEC! 6-2 and counting. I got a bad feeling though the Vest is going to coach Miles right out of the Dome though...
Posted: 9:58 AM   by Blogger Charles
for Jonathon - You are right about your body of work summary. But I am slower than most to get off or on a bandwagon. When USF was ranked second in the country I had them ranked third in the state of Florida. It will take more than this year's results before I move them lower in my rankings.
Posted: 10:09 AM   by Blogger MikeSBSC
I am so tired of Pete Carroll and USC whining! Maybe the AP will vote them number 1 like they did in 2004 (which was undeserved) and they can "share" #1 with the REAL #1, the BCS winner. USC should have thought about all this when they choked against lowly Stanford and Oregon. Their Hollywood attitude is that the BCS rules somehow don't apply to them. And then when they DO get in the BCS Championship game, they lose to Texas. Get over it, USC.
Posted: 10:10 AM   by Blogger Dawgfan
I feel bad that the notion around the country is that SEC fans have no class. There isn't a bigger SEC fan than myself, but I was really happy to see Coach Carr go out a winner. It was very apparent that UM had a better, stronger and deeper team than UF. UF worries me with their gimmicky offense and complete relience on one player. Michigan totally exploited it, congrats to them and the Big 10 for that one.

That being said, the SEC has 9 bowl teams and has gone 6-2. I have a hard time believing that OSU will be 1-8 against the SEC in bowls after next week. Geaux Tigers (although UGA is clearly the class of the league. Go Dawgs 2008!! - and lets get a playoff! the Hawaii game looked like practice against the scout team).
Actually Charles, Rose bowl bids are automatically awarded to the Pac10 and Big10 champs every year. In the event that on of those teams is also eligible to play for the BCS championship, such as OSU this year, then it is up to the BCS bowl selection committee to determine an appropriate replacement, which could be a team from a different conference. Therefore, the BCS could have awarded GA a Rose bowl bid and that would have been wonderful, because we wouldn't have to endure the baseless hype of biased journalists and USC fans after Georgia pounded them senseless. =| I would have much rather seen Wisconsin play USC in the Rose bowl than Illinois.
Posted: 10:26 AM   by Blogger jesse1834
Hawaii and Illnois would have been a better match up.
Posted: 10:28 AM   by Blogger Dallas
I have three comments to add to this thread. First, I agree that USC-Georgia would have been an awesome game. I could only find it in me to watch a few minutes of the USC-Illinois matchup - a truly lousy game (just as Georgia-Hawaii was). Second, as a fan of a Big10 team I agree with the above-posters who indicated their annual disappointment in the locations of many of the bowl games. It's really frustrating to see teams get a home-field advantage just because they, and the bowl games, are located in sunnier weather. Pretty much a home game for Florida, LSU, etc. Third, I also agree with Stewart's comments on conference-fanhood. I grew up in the South but went to a Big10 university. Just in the past couple years I have watched my family and Southern friends - who used to root for a particular SEC team - become obsessed with all things SEC. Really, I am so worn down from their religious-like fanaticism that it sort of sucks the joy out of watching football with them, which used to be a rare (if annual) treat. Their overwhelming message seems to be pretty much that the SEC is so far superior that, really, all the other teams should just go away and we should all simply watch SEC games (despite the fact that many of us live in locales where other conferences are more important).
For what it is worth - the MI-FL game was sure fun to watch (best game so far), and even though I was pulling for MI, it was obvious that Tebow deserved the Heisman.
Posted: 10:28 AM   by Blogger Mark
Seriously, This is stupid. Do you have nothing better to do then argue over conference ranking? Who is better then who? When the top team in one conference goes and plays the 5th or 6th team in another because they won one big game, it equals lopsided win for the best team in the conference. We will never know who has the best conference in a given year unless they matches up the conferences which can't happen. I'd rather discuss a playoff or plus one.

P.S. OSU and MI paid their players with money or grades for most of the century. You would know that if you read a book. Hell you'd know that if you listened to Harbaugh with his crazy rants.
lol @ quentin.

Quentin you are a UGA bulldogs fan that thinks USC may have had a chance to beat UGA...

I think that the only team in the country that could beat UGA right now is the New England Patriots.
Posted: 10:46 AM   by Blogger Kevin
As a Michigan fan I was happy to see them win, Having been disappoint so many times in the past I truely expected another loss. It was a great game for Michigan and Carr what really bugs me is to see one of Michigans players a senior and supposed leader on the team laugh when he fumbles the ball and do so much trash talking Mike Hart is a real disappointment. I am happy for Carr going out with a win especially with the lousy season they had and I am looking forward to the changing of the guard at Michigan maybe RR can bring Michigan back to a winning program I for one am happy to see the Bo era ending.
Posted: 10:48 AM   by Blogger Larry
I love seeing these SEC comments

"Georgia would dominate and embarrass USC"

"USC is a farce"

"SEC teams never lose to anyone but SEC teams"

"The reason there's no playoff is because the SEC teams would run the table".

This is pretty embarrassing stuff. Do you guys really believe this? Do you realize that while you bluster and pound your chest, the rest of the country basically sees you as the loud drunk at the party?

The SEC is good this year...I give you credit for that. But flat out STUPID statements like the above continue to perpetuate the stereotype of the SEC fan as completely blind to anything SEC, and ignorant and unobjective about college football. I mean, really...aren't you embarrassed when people make comments like this? I know there are plenty of classy SEC fans out there (just like there are classy Big 10 fans, etc.)...just realize that statements like the above make it hard for you to be heard.

As for excuses, there seem to be plenty of them out there, so it's interesting to me that when "excuses" are made by Big 10 fans, it's deplorable, but when voiced by SEC fans, those same critics are silent.

We'll see what happens on Monday...I believe it will be a close game, and certainly hope that OSU will win. But in any case, Michigan beating Florida and Wisconsin hanging with Tennessee (SEC runner up) suggests to me that the Big 10 can indeed play football. Me? I'm going to just enjoy the game.
To all you people who think SEC fans are obsessed with all things SEC - It's not true. SEC fans are obsessed with their own teams, just as always. They hate their rival teams, just as always. You should freaking realize that when they band together to root for their most hated teams against other conferences, it is because there is something seriously FOUL with the way national championships are resolved...The rest of the nation is completely biased against the SEC - because the SEC dominates college football - and as a result, people who live in the South have to endure endless and brainless comments about the civil war, racism, our obsession with the SEC, etc. But truth be told, if the whole country would agree to a *FAIR* method of determining a national title, you would see SEC fans go back to their normal bitter and all consuming hatred of each other. What would you think if Red Sox fans started rooting for the Yankees to beat the Blue Jays? You would think that there was something seriously wrong with the Blue Jays, not that those fans were suddenly obsessed with the AL east being the superior division...

Every SEC fan knows that the SEC is the best conference in college football, and so does every other fan who just won't admit it. The reason they start rooting for other SEC teams is because they KNOW that undefeated Auburn got FLAGRANTLY screwed out of a national championship, and the same thing could happen to any team in the SEC, just because the rest of the country doesn't like the fact that the SEC is better. So why don't you people try looking at both sides of the coin for a change before passing judgment or calling names etc. Wake up and smell the truth!
Posted: 10:53 AM   by Blogger Jonathan
Charles, thank you for being a good sport. It's okay to want to hang onto the bandwagon, but it helps to see someone who isn't afraid to peak out from under their maroon and gold colored bandana over their eyes and look at just the facts. Good show.

BUT MY CHALLENGE STILL STANDS!!! I DOUBT EVEN STEWART MANDELL CAN FIND SOMEONE TO DEFEND USC AND THEIR 2-WINS OVER TEAMS WITH WINNING RECORDS!

Now, to address the whole "home field advantage" of bowl games.

First off, a lot is made about LSU playing a "home game" against tOSU in the BCS Bowl. To that I say..."What of it?"

How many people in the media made a big deal when USC had a "home game" against Texas in the Rose Bowl a few years back? I don't recall Texas fans being all up in arms?

Also, it's not like ticket distribution is skewed to one team or the other. Basically both schools get the same "allotment" of tickets. The rest go to ticket brokers who have purchased the rights to the tickets years in advance. From then (I believe at least...im not certain) schools can request more tickets but it's not a given that they will get them.

LSU had an overwhelming request for tickets to the BCS game but the majority of Tiger fans were out of luck. tOSU can make the same requests. The only difference is that it's a longer distance for the fans to travel, but they have the same odds of getting tickets that LSU fans have. And from what I hear and know (having lived in both Baton Rouge and Ohio) is that tOSU fans travel very very well and are loud, obnoxious people (*wink*).

So, home field advantage in a bowl game is not nearly on the same level as it would be during a regular season game. Is it an advantage? Probably more of an "emotional" one for LSU than an actual "crowd noise" advantage. I believe their will be more LSU fans at the game, and definitely in the city, but you will be able to hear tOSU fans screaming on the television. It's not like it's a 90% / 10% split.

These big BCS bowls are hardly overrun by fans from one team, it's just too hard to do because tickets are in such demand and made almost equally available to both teams fans. There is some advantage, but I do not believe that it's near what it would be for a regular season game.
Posted: 10:56 AM   by Blogger Cyrus1085
I'm a USC fan so I'm being a little bias but here are just some of my observations.

1. All the people that say that usc played only 2 teams with over .500 record need to realize that usc doesnt set up their schedule like that. Pac-10 was injury-plagued all season and should of been much better. Also, their non-conference schedule before the season was pretty legit.

Nebraskas, Norte Dame both turned out disappointments but at least Pete Carroll was trying to set up some good matches but we all know both teams were shitty.

And look at next year. Virginia, which is a promising ACC team, at their house to start the season and next week they come back with Ohio State at home.

2. Another fact is that under Carroll, usc have never lost a game by more than 7 points except once in his 1st year and that was with the other coach's players.

3. USC tends to play much better when they play better teams. When you face USC in a bowl game, you are going to face USC at their best, plain and simple. Illinois could have had a chance if they played thier best and USC didn't but that doesnt happen.

I could go on and on about facts but here's the bottom line: the 2 best teams in the country ARE NOT playing the national championship game. LSU has looked very sketchy the past few games and had to win by some miracle plays that went their way. Ohio State got beat by Illinois LATE in the season and USC dominated them.

The 3 best teams next now are Georgia, Oklahoma and USC. It's a shame LSU will win the NC just because Les Miles has a big mouth since "they never lost in regulation so if this was 1940, they would be undefeated since they had ties back then". Get back to reality Miles, you dont want to play USC and neither does anyone else when we have Carroll on our side. FIGHT ON TROJANS!
Posted: 11:05 AM   by Blogger Larry
Jonathan and Digital Samurai:

I'm a Big 10 fan, and I believe the SEC is in fact the strongest and deepest conference right now. But it wasn't always that way, and it WON'T always be that way--or do you believe that the forces of change have now stopped?

Also, I don't know if it's an inferiority complex thing or not, but if you'd stop and read posts, most of them (including those from Big 10 fans) agree that the SEC is strongest RIGHT NOW. However, the only ones who seem to think that will continue in perpetuity are SEC fans, and for whatever reason you feel the need to continually beat your chest. Get over it and enjoy your time on top of the pile, and try enjoying it with class. But continued defensiveness in the form of outrageous statements, conspiracy theories, etc. is unnecessary and pretty ridiculous.

I think you'd find, quite frankly, that if you'd just shup up about being the Best Conference Since Time Began, you'd find that people will give you your due credit for being what you are...the strongest current conference. But if you have perspective, you'll see that the disparity isn't that great, and like it's always been, it's in flux.

And like others have noted, because this whole conference strength thing is so tiresome (and it seems like so tied to a need to reduce feelings of inferiority) why can't we drop it like so many have suggested and just enjoy the games for pete's sake!

Congrats to the SEC on what looks like a great bowl season, but even more, congrats to all the players on both the winning and losing sides who won and lost with class, dignity and honor, because THAT'S whats it's all about.
Posted: 11:19 AM   by Blogger richard
Arranging better bowl matchups will never be as easy as it sounds until conference officials lose control of the bowl match-up. As Stewart pointed out in an earlier column, the OU-Va.Tech match in the Orange depended on the approval of conference members themselves, who split lucrative profits from these games among each conference member. That's why the Big Ten held tough to keep Illinois in the Rose. Breaking up that kind of system will be as difficult as convincing college Presidents to go for a playoff stystem. As the old saying goes: "It's not the money...it's the money." Richard
Hey Larry, rather than passing insults at people, why don't you back up your claims with facts? I'll tell you why - because there are no facts that exist that would substantiate your claims. Embarrassing? LOL. The fact that all you can do to refute my claims is pass baseless insults just proves that my words are right on the money. We already know you don't hear us, and we already know why too. Let me do you a favor, I will gather some stats for you.

SEC teams overall lifetime record vs div 1A non-conference teams:

2760W - 1766L

http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/sec/vs_conf.php

Show me some evidence, and I will stfu. Until then, you try it. Thanks.
Posted: 11:22 AM   by Blogger Matthew
For those who complain that USC has only 2 victories of note, you need to look at the Pac-10 season as a whole. A handful of teams were really good at certain points of the season before major injuries crippled them.

- Oregon had Dixon out for the season, not to mention 3 of their top 4 receivers
- Cal lost without Nate Longshore, and would have been #1 in the nation at one point if not for that fact
- UCLA was forced to play with a walk on freshman QB when Olsen and Cowen both went down
- Arizona State lost Keegan Herring

Oregon was a legitimate title contender before Dixon left, even after their other skill position losses. You saw how good they are when they crushed USF's supposedly stout defense with Dixon on the sidelines.

Arizona State was ranked as high as #6, and while it may have been a bit high, it's not as if Texas lacked the talent to win against anyone in the nation. Arizona State didn't have half the talent, but Erickson has them playing at peak performance for what they have. Wait till they start recruiting, and you'll see.

Cal had the backup QB debacle to lose their first game, and spiraled downhill after that. Was Cal as good as #2 or #1? No. But when firing on all cylinders they are clearly a top 10 team with a scary offense.

UCLA lost to ND and Utah pretty bad. Dorell is an idiot. Don't forget that defense was still formidable most of the year, but the offense let them down.

I won't even talk about USC's injuries for name value, but name me a team that could lose 4 of 5 starting offensive lineman, have an injured QB, and be missing 4 of their top 6 CB's, and still win a football game against a Division I school. You can't unless you have serious problems understanding football. USC almost pulled off the impossible because they are simply that incredible. USC's schedule looked weak when you throw out actual rankings, etc, but consider when USC played all of the teams. Oregon still had Dixon and they played at Eugene. They played Cal when Longshore was behind center at Memorial Stadium. They played Arizona State without Herring, but away from home on Thanksgiving. They mopped up UCLA with both Olsen and Cowan healthy. USC played every Pac-10 team at close to full strength.

You USC haters need to give credit where credit is due. Pete Carroll has the best team in the nation yet again, and USC has won 6 consecutive conference championships and 6 consecutive BCS berths because Pete is the best in the business. All the hype we heard about Urban Meyer was put to rest when he got outcoached by a coach who was constantly ridiculed for not showing up in big games, and who quit two months ago. That's the same coach Pete has manhandled in the Rose Bowl, and when UM had much better teams than this most recent one that lost to App State and got crushed by Oregon.

Let it be preached in every stadium around the nation: Pete Carroll and USC are what everyone aspires to be, and will likely never become. True story.
Uh Larry...if you stopped and read posts, you would see that I already stated that "For years I have staunchly defended the big 10 as being equally competitive as the SEC, and for years they were. This simply is not the case anymore."

Thanks.
Posted: 11:28 AM   by Blogger Gary86442
Everybody seems to be overlooking the fact that the University of Oregon would be the legitimate #1 team had it not been for the injury to Dennis Dixon, their quarterback. They easily beat Michigan and USC when they were healthy. Seredipity sucks as much as the BCS.
Posted: 11:28 AM   by Blogger Jonathan
To Cyrus1085:

How can you go on and on about how USC is better than Ohio State because USC manhandled Illinois and Ohio State lost to them when USC lost to Stanford? Using that argument we could argue that any team who beat Stanford or Oregon is better than USC.

Also, you make excuses becasue of injuries when LSU and Oklahoma both had injuries woah's as well. You make up excuses because Nebraska and Notre Dame weren't as good as they were in the 80's, well it happens. That's why it is meaningless for you to state these things, they don't mean anything because the bottom line is your team lost two games, one of them to sub par competition at home. And of the teams that you did beat, only of of them won the majority of their games.

Look at the rest of the two loss teams, you will find PLENTY others who beat more teams with winning records than USC. That's just the way the cookie crumbles and I'm sorry that for you this year your cookie crumbled early on and no of the other teams you surrounded yourself with could help you get anything more than a half baked one done before the bowls came around.

You can go on and on about your feelings, or how Georgia got shafted. But Georgia didnt' put up when they needed to, they couldn't beat Tennessee. They got CREAMED. And Tennessee kept up their end of the bargin and beat Kentucky and Geogria.

Georgia is a great team, but just because they beat up on a undersized Hawaii team doesn't mean they can claim part of the national title. They lost the wrong games, period. That's how this works, it's sad, and it makes people angry, but that's how it works.

Once again, still looking for someone who can justify USC's claim to the best team in college football...no serious takers????

As they say, c'est la vie!
Posted: 11:30 AM   by Blogger Gary86442
Everybody seems to be overlooking the fact that the University of Oregon would be the legitimate #1 team had it not been for the injury to Dennis Dixon, their quarterback. They easily beat Michigan and USC when they were healthy. Seredipity sucks as much as the BCS.
Ok heres one for all you USC fans:

The bottom line is this - USC lost twice, once to STANFORD, and didn't beat anyone GOOD. Nobody cares why they weren't good. Nobody cares if injuries depleted a team. That happens to every team. And by saying Cal was a top 10 team, you pretty much discredit anything else you say. If you cannot win more than 7 games without your starting QB, then you are NOT a top 10 team, even with your starting QB healthy.
Posted: 11:35 AM   by Blogger Jafer
Didn't the Buckeyes lose by a touchdown at home to the Illinois team that just got demolished by USC? And didn't LSU get bounced in the 2nd to last game by the Arkansas team who Missouri just destroyed. Neither LSU or Ohio State has any just claim to being the best team in the country.
Posted: 11:36 AM   by Blogger u32
AFter watching the bowls yesterday USC is not even close to being the best team in the country. Had Illinois begun to pass earlier they would have given USC a game. Honestly I think michigan could have beaten USC, they looked awesome. After yesterdays preformances Georgia looked like the best team with their super fast Defense, but I still refuse to believe the Trojans are the best.
Posted: 11:38 AM   by Blogger Larry
To Digital Samurai:

Exactly what "claims" am I making that need to be refuted by facts?

That the SEC is the strongest right now? That conference strength is cyclical? These seem self-evident to me.

The biggest thing I'm saying is that you are the complete epitome of the SEC fan who is drunk with SEC kool-aid, and statements like those that you made earlier are ridiculous and I'm sure patently embarrassing to classy, knowledgeable SEC fans. Put another way...the statements of yours I mentioned (USC is a farce, blah blah blah) would be seen as ridiculous not just by me and other fans, but I'm sure by virtually every expert in college football.

Let me be even more blunt...I'm sure you'll rant back, but frankly while I enjoy blogging and have engaging discussions with a number of people (even those like Charles that I often disagree with), you are simply not worth any more of my time. I suggest you continue doing what you're doing for the day...posting comment after comment, rant after rant...get it out of your system.

P.S. Georgia is a great team, no doubt about it. Kudos to them. But if they were the best team in college football, they would have won their conference.
Jonathan - I agree that GA shouldn't share the national title. Whoever wins the BCS championship game should be the national champ, period, with no sharing, ever. I think you could definitely argue that GA belongs in that game, however, I think you could argue that they don't just as well. That doesn't change the fact that they are the best team in college football, but they were not at the start of the season and now they have to pay the price for that.
Posted: 11:39 AM   by Blogger Jonathan
To Matthew:

You can say USC beat Cal at "near full strength"...

But how does that explain Cal losing 7 of their last 8 games before their bowl???? Sounds like a GREAT team considering Cal had lost 3 out of their last 4 games right before they played USC.

BUSTED.

And once again, why do we keep talking about injuries? Excuses, Excuses? Everyone has injuries. Dorsey was illegally chop blocked and could barely walk during the second half of the season but you don't see LSU fans whining? It's college football, what are you going to do?

Talk about this season, talking about how good you were last year is for fans who can't stomach talking about how you did this year. You people just have to man up and look purely at the facts. Let's stop making excuses about injuries or "this team wasn't as good as they were suppposed to be."

You don't see me saying "well, Florida shouldn't of lost to Auburn before we played them..." do you? No, it doesn't matter!

Challenge still stands, no one can truly justify USC's claim without crying about injuries. Injuries are not conspiracy, and they happen in every single conference. Quality wins, quality loses people...none of this speculative hoo-haa. Look at what happened on the field and that's it! Anyone else want to man up and try?
Posted: 11:41 AM   by Blogger pmagnusson
I can't believe you actually judged the merits of the competition on this very dated and sexist comment:

"one major mismatch: when ABC’s cameras showed consecutive shots of the USC Song Girls followed by their Illinois counterparts. Umm … yeah."

Shame on you and please join the 21st century.
Larry. You are an idiot. USC is a joke, and everyone knows that, except USC fans. ESPN analysts are NOT experts. They are propagators of Bowl system jargon because a playoff system would render their opinions moot. Thus, their opinions are completely biased. Don't you find it ironic that all of ESPN's defenders of big 10 teams are ALUMNI from big 10 schools? Come on, try not to be such a mindless media puppet pal. Thats called alliteration.

I have provided DATA that supports my claims of the SEC being the dominant conference, I have posted twice that it wasn't always the only dominant conference, and I agree that conference strength is absolutely cyclical. However, the SEC is ALWAYS in the top tier. You cannot argue that. Look at the stat I posted previously. It speaks for itself.

SEC vs rest of NCAA div 1A
2760W - 1766L

That is a winning percentage of 0.640 vs the rest of college football, ALL TIME. So I think my claims are well founded here. Keep your jargon to yourself, as any SEC fan would agree with most of what I have said.

*It is worthy to note that the big 10 is the ONLY conference that has a winning record lifetime against the SEC, barely, and thanks only to Michigan, whom without there 19-5 record vs the SEC, the SEC would have the winning record.
Posted: 11:54 AM   by Blogger James
I have no interest in giving USC any credit for anything until that school cooperates with the NCAA in the Reggie Bush investigation.

If USC wants some credibility nationally, then it's time to come clean and take the penalties.

Until then, I consider Illinois to be the Rose Bowl Champion, no matter the score.

Integrity matters.
Posted: 12:01 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Larry - Thanks for the backhanded compliment. I do think digtal samurai et al have misunderstood your comments or are guilty of making them out to be something you did not intend. I have never seen comments of yours suggesting that you are guilty of their accusations. And see. There are things we agree on.
USC is a good team. They are a JOKE as a national championship contender, and I probably should have stated that more clearly. They are probably the best Pac10 team out there, but this year, that isn't saying much. But they are not top tier, and there is no base for a claim that they should be national champs whatsoever.

I assumed that anyone reading my post would be astute enough to realize that I am only referring to the top rated teams in my posts, I am not gonna waste time comparing USC to Akron. I assumed you would realize that when I say USC is a farce, I am talking about in comparison to REAL national championship contenders, not to the 100+ teams that are non-contenders like USC. Next time, I will remember to spoon feed my opinions to you.
Call me an old-fashioned 27 year-old, but I'm glad the Rose Bowl doesn't sell its soul and give up the traditional Pac-10/Big-10 match-up. The Rose Bowl has already conceded the match-up if the mythical national championship is on the line, but the only reason people seem to come up with to forgo tradition is for college football fans to get a "better game" for the sake of arguing which conference is better. The "granddaddy of them all" is above petty conference squabbling and is an incomparable experience for the teams and fans involved from the Lawry's Beef Bowl to Disneyland to the Rose Parade on down to the majestic sunset over the Arroyo Seco in the most beautiful setting for a football game on New Year's Day. The Rose Bowl experience embodies what makes college football special compared to the NFL. Sometimes, the game could be a lot beter, but the game really is just one aspect of the experience.
Posted: 12:03 PM   by Blogger observer
SECJake The 2004 Michigan squad played in the Rose Bowl as the Big Ten champs I do believe some of those players were on that team Hart, Henne, Long, Arrington, and others. I think their might be a ring involved. Not to mention (act like they have won before you said) they have more games than anyone else.
Posted: 12:04 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
pmagnusson-
Sexist? Do you think there's any possibility that the target of your disdain was joking? Does PC liberalism have to suck the humor out of everything? Besides, I think that the more natural, down to earth midwestern girls are far more attractive than those materialistic, high maintenance silicone blow-up dolls with heavy make up that everyone gets so worked up about. If you don't know what I'm talking about, you're truly missing out.

Come on guys, I think it's time to drop these silly conference debates. In one of yesterday's broadcasts, the crew mentioned that over something like the last 5 years, the SEC and Big Ten are 11-11 against each other. What a great competition. And USC? They lost to Stanford at home. You lose to Stanford at home, you don't deserve to play for the title. Live with it. Be more consistent from wire to wire. Play a tougher schedule, etc. etc. Case closed.
Posted: 12:10 PM   by Blogger Michael K
Lets give SC a few answers. USC beat three teams with a winning record - ASU, OSU and Ill. Bottom line they cant pick how good there opponents are going to be. They have not lost a game by more than 7 points in the last 6 years. The have lost a total of 8 games in the last 6 years by a total of 30 points. They have 11 National championships, 7 Heisman winners and are one of the top teams to put players in the NFL (great players if you check out superbowl teams) and THEY dont play Div AA teams - so anyone who says USC gets too much hype is just a plain Moron. And as for the SEC best conference.... well, i suppose people have to find something in life to hang their hat on. (PS as far as sports goes - check to see which two teams have the most National titles in the NCAA) then lets talk sports superiority.
Posted: 12:10 PM   by Blogger kraal2004
I like tradition ! Pacific coast fan all my life. Like tradition of Pac-10 and Big-10, runs in cycles of who wins. SEC has there tie in so do all the BCS conferences (6). Maybe add a plus one or two, but keep 32 bowls(64 teams), football cannot play 4 games in 10 days like basketball can. Also rule of only two (2) teams from BCS conf in BCS games is good.Pac-10 plays all (9) conference games, don't need 12 team conference where isn't settled on field. The SEC got larger for money and exposer for recruits, great but extra game , best can lose. ACC, BIG-12 followed, can win or lose that game. I do believe SEC is most often strongest from top to bottom. but that conference playoff game can hurt. Since SEC and BIG 10 had team in championship game, they each still have tie in game. If want more add another BCS game in Dalles. New Cotton bowl maybe. Remember, most of the good teams that lose one or two games, its always in conference usually. SEC, BIG-12, ACC and BIG-10 (AKA bigger 11) did not add ninth (9) conference game ! maybe worrying about another chance of upset, creating problems for polls. Your conferences set up the championship game, so if you win you are in, if you lose, gotta take your chances !! Anyway love all this @#* about bowls and teams. If you did have a playoff, it would be n NCAA selection committee and not BCS committee and can't play earlygames at home (like basketball) so teams might have to play someone in Michigan, or Idaho or New England at this time of year. Anyway try to watch all the bowl games that i can, as most kids won't be pro's and they are student atheletes. Everyone have happy new year....... can't wait for it to start all over again....
This board is a prime example of what happens when obsessive compulsive sports geeks start trying to out-geek each other. zzzzzzzzzzz...
Posted: 12:13 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Jonathon - One thing you stated that I completely agree with is that Georgia did not put up enough numbers to even earn their way into the SEC title game. If we put them in the NC game now it means abandoning the regular season conference races entirely. I am not prepared to do that.
In defense of USC one of the reasons I have not jumped off the the bandwagon (and remain mostly on the Texas bandwagon) is that those schools recruit elite classes every year. When I rank teams I give thought to what that talent can do. I'll admit that Michigan shook up my theory early, but underneath the turmoil was a talented team capable at their best of giving most anyone a good game. Florida found out. Before you say talent should not be a primary consideration I will say I already agree with that. But I believe that most talented teams, when it is really a big game, will prove themselves. OKLA is a good example. Lose to TCUs, Boises and Colorados but usually win when faced with a top team.
Posted: 12:13 PM   by Blogger Dead Parrot
Digital Samurai and Charles - It is my understanding that host cities that lose their local school to the BCS championship game (as New Orleans did this year with LSU) get first pick of qualifying BCS teams. The Sugar Bowl chose Georgia before the Rose Bowl had a chance to do so. I think that Oklahoma was locked into the Fiesta Bowl and Va Tech to the Orange Bowl. So the Rose Committee had to choose among the other qualifying schools.

Bowl games are exhibitions whose main purpose is economic impact on the host communities and the networks that televise the games. Fans have a hard time accepting this. But once you do, you understand why committees make certain decisions.
Congratulations to Lloyd Carr and Michigan, great game. Here is what we have learned so far in the bowl season:

1. USC, Georgia and Missouri are very good teams, when healthy.

2. Florida is talented but young and needs some true running backs.

3. Hawai'i is fun to watch when they are playing a team of approximately equal caliber; but that was not the case in the Sugar Bowl. This does not mean they are not a decent team, but they are not, yet at least, a legitimate top-ten team.

4. Games can be won or lost by the better team (or not) based on consistency of execution.

5. The trash talking and 'look at me' attitude of many college football players (and in other televised sports as well) hurts the sport (i.e., Mike Hart, USC's three excessive celebration and/or taunting penalties).

What we have to look forward to:

1. A OU/WV in the Fiesta - a potenially fun game to watch.

2. Kansas/Va Tech - we can hope Kansas is up to the challenge; after watching Missouri yesterday they might make it a fun game as well.

3. The National Championship game. Let's hope it becomes an instant classic - it would be a great way to close off an exciting season.

4. No playoffs in FBS. Yes, clinically it would be a better approach than the bowl system, BCS and the forms that came between the two, but I have to admit, the college football season was great to watch this year because so many team were in the NC picture at some point in the season. That is what I'll take from this season; what a ride!!

Best wishes for a great 2008 - fellow football fans!
Posted: 12:16 PM   by Blogger Larry
Charles:

Sorry, the compliment wasn't intended to be backhanded at all. I do enjoy our back and forth, and yeah while we disagree on some things I think we get along pretty well, and probably would in person as well. What's great and problematic at the same time about CFB is that we get so emotional about it, but I suppose that's why it's so engaging. Damn it! :)

And Eric, I agree on dropping the conference debate thing. My two cents, but if we kept in mind the goal of winning (or losing) with class, dignity, and honor, and shook hands after every game like good sports, it would be much more enjoyable and much more what's it's supposed to be. We'd focus on the game itself more, and that's where it should be. I think Mandel mentioned once that he thought the genesis of the debate was the implementation of the BCS system...who knows? But it would be nice to just drop it. In any case, once again congrats to the SEC for what looks to be a great year for them.
Posted: 12:19 PM   by Blogger Charles
for joey jack nasty - I do resent your comments about being an obsessive compulsive geek. Anyone who knows me will tell you I am not technologically oriented. Obsessive compulsive nerd is a lot closer to the truth but you strike me as someone unwilling to admit a mistake.
Posted: 12:21 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Congrats to the University of West Virginia at Ann Arbor on winning the Nectarine Bowl and breaking that 5 game bowl losing streak
Posted: 12:23 PM   by Blogger Larry
I don't know about you guys, but while Hawaii clearly had a tough game, in the larger perspective it was nice to see them in a bowl (although maybe a different bowl would have been better). Someone mentioned before that their coach hadn't recruited on the mainland for three years, but I don't think that's by choice.

As I recall from watching the game, Hawaii's recruiting budget is $50,000 per year, which is reportedly 10% of what programs like OSU, USC, Florida, etc. spend. He seems to have done a good job with the resources he had--maybe he'll get more going forward.
Posted: 12:24 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Funny how USC fans and media want everyone not to count losing to Stanford at home against them. In past years, if Notre Dame ever lost to an unranked team at home, people would be crying bloody murder if ND would still go to a 17 million dollar BCS bowl. One more example of the media's pro USC bias.
Posted: 12:24 PM   by Blogger Steve
To SEC and USC fans and Sports Writers:

You can't claim part of the national championship by trouncing a WAC team or the Big Ten #3 in your bowl games. If the BCS did anything right, it set this years bowls up so that only the championship game is worthy of being called a national championship.

I'm not impressed with 2-loss USC's victory over Illinois, because this is the same team that almost lost to Washington by giving up just as many yards. You're lucky Illinois is so inept and coached by a complete idiot.

And Georgia fans, come on! WAKE UP!!! You beat a WAC team! A team that didn't run the football all season! Boise State had a great rushing attack, and THAT'S how they beat Oklahoma - with BALANCE. You beat an unbalanced WAC champion. You are the least deserving of a national championship, so stop wasting our time.

Ohio State - LSU. That's it, baby.
Posted: 12:24 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Larry - Like the bowls I think the conf arguments are here to stay. How else do you argue which of OSU, OKLA, LSU or USC belong in the title game?
But I think Stew is wrong about it being a BCS phenomena. Remember 1996 when both OSU and Florida finished with one loss? There was a great deal of examination of the schedules and margins of victory by the voters in deciding the champ that year.
BTW have you noticed that the strength of schedule argument has even crept into major league baseball? It's not fair some say that the Dodgers have to play the Angels and the Mets the Yankees in interleague games while others play Pittsburgh and so on.
Posted: 12:29 PM   by Blogger Michael K
Once again the blogs bring humor to our day. Bottom line - best conference - best team..... will not be answered in our age. Best conference is a futile argument and will always be subjective..i.e USC can decide when Ark and Auburn will be good. If they are from the best confernce then they should always be good which would makes USC claim more legit... you will not be able to win with reasoning. This year - best teams, USC, OK yes, won confernce, OSU, LSU yes, won confernce, GA good team but frankly didnt get to conf championship. USC yup lost to Standford (enough already) injuries are a part of the game and do matter. Do you think Texas would have been national champs without Vince Young? Bottom line is there a a handful of teams that deserve to be in the argument whether you like it or not, (and yes even USC for all the USC haters out there)
Frankly my take is that this year there just simply is NO National championship game and it doesnt matter who wins with OSU and LSU, there just are too many arguments. (and it won't matter how much the mouth of LSU spouts out - he will just be trying to convince himself...reminds me of a lot of politicians out there)
Posted: 12:30 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
how stupid are USC supporters for whining about not having a playoff and claiming they have a right to prove they are the top team, when they are part of a conference that refuses to give up the Rose Bowl and its big payday, which is the biggest single reason why there is no playoff---the Pac 10 and Big 10 won't give up the cash cow called the Rose Bowl. So quit whining about not having the chance to play for a National Title when you lost to Stanford and you won't give up your precious Rose Bowl so you can play a mediocre Illinois team
Posted: 12:30 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
Many problems would be solved by the plus one playoff system. Mainly, outclassed Illinois and Hawaii would have been replaced in this year's BCS games by OSU and LSU. In the best scenario, OSU would have played USC in the Sugar Bowl (neutral field) and LSU would have gotten Oklahoma in the Rose Bowl. Once the smoke clears, the top two teams play in a city chosen by that year's host BCS conference on a rotating schedule. It could be Pasadena, Miami, Chicago, Indy, Houston, St. Louis, whatever...It's simple. I truly believe that there should be no problem, year in and year out, with a system like this. There will still be the gripes, but they'll be nominal and unfounded compared to what we have now.

I truly feel that we should all come together and lobby for an improvement in the current system. These inter-conference squabbles are fomented by the current system and keep our minds off what the real issue is, an unsatisfying annual conclusion to a great American sport and cultural institution.
Posted: 12:31 PM   by Blogger Larry
Charles:

I think you're probably right, unfortunately, about the bowl arguments being here to stay. It just seems like that with the BCS, the whole thing starts off at the beginning of the season and goes on ad nauseum. I can't remember for sure, but it seemed like before the BCS the whole conference strength thing came to a head more at the end of the season, when the NC champ was being voted upon. Oh well...

I've got to run, so have a good day everybody!
It makes me sick when people why about tradition and sportsmanship. I don't like to see teams run up the score, but lets be real here. Football is a mock up of WAR. The point is to win. Why even bother keeping score if we are not trying to determine who is the best? And if we are going to determine who is best, it should be done fairly. That is the tradition of every other American sport. Why should college FB be different? The answer is easy - People fear the SEC. Plain and Simple.
Posted: 12:33 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Irishforever - I have not read a single commentary suggesting that the USC loss to Stanford should not count. What most people are saying is that the loss does not define the season.
The reason for all of this debate is that all teams struggled at times during the season. Last year OSU never struggled and there was no debate about their inclusion in the NC. Had OSU and Florida produced the kind of seasons this year that they produced last year no one from USC would be arguing about their omission from the NC.
Posted: 12:38 PM   by Blogger Charles
for digital samurai - When you make idiotic comments about teams fearing the SEC it makes me want to claim to be an ACC fan. Put LSU in the NC and virtually every other school in the country would want to play it. Even Hawaii, the king of scheduling weak teams, voluntarily agreed to play Florida next year.
Posted: 12:38 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
People fear the SEC? Yep, Mizzou looked real scared yesterday of Arkansas. How embarrassing for the SEC that the Big 12 #3 team holds an Arkansas team that hung 50 points on LSU to a measly 7 points. Ouch.
Posted: 12:41 PM   by Blogger Jonathan
Charles:

Talent at this point is pretty mute. I mean, I REALLY hate to bring in history when talking about what happened this year because if you really think about it it's pointless. A game between LSU/tOSH or LSU/USC in the 70s doesn't mean anything when it comes to a game in a different century.

Second, all the top teams (OU, LSU, USC, and tOSH) have had top 10 recruiting classes the past 10 years. LSU had 4 first round draft picks last year and STILL made it to the National Championship game THIS year. That's four BIG starters that had to be replaced...so it's not like they are sweating it either.

Plus, if anything this year proves that recruiting "stars" and talent mean very little. Look at all the smaller teams this year with players who have stepped up from a 3 star rating to become legitimate Div 1 starters/stars. Plus, star ratings mean nothing compared to schedule and quality wins/loses.
Posted: 12:41 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Pete Carroll said USC would play anyone anywhere. Sure Pete, anyone but Stanford at the Coliseum.
Umm...here is the end of the "Which conference is best?" issue:


SEC vs rest of NCAA div 1A
2760W - 1766L

That is a winning percentage of 0.640 vs the rest of div 1A college football, ALL TIME.

I think that pretty much closes the case.

And currently:

SEC bowl record this year: 6-2 (soon to be 7-2) - case closed again. Thanks for playing.

Of course, a playoff system would *prove* beyond all doubt that the SEC is the single dominant conference in college football.
Funny how nobody responds to that statistic, isn't it?

"There's a flaw in our argument, so let's just ignore it! w00t! go pac 10!"
Posted: 12:49 PM   by Blogger James
I'd choose any of the Illinois cheerleaders over a Song Girl any day of the week, by the way.

I thought the Illinois cheerleaders looked pretty, actually.
BTW - The issue of which conference is best became paramount when undefeated Auburn was denied a chance to play for a national title due to USC and OU also being undefeated - Basically you are saying that USC and OU get the chance because they play in tougher conferences, which is a shame-faced travesty.
Posted: 12:51 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
The only people waging the "which conference is best" argument is the SEC nutjobs. No one cares. An individual team A beating team B doesn't prove anything regarding conference strength. You don't go to a football game to watch a conference play, you watch a team play. Get over yourself SEC nutjobs---you lost the Civil War and no amount of politicking about football conference strength will change that. I spit on Robert E Lee's grave.
Posted: 12:51 PM   by Blogger Charles
I know I have aggravated people all season with my comments that Hawaii was a joke undeserving of even a Top 25 ranking. I guess those people are still in withdrawal.
Posted: 12:53 PM   by Blogger Dink
To Digital Samurai and other SEC fans denying the purest proof of all:

Last year the SEC went 1 - 4 against the Big 10 head-to-head.

This year it is 1 - 1 and the victory came at the hands of the SEC runner-up playing the 4th place Big 10 team. I really don't care about B10 #2 vs SEC #4 etc. etc.

But then again I'm not going around claiming the Big 10 is the best conference, I'm merely providing the purest evidence available that you and other SEC fans are in denial about the true reality.

Regards to all!
Posted: 12:53 PM   by Blogger bigmac74
GEORGIA played a ONE DIMENSIONAL WAC team in Hawaii!! Illinios BEAT the now number one team in the country and you crazies INCLUDING Mr. Stewart Mandell are lobbying Georgia as the better team?

Please!
Posted: 12:56 PM   by Blogger Jonathan
Mandell, I can't believe you would be FOR performance enhancers in college athletics????

Living in Southern California increases the chances that those SoCal cheerleaders have all the perks of collagin injections, implants, nose jobs, etc. After all it is Dr. 90210 and not Dr. 60563!

Give me good natural beauty any day of the week!

Shame on you Mandell!

(NOTE: all to be taken with a grain of salt!)
To Dink - Who won the NC? Yup. Who did they beat again? Yup. Was it convincing? Yup. Any other questions? Shouldn't be.

And once again -

SEC vs rest of NCAA div 1A
2760W - 1766L

That is a winning percentage of 0.640 vs the rest of div 1A college football, ALL TIME.

Could someone please refute this statistic?
Posted: 12:59 PM   by Blogger brice
You're right Mandel.

It is pretty messed up when Georgia fans root for Florida. Even more messed up is when Ohio State fans root for Michigan to win. I've seen a lot of that going around online. Georgia/Florida is one rivalry, but Ohio Stat/Michigan is "the" rivalry game.

By the way, I was rooting for OSU in the BCS title game last season b/c I'm a Georgia fan and I hate Florida. I was glad to hear that Florida lost to Michigan b/c Lloyd Carr seems like a good guy.
Posted: 12:59 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
maybe if Mandel started paying less attention to which college cheerleaders he wants to boink and pay more attention the football games, he could write something intelligent once in a while
Posted: 1:02 PM   by Blogger Michael K
DS - You are starting to sound like one of those wonderful computer polls and we all know how accurate they are and how accurate statistics are. So as far as answering ....anyone who knows stats know how ridiculously flawed they are and don't mean squat in the game. I am glad you have something to hold on to make yourself conviced of your own argument.
And again, Yes, USC lost to Standford, inexcusable so was Michigans loss to AS but they still beat Florida and SC still beat Ill who beat OSU and Missouri beat Ark who beat LSU and Michagan got kicked by Oregon who beat USC but lost to OSU who got beat by USC who beat Cal who beat Tenn who beat Georgia who got beat by South Car who lost to Ark who beat LSU who gets to play OSU In the reported National championships...... so much for statistics
Posted: 1:05 PM   by Blogger Charles
for bigmac74 - You claim that Hawaii is one dimensional. Could you possibly identify the dimension so I can respond? They did seem to have a good field goal kicker, but I am not sure what you meant.
Posted: 1:09 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
hey digital sword guy---no one cares what some SEC team did in 1936 as far as wins and losses. It has no relevance to right now. Put away the stats and the porn and join us in the real world.
Posted: 1:09 PM   by Blogger matthewdenny
About the SEC home field advantage.

The average distance from SEC schools to their bowl = 292mi. Basically a 5 hour drive. 2 of them in their own state. LSU right down the road. Only team traveling more then 500 mi: Tenn.

Average distance for opponents= 1112 mi. Mid distance flight. Only team less then 500 miles away is Clemson.
Posted: 1:13 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
You guys still read what Stewart says? Wow. I stopped doing that a long time ago (haha). But now that I have read his comments and realize that he's the one who pmagnusson accused of "sexism", I'm truly sorry to see that a native Ohioan has such ridiculously cheesy taste in women. That's hilarious. Twenty years from now he'll be married to one of those "Real Housewives of Orange County" type monstrosities with his house mortgaged to the hilt so he can pay off the botox bills. Come on Stew! I can only imagine what horrible things happened to you in Cincy and Evanston that turned you into such an incomprehensible, unabashed midwest hater! DUDE!!! Please!!! It's time to forgive and forget.
Posted: 1:14 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
matthewdenny---tell me you didn't actually sit down and calculate the bowl distances of every SEC bowl game. Wow, there's someone who desperately needs a date.
Posted: 1:15 PM   by Blogger Pete
Oh well. Florida fan here. That was a hard game to watch, but Michigan players and coaches clearly "wanted it" more than the Gators. They whupped us fair and square, and the game doesn't feel as close as the score indicates. Congratulations to Michigan's Lloyd Carr on his long and successful career, and I'm glad we could let him end it on a high note! :) ..........

As for the conference vs. conference stuff....give me a break. I am so sick and tired of the arguments over which conference is better or tougher, which is faster, which has a better bowl record....it is meaningless crap, and I blame the BCS for it all. I don't really care how the rest of the SEC does in their bowls. All the conferences are the same, they recruit from the same pool of kids. It takes away some of the joy of watching college football to worry so damn much about your team's SOS and getting a tenth of a point edge in the idiotic BCS standings.

But congratulations to Michigan fans, and USC and UGA fans can be proud that their teams absolutely dominated!
Posted: 1:16 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
I am not quoting meaningless stats. I am quoting 1 stat that pretty much sums up the debate of conference superiority. I have previously cited my source for that stat as well so that you could verify it for yourself. Also - that isn't just 1936. You conveniently omitted the other 73 years included in that statistic.

Click here to verify stat - there you don't even have to type in the address to check it now.

SEC vs rest of NCAA div 1A
2760W - 1766L

That is a winning percentage of 0.640 vs the rest of div 1A college football, ALL TIME.

When I ask for people to refute this stat, I'm not asking you to claim that it is irrelevant. I am asking you to provide some more convincing evidence that any conference has ever been stronger than the SEC.
Posted: 1:16 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
irishforever-
One thing I love about you ND fans: No matter how lousy your guys play, the whiskey never lets you lose your rapier Irish wit. Slainte!
Posted: 1:17 PM   by Blogger Dink
Blahahahaha!

What a typical SEC fan retreat when faced with indisputable head-to-head evidence contrary to their SEC dominance illusion.

"We won a big game last year and won it convincingly".....who cares....we're talking about conference vs conference results, stay in context with the debate and quit retreating to that one game, one team saving face argument.

SEC supporters are putting down the other conferences in the face of the purest evidence available that doesn't support your claim.

Y'all aren't as good as you like to think you are and the rest of the country knows it.

Last year the SEC went 1-4 head-to-head vs the Big 10 and this year it is 1 - 1 so far. Give it a rest!

Regards to all!
Posted: 1:21 PM   by Blogger Dink
And...who cares if you have a winning percentage against other Div 1-a Teams. Many other teams can make that claim and probably against historically stronger teams. Give it a rest and witness the purest indicator of all:

Head-to-Head

Regards to all!
Posted: 1:21 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Digital Dipwad---you still don't get it. NO ONE CARES. What SEC teams did 70 years ago is MEANINGLESS to what is going on today, or the current bowl matchups. No one cares what the all time SEC record is except you. Put down the history books and grab a few issues of Juggs, retire to the bedroom and relax.
Posted: 1:23 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai

Ahem click here.


Sorry about that, copy-paste functionality is impaired for some reason.
Posted: 1:26 PM   by Blogger bgault
Digital Samurai -

*Yawn*

Historical context means very little for how much the collegiate game has changed in the last twenty five years. UM has a winning record all time against tOSU, but do you think that was any consolations for 1-6? (btw...that was Lloyd Carr's record against Jim Tressel)

By the very nature of the bowl system, most southern and west coast teams are given an extra "home" game. SEC fans love to tout 0-8 for the Buckeyes...but if you take the regular season into account, that figure jumps to a much more respectable figure.

Additionally, there's a great website that gives some perspective on the whole OSU - SEC bowl game debate:
http://www.secsportsfan.com/ohio-state-vs-sec.html

All that being said...for as much as the game has changed, we should probably be looking at these figures from the time the reduction in scholarships happened, or some other more relevant figure.

But, if it makes you feel better to live in the 1930's, I can be happy with the fact that my Buckeyes are playing for their third national championship in six years, and I can live with the fact that Florida was the better team one day last year. But, as a final parting jab, the "pathetic" Big Ten has a winning record against the SEC the last five years. Wow...SEC dominance there.
Posted: 1:28 PM   by Blogger matthewdenny
Irish... Yes I did sit here and google distances. I have a job with an internet connection that i don't like nearly as much as ncaa football.
Posted: 1:28 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
the only SEC stat I care about is Bear Bryant's record against Notre Dame---0 and 4, and two lost national championships. Bwahhahhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Posted: 1:31 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
irishforever - you are apparently illiterate. That is a compiled record since 1933, including all games up to last year. Not just 70 years ago moron, the ENTIRE history of SEC football.

Also, which SEC teams got beat by big 10 teams last year? I noticed how you didn't mention that. But I did mention the game that seems to sum it all up for me, the SEC best vs the big 10 best, and it was a BLOWOUT. You Big 10 boys shouldn't even step on the field if you cannot keep it competitive.

And BTW - I am all for a playoff to prove my claims. Are you a supporter of the playoff system?? I am guessing not.
Posted: 1:33 PM   by Blogger Chris
Illinois deserves more credit than they got because they almost came back before that first red zone fumble. Also, Illinois showed it could compete because once it started throwing, it moved that ball well. I blame the coaches for not opening up that throwing game early enough. The players did well in my opinion.
Posted: 1:37 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
digital samarai inbreeder---you still don't get it. No one cares what the alltime record is except you. What teams did in the 30s and 40s and 50s etc is meaningless. How many times do we have to wack you upside the head with your tiny sword until you get it?

And my team is not in the Big Ten, so that's a shwing and a whiffffffff.
Posted: 1:40 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Dink - That is the SEC's compiled record vs ALL NCAA div 1A teams EVER. That includes every team that has ever stepped on the field with an SEC team since 1933. There is no question as to whether they saw the best teams...that is ALL TIME. And go ahead and find a conference with a better record vs NCAA than that...lmao.

You people whine and moan because you CANNOT refute that stat. You try to undermine it, draw attention away from it, and when that doesn't work, you just ignore it. But you CANNOT refute it. That's the simple truth of it. So bow down to the SEC you spineless yuppies, because you know that as soon as we have even a +1 system, the days of big 10 and pac 10 national titles every couple years will be done. You know it and you fear it. And um..did someone mention Notre Dame? lol. Touche.

BTW - the Big 12 is still gonna get theres when a playoff system happens, because they produce an unbelievable team every 3-4 years. But the Big 10 and Pac 10 are finished. But at least you will have the Rose Bowl guys. lol.
Posted: 1:40 PM   by Blogger bgault
So Digital...

Just to be clear here...the #1 team losing to the #2 team in a blowout is more or less embarrasing than the #9 team playing a "home" game and losing to an UNRANKED team?

Guess Florida "earned" that #9 ranking, eh?

You live in last year, and I'll live in this year.
Posted: 1:40 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Mandel was 3-3 in picking New Years Day bowl games. My comatose grandmother could do a better job than that picking games.
Posted: 1:42 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
irish - of course you don't care about that stat. If you cared about it, you would have to admit to SEC superiority. This just goes back to the "can't refute it so ignore it" mentality again.
Posted: 1:46 PM   by Blogger Larry
This post has been removed by the author.
Posted: 1:46 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Digital tiny bits---instead of talking about the SEC as a whole all day, tell us which TEAM is yours, or where you went to school. No one roots for a conference all year. Put your nads on the line and tell us about YOUR TEAM you meatdagger.
Posted: 1:48 PM   by Blogger Larry
Digital Samurai:

While, like many others here, I'm wishing for an "ignore" feature, let me suggest that you think carefully about the statistics you use. In the spirit of Twain's "lies, damned lies, and statistics" quote, if you use the same "vs. conference" information that you linked and compare the SEC records to those of the Big 10, available here http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/bigten/vs_conf.php

unless I've made a mistake, I think you'll find the following winning percentages against other conferences:

SEC vs. ACC: .545
B10 vs. ACC: .633

SEC vs. Big 12: .507
B10 vs. Big 12: .593

SEC vs. Big East: .606
B10 vs. Big East: .680

SEC vs. PAC 10: .606
B10 vs. PAC 10: .515

That said, I'm not claiming the Big 10 is superior to the SEC or any other conference, because as people have pointed out, these data are cumulative and just don't mean that much for the current day. There's no doubt information on that site that suggest every conference has had its shining moments, and the reality is that every conference has it's own shining stars. OSU, Michigan, Florida, Georgia, LSU, USC, Oklahoma, Missouri, West Virginia, BC...what's not to like about these teams!
Posted: 1:49 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Irishforever - Don't stop there. I think your comatose grandmother could have played quarterback for the Irish this season and done a better job.
Posted: 1:55 PM   by Blogger Joe
This post has been removed by the author.
Posted: 1:56 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
charles, you are probably right there.
Posted: 1:58 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Larry - Instead of wishing for an ignore feature just try laughing instead. When I see someone go back 70 years to prove a point I just give thanks for being spared the insecurities that must run rampant. I mean when you view a victory by your team or conf as proof of superiority instead of just with some good feelings you are still a work in progress.
Posted: 2:01 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
I would love to see what ANY SEC team's record would be if they had to play USC, Michigan, Purdue Georgia Tech, Boston College, UCLA etc year in and year out, with no hyphenated or 1-AA games for padding.
Posted: 2:01 PM   by Blogger Michael K
digital dick - just so you can have your jollies - if your numbers are accurate which I will assume they are then i will give you the fact that your numbers are accurate. There said all that can be said.

Now, if you would be so kind I would like to know since the 30's what the SEC record is against the other confernces and not just as a whole but as each confernce. and I would like to see those stats by decade and I would like those stats correlated against winning teams and losing teams. If you want to talk about the best confernce you cannot sit on your lovely single stat as accurate as it may be. The question is how do your best teams fare against the other confernces best teams, then and only then can you begin to a meaningful conversation. If your facts prove out across the board then I will be the first to say that historically the SEC may be the best confernce but until then you need to quick smoking or drinking whatever medication it is you are taking.

Bottom line, The SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac Ten historically produce the top teams. Yes, the SEC has great depth and football is a time honored tradition. And you cannot argue that Notre Dame is also in the same league historically with those top teams (note I despise ND) but when you think of history there are great teams and great coaches that come to mind and I dont know about you but the names that come up for me are Knute, Bear, Bo, Woody, John McKay, Switzer and Wilkenson from OK and Eddie Robinson, Bowden and Paterno (even if just for their tenure) Darrel Royal, Yost from Michigan, Don James and Tom Osborn. And if you look closely at these names and schools you see one thing, NOT FROM ONE SINGLE CONFERNCE. So you see with your unfinished argument realy does not mean squat - what matters is that there is talent all over this country and many confernces produce championship teams and will continue to do so not matter non-BSC, BCS, BCS +one. WHat also matters is that there are some really good coaches out there (and coaching does include recruiting) and those coaches are in various confernces. And anyone who thinks differntly , once again is just a moron and doesnt deserve any more answers.
Posted: 2:06 PM   by Blogger Joe
As a huge Florida (and SEC) fan, I was stunned to see Michigan stuff the Gators. For the past few weeks I was lamenting the fact the Florida was going to play an unranked team from the Big 10. We were ranked #9, and so I was hoping that we would have played USC or some highly ranked team so that we could show everyone how good we were. Michigan was only able to gain 91 yards total offense against Ohio State but seemed to run and pass at will against the Gators (over 500 yds offense!). Since we looked so tough when we were playing our conference schedule, I sat in stunned disbelief as the Michigan defensive line manhandled Tebow and our offense play after play. Chad Henne (I have never heard of this guy) threw for 370 yds, while Tebow only managed 150 yds. I am just thankful that Michigan turned the ball over 4 times--3 of which where when they were about to score--who knows what the score would have been otherwise. I thought the Big 10 was supposed to be a terrible conference. What happened?
Posted: 2:16 PM   by Blogger Realist
As a Florida and SEC fan I totally agree with my man Joe. The Gators got manhandled by Michigan and were only allowed to stay in the game through the grace of 4 Michigan turnovers. I'm also having difficulty finding Georgia's win over lowly Hawaii as something to get all high and mighty about. Then there's the Arkansas embarrassment against Mizzou. And don't forget Tennessee, our conference runner-up, barely getting by against Wisconsin. I am proud of Auburn's OT win over Clemson, but Bama barely beating 6-6 Colorado practically in their backyard and Miss St. slipping by Central Florida are nothing to brag about. Anyone who thinks that SEC is superior is living in a dream world. We need to step it up fellas! Hopefully LSU will bring us some redemption.
Posted: 2:19 PM   by Blogger BigTenFan
For you SEC fans raving about being 6-2 in bowls, the MWC is 4-1. Does that make them the best conference?
For all those who keep referring to the loss to AP St, which of your teams had the nerve to play them,let alone beat them?
And as for OSU playing LSU, remember OSU is in the NC for the third time in six years. Which other team comes close to that.
And for those predicting a big LSU win, how many of you picked Stanford, Kentucky, or Illinois in their upsets?
The games are played on the field and not in these blogs. Let the games begin.
Posted: 2:19 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Joe Florida fan---never heard of Chad Henne? Have you watched any college football all year?
Posted: 2:24 PM   by Blogger Michael K
Digital - first my apologies for the dick additive, lowered myslef and I should not have. It is brought on by the futility of we are best argument that is really fairly pointless. It is like me trying to USC or ND as the greatest teams historically becuase of their national titles and Heisman winners. So - my apologies.

The SEC is truly a great conference and is clearly one of the best historically and arguably the best overall. Statistica are just that - statistics, statistically speaking Goliath should have beat David.

I think the frustrating part for the rest of us is the seemingly endless borken record from SEC fans.... great - so you might be the best. Does it really matter game to game season to season, do you really have to do it in a fashion that basically states everyone else stinks? The problem is and always will be the bowl scenario, if will never allow a true national champion, it dint before BSC and it wont after not even with a plus one. For instance Texas and USC play conclusively to a ntional championship, but did they. Would they have beaten the top SEC and Big Ten teams? Who knows - point is doesnt matter.

Again this year, OSU, LSU, OK, VT and USC are conference champs of the big 5. Whos the best - frankly no one knows and the only thing that will be settled is OSU and LSU because they ar the only teams in the top 5 who actually play.

Good luck to you and your conference, though I think history is gone as the future will bring unprecedented parity in College football and until the history of bowls changes with it the argument will rage on.

I am curious who your actual favorite team is? (I have been a USC fan since I was knee high to a grass hopper and that was about 40 years ago growing up in big ten country)

Good luck in your SEC B10 matchup.
Posted: 2:25 PM   by Blogger Larry
Hey Irish:

I was visiting the South Bend area last week and stopped by ND for a visit...neat to see Touchdown Jesus, etc. Anyway, in the bookstore there they had what I thought was a very cool t-shirt...dark green with a message like "Still Together" or something like that. Very cool. You guys have had some tough years recently but I have no doubt you'll be back.
Posted: 2:26 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Irishforever - I would love to see SEC teams play the ones you mentioned also, but I don't think it will happen. As long as we reward teams like Kansas, Hawaii & Boise St for playing weaklings there is no incentive to risk losing a challenging match. With yahoos claiming that an overtime victory by Hawaii over La Tech is just as great as LSU beating Fla, a win is a win right, why should teams take the risk?
Teams cancel games routinely. Two teams join the ACC and immediately set up ACC schedules. Last February Fla and OSU should have canceled two early season patsies and played each other. That would have brought in more money for everyone including paying off the patsies who were canceled. But as long as our powderpuff heroes are successful in reaching BCS games without having any quality wins it won't happen.
Posted: 2:28 PM   by Blogger the_sports_dude
I'm getting a kick out of the college football sabermetricians on this board. I'm glad the SEC-honks are using something tangible instead of the usual myopic rhetoric we're used to seeing though. Something I've resigned myself too that I think every serious college football fan should is that there will NEVER be a playoff system and the incessant pissing contest will go around in circles FOREVER.
Posted: 2:39 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Larry - Have you read the comments which suggest that with the current Notre Dame admission standards that the Irish may never be an elite power again? Saying that they won't achieve a solid status and saying that they won't be elite are two different things.
I think they can become a good team, but maybe not elite.
BTW I am easily old enough to remember when Notre Dame first got its own TV contract. Irish fans were claiming that ND would challenge for the title every year. They haven't challenged once since then.
Posted: 2:46 PM   by Blogger Buckeye99
Most of you Big 10 morons calling yourself fans are embarassing to our conference. You don't know how to accept congratulations from others regarding Michigan's win and coach Carr's success. Hey, Florida had a few things go bad taht otherwise could have ut up another 21. So Andrew, Charles etc., don't get into verbal wars, your unarmed!
Posted: 2:54 PM   by Blogger Larry
Charles:

No, I haven't seen those comments, but hopefully even with those higher standards they can field a very good team. Can they be "elite"? Maybe, maybe not...it definitely makes recruiting a challenge though. But speaking as a college educator, and given that the vast majority of players don't go on to the pros, I'd be very happy with my son playing at ND--a great school, great education, great values, etc. I sure wish more players stayed to get their degree. I know it's unrealistic, however.

Hopefully Tebow will stay...he's a very impressive guy and seemingly a very genuine, good person, so I wish him nothing but the best (not when in uniform against the Big 10 of course :) ).
Posted: 2:59 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Irish - I do not root for the SEC. I went to Alfred University in Alfred NY, and as I previously stated, I am a life-long Penn State fan. I hate the fact that the SEC is dominant as much as anyone, but I will not make up reasons why they are not dominate, because I cannot stand when people do that crap. I have spent years arguing with these Southrons (I live in Georgia, and have lived also in Tennessee in the past) about SEC vs Big 10, but what I discovered is that no matter how you slice it, year after year, the SEC always made me look foolish. Every bet I've ever made, I've lost. Every time I've ever put my nads on the line defending a big 10 team, I've been embarrassed. So finally I just accepted the truth. College football is more competitive in the SEC because anybody can play football in the cold without any actual physical disadvantage (psychological, maybe, but not physical), but you have to be conditioned to play in 120+ degree heat indexes, or you physiologically cannot function as well as a team that is. That is my theory.

Larry, I will verify your stats, since you left out a few, and if they hold up, then I will recant as promised.
Posted: 3:08 PM   by Blogger DiZmO
I don't think there's any question the SEC is the strongest, most competitive conference right now. I think most Big 10 fans agree with that. Where I take issue, and I think most b10 fans take issue, is with the comments that disparage the whole big ten as being slow, weak, eternally inferior to every SEC team (that a 8-0 record in the b10 is equal to a losing record in the SEC) and the implication that big ten teams don't really deserve to play for national titles, since, well they aren't the SEC.

But keep in mind Michigan is something like 26-5 all time vs SEC teams.

It's not as though the big ten is overmatched yearly. Most of the SEC-Big 10 match ups are close games that come down to the last few plays. I can only recall a couple of games that were blow out likelast year's national title game between OSU and Florida. That wasn't an indication of The SEC being far superior to the big ten. That showed Florida was prepared and executed their game plan. Ohio State did not. It's as simple as that.
Big 10 and SEC are pretty evenly matched. Wisconsin was one pass away from beating Tennessee. MSU lost to BC because of 5 turn overs.

Secondly, I think people are forgetting the criteria for BCS bowl eligibility. Teams must be in top 14 and only two teams from a single conference can go to BCS bowls. That left, Hawaii, Kansas, Missouri, Florida, Illinois, ASU, Georgia and BC. Since Kansas and Oklahoma wwere selected , Missouri was ineligible. Florida was ineligible since both LSU and Georgia were in BCS games. Hawaii was a virtual lock by going undefeated ( whether they deserved to be in a BCS bowl or now is another debate). So we're left with Georgia, BC, ASU and Illinois. YOu have to figure ASU and BC were out of that picture -- ASU since the Rose wasn't going to have a USC-ASU rematch game and BC for the simple fact that it would not have generated $$. So it came down to Illinois or Georgia. The Rose bowl chose tradition over the better match up. That said, Illinois was on a 4 game win streak, having upset OSU at home. I wish the Rose had chosen Georgia so there would have been one truly great match up.
But odds are Illinois would have ended up in a BCS bowl (probably the sugar) regardless by virtue of fans traveling, etc.
Posted: 3:13 PM   by Blogger Mikeosu02
RE: Digital Samurai

Give your stats some context, and they don't show very much. Consider the following:

The SEC's compiled record against NCAA Div 1-A is 2760-1766-195 (total of 4,721 games).

The Big Ten's compiled record against NCAA Div 1-A is 1836-1170-102 (total of 3,108 games).

Using those numbers, the SEC's winning percentage versus NCAA Div 1-A is 0.605; while the Big Ten's winning percentage versus NCAA Div 1-A is 0.607. (Ties count as .5 wins). Omitting the ties (as you did in your math), the SEC's winning percentage is 0.610 (I suspect that you accidentally hit "4" instead of "1"); the Big Ten's winning percentage is 0.611.

I will let you draw your own conclusions, but unless I did the math wrong, I found a conference with a better record than the SEC. Oh, and by the way, Big Ten versus SEC all time -- 94-87-7 in favor of the Big Ten.

Do those stats (same website you gave) show anything about this year? No. In my opinion, the new trend of people chest thumping about their conference is rather silly, and is just another excuse for losing a game or two during the season. Debate about it if you will -- I don't really care -- my point is that statistically (and historically), there is no difference between these two conferences.
Posted: 3:19 PM   by Blogger Larry
This post has been removed by the author.
Posted: 3:20 PM   by Blogger Larry
Digital:

My point in presenting those was NOT that the Big 10 is better, and I'm not suggesting you go back through and compare; it's simply that throughout that site is information that could bolster a variety of arguments about who's best. And while there may be statistically significant differences, it seems to me that most of the major conference records against each other are pretty close to the 50/50 mark.

I think the point that many (including myself) are making is that the past is basically irrelevant. What matters is the here and now, and the here and now to me anyway is that that all the conferences have some really good teams and all of us have can feel good about some success stories in our favorite conference(s). I, for example, have always liked the Big 12 right behind the Big 10, so I was thrilled to some of their teams do well this year (e.g., Missouri).

Should be a good and interesting game tonight as well!
Posted: 3:39 PM   by Blogger dan
If there was a bowl for "whinning" missouri fans and their team would win the national championship hands down.

Get over it. Oklahoma blew you away twice, your best win is over KU, a team that you continue to trash, which hurts your cause. You had your shot and lost by a whole bunch in the biggest game of the year.

In my opinion, OU, USC, Georgia and Ohio State are the best teams in the country and any two of the above teams playing for the national championship would have a heck of ball game.
Posted: 3:40 PM   by Blogger Mike
Since LSU keeps saying they deserve to play in the national championship because they are "undefeated in regulation" since they only lost in overtime, does that mean that LSU fans now accept USC's co-share of the national championship because the Trojans also were undefeated in regulation (only loss that year was in triple OT to Cal)? You can't have it both ways guys...
Posted: 3:43 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Firstly, I have never once claimed that the big 10 was not an elite conference. I despise those remarks as much as anyone does ( I really *am* a PSU fan ). I am simply saying that the SEC has historically been the strongest conference, and while I welcome differing opinions, I want you to support your opinions with facts, not with "You are an inbred redneck that is just mad about the civil war." When people say stuff like that, I bite back hard.

For one thing, I was born and raised in Western NY (hence being a fan of PSU) and I did not move to the south until I was in high school. Secondly, I am not inbred. Thirdly, I am more intelligent than 99% of all people that have ever encountered. This is not a random stat, this is a number generated by countless IQ and aptitude tests. I am *always* in the 99th percentile.

People need to understand that southern does not mean dumb. There are dumb southerners, but there are dumb people everywhere. Give us a little respect, because I would be glad to challenge any one of you to a game of chess right now.

And I would never suggest the big 10 is not an elite conference, and I don't think any other conference can even come close to competing with the SEC year in and year out, except the big 10. However, in my opinion, the SEC is currently *and* historically the tougher conference. It took a long time for these Southrons to convince me of that, and I did not change my opinion lightly. But I did eventually change my opinion, not because I became an SEC fan, because I hate every team in the SEC with passionate fervor except UGA (I like UGA b/c I live here and my dad is a passionate, life long fan), but rather because after more than 10 years of arguing, I came to realize that it was an argument I could never win, and I was always doing what so many people here have done in response to my opinion - ignore the facts, and change the subject, undermine the truth. Eventually, you just have to accept it, and I know that it is a very bitter pill to swallow. Regards.
Posted: 3:45 PM   by Blogger fanofstews
Wonder what happened to the "Dukester". He predicted that Hawaii would run rings around UGA.
Posted: 3:48 PM   by Blogger richard
How can USC rest its case for a national championship on the basis of a rout over the likes of Illinois? Ron Zook may know how to recruit, but that offense is as about as imaginative as three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust. And, for the intellectual health of all of us, will someone PLEASE FIRE BRENT MUSBERGER!!
Posted: 3:50 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Charles, I agree that with Notre Dame's admission standards and requirements it will be harder to win year in and year out like the big state football factories which don't have to worry about academic requirements, or blatantly cheat (ie see USC and Reggie Bush), but ND fans are not unrealistic and don't expect a National Championship every year---we realize with our schedule that is extremely difficult, but we still expect a serious run every 4 years or so, and consistent 8-9 win seasons otherwise with major bowl bids. prior to this year, we had 2 consecutive 9 win top 10 seasons prior to the bowls, so its not like this is some long drought.

You are also wrong about competing for the national title since the TV contract. In 93 we got robbed of the National title when they gave it to Bowden because the media loved him so much, despite ND pounding FSU at the end of the year. We have had several 9 wins seasons since then where we were in the hunt until a late loss. Get your facts straight.
Posted: 3:51 PM   by Blogger killerdawg
Georgia will win the national championship next year, and hopefully, it will be against USC. Pete Carroll is pretty arrogant, and he really does deserve to get his hiney whipped. The SEC has the best looking women. If you don't believe me, you can check the campuses. It is hard to look sexy in a parka, you single digit lovers. And Georgia is not afraid of cold weather. Heck, Knowshon Moreno grew up and played football in New Jersey. Also, did you know Georgia will return 17 starters next year? I think I just heard several thousand OSU sweatshirts getting ripped off and discarded to reveal Cleveland Brown's t-shirts underneath. Sorry to have spooked y'all, you can go back to your bratwurst now.
Posted: 3:55 PM   by Blogger JW
It's funny that this blog makes a point about how pointless the conference vs. conference debate is, and yet the majority of the comments have the theme of "My conference is better than your conference". Please stop the insanity! I've never understood how die-hard fans of a team can root for their bitter in-conference rivals for any reason, period. If I'm a Georgia fan, I want Florida and every other SEC team to lose every game in blowout fashion. Every non-LSU SEC fan should be pulling for the Buckeyes.

And somehow we forget that every college football game exists in a vacuum, completely separate from every other game ever played. If the SEC wins 6 bowl games, it only means that for those six individual games those SEC teams were the winners. They may have overpowered an inferior opponent with superior strength and speed. They could also have had the best field goal kicker that day. Or maybe there was a questionable call by an official that affected the outcome. Or fewer injuries. Or better motivation. Or more karma. Or louder fans. Or drunker fans.
Posted: 3:59 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
digital IQ guy---you are smarter than 99% of the population huh? I love these guys who go around with their SAT scores and IQ tests in their pocket calculators. Dude, you're that smart and you had to settle for Alfred the Butler University? Maybe you got rejected by Notre Dame. Sorry for that.

For a guy who claims he is so smart, why can't you see that quoting the SEC's all time record over 70 years over and over like a frothing rabid dog means nothing and is irrelevant to the discussion the rest of us are having. When God was giving out common sense, you were obviously snoozing Mr 99%.
Posted: 4:04 PM   by Blogger swindlerjackson
Michigan is 20-5-1 all time against the SEC.

I could care less what the rest of the Big 10 does. Congrats Lloyd. You deserve to go out this way.
Posted: 4:07 PM   by Blogger gunnerrat
Congrats, Samurai, on posting the most useless stat:

"SEC teams overall lifetime record vs div 1A non-conference teams:

2760W - 1766L"

You throw out one little stat with no comparative analysis. What does it mean? Nothing!

What is the B10 non-conf record in the same time frame? Are these qualitative wins (ie. how good were those wins at the time?)? How are they against ranked non-conf teams? Etc. Etc.

Here's a stat: UM has the all-time biggest winning percentage. ND is #2. What does it mean? Does it mean UM & ND are today the greatest teams?

It's a great accomplishment to stand on to have that, and it's great tradition. That doesn't mean today, right now, UM & ND are the best teams, despite the fact I gave you a true piece of data.

Throwing out one small piece of data with zero analysis is lazy. Your claim is no better than Larry's or anyone else's.

Michigan has proven it can hang with the SEC teams. UM has fits with USC, but it's proven it can beat Florida, Auburn, Clemson, etc. Hmmm, what can lazy analysis draw from that?
Posted: 4:07 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
I am glad to see that Michigan has a winning record against the SEC because their record against the PAC 10, especially in bowl games, must be horrendous. Like I said before, congrats to West Virginia at Ann Arbor for their stunning Nectarine Bowl win.
Posted: 4:07 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
You know, I've ripped my dad about UGA being choke artists many many times, and the same thing may happen again. But if Georgia stays healthy, I don't see how any team can hope to compete with them next year.

Hawaii wasn't a bad team - I think they got pounded on by the hands down best team in the nation. I don't think any other team could play UGA to within 14 pts right now.

They are big, strong, and fast on both sides of the ball. They have a excellent young QB with a rifle arm. They are loaded to the core (as usual) with talented running backs. They can apply pressure on anyone. They can cover anyone, and have proved it time and again. There is no weakness to exploit anywhere in their defense. They completely shut down Tim Tebow. And they are riding the longest current winning streak among ranked teams in the country. Yes, I think all the UGA fans out there have a legitimate claim as the best team in the land right now, and no, they didn't automatically deserve a shot at the BCS title game either.

Please, disagree if you must, but for the sake of everything holy, give some reasonable evidence as to why you disagree.
Posted: 4:15 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Digital nutcase is on the loose again---"I don't see how ANY team can compete with Georgia".

So, you are predicting that Georgia will run the table and go undefeated next year, and not only that, none of the games will even be close, because NO ONE CAN EVEN COMPETE WITH THEM. So watch out SEC, Georgia is going to pound everyone on their way to an undefeated season and then trounce USC or someone in the national title game according to MR 99% SmartyPants who couldn't get into Notre Dame or any Ivy League colleges so he settled on Alfred the Butler University.
Posted: 4:18 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
Digital Samurai-
I fully agree that there is no significant difference between the Big Ten and the SEC. Thank you for bringing an historical statistical analysis into the debate that is useful and telling. Your data proves that SEC and Big Ten dominance is in fact cyclical and that we will soon see the Big Ten wearing the strongest conference crown. However, I'd also suggest that if the Big Ten hopes to remain in the cycle, they will need to add another university with a powerful football program or one that is filled with the potential to win a lot of games (Rutgers, Notre Dame, Pitt, etc). One thing that always gets left out of this debate is the fact that the SEC has one more team than the Big Ten. This may seem insignificant, but when dealing in low value numbers such as 11 and 12, it is huge.

I also score high on aptitude tests, but one thing I've learned, via my intelligence, is that aptitude tests mean little outside of specific situations. Those who score high on such tests are prone to an intellectual narcissism that sets them up for an intense fall. For example, by suggesting that you are more intelligent than 99% of all people you have encountered because you routinely score in the 99th percentile on aptitude tests is an analysis that is sorely lacking in a broad world view. In other words, you don't sound so smart. After all, your analysis of the data does not even take into consideration the people who never even take those tests, and if the only people you've ever encountered are those who take those tests, then you live in a freakishly limited sphere that renders you ignorant of massive segments of thought and culture. To put it simply, there's a whole lot in this world that the GRE doesn't cover, and I can name many situations that MIT Phds would miserably fail in while more "average" folks would thrive. No one cares what you scored on aptitude tests in the real world.
Posted: 4:21 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
gunneratt, you are right. Michigan and ND are the two winningest programs in college football history (Michigan has played more seasons and ND is just fractions of % points behind) but that does not mean those teams are the best THIS year. Digital Samurai Straightjacket doesn't seem to understand that, despite the fact that he claims he is smarter than 99% of the universe. That stat does mean that Notre Dame and Michigan are the two most storied and successful football programs of all time, better than ANY SEC team. Bwwwhahhhaaaaahhhhaaaaaaaaaaa.
Posted: 4:21 PM   by Blogger richard
JW: On your point about SEC conference loyalty in the face of outsiders, you're talking about Bubbas here. Bubbas stick together even when it makes no sense; even when it gets to the prettiest women; even when......
Posted: 4:22 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Irishforever - I didn't say that ND had not had any good teams recently. I said that they had not challenged for the title. I do not consider 9-2 challenging for the title. It's a matter of definition. And if you have to go back to 1993 to prove I am wrong you may actually be suggesting the opposite. I don't think ND fans thought there would be 15 or 20 years of no titles when they got the contract, robbed or not.
The real robbing takes place when ND slips into the BCS bowls because of the special rules regarding its participation. If Notre Dame had real pride they would insist on no special favoritism.
Posted: 4:22 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Irish - You assume that Notre Dame held any appeal for me. It didn't. I didn't "settle" for any school. I was accepted into every school I applied for, and chose Alfred because it was a highly prestigious private school close to my family who could help me financially.

Lets just settle it right now. Play me in chess, you spineless infraction of a man, or shut your mouth. I will be logged onto Yahoo games in the chess room "Camel Club" under the name of "Spacial_Disproportion"

I am begging you to have the fortitude to come and get your ego crushed. We shall see which university produced the deeper thinker between us.

Or do you not know how to play?
Posted: 4:24 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Irish - news flash. I never talked about a single team being dominant. I was talking about entire conferences being dominant. Come play me in chess or shut your hole you filthy Irish pig.
Posted: 4:27 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Eric-y-town I remember pointing out to you once that a high percentage of recruiting classes were going south. Check Rivals if you wish. If that is the case I doubt we will see many elite northern schools for the foreseeable future. I would agree that OSU and maybe Michigan will get their share of top people, but I think the days of Big 10 dominance are over for a long time.
Posted: 4:31 PM   by Blogger stagman
Hey digital quick question. You have asked for someone to refute your claim of SEC dominance. I agree with you stats but have a question. I believe this stat can be misleading. I know that the Big 10 has a large winning record over the Big 12(8) due to Iowa and Iowa State playing every year in their rivalry game. Does this SEC stat have something similar (Georgia vs. Duke for instance, I know they don't play but I hope you get my meaning). Personally these stats of conferences can be a little misleading. If Ohio State played Vanderbilt every year then Big 10 would have a little big of a advantage.
Posted: 4:34 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
I really don't understand this love affair with Matthew Stafford. His numbers are frighteningly Morelli-like while actually being inferior. I know he's only a sophomore, but shouldn't more potential be coming through at this point?

Stafford: 55.7% comp. rate, 2523 yds., 19 tds and 10 ints.

Morelli: 58.2% comp. rate, 2651 yds., 19 tds and 10 ints.
Posted: 4:34 PM   by Blogger Charles
for digital samurai - Say no more. When you call someone a spineless infraction of a man I am convinced that you must be the product of one of the best institutions in this country. And kudos to whoever raised you to achieve such cultural and refined standards. I am in awe.
Posted: 4:35 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Hrmm thats a good point stagman. And I think Larry + a few others have indeed refuted that statistic adequately enough so that it cannot be a basis for superiority. You know, I should right a computer program that can calculate all this data and keep track of who played who and what the situation was etc and spit out some nicely refined numbers - I think I will do that. Thanks for the inspiration man.
Posted: 4:38 PM   by Blogger Mikeosu02
re: Stagman's Question

1,197 of the SEC's games (SEC's record: 798-381-48) are against Conference USA (using the current configurations).
Posted: 4:38 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Charles---what special rules for ND re BCS bowls? People claim that and never understand what they are saying. ND has the same participation rules as ANY non BCS conference team. Actually I think the rules for a team like Boise St or Hawaii is even easier---if they are ranked in the BCS top 14 they are in. ND has to be ranked in the top 12, unless they fixed that quirk last year. Otherwise, there is no other special rule. If they have 9 wins and are ranked in the top 12 they are ELIGIBLE, but they only AUTOMATICALLY qualify if they finish in the top 6 I think. Whereas, a team like West Virginia this year AUTOMATICALLY qualifies even though they are ranked 9th simply because they won the Big East, which produces ridiculous results like the years FSU gets in with 4 losses and not even ranked in the top 12. So its EASIER for Big 6 conference teams to get a BCS bid than Notre Dame. So you are dead wrong.

Digital nutjob. I have no time for chess, as I am busy working on revising the algorithmic fluctuations for several nuclear propulsion labs. Sorry.
Posted: 4:38 PM   by Blogger Timothy
Digital- So now that your stats don't actually back you up, you abandon them? It appears that the Big Ten and SEC have nearly identical records against Div 1-A opponents, so how exactly is the SEC dominant?
As to your Chess challenge, if you beat someone in chess, does that prove you are smarter or simply that you are better at chess?
If I beat you in basketball does that mean I'm a better athlete or just better at basketball?
Your logical holes make your claims of intellectual superiority as hollow your SEC argument.
Posted: 4:40 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Charles, are you freaking kidding me? How many times do you expect me to be insulted in good sport before I bite back? Did you happen to notice how many times I have been called names and insulted in the most derogatory of terms before I started insulting back? Comon man, be fair. Do you expect me to sit here and take the insults all day because I presented an opinion, which is my right? F*ck that. I try not to be personally insulting but at some point everyone has to bite back, or live with the knowledge that they are a total flippin puss.
Posted: 4:42 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Timothy - scroll up and find out what is going on before commenting please. I challenged someone to refute that stat, and I think Larry did that, and so I conceded the point. I am not going to make an argument that is flagrantly untrue just because I want it to be true. Good grief.
Posted: 4:45 PM   by Blogger stagman
Just some food for thought Digital. I would love to see the program when it was done. I'm out but I wish you well this year and have some fun with the cfb we have left.
Posted: 4:47 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
Charles-
I don't see that recruiting trend happening in Ohio, my area of expertise. As a matter of fact, OSU relies quite a bit on the surplus of talent in the south and the majority of blue chippers in Ohio are going to Big Ten schools. I think it's possible that we see more players from states like NJ and NY heading south or to USC, but the number is nominal. If anyone is affected by this trend, it's Penn State. For the class of 2008, OSU has 4 southern commits (3 Fla. and 1 TX) out of I think 15 total while Florida has 2 commits from the north (Pa. and NJ) out of about 15 total. Those are just 2 examples, but as far as I see they adequately represent the norm. The notions that Zook is plundering Ohio and Rodriguez will do the same are also unfounded. Zook gets a lot of guys from Ohio, but the overwhelming majority of them were never offered scholarships by OSU. If Rodriguez is going to invade Ohio, he better get on it. Since he became Michigan's coach, OSU has signed 3 Ohio blue-chippers for the class of 2009. Tressel is definitely marking his territory.
Posted: 4:49 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
LMAO--Digital nutcase spent all day quoting some stat he thought was meaningful and significant, even though it was completely irrelevant anyway, and now someone pointed out the stat is flawed and is not any argument for superiority, so he gets his dander up and wants to challenge people to chess matches to prove his intellectual genuis. This guy is precious. Has anyone seen a bigger buffoon than this guy on a college football blog?
Posted: 4:53 PM   by Blogger bgault
People, let's not get all up in arms over what Digital is posting. Read very carefully what he posted...

"Posted: 11:22 AM by Digital Samurai

SEC teams overall lifetime record vs div 1A non-conference teams:

2760W - 1766L"

Thus, when powerhouses such as Western Kentucky, Florida Atlantic, and Louisiana Lafayette are considered staples of an SEC OOC schedule...it's easy to see why they have the figures they do.

Digital, you're a moron...only people with little penises brag about how big theirs is. And I'm not sure what chess has to do with college football; chess is all about repitition and patterns, and with chess bots readily available, there's no guarantee that your 99% dumb ass is even playing the games.

Are you ever going to respond to my posting about games this year? You want to cite historical "facts" - but you fail to acknowledge that the game has significantly changed since those 1930s stats came about.

And...you haven't even remotely mentioned UF losing to an unranked team in their backyard, despite making fun of OSU for losing to UF last year. Cat got your tongue? Or are you so deep in thought that you can't think of the words?

Ig - no - ra - mus = you.
Posted: 4:54 PM   by Blogger Timothy
digital- Your retraction post came while I was typing my last post which explains my overlap. It would be foolish to continue to defend the stat, as you noted, but that doesn't explain your foolishness in relying on it to begin with.
When you compiled the SEC statistic in the first place why didn't you simply do the same for the Big Ten and every other conference? Given your claims of intelligence, it wouldn't have taken more than a minute or two.
Posted: 4:56 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
Charles-
To further elaborate on the recruiting question, take a look at Purdue's commits for 2008. When you look at where these guys come from, you'll see that Purdue successfully recruits everywhere. They are a national program. These guys are 2 and 3 star rated, but that is what Purdue has always had to rely on, less talented players that they develop. On the other hand, Miss. St. represents a reasonable SEC facsimile of Purdue, yet they recruit almost exclusively in Mississippi and Alabama. This is because the south has a surplus of talent, but at the same time, it dispels the belief that a lot of northern players are heading south. I just don't see it happening.
Posted: 4:56 PM   by Blogger Hyde
DiZmO said: "I don't think there's any question the SEC is the strongest, most competitive conference right now. I think most Big 10 fans agree with that. Where I take issue, and I think most b10 fans take issue, is with the comments that disparage the whole big ten as being slow, weak, eternally inferior to every SEC team (that a 8-0 record in the b10 is equal to a losing record in the SEC) and the implication that big ten teams don't really deserve to play for national titles, since, well they aren't the SEC."

I agree with this. I think the difference between the conferences is that the middle class SEC teams are almost always stronger than the similar teams in the Big Ten. This year for example, Auburn, Arkansas, and Alabama were better than Purdue and Michigan State.

But I don't think historically there's been a big difference at the very top of the conferences, and if you saw more games between the best of the SEC and the best of the Big Ten, I think this would become clear.

Right now, almost all Big Ten/SEC meetings occur in the postseason, on turf friendly to the SEC. I know there are reasons why some SEC schools wouldn't want to schedule the Big Ten--Florida and Georgia have an important annual nonconference game and most national powers don't want a second such game--but Alabama and LSU, to name two, are notorious for playing soft nonconference schedules.

I'm an Ohio State fan, and I think the Buckeyes would like to get a home-and-home with a SEC power, the same way they had a recent home-and-homes with Texas and have them coming up with Va. Tech, USC, and Miami. But it takes two to tango. LSU came to Columbus with a Top 10 team in 1988 and lost to the worst Buckeye team of the last 40 years, so I'm not surprised they haven't been eager for a rematch away from Louisiana.
Posted: 4:57 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
LMAO @ irish. Please elaborate on this project. I am *actually* learned in nuclear physics fool, you picked a bad bluff. I am also learned in Computer Science, and highly familiar with the development of logical algorithms. So in a field with so much potential for disaster, why exactly would we want any kind of fluctuations to be present? That seems kind of insane. Also, could you please elaborate on how these fluctuations would be implemented at the various laboratories? Are the fluctuations to be applied on the atomic level, the sub atomic level, the molecular level, etc? What is the purpose of these "algorithmic fluctuations"? And most importantly, the only objects that I am aware of that use nuclear propulsion are military ships - uhh...are you not under some sort of classification - you know, since nuclear technology is probably the single most highly protected technology in the world? LOL you fool. I was accepted into the Navy Nuclear Power Program. I happen to know that they DO NOT contract civilian scientists to develop their nuclear technologies. Or perhaps GE is getting into the field of nuclear propulsion now...

Also - I can see how you don't have time to play chess, what with your algorithmic fluctuation project AND your continuous monitoring of this football thread...

What a joke.
Posted: 4:59 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
I think what this all reveled was despite Digital nutcase's claims of intellectual superiority, he not only is not that smart, but lacks common sense, AND has a teeny weeny pud to add insult to injury.
Posted: 5:01 PM   by Blogger Charles
for digital samurai - You are posting someone, me, who has set the record for being called an idiot, pooper scooper and other labels I care not to repeat. If you've noticed I try to laugh when this happens. A cultured, refined person will not stoop to biting back as you say. The trick and the challenge, if you will pardon my suggestion, is to call the other person an idiot without making it obvious to other intelligent people that you are lowering yourself to the level of the namecaller. In my humble opinion, when you call someone a spineless infraction of a man, which they may well be, you have lowered yourself to their level and they win. Plus Stew will not pull the plug as frequently on his blogs. Doesn't my approach seem better, and better for your BP?
Posted: 5:01 PM   by Blogger Cyrus1085
In the end, there's really no way to settle anything. You can bring up this stat and what that guy did but every team looked terrible at times and this season was the perfect reason for a playoff system. But it wont happen b/c everyone wants money and are greedy so instead we will just wander what if. But man, after last night, I just want to see USC/UGA that much more. BCS sucks and thats something everyone can agree on. FIGHT ON TROJANS!
Posted: 5:02 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Irishforever - When you speak of teeny weeny puds you do sound like a man of experience. Is that the impression you wish to give?
Posted: 5:02 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
Digital Samurai-
So the aptitude test you aced was the ASVAB? Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa!!!!
Keep it comin' genius!!! Keep it comin'. Ahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!
Posted: 5:04 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Timothy - the purpose of that stat was to illicit a response based on data and reason, instead of trying to discredit me because I am "mad about the civil war" as someone else put it.

If I had posted comparative stats, then nobody would be inclined to do their own research to formulate an argument against it. Instead, Larry went and found some numbers like I had been begging someone to do, and his numbers made good sense, and also kind of surprised me, so yea, I recanted.
Posted: 5:11 PM   by Blogger fanofstews
Hey Irish, think Dig got you there! Too funny!
Posted: 5:11 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Actually Eric - Yes.

I made a perfect score. I got every question right. EVERY SINGLE ONE. I correctly answered EVERY question on EVERY phase. I was told this had never happened in the history of the Atlanta MEPS.

And I don't expect you to believe it - my own parents didn't believe it until the recruiter came to their house bragging about me, and I didn't even believe it until the coordinator of the Navy Nuclear Power Program sat me down at his desk and showed me the results on his personal PC. And all the LOLz you might do only reinforce what a phenomenal achievement that really was, so laugh away.
Posted: 5:11 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
digital fruitbasket, you obviously know less about nuclear propulsion physics than you do college football. Anyone with a slide rule could tell you that the algorithmic
equations for nuclear reactions have to be adjusted periodically to account for minute fluctuations in atomic matter both on the atomic and sub-atomic levels. My god, what kind of personnel is the Navy recruiting nowadays?
Posted: 5:13 PM   by Blogger Charles
for Cyrus1085 - I suspect that it was the Rose Committtee's dedication to tradition and not the BCS that denied us the UGA/USC game. Remember that we would have had no such game under the old system either.
But ultimately it was USC's failure to deal with Stanford and UGA's failure to deal with either Tenn or SC that denied us this game. When you don't beat a Stanford, or don't even qualify for your conf title game you have no one to blame but yourself.
Posted: 5:14 PM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
and BTW - I never said I aced it, I said I scored in the 99th percentile, which you can do without acing it. But since you asked, I *did* in fact make a perfect score. So thanks for asking.
Posted: 5:15 PM   by Blogger bgault
Digital...

Still waiting...

UM (unranked) beats UF (ranked #9) in Florida for Chrissake.

You trashed OSU for their loss last year. According to the polls, UF was the #3 SEC team (behind UGA and LSU)...so what does that say about the defending national champions?

AND..you still haven't responded in kind about a starting point for these records based on the reduction in scholarships, realignment of conferences, etc...

Just remember that Army and SMU used to be national powerhouses, but nobody would even dare to throw them in the mix of a conversation of "best" collegiate programs...so can we please be relevant with your statistics.

And, with all due respect, any moron can score well on the ASVAB...have you seen the statistics about how shorthanded the US military is right now? They WANT people to sign up.

Keep the discussion to college football, and you won't overwork that one remaining brain cell you have...after all, you're "right"ing a computer program, genius. (Check your posts...LOL)
Posted: 5:16 PM   by Blogger Timothy
Digital said. "Umm...here is the end of the "Which conference is best?" issue:


SEC vs rest of NCAA div 1A
2760W - 1766L

That is a winning percentage of 0.640 vs the rest of div 1A college football, ALL TIME.

I think that pretty much closes the case."

Its pretty clear from your own words that you thought you had the final answer, particularly when you add your claims of superior intelligence to the mix. So don't pretend you were trying to create an intelligent, data driven debate with the statement above.
If you were you would not have made such an intellectually dishonest argument to begin with.
Posted: 5:19 PM   by Blogger SEC4LIFE
Sec is 6 and 2 in bowls this year, can any other conference say the the same? By the way USC is not the best team in the country!! Georgia, LSU, Would knock the stuffing out of USC..Period
Posted: 5:21 PM   by Blogger Eric Y-town
Digital Samurai-
You have to be a troll. The ASVAB is about as complex as the abacus. Very nice performance troll boy. You pulled one over on all us nerds. I think I need a shower.
Posted: 5:28 PM   by Blogger bgault
Oh boy , here we go...do you SEC people have designated shifts, or what?

UGA beating Hawaii does not prove anything, except that Hawaii was horribly overmatched on the lines.

And, the part you are failing to mention in that great 6-2 bowl record is that THE NUMBER NINE TEAM IN THE COUNTRY LOST WHAT WAS ESSENTIALLY A HOME GAME TO AN UNRANKED TEAM!

Get a clue man, the MWC is like 4-1 in their bowl games (for an .800 winning percentage to the .750 winning percentage of the SEC for all those math challenged people out there). Does that mean the MWC is the "best" conference? Do us all a favor and STFU, go drink a Pabst, and root for 'Bama to return to glory.
Posted: 5:29 PM   by Blogger Richard
@ Digital Samurai

In regards to the comment Football is a mock up of WAR. The point is to win."

I suggest you actually fight in a war before you make such a stupid comment.
Posted: 5:29 PM   by Blogger Irishforever
Under the old pre BCS bowl system, these would be the matchups most likely:

Rose--USC v Ohio State
Sugar-LSU v Va Tech
Orange-Oklahoma v Georgia
Fiesta-Missouri v West Virginia
Cotton-Texas/Kansas v Florida

with no DESIGNATED national championship game, the bowls would all be meaningful and have affect on who would be national champion, and the matchups are all better. A plus one system coming off the bowls as set up like this would most likely resolve most conflicts, although still not perfect. The flaw with the BCS now is the emphasis on ONE game, instead of giving meaning to ALL the big games.
Posted: 5:33 PM   by Blogger Richard
On and one more comment Mr. Digital Dorksword

Anyone bragging about their ASVAB score results on a sports forum blog has to be mentally challenged. Are you sure you didn't take some kind of test where the perfect score meant you painted by numbers?
Posted: 5:40 PM   by Blogger WOLVIE777
SEC fans you want respect? Heres how you get it..

1.Quit Cheating..I believe only 1 SEC team Vandy has not been on probation during the last 10-15 years..Everyone outside the SEC knows you guys cheat.

2. Schedule some Nonconference games OUTSIDE of the south and against teams that dont have north south east or west in them. Every year you SEC fans proclaim how great you are because 9 teams make the bowls..what you fail to mention is that almost EVERY SEC teams schedules 4 creampuffs wins a couple of SEC games and qualifies for a LOCAL bowl game. At least B10 teams will schedule 1 or more Big time name schools out of league.

3.Play a bowl game outside of your region..This year and most every year B10 teams play bowl games on the road against home teams..This year..UM vs Florida in Orlando..OSU vs LSU in New Orleans..Penn St vs Texas A & M in Texas and Ill vs USC in LA..Of course were at a disadvantage every year but we Dont complain about its just the way it is but please quit acting all superior without pointing out the HUGE advantage the SEC has in bowl games every year played in your back yards..Im sure if all 8 B10 teams played their bowl games in the Midwest wed have a better record every year.

4.Quit ignoring the facts..the last 26 head to head SEC B10 bowl matchups are 13-13 Hardly makes the SEC vastly superior. Michigan OWNS the SEC 23-5 over all and 7-1 last 8 matchups..

5. Be a little more gracious..Most B10 fans will gladly acknowlege the SEC is tough but you dont see very many if any SEC acknowleding the reverse..all we get is the same ol how superior the SEC is based upon these skewed bowl records..HEAD TO HEAD were EVEN GOT IT?
Posted: 5:47 PM   by Blogger jblack
Hey! re: the song-girl from USC and the cheerleader from Illinois. BOTH attractive appealing humans, both too good for 90% of the slobs who use a couch for watching weekend football, and both too classy for an SI "comparison" deal.
Posted: 6:00 PM   by Blogger Charles
for bgault - Your comments related to who you beat and not just a won-loss record are precisely why the numbers we see displayed by Digital Samurai are meaningless. For all the wisdom he claims to have he is assuming that the SEC and Big 10 played an equal number of powderpuffs like Troy or Akron to build them. He is also assuming that there are just as many OSU/LSU matches as there are Vandy/Northwestern. It could be that after this analysis that we find his numbers relevant, but he has much work to do before then. Afterall, Hawaii's numbers are 12-1 and only someone on a pineapple diet will put them on the same level as a one loss OSU team.
Still you, or perhaps others, make too much of the Big 10 going 2-1 vs the SEC last season. This ignores the fact that the two wins were fairly close ones, and the loss was a bad one. It also ignores the fact that the SEC won most of its bowls, and the two most important ones, and the Big 10 did the opposite.
My point of course is that you have to dig behind the numbers, as you suggest, but also consider width & breath, and not isolated results.
The SEC has put up some very good bowl statistics this season. And I think these numbers are better than the Big 10. But that does not mean that the SEC could be matched against the Big 10 and win 11 of the 11 games.
A case can be made that one cannot take most Big 10 schools lightly. The Big 10 is a strong conf, but perhaps not quite as strong as some others. I think we would all be happier if we stopped trying to claim absolutes and instead acknowledged that the differences that may exist are probably small.
Posted: 6:06 PM   by Blogger Charles
for wolvie777 - Fla played FSU, SC played Clemson, LSU played Va Tech, Aub played USF & K St, GA played OK St (& GA Tech), Kentucky played Louisiville. Miss St played WV. On the Big 10 side Illinois played Mizzou. Several experts who rated non-conf games credited the Big 10 with no quality wins.
You might want to revise your comment about nearly every SEC school scheduling four powderpuffs, or at least acknowledge that the Big 10 was worse.
Posted: 6:14 PM   by Blogger Larry
Hey guys, I like a good frothing rant as much as anyone, but it seems like this is getting a bit out of control. I'm glad nobody's got their finger on the button! :)

How about we all take a breath, count to 10, shake hands and start over? Lots of good teams out there, lots of reasons to feel good about the sport of college football, and there's lots of good ball being played in every conference.

I said this before, but one of the most compelling things I see in the games is afterwards, when guys that were hitting each other as hard as they could actually shake hands, talk a bit, maybe even smile, maybe even gather in a circle. We play games like this to demonstrate courage and honor and sportsmanship, so I'd like to think we can do the same thing as observers.

Just my two cents. Have a good night and stay warm if you've got snow...it's a cold one here in Columbus tonight!
Posted: 6:42 PM   by Blogger Amer
Lol @ Irish--

Dude I've just been sitting and reading everyone's comments for the past hour and you making fun of Digital is making me laugh out loud. Classic stuff my friend.

Digital--

Please don't talk about how smart you supposedly are, it just makes you look bad.
Posted: 6:45 PM   by Blogger Amer
jblack--

C'mon man, the SC chick in that picture is way hotter than the U of I one.
Posted: 6:52 PM   by Blogger SpeedOfDark
"And once again -

SEC vs rest of NCAA div 1A
2760W - 1766L

That is a winning percentage of 0.640 vs the rest of div 1A college football, ALL TIME.

Could someone please refute this statistic?"

There is nothing to refute. But what does it prove? The data on that page shows that they really beat up on the WAC, MAC, Sunbelt, Conference USA and Mountain West conferences. Other major conferences have likely done the same.
Posted: 6:59 PM   by Blogger Charles
for speedofdark - The key word in your statement is 'likely'. Until we know that the SEC built that record with the same number of quality match ups we simply do not know what those numbers mean. And what matters most is the here and now. Beating OSU last year is little comfort in the Michigan loss to Florida yesterday. But maybe I am in the minority.
Posted: 7:44 PM   by Blogger SpeedOfDark
Hi Charles,

Actually, I feel the numbers mean nothing and was trying to indicate that. I was going to let DS reply and have others argue it out with him. If you compute the records for the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, PAC 10 and SEC from that site (ignoring ties as he did) you get:

Big 10 1661 901 .647
PAC 10 1741 1105 .612
SEC 2760 1766 .610 (not .640 as he claimed)
Big 12 2424 1756 .580
ACC 2081 1960 .515
Big East 1349 1528 .469

As you and I know and most others know the above means squat. The data goes back into the 1800s and teams have shifted around and former independents brought records with them into conferences and certainly what happened 100 years ago has no bearing on today. But I'll leave it for DS to prove whatever it is he thinks it proves.
Posted: 7:49 PM   by Blogger Mike
Digital Samurai:

I will refute your post...learn how to do math!

SEC: 2760 wins, 1766 losses = 4526 total games for a winning percentage of 2760/4526 = 0.609

Big Ten: 1836 wins, 1170 losses = 3006 total games for a winning percentage of 1836/3006 = 0.610

REFUTED! BIG TEN BEST CONF EVER! Haha....I signed up for an account just to post this.
Posted: 7:57 PM   by Blogger SpeedOfDark
Made a mistake in my numbers as I missed the independents for the Big 10. It changes their record to 1836 and 1170 and drops them to .611.
Posted: 8:00 PM   by Blogger SpeedOfDark
Hello there Mike,

I made a mistake and did not pick up the independents. Sorry for offending you.

There was no intent to prove anything. Clearly you only looked at the numbers I posted and didn't even read the text where I said the numbers don't mean squat. Please do so before behaving like a jerk next time. Thanks in advance.
Posted: 8:04 PM   by Blogger Mike
Speedofdark,

I didn't post to you, no ill will. Was in response to Digital Samurai asking to be refuted. I started writing before you posted....too quick to jump to conclusions I fear...aka jerk comment. 'Clearly' you didn't read who I posted to.
Posted: 8:05 PM   by Blogger SpeedOfDark
Sorry Mike, I missed that you were posting to DS.
Posted: 9:10 PM   by Blogger bgault
Charles,

My frustration over most SEC fans deals almost exclusively with this notion that "our top eight teams would go undeafeated in your lousy conference, and your best teams would all lose three games in ours."

When presented with this obviously lame argument time and again, as an Ohio State fan first of all, and a Big Ten fan next, I can't help but point out the flaws of such an argument. After all, if the top eight teams should have gone undefeated in the inferior Big Ten, how on earth did Wisconsin and Penn State last year, and Michian this year, beat an SEC team?

If an SEC fan, or more specifically a Florida fan, wants to say that their team was better than my team at gametime last year...well, there's not much I can say. But when an LSU fan extrapolates that because Florida won last year that they will win this year...well, that's not logic at all, and I will do my best to show the fallacious thinking involved.
Posted: 12:48 AM   by Blogger Jake
Wolvie777 Re: Every SEC school cheats.

But the Big 10 is perfect? Maybe you forgot about the Fab Five issues you had or the Minnesota basketball cheating scandal, or the Northwestern Scandal or the Penn State football team or the king of sleaze, Kelvin Sampson, now at Indiana. Lets not forget that angel, Maurice Clarett! Give me a break.
Posted: 8:11 AM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
This post has been removed by the author.
Posted: 8:18 AM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
Eric - You are correct. The ASVAB consists of the following components:

Verbal Skills
Mathemathics
Deductive Reasoning
Mechanics
Electronics
Reading Comprehension
Spacial Analysis
Memorization
Motor Function

And there may be one or two more that I cannot remember. And yes, I made a perfect score, on every phase. And no, I don't care if anyone thinks it makes me look bad to say so, I never started the comment about my intelligence, I merely defended it once insulted. Read the thread.

I don't expect anyone to believe my claim - nobody ever does - but as I previously stated, the fact that everyone finds it so unbelievable only makes it that much sweeter that I actually did it. w00t for me.

You could always call the Navy recruiting office in Warner Robbins GA and ask them if they ever had anyone ace the ASVAB...it was a pretty big deal when it happened, which was about a year and a half ago. But I bet you don't have enough balls to do it. Won't you feel silly when you find out I am telling the truth?
Posted: 8:58 AM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
The bottom line here is that you people don't like me because I am egotistical, I threaten the superiority complexes you all have, and I don't mind letting you know that I am smarter than you. Since I also live in the south, this is particularly offensive to you all - its not fair for us to dominate football *and* be intelligent, right? People typically do not respond well to this sort of behavior. It is a natural defense mechanism. I completely understand. And it brings me great joy to get you all in such a tizzy that you find it necessary to start slinging insults for no reason whatsoever, other than you don't like what I have to say. So you can all just bow down and worship me at any time. Fools.
Posted: 9:13 AM   by Blogger Timothy
Digital- I certainly am not threatened by an individual who posts the winning percentage of one conference and declares it to be the best conference based on that winning percentage. That's not an intelligent argument.
With that said, it certainly doesn't mean you aren't smart. Lots of smart people can't put together a logical argument.
I thought you were from the North somewhere, but just live in the South, so I don't see how your current home's location in reference to the Mason Dixon line adds insult to the alleged intellectual injury you have given us.
Posted: 9:43 AM   by Blogger Digital Samurai
You have good points Timothy, and my comments really aren't directed at you anyway. To be perfectly honest, you haven't really offended me in any way. I can take criticism and I love for people to disagree, but to disrespect me brings out the megalomaniac that is buried not so deeply beneath my calm and sexy demeanor. You didn't ever disrespect so I have no problems with you whatsoever. =]

It wasn't really an argument until someone else added some feedback though, and when I ask for someone to refute my claim based on the statistic, I considered it to be obvious that I wanted someone else to post the comparative percentages that would be relevant to the argument.

Take a look at my original post:

"Blogger Digital Samurai said...

Hey Larry, rather than passing insults at people, why don't you back up your claims with facts? I'll tell you why - because there are no facts that exist that would substantiate your claims. Embarrassing? LOL. The fact that all you can do to refute my claims is pass baseless insults just proves that my words are right on the money. We already know you don't hear us, and we already know why too. Let me do you a favor, I will gather some stats for you.

SEC teams overall lifetime record vs div 1A non-conference teams:

2760W - 1766L

http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/sec/vs_conf.php

Show me some evidence, and I will stfu. Until then, you try it. Thanks."

In that post, I didn't claim that this stat was proof of SEC dominance. I was asking Larry to back up his opinions with facts, and to get things started, I gave him a fact to refute. I then stated that if he showed me some evidence, I would shut up about it - I think it is pretty obvious I was asking him to post a comparative statistic. That post was far up on the thread before you ever responded, so I am sure you never saw it. Anyways dude all of your remarks are pretty close to on the money, within the scope of what you had read. Peace.
Posted: 9:52 AM   by Blogger Timothy
Digital- I agree that you and I have been fair to each other. I did read your initial comment, but some of the other comments you posted, seeming to indicate your stat trumped all others, stuck in my brain more.
You probably started to do that because people weren't bringing facts to the table, just opinion and also because they were insulting you. That often causes emotion to get in the way of rational thought.
You were willing to admit when you were wrong which says more about you as a person and your intelligence than any standardized test could. As I am sure you know, you learn more from your mistakes. Although, if you are dealing with nuclear technology, I don't know if that is true.
This post has been removed by the author.
LOL. Touche. You are correct, in all regards. And I said I have knowledge in nuclear physics, which is true, not that I am a nuclear physicist. It is limited knowledge, but far more than most people can claim.

And Irish -

I just saw your post asking what I thought UGA would do next year. You can officially put me down as saying:

"I predict that Georgia will run the table in the SEC, go undefeated, and utterly trounce whomever they play in the NC game."

Instead of jumping on the biased media bandwagon, watch some UGA games against ELITE competition (competition that has dominated the bowl scene this year - and uh, btw, way to compare the #2 ranked big 12 team to the #6 ranked SEC team as an indication of conference strength - whomever did that, it was brilliant), and look at the roster of UGA and see how many people they are returning...the rest of the NCAA is going to have their hands full handling UGA for at least the next 2 years - not to say that cannot be beaten, but I don't think they will.
Posted: 10:52 AM   by Blogger Timothy
Digital- I have only seen Georgia play a couple of times. Once against Florida and against Hawaii. They looked very good both games and from what I know, are pretty young. They certainly will be in the top 3 headed into the season.
So would you prefer to see a couple of undefeated teams, or a season like this where you really don't know who is going to win any given game. Unless the #2 team is play because you know they will lose.
Posted: 11:47 AM   by Blogger RizzoSports
WVU looks just a good as any team, I think their 3-3-5 D could hold USC under 30.
Posted: 12:46 PM   by Blogger CornDawg
Stewart,

Concerning cheerleaders, that USC gal will have you shelling out $1000 a month for hair extensions, color and highlights, clothes and accessories, body wax, spa treatments, tooth whitening and appliques, all of which is over and above what you're forking out for her BMW convertible and a personal trainer named Ronaldo. By the time she hits 40, that southern California sun will have baked out her skin so much that it has the consistency of leather and she'll be applying her makeup with a mason's trowel. Too bad she only has one arm, or is it behind her back picking her thong out of her crack?

The Illinois cheerleader? Beautiful naturally, with no need of a "pit crew" - the kind of girl you bring home to meet mom and settle down with for life.
Posted: 1:44 PM   by Blogger Drew
Digital S ...

I am also tired of this which conference is better argument, but I must follow up on your All Time winning percentage argument. Beyond the fact that it is very historical stat (already mentioned), the statistic itself has many flaws:

1. It includes wins against ALL Div 1A conferences, including all the non BCS conferences. I would suspect that most of the BCS conferences (a concept only introduced a few years ago) would have winning percentages above 50% and approaching 60% against all of Div 1A.
2. 2760 wins and 1766 losses = a winning percentage of 61.0%, not 64.0%. Further to my point 1, I added up the Big 10: 1836 wins vs 1170 losses for a winning percentage of 61.1%

I'm not saying the B10 is better than the SEC today (though as a Michigan fan I LOVED that win), but its clear your supposedly irrefutable stat is, as Larry already pointed out, quite refutable.
Posted: 6:51 PM   by Blogger Chris
Ok that cheerleader comment is nuts. It's funny, I was watching the Rose Bowl...all excited to see if the USC girls were as hot as everyone made them out to be....then zoom in on HD and I see so much makeup they have on and how unattractive they are up close I almost laughed. I'll take the Illinois girl any day.
Posted: 8:22 PM   by Blogger rhymeister
Pretty insensitive remark if you ask me about the USC vs Illinois cheerleaders. Don't you think some of those ladies, their families, friends and peers read your column? Beauty is subjective and while I, as a hetero male, appreciate the kind of beauty which only a woman can bring to the table, I doubt everyone appreciates you, as a very nondescript looking male, to be belitting a select group of women who I am sure many guys find attractive.

Learn some manners, Stew!
LOLz. What's up all you doubters?? Case closed. Oh yea...I like that final AP poll. What about the SEC? Case closed. Bow down. LMAO.

Get used to it, we will see it again next year. Peace out.
The Book
Comments
More Mandel
Recent Posts
divider line
Search