Archive

The Next Percy Harvin, and "now" SEC vs. Big 10 Debate

  • ytownfootball
    OK...I won't.

    Likewise, when you come to play in the Big10 sandbox and smell like a turd, don't expect to not get buried.
  • Pick6
    enigmaax wrote: See, there you go with "I don't think" and "if". When you have to use terms like that, there is really no argument. Most conferences do schedule a bunch of OOC patsies, the difference is that the SEC wasn't losing to the MAC and Syracuse this past season. The SEC wasn't finishing with less than half of their teams below .500.

    I know it was treacherous for OSU to have to prepare for Purdue after the way the Boilermakers pounded Northern Illinois...oh wait. And Iowa simply ran into a buzzsaw at home versus that Northwestern team that got beat by the Big East bottom feeder. Oh, but the whole season Iowa was overrated anyway according to most people around here. But now the conference hangs its hat on that team's big bowl win.

    So, you can have your "thoughts" and your "ifs".....and keep trying to convince everyone else in the real world.
    Oh so the SEC had more than half of their teams under 500?

    Oh and your talking about that Northwestern team...that it took overtime for Auburn to beat them (even though northwestern had a shit load of turnovers in scoring position). And was this that same Auburn team that just about and should have beaten Alabama..who were national champions?
    I can compare scores to man. But they dont mean anything, considering Oregon beat Purdue, and slaughtered USC, so I guess Oregon should have beaten OSU by 20+ right?

    Fact is, the SEC is still probably the best conference in the country. But by nowhere near as far as it was a couple years ago. Once/if Michigan ever gets back, I believe there will be no question that the Big 10 will be the best again. Also it shows how deep the Big 10 is that one of the bottom teams, in Purdue, can beat the top team.
  • Speedofsand
    lhslep134 wrote:
    Speedofsand wrote: They still compared evenly overall.
    I believe that would be my original point, one that "themightygators" simply dismissed as false, even though it's true.
    Yes, when the SEC has a down year and the Big11 counts a few bowl wins as a great year, then they compare even.
  • Speedofsand
    sleeper wrote:
    Speedofsand wrote: sleeper, Florida is right up there with tOSU dumbass.
    You know SEC football is better, so now you spin it into an academic debate.
    Nice try.
    Nope. Big Ten football is better than SEC football, no doubt in my mind. But those are opinions, whereas academics are facts.
    you have the mind of a phuctard
  • Speedofsand
    sleeper wrote:
    Considering the Big 10 is 97-91 roughly against the almight SEC, including the bowl games that are primarily played in the south, you could easily say the SEC is jealous of the Big 10, and they have superior academics across the board.
    [/quote]

    overall, maybe. Not 'across the board'. Keep hanging on to the academic rating.
  • enigmaax
    Pick6 wrote: The SEC wasn't finishing with less than half of their teams below .500.
    Yes, pardon me, I mistyped. Obviously we know which conference had more than half its teams below .500.
    Pick6 wrote: Oh and your talking about that Northwestern team...that it took overtime for Auburn to beat them (even though northwestern had a shit load of turnovers in scoring position). And was this that same Auburn team that just about and should have beaten Alabama..who were national champions?
    The difference here is that you are saying "almost" and "almost". Wins are what counts. Northwestern lost to the worst team in what many say is the worst major conference. Then they beat a would-be Big Ten champ. Then they lost to an SEC team. What is your point?
    Pick6 wrote:Fact is, the SEC is still probably the best conference in the country.
    Ah, see, thats really all there is to it.
    Pick6 wrote:But by nowhere near as far as it was a couple years ago.
    Again, what is the point? Your statement really illustrates that desperation that Big Ten fans feel. Now the argument isn't "they aren't the best", it is "they aren't (this much) better". The best is the best. Period.
    Pick6 wrote:Once/if Michigan ever gets back, I believe there will be no question that the Big 10 will be the best again.
    More ifs. Good argument.
    Pick6 wrote:Also it shows how deep the Big 10 is that one of the bottom teams, in Purdue, can beat the top team.
    It would...IF...Purdue hadn't been beaten by a MAC team. You are seriously going to try and prove depth when your champion couldn't beat a team that was beaten by a mid-level MAC team?
  • Speedofsand
    sleeper wrote:
    enigmaax wrote:
    sleeper wrote: Considering the Big 10 is 97-91 roughly against the almight SEC, including the bowl games that are primarily played in the south, you could easily say the SEC is jealous of the Big 10, and they have superior academics across the board.
    Aside from the flaw in your numbers, SEC fans don't really care about what happened in 1900. The SEC is the best NOW and that is really all that matters to them.

    Games are played primarily in the south because that is where EVERYBODY wants to be, so I'm sure that doesn't bother SEC fans.

    And finally, nobody gives a shit about academics unless their star player is ineligible, so once again, there's no real motivation for SEC jealousy on that front.

    You big ten cats are the ones who are searching for some acknowledgement of relevance from the rest of the country.
    See, I don't think they are the best right now even. They have 2 good teams every year, sort of like well I don't know, EVERY other conference. The facts are simple, if the SEC ever left the south to play any big games, they'd get BLOWN out. They schedule 4 patsies so they are all pretty much 4-0 going into conference play, and then snooze through 2 bowl wins against the plentiful conference bottom feeders(kentucky, arkansas, tennessee, miss state, auburn, vanderbilt, + 2-3 teams like Georgia and LSU that decide to be mediocre for that year.

    Now sure, they've won the past couple of National Championships(notice I made sure the conference won it, not the teams), but when you only have to get up for 1-2 games all year its pretty easy to be fully rested and healthy for that game. I'd like to see some of these SEC teams come up north and try to win football games, because you and I both know, the SEC would get CLOWNSTOMPED if they ever crossed the mason dixie line, and you can take that to the bank.
    4 in a row. In the last 30 years, the Big11 has won 4 National Titles. The SEC has 10. Only going back 20 years, the Big11 has 2, the SEC has 8 National Titles. Get that ? 8 of the last 20 National Titles live in SEC trophy cases. 5 of the last 8 by 3 different SEC teams.
    Get up for 1 or 2 games a year, STFU until the Big11 has a Conference Championship game.

    The facts are simple, if the SEC ever left the south to play any big games, they'd get BLOWN out.
    Why are you stating your opinion as fact ?
  • Pick6
    Trying to compare scores again.....IF scores mean everything, why didnt Oregon destroy OSU? Seeing Oregon beat Purdue and USC and all.
  • Pick6
    Speedofsand wrote:
    sleeper wrote:
    enigmaax wrote:
    sleeper wrote: Considering the Big 10 is 97-91 roughly against the almight SEC, including the bowl games that are primarily played in the south, you could easily say the SEC is jealous of the Big 10, and they have superior academics across the board.
    Aside from the flaw in your numbers, SEC fans don't really care about what happened in 1900. The SEC is the best NOW and that is really all that matters to them.

    Games are played primarily in the south because that is where EVERYBODY wants to be, so I'm sure that doesn't bother SEC fans.

    And finally, nobody gives a shit about academics unless their star player is ineligible, so once again, there's no real motivation for SEC jealousy on that front.

    You big ten cats are the ones who are searching for some acknowledgement of relevance from the rest of the country.
    See, I don't think they are the best right now even. They have 2 good teams every year, sort of like well I don't know, EVERY other conference. The facts are simple, if the SEC ever left the south to play any big games, they'd get BLOWN out. They schedule 4 patsies so they are all pretty much 4-0 going into conference play, and then snooze through 2 bowl wins against the plentiful conference bottom feeders(kentucky, arkansas, tennessee, miss state, auburn, vanderbilt, + 2-3 teams like Georgia and LSU that decide to be mediocre for that year.

    Now sure, they've won the past couple of National Championships(notice I made sure the conference won it, not the teams), but when you only have to get up for 1-2 games all year its pretty easy to be fully rested and healthy for that game. I'd like to see some of these SEC teams come up north and try to win football games, because you and I both know, the SEC would get CLOWNSTOMPED if they ever crossed the mason dixie line, and you can take that to the bank.
    4 in a row. In the last 30 years, the Big11 has won 4 National Titles. The SEC has 10.
    Get up for 1 or 2 games a year, STFU until the Big11 has a Conference Championship game.
    The facts are simple, if the SEC ever left the south to play any big games, they'd get BLOWN out.

    Why are you stating your opinion as fact ?
    What happened when the speed of the SEC got on a muddy field and cooler conditions against a big 10 team that was a distant 3rd best in the conference? Hell Miami was wearing under armour in 50 degree weather against wisconsin. I dont think you can honestly say if and SEC team came up north in November they would play at the same level as if they were down in the 80 degree weather.
  • Speedofsand
    Pick6 wrote: Trying to compare scores again.....IF scores mean everything, why didnt Oregon destroy OSU? Seeing Oregon beat Purdue and USC and all.
    because Oregon is not in the SEC
  • Speedofsand
    Pick6 wrote:
    What happened when the speed of the SEC got on a muddy field and cooler conditions against a big 10 team that was a distant 3rd best in the conference? Hell Miami was wearing under armour in 50 degree weather against wisconsin. I dont think you can honestly say if and SEC team came up north in November they would play at the same level as if they were down in the 80 degree weather.
    LSU was a distant 3rd or lower in the SEC and barely lost to a team that should be superior in those conditions. That shitrus bowl turf was worse than muddy, it ripped a player's knee up so bad he is already out for all of the 2010 season.
    Big11 homers always cry that they would have could have should have beat the SEC up north in the cold. What an excuse, I can't believe so many Big11 fans use it.
  • dtdtim
    Speedofsand wrote: I'm not jumping too deep into this pissing match
    Good call there....oh, wait.
    sleeper wrote:
    dtdtim wrote: Vanderbilt and Florida are very good schools, for the record. Georgia is also a pretty good school, maybe just a notch or two below OSU.

    The rest are 3rd tier.
    Still the worst in the country, I'd post facts but you're probably from the south and can't read anyways.
    Nothing I said wasn't true. I'm an OSU alum that lives in Ohio, by the way. Note the quote in my signature or my location. Context clues, Sleeper.
    Speedofsand wrote: overall, maybe. Not 'across the board'. Keep hanging on to the academic rating.
    Overall, it is not a maybe.

    I could really care less about the SEC/Big 10 football debate because it is clearly obvious that the SEC has been better lately and I have freely admitted it multiple times. The same 12 people on this board have this same argument all the time and nobody ever changes viewpoints or brings anything new to the table. We get it, speedofsand thinks the SEC is better and Sleeper thinks the Big 10 is better. Nothing new.
  • Speedofsand
    dtdtim wrote:
    Speedofsand wrote: I'm not jumping too deep into this pissing match
    Good call there....oh, wait.
    sleeper wrote:
    dtdtim wrote: Vanderbilt and Florida are very good schools, for the record. Georgia is also a pretty good school, maybe just a notch or two below OSU.

    The rest are 3rd tier.
    Still the worst in the country, I'd post facts but you're probably from the south and can't read anyways.
    Nothing I said wasn't true. I'm an OSU alum that lives in Ohio, by the way. Note the quote in my signature or my location. Context clues, Sleeper.
    Speedofsand wrote: overall, maybe. Not 'across the board'. Keep hanging on to the academic rating.
    Overall, it is not a maybe.

    I could really care less about the SEC/Big 10 football debate because it is clearly obvious that the SEC has been better lately and I have freely admitted it multiple times. The same 12 people on this board have this same argument all the time and nobody ever changes viewpoints or brings anything new to the table. We get it, speedofsand thinks the SEC is better and Sleeper thinks the Big 10 is better. Nothing new.
    Good call there....oh, wait.
    I was bored.

    Overall, it is not a maybe.
    My bad, overall it is. You are correct Vandy, Florida and Uga are comparable. But who cares about academics unless a 5 star recruit is failing then gets a misdemeanor arrest and all of a sudden he is booted off the team ? If the kid was in the Big10 he could drive drunk and not even miss a game against YSU or Akron.
  • TheMightyGators
    Speedofsand wrote:
    sleeper wrote:
    enigmaax wrote:
    4 in a row. In the last 30 years, the Big11 has won 4 National Titles. The SEC has 10. Only going back 20 years, the Big11 has 2, the SEC has 8 National Titles. Get that ? 8 of the last 20 National Titles live in SEC trophy cases. 5 of the last 8 by 3 different SEC teams.
    Get up for 1 or 2 games a year, STFU until the Big11 has a Conference Championship game.
    The Big10 has won 4 National Titles in the past 30 years? Who are they? Penn St. won 2, but they were not members of the Big10 when they won them. I'm pretty sure the Big10 has produced 2 National Titles in the past 42 years. Lol! One being controversial and the other being shared.
  • Speedofsand
    haha that is right. I thought PSU joined the Big10 in 1980 but it was 1990. PSU won it twice in the 80's but they were not in the Big10 yet.

    SEC > Big10
  • dtdtim
    Speedofsand wrote: My bad, overall it is. You are correct Vandy, Florida and Uga are comparable. But who cares about academics unless a 5 star recruit is failing then gets a misdemeanor arrest and all of a sudden he is booted off the team ? If the kid was in the Big10 he could drive drunk and not even miss a game against YSU or Akron.
    When did the SEC begin to make the winner of the football title its only conference champion? Unless I'm mistaken conferences compete in more than just football and, being that these are universities, the academics of said institutions should play some part in a debate of which conference is better.

    If this is a debate about football only then the SEC wins. Congratulations, you win the Dead Horse Trophy.
    If this is a debate about the two conferences as a whole, I don't really see why academics wouldn't play into the discussion. And, if that is so, I don't really think there is a comparison between the two when you include everything.
  • jhay78
    dtdtim wrote:
    Speedofsand wrote: My bad, overall it is. You are correct Vandy, Florida and Uga are comparable. But who cares about academics unless a 5 star recruit is failing then gets a misdemeanor arrest and all of a sudden he is booted off the team ? If the kid was in the Big10 he could drive drunk and not even miss a game against YSU or Akron.

    If this is a debate about football only then the SEC wins. Congratulations, you win the Dead Horse Trophy.
    SEC honks aren't happy with that- they want you to acknowledge that their conference is the greatest in the history of the universe and that the middle-of-the-road team in the SEC could compete in the AFC South. They also want you to say that the Big 10 is 0-943 against the SEC in bowl games, even though it's basically dead even the past decade.
  • cats gone wild
    Speedofsand wrote:
    lhslep134 wrote:
    Speedofsand wrote: They still compared evenly overall.
    I believe that would be my original point, one that "themightygators" simply dismissed as false, even though it's true.
    Yes, when the SEC has a down year and the Big11 counts a few bowl wins as a great year, then they compare even.
    The funny thing is, that the Big 10 posted its first winning bowl season since 2002. ROGL! Huge accomplishment
  • Speedofsand
    This is a college football forum, so you want to debate academics because Big11 football sucks ass. I understand.
  • sleeper
    Speedofsand wrote: This is a college football forum, so you want to debate academics because Big11 football sucks ass. I understand.
    Academics is only a small part of why the Big 10 is better than the SEC. Big 10 football is tied with the SEC in head to head match ups since the beginning of the BCS era, and has an overall record all time greater than the SEC. And since, 99% of bowl games are played in the SEC's back yard, I'll give the BCS nod to the Big 10 and continue to believe that if the SEC ever left the south, they'd get their ass handed to them, and you can take that to the bank.
  • ksig489
    Until an SEC school comes to Big Ten country in the second half of the season...I dont want to hear about their "dominance". Lets see them play a bowl game in the snow...why doesnt Michigan or Wisconsin or OSU host a bowl game just to see how the southern schools would fare in January Big 10 weather?
  • cats gone wild
    ksig489 wrote: Until an SEC school comes to Big Ten country in the second half of the season...I dont want to hear about their "dominance". Lets see them play a bowl game in the snow...why doesnt Michigan or Wisconsin or OSU host a bowl game just to see how the southern schools would fare in January Big 10 weather?
    Maybe you are new to forums, but this is a repeatedly scratched up, broken record.