U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-07-2011, 10:58 PM
 
922 posts, read 1,020,637 times
Reputation: 750

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acuda View Post
Feel free to continue to tell yourself your point of, "Well, we got a new OC and that would have put a stop to that pesky USC NFL defense factory," is the coup de grace. If that is not the weakest solo arguments I have seen, it sure is close. Completely ignoring the fact that USC is one of the few teams that one can roll call a list of NFLers is simply amateur. But, since you have essentially leached onto the SEC, I can only expect as much.

As far as the NC game, if you go back and read my pre-game and post game comments, I was actually not far off. In a brief abstract, we can easily look back and see that Oregon had success when they sped up the pace, DT hit his receivers, and...again SPED up the pace. Mysteriously, we did not keep the pace up like we should have. We did see a form of the triple option in the 1st and it was effective until DT threw that INT. Again, if you go back and reread, you will note I said that is what the Ducks needed to do. Some of them we did and were successful, and a few we went away from and we shot ourselves in the foot. Sheesh, the world is too full of people on high horses who don't even know it.

As for the tone of my posts. Pot.Kettle.Black (I'm rather aware you agreed with me)

Buck up lil' soldier. I'm out. Gonna go watch the Northwestern BCS recording...oh wait
The number of NFL players by college shows that dominating your conference on the recruiting trail year after year like USC has done makes it harder for many of their players to make the transition to the NFL because they are not competing against teams that have numerous players with NFL ready talent week in week out. USC , LSU and Oklahoma are the only 3 teams from 2002-2010 with top 5 average recruiting classes that have equated to top 5 winning percentages during the period. USC's average recruiting ranking is #1 and it's winning percentage is #2. LSU's average recruiting ranking is #4 and it's winning percentage is #5. Oklahoma's average recruiting ranking was #5 and it's winning percentage was #4. But because of LSU competing in the SEC it's the only one of the three whose average ranking of most players in the NFL during the same period is also in the top 5 at #5. USC is outside the top 5 ranking at #7 for most NFL players during the period while Oklahoma is outside of the top 10 ranking at #14 for most NFL players during the period. What other explanation is there for those numbers if it's not because of the SEC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-08-2011, 01:19 AM
 
922 posts, read 1,020,637 times
Reputation: 750
Yet another example of national hacks and their lack of using logic on a consistant basis is the fact that their logic behind the reasoning of why Auburn would not have beaten USC in 04 was based on the results of the previous season which showed a long term memory. In contrast, when LSU and USC both had 2 losses and LSU made it to the title game many were of the opinion that USC was just as deserving as LSU even though one of USC's losses was at home to a 41 point underdog. In that case it showed a rather convenient loss of short term memory as USC's loss to a 41 point underdog occured only 1 month earlier and not the previous season. So what kind of people are on our TV sets if they could remember something that happened a year earlier but forget something that happened only 1 month earlier in sharing their opinions.

Last edited by Aceter; 02-08-2011 at 01:56 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2011, 04:52 AM
 
Location: New Orleans, LA
1,757 posts, read 3,919,876 times
Reputation: 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aceter View Post
In contrast, when LSU and USC both had 2 losses and LSU made it to the title game many were of the opinion that USC was just as deserving as LSU even though one of USC's losses was at home to a 41 point underdog.
Are you talking about the 2007 season when LSU had 2 triple-overtime losses against Arkansas and Kentucky or you're talking about the 2003 season when LSU had 1 loss which was at home against the Florida Gators? Which that loss was just a let down by the LSU team which meant they took themselves seriously, after that when Nick Saban got on them about that loss they were back to their winning streak.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2011, 08:35 AM
 
1,640 posts, read 4,235,598 times
Reputation: 1002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aceter View Post
Yet another example of national hacks and their lack of using logic on a consistant basis is the fact that their logic behind the reasoning of why Auburn would not have beaten USC in 04 was based on the results of the previous season which showed a long term memory. In contrast, when LSU and USC both had 2 losses and LSU made it to the title game many were of the opinion that USC was just as deserving as LSU even though one of USC's losses was at home to a 41 point underdog. In that case it showed a rather convenient loss of short term memory as USC's loss to a 41 point underdog occured only 1 month earlier and not the previous season. So what kind of people are on our TV sets if they could remember something that happened a year earlier but forget something that happened only 1 month earlier in sharing their opinions.
If you're talking about 2007 season it was because LSU lost their last regular season game to an unranked team and then had a hard time putting away an average TN team in the SEC championship game, yet they still leaped over several teams in the final regular season BCS ranking.

There really wasn't much talk about USC at the end of 07', it was more about WVU and Mizzou blowing it in the final week while Ohio State and LSU backed into the title game.

The USC love fest was tiresome but you're blind if you don't think the SEC gets the same treatment from the "national hacks".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2011, 04:57 AM
 
Location: New Orleans, LA
1,757 posts, read 3,919,876 times
Reputation: 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by truckingbronco View Post
If you're talking about 2007 season it was because LSU lost their last regular season game to an unranked team and then had a hard time putting away an average TN team in the SEC championship game, yet they still leaped over several teams in the final regular season BCS ranking.

There really wasn't much talk about USC at the end of 07', it was more about WVU and Mizzou blowing it in the final week while Ohio State and LSU backed into the title game.

The USC love fest was tiresome but you're blind if you don't think the SEC gets the same treatment from the "national hacks".
Ohio state was UNDEFEATED(until the National Championship game which they lost to LSU), while LSU lost 2 TRIPLE-OVERTIME GAMES(1 against Kentucky and another against Arkansas). And please, don't come up with the "backed into" thing whenever a team have a chance to go to the big game. It's called TAKING ADVANTAGE. And like I've said in my other post, everytime an SEC team goes to the National Championship and/or wins the title almost everyone wants to cry that the BCS system in the season is messed up. But when another team that's not in the SEC wins the National Championship nobody cries foil play.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2011, 05:01 AM
 
Location: New Orleans, LA
1,757 posts, read 3,919,876 times
Reputation: 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by truckingbronco View Post
If you're talking about 2007 season it was because LSU lost their last regular season game to an unranked team and then had a hard time putting away an average TN team in the SEC championship game, yet they still leaped over several teams in the final regular season BCS ranking.

There really wasn't much talk about USC at the end of 07', it was more about WVU and Mizzou blowing it in the final week while Ohio State and LSU backed into the title game.

The USC love fest was tiresome but you're blind if you don't think the SEC gets the same treatment from the "national hacks".
I'm sorry, I've meant that Ohio State lost 1 game but still that's not like USC's 2 loss in that 2007 season.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2011, 08:24 AM
 
1,640 posts, read 4,235,598 times
Reputation: 1002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackandgold51 View Post
Ohio state was UNDEFEATED(until the National Championship game which they lost to LSU), while LSU lost 2 TRIPLE-OVERTIME GAMES(1 against Kentucky and another against Arkansas). And please, don't come up with the "backed into" thing whenever a team have a chance to go to the big game. It's called TAKING ADVANTAGE. And like I've said in my other post, everytime an SEC team goes to the National Championship and/or wins the title almost everyone wants to cry that the BCS system in the season is messed up. But when another team that's not in the SEC wins the National Championship nobody cries foil play.
LSU and Ohio State both backed in, call it "taking advantage" if you like, it's just rhetoric. The point is they weren't in control of their own destiny and neither would've played in the NC if WVU and Mizzou took care of business in the final week.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2011, 08:29 AM
 
1,640 posts, read 4,235,598 times
Reputation: 1002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackandgold51 View Post
I'm sorry, I've meant that Ohio State lost 1 game but still that's not like USC's 2 loss in that 2007 season.
What's your point? USC didn't play in the title game in 07.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Austin, Texas
2,092 posts, read 3,022,778 times
Reputation: 869
Maybe this is why the SEC is so superior...

SPORTSbyBROOKS Ex-Auburn Players Claim Systematic Pay-To-Play

Oh, the ax awaits...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 11:35 PM
 
1,261 posts, read 1,773,715 times
Reputation: 371
Er, can't this be chalked up to more logical mundane answers?

High amounts of population, Stronger middle school and high school programs (relative to most parts of the country), longer runs of football practice throughout the year and VERY well funded development, training, scouting and administration at the college level?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top