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 11-08-2011, 11:37 AM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,419,007 times
Reputation: 1322

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoPro View Post
Texas is 40-27 against the SEC.

Just a fact.


LOL... ok, you can count that. But they havent played more than half the SEC teams since 1970. I wasn't even born yet... So I'll only care about the games in the BCS era.

What's their record vs the SEC in the BCS era?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-08-2011, 11:53 AM
 
1,359 posts, read 4,386,327 times
Reputation: 771
Quote:
Originally Posted by truckingbronco View Post
Wasn't the year Arky won the West the same year that USC hung 70 on them?
That was 2005, they went 4-7 that year. You probably have it mixed up with 2006, USC hung 50 on them that year but they ended up winning the West.

They first won the West in 1995, but that was their only winning season from 1992-1997.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2011, 01:28 PM
 
1,640 posts, read 4,235,148 times
Reputation: 1002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. GE View Post
that's what the SEC does... It makes you better. You can't compare the Big 12 recruiting to the SEC... U just can't. I'm sorry that bothers u but it's true. And they haven't recruited that well for Big 12 measurements, have u seen their players?

South Carolina was a dismal program when they joined the SEC.. Now they are a top 10 program. The SEC has that type of affect. and it will happen faster with TAMU because they are in TX.

You can quote history all you want on what they did before but they are in the SEC now. And they are not Kentucky or Vandy. They have the school size and support to build a great football program. the SEC brand is what they needed to get over the hump. Its huge to kids with asperations to play in the NFL. And now they can compete with TX & OK in getting those kids... They didn't have much of a chance before.
By what measure is South Carolina a top ten program? Yes, they've briefly flirted with a top ten ranking a couple of times but they always crumble and have never once finished in the top ten. All history says about South Carolina is they're 4-12 in Bowl Games.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2011, 02:07 PM
 
Location: Houston, TX
17,032 posts, read 26,923,366 times
Reputation: 16190
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoPro View Post
A&M has recruited pretty well for years but has been knocking on the Big 12 cellar door most of the time for the past ten. But now y'all are saying that they will fare better in a much tougher conference? How does that work?
I think they have too, but starting at #7 and 4 losses with 3 to go isnt saying much. They better hope to get in the east division.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2011, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
8,412 posts, read 8,410,833 times
Reputation: 7046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. GE View Post


LOL... ok, you can count that. But they havent played more than half the SEC teams since 1970. I wasn't even born yet... So I'll only care about the games in the BCS era.

What's their record vs the SEC in the BCS era?
What does age have to do with it?

I care about it all, not some narrowed down version.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2011, 03:24 PM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,419,007 times
Reputation: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by truckingbronco View Post
By what measure is South Carolina a top ten program?
Agreed... Got caught up in the argument.

Top 25 is more accurate. It's still a huge improvement than before they were in SEC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2011, 03:31 PM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,419,007 times
Reputation: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoPro View Post
What does age have to do with it?

I care about it all, not some narrowed down version.
I don't consider pre civil rights success... Things weren't really fair and square. The SEC states had to grow up first... But u are entitled to cherish those years. I choose not too. I'm entitled.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2011, 04:33 PM
 
1,261 posts, read 1,773,491 times
Reputation: 371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. GE View Post
that's what the SEC does... It makes you better. You can't compare the Big 12 recruiting to the SEC... U just can't. I'm sorry that bothers u but it's true. And they haven't recruited that well for Big 12 measurements, have u seen their players?

South Carolina was a dismal program when they joined the SEC.. Now they are a top 10 program. The SEC has that type of affect. and it will happen faster with TAMU because they are in TX.

You can quote history all you want on what they did before but they are in the SEC now. And they are not Kentucky or Vandy. They have the school size and support to build a great football program. the SEC brand is what they needed to get over the hump. Its huge to kids with asperations to play in the NFL. And now they can compete with TX & OK in getting those kids... They didn't have much of a chance before.
That being better line is a nice line.

Only problem is Ole Miss and Missy St. have been in the SEC FOREVER. After Jonny Vaught left, Ole Miss withered. Missy State has barely had a pulse.

Vandy and UK have always sucked (UK's sole exception being when the bear was there).

SCar got a good coach and talent now they are doing well, same with Arky. However Arky was a power BEFORE they were in the SEC.

And Florida was in the SEC forever as well, yet they weren't real hot stuff until they got Spurrier.

It all depends on your staff and talent, not the conference. Otherwise, USC wouldn't have been the power it was because according to most people Pac-10 had no name power relative to the SE(X).

Anyways, the worst teams will still likely switch between Kentucky and Vandy. Above them will be the Miss. schools (unless something big happens) and then likely will be TAMU and Mizzou. And that's just short term future. Who knows what will happen long term.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2011, 05:49 PM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,419,007 times
Reputation: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by waltlantz View Post
That being better line is a nice line.

Only problem is Ole Miss and Missy St. have been in the SEC FOREVER. After Jonny Vaught left, Ole Miss withered. Missy State has barely had a pulse.

Vandy and UK have always sucked (UK's sole exception being when the bear was there).

SCar got a good coach and talent now they are doing well, same with Arky. However Arky was a power BEFORE they were in the SEC.

And Florida was in the SEC forever as well, yet they weren't real hot stuff until they got Spurrier.

It all depends on your staff and talent, not the conference. Otherwise, USC wouldn't have been the power it was because according to most people Pac-10 had no name power relative to the SE(X).

Anyways, the worst teams will still likely switch between Kentucky and Vandy. Above them will be the Miss. schools (unless something big happens) and then likely will be TAMU and Mizzou. And that's just short term future. Who knows what will happen long term.

Everything you say is true... And if you read my original post I put both schools exactly where you did. I also had KY and Vandy at the bottom of the East and the Miss schools at the bottom of the west. Mizzou & TAMU coming right behind them respectfully.

As far bringing up schools that suck from the SEC though... In every conf you have the perennial bottom dwellers. The SEC's four are mentioned above. That's a 1/4 of the conference, but the rest of the conference competes for national titles. No other conference can say that.

Indiana, Northwestern, & Purdue hold those dweller spots for the Big10. The Pac 12 is Washington State and Oregon State probably. The ACC is Duke and Wake Forest, maybe NC State or Maryland too. Big 12 is Baylor, Kansas, and Iowa State.

Then you have the cream of the crop in very conference that makes up about the same amount normally... PAC-12 is USC and Oregon. Big 10 is Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State. ACC is Florida State, Miami, Clemson, and VA Tech. Big 12 is Oklahoma, Texas & OK State. And all of these schools have not even played for a national title...

The difference in the SEC's top schools is that every school that is not in the dweller list is a team that competes for national titles. Of course programs have bad years. And of course bad programs are good sometimes. But realistically the middle of the pack programs have no shot at a national title in most conferences. When was the last time Boston College, Illinois, UCLA, or Texas Tech had a real shot at a national title?

In the SEC East Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina all have a legitimate shot at national titles every few years. Same for the West... LSU, Alabama, Auburn, and Arkansas all have legitimate shots. Even if you think I'm stretching with South Carolina and Arkansas, that still leaves 6 programs that compete for national titles.

Out of those 6 only Georgia hasn't won a BCS title (they probably should have played for it when they had to play Hawaii) and Auburn went undefeated one year and was left out as well... And if Tennessee doesnt lose to LSU in the SEC title game back in 01 they would have played for another natty too. that's a consistent and stacked conference. When you should have played in a possible 10 of the 13 national title games with 6 different schools. When half of your conference has won a national title in the BCS era and 2 of them have won multiple titles... And none of them have lost a national title game. come on guys... what other conference can say that? The Big 12 has only had 3 teams even play in the Natty (half as many as the SEC and now one of them is gone). The Pac12 & ACC have only had 2. And the Big East & Big 10 have only had 1 team each and Miami left the Big East so it has none now... And yet you all think the SEC is not always the best conference? It should be obvious that I don't mean always literally but most of the time... like 75% the SEC has the best team!

Last edited by Mr. GE; 11-08-2011 at 06:01 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2011, 08:26 PM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,419,007 times
Reputation: 1322
Correction... The ACC has only had one team... VA Tech was in the Big East when it played in the Natty against Florida State of the ACC.
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