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.
Good to see another school get a shot. Bama has been good, but the bcs is a sham and makes it very easy for sec teams to get to the title game. Texas a&m and Missouri have proved in their first two years that the SEC is not untouchable. These teams were both middle of the road b12 teams and have performed well.
[quote=slo1318;32505746]Good to see another school get a shot. Bama has been good, but the bcs is a sham and makes it very easy for sec teams to get to the title game.
Uh, if SEC teams didn't deserve to be in the national title game, then they'd actually lose one once in a while -- like Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Nebraska. And then you've got a team like Oregon that loses the BCS title game and then promptly gets hammered by LSU on opening day the following year - and LSU had four starters missing in that game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by slo1318
Texas a&m and Missouri have proved in their first two years that the SEC is not untouchable. These teams were both middle of the road b12 teams and have performed well.
So what? Teams change from year to year. A&M has a new coach, and Mizzou has new players and a different offensive line that's more suited to its new conference. Part of the reason they're better is because they're not playing flag football anymore; they're playing balanced, big boy football.
Well it is true. A team like Baylor wouldnt do nearly as well in the SEC as they are in the Big/Little 12.
Dont be so sure. Baylor is better than A&M and Mizzou. The sec is not all that. Its usually a couple of top flight teams and the rest are not better than anyone else.
Dont be so sure. Baylor is better than A&M and Mizzou. The sec is not all that. Its usually a couple of top flight teams and the rest are not better than anyone else.
Oh no they are not! A&M and Mizzou are better than they were just because they are in the SEC West and East respectively. Look at their in-conference schedules! A&M has to play Alabama, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, Mississippi State, LSU, then from the East, Vandy and Mizzou! Same thing for Mizzou.
SEC West > SEC East > than everybody else... except for FSU this season. They have to play each other. Do you not see that as being worth a superior strength of schedule right there?
Let's see how the SEC West teams do in their respective bowl games, and the SEC East for that matter.
Sure Arkansas and MissSt are easy to pick on this year, but even those bottom feeders have a respectable out-of-conference record; Arkansas 0-8 in and 3-9 out, MissSt 3-5 in and 6-6 out of conference.
^^^such a load of crap. Those teams wouldve been the same in the Big 12. The Pac12 and the top of the Big10 would easily compete in this years sec.
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.
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.
