NCAA Football 2007-08

IF Kansas were to win out...and LSU wins out....LSU, BECAUSE they play in a stronger conference than Kansas is a better team...IMHO.
But then, how do we know the SEC is the stronger conference? What are their big out-of-conference wins (not that the Big-12 really has any). All we know is that LSU is competitive with all the SEC teams, and manages to win most by a few points. Just squeaking past Auburn at home doesn't show me that LSU is a powerhouse, and Missouri and Oklahoma are better teams than Auburn.
 
Agreed (Again?). Until they beat somebody of substance, I'll group them with all the other pretenders we've seen this season. (BC, South Florida, etc...) For the record, i don't believe that OSU has beaten anybody of worth either, and they're on top only by default. Last season's team was way stronger than this version, and we all know what happened to them.

Yes, I would like to see how the SEC plays in the bowl games if they were forced to take 50 days off between games.
These conferences have a HUGE advantage due to only being off a few weeks.

These other conferences schedule off weeks during the year so they don't get tired and have an extra week to gameplan against the top teams.
The BIG TEN plays real football 12 weeks straight thru. at least this year.

This is a HUGE reason that a PLAYOFF should be in the making, so you don't have teams with 2 months off between games.

Jimbo
 
But then, how do we know the SEC is the stronger conference? What are their big out-of-conference wins (not that the Big-12 really has any). All we know is that LSU is competitive with all the SEC teams, and manages to win most by a few points. Just squeaking past Auburn at home doesn't show me that LSU is a powerhouse, and Missouri and Oklahoma are better teams than Auburn.

With your same logic, WHAT does losing to Colorado show about Oklahoma? And BARELY getting by a 2-5 Iowa State? The Big 12 is not as strong as it once was. THE ONLY team in the Big 12 that has played a tough schedule is Oklahoma and Missouri....

Losing IN CONFERENCE is no big deal because you play the same team and they know who you are.....so again, your logic does not prove who is stronger.
 
Yes, I would like to see how the SEC plays in the bowl games if they were forced to take 50 days off between games.
These conferences have a HUGE advantage due to only being off a few weeks.

These other conferences schedule off weeks during the year so they don't get tired and have an extra week to gameplan against the top teams.
The BIG TEN plays real football 12 weeks straight thru. at least this year.

This is a HUGE reason that a PLAYOFF should be in the making, so you don't have teams with 2 months off between games.

Jimbo

Jimbo...is there REALLY a difference between 3 weeks off and 2 months off??!!

I mean really, your making a big issue over nothing. The teams in the south can say that the north has advantage because of the heat visa versa....:confused:

Look at the baseball World Series, the Rockies had not played for almost 11 days when the Series started....WHO had momentum? The team that JUST FINISHED playing...or the team that had been rested with 11 days? A football example was my Hurricanes against NC State. The 'Canes came off a HUGE win at Florida State2 weeks ago....what happened....'Canes had a off week and they came out FLAT against NC STATE and lost....and NC STATE had a BIG win against Virginia and momentum coming into the game against Miami....and won.
 
Jimbo...is there REALLY a difference between 3 weeks off and 2 months off??!!

I mean really, your making a big issue over nothing. The teams in the south can say that the north has advantage because of the heat visa versa....:confused:

Look at the baseball World Series, the Rockies had not played for almost 11 days when the Series started....WHO had momentum? The team that JUST FINISHED playing...or the team that had been rested with 11 days? A football example was my Hurricanes against NC State. The 'Canes came off a HUGE win at Florida State2 weeks ago....what happened....'Canes had a off week and they came out FLAT against NC STATE and lost....and NC STATE had a BIG win against Virginia and momentum coming into the game against Miami....and won.

I think you made my point EXACTLY !!!!

Thank you :)

Of course having 2 months off makes a huge difference.
 
Don't think I'm not concerned about that. Playing the Dawgs in Atlanta is like playing LSU in New Orleans - not quite a neutral site for either team. Georgia could easily end any hopes of LSU making it to the MNC.
Just pray for Tennessee to win out, as the Vol's own the tiebreaker.
 
Yes, I would like to see how the SEC plays in the bowl games if they were forced to take 50 days off between games.
These conferences have a HUGE advantage due to only being off a few weeks.
And who's fault is that? The Big 10 teams are free to schedule games when they want to, same as the other conferences.
 
I'll put those ratings in the same place I put the NCAA football polls - in the circular file. It's got to be easier to rate college teams, than to rate thousands of recruits, yet the polls have been notoriously wrong all season. Teams in the top 5 (with the exception of Ohio State) have been going down faster than Paris Hilton.
 
With your same logic, WHAT does losing to Colorado show about Oklahoma? And BARELY getting by a 2-5 Iowa State? The Big 12 is not as strong as it once was. THE ONLY team in the Big 12 that has played a tough schedule is Oklahoma and Missouri....

Losing IN CONFERENCE is no big deal because you play the same team and they know who you are.....so again, your logic does not prove who is stronger.
It wasn't meant to prove who is stronger. The point I made is: there is no objective criteria to prove who is stronger, so why assume that the SEC is stronger? If Kansas wins out, they'll have beaten teams with higher rankings than the ones LSU has beaten, at the times the games were played.

But I'm just playing the Devil's advocate here, cuz I fully expect OU to beat Kansas or Missouri in the Big-12 championship. :)
 
It wasn't meant to prove who is stronger. The point I made is: there is no objective criteria to prove who is stronger, so why assume that the SEC is stronger? If Kansas wins out, they'll have beaten teams with higher rankings than the ones LSU has beaten, at the times the games were played.

But I'm just playing the Devil's advocate here, cuz I fully expect OU to beat Kansas or Missouri in the Big-12 championship. :)

Well...since we are ALL in the devils advocate mode...:) Let's say KU goes unbeaten....they would have played what? 3 teams in the top ten? IF LSU wins out, they would have beaten 5 to 7 teams in the top 20....so which one do you think would hold more weight?:confused:
 
Well...since we are ALL in the devils advocate mode...:) Let's say KU goes unbeaten....they would have played what? 3 teams in the top ten? IF LSU wins out, they would have beaten 5 to 7 teams in the top 20....so which one do you think would hold more weight?:confused:
I'd assume that the loss to Kentucky would carry the most weight.
 

This is why they suck

Joe Gibbs retires again