bob stoops: SEC is not overwhelming

[BamaTee1]

The others have to do with the fact that OU converted them all night, that one was no different.

Pretty sure OU didn't convert them all so try to stay on point. (OU was 7/15 while Bama was 6/12)
Again, what do these numbers have to do with the importance of that one?

 

[Clayton]

Yeah, and coming in here talking shit about Oklahoma's bcs record without even having been to one yourselves it's so classy. :rollseyes:

:rollseyes: Mizzou was in play-in games for the National Championship twice in the past 7 years. You guys are just trolling because I'm right

 

[offshore1509]

Pretty sure OU didn't convert them all so try to stay on point. (OU was 7/15 while Bama was 6/12)
Again, what do these numbers have to do with the importance of that one?

Nothing really, but you you could play the 'woulda, coulda, shoulda' game all night, Bama lost.

 

[BamaTee1]

But let's be honest, the Sec was the higher ranked team in every single game. Sometime way higher and you even had a couple of your ranked teams playing unranked teams. Cards where a little stacked....

You are helping prove the point. Example: If #1 SEC is suppose to play #1 B1G and #2 plays #2 Big 12, etc and those teams from the SEC are ranked nationally (hypothetically) #1,#2,#3,#4,#5, etc how the hell is the cards not going to be stacked? Those teams will ALWAYS be ranked higher. Now the SEC is 7-2 (counting Vandy, up 24-0) with close losses by Bama and Georgia and Auburn playing for the NC Monday night. What is your point?

 

[MI Nightmare]

With Vandy up 24-0 on Houston, SEC will go 7-2; not bad for such a bad bunch of teams.

Vandy was only favored by a point and a hook.... Damn, missed that action.

 

[BamaTee1]

Nothing really, but you you could play the 'woulda, coulda, shoulda' game all night, Bama lost.

So now all of a sudden your point about 3rd down conversions aren't as important?

Yes OU did win and I have acknowledged that but my posts are for the guy who said Alabama wasn't a top 10 team because look what OU did to them. I was showing him a few plays late and Alabama can still win that game. They did have 516 yards. Made to many mistakes and not enough plays! Doesn't mean they would do that if they played again now is there?

It's still ok to summarize a game isn't it?

 

[Berkeley_Blues]

OK. I'll concede the SEC is the best football conference. But if you added MIZZOU and A & M to the Big 12 this year -- the Big 12 has an argument.

(Also, I'd like to see Alabama travel out West to play Stanford, USC and Oregon. But we all know that will never happen)

 

[Kevin12773]

With Vandy up 24-0 on Houston, SEC will go 7-2; not bad for such a bad bunch of teams.

I swear no one actually reads.
No one is saying they're bad teams. The point people are making is the media and SEC honks credits ole miss, Florida ( this year) Georgia etc... As being good and in fact are average at best. Perception is other conf mid tier teams suck but if you have an SEC patch your somehow better.

 

[Runeman]

But let's be honest, the Sec was the higher ranked team in every single game. Sometime way higher and you even had a couple of your ranked teams playing unranked teams. Cards where a little stacked....

according to you, Jonvi, and several others, the SEC teams all got favored in the rankings. If that's the case, they all should have lost. Hopefully the logic here does not get lost, but you folks can't have it both ways. SEC will be 7-2 and the only legit loss was Alabama; Georgia was lucky to have enough guys to field a team. A healthy Georgia would have blown out Nebraska. I have stated several times, the top SEC teams are not so dominant, however the bottom of the SEC is pretty good compared to the bottom of other conferences. 7 straight NC's speak to the ability of the top ranked SEC teams; even the most ardent critic of the SEC has to get that. Tennessee didn't even get a bowl game; yet they smoked Oklahoma. What's up with that? You folks continue to dog the SEC and the teams continue to do well.

 

[offshore1509]

So now all of a sudden your point about 3rd down conversions aren't as important?

Yes OU did win and I have acknowledged that but my posts are for the guy who said Alabama wasn't a top 10 team because look what OU did to them. I was showing him a few plays late and Alabama can still win that game. They did have 516 yards. Made to many mistakes and not enough plays! Doesn't mean they would do that if they played again now is there?

It's still ok to summarize a game isn't it?

Well that's just dumb, of course Bama was and still is a top ten team. Just because OU outplayed them don't change that, I think what people are saying is that OU is still a crap team that beat Bama, which is also bullshit.

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

I am curious on which teams are the three and four. I think the South Carolina has a very well balanced offense and the defense can be great at times but Clowney takes away too many plays off. If he can focus and that defense can focus, they could probably do great things. For that reason I think Clowney was over rated. He had a great year last year. This year was lack luster. Hopefully South Carolina can pull a rabbit out of their hat because losing Shaw and Clowney is a lot of talent leaving the field.

Well Michigan State would be one. I wouldn't have a lot of confidence against them on a neutral field. The fourth team would be someone like Stanford...although the way Oklahoma played the other night, I might add them to the list.

Anybody else in the country, i'd like our chances. Just still shaking my head about the Vols game...

 

[offshore1509]

So now all of a sudden your point about 3rd down conversions aren't as important?

Yes OU did win and I have acknowledged that but my posts are for the guy who said Alabama wasn't a top 10 team because look what OU did to them. I was showing him a few plays late and Alabama can still win that game. They did have 516 yards. Made to many mistakes and not enough plays! Doesn't mean they would do that if they played again now is there?

It's still ok to summarize a game isn't it?

I tried to summarize the game with UF in 2008, got blasted for it. Fact is, a couple of plays here or there and OU walks out the winner in that one.

 

[Clayton]

But let's be honest, the Sec was the higher ranked team in every single game.

Oklahoma St was a slight favorite by game time for whatever that is worth. Auburn is also a heavy underdog

 

[offshore1509]

Oklahoma St was a slight favorite by game time for whatever that is worth. Auburn is also a heavy underdog

Anybody would be an underdog to FSU.

 

[BamaFanAlways]

I always love the argument:
SEC teams don't deserve their rankings!

... but they won...

Well, they should have, they were ranked higher!

Logical, right?

 

[romeo212000]

:rollseyes: Mizzou was in play-in games for the National Championship twice in the past 7 years. You guys are just trolling because I'm right

And failed in both chances. Once to Oklahoma.

 

[romeo212000]

I tried to summarize the game with UF in 2008, got blasted for it. Fact is, a couple of plays here or there and OU walks out the winner in that one.

Very true

 

[Wishbone]

I always love the argument:
SEC teams don't deserve their rankings!

... but they won...

Well, they should have, they were ranked higher!

Logical, right?

Lol yeah pretty much. Isn't that why they rank the teams in the first place?

 

[trojanfight]

OK. I'll concede the SEC is the best football conference. But if you added MIZZOU and A & M to the Big 12 this year -- the Big 12 has an argument.

(Also, I'd like to see Alabama travel out West to play Stanford, USC and Oregon. But we all know that will never happen)

I would like that too problem is with current bowl set up there aren't any pac 12-SEC matchups...occasionally you get matchups like Washington st vs auburn. @ auburn. ill also note not there isn't a matchup @ Washington st following year. Its not the entire SEC. I give LSU a lot of credit for their scheduling over the years. Georgia hasn't been bad either. Alabama is one of the worst in traveling. for most part they aren't interested in traveling unless its texas stadium or Georgia dome for a neutral field with no advantage to other team. I can see a call from USC or another out west school going like this . Alabama this is so and so we want to schedule a home and home. Alabama responds oh sounds great we would love to have you come out here....however we don't so much want to have to go to your stadium following year. well why not?? oh a road game in non conference play. we have only done that 2 or 3 times in 10 years. how you think we won 2 championships...

yeah I heard the excuses of recruiting etc... alabamas had a top 10 recruiting class if not top 5 for several years now...im willing to bet it wouldn't suffer any without these neutral site matchups

 

[BamaFanAlways]

I would like that too problem is with current bowl set up there aren't any pac 12-SEC matchups...occasionally you get matchups like Washington st vs auburn. @ auburn. ill also note not there isn't a matchup @ Washington st following year. Its not the entire SEC. I give LSU a lot of credit for their scheduling over the years. Georgia hasn't been bad either. Alabama is one of the worst in traveling. for most part they aren't interested in traveling unless its texas stadium or Georgia dome for a neutral field with no advantage to other team. I can see a call from USC or another out west school going like this . Alabama this is so and so we want to schedule a home and home. Alabama responds oh sounds great we would love to have you come out here....however we don't so much want to have to go to your stadium following year. well why not?? oh a road game in non conference play. we have only done that 2 or 3 times in 10 years. how you think we won 2 championships...

yeah I heard the excuses of recruiting etc... alabamas had a top 10 recruiting class if not top 5 for several years now...im willing to bet it wouldn't suffer any without these neutral site matchups

Yes, we get you don't like Bama. I have the only logical repsone for that: