Should the SEC adopt a 9 game conference schedule?

[trojanfan12]

They can, your conference can change back if they want.

Which would be fine with me. Your conference can increase to 9 if they want. I really don't care which one happens.

Rather than being like - hey college football, we did a really stupid thing. Can you guys come do it with us so we can look like pioneers rather than dumbfucks?

If it were only the PAC-12 playing 9 conference games, you might have a point.

If it were only PAC-12 fans saying that all conferences should have the same number of games, you might have a point.

But it's not, so you don't.

 

[4down20]

What "Mercer" type school does UCLA or USC schedule?

Yes, you've already posted about the 2 schools total.

And yet, the best SoS the Pac12 could muster this year was #24.

 

[4down20]

Which would be fine with me. Your conference can increase to 9 if they want. I really don't care which one happens.

If it were only the PAC-12 playing 9 conference games, you might have a point.

If it were only PAC-12 fans saying that all conferences should have the same number of games, you might have a point.

But it's not, so you don't.

You are the ones crying about it right now, so I do.

 

[The Oldtimer]

Yes, you've already posted about the 2 schools total.

And yet, the best SoS the Pac12 could muster this year was #24.

Actually Stanford finished at #12.

 

[trojanfan12]

The toughest SoS for a Pac12 team this year: #24 UCLA

Actually, I just saw a ranking the other day (by 247sports) that had Cal #1 in SOS, USC #3 and Bama #10.

 

[socaljim242]

Whats funny is when having this exact argument a few years back with this gump he laughed when I mentioned that USC traveled to play Syracuse and that they played Fresno State. He called them equal games to playing Mercer and Chattanooga. Syracuse beat Clemson this season and Alabama used their Fresno State win to help them get to the final four because the rest of the SEC was so bad the Fresno State win was one of their biggest wins. LOL

 

[4down20]

No one said the PAC doesn't schedule FCS schools. They just schedule fewer and have 2 of the 3 schools that have never played an FCS school.

Additionally, it's not about being "anti-SEC" it's about making sure that teams that are all trying to reach the same ultimate goal are doing so with relatively equal starting points.

I, for one, am not blaming the SEC. I'm saying that all conferences should play the same number of conference games. I don't care if other conferences drop to 8 or the SEC moves to 9. Just so it ends up with the same number.

It's really not that difficult to understand.

No one says it, but yet all you guys ever bitch about are the SEC schools. There is a reason why "FCS" has been replaced with "Mercer" in these conversations.

And again, if the Pac12 wants brownie points because 2 schools don't play them, then you guys are fucking pathetic. If you want to talk about USC's individual SoS, fine. But other than that, it's pathetic.

And yes, it's all Anti-SEC, you guys just won't admit to it as usual. Again, only the SEC gets complaints about the FCS teams. Only the SEC gets complaints about the 8 game schedules. And yet the SEC is not the only one who does it.

And I don't give a fuck what your conference does. Schedule as many games as you want. Go for 5 if you think it's going to give you an advantage. Only people looking for excuses cry about such things.

 

[trojanfan12]

You are the ones crying about it right now, so I do.

You're a one trick pony. No one is "crying" about anything. You have no logical response. But rather than just admit that others may have a point. You accuse them of crying.

Reality is, you cry about every change that anyone talks about and take it as an attack on the SEC. As an SEC fanboy, you can't have that, so you just say everyone else is crying to make yourself feel better.

 

[4down20]

Actually, I just saw a ranking the other day (by 247sports) that had Cal #1 in SOS, USC #3 and Bama #10.

Then it's a shit ranking. Alabama played a terrible SoS this year due to FSU crapping out.

The ones I use and have used for years now have Alabama all the way down in #60. Auburn, who played 3 of the 4 playoff teams(1 of them twice) is #1.

Cal is #50.

That's what a good SoS method looks like.

BCF Toys - 2017 SOS Ratings

 

[4down20]

You're a one trick pony. No one is "crying" about anything. You have no logical response. But rather than just admit that others may have a point. You accuse them of crying.

Reality is, you cry about every change that anyone talks about and take it as an attack on the SEC. As an SEC fanboy, you can't have that, so you just say everyone else is crying to make yourself feel better.

When your fans are talking about the 2 teams that don't play FCS teams as validation for their complaints about SEC teams - it's crying.

Deal with it.

The reality is - I just like telling you guys how much you suck as a conference.

 

[smilesid]

You know, in basketball, you see a ton of really good intersectional matchups early in the year, we had the B1G/ACC challenge, and a dozen tip-off tourneys. I watched Gonzaga play Villanova last night. They do it because the coaches want their teams ready for March by challenging them with tough games early. But football is the opposite. Since only 4 get in, they deliberately manipulate the schedule, by loading up on financially rewarding home games (often against hopeless underdogs) and refusing to travel into other parts of the country unless they absolutely have to. The SEC is famous for how it schedules its OOC games. One good opponent, hopefully in a nearby neutral site, or a home and home series, and three easy marks, almost all of them at home. So you get teams like Florida who hasn't had an OOC game outside the state in 30 years, and Alabama who hires an FCS hooker to give them some jollies the week before the Iron Bowl. To bad that they had such an easy ride that they came into Auburn too hung over, I guess. That's when having the advantage of all those easy wins early comes in handy!
Hey, it works, I think that the SEC will continue to do this until everyone else insists that the rules allowing it be changed.

 

[trojanfan12]

No one says it, but yet all you guys ever bitch about are the SEC schools. There is a reason why "FCS" has been replaced with "Mercer" in these conversations.

Mercer is an obvious comparison because no P5 school should be playing them.

I have not singled out any conference or team. I am simply saying that all conferences should play the same number of conference games. I really don't care if it's 8 or 9.

Again, really not that difficult to figure out.

You just take everything as an attack on the SEC. Maybe if the SEC wasn't doing most of the FCS scheduling, you wouldn't have to be so defensive about it?

 

[trojanfan12]

When your fans are talking about the 2 teams that don't play FCS teams as validation for their complaints about SEC teams - it's crying.

It's not crying. It's called a statement of fact.

You getting butthurt and defensive over every sleight against the SEC, whether real or imagined, is however, the very definition of crying.

 

[smilesid]

No, your school would not love to come to Tuscaloosa, Boise St fans like to pretend they would. Big difference.

Alabama and many other schools have offered Boise St these types of games and you refuse to take them because you think you deserve more.

You're gig is up, your 15 minutes are over, deal with it.

So when will we see your ass in Boise? Yeah, didn't think so. Boise plays in every time zone but they do insist on equal treatment, either a home and home or neutral site, Alabama has turned down requests to do just that over the years.

 

[4down20]

It's not crying. It's called a statement of fact.

You getting butthurt and defensive over every sleight against the SEC, whether real or imagined, is however, the very definition of crying.

It's crying because it's some petty bullshit that doesn't really have anything to do with why the Pac12 is being left out. AKA, excuses.

 

[4down20]

So when will we see your ass in Boise? Yeah, didn't think so.

Sorry you aren't relevant?

 

[trojanfan12]

It's crying because it's some petty bullshit that doesn't really have anything to do with why the Pac12 is being left out. AKA, excuses.

Actually, it's not petty at all. You just want to claim it is because you have zero logical points to make against it. It's why you resorted to your typical "everyone is just crying" nonsense as you always do when you have no logical point.

It's always the same..."You're crybabies", "You're just crying", "cry more."

All mean the same exact thing...you have no logical argument.

 

[DHoey]

Now quote the Pac12's OOC record.

Also, lol @ your teams not being able to get in on academics while 5 win SEC teams do.

This might take a minute to understand but here we go.....

Over the last 4 years
SEC= 430-281 = .605 winning percentage
PAC= 349-262 = .571 winning percentage

If you take out a conference game for the PAC (guaranteed to go 24-24), and add in an OOC game that on average the conference goes 10-2 (40-8) that gives them a 365-246 for a winning percentage of .597.

If you add in a conference game for the SEC (guaranteed to go 28-28), and take a way an OOC game that on average the conference goes 12-2 (48-8) that gives them a 410-301 for a winning percentage of .577.

Hopefully I didn't fat finger a number in there but it is possible.

 

[4down20]

Actually, it's not petty at all. You just want to claim it is because you have zero logical points to make against it. It's why you resorted to your typical "everyone is just crying" nonsense as you always do when you have no logical point.

It's always the same..."You're crybabies", "You're just crying", "cry more."

All mean the same exact thing...you have no logical argument.

Overall SoS is what matters. That's the logical response.

BCF Toys - 2017 SOS Ratings

And when the overall SoS doesn't support your claims, then that means they are petty and don't really mean what you claim they do. Adding the extra games does not make your schedules tougher, in fact, as a whole, the Pac12 has the weakest schedules of all P5 conferences.

Let me say that again - the Pac12 has the weakest schedules of all P5 conferences.

And yet, here you all are complaining about the toughness of one of the conferences that plays the toughest.

So yeah, cry babies.

 

[4down20]

This might take a minute to understand but here we go.....

Over the last 4 years
SEC= 430-281 = .605 winning percentage
PAC= 349-262 = .571 winning percentage

If you take out a conference game for the PAC (guaranteed to go 24-24), and add in an OOC game that on average the conference goes 10-2 (40-8) that gives them a 365-246 for a winning percentage of .597.

If you add in a conference game for the SEC (guaranteed to go 28-28), and take a way an OOC game that on average the conference goes 12-2 (48-8) that gives them a 410-301 for a winning percentage of .577.

Hopefully I didn't fat finger a number in there but it is possible.

Sorry, if you think all 7-5 teams are equal, then you aren't suited for this discussion.

Win% is about the dumbest method for SoS you can find....well except for quoting P5 games and conference games.

BCF Toys - 2017 SOS Ratings

Here, this one is done by people who know wtf they are doing.