The PAC12 THREAD v.2

[seahawksfan234]

So 3 Oregon players got cut from the team over those r*pe allegations and it's being reported that the girl in question admitted having consensual sex with two of them the next day? Something fishy there. But losing 3 kids off that basketball team is going to suck for them next year.

I read the police report and the entire thing seemed pretty sketchy to me. The fact that they assaulted her in a bathroom, then she gets in a car with them and goes back to one of their apartments? It appeared like r*pe to me, but details like that make it seem as if it was not. Strange case either way.

Saw some woman in her 50s texting and driving for over a mile today, I was not surprised to see she had an Oregon sticker in her window.

 

[4down20]

The committee will "screw the SEC" during selection process. These guys ain't fuckin around with SOS.

4whine20 you are delusional

No, you are delusional if you think SoS is going to matter more than being undefeated or having the best record just because of a committee.

People say they want SoS to matter, but in the end they don't really.

If you want SoS to matter more - give more weight to computers. Instead, they removed them completely.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

If you want change then what has to happen is OTHER CONFERENCES have to start playing tougher OVERALL schedules than the SEC by a wide enough margin to matter.

Like it or not, even with 8 conference game schedules and 1 FCS team, the SEC still has a more difficult schedule on average.

Instead what happened was teams like Boise St and TCU were getting credit as being world beaters while playing extremely shitty schedules, and because they would go undefeated people were screaming they should go to the NCG. But no, they aren't to blame, it's the teams that were already playing the more difficult schedule that is to blame?

What is the SEC going to accomplish here? Seriously.

According to some in here, they dont need to accomplish anything, they run the NCAA

 

[Wild Turkey]

The committee will "screw the SEC" during selection process. These guys ain't fuckin around with SOS.

If that's true then the process is a sham. If the playoffs go off without an SEC representative (assuming the league doesn't blow up and everyone has two losses) then shut it down.

 

[WhiteMamba]

If that's true then the process is a sham. If the playoffs go off without an SEC representative (assuming the league doesn't blow up and everyone has two losses) then shut it down.

Of course it is a sham. In many ways. And it hasn't even started.

 

[WizardHawk]

Do you not get that win% is the worst way to measure SoS to begin with and that pretty much nobody with a clue actually uses it?

Did you even notice that even in a conference itself, the SoS changes dramatically from team to team? So maybe, just maybe, potentially 7 losses ain't such a big deal at the end of the day.

Sure it is, because even if you end up with a bottom dwelling SEC team instead of torntshirt state it's still a substantial bump in SOS, but half the conference will be playing the tougher teams. Every one of them gets a massive bump.

Again, why aren't some of you more in favor of going to 7 conf games for the very same reason you so vociferously defend the need to have 8 and the 3 terrible OOC games you have now?

That is why this indefensible position of yours will always put you in fail land for even trying. 9 is better than 8 and 8 is obviously better than 7. You just can't win this. Can't.

 

[yeodonie]

I think the committee will reward the SEC for having more wins. They'll over rank teams that would normally have more losses giving more credit to the one or two good teams than would normally be given. That's why the 9th game matters. It's not rocket science

 

[WhiteMamba]

I think some folks are in for a Rudd awakening sitting there with one loss when the level of competition is evaluated. That is why I was pissed when Oregon scheduled 3 fcs teAms in 3 straight upcoming years. Ya, we got MSU, tOSU, ATM, Nebraska upcoming..... But still fuck this fcs bidness

 

[WhiteMamba]

I think the committee will reward the SEC for having more wins. They'll over rank teams that would normally have more losses giving more credit to the one or two good teams than would normally be given. That's why the 9th game matters. It's not rocket science

Lots of B1G and PAC rep in that group.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

Because there aren't ACC homers defending it?

Wouldnt matter if they did, not one of you has really poked your head in other than a single world quip or maybe a one liner. This speaks volumes, one because the SEC fans will defend their conference and two because it was never about fairness and the lack of posts in that thread says so. Your very presence here in this thread speaks volumes about your agenda...and its not level playing field.

I'll tell you why its not about fairness. Because if the ACC had voted to go to nine games and the other conferences, minus the Big 12 who cannot get enough members to do anything but play a round robin nine game conference schedule, we all at nine games, then the SEC would not make the playoffs most likely due to SoS. This is why i know its not about fairness because that would have forced the hand of the SEC to change or wither on the vine.

 

[WizardHawk]

Oh yeah, 9 conf games?

Let's see what games your extra conference games gave you this year.

UCLA
Arizona
Utah
Colorado

Wow. Just knocking down them tough teams right? I guess UCLA has a chance of being top25 at the end of the year.

And what does the north have to offer anyway?

Stanford - you'll probably lose again.
Washington - might be better than last year, but we'll see.
Oregon St - lol
Washington St - lol
Cal - LMAO

Then how about the OOC games?

Michigan St - very high quality game and probably the best team on your schedule.
Wyoming - went 5-7 last year after playing almost the easiest schedule in football.
South Dakota - FCS


So pretty much the good games of your regular season:

1. Michigan St
2. Stanford

Potentially good, as in maybe top25:

1. UCLA
2. Washington.

The rest are basically trash.

Turns out, playing 9 conference games doesn't really mean shit. Without that Michigan St game, your schedule wouldn't even crack the top90 and would pretty much consist of "Stanford", much like last year.

How many fucking times does someone need to tell you that when the SEC goes to 9 the Pac would have to respond and we would likely see a lot less of those terrible FCS games as a result? They would have to do something to improve their SOS, which as you point out (and no one has ever fucking denied) is not quite world beaters as it is. I mean THAT'S the point! You keep throwing this shit up like you are getting one over on us and all you are doing is proving our point for us.

 

[yeodonie]

Lots of B1G and PAC rep in that group.

I have zero faith in this crap they've thrust on us

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

Lots of B1G and PAC rep in that group.

And one who is a Stanford Cardinal that is also an Alabama fan.

 

[asu_08]

ASU and Michigan State scheduled a home and home for 2018 and 2019. I really like the non-conference lineup ASU has scheduled right now.

 

[4down20]

Sure it is, because even if you end up with a bottom dwelling SEC team instead of torntshirt state it's still a substantial bump in SOS, but half the conference will be playing the tougher teams. Every one of them gets a massive bump.

Again, why aren't some of you more in favor of going to 7 conf games for the very same reason you so vociferously defend the need to have 8 and the 3 terrible OOC games you have now?

That is why this indefensible position of yours will always put you in fail land for even trying. 9 is better than 8 and 8 is obviously better than 7. You just can't win this. Can't.

I'm in favor of no conferences at all. So, I can go as low as 0 conference games.

9 games sucks because all conferences do in general is keep the game regionalized. You know what I am most worried about when it comes to playoffs? When people want to see 1 conference representative like that one guy who only talks about playoffs in the threads he makes. Why? Because all it does is make college football more regional than it already is.

I'd rather seem conferences go away rather than get bigger and have teams have to schedule quality teams themselves.

 

[trojanfight]

If that's true then the process is a sham. If the playoffs go off without an SEC representative (assuming the league doesn't blow up and everyone has two losses) then shut it down.

there will be one sec team not the two sec fans are begging for

 

[4down20]

How many fucking times does someone need to tell you that when the SEC goes to 9 the Pac would have to respond and we would likely see a lot less of those terrible FCS games as a result? They would have to do something to improve their SOS, which as you point out (and no one has ever fucking denied) is not quite world beaters as it is. I mean THAT'S the point! You keep throwing this shit up like you are getting one over on us and all you are doing is proving our point for us.

9 games doesn't mean more schedule strength at all.

I just pointed that out with Oregons schedule.

What gave Oregon the most strength this year? 9 games? No. 1 good quality OOC game - Fuck YES.

Remove that 1 OOC game and put in even a 10th conference game. Is the schedule stronger? Nope. Maybe they would get USC or ASU and add some strength, but it won't be the strength of MSU.

Why is Alabama's schedule so weak this year? Because of the number of conference games? Not that much. What is the bigger killer? We have WVU this year instead of a higher quality team, top10-top25 team. Last year the same thing happened with VT.

 

[yeodonie]

I can see 3 SEC teams getting in.

 

[WhiteMamba]

I'm in favor of no conferences at all. So, I can go as low as 0 conference games.

9 games sucks because all conferences do in general is keep the game regionalized. You know what I am most worried about when it comes to playoffs? When people want to see 1 conference representative like that one guy who only talks about playoffs in the threads he makes. Why? Because all it does is make college football more regional than it already is.

I'd rather seem conferences go away rather than get bigger and have teams have to schedule quality teams themselves.

Wow. I have never heard a fan of cfb say they want to go away from conferences. Enjoy cfb for what it is. Rivalries regional bragging rights etc. sorry, but that is the worst pile of dookie for an idea I can imagine.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

there will be one sec team not the two sec fans are begging for

Must have missed that post, can you find it for me?