The PAC12 THREAD v.2

[WizardHawk]

And in the same light, you guys need to see that you have fans that are claiming its the chest thumping and overzealous nature of some of the SEC fans and not anything to do with the 8 game in conference schedule that several conferences play. This, in my opinion, is not about fairness, its about the bone may have to pick with the SEC over whatever slight they feel that they wont admit they feel. If it was about fairness in scheduling, then a similar rant would be going towards the ACC at this very moment...and we've seen the crickets in that thread.

The problem is the ACC is dead last in most rankings of the major conferences while the SEC is first. This despite FSU wining it all. They just don't matter.

 

[4down20]

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

If it's a repeat of 2011 type season, there will be 2.

But if it's spread out like 1 East team and 1 West team that meets in teh SECCG, I agree only 1.

Conference shouldn't matter, overall team SoS should.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

I can see 3 SEC teams getting in.

True blindness

 

[4down20]

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.

Don't need a conference to play rival teams.

ND isn't in a conference with USC or Stanford.

But yes I realize I'm in a major minority.

 

[yeodonie]

SEC champ. SEC runner up. SEC West team that only lost to SEC West champ

Bingo 3 teams.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

The problem is the ACC is dead last in most rankings of the major conferences while the SEC is first. This despite FSU wining it all. They just don't matter.

Doesnt matter where they rank, what matters is they are a power 5 conference that has a similar style model of play and is a more egregious offender in FCS games. If its truly about fairness for you guys, then you should be going after everyone who offends, not just the strongest or perceived strongest in the crowd.

The ACC could have forced the hand of the SEC, but instead they chose to keep their model the same as they had been using. all they had to do was vote for 9 and then SEC would ahve had to change to keep up with many of the power 5 conferences, instead you have two not going up to nine, but only one being ripped on for its practices. This does speak volumes if you look at it objectively.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

SEC champ. SEC runner up. SEC West team that only lost to SEC West champ

Bingo 3 teams.

I dont normally call names, but you're an idiot. All you came to do was prove my point and your doing a very good job of it.

 

[Wild Turkey]

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.

He wants college to become like pro ball and is more interested in numbers and stats than tradition and ethical treatment of players. I have no idea why he follows college football he would rather it be more gladiatorial and cutthroat.

 

[yeodonie]

I dont normally call names, but you're an idiot. All you came to do was prove my point and your doing a very good job of it.

Lol. Okay buddy. You don't see how that is possible?

You think a committee leaves out a 13-0 SEC champ? Me either

how about an 11-2 or 12-1 runner up? Me either.

How about an 11-1 team for the West who only lost to the 13-0 team?

Where is any of that impossible or even improbable?

 

[trojanfight]

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.

why the lol @ wash st? they played auburn on the road and lost by just 7 points. the team that represented sec in championship game remember them? that was the 8th best team in pac last year. imagine if they played more of a middle of pac team like arizona st...probably a loss for auburn. now would Florida atlantic, southern miss, florida, arkansas, tennessee, miss st, western carolina, west virginia, ole miss be also regarded as trash teams? probably not from sec fans. but most top 25 teams would like their chances to get 9 wins from those opponents

 

[WhiteMamba]

He wants college to become like pro ball and is more interested in numbers and stats than tradition and ethical treatment of players. I have no idea why he follows college football he would rather it be more gladiatorial and cutthroat.

Yep. It is very strange to read that on a cfb msg board. I almost vomited at the idea.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

He wants college to become like pro ball and is more interested in numbers and stats than tradition and ethical treatment of players. I have no idea why he follows college football he would rather it be more gladiatorial and cutthroat.

I would hate college ball if they went away from the conferences. I wish they would go back to smaller conferences of 10 in size and play a round robin like the Big12. Then we could go with the conference Champions in a tourney to see who is supreme each year.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

Lol. Okay buddy. You don't see how that is possible?

You think a committee leaves out a 13-0 SEC champ? Me either

how about an 11-2 or 12-1 runner up? Me either.

How about an 11-1 team for the West who only lost to the 13-0 team?

Where is any of that impossible or even improbable?

Wont happen in yours or my lifetime, you can take that to the bank. I dont see why you dont just go to the race track and bet your entire life savings on a superfecta if you think its possible, the odds are about the same.

 

[yeodonie]

I would hate college ball if they went away from the conferences. I wish they would go back to smaller conferences of 10 in size and play a round robin like the Big12. Then we could go with the conference Champions in a tourney to see who is supreme each year.

Yes please! I'm still posse day the P12 for the garbage CCG and not playing everyone in the conference

 

[yeodonie]

Wont happen in yours or my lifetime, you can take that to the bank. I dont see why you dont just go to the race track and bet your entire life savings on a superfecta if you think its possible, the odds are about the same.

If the East wouldn't have sucked the year of the rematch that exact scenario would have happened lol

 

[WizardHawk]

Doesnt matter where they rank, what matters is they are a power 5 conference that has a similar style model of play and is a more egregious offender in FCS games. If its truly about fairness for you guys, then you should be going after everyone who offends, not just the strongest or perceived strongest in the crowd.

The ACC could have forced the hand of the SEC, but instead they chose to keep their model the same as they had been using. all they had to do was vote for 9 and then SEC would ahve had to change to keep up with many of the power 5 conferences, instead you have two not going up to nine, but only one being ripped on for its practices. This does speak volumes if you look at it objectively.

I guess I'll just keep saying it as none of you seem to listen, but no amount of trying to change the subject is going to work. THIS thread was about the Pac coaches that chimed in on the 8 vs 9 conference games in the SEC. THIS thread is discussing that. I haven't, and won't, join the ACC thread because they don't really make a difference. They aren't worth arguing with. Of course we want all of the power conferences to be level. Said that more than once. That has ZERO to do with this thread. There is no solution that starts, or even cares about, the ACC.

You want fair? This is fair. The SEC is perceived to be so high and yet plays such garbage. Changing that would impact, at least to some degree, the rest of the power conferences. The ACC wouldn't create more than a footnote. That's reality. No amount of your trying to make it into something it's not will change that. It simply won't.

 

[4down20]

He wants college to become like pro ball and is more interested in numbers and stats than tradition and ethical treatment of players. I have no idea why he follows college football he would rather it be more gladiatorial and cutthroat.

Actually, quite the opposite of pro ball. The direction CFB is heading now is more like pro ball, with people wanting each conference to automatically have 1 person in the playoffs and junk.

As for tradition, not all tradition is good. If they really gave a shit about tradition, then we wouldn't have Arkansas, South Carolina, Missouri or Texas A&M in the SEC right now. Arkansas and South Carolina I've gotten use to by now, but the addition of these teams had nothing to do with tradition, and everything to do with progressing the game.

I'd rather see more top teams being played every year. And to do that, you need less Vandy, less Kentucky and more Oklahoma, more Penn St, more USC, etc. But more conference games just leaves less OOC slots available.

For all the shit Notre Dame gets - look at their schedule. What is so bad about wanting more of that?

Not sure where the ethical treatment of players comments come from.

 

[4down20]

I guess I'll just keep saying it as none of you seem to listen, but no amount of trying to change the subject is going to work. THIS thread was about the Pac coaches that chimed in on the 8 vs 9 conference games in the SEC. THIS thread is discussing that. I haven't, and won't, join the ACC thread because they don't really make a difference. They aren't worth arguing with. Of course we want all of the power conferences to be level. Said that more than once. That has ZERO to do with this thread. There is no solution that starts, or even cares about, the ACC.

You want fair? This is fair. The SEC is perceived to be so high and yet plays such garbage. Changing that would impact, at least to some degree, the rest of the power conferences. The ACC wouldn't create more than a footnote. That's reality. No amount of your trying to make it into something it's not will change that. It simply won't.

Except the schedules aren't garbage at all on a whole, and 7 more games isn't going to change it that much at all.

You can say Alabama's schedule this year is garbage, and right now that looks to be correct. But on the whole for the entire SEC? It's not true.

 

[Wild Turkey]

I think the SEC and ACC are trying to strike a conference game exchange and step 1 was keeping room on the schedules. Don't be surprised when a host of SEC vs ACC games get announced for the future. This has been hinted for a while yet.

 

[4down20]

I think the SEC and ACC are trying to strike a conference game exchange and step 1 was keeping room on the schedules. Don't be surprised when a host of SEC vs ACC games get announced for the future. This has been hinted for a while yet.

Speaking of not needing conferences to maintain rival games... Already have a good bit with rivals like Clemson, GT and Florida St.

But close location makes it a natural fit.