GWPFFL BrianW Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 , my bad, wasn't directed at u at all, carry on No problem... I'll say this... I would love to see Luck in a Kansas City Chiefs uniform Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 No problem... I'll say this... I would love to see Luck in a Kansas City Chiefs uniform looks Carolina is going to run away with the Andrew Luck sweepstakes. Newton is the deserving choice for the Heisman but Luck is the best football player in the country Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 (edited) Pac-10 blogger. enough said. Complete garbage. That's right, dismiss the facts. I love it! Edited November 30, 2010 by theprofessor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Living the Dream Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 That's right, dismiss the facts. I love it! what facts, stanford coach can whip our coach. Lets just say I seriously doubt this. I doubt Stoops is scared of a former QB. the only real fact about the whole post "The honest truth is that we do not know if Stanford is better than your team. We just typed that to make you mad. Sorry." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 That's right, dismiss the facts. I love it! He's just pissed because someone else took a massive dump on his theory about the Pac 10 and bowl eligibility. Everything we've been saying here plus the bit about more road games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Living the Dream Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 He's just pissed because someone else took a massive dump on his theory about the Pac 10 and bowl eligibility. Everything we've been saying here plus the bit about more road games. LMAO, pissed this conference has 4 teams with winning records when every other conference has more than half. Its sad you people are too stupid to see how pathetic this conference really is, and you listen to bloggers who get paid to write about said conference. The conference is crap in more ways than bowl eligibility. Its means this conference cant win games, games that would get teams bowl eligible. Its nothing more than excuses why you didnt win, instead of proving you are good on the field by actually winning. Never seen 3 bigger tools argue this conference is so good, only 4 of 10 teams can muster a winning record, hell even a 500 record gets you bowl eligible, and right now, you only have 3 teams bowl eligible. pathetic. Typical left coast liberal excuses. EVER HEARD OF RESULTS, instead of EXCUSES. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 LMAO, pissed this conference has 4 teams with winning records when every other conference has more than half. Its sad you people are too stupid to see how pathetic this conference really is, and you listen to bloggers who get paid to write about said conference. The conference is crap in more ways than bowl eligibility. Its means this conference cant win games, games that would get teams bowl eligible. Its nothing more than excuses why you didnt win, instead of proving you are good on the field by actually winning. Never seen 3 bigger tools argue this conference is so good, only 4 of 10 teams can muster a winning record, hell even a 500 record gets you bowl eligible, and right now, you only have 3 teams bowl eligible. pathetic. Typical left coast liberal excuses. EVER HEARD OF RESULTS, instead of EXCUSES. Amongst a ton of excellent points made in the posted story, I think this one fits particularly well for you... If you don't believe playing two fewer road games a season is a huge advantage, you know nothing about college football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 Amongst a ton of excellent points made in the posted story, I think this one fits particularly well for you... No matter how much logic you bring to the table his desire to bash the Pac-10 conference will not allow him to see it. He is, who we thought he was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinity Posted November 30, 2010 Author Share Posted November 30, 2010 (edited) This is something that i found interesting, for all you people that say MSU is the #3 team out of the three. I will say though that Wisconsin is playing great football since the loss to MSU, and they will play the best against a team in the Rose bowl but still. I believe Wisconsin is the best team to represent the Big Ten in the Rose Bowl. That said, I don't understand why Michigan State continues to suffer in the BCS computers, which don't factor margin of victory. The Spartans played a tougher schedule and have more wins against bowl-eligible teams than both Ohio State and Wisconsin. I just wish it wasn't so cut-and-dried that Wisconsin and Ohio State are in BCS bowls and Michigan State is an afterthought. I agree with Mark Dantonio and Mark Hollis that the Spartans deserve to be part of the discussion. And if I was on a bowl committee and felt confident that my game would be attractive and profitable with Michigan State involved, I might select the Spartans ahead of an Ohio State team that boasts a ton of talent but no real signature win. It shouldn't just be a popularity contest. Edited November 30, 2010 by Infinity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 This is something that i found interesting, for all you people that say MSU is the #3 team out of the three. I will say though that Wisconsin is playing great football since the loss to MSU, and they will play the best against a team in the Rose bowl but still. I don't think #8 in the BCS is suffering........ I call it maximum value I happen to think both Wisky and OSU played tougher schedules - both in their non conference and in the simple fact that theyboth played each other. Iowa thumping Sparty and MSU pulling 3 wins out of their azzes probably has something to do with it. Most people have them third in this race, and I am one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Living the Dream Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 (edited) Amongst a ton of excellent points made in the posted story, I think this one fits particularly well for you... Who cares who you play, if you consistently dont win, you are not very good. Oregon St proved this over and over. hell one of you said they were a top 15 team, had they not played 2 non AQ schools. Seriously. And this conference didnt win very much. So how can any of you argue they are that good. When the results say something completely different. Its such a joke, i have no idea why I even bother anymore. I dont care who you played, where you played etc, how many times you got to play other under 500 teams in your own conference.. Your conference lost more games than it won. Its that simple. only 4 teams with winning records, only 3 bowl eligible teams, and maybe a 4th if a 5-6 team can beat a 2-9 team this weekend. Sorry, that isnt one of the best conferences in the country. Oklahoma had to go on the road and beat a top 10 team to make the Big 12 Champ game. Nebraska had to beat a top 10 Missouri team at the time to get to the Big 12 Champ game. Auburn had to beat Bama, LSU, S Carolina, and Ark to get to the SEC Champ game, and S Car again to get to the NC game. . Real teams have to win games against top foes to get somewhere. Stanford will make the BCS having beat not one single top 25 team in the AP. Oregon will make the NC Game, having beat one team, Stanford who didnt beat any top 25 teams. If the Pac-10 were better, Oregon and Stanford would have better resumes, instead of punking a bunch of 4-7, 5-6, 2-9 teams in their own conference, whether on the road or not. OU played 4 ranked teams right now, and went on the road and beat Cincy, who is a helluva lot better than any of these under 500 Pac-10 teams. No they didnt win them all, they lost on the road to two top 20 teams, Missouri and A@M. Stanford didnt play a top 25 team, in the final AP poll, except for the one they lost. . No wonder they have only 1 loss, the only legit top 20 team they played, they lost by 3 TDs. So maybe OU needs to be ranked ahead of Stanford, their resume is a helluva lot better, they played 3 top 20- teams on the road. OU has to beat another top 15 team in Nebraska to make the same BCS game Stanford already locked up. Tell me how playing 5 ranked teams, losing 2 on the road, winning 2 on the road and 1 at home, worse than Stanford losing its only ranked team, by 3 TDs, and having 1 less loss. That is the joke if you ask me. Edited November 30, 2010 by Living the Dream Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Square Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 I will find it interesting if the winner of the OU vs NU game plays Stanford as some have projected. It'll be somewhat telling to see what those teams do against each other. NU is a little hobbled at the QB spot but Luck vs either of those defenses would be fun to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 Its such a joke, i have no idea why I even bother anymore. We were wondering the same thing. Just stop .... your entering a new level of "tooldom". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Living the Dream Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 (edited) We were wondering the same thing. Just stop .... your entering a new level of "tooldom". Coming from any of you 3, that is a compliment. How can 3 people lose an argument so badly, and still claim victor when the facts are so obvious, and prove otherwise. None of you can say with a straight face this is the best, or top 3 in terms of conferences in the country, this yr. The SEC, Big 12, and Big 10 all proved to be superior through out the season, on the field. At best this conference is 4th, but Im not so sure the ACC nor Big east would concede anything but Oregon. I bet Va Tech would love the opportunity to drill Stanford. And I know Nebraska or OU would rather face Stanford than TCU or Wisconsin. Luckily for US, the rest of the country, we get to see the bowls and this will be proven to the 3 of you. And just like last yrs 2-4 mark, there will be some excuses, when you go 1-3 at best. Edited December 1, 2010 by Living the Dream Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 (edited) None of you can say with a straight face this is the best, or top 3 in terms of conferences in the country, this yr. The SEC, Big 12, and Big 10 all proved to be superior through out the season, on the field. And just like last yrs 2-4 mark, there will be some excuses, when you go 1-3 at best. Or the previous year when the Pac-10 was the only conference to go undefeated in the bowls as we went 5-0? Tool You're pathetic Here's a portion of my post that I wrote a couple days ago that you already responded to where I rank the Pac-10 #4 out of the Top 4 power conferences. You continue to amaze me with your stupidity. Mr. Alias starting his "Pac-10 only has 3 teams bowl eligible" thread when there were still 2 games left in the conference which tells you something about this punk that hides behind multiple masks. The reality is that if Oregon State, Washington and Arizona State wins this weekend the Pac-10 will have a higher percentage of bowl eligible teams (70%) than the Big 12. I know USC can't go but they have the necessary wins to be bowl eligible so they should be included in the conversation. The only thing I have said about the Pac-10 earlier in the year is that historically they have teams suffer in the Top 25 standings because of playing tough games in conference which normally knocks Pac-10 teams from the Top 25 when they are probably deserving of that ranking. and that the Pac-10 is tough from top to bottom. I stand by that commment 100%. This is how I would rank the 4 power conferences in 2010: SEC Big 10 Big 12 Pac 10 And let's not forget that the Pac-10 has 2 of the Top 4 teams in the BCS standings Retention down? Edited December 1, 2010 by theprofessor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 SEC Big 10 Big 12 Pac 10 And let's not forget that the Pac-10 has 2 of the Top 4 teams in the BCS standings [/b] Retention down? wow, really? personally I will take 2,4,23 out of 10 teams vs. 5,6,8 out of 11 and no shot at the NC. AFter Iowa the Big 10 is dreadful, I don't care what their puffed up records are and sorry, MSU does absolutely nothing for me. There is better football being played week in and week out in the Big 12 than the Big 10..... the SEC West is incredibly strong this year, while the East is terrible. A lot of drop off in every conference really......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 wow, really? personally I will take 2,4,23 out of 10 teams vs. 5,6,8 out of 11 and no shot at the NC. AFter Iowa the Big 10 is dreadful, I don't care what their puffed up records are and sorry, MSU does absolutely nothing for me. There is better football being played week in and week out in the Big 12 than the Big 10..... the SEC West is incredibly strong this year, while the East is terrible. A lot of drop off in every conference really......... Taking a closer look at the Top 4 conferences, clearly they are all down a bit. Maybe I gave the Big 10 too much credit? But, I disagree on your assertion that after Iowa, the Big 10 is dreadful? Iowa has fallen mightily the last half of the season while Wisky, Michigan State and Ohio State are each playing pretty well. Clearly, better than Iowa. After the Top 3 there's a lot of mediocrity and inconsistency similar to the Pac-10. In the Big 12, after the Top 5, (Nebraska. Mizzu, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St) there is nobody left of any significance. I think if we took the bottom 7 of the Pac-10 against the Bottom 7 of the Big 12 the Pac-10 would win at least 5 of those matchups. USC - Kansas St Oregon St - Texas Tech Baylor - UW ASU - Iowa State Cal - Colorado Kansas - WSU UCLA - Texas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinity Posted December 2, 2010 Author Share Posted December 2, 2010 Records: MSU 11-1 OSU 11-1 Strength of Schedule: MSU 38th OSU 54th Wins against bowl eligible teams: MSU 8 OSU 6 Marquee win: MSU 34-24 over 11-1 Wisconsin OSU 36-24 over 7-5 Miami Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.