This is obviously completely false. I hope this is a joke.hrmm by the time all is said and done Bama and Georgia will have played 3 teams in the current top 10. Notre dame 0.
This is obviously completely false. I hope this is a joke.hrmm by the time all is said and done Bama and Georgia will have played 3 teams in the current top 10. Notre dame 0.
Obviously, Notre Dame will have played Stanford and the SEC champion.This is obviously completely false. I hope this is a joke.
Right. And if Oklahoma wins out, they would likely move up. Not to mention if Texas bests KSU, we will have beaten the PAC 12 and Big 12 champions.Obviously, Notre Dame will have played Stanford and the SEC champion.
The most important game that the Pac12 has played against the SEC didn't go their way. Most of those Pac12 games were not played against the top SEC teams at the time. When the Pac12 has faced the top SEC teams, it's typically not gone their way. See Oregon against LSU last year as an example.I really don't think it is just other teams not willing to schedule the SEC. I think it is the SEC that is also unwilling to schedule very good, out of conference opponents. Seeing as how the SEC is 11-12 against the PAC 12 since 2000, it is understandable. And seeing how USC is 4-0 since 2000, it is also understandable.
Right. But that is only one year. I went back to 2000.The most important game that the Pac12 has played against the SEC didn't go their way. Most of those Pac12 games were not played against the top SEC teams at the time. When the Pac12 has faced the top SEC teams, it's typically not gone their way. See Oregon against LSU last year as an example.
As of 3pm it will be true for both teams.This is obviously completely false. I hope this is a joke.
Alabama is about as different a team in 2012 compared to 2000 as it can get. If your argument wasn't about a single upcoming game and instead was about dominance over a period of time it might be relevant in some way. As it stands, not so much...not at all really.Right. But that is only one year. I went back to 2000.
The justification is you don't need to schedule out of conference games because the in conference is so tough. Yet, if many teams outside the SEC are inferior, and they are all playing against inferior teams in their conference as well, NO ONE would schedule an out of conference game. Their justification would be the same as yours.
My point is I don't think its other teams that don't want to schedule you. I think many would like a shot, actually.
A lot of it has to do with money, willingness to play home and home, etc. However, I do believe the SEC gets a lot of stereotyping from fans of other conferences as well.If you could view the best teams on the roster in isolation, your metric might work. However, your FCS and other non-conference games bring you down, just low enough, to where our SOS is better. Nevertheless, the tougher teams on your schedule are probably overall tougher than the toughest teams on our schedule.
I really don't think it is just other teams not willing to schedule the SEC. I think it is the SEC that is also unwilling to schedule very good, out of conference opponents. Seeing as how the SEC is 11-12 against the PAC 12 since 2000, it is understandable. And seeing how USC is 4-0 since 2000, it is also understandable.
Unfortunately we do not have complete control over our schedule yet y'all do and schedule Purdue and Wake Forest? Yet you are here basically calling the SEC "scared" to schedule tougher OOC games. WOW!If you could view the best teams on the roster in isolation, your metric might work. However, your FCS and other non-conference games bring you down, just low enough, to where our SOS is better. Nevertheless, the tougher teams on your schedule are probably overall tougher than the toughest teams on our schedule.
I really don't think it is just other teams not willing to schedule the SEC. I think it is the SEC that is also unwilling to schedule very good, out of conference opponents. Seeing as how the SEC is 11-12 against the PAC 12 since 2000, it is understandable. And seeing how USC is 4-0 since 2000, it is also understandable.
I really don't think it is just other teams not willing to schedule the SEC. I think it is the SEC that is also unwilling to schedule very good, out of conference opponents.
So the SEC is now afraid of the Pac 12? Is that why Oregon, allegedly the greatest offensive juggernaut ever seen and capable of putting 60 points on Alabama, went 0-2 in consecutive games against the SEC eight months apart?Seeing as how the SEC is 11-12 against the PAC 12 since 2000, it is understandable.
And seeing how USC is 4-0 since 2000, it is also understandable.
Western Kentucky would destroy Navy and the media never crucifies ND. Saying they have always been media darlings would be an understatement. LSU won 12-10 against Auburn on the road early in the season.Playing Navy or Pitt is a WHOLE lot tougher then playing Western Carolina, Western Kentucky, or Florida Atlantic. IF ND EVER played a team like that the media would CRUCIFY them....Those games ARE scrimmages. And if the the mighty LSU can struggle against "mighty" Towson State (12-10 victory) and Florida can struggle against that "juggernaut" Louisiana Lafayette (27-20) ND can "struggle" against ANY team on their schedule.
These are kids not professionals so ANYTHING is possible.
All these Notre Dame fans here telling us how good they are and how they belong...
Brings to mind one question, Are you trying to convince us,, or are you trying to convince yourselves?????
Sure seems like the second.
Nobody cares whose calculated number is better. They care who will whip who on the field, and there is but one way to find out.If you could view the best teams on the roster in isolation, your metric might work. However, your FCS and other non-conference games bring you down, just low enough, to where our SOS is better. Nevertheless, the tougher teams on your schedule are probably overall tougher than the toughest teams on our schedule.
This is fair. Some of those years were competitive, some were not. I tried actually making an objective, historical comparison with the Big 12...that got me nowhere. I will say that in comparison, at least with the Big 12, the OOC comparison doesn't render an honest conclusion one way or the other.Alabama's OOC schedule since 2000:
2000 and 2001: Home and home with UCLA. On paper a quality opponenet.
2002 and 2003. Home and home with Oklahoma. At Hawaii. 2003 also featured an improving South Florida squad.
2004: Southern Miss. Nothing to write home about.
2005: Southern Miss. Again, nothing special.
2006: Duke. Weak sauce.
2007: Neutral site with FSU.
2008: Neutral site with Clemson.
2009: Neutral site with Virginia Tech.
2010 and 2011: Home and home with Penn State.
2012: Neutral site with Michigan.
That's almost twelve years with a serious OOC game. Combine that with an eight game SEC schedule and I think any school is entitled to a couple of cupcakes.
Box. Of. Rocks.This is fair. Some of those years were competitive, some were not. I tried actually making an objective, historical comparison with the Big 12...that got me nowhere. I will say that in comparison, at least with the Big 12, the OOC comparison doesn't render an honest conclusion one way or the other.
I got hammered for picking an arbitrary year of "2000." Again, fair enough. Let's look at 2012. This year, the SEC has 14 OOC games against opponents from major conferences. Miss. St and A&M didn't play any OOC BCS opponents. Vandy and Missouri were the only teams to play more than one OOC BCS team. Four of the 14 OOC games to BCS opponents are the result of big, in state rivalries (FSU v. UF, Kentucky v. Louisville, Georgia v. GT, South Carolina v. Clemson). And most of the top teams in the SEC and their OOC games are either home, or on neutral sites. Florida has not even played an OOC game outside of Florida since 1991 (Syracuse)
Now this is really going to upset you guys, and I know he doesn't speak for the conference in general. But in the words of Steve Spurrier, "If we keep playing the top teams from other conferences, our record isn't going to be near as good ... It's whether you want to be happy or want to play a whole bunch of tough teams." Once the SEC goes to a 9-conference schedule (like CNS wants to), it will be tougher to schedule really good OOC opponents.
Listen. I'm not here to try and tear apart SEC OOC. I didn't even want to venture to that discussion. It all comes down to the SEC is the toughest conference to play in, thus there may not be a reason to schedule really tough OOC opponents consistently (at least for the top 7 in SEC this year). I think that my ultimate takeaway is that for everyone who says that ND should be in a conference and it is unfair that we aren't, look at our schedule. Look at where we travel (Dublin, Ireland, Oklahoma, SoCal, Boston, etc.). We play tough teams from the top of every conferences in regular season (except you, of course).