I've been talking so much SEC fanboy shit lately, it's not even funny.Kmarion wrote:
Well rest assured that after this thread, I will be looking like the idiot if they do lose. I'm actually not making a prediction though. I think it will be a good game.phishman420 wrote:
I hate the Gators so fucking much. I hope you guys lose and make me look like an idiot.
I still can't believe LSU beat GT 38-3
0-0 ? ..lol
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I like how the Okla guy just got beat by 20 yards and he got up beating his chest like did something good just now.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
32 days off is a longgg time.Kmarion wrote:
0-0 ? ..lol
There you go.
Last edited by phishman420 (2009-01-08 18:07:31)
TouchDOWN FL!
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Woo, go pats!
banThe Sheriff wrote:
Woo, go pats!
edit:I lol'd too haha
Last edited by ColCarnage (2009-01-08 18:14:42)
TBH even though I lol'd.ColCarnage wrote:
banThe Sheriff wrote:
Woo, go pats!
I'm going to close this thread temporarily every time Okla scores.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Ahh..aha 4th and goal pwnage.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I hate both teams equally and was hoping for a 0-0 game. Either the Big-12 or SEC will use this as an excuse to pretend they are the obviously the best conference, when they quite clearly are not as dominant as they would like to believe. Such hype got them into the championship in the first place, and any victory here won't be indicative of their strength at all. Honestly, both conferences have done little to impress me, and I hate it when they get an inflated sense of their qualities. Noticeably, none has gone undefeated in bowl games.
So what conference impresses you?nukchebi0 wrote:
I hate both teams equally and was hoping for a 0-0 game. Either the Big-12 or SEC will use this as an excuse to pretend they are the obviously the best conference, when they quite clearly are not as dominant as they would like to believe. Such hype got them into the championship in the first place, and any victory here won't be indicative of their strength at all. Honestly, both conferences have done little to impress me, and I hate it when they get an inflated sense of their qualities. Noticeably, none has gone undefeated in bowl games.
PAC10LOL
.. it's a game. Hate is such a dirty word.nukchebi0 wrote:
I hate both teams equally and was hoping for a 0-0 game. Either the Big-12 or SEC will use this as an excuse to pretend they are the obviously the best conference, when they quite clearly are not as dominant as they would like to believe. Such hype got them into the championship in the first place, and any victory here won't be indicative of their strength at all. Honestly, both conferences have done little to impress me, and I hate it when they get an inflated sense of their qualities. Noticeably, none has gone undefeated in bowl games.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I would love to see Georgia get handled by USC or Oregon. It's very easy to get so many teams to a bowl game when you beat up on four easy teams for your OOC and can avoid teams in your conference. The SEC fails to impress me.phishman420 wrote:
So what conference impresses you?nukchebi0 wrote:
I hate both teams equally and was hoping for a 0-0 game. Either the Big-12 or SEC will use this as an excuse to pretend they are the obviously the best conference, when they quite clearly are not as dominant as they would like to believe. Such hype got them into the championship in the first place, and any victory here won't be indicative of their strength at all. Honestly, both conferences have done little to impress me, and I hate it when they get an inflated sense of their qualities. Noticeably, none has gone undefeated in bowl games.
PAC10LOL
Strongly dislike, then.Kmarion wrote:
.. it's a game. Hate is such a dirty word.nukchebi0 wrote:
I hate both teams equally and was hoping for a 0-0 game. Either the Big-12 or SEC will use this as an excuse to pretend they are the obviously the best conference, when they quite clearly are not as dominant as they would like to believe. Such hype got them into the championship in the first place, and any victory here won't be indicative of their strength at all. Honestly, both conferences have done little to impress me, and I hate it when they get an inflated sense of their qualities. Noticeably, none has gone undefeated in bowl games.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2009-01-08 19:14:00)
Right, lets look at the top teams going into bowl games, shall we?nukchebi0 wrote:
I hate both teams equally and was hoping for a 0-0 game. Either the Big-12 or SEC will use this as an excuse to pretend they are the obviously the best conference, when they quite clearly are not as dominant as they would like to believe. Such hype got them into the championship in the first place, and any victory here won't be indicative of their strength at all. Honestly, both conferences have done little to impress me, and I hate it when they get an inflated sense of their qualities. Noticeably, none has gone undefeated in bowl games.
1. Oklahoma Big 12
2. Florida SEC
3. Texas Big 12
4. Alabama SEC
5. USC PAC 10
6. Utah MWC
7. Texas Tech Big 12
8. Penn State Big 10
9. Boise WAC
10. Ohio State Big 10
Looks like the top 4 are Big 12 or SEC, and 5 out of the top 10 teams are either Big 12 or SEC.
Last edited by MadKatter (2009-01-08 19:09:57)
Oh look, subjective poll rankings based on the hype I identified earlier. Laying 50 point beatdowns on FCS and horrendous FBS schools, and then claiming you are good only gets you high poll rankings. It doesn't mean you are good.MadKatter wrote:
Right, lets look at the top teams going into bowl games, shall we?nukchebi0 wrote:
I hate both teams equally and was hoping for a 0-0 game. Either the Big-12 or SEC will use this as an excuse to pretend they are the obviously the best conference, when they quite clearly are not as dominant as they would like to believe. Such hype got them into the championship in the first place, and any victory here won't be indicative of their strength at all. Honestly, both conferences have done little to impress me, and I hate it when they get an inflated sense of their qualities. Noticeably, none has gone undefeated in bowl games.
1. Oklahoma Big 12
2. Florida SEC
3. Texas Big 12
4. Alabama SEC
5. USC PAC 10
6. Utah MWC
7. Texas Tech Big 12
8. Penn State Big 10
9. Boise WAC
10. Ohio State Big 10
Looks like the top 4 are Big 12 or SEC, and 5 out of the top 10 teams are either Big 12 or SEC.
Also, I love how Oklahoma's defense already has two interceptions, and Oklahoma's offense has only seven points. The press has told me the offense supposed to be good and the defense supposed to suck.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2009-01-08 19:15:08)
nukchebi0 wrote:
Oh look, subjective poll rankings based on the hype I identified earlier. Laying 50 point beatdowns on FCS and horrendous FBS schools, and then claiming you are good only gets you high poll rankings. It doesn't mean you are good.
If you CAN'T lay down 50 points beatdowns on shit teams, maybe you're not as good as you think.
Don't mind him.
Even the maligned Pac-10 teams laid down 50 point beatdowns on sucky teams (the few they played). The point was that the SEC and Big-12 like to schedule obvious weaklings for their non-conference schedule, get their team rankings ballooned based on hype, and continually justify scheduling such patsies by stating their conference schedule is so difficult, when in reality this assertion in being buoyed by the inflated rankings throughout the conference. If UW had scheduled Northern Texas, Chattanooga, and VMI, rather than OU, BYU and Notre Dame, they would have been 3-0 in non-conference. Locker conceivably would not have been injured, and the team, with some morale wins against one or two Pac-10 teams. Instead of some pathetic 0-12 season, they would be at 4-8 or 5-7, and not belittled nearly as much.MadKatter wrote:
nukchebi0 wrote:
Oh look, subjective poll rankings based on the hype I identified earlier. Laying 50 point beatdowns on FCS and horrendous FBS schools, and then claiming you are good only gets you high poll rankings. It doesn't mean you are good.
If you CAN'T lay down 50 points beatdowns on shit teams, maybe you're not as good as you think.
Also, I love it how SEC upsets are an indication of conference depth, while Pac-10 upsets (i.e. USC losses) are an indication of USC slipping up against vastly inferior competition. Its a pathetic excuse for a double standard, and completely inaccurate.
I love it how you start posting like this when you can't respond to anything.phishman420 wrote:
Don't mind him.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2009-01-08 19:29:49)
You care to check Texas's Strength of Schedule? They played 3? 4? Undefeated teams this season.
Have your PAC10 buttbuddies play OU, OSU, TTECH, Mizzou, A+M and Baylor and tell me if they end up one loss. I don't care if non-conference games are blowouts or not, PAC10 teams don't have an impressive WL.
You'd also know that strength of schedule is accounted for in BCS rankings, I'm sure.
Have your PAC10 buttbuddies play OU, OSU, TTECH, Mizzou, A+M and Baylor and tell me if they end up one loss. I don't care if non-conference games are blowouts or not, PAC10 teams don't have an impressive WL.
You'd also know that strength of schedule is accounted for in BCS rankings, I'm sure.
Because I don't feel like taking 15 minutes to write a post to argue with you.nukchebi0 wrote:
Even the maligned Pac-10 teams laid down 50 point beatdowns on sucky teams (the few they played). The point was that the SEC and Big-12 like to schedule obvious weaklings for their non-conference schedule, get their team rankings ballooned based on hype, and continually justify scheduling such patsies by stating their conference schedule is so difficult, when in reality this assertion in being buoyed by the inflated rankings throughout the conference. If UW had scheduled Northern Texas, Chattanooga, and VMI, rather than OU, BYU and Notre Dame, they would have been 3-0 in non-conference. Locker conceivably would not have been injured, and the team, with some morale wins against one or two Pac-10 teams. Instead of some pathetic 0-12 season, they would be at 4-8 or 5-7, and not belittled nearly as much.MadKatter wrote:
nukchebi0 wrote:
Oh look, subjective poll rankings based on the hype I identified earlier. Laying 50 point beatdowns on FCS and horrendous FBS schools, and then claiming you are good only gets you high poll rankings. It doesn't mean you are good.
If you CAN'T lay down 50 points beatdowns on shit teams, maybe you're not as good as you think.
Also, I love it how SEC upsets are an indication of conference depth, while Pac-10 upsets (i.e. USC losses) are an indication of USC slipping up against vastly inferior competition. Its a pathetic excuse for a double standard, and completely inaccurate.I love it how you start posting like this when you can't respond to anything.phishman420 wrote:
Don't mind him.
For reference please see this:MadKatter wrote:
Have your PAC10 buttbuddies play OU, OSU, TTECH, Mizzou, A+M and Baylor and tell me if they end up one loss. I don't care if non-conference games are blowouts or not, PAC10 teams don't have an impressive WL.
You have absolutely no indication that any of these teams are good, other than their inflated OOC records. As the Texas-OSU game and Missouri-Northwestern games both indicated, they aren't necessarily that far above the Big Ten at all. Also, my Pac-10 'butt-buddies' played Oklahoma State this year. They won. They also won with a third string, first year quarterback. I'd love to see a Big-12 team win their bowl game with a third string QB.I, above, wrote:
Even the maligned Pac-10 teams laid down 50 point beatdowns on sucky teams (the few they played). The point was that the SEC and Big-12 like to schedule obvious weaklings for their non-conference schedule, get their team rankings ballooned based on hype, and continually justify scheduling such patsies by stating their conference schedule is so difficult, when in reality this assertion in being buoyed by the inflated rankings throughout the conference. If UW had scheduled Northern Texas, Chattanooga, and VMI, rather than OU, BYU and Notre Dame, they would have been 3-0 in non-conference. Locker conceivably would not have been injured, and the team, with some morale wins against one or two Pac-10 teams. Instead of some pathetic 0-12 season, they would be at 4-8 or 5-7, and not belittled nearly as much.
Which is inflated by the hype as mentioned above.You'd also know that strength of schedule is accounted for in BCS rankings, I'm sure.
Also, to humor you, I'll run Oregon and USC through Texas' season.
OU: Oregon loss, USC win
OSU: Oregon win, USC win
TTU: Oregon win, USC win
Mizzou: Oregon win, USC clobbering
TAMU: Oregon win, USC clobbering
Baylor: Oregon win, USC clobbering
Oregon's defense would hurt them against OU (although I'm sure the refs would assist them if necessary), but TTU/OSU/Mizzou don't have enough defense to stop Oregon, as has been illustrated already, and TAMU and Baylor aren't good, period. USC's defense would be a shock to every single Big-12 offense (as OSU's weaker defense was to Texas in the Fiesta Bowl), and would easily attain them the win. I'll give a +1/-1 either way to account for aberrations (such as the refs helping Oregon, or USC sleeping against TAMU/Baylor).
Until you've shown you can that is an empty excuse.phishman420 wrote:
Because I don't feel like taking 15 minutes to write a post to argue with you.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2009-01-08 19:52:07)
Knukchebi0 wrote:
For reference please see this:MadKatter wrote:
Have your PAC10 buttbuddies play OU, OSU, TTECH, Mizzou, A+M and Baylor and tell me if they end up one loss. I don't care if non-conference games are blowouts or not, PAC10 teams don't have an impressive WL.You have absolutely no indication that any of these teams are good, other than their inflated OOC records. As the Texas-OSU game and Missouri-Northwestern games both indicated, they aren't necessarily that far above the Big Ten at all. Also, my Pac-10 'butt-buddies' played Oklahoma State this year. They won. They also won with a third string, first year quarterback. I'd love to see a Big-12 team win their bowl game with a third string QB.I, above, wrote:
Even the maligned Pac-10 teams laid down 50 point beatdowns on sucky teams (the few they played). The point was that the SEC and Big-12 like to schedule obvious weaklings for their non-conference schedule, get their team rankings ballooned based on hype, and continually justify scheduling such patsies by stating their conference schedule is so difficult, when in reality this assertion in being buoyed by the inflated rankings throughout the conference. If UW had scheduled Northern Texas, Chattanooga, and VMI, rather than OU, BYU and Notre Dame, they would have been 3-0 in non-conference. Locker conceivably would not have been injured, and the team, with some morale wins against one or two Pac-10 teams. Instead of some pathetic 0-12 season, they would be at 4-8 or 5-7, and not belittled nearly as much.Which is inflated by the hype as mentioned above.You'd also know that strength of schedule is accounted for in BCS rankings, I'm sure.
Also, to humor you, I'll run Oregon and USC through Texas' season.
OU: Oregon loss, USC win
OSU: Oregon win, USC win
TTU: Oregon win, USC win
Mizzou: Oregon win, USC clobbering
TAMU: Oregon win, USC clobbering
Baylor: Oregon win, USC clobbering
Oregon's defense would kill them against OU (although I'm sure the refs would assist them if necessary), but TTU/OSU/Mizzou don't have enough defense to stop Oregon, and TAMU and Baylor aren't good, period. USC's defense would be a shock to every single Big-12 offense (as OSU's weaker defense was to Texas in the Fiesta Bowl), and would easily attain them the win. I'll give a +1/-1 either way to account for aberrations (such as the refs helping Oregon, or USC sleeping against TAMU/Baylor).Until you've shown you can that is an empty excuse.phishman420 wrote:
Because I don't feel like taking 15 minutes to write a post to argue with you.
This thread is full of hilarity.
Xbone Stormsurgezz