WHO CARES ABOUT THE $EC.......DON'T KNOW WHY THEY TROLL THIS BOARD?  WE ALL KNOW THE REASON

scarlet71 wrote: WHO CARES ABOUT THE $EC.......DON'T KNOW WHY THEY TROLL THIS BOARD?  WE ALL KNOW THE REASON

You respond to every SEC thread, why..

cincydawg4 wrote:

Alabama Future Non-Conference Opponents - 2013+
2013	2014
08/31 - Virginia Tech (at Atlanta, GA) 09/21 - Colorado State 10/05 - Georgia State 11/23 - Chattanooga	08/30 - West Virginia (at Atlanta, GA) 09/06 - Florida Atlantic 11/22 - Western Carolina
2015	2016
TBA - Colorado State (or 2017)	09/03 - Michigan State
2017	2018
09/02 - at Michigan State TBA - Colorado State (or 2015)	TBA
2019	2020
TBA - Georgia Tech	TBA - at Georgia Tech

That future slate looks fairly typical if they add someone in 2015 of note.

Bama will be playing another neutral game in '15, possibly against Wisconsin if they accept.

Since 2003, in football, baseball and basketball, the SEC has 14 titles, the big ten has ZERO.

16isles wrote: Since 2003, in football, baseball and basketball, the SEC has 14 titles, the big ten has ZERO.

Same as Cryami.  You really are pathetic.

Jetmanlee wrote:

scarlet71 wrote: WHO CARES ABOUT THE $EC.......DON'T KNOW WHY THEY TROLL THIS BOARD?  WE ALL KNOW THE REASON

You respond to every SEC thread, why..

This is an OSU Board.........WHY ARE YOU HERE?, WHY NOT PAT YOUR BACK ON AN $EC BOARD?

Since ND, USC & UCLA have never played an FCS school, they all have a multi-decade history of playing home & home matches against anybody.

UCLAMarv wrote: Since ND, USC & UCLA have never played an FCS school, they all have a multi-decade history of playing home & home matches against anybody.

You must be tired of posting incorrect facts and spread yourself out into irrelevant ones.

I'd be prouder, on a personal level, of a "conference affiliation" that had more impressive academic credentials than athletic credentials.

I doubt anyone puts on their resume anything about how their university won this or that championship if they were not personally involved.

b10 is only "major" conference that hasn't won anything. These things are cyclical though, right? When was the b10 winning a lot of titles, again?

Stratbuck wrote:

16isles wrote: Since 2003, in football, baseball and basketball, the SEC has 14 titles, the big ten has ZERO.

Same as Cryami.  You really are pathetic.

16isles wrote: Since 2003, in football, baseball and basketball, the SEC has 14 titles, the big ten has ZERO.

That is a shocking statistic. Baseball does not really surprise me as baseball players, like golfers, tend to flock to the warmer weather where they can work on their craft year round. Big Ten has not won a baseball championship since 1966, so I'm not sure it's relevant to throw that one out there. I think the most shocking title was Minnesota winning the Golf championship in 2002. Explain that one!

We probably all agree, at least the reasonable folks, that the SEC has the stronghold on football. There's no denying that. Basketball is a different story. The Big Ten is likely the best basketball conference in the county at this point.  Outside of Kentucky and Florida, the SEC isn't really on the radar in basketball. There is not depth in the conference like there is in football.

Nonetheless, that stat is no less shocking to read.

b10 is definitely the deepest conference, but I would be really surprised if they actually won the national title. Duke, Louisville, Syracuse at full strength all look like better teams. Florida is going to be really hard to beat as well.

superman2424 wrote:

16isles wrote: Since 2003, in football, baseball and basketball, the SEC has 14 titles, the big ten has ZERO.

That is a shocking statistic. Baseball does not really surprise me as baseball players, like golfers, tend to flock to the warmer weather where they can work on their craft year round. Big Ten has not won a baseball championship since 1966, so I'm not sure it's relevant to throw that one out there. I think the most shocking title was Minnesota winning the Golf championship in 2002. Explain that one!

We probably all agree, at least the reasonable folks, that the SEC has the stronghold on football. There's no denying that. Basketball is a different story. The Big Ten is likely the best basketball conference in the county at this point.  Outside of Kentucky and Florida, the SEC isn't really on the radar in basketball. There is not depth in the conference like there is in football.

Nonetheless, that stat is no less shocking to read.

16isles wrote: b10 is definitely the deepest conference, but I would be really surprised if they actually won the national title. Duke, Louisville, Syracuse at full strength all look like better teams. Florida is going to be really hard to beat as well.

Strongly disagree. Michigan looks like the most complete team. Duke just got trounced by Miami and have an earlier loss to NC St. Louisville hasn't impressed me.  The blow out really bad teams, but I don't think they are elite. Syracuse I can see the argument. I think they are a very good team and one of the top 2 in the nation. Michigan has 1 loss that the apparently slept through the first half @ OSU, but came storming back in the second.

We're going to find out because Michigan has a brutal schedule coming up. @Illinois, @Indiana, OSU at home & @MSU. A few other games mixed in there, but they will be tested in the next 2 1/2 weeks.

Michigan doesn't have anybody down low. What win by Michigan has impressed you? I forgot.... Kansas. Big upside there, no way a b10 teams win NC this year. Won't happen.

superman2424 wrote:

16isles wrote: b10 is definitely the deepest conference, but I would be really surprised if they actually won the national title. Duke, Louisville, Syracuse at full strength all look like better teams. Florida is going to be really hard to beat as well.

Strongly disagree. Michigan looks like the most complete team. Duke just got trounced by Miami and have an earlier loss to NC St. Louisville hasn't impressed me.  The blow out really bad teams, but I don't think they are elite. Syracuse I can see the argument. I think they are a very good team and one of the top 2 in the nation. Michigan has 1 loss that the apparently slept through the first half @ OSU, but came storming back in the second.

We're going to find out because Michigan has a brutal schedule coming up. @Illinois, @Indiana, OSU at home & @MSU. A few other games mixed in there, but they will be tested in the next 2 1/2 weeks.

I think the big ten is very good in basketball but they do not have one great team out of the bunch. They will get a few teams into the sweet 16 and maybe two in the elite eight and I doubt they get one into the final four. JMO

16isles wrote: Michigan doesn't have anybody down low. What win by Michigan has impressed you? I forgot.... Kansas. Big upside there, no way a b10 teams win NC this year. Won't happen.

superman2424 wrote:

16isles wrote: b10 is definitely the deepest conference, but I would be really surprised if they actually won the national title. Duke, Louisville, Syracuse at full strength all look like better teams. Florida is going to be really hard to beat as well.

Strongly disagree. Michigan looks like the most complete team. Duke just got trounced by Miami and have an earlier loss to NC St. Louisville hasn't impressed me.  The blow out really bad teams, but I don't think they are elite. Syracuse I can see the argument. I think they are a very good team and one of the top 2 in the nation. Michigan has 1 loss that the apparently slept through the first half @ OSU, but came storming back in the second.

We're going to find out because Michigan has a brutal schedule coming up. @Illinois, @Indiana, OSU at home & @MSU. A few other games mixed in there, but they will be tested in the next 2 1/2 weeks.

Ktffan--You have no equals when it comes to posting fiction; my previous statement was 100% correct, and the article I posted dissecting the fraud that is the SEC and pointing out their unmatched addiction to padding their schedules against FCS schools is also correct.

Deal with it!

UCLAMarv wrote: Ktffan--You have no equals when it comes to posting fiction; my previous statement was 100% correct, and the article I posted dissecting the fraud that is the SEC and pointing out their unmatched addiction to padding their schedules against FCS schools is also correct.

Deal with it!

Marv,  you're really trying to claim that the SEC has averaged more than two FCS opponents per team per year? That's not even close to correct.

Yeah, seriously, man up, dude. That is the most insane statement. 2 teams a year...lol Can you even follow football and think that? lol

rivergator wrote:

UCLAMarv wrote: Ktffan--You have no equals when it comes to posting fiction; my previous statement was 100% correct, and the article I posted dissecting the fraud that is the SEC and pointing out their unmatched addiction to padding their schedules against FCS schools is also correct.

Deal with it!

Marv,  you're really trying to claim that the SEC has averaged more than two FCS opponents per team per year? That's not even close to correct.

UCLAMarv wrote: Ktffan--You have no equals when it comes to posting fiction; my previous statement was 100% correct, and the article I posted dissecting the fraud that is the SEC and pointing out their unmatched addiction to padding their schedules against FCS schools is also correct.

Deal with it!

Feel free to show evidence that backs you up.  You make the most outlandish claims and then don't both to back them up when you get called out?  Please.

I don't see much difference in playing Georgia State (FCS) versus Buffalo or Florida Atlantic.  A decent team is going to blast any of them at home.  Georgia State is probably a tougher out.

A cream puff is a cream puff, no matter their classification.

Most teams play three a year OOC and one BCS level team, fact.  No decent team will be challenged by those three cream puffs played at home.  Who cares who they are?