Top Conferences College Football

[johngateswhiteley]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=4460507

not sure that the Pac-10 isn't tied with the Big 12 at this point. we'll see...

[vander]

if BSU ditched the pathetic WAC for the MWC, it would be at least #5 on that list.
the MWC would have to become a BCS conference then, otherwise it's just as well to have BSU or some MWC team go undefeated every year to crash the BSC party

[johngateswhiteley]

if BSU ditched the pathetic WAC for the MWC, it would be at least #5 on that list.
the MWC would have to become a BCS conference then, otherwise it's just as well to have BSU or some MWC team go undefeated every year to crash the BSC party

lets get boise state in the Pac-10. btw, utah beat san jose state by 10...surprising.

[vander]

I've read that the Pac-10 has absolutely no desire to change anything, no matter how bad the Washingtons and anyone else gets. They're just going to sit back and ride the USC gravy train, like the WAC with BSU :lol :bang

[johngateswhiteley]

They're just going to sit back and ride the USC gravy train, like the WAC with BSU :lol :bang

don't agree with that at all, though you may be joking. i'm sure it has more to do with money than anything else...but not just cause USC. and because of other sports.

[tlongII]

Pac-10 is the best football conference by far. No other conference even comes close.

[vander]

Pac-10 is the best football conference by far. No other conference even comes close.

you're funny

didn't the MWC almost go undefeated against the pac 10 last year?

[tlongII]

you're funny

didn't the MWC almost go undefeated against the pac 10 last year?

Last Year Forum

[Girasuck]

I've read that the Pac-10 has absolutely no desire to change anything, no matter how bad the Washingtons and anyone else gets. They're just going to sit back and ride the USC gravy train, like the WAC with BSU :lol :bang

I heard the exact opposite. The Pac-10 was in talks to expand to a 12 team conference with two divisions and invite Utah and Colorado. TCU would then join the Big-12 to replace Colorado and the MWC and WAC would either combine into a 16 team conference or the WAC would give up 1 team to the MWC.

[dirk4mvp]

I don't think there's any doubt about which conf. is #1.

[vander]

I heard the exact opposite. The Pac-10 was in talks to expand to a 12 team conference with two divisions and invite Utah and Colorado. TCU would then join the Big-12 to replace Colorado and the MWC and WAC would either combine into a 16 team conference or the WAC would give up 1 team to the MWC.

wow, Utah and Colorado? I thought the Pac-10 preferred the in state rivalry pairs, Utah and BYU would work better.

but yeah, it's been well over a year since I was scouring the internet looking for conference rumblings, things could have changed a lot since then

I like most of that though, TCU should be in the Big 12 instead of Colorado, the Pac-10 should add 2 teams and get a championship game, and the WAC should join up with the MWC, dropping some of the FCS quality teams like Idaho, New Mexico State, etc

[tlongII]

It's unfortunate that hicks in Texas don't realize that the Pac-10 is by far the best conference in college football.

[mookie2001]

spurstradomus, i dont know how much you read the college sports forum

some posters, have a shtick or a go to subject that they post over and over and over again to get the same responses over and over and over again

theres also an old interwebs saying-dont feed the trolls


we all know a conference isnt the best at shit, and we all know what that conference is

ignore these people

you just made this posters day, and so did I, but im posting this for the common good of the spurstalk community

[tlongII]

spurstradomus, i dont know how much you read the college sports forum

some posters, have a shtick or a go to subject that they post over and over and over again to get the same responses over and over and over again

theres also an old interwebs saying-dont feed the trolls


we all know a conference isnt the best at shit, and we all know what that conference is

ignore these people

you just made this posters day, and so did I, but im posting this for the common good of the spurstalk community


If you wanted to do good for the spurstalk community you would admit that the Pac-10 RULES COLLEGE FOOTBALL! Don't blame me. I'm just a messenger.

[Ghazi]

Due to slavery, the SEC is the best conference in college football.

What's odd about that is that the ACC hasn't yielded an elite team in a while but they have A LOT of talent in that conference. Maybe 2nd most talented conference but like 4th or 5th best conference.

[tlongII]

SEC = Overrated

[JamStone]

What's odd about that is that the ACC hasn't yielded an elite team in a while but they have A LOT of talent in that conference. Maybe 2nd most talented conference but like 4th or 5th best conference.

What might be even odder is that the ACC tried to strengthen their conference to get closer to the level of the SEC by adding the Big East powerhouses of Miami and Virginia Tech. But soon after those programs started to regress and the Big East in general got better instead of worse for it.

I have often wondered why the ACC hasn't been better over the years.

[TFloss32]

Due to slavery, the SEC is the best conference in college football.

:lmao OMG that's so wrong, hilarious and probably true...all in one. Big XII was the best last year but the SEC has since taken over.

[vander]

:lmao OMG that's so wrong, hilarious and probably true...all in one. Big XII was the best last year but the SEC has since taken over.

by "last year" do you mean, like, "in the previous era" or is that literal.

SEC has been dominant for most of the 21st century

[TFloss32]

by "last year" do you mean, like, "in the previous era" or is that literal.

SEC has been dominant for most of the 21st century

Yes, I mean last year...not yesteryear. The Big XII was the best overall conference in 2008. The SEC is the best in 2009 so far...

[tlongII]

Yes, I mean last year...not yesteryear. The Big XII was the best overall conference in 2008. The SEC is the best in 2009 so far...

Hardly. Check the record against other BCS Conferences. The Pac-10 is #1.

[TFloss32]

Hardly. Check the record against other BCS Conferences. The Pac-10 is #1.

Great win by USC this weekend. The SEC has 3 teams in the Top 5 and one of them will be in the national championship.

Schlong, you think Portland State can be a BCS buster this year? I, personally, think they have what it takes.

[tlongII]

Great win by USC this weekend. The SEC has 3 teams in the Top 5 and one of them will be in the national championship.

Schlong, you think Portland State can be a BCS buster this year? I, personally, think they have what it takes.

So what? It's all about non-conference opponents and bowl games.

[tlongII]

My purpose is to bring enlightenment.

[TFloss32]

So what? It's all about non-conference opponents and bowl games.

You're right, the SEC will end up having better bowl games than the Pac-10. Portland State would put the Pac-10 over the top though.

As far as non-conference games go, you know better Schlong. Those games are irrelevant unless you have a good record at the end of the season. You don't receive a great bowl bid by losing two or three conference games and beating one good non-conference opponent. Plus, what non-conference success has the Pac-10 had besides the USC/Ohio St. game? Oregon over Utah doesn't count.

Go Beavers!

[tlongII]

You're right, the SEC will end up having better bowl games than the Pac-10. Portland State would put the Pac-10 over the top though.

As far as non-conference games go, you know better Schlong. Those games are irrelevant unless you have a good record at the end of the season. You don't receive a great bowl bid by losing two or three conference games and beating one good non-conference opponent. Plus, what non-conference success has the Pac-10 had besides the USC/Ohio St. game? Oregon over Utah doesn't count.

Go Beavers!

You see that is exactly my point! The Pac-10 is brutal. Texas and Florida would never get through a Pac-10 schedule without a loss!

[MajorMike]

You see that is exactly my point! The Pac-10 is brutal. Texas and Florida would never get through a Pac-10 schedule without a loss!


Except for the fact that UT and uo and Florida routinely make it thru their conference schedule, which includes other teams ranked in the top 10-20, and don't lose to unranked conference teams year in and year out.

Sure you can say Washington is now a ranked team; however, just like Houston after they beat OSU, neither would be ranked if they would have lost like they were supposed to.

Sc doesn't loose to unranked P10 teams because they are good: 4-8 Stanford in 2007 was not good; UCLA was not good in 2006; if not for wins over USC, Ore State would not have been ranked (twice) at 8-5; Cal finished 8-6 in 2003.

When UT and uo get beat by the middle of the road teams (atm, ttek, OSU) they more often than not don't play for the BCS, and that is in the best division in football. SC is normally just good enough to be collectively better than everyone else in the just barely better than ACC or Big East P10 to warrant a BCS bid every year.

As long as SC continues to be upset in conference games they obviously should win, they will not be rewarded with a BCS title game appearance. The football community is tired of the big game stars who can't play in the little game. Just the way it is. Until SC shows they can run the table in a second-rate conference, they don't deserve anymore than what they get, which is the annual Rose Bowl.

2008 Post, but still relevant:

There have been more teams from non-BCS confs in BCS Bowls (3) than 2nd P10 teams in the BCS as an at-large (2).

Only USC has multiple BCS Bowl bids - no other P10 school has more than 1.

Only twice this century have more than 2 P10 teams been ranked in the final AP poll (Az State #20 - 2004; UW #19 - 2001).

P10 only had one team in the top 20 in 1999 (Ore #19), 1998 (UCLA #8), 1995 (SC #12), 1990 (UW #5), 1989 (SC #8), 1985 (UCLA #6), 1983 (UCLA #13) and I got tired of looking.

P10 is only a better conf than the ACC or BEast in the BCS era because SC is in it. That's all, nothing more.

Hell if ttek even got to play that schedule every year they'd have 11 wins 7 or 8 years in a row, let alone uo, UT, LSU, Fla, UGA, etc.

And to further prove how lucky SC is to have the P10, the reason they get to go to the BCS every year - because of the patsy P10 schedule, let's look at the records of the BCS Era:

Boise State - 103-24; 1 BCS Bid
UT - 103-25 2 BCS Bid; 1 Title
uo - 102-28 6 Bids; 1 Title
Ohio - 98-27 6 Bids; 1 Title
Va Tech - 99-28; 3 Bids
UGA - 97-30; 3 Bids
Miami - 94-30; 4 Bids; 1 Title
SC - 94-32; 6 Bids; 1 Title

In the BCS era, the only other P10 team in the top 20 in record is Oregon (#17) and they have 1 BCS bid. To my suprise, Oregon State was next... at #31.

The B12 has 2 in the Top 3 (the top 2 if you aren't counting Boise), Neb (18), KSU (24) and ttek (28). atm is at 42 which is still above the next P10 team (UCLA 44).

SEC has 6, 10, 10, 16, 19.

ACC has 5, 7, 12, 19, 27.

BEast has 5, 14, 22, 26.

B10/1 has 4, 9, 15,

SC makes a living feasting off of poor P10 teams to get the auto BCS bid. Have they won a good amount of games since then, yes; good on them. Getting the auto bid guarantees them a home game at the Rose Bowl where 4 of their BCS games have been and they are 3-1 (losing only to UT in the title game).

I'm sure Ohio and UT and uo would love to play a home game for a BCS Bowl, as well.

[THEOhioSt.University]

The pac 10 looked amazing this week. USC loses to a team that was winless all last year and Cal had a battle with lowly Minnesota before pulling away. The ACC is way overrated, as well. Just because you beat other crappy teams in the ACC doesnt make you good. Be prepared folks, I'll be here speaking my mind all year.

[mookie2001]

UT - 103-25 2 BCS Bid
dont you mean 3

[mookie2001]

oh i see from 2008

[tlongII]

5-0 in bowl games.

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

I'm sure Ohio and UT and uo would love to play a home game for a BCS Bowl, as welland not play a conference championship game

[vander]

and not play a conference championship game

of course the flip side of that is not having to schedule all the best teams in your conference every year, does Alabama play Florida this year? do Texas and Oklahoma play... wait that doesn't really matter because the Big 12 north sucks pretty hard

[TFloss32]

of course the flip side of that is not having to schedule all the best teams in your conference every year, does Alabama play Florida this year? do Texas and Oklahoma play... wait that doesn't really matter because the Big 12 north sucks pretty hard

Yes, Texas and OU play every year.

[vander]

Yes, Texas and OU play every year.

not where I was going with that :lol

[TFloss32]

not where I was going with that :lol

I know where you were going Vander. I was being sarcastic and making fun of your post because it's a null point. You were saying that it's more advantageous to schedule teams every other 2 years because teams can avoid the juggernauts in their respective conferences during regular season play and hope that they faulter somewhere along the line. However, you are saying, that idea doesn't apply to the Big XII because the North division sucks so badly. I get it...

But...realistically, a round robin is much more beneficial because you don't have to play an extra game each year and you get to sit pretty while the top dogs in other conferences take each other out. Plus, the SEC and Big XII conferences are the best overall each year anyway and that makes your argument irrelevant.

[johngateswhiteley]

I know where you were going Vander. I was being sarcastic and making fun of your post because it's a null point. You were saying that it's more advantageous to schedule teams every other 2 years because teams can avoid the juggernauts in their respective conferences during regular season play and hope that they faulter somewhere along the line. However, you are saying, that idea doesn't apply to the Big XII because the North division sucks so badly. I get it...

But...realistically, a round robin is much more beneficial because you don't have to play an extra game each year and you get to sit pretty while the top dogs in other conferences take each other out. Plus, the SEC and Big XII conferences are the best overall each year anyway and that makes your argument irrelevant.

thats not a complete perspective.

[vander]

I know where you were going Vander. I was being sarcastic and making fun of your post because it's a null point. You were saying that it's more advantageous to schedule teams every other 2 years because teams can avoid the juggernauts in their respective conferences during regular season play and hope that they faulter somewhere along the line. However, you are saying, that idea doesn't apply to the Big XII because the North division sucks so badly. I get it...

But...realistically, a round robin is much more beneficial because you don't have to play an extra game each year and you get to sit pretty while the top dogs in other conferences take each other out. Plus, the SEC and Big XII conferences are the best overall each year anyway and that makes your argument irrelevant.

flip side = more advantageous?
no, I wasn't making that argument at all.

[tlongII]

I know where you were going Vander. I was being sarcastic and making fun of your post because it's a null point. You were saying that it's more advantageous to schedule teams every other 2 years because teams can avoid the juggernauts in their respective conferences during regular season play and hope that they faulter somewhere along the line. However, you are saying, that idea doesn't apply to the Big XII because the North division sucks so badly. I get it...

But...realistically, a round robin is much more beneficial because you don't have to play an extra game each year and you get to sit pretty while the top dogs in other conferences take each other out. Plus, the SEC and Big XII conferences are the best overall each year anyway and that makes your argument irrelevant.

No they're not. The Pac-10 is clearly better than either of those conferences top to bottom. There's only one weak team in the Pac-10 this year.

[JamStone]

What one weak team is that?

Oregon?

They lost to a WAC team and barely beat a shitty Purdue team at home. Is that the team you're referring to?

[mookie2001]

ignore


if 10 teams all went 5-5 this poster would be jacking off to how powerful they were

[johngateswhiteley]

No they're not. The Pac-10 is clearly better than either of those conferences top to bottom. There's only one weak team in the Pac-10 this year.


i love your passion...i do. but you aren't helping our cause by always saying the pac-10 is better and thats that. the pac-10 is not better than the SEC, but that doesn't mean we can't play with a lot of those teams. it is, however, on par or slightly behind the big 12. anyone, that suggests the pac-10 is, at minimum, not the 3rd best in the country...just doesn't watch enough CFB.

aside from all of that, back to the latest topic at hand, the current scheduling system is more difficult than most realize...and even a great team like USC is going to stumble. To be fair, i think part of it has to reside on Carroll's shoulders...even though he has been phenomenal. 6 of our last 7 losses, or something like that, have been to unranked Pac-10 teams on the road...that should tell anyone, with thought, all they need to know about Pac-10 scheduling. USC doesn't struggle, or even lose really, with out of conference opponents. the hating, if you want to be taken seriously, should stop...

[TFloss32]

thats not a complete perspective.

Elaborate...

[johngateswhiteley]

What one weak team is that?

Oregon?

They lost to a WAC team and barely beat a shitty Purdue team at home. Is that the team you're referring to?

does beating utah not count?

[TFloss32]

of course the flip side of that is not having to schedule all the best teams in your conference every year, does Alabama play Florida this year? do Texas and Oklahoma play... wait that doesn't really matter because the Big 12 north sucks pretty hard

How are you not implying an advantage by saying this?

[tlongII]

What one weak team is that?

Oregon?

They lost to a WAC team and barely beat a shitty Purdue team at home. Is that the team you're referring to?

I guess you forgot about #16 Utah that they just beat?

[tlongII]

i love your passion...i do. but you aren't helping our cause by always saying the pac-10 is better and thats that. the pac-10 is not better than the SEC, but that doesn't mean we can't play with a lot of those teams. it is, however, on par or slightly behind the big 12. anyone, that suggests the pac-10 is, at minimum, not the 3rd best in the country...just doesn't watch enough CFB.

aside from all of that, back to the latest topic at hand, the current scheduling system is more difficult than most realize...and even a great team like USC is going to stumble. To be fair, i think part of it has to reside on Carroll's shoulders...even though he has been phenomenal. 6 of our last 7 losses, or something like that, have been to unranked Pac-10 teams on the road...that should tell anyone, with thought, all they need to know about Pac-10 scheduling. USC doesn't struggle, or even lose really, with out of conference opponents. the hating, if you want to be taken seriously, should stop...

Nah dude, I know what I'm talking about. SEC and Big-12 honks think they're so good because they always have a couple of teams in the top 8. The joke is they never play anybody good out of conference and they don't even play everybody IN their conference. They only have a few tough games a year. Pac-10 teams always have at least 7 tough games on the schedule.

[johngateswhiteley]

I guess you forgot about #16 Utah that they just beat?

as i said above. also, losing to boise state at boise state isn't a bad loss, especially if they go undefeated the rest of the way. but, damn, i'm tired of boise state.

[tlongII]

ignore


if 10 teams all went 5-5 this poster would be jacking off to how powerful they were

Well OF COURSE! Parity is what the NFL is all about! Are you saying that the Big-12 is better than the NFL?


lol lol rofl rofl!

[JamStone]

I guess you forgot about #16 Utah that they just beat?

No I didn't. Does beating Utah change the other two games?

[johngateswhiteley]

Nah dude, I know what I'm talking about. SEC and Big-12 honks think they're so good because they always have a couple of teams in the top 8. The joke is they never play anybody good out of conference and they don't even play everybody IN their conference. They only have a few tough games a year. Pac-10 teams always have at least 7 tough games on the schedule.

i agree with most of that, and btw, that argument is much better than what you usually type. and its true! the Pac-10 play tougher out of conference opponents and everyone in their conference each year. this allows for a variety of different variables...teams see you every year, increased motivation, more heated match ups...shoot USC has a bulls eye on their back each game. the San Antonio Spurs know how hard it is to repeat...i guess since most fans are in big 12 country, they don't care to have the same broad perspective.

[johngateswhiteley]

No I didn't. Does beating Utah change the other two games?

boise state is good and they beat purdue. i didn't know you were into style points...further, i cannot believe you are actually picking and choosing what games count.

[JamStone]

Relax jgw. It was obviously a jab at tlong and a friendly one at that.

But thanks for defending his honor, prince charming.

[vander]

How are you not implying an advantage by saying this?

because I'm not overruling your point about conference championships, merely adding to it, perhaps neutralizing it

[MajorMike]

i agree with most of that, and btw, that argument is much better than what you usually type. and its true! the Pac-10 play tougher out of conference opponents and everyone in their conference each year. this allows for a variety of different variables...teams see you every year, increased motivation, more heated match ups...shoot USC has a bulls eye on their back each game. the San Antonio Spurs know how hard it is to repeat...i guess since most fans are in big 12 country, they don't care to have the same broad perspective.


Yeah, no one EVER circles UT and uo on their calendar.

[rjv]

nice beating on the beavers by the bearcats this weekend. and of course it is always good to see USC go down.