BG College Football Pick Em / College Football Thread

[Plow]

Yeah... I guess that's why you missed the underlying meaning of some of my post where I said the Big 12 was better than the SEC, yet I can't handle the truth. Okay. I'm saying the Big 12 has zero defense. I'm not saying they suck. Also, did you not see where I call the SEC teams like Tennessee, Auburn, and such bad? No, probably not. I'm too homerish. I'd NEVER admit faults of a SEC team. We're the best!

I'm just sitting around laughing at how LSU defense being shitty all year long is a "fluke" game, while OU giving up less points to way better opposition is OU's defense sucking, 2 offenses sucking can't be possible, it has to be good defense, but 2 offenses being amazing isn't possible either, it has to be bad defense, etc. Nevermind that AMAZING Ohio State offense doubling their USC total with a whopping 6 points. Surely it was that Penn State team that gave up 17 in the first half to a joke of a Michigan team playing their amazing D.


The fact of the matter is, you ask any of the top 4-6 big 12 teams who they'd most like to play in a bcs bowl or championship, it's going to be anybody other than USC or Florida, because those are the only teams that would remotely concern them.


Remember that last part of the Ohio State game where Terell freaking Pryor was driving down the field, throwing mid distance routes along the sideline? Remember that part where one 10 yard downfield pass missed the receiver by a good 15 yards? Yeah, if that guy can drive throwing the ball mid distance to the sidelines in a situation where you're 100% focused on stopping mid to long distance sideline passes just imagine what Todd Reesing would do on a good day. Let alone OU, Texas, OSU, Tech, or Mizzou. Hell put Josh Freeman in at QB alongside Beanie, Ohio State probably wins that 28-6.

[Gregorio]

I'm not going to deny that the QB play is superior in the Big 12 to the SEC and Big 10. But by this point you should be able to tell the difference between a great offense picking apart a defense and a great offense playing a team with no defense. There's no good pass rush, no good coverage, no tackling. Every time the defenses come onto the field they look like high schoolers.

[Plow]

I'm not going to deny that the QB play is superior in the Big 12 to the SEC and Big 10. But by this point you should be able to tell the difference between a great offense picking apart a defense and a great offense playing a team with no defense. There's no good pass rush, no good coverage, no tackling. Every time the defenses come onto the field they look like high schoolers.

Sure, if you disregard the facts that Texas and OSU are the only teams that have been able to run on anybody, the fact that 90% of the pass plays are either quick short virtually uncoverable passes or broken plays where the QB's are doing ridiculous jobs avoiding pressure and buying too much time for it to be possible to cover everyone, and the fact that OU and Texas are giving up 10-15 points a game outside the multiple top 10 teams they've both played.

[Akiyama]

sigh

Just one thing. What better competition are you comparing to who LSU gives up points to? LSU giving up a ton to UGA/Florida compared to Oklahoma giving up a ton to Kansas/Texas/K-State? Last I checked, KU didn't belong in the Top 15 when they played Oklahoma, and K-State's unranked. I could be wrong. Also, stop blaming "It's just their third stringers" when Oklahoma gives up a shit ton of points, please. Bradford was still in the game, throwing his stellar 13-32 in the game with K-State in the third, was he not? Actually, I think he played the entire game. Why would it be their "Third String Defense" if their starting QB is still in the game?

The fact is, Big 12 teams are built to play really really well in the Big 12. Athletes are picked out for scholarships, the offenses/"defenses" run are all designed to go toe to toe mostly with the Big 12. We've seen Mizzour exposed for who they were. Kansas was exposed in my opinion early on against South Florida, though they played okay with Oklahoma. I thought they were matched up with Texas Tech, at home, at homecoming... but god was I wrong. It was a mixture of Tech being good, and Kansas sucking horribly. I don't see how you can brag about teams putting up so many points on a Big 12 team, then turn around and "lol" at LSU giving up a ton of points to two good teams. I'm just confused really. Oh well.

[Plow]

I had high belief in Mangino and the KU defense improving dramatically throughout the year, I was dead wrong.


Freeman, as I've stated before, *could* be an amazing quarterback. I honestly believe if he'd been playing the last 3 years at Florida, and gotten to be coached by Urban, on a team where comeback after comeback wasn't thrown away by defense that can't keep sun belt teams below 35, he would not only be better than Tebow, he would be leading heisman candidate leading the #1 team in the country to the national championship right now. Don't be surprised if K-State pulls off an upset against KU or Mizzou-- we reeeeaally hate Mizzou anywhere in Kansas outside KC, and losing to them is something that's not supposed to happen, ever. I'm almost certain they'll beat Nebraska and Iowa State at home and be bowl eligible, won't be surprised at all if they end up 7-5 before the bowl. Not that I'd be that surprised if they ended up 4-8 at this point, but anyway.

I'm pretty confident even K-State's offense is on par with Georgia's. Freeman is playing as well as Stafford, and he has some of the best speed at wr in the nation. No question Texas, OU, and OSU's are a fair bit ahead.


Florida has put up 50 3 times this year now. They've played 1 ranked team. Before scoring 50 on LSU, they hadn't scored 40 since week 1 vs Hawaii.

OU has done it 4 times, + a 45 and a 49, Texas has done it 4 times, + 2 more 40+, both having played 3 ranked teams.



Guess what? SEC teams are built to play SEC teams too (other than Florida). That means having good defense to the point of hardly even bothering with offense. That's why the ones that manage to have an actual offense do so amazingly well. Cept, this year, their defenses suck too.


Just wait. Mark my words, when SEC teams play Big 12 teams this post season, the SEC teams will not be able to run the ball at all, and their weakness at qb will be unable to even begin to make up for it the way the good Big 12 teams do this year.


Face it, we're seeing an occurrence in college football this year every bit as freak as the Pats were in the NFL last year. We'll never see a group of quarterbacks in the nation as good as the group in the big 12 right now, I doubt we'll see a group of any position as good as the QB's in the big 12 are right now for a long time.

Yeap, it's a fluke, and yeap, it's crazy to watch, and yeap, as I said all along it doesn't matter how good the big 12 defenses are, they're going to look weak, but in the end, the big 12 just clowns everybody else out there top to bottom this year.


Oh yeah, I'd like to take this opportunity to lol @ colt's scrubbery almost giving the game back to OSU.

[Tyche]

If SEC teams are only built to beat SEC teams, they why do they just rape people in bowl games? That's a poor argument you have there.

[Akiyama]

k. whatever you say.

[Plow]

If SEC teams are only built to beat SEC teams, they why do they just rape people in bowl games? That's a poor argument you have there.

Because they play the big east and notre dame, which are pretty much exactly like the SEC but not as good...

[Tyche]

...and florida state and illinois and Oklahoma and about 9 other teams you refuse to mention.

[Plow]

Oklahoma wasn't even the best team in the big 12 that year, Illinois is from the Big 10 which is again exactly like the SEC, Florida State is 3-5 in bowls since their last nc, etc. etc.


Oh well, I guess being built to beat running teams makes it impossible to win the like 3 bowl games they've played in the last 10 years against pass first teams.



By the way, in case you honestly haven't noticed, the big 12 has always been a run first conference as well, and the defenses are built around stopping the run first, just like, oh, every other major conference in college football has ever been.


It's ok, keep trying, maybe you can find some meaningless argument somewhere to somehow make the SEC look better than the Big 12, at least I would hope so with this level of desperation.

[Tyche]

The SEC sucks for the most part this year. I've said that. I think Florida could beat anyone in the Big 12, but I don't think any other SEC team could break the top 3. It's just your justifications are so god damned absurd that you have to be called out on it. "Well, SEC teams are built to beat SEC teams.." They have the best bowl record since the BCS has started. They've beat a huge slate of teams. The big 12 have half as many wins with just as many appearances. I don't think they even have a winning record in BCS bowls. Apparently they know how to beat teams out of their conference...your argument reflects the big 12 much much more.

[Plow]

The SEC sucks for the most part this year. I've said that. I think Florida could beat anyone in the Big 12, but I don't think any other SEC team could break the top 3. It's just your justifications are so god damned absurd that you have to be called out on it. "Well, SEC teams are built to beat SEC teams.." They have the best bowl record since the BCS has started. They've beat a huge slate of teams. The big 12 have half as many wins with just as many appearances. I don't think they even have a winning record in BCS bowls. Apparently they know how to beat teams out of their conference...your argument reflects the big 12 much much more.

Hi, this is the part where I laugh about how my responding to someone saying Big 12 teams are built to beat Big 12 teams means I'm the one that brought it up, and that I'm being ridiculous by saying it.


You realize LSU has 1/3 of all SEC bcs bowl wins right? The pac-10 has the next best BCS bowl record after the SEC at 8-4, with USC being 5-1. I guess that means the pac-10 is built around beating ACC teams right?


Because it's totally anything remotely resembling some kind of intelligent argument to try to argue that SEC teams don't build themselves for success the the SEC. They're totally focused on the mountain west, duh. You're definitely not grasping at straws trying anything you can possibly come up with to discredit the big 12 through meaningless, silly, unrelated arguments, not at all.

[Byrd]

You're definitely not grasping at straws trying anything you can possibly come up with to discredit the big 12 through meaningless silly arguments, not at all.

Out of curiosity, do you genuinely think you're winning this argument?

[Plow]

Out of curiosity, do you genuinely think you're winning this argument?

What's the argument?

[Akiyama]

Hi, this is the part where I laugh about how my responding to someone saying Big 12 teams are built to beat Big 12 teams means I'm the one that brought it up, and that I'm being ridiculous by saying it.


You realize LSU has 1/3 of all SEC bcs bowl wins right? The pac-10 has the next best BCS bowl record after the SEC at 8-4, with USC being 5-1. I guess that means the pac-10 is built around beating ACC teams right?


Because it's totally anything remotely resembling some kind of intelligent argument to try to argue that SEC teams don't build themselves for success the the SEC. They're totally focused on the mountain west, duh. You're definitely not grasping at straws trying anything you can possibly come up with to discredit the big 12 through meaningless, silly, unrelated arguments, not at all.

lololol wat?

You just reached a whole new level of stupid. Seriously.

First, yes. I'm the one who said "The fact is, Big 12 teams are built to play really really well in the Big 12." That may have been a blind statement at first, but every conference recruits players to build their team around their conference play, as first thing's first for ANY team; winning your conference. You always hear coaches say they want to win their conference, then it's all about "the next game" and so forth. It was Tyche that said that.

USC is 5-1 because their team has been a beast. Excuse me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it Oklahoma that USC steamrolled in 04-05? Yes, before you throw it in, USC also steamrolled Auburn the year before 23-0. So don't go throwing that in my face, as this isn't even about the SEC anymore. It's about how little you seem to know about football OUTSIDE the Big XII. Also, yes, USC's only loss came to Texas and the "arguably best college athlete/QB/whatever the fuck you said ever." But WHERE THE FUCK does the statement "The Pac-10 is built around beating the ACC"????? Seriously. Did you pull that from your ass or something? They play the Big 10 in the Rose Bowl. Is that what you were talking about? Clear that up please.

The SEC does build themselves around winning in their own conference. Every conference builds mainly to compete and win their own conference. That's what I believe. The Big 12 was run first, but with their QBs, now they are pass first and defense fell by the waste side. Also, the Big 12 forgot Defense was key in games as I don't care what the hell you say about who they play, they give up a TON of points to any team that has a resemblance of an offense. Get the fuck off the "I HATE THE SEC HURKHURK" soapbox dude. I already said countless times the Big 12 is better, not only to state a fact, but to get you to SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Also, one thing. Should we really be talking bowl records when you do have Big Game Bob and Oklahoma in the Big 12? Really?

[Plow]

lololol wat?

You just reached a whole new level of stupid. Seriously.

First, yes. I'm the one who said "The fact is, Big 12 teams are built to play really really well in the Big 12." That may have been a blind statement at first, but every conference recruits players to build their team around their conference play, as first thing's first for ANY team; winning your conference. You always hear coaches say they want to win their conference, then it's all about "the next game" and so forth. It was Tyche that said that.

USC is 5-1 because their team has been a beast. Excuse me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it Oklahoma that USC steamrolled in 04-05? Yes, before you throw it in, USC also steamrolled Auburn the year before 23-0. So don't go throwing that in my face, as this isn't even about the SEC anymore. It's about how little you seem to know about football OUTSIDE the Big XII. Also, yes, USC's only loss came to Texas and the "arguably best college athlete/QB/whatever the fuck you said ever." But WHERE THE FUCK does the statement "The Pac-10 is built around beating the ACC"????? Seriously. Did you pull that from your ass or something? They play the Big 10 in the Rose Bowl. Is that what you were talking about? Clear that up please.

The SEC does build themselves around winning in their own conference. Every conference builds mainly to compete and win their own conference. That's what I believe. The Big 12 was run first, but with their QBs, now they are pass first and defense fell by the waste side. Also, the Big 12 forgot Defense was key in games as I don't care what the hell you say about who they play, they give up a TON of points to any team that has a resemblance of an offense. Get the fuck off the "I HATE THE SEC HURKHURK" soapbox dude. I already said countless times the Big 12 is better, not only to state a fact, but to get you to SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Also, one thing. Should we really be talking bowl records when you do have Big Game Bob and Oklahoma in the Big 12? Really?

Holy. Fucking. Woosh. Batman. This has got to be the most oblivious post I've ever seen.

[Akiyama]

I was going to insult you, which I actually did... but editing the post. You're right about everything Plow. I don't know why I argue with you. Your knowledge clearly exceeds my own, and I have no right to post in this thread. You win.

[Plow]

This is just sad. Seriously. The only reason I'm actually going to respond to this is because your stupidity might convince other stupid people that I'm the one being stupid if they're honestly that oblivious to blatant sarcasm and fail to understand basic arguments like that.

lololol wat?

You just reached a whole new level of stupid. Seriously.

First, yes. I'm the one who said "The fact is, Big 12 teams are built to play really really well in the Big 12." That may have been a blind statement at first, but every conference recruits players to build their team around their conference play, as first thing's first for ANY team; winning your conference. You always hear coaches say they want to win their conference, then it's all about "the next game" and so forth. It was Tyche that said that.

Exactly? My whole point was that every team in every conference builds its team around the conference they play in. This is a massive fucking duh, how you would try to bring it up in the first place is beyond me, and Tyche is just ignoring you bringing it up to try to jump on me for arguing something so fucking dumb.

USC is 5-1 because their team has been a beast. Excuse me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it Oklahoma that USC steamrolled in 04-05? Yes, before you throw it in, USC also steamrolled Auburn the year before 23-0. So don't go throwing that in my face, as this isn't even about the SEC anymore. It's about how little you seem to know about football OUTSIDE the Big XII. Also, yes, USC's only loss came to Texas and the "arguably best college athlete/QB/whatever the fuck you said ever." But WHERE THE FUCK does the statement "The Pac-10 is built around beating the ACC"????? Seriously. Did you pull that from your ass or something? They play the Big 10 in the Rose Bowl. Is that what you were talking about? Clear that up please.

Extremely simple point: what in the fucking sam hell does the SEC's overall record in bowls have to do with the fact that it's a really simple concept that teams build themselves around their conference? If the SEC having a good record in BCS bowls means they're not built around playing in the SEC, wouldn't that mean the Pac-10 having a good record (thanks exclusively to USC) wasn't building teams around playing in the pac-10?

My point was that your, and Tyche's arguments are fucking ridiculous.

You're now pointing out the fact that my sarcastic imitations used as examples of how ridiculous your arguments are... are ridiculous.

D U H

The SEC does build themselves around winning in their own conference. Every conference builds mainly to compete and win their own conference. That's what I believe. The Big 12 was run first, but with their QBs, now they are pass first and defense fell by the waste side. Also, the Big 12 forgot Defense was key in games as I don't care what the hell you say about who they play, they give up a TON of points to any team that has a resemblance of an offense. Get the fuck off the "I HATE THE SEC HURKHURK" soapbox dude. I already said countless times the Big 12 is better, not only to state a fact, but to get you to SHUT THE FUCK UP.

So what, then, was the point in the first place of pointing out that the big 12 teams are built around playing in the big 12? Oh, what's that? There's no point? It's ridiculous? You're just trying to insult the big 12, and when someone says the exact same "fucking duh" statement about the sec, they're wrong and stupid?

Also, one thing. Should we really be talking bowl records when you do have Big Game Bob and Oklahoma in the Big 12? Really?

Awesome, all 4 of your arguments in this post are about how I shouldn't bring up things you or Tyche brought up.

[Plow]

I was going to insult you, which I actually did... but editing the post. You're right about everything Plow. I don't know why I argue with you. Your knowledge clearly exceeds my own, and I have no right to post in this thread. You win.

I hate to be quite that blunt about it, but damn dude, if you can read me saying that the SEC teams are built to compete with the mountain west and not pick up on the sarcasm, you're damn right in this post.

[Bearsan]

Because South Carolina was an unranked team who at the time had a statistical superior defense in all of the NCAA. And again at the time, people were discrediting UGA cause we didnt put 30+ on them. Arizona was given short fields SO many times to work with, and yes it was a great defensive fight, but when given short fields and amazing field position that often and to come up with nothing more often than not is sad.

Also, Southern Cal lost to unranked Oregon State. And somehow they vault teams for no real reason because they hang 69 points on a 0-8 washington team? Please. That is a gnat hanging around because theyre adored by the press. The computers hated them and rightfully so.

So Georgia scoring 14 on South Carolina is because of South Carolina's stellar defense, but Arizona putting 10 on USC is because Arizona is incompetent. Why do you apply a double standard to the Georgia/South Carolina game? Even though you say that the USC/Arizona game was a "great" defensive fight," you imply that Arizona's offensive woes were a result of incompetence and in no way caused by USC's defense.

Regarding USC's loss and current rank: even though Georgia lost to Alabama, I think it's still difficult to say which team is clearly better, given Alabama's close wins since then, and Georgia's beating LSU. However, does anyone really think that because Oregon State beat USC, that Oregon State is arguably the better team overall? USC lost because pride or whatever else prevented them from taking Oregon State seriously, and they allowed Oregon State to be the better team on that day.

Your obsession with how much the media loves USC blinds you from the fact that the lost to Oregon State did effectively take away USC's right to play in the national title game. Any Big-12 or SEC team would have to lose TWICE in order for USC to even be considered. As for the computers, are you really going to trust a system that ranks Ohio State 5th, above Penn State, Georgia, and Florida?