Ohio State v. LSU

Off Topic
21

[quote]rainjack wrote:
That’s arguable. Mizzou is a top 5 team, as is Kansas, and Oklahoma. VaTech should feel screwed over because they played their way in. They are just a decent team in a weak conference though.

I agree with your last statement 100%. Too bad the money talks and everything else walks.

[/quote]

The Big 12 is pretty over rated right now too. OU and Texas are the only real good teams. It has now gotten to a point in the Big 12 North where some of the teams are so bad that the sheer difference between them and MU/KU make MU/KU look much better than they actually are. Mizzou may be a top 10 team, KU is top 20 at best, but of course without a playoff this is all speculation and very difficult to argue.

22

[quote]tedro wrote:
rainjack wrote:
That’s arguable. Mizzou is a top 5 team, as is Kansas, and Oklahoma. VaTech should feel screwed over because they played their way in. They are just a decent team in a weak conference though.

I agree with your last statement 100%. Too bad the money talks and everything else walks.

The Big 12 is pretty over rated right now too. OU and Texas are the only real good teams. It has now gotten to a point in the Big 12 North where some of the teams are so bad that the sheer difference between them and MU/KU make MU/KU look much better than they actually are. Mizzou may be a top 10 team, KU is top 20 at best, but of course without a playoff this is all speculation and very difficult to argue.
[/quote]

I disagree. KU goes 11-1, and they are only a top 20 team at best? Mizzou loses twice to OU, and they are only top 10? No one in the big 10 could get through the B-12 South without, probably 2 losses. VaTech would be hard pressed to even be bowl eligible in the Big 12. I am as tired as anyone of it always being ou/tu.

You say the Big-12 is a weak conference, I say it is so strong from the middle up it canabilizes itself. Granted there are some suck ass teams in the Big 12, but our Baylor is the SEC’s Vandy.

I hate to say it, but Texas Tech fucked up the best shot we had at a decent Championship game when they schooled OU. But there again - from the middle up - the Big 12 is too strong to escape hurting itself.

23

rainjack, the Big 10 has a winning record against the SEC and was 2-1 last year. Yes Ohio State was blown out and is the only reason this is being brought up. I believe not to long ago OU was blown out in a championship game. Also didn’t Ohio State beat Texas pretty good last year?

24

[quote]rainjack wrote:
…
I hate to say it, but Texas Tech fucked up the best shot we had at a decent Championship game when they schooled OU. But there again - from the middle up - the Big 12 is too strong to escape hurting itself.
[/quote]

A 7-point home win after OU loses their QB on the first snap of the ballgame is a schooling?

25

[quote]bucknut wrote:
rainjack, the Big 10 has a winning record against the SEC and was 2-1 last year. Yes Ohio State was blown out and is the only reason this is being brought up. I believe not to long ago OU was blown out in a championship game. Also didn’t Ohio State beat Texas pretty good last year?[/quote]

Texas sucked last year. ANd the year before Texas went to the horseshoe and schooled OSU, going on to win the national championship.

The Big-10 is weak. I don’t know what to tell you. None of the powerhouses in that conference could get to a conference championship game in any real conference. Sorry.

26

Texas sucked last year at 10-3? And how is 25-22 getting schooled? You keep saying the Big-10 is weak but not providing a reason why.

Ohio State who is supposed to be slow and not very good is like 3-1 or 4-1 in BCS games. The only team better in the past few years is USC.

27

Ohio State will win,
Sec conference is the best overall, but this year there is no Dominant team in the SEC or country as a whole.
Oklahoma is my Number 1.
I still don’t understand how you have a 2 loss record with LSU, Beat the number 1 team in the nation and not end up ranked 1 or 2.

28

[quote]bucknut wrote:
Texas sucked last year at 10-3? And how is 25-22 getting schooled? You keep saying the Big-10 is weak but not providing a reason why.

Ohio State who is supposed to be slow and not very good is like 3-1 or 4-1 in BCS games. The only team better in the past few years is USC.[/quote]

OSU is 0-8 against SEC schools in BCS bowls. USC is a fabrication of the media, much like the rest of the PAC-10 and Big-10.

Yes, Texas was a bad team last year. They are not much better this year, but still put an ass whipping on ASU last night. Until they get a decent QB - and Colt McCoy is no where close - Texas will continue to be a disappointment.

29

[quote]rainjack wrote:
OSU is 0-8 against SEC schools in BCS bowls. USC is a fabrication of the media, much like the rest of the PAC-10 and Big-10.[/quote]

I wouldn’t call USC a media fabrication. ESPN and co. overrates them considerably, but they are still a very good football program.

I think the past 40 years have proven that unless Texas has a transcendent, once-in-a-generation talent like Vince Young (i.e. much more than just decent QB), they will always be a disappointment.

They’re all hat, no cattle. Always have been.

30

OSU is 0-8 against the SEC in Bowl games, not BCS bowl games.

The Big-10 however does not have a losing record to the SEC. And as I have said Ohio State has been one of the most dominating teams since the BCS started.

It is convenient for you to just say texas was no good when we beat them bad at there house (I believe the ended the season top 15) but then bring up our 3 point loss to them, when they were no doubt the best team in the country.

31

Go Bucks!

Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

32

[quote]rainjack wrote:
tom63 wrote:

You know, the south didn’t invent football, win the civil war, etc. There are good teams everywhere.

Just not in the Big 10

PSU was an independent until money, bowl money, forced them to whore out to the highest bidder.

[/quote]

Ughh, there are a lot of teams in conferences if you haven’t noticed. Are they all whores? Joining a conference was practically a necessity in the early nineties.

33

[quote]tom63 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
tom63 wrote:

You know, the south didn’t invent football, win the civil war, etc. There are good teams everywhere.

Just not in the Big 10

PSU was an independent until money, bowl money, forced them to whore out to the highest bidder.

Ughh, there are a lot of teams in conferences if you haven’t noticed. Are they all whores? Joining a conference was practically a necessity in the early nineties.

[/quote]

As far as I know - Notre Dame is the only school who has not given in to joining a conference. There used to be a bunch of schools that were independents. PSU, Pitt, and ND have all won National Championships as independents.

Like you say, it’s just the way it is - money. PSU went with the best bet for making money, and that was to go to the Big-10 over the Big East, or the ACC.

I wasn’t slamming them, just stating a fact.

I can’t really consider Penn State as a member of the Big-10. It just makes me feel dirty.

But lest you think I am picking on your Lions - The Southwest Conference had to completely disband and go groveling to the Big-8, and they only took 4 schools.

34

[quote]rainjack wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Ughh, there are a lot of teams in conferences if you haven’t noticed. Are they all whores? Joining a conference was practically a necessity in the early nineties.

As far as I know - Notre Dame is the only school who has not given in to joining a conference. There used to be a bunch of schools that were independents. PSU, Pitt, and ND have all won National Championships as independents.
[/quote]

Army and Navy are two other traditional independents, Western Kentucky is also currently independent.

35

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I disagree. KU goes 11-1, and they are only a top 20 team at best? Mizzou loses twice to OU, and they are only top 10? No one in the big 10 could get through the B-12 South without, probably 2 losses. VaTech would be hard pressed to even be bowl eligible in the Big 12. I am as tired as anyone of it always being ou/tu.

You say the Big-12 is a weak conference, I say it is so strong from the middle up it canabilizes itself. Granted there are some suck ass teams in the Big 12, but our Baylor is the SEC’s Vandy.

I hate to say it, but Texas Tech fucked up the best shot we had at a decent Championship game when they schooled OU. But there again - from the middle up - the Big 12 is too strong to escape hurting itself.
[/quote]

I’m not talking about rankings by record, MU and KU are ranked appropriately by record. My point is that KU has beaten NO ONE that gives you reason to claim they are any better than a top 20 team. NO ONE!

If Ohio St. were in the Big 12 North, they would have advanced to the Big 12 championship game with 1-loss to a Big 12 south team. MU could give them a close game, but that would be the only real competition in the North.

36

[quote]tedro wrote:
rainjack wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Ughh, there are a lot of teams in conferences if you haven’t noticed. Are they all whores? Joining a conference was practically a necessity in the early nineties.

As far as I know - Notre Dame is the only school who has not given in to joining a conference. There used to be a bunch of schools that were independents. PSU, Pitt, and ND have all won National Championships as independents.

Army and Navy are two other traditional independents, Western Kentucky is also currently independent.[/quote]

Navy’s in a conference I thought - maybe just basketball. I don’t know.

37

[quote]tedro wrote:
I’m not talking about rankings by record, MU and KU are ranked appropriately by record. My point is that KU has beaten NO ONE that gives you reason to claim they are any better than a top 20 team. NO ONE!
[/quote]

Same argument could be made about Hawaii.

The North has sucked ass since Osborne took a powder. I’ll agree with you here - assuming that OSU got a cake schedule against the South teams. Really, there is only one bonafide suck team in the South, and that would be Baylor.

38

[quote]rainjack wrote:
tedro wrote:

The North has sucked ass since Osborne took a powder. I’ll agree with you here - assuming that OSU got a cake schedule against the South teams. Really, there is only one bonafide suck team in the South, and that would be Baylor.
[/quote]

When the Big XII conference was forming, the Big 8 was taking three Texas schools (Texas, Tx A, and TTech) from the Southwest Conference, and the last school was actually down between Baylor and Arkansas.

If the Big XII would have gotten Arkansas, no one could run with the Big XII South. Heck, if the Big XII south was its own conference with Arkansas, it would be one of the best in the nation, if not the best.

This is hearsay, but I heard Baylor was chosen because (1) keep all new member schools from Texas, and (2) academic purposes, make the Big XII look good, although Texas and Tx A have very good reputations as good academic schools.

But back to the original question, I’m still going with LSU in a blowout.

39

[quote]tmoney1 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
tedro wrote:

The North has sucked ass since Osborne took a powder. I’ll agree with you here - assuming that OSU got a cake schedule against the South teams. Really, there is only one bonafide suck team in the South, and that would be Baylor.

When the Big XII conference was forming, the Big 8 was taking three Texas schools (Texas, Tx A, and TTech) from the Southwest Conference, and the last school was actually down between Baylor and Arkansas.

If the Big XII would have gotten Arkansas, no one could run with the Big XII South. Heck, if the Big XII south was its own conference with Arkansas, it would be one of the best in the nation, if not the best.

This is hearsay, but I heard Baylor was chosen because (1) keep all new member schools from Texas, and (2) academic purposes, make the Big XII look good, although Texas and Tx A have very good reputations as good academic schools.

But back to the original question, I’m still going with LSU in a blowout.[/quote]

Arkansas had already left the SWC and defected to the SEC. I would find it hard to believe that they would leave the SECfor the the Big 12.

What I heard was that the Big 8 took all the teams that were not in a major media market (SMU, TCU, Houston, and Rice were left out) so that no one team had a media advantage over the original 8. But that’s just what I heard.

As a long suffering Red Raider fan, it is just one disappointing year after another. Tech is the only school in the Big 12 to have a winning record every season since the inception of the conference, but they never put an entire season together. If we only had a damn defense.

40

[quote]rainjack wrote:
tedro wrote:
I’m not talking about rankings by record, MU and KU are ranked appropriately by record. My point is that KU has beaten NO ONE that gives you reason to claim they are any better than a top 20 team. NO ONE!

Same argument could be made about Hawaii.
[/quote]
I think you are misinterpretting me a bit. When I say KU is not a top 20 team, I mean that I don’t think they are one of the 20 best teams in the Nation. However, based on our current ranking system, I do think they are ranked appropriately. I don’t think Hawaii is really the best team in the country, but I do think they should be ranked #1. We have a system in place, a flawed one, but there is a system. If we go by the system then Hawaii should indeed be #1 as they are the only undefeated teams.

We are in agreeance on most of this, except I really don’t think KU is that good of a team.