Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Specific failings? You think that was a fluke? You think that team was going to be even close to USC, Florida, Cal, or LSU? So Michigan getting worked by USC was also a fluke? That Texas team was one VY knee injury away from completely self-destructing. You put any other quarterback on that team, including Leinart, and had Booty start for USC they would have won. So somehow if Texas beats USC in a nailbiter I cannot argue that calling Texas better is being results oriented, while you can argue calling tOSU wildly overrated for letting Michigan run up 39 and then Florida 41 in a blowout is results oriented garbage? Face it, they had no defense, it just looked that way because they played a bunch of terrible teams. I also guarantee tOSU gets destroyed if they play an SEC or Pac10 team in the NCF

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey -- The Big 10 is 9-6 in bowl games against the SEC in the past 5 years.

Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]
They're 2-5 to the Pac10 in the last 5 years. And, their last win against the pac10 in a bowl game came 4 years ago. Thanks.

Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007 *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by MEbenhoe

Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007 *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by MEbenhoe

Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

They're 2-5 to the Pac10 in the last 5 years. And dipshlt, their last win against the pac10 in a bowl game came 4 years ago. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

USC 32, Michigan 18
UCLA 50, Northwestern 38


USC 28, Michigan 14
Minnesota 31, Oregon 30
USC 38, Iowa 17
Purdue 34, Washington 24

I see 4-2. And they've played 2 games in the last 4 years, both Pac10 wins. What am I missing?

[/ QUOTE ]
you're missing asu-purdue from a couple years back

[/ QUOTE ]

So when you said 2-5 you actually meant 5-3? Or what?

Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007
 

My take on Lloyd (as a Michigan fan):

I think people rip Lloyd for the wrong reasons. The big knock is "he refuses to innovate." Well that is true, but only to a point. When Michigan has been the underdog, Lloyd and his staff have been willing to try different things and that has generally been successful- his record against the top 10 is excellent.

But as a fan I think he has to go because whenever we get into the top 5 its back to the old "We're Michigan and we will win running the same offense we've run since Bo and I don't care if they know what's coming because if we execute we will in the game." Examples include opening 80% of drives with runs over Long, always running towards a FB shift/motion, failing to tailor play calling to the defense's weaknesses, etc.

We do not lose because "the South and West have more speed." We lose because we fail to adjust out of arrogance and our poor schemes have players out of position and looking slow.

Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Specific failings? You think that was a fluke? You think that team was going to be even close to USC, Florida, Cal, or LSU? So Michigan getting worked by USC was also a fluke? That Texas team was one VY knee injury away from completely self-destructing. You put any other quarterback on that team, including Leinart, and had Booty start for USC they would have won. So somehow if Texas beats USC in a nailbiter I cannot argue that calling Texas better is being results oriented, while you can argue calling tOSU wildly overrated for letting Michigan run up 39 and then Florida 41 in a blowout is results oriented garbage? Face it, they had no defense, it just looked that way because they played a bunch of terrible teams. I also guarantee tOSU gets destroyed if they play an SEC or Pac10 team in the NCF

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey -- The Big 10 is 9-6 in bowl games against the SEC in the past 5 years.

Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]
They're 2-5 to the Pac10 in the last 5 years. And, their last win against the pac10 in a bowl game came 4 years ago. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

take away USC and the big ten crushes the pac10

so there!

Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007
 

[ QUOTE ]

take away USC and the big ten crushes the pac10

so there!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm getting leveled, aren't I?

Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Semtex- It was a good idea not to mention Wisconsin beating Auburn and Penn State beating Tennessee in their respective bowl games when your theory is that the SEC outclasses the Big Ten significantly.

It's rather clear that you don't follow college football outside of USC, maybe you shouldn't try to speak with authority about [censored] you don't know?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm convinced he doesn't know anything about USC football either, claiming they are good after getting beat by an awful Stanford team and nearly getting beaten by an awful Arizona team.

[/ QUOTE ]
yeah right and last year i claimed usc was still one of the top teams in the country after losing to OSU and you guys all said i was an idiot. shows what you guys know.

EDIT: also flywf, you could have said i only follow pac10 football and you might have been halfway right. But to say i ONLY follow USC is pretty moronic. Do you see me posting in any baseball threads or anything like that? Those are things i legitimately don't follow so I don't post about them.

Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

take away USC and the big ten crushes the pac10

so there!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm getting leveled, aren't I?

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope so


anyway, the point that the Big11Ten has played one game under .500 in bowls v the Pac10/SEC over the last 5 years speaks to the general parity among BCS conferences in NCAAF

Yes, I've argued Pac10 number one and SEC number 1B. But, the differences between them and the BigEast, Big11Ten, BigXII, and ACC are not as HUGE as many like to believe.

Re: OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank\'em thread: October 14, 2007
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

take away USC and the big ten crushes the pac10

so there!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm getting leveled, aren't I?

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope so


anyway, the point that the Big11Ten has played one game under .500 in bowls v the Pac10/SEC over the last 5 years speaks to the general parity among BCS conferences in NCAAF

Yes, I've argued Pac10 number one and SEC number 1B. But, the differences between them and the BigEast, Big11Ten, BigXII, and ACC are not as HUGE as many like to believe.

[/ QUOTE ]
yeah i was always under the impression the big10 was far behind the the other 2. the blowouts last year of ohio state and mich confirmed that in my head, but going back and looking at all the games they are all more or less even. i went through all the scores between the SEC and Big10 bowl games of the last 4 years trying to find some disparity favoring the SEC and it came back almost even, like 125-124 or something.