The Ofiicial SEC is the best conference thread

Well last year, USC beat the #2 team in the Big Ten. Same in 2003 (Orange Bowl), and same this year. Seems that it's actually pretty rare that USC does go up against the "best the Big Ten has to offer". Which is one reason I'm really sick of the Rose Bowl's determination to put together the Big Ten and Pac 10. I think everyone, including the fans of Pac-10 and Big Ten schools, would rather see a good matchup in Pasadena than what we've been getting lately. USC-Georgia would have been an amazing game.

But I don't think a playoff would solve a thing. You'd probably have to have each major conference represented and a few wild cards. Then teams like KU, MU, Georgia would probably be excluded. Or if you base it on rankings, there's a good chance USC wouldn't be included. And the number of games it would require would probably involve shortening the regular season. No thanks.

Just face it - division 1A football is not division 1 basketball. You're not going to know any better who the best team is with a playoff. Of course, maybe it doesn't bother me so much since it's not often that my team is in the hunt for a national title and I find the bowl games pretty interesting.

Lazy L wrote:

Just face it - division 1A football is not division 1 basketball. You're not going to know any better who the best team is with a playoff.

I can accept most of what you said, but this simply isn't true, just like it wouldn't be true for the NFL. You only need two more games, and actually only one more most of the time. I say you take the BCS top 8 and play them off, including all the major bowls in the first round. And every major conference wouldn't and shouldn't be represented (just look at BC-MSU). Here's your top 8 below. OSU would get the benefit of the doubt because they would be seeded #1. But the best team would ultimately rise to the top. And my best educated guess is that it would come from USC, OU, Georgia, and the winner of the OSU-LSU game. The regular season would still matter because a three-loss team would not make it in and seeding would be important. And, by the way, how did Mizzou at #6 in the BCS' own rankings not make a BCS bowl?

Scratch that, BC didn't win the ACC did they. Unfortunately, Va. Tech didn't get a good draw against an overrated KU squad that doesn't belong in a BCS bowl to begin with. And if they lose, well then...

Well OSU and USC play next year early on, so that should be very interesting.

Yes, it should be. Unfortunately, USC will lose half their team to the NFL before then.

The Ofiicial SEC is the best conference thread

_________________________________________________________

Not in spelling.

Do you know who from USC will probably leave? I honestly I have no idea. I haven't followed them a ton this year. I do know that OSU will probably lose at least 3 or 4 underclassmen to the draft, which is a huge loss. But I would expect something roughly similar from USC, correct?

UGA better than LSU? USC would tear LSU apart? You aren't very bright, are you? LSU has earned their shot in the MNC game, going 6-1 against top 20 foes. I could care less that those two played well their last few games, they choked on their chances this year.

UGA needs to shut up and win their own division before they bitch about LSU going to the title. If they had done that, LSU would have disposed of them in the SECCG. LSU/USC, would have loved the matchup but SC choked on it against Stanford. Hottest teams, my arse. LSU takes both of them this year. I'll be enjoying it big time Monday night when LSU walks off with the crystal trophy.

Well, we found out today that Illinois and Hawaii suck and that Georgia and USC sucked during the regular season. No surprises there!!!!!

In a few days we will find out that LSU sucks in the regular season and in bowl games.

Sagarin,

You don't want to face the reality that a football season spans lots of games. So USC finally got it all together in the final game in their own backyard and beat an Illinois team that was just happy to be there (after being 2-10 last season and not in the Rose Bowl since 1984). USC is a good team. They've got superior players to Illinois' team. Good for them. They get NO bragging rights though about what they could do to LSU or OSU, because they didn't do enough during the season to warrant a shot. I don't care if Booty was injured during that Stanford game. That USC team felt they could dial it in, and they obviously couldn't. Inuries are part of the game. What, no other football teams had key injuries? Maybe they're all a bunch of pansies who can't handle the rigors of an entire football season. Ever think of that Sagarin? It's all part of it. Maybe being great 10 of 12 times isn't as good as staying healthy and being very very good 12 times.

USC can try again next year. They even play the Buckeyes, so if they beat them when healthy next year, then USC can actually crow about something. I have no doubt that USC will go in to that OSU game ready to play -- the problem they apparently have is that they can't get up for a Stanford or UCLA game. Pathetic. You'd think they would have learned last year after losing to UCLA.

Sagarin wrote:

Yes, it should be. Unfortunately, USC will lose half their team to the NFL before then.

What's with the excuses? OSU loses half their team every year to the NFL. They were picked to finish 3rd in the Big Ten this year because of all the losses last year and won the conference. You're full of what-ifs and could haves.

Dude, there are games on the schedule. Teams prepare to beat those teams on the schedule. If they don't, they don't make the title game. If they do, they have a shot.

Injries -- OSU's Chris (Beanie) Wells has played with an injured ankle all season. Coach Tressel told him to toughen up and play. He has. USC has a couple injuries and they lose to STANFORD.

Getting the matchup you want -- USC and OSU will play each other early next season, and you are already making excuses. Dude, you like to put the team you say is the best in the best possible circumstance and then say they could win. Hell, take any top 20 team and give them all the advantages and they could probably beat any other team.

Lots of teams are powerful at the end of the season who don't get a shot at the title because they weren't that good all season. Buckeyes ended the 2005 season as perhaps the best team in college football, but you didn't hear me complain that they weren't in the title game. They rode that to the #1 ranking the next season.

USC sure does well in bowl games against other teams who also didn't make the title game.

Wow, what an impressive and predictable response. Yep, apparently in Flagpole's world, winning the regular season is what matters, no matter how weak your schedule, not finding out who the very best team is at the end of the year. Illinois was "just happy to be there," kind of like the Michigan team that everyone was still touting as the second best team in the nation, not just the Big Ten, was simply "flat" from too long a layoff last year. Who's making the excuses? I'm sure we'll hear it all over again after the coming loss to LSU on Monday night. Somehow, USC again manages to struggle mightly in conference, but they put the wood to some of the Big Ten's best teams. 49-17 over the ONLY team that could play with OSU. You're just glad you're not playing them when it matters, at the END of the season rather than the beginning. You're right about one thing though. Illinois definitely did not have the athletes to match SC.

It is "I COULDN'T CARE LESS"If you COULD care less then that means you do care about it. Please use the saying the correct way!!

mdobb wrote:

UGA better than LSU? USC would tear LSU apart? You aren't very bright, are you? LSU has earned their shot in the MNC game, going 6-1 against top 20 foes. I could care less that those two played well their last few games....

You're incredible Flagpole. We're talking KEY injuries, like your QB BREAKS HIS FINGER and throws five picks. Like your offensive linemen go down. We're not talking about just losing a wide receiver, which are pretty much a dime a dozen. And as for this regular season bullshit, you're right, I don't very much care who wins against OSU-USC at the beginning of the season (just like I don't put much emphasis on the regular season at all). To you, it will reveal who the best team is that can carry that mantle for the entire season. To me, it doesn't mean anything about who is the best at the end of the season, WHEN IT REALLY MATTERS.

Tell the best NFL teams that they don't get a shot because they lost 4, 5, or 6 games during the regular season. Tell that to the Pittsburgh Steelers of about three years ago who barely even made the playoffs but went on to beat everyone convincingly. Winning the regular season as OSU seems to prioritize doesn't mean shit in the grand scheme of things, other than that they get a good seed. There are at least four teams that could easily dispose of OSU right now, and there's NO WAY OSU makes it through an eight team playoff, because there are BETTER teams out there.

Let me jog your memory Flagpole. OSU beat Texas early last year and got to carry that "clout" all the way to the title game. Very meaningful stat to you I'm sure, but only you.

Dude, get all excited about USC beating Illinois if you want. Just because they beat Illinois doesn't mean they could beat OSU. Michigan also beat Illinios and Ohio State took Michigan apart this year in poor conditions in Ann Arbor.

I never said winning the regular season is what matters, but you need to win the regular season to get to the only game that matters -- the national championship game. Winning the Rose Bowl is nice, but it's a consolation prize brother. You can't say that winning a non-championship bowl game proves anything. Buckeyes have to play the only other team worthy of a national title shot. Playing a team with THAT mentality is MUCH MUCH better than playing a team who lost to Stanford.

If USC the last two years had lost to GOOD teams in the Pac-10, then you'd have a point, but to "struggle mightly" in conference against UCLA and Stanford in consecutive years shows that USC doesn't know how to prepare for each and every game. Strength of their conference has nothing to do with it when they lose to such poor teams as UCLA and Stanford. Try again.

Dude, you are full of it.

1) OSU does not prioritize winning the regular season. OSU prioritizes getting to the national championship game and winning titles.

2) Don't give me the crap about weak out of conference schedules either. OSU played TEXAS last year and the year before, and Miami, FL before that and USC the next two years. This ONE year happened to be a down year when Washington wasn't that good.

3) If Booty had a broken finger and couldn't throw, then they should have put in his backup. To bitch about it afterwards is for losers.

4) You should care who wins in a big matchup at the beginning of the season because all the games count brother. This is the first year in the history of the BCS that a 2-loss team got in the title game. Most seasons you'd better be undefeated or maybe get in with one loss. One loss can wreck your season. Those are the rules. I didn't make the rules. You just want different rules. I'm fine if there are different rules, but there aren't different rules, and so the regular season counts big time whether you want it to or not.

5) USC just beat the #13 team in the country. OSU and LSU have to play each other (#1 vs. #2). Can you really compare beating a #13 team to having to beat a #1 or #2 team? Get serious.

6) Actually there are not at least 4 teams out there that could dispose of OSU. There's only one that could -- LSU. The others didn't prove to be worthy enough. Those regular season games aren't just for your entertainment. They actually count. Ohio State knows this better than any team I've ever seen. Coach Tressel talks the talk and walks that walk. He's right too. Plan to beat each team (each team no matter how bad they are "STANFORD" takes special focus and planning; OSU did that well this year; USC didn't), and if you do then you have a good chance at a title shot at the end of the season.

7) You saying that no way OSU makes it through an 8-team playoff is as silly as saying that OSU couldn't win on the moon. It's not part of the reality. OSU has been doing very well with the reality of college football. Those who don't do well with the reality always want something better. I think Ohio State would do just fine anyway even in a playoff. They have superior coaches and outstanding athletes that go the NFL every year. They recruit nationally. But, it's a silly argument. There is no playoff -- well, other than the regular season, and guess who fared well there? GO BUCKS!

Dude, I can see I'm getting nowhere, so I will leave this for now. You have NO argument from me that under the CURRENT BCS rules, the regular season matters. Did you hear that? I am not arguing that point with you and I never have been. You can keep saying it until you're blue in the face, and you'd still be missing the point entirely. I simply want to see the two best teams matchup at the end of the season (rather than the beginning). I want to know who the best team is, not the team that played a soft schedule to get to the title game, a team that would have two or more losses themselves in the SEC or Big 12. And we simply cannot, will not know who the best team is without taking into consideration who is peaking at the right time. The regular season is also about preparation, at least in every other sport known to man. Funny though, how you are touting LSU's credibility now that you have a reason to, whereas before you, and you practically alone, were ridiculing the team a mere seven or so weeks ago. There's a word for that.

If OSU somehow manages to eke out a win over LSU, only Buckeye fans specifically, and Big Ten fans, more generally, will believe that OSU is the best team in the nation, not merely the BCS champ. And that's sad. And if they don't. Well, then they will have beaten no top 20 teams this year. Think about that.