The Goat Pen

KeviNole wrote:Have you forgotten the narrative Doc? The SEC doesn't care about bowl games unless they're championship games.

been three years since the SEC champ won its bowl game...

When the ACC stomps the SEC on rivals weekend, "it's just the SEC East - they suck - the SEC West is where the dominant teams are".

Now that the SEC West has gone 2-5 in its bowl games and the SEC East has gone 5-0, how do you spin it to prove the season's narrative?

Again, I'm not arguing whether the best football is played in the SEC - it is. But it's not THAT much better than the rest of the country, especially in 2014 when there were no really dominant, complete teams and just a lot of very good teams that can beat each other on any given day.

KeviNole wrote:When the ACC stomps the SEC on rivals weekend, "it's just the SEC East - they suck - the SEC West is where the dominant teams are".

Now that the SEC West has gone 2-5 in its bowl games and the SEC East has gone 5-0, how do you spin it to prove the season's narrative?

Again, I'm not arguing whether the best football is played in the SEC - it is. But it's not THAT much better than the rest of the country, especially in 2014 when there were no really dominant, complete teams and just a lot of very good teams that can beat each other on any given day.

1. The narrative that the SEC West is great and the the SEC East is bad was proven wrong.
2. The narrative that the best SEC teams are superior to any other conference's teams was also proven wrong. It was proven in last year's BCSCG. Bama was the only SEC team that was perceived as such as this season progressed. But that turned out to be just force of habit of thinking of Bama as dominant. Instead, a third-string QB from a maligned conference just went out and beat Nick Saban's defense. Issue settled.

The idea that the SEC East is better than the West because of bowl games is just proof that you can't trust bowl records completely. The SEC West and East played a lot of games against each other and the West went 11-4

yea, but they were only playing the SEC East.....

Professor Tiger wrote:Bama was the only SEC team that was perceived as such as this season progressed

I can't agree with that really. Maybe at the end of the regular season when there was only one 1-loss team, but as the majority of the season progressed there was still a strong outcry that the SEC needed two teams in the playoffs because they were so much stronger than the rest of the country. And the first CFP rankings were not released until well into the season's progression, and it included three SEC teams.

UGA may have been the best in the league, with respect to them playing up to their potential was better than anyone else playing up to their potential, but they completely shit the bed against Florida and had a spat of bad luck against Georgia Tech (though Tech played very well in that game).

Teams that play up to their potential (to be the best in their division, not to mention their conference) don't get destroyed by a really bad Florida team.

BTW, if you type "UGA" and "plays up to their potential" in the same sentence on your iphone, it autocorrects. Try it.

I was referring to potential on a game-by-game basis obviously. They beat Clemson, Missouri, Auburn, and Louisville worse than anyone else. If they had a competent QB they probably make the playoffs (not a Hutson Mason fan).

F--- THIS S---

http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2015/7/2 ... uide-curse

well, it WAS right underneath Wake's schedule...

Would FTS be a better option as a 15th/16th team than Cincy or UConn?

Cincy would be the better option in both sports. They are finishing up an $90 million rehab on their football stadium and just announced they are putting another $80 million into rehabbing the basketball arena. Football is not to far removed from back to back BCS Bowl appearances and basketball has finally been restored to top 40 after the whole thing was blown up by that bitch.

I wish you had been blown up by that bitch. Wait, you already were, by your wife. BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!! Ahem...

Shes on welfare. Im not.

Winning!

"back to back BCS Bowl appearances"

a BCS bowl appearance... courtesy of winning the Big East/AAC? please.

hell, UConn can claim they did that. so could Pitt....

The ACC will end up with effing UConn and Cinci by the time this is over. The thought of that makes me sick, but that's the way it is.

dave_rickart wrote:"back to back BCS Bowl appearances"

a BCS bowl appearance... courtesy of winning the Big East/AAC? please.

hell, UConn can claim they did that. so could Pitt....

UC was #3 in the BCS in 2009. Of course the Gators smashed them in the Sugar Bowl which I loved. Butch bailed before that game. Still, you can't ignore that. Comparing them to UConn & Pitt is just plain dumb. Then again, considering....

getting ranked highly because of an easy schedule? no, I didn't ignore that.

and the results in those BCS bowl games bear out my point. combined losses of 71-31

(pretty similiar UConn's result, and Pitt's result, et al)

Its no wonder you are this threads resident idiot.

Don't forget UC was a dropped TD pass x2 at the end of regulation that saved your Suckeyes their 2002 title. Been afraid to play in Cincy ever since.