2012 College Football Offseason Thread

[NOLA]

Oh, okay, you're a "we'll see if they can beat Vandy" guy. Carry on.

 

I'm not sure what "that" guy is, but I'm not being an SEC homer whatsoever. Do not dismiss Vanderbilt because they're Vandy. That is a tough team that gave everyone fits last year.

 

After losing at South Carolina and at Bama, they had Arkansas, Georgia and Florida on the ropes before losing nailbiters at the end by a combined 13 points. They return their starting QB, running back, leading receiver and most of their defense. So yes, we will see if they beat Vandy. If they do, which is definitely posible, they will have beaten a solid team.

 

Don't mean to disappoint your expectations by bringing facts into this.

[SouthSideRyan]

TT's going to love the SEC

[Guest]

Comparing college football teams is a tortuous enough experience without considering the offseason changes, and the lack of history with a new conference mate. I'll leave it at this.

 

You're extolling the virtues of a team that had a losing record last year, whose senior class has 10 wins in their career. You're calling their road game against Mizzou, a team who hasn't won less than 8 games since Bush's 1st term, who returns a very good QB in a program that wins 10 games when they have experience at the position; a toss up for Mizzou. I think it's safe to say that I'm going to fundamentally disagree with your valuations of the rest of the conference as well.

 

And that's fine, maybe I'm the dope who doesn't know what Mizzou got themselves into. As I see it, I expect Mizzou will lose to Alabama. I expect they'll beat Kentucky and Vanderbilt. I'll be disappointed but understanding of road hazards if they don't beat Tennessee and aTm(making 3 straight years winning at College Station). And I consider the remaining 3 games against Georgia, SC, and Florida tossups to varying degrees. I'm expecting 8 wins, wanting 9, and hoping for 10.

 

With the way the schedule works out, I think that competing for the East is well within the realm of possibility. I know that flies in the face of the reverence that it seems the SEC is anticipating, but that's okay with me. I hold no illusions of duking it out with Bama, LSU, or whoever the National Title contender happens to be in a particular year. But the middle of the SEC does not scare me, as Mizzou has shown their quality for years now, and that hasn't changed when they happen to be matched against the SEC.

[NOLA]

I think the only disagreement I have with you are the SC and maybe the Vandy game.

 

As for that Cotton Bowl vs. Arkansas, you're talking about a UA team that had just fired their Head Coach and DMac and Felix Jones already had one foot in the NFL draft. They had talked about not even suiting up after Nutt was canned. Agree to disagree.

 

To sum it up, I think neither Texas A&M nor Mizzou understand the grind that's the SEC schedule. Sure, teams can get up for a bowl game, but that's not the whole story. It's one week after having to play Bama or LSU, you have to face a physical Carolina team. The next week face a down but talented Auburn or Miss State. The biggest reason Bama and LSU are dominant isn't so much the starters, it's the NFL talent they have in their 3 deep roster. Outside of Ole Miss, there are no Indianas, Dukes or Kansas's on the schedule. If you don't get up to play at Neyland Stadium you'll lose.

 

All that said, I think the USC Trojans are the best team in the country.

[Magnetic Curses]

please take the SEC talk to some forum that [expletive] cares

[Tracer Bullet]

USC may have the best top talent in the country but boy do they seem shallow.

[Magnetic Curses]

that goes for any talk of texas football too, you cretins

[NOLA]

please take the SEC talk to some forum that [expletive] cares

 

I was under the impression the the SEC was still a part of college football. My bad. I'll start brushing up on my Northwestern and Purdue knowledge.

[Guest]

I don't agree. The strength of the SEC is not in a meat grinder of depth, but it's that they annually have 2 teams that are very, very, very good. They do a great job of psychological anchoring to make everyone else seem better as a result. Case in point, "If you don't get up to play at Neyland Stadium you'll lose". Tennessee has lost 11 home games the last 4 years, including to such powerhouses as Wyoming and UCLA. By that standard, the SEC should be terrified of playing at Mizzou, with their 6 home losses the last 6 years

[NOLA]

USC may have the best top talent in the country but boy do they seem shallow.

 

It just seems that they have a pretty mediocre schedule. If they can get through that unscathed, then the lack of depth in a one game championship won't be as glaring.

[NOLA]

I don't agree. The strength of the SEC is not in a meat grinder of depth, but it's that they annually have 2 teams that are very, very, very good. They do a great job of psychological anchoring to make everyone else seem better as a result. Case in point, "If you don't get up to play at Neyland Stadium you'll lose". Tennessee has lost 11 home games the last 4 years, including to such powerhouses as Wyoming and UCLA. By that standard, the SEC should be terrified of playing at Mizzou, with their 6 home losses the last 6 years

 

 

I disagree. Year after year the SEC has a solid if not dominating bowl record, speaking to the depth of good teams. We'll see.

[SouthSideRyan]

that goes for any talk of texas football too, you cretins

 

I hear Ball State's future is looking up.

[Andy]

I don't agree. The strength of the SEC is not in a meat grinder of depth, but it's that they annually have 2 teams that are very, very, very good. They do a great job of psychological anchoring to make everyone else seem better as a result. Case in point, "If you don't get up to play at Neyland Stadium you'll lose". Tennessee has lost 11 home games the last 4 years, including to such powerhouses as Wyoming and UCLA. By that standard, the SEC should be terrified of playing at Mizzou, with their 6 home losses the last 6 years

 

 

I disagree. Year after year the SEC has a solid if not dominating bowl record, speaking to the depth of good teams. We'll see.

Oh good, we're using bowls to fight the conference pissing contest again.

[NOLA]

I don't agree. The strength of the SEC is not in a meat grinder of depth, but it's that they annually have 2 teams that are very, very, very good. They do a great job of psychological anchoring to make everyone else seem better as a result. Case in point, "If you don't get up to play at Neyland Stadium you'll lose". Tennessee has lost 11 home games the last 4 years, including to such powerhouses as Wyoming and UCLA. By that standard, the SEC should be terrified of playing at Mizzou, with their 6 home losses the last 6 years

 

 

I disagree. Year after year the SEC has a solid if not dominating bowl record, speaking to the depth of good teams. We'll see.

Oh good, we're using bowls to fight the conference pissing contest again.

 

 

OK, the last 6 national titles have been won by 4 different SEC teams.

Somehow this discussion went from thoughts on the SEC teams in the preseason Top 25 to my being a spokesman for the conference. I yield the floor.

[SpongeWorthy]

USC is the only program in the country that can stop the perennial SEC gravy train to the national title.

 

Discuss.

[Andy]

USC is the only program in the country that can stop the perennial SEC gravy train to the national title.

 

Discuss.

I hate you. :twisted:

[minnesotacubsfan]

Notre Dame is a bunch of chokers.

Discuss.

[shnsajax]

Texas

Texas

Texas

Texas

Texas

[Magnetic Curses]

please take the SEC talk to some forum that [expletive] cares

 

I was under the impression the the SEC was still a part of college football. My bad. I'll start brushing up on my Northwestern and Purdue knowledge.

 

let me clarify for you, arkansas is the most boring-ass program to a chicago cubs message board, literally no one who matters thinks about arkansas. no one cares about the sec except maybe missouri or tennessee but all programs should generally be avoided.

 

the big ten is fine except for penn state, whose discussion should be kept to the sandusky thread in rants. the jury is out on nebraska, but they get the benefit of the doubt.

 

the pac-12 is fine.

 

the big 12 or whatever is fine outside of texas or any school contained within the state. texas has numerous boards where maniacs can actually discuss the pointless program, but it has no relevance in this forum.

 

notre dame football is fine but notre dame basketball isn't, as only a crazy person would care about it.

 

big east football is generally stupid and should be shunned.

[Tracer Bullet]

Nebraska sucks

[Magnetic Curses]

Nebraska sucks

 

but i like their coach

[shnsajax]

Nebraska sucks

 

but i like their coach

 

Which says a lot.

[Magnetic Curses]

can you talk about texas football in the soccer thread please

[shnsajax]

can you talk about texas football in the soccer thread please

 

I could Clint Dempsey is a fan being from Texas and all.

[CubInOK]

Sweet, sulley didn't include OU.

 

Apparently the Sooners stole some Penn State guy today.