If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Aww, how cute. People still think that Ohio State can compete against SEC teams   (sports.yahoo.com) divider line 125
    More: Amusing, Ohio State, Pat Forde, Ohio Stadium, Big House, Percy Harvin, tandems, Brady Hoke, Southeastern Conference  
•       •       •

1930 clicks; posted to Sports » on 13 Aug 2013 at 12:57 PM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



125 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-13 11:33:35 PM
Oh yeah, the SEC, where Alabama has to play this ridiculously hard schedule:

08/31/13 vs. Virginia Tech Atlanta, Ga. 4:30 p.m. CT UNRANKED
09/14/13 at Texas A&M * College Station, Texas 2:30 p.m. CT #6
09/21/13 vs. Colorado State Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
09/28/13 vs. Ole Miss *Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
10/05/13 vs. Georgia State Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
10/12/13 at Kentucky *Lexington, Ky. TBA UNRANKED
10/19/13 vs. Arkansas *Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
10/26/13 vs. Tennessee *Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
11/09/13 vs. LSU *Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA #13
11/16/13 at Mississippi State *Starkville, Miss. TBA UNRANKED
11/23/13 vs. Chattanooga Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
11/30/13 at Auburn *Auburn, Ala. TBA UNRANKED

Wow, that schedule is sooooo hard. Typical SEC team- schedule a shiat schedule and then proclaim you're the best when you beat farking Chattanooga by 60. GFY.
 
2013-08-13 11:37:18 PM

Your Average Witty Fark User: Wow, that schedule is sooooo hard. Typical SEC team- schedule a shiat schedule and then proclaim you're the best when you beat farking Chattanooga by 60. GFY.


Yeah, it's totally Alabama's fault that Virginia Tech is unranked.  Seriously, get a new meme.
 
2013-08-13 11:38:13 PM

pissnmoan: There really aren't many softies (besides Mizzou) in the SEC.


Did Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Auburn all leave the SEC?
 
2013-08-13 11:44:57 PM

flak attack: UGA will never win a title with Mark Richt as head coach.


I had a similar view until last year's SEC Championship.
That seriously changed my opinion of him.
 
2013-08-13 11:47:53 PM

Mentat: Prove it how?  By winning the National Championship Game?


Only if they win the semifinal game first.  It opens up the ability of other teams to win the NC that would have no shot in the BCS System.
 
2013-08-13 11:50:13 PM

Mentat: Your Average Witty Fark User: Wow, that schedule is sooooo hard. Typical SEC team- schedule a shiat schedule and then proclaim you're the best when you beat farking Chattanooga by 60. GFY.

Yeah, it's totally Alabama's fault that Virginia Tech is unranked.  Seriously, get a new meme.


And you know by the end of the season at least 4 of those unranked teams are going to be ranked.
 
2013-08-14 02:21:28 AM

HeadLever: Only if they win the semifinal game first.


Oh, you mean the SEC Championship Game?
 
2013-08-14 02:29:39 AM

T-Boy: The way things stand, it will be 2 teams from the SEC, Notre Dame (for no good reason) and a sacrificial lamb "surprise team" like Louisville. That is why the SEC pushed for a playoff and conferences other than the SEC voted against any kind of playoff until they had no more choice. SEC leaning media pushed for the playoff for years and so many suckers across the country fell into line, not realizing that this will mean that big post-season money will flow almost entirely to the SEC and the handful of other super-big teams. If you live in the North, Midwest or West, or root for a team in a mid-level conference,how does it feel to be locked out?


About the same as Norwegian soccer fans did when Rosenborg was winning 15 straight league titles, running from 1990-2004.

Their response? A lot of them just stopped watching. They gave up. It was a foregone conclusion and not any fun anymore. Those who stuck around just started wearing neutral colors, colors that no club was using, and rooting for anyone to win that wasn't Rosenborg. It didn't even matter if it was their own club's biggest rival. Just as long as Rosenborg lost.

The second Rosenborg lost, fans were back in the seats in droves.
 
2013-08-14 05:54:53 AM

redmid17: How did I get dragged into this post?


Yeah, there's a post or two that are completely missing from last night.  No idea why, I didn't see anything worth deleting.
 
2013-08-14 08:33:35 AM

Your Average Witty Fark User: Oh yeah, the SEC, where Alabama has to play this ridiculously hard schedule:

08/31/13 vs. Virginia Tech Atlanta, Ga. 4:30 p.m. CT UNRANKED
09/14/13 at Texas A&M * College Station, Texas 2:30 p.m. CT #6
09/21/13 vs. Colorado State Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
09/28/13 vs. Ole Miss *Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
10/05/13 vs. Georgia State Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
10/12/13 at Kentucky *Lexington, Ky. TBA UNRANKED
10/19/13 vs. Arkansas *Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
10/26/13 vs. Tennessee *Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
11/09/13 vs. LSU *Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA #13
11/16/13 at Mississippi State *Starkville, Miss. TBA UNRANKED
11/23/13 vs. Chattanooga Tuscaloosa, Ala. TBA UNRANKED
11/30/13 at Auburn *Auburn, Ala. TBA UNRANKED

Wow, that schedule is sooooo hard. Typical SEC team- schedule a shiat schedule and then proclaim you're the best when you beat farking Chattanooga by 60. GFY.


Those are the preseason rankings, which mean nothing.  I would bet by the end of the season they will have played at least 4 teams ranked at the time of the game.  Also, they have no control over the SEC schedule.  It rotates every year and this year happens to be the year they miss South Carolina, Florida and Georgia.  While you can argue about the non-conference schedule being very weak, they had no idea when they scheduled Virginia Tech 4-5 years ago that they would be unranked this year.  One other thing, I am not an ALA apologist but the SEC's scheduling where they give teams off weeks in October and November causes part of this.  Other teams are knee deep in their conference schedules by October so the number of teams ALA can schedule on Nov 23 is pretty limited.  This is one of the reasons the SEC is going to a 9 game conference schedule in a couple years.
 
2013-08-14 09:52:04 AM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Frankly, the very worst teams in the NFL would have to actually try in order to beat the top teams in the SEC.

Sure, the physical size of the NFL players would carry the day, but LSU/Bama could at least put some serious points on the board first.


No. You're telling me that a team of 18-22 year olds in top physical shape has a shot against a team of 23-28 year olds in top physical shape?

Outside of the fact that the starting talent pool for the NFL is bigger, the players are in the peak years of their life physically and the number of roster spots is smaller.

A terrible NFL team would destroy a college team.
 
2013-08-14 10:45:12 AM

Mentat: Oh, you mean the SEC Championship Game?


Are you unaware of the new system being enacted?  The new playoff format will take place after all confrence championship games.  This includes the SEC Championship Game.
 
2013-08-14 11:08:52 AM

HeadLever: Mentat: Oh, you mean the SEC Championship Game?

Are you unaware of the new system being enacted?  The new playoff format will take place after all confrence championship games.  This includes the SEC Championship Game.


Are you unaware of how easy it is to poke SEC haters?  Never mind, don't answer that.
 
2013-08-14 12:13:02 PM

Mentat: Are you unaware of how easy it is to poke SEC haters?


I really don't mind the SEC in this context.  If the NC game becomes a rematch of the SEC Championship Game because they beat eveyone during the playoffs, then the more power to them. At least they proved it on the field.  That is all that I have ever asked.
 
2013-08-14 12:18:10 PM

HeadLever: Mentat: Are you unaware of how easy it is to poke SEC haters?

I really don't mind the SEC in this context.  If the NC game becomes a rematch of the SEC Championship Game because they beat eveyone during the playoffs, then the more power to them. At least they proved it on the field.  That is all that I have ever asked.


You know people will still be crying about that and saying the refs were for the SEC. Nobody will ever admit that the SEC is the best conference in college football right now because as of now they have the best recruiting pool and are able to keep the top recruits from that pool in the SEC and from going to other conferences. This type of stuff happens. 5 or 10 years from now it may be the Pac 10, and guess what, people will be crying and complaining the same way about them.
 
2013-08-14 12:52:27 PM

ongbok: You know people will still be crying about that and saying the refs were for the SEC


Some folks will cry about anything.  For me, so long as they prove it on the field, I have nothing against tagging the SEC or anyone else as the 'best'.  Sure better than the old system where a good number of teams never got the shot.
 
2013-08-14 01:22:35 PM

bluenote13: Those are the preseason rankings, which mean nothing.  I would bet by the end of the season they will have played at least 4 teams ranked at the time of the game.


That's right.  LSU will be ranked number 1 before and after they beat Alabama.
 
2013-08-14 01:28:24 PM

T-Boy: We have a winner.  Even the Pac-12 homers can see the coup which has taken place.


It was pretty clear before it ever happened. I've made that argument against the playoff in every thread where morons think that a playoff is the only acceptable way to determine a champion. But of course, it couldn't rise above the cacophony of simpletons shouting "PLAYOFF! PLAYOFF! PLAYOFF!"

Oh, gee, I wonder why ESPN had been pushing a playoff really really hard recently. Could it be because they just got a contract with the SEC?

bluenote13: I would bet by the end of the season they will have played at least 4 teams ranked at the time of the game.


Largely due to the fact that there's an unwritten rule about there being 6-9 SEC teams ranked every week. (Six if it's a down year and for some reason there are a lot of early losses, despite the conference's general rule of scheduling patsies in OOC play, usually 7-8).
 
2013-08-14 03:47:07 PM

IAmRight: T-Boy: We have a winner.  Even the Pac-12 homers can see the coup which has taken place.

It was pretty clear before it ever happened. I've made that argument against the playoff in every thread where morons think that a playoff is the only acceptable way to determine a champion. But of course, it couldn't rise above the cacophony of simpletons shouting "PLAYOFF! PLAYOFF! PLAYOFF!"

Oh, gee, I wonder why ESPN had been pushing a playoff really really hard recently. Could it be because they just got a contract with the SEC?

bluenote13: I would bet by the end of the season they will have played at least 4 teams ranked at the time of the game.

Largely due to the fact that there's an unwritten rule about there being 6-9 SEC teams ranked every week. (Six if it's a down year and for some reason there are a lot of early losses, despite the conference's general rule of scheduling patsies in OOC play, usually 7-8).


Dude, you're one of my favs on the Sports tab, because a) you know your stuff when it comes to football, but I mainly love you because b) you're such a Northwest/ Pac12 homer, you can't help but put out insane arguments such as that the playoff won't matter because all 4 will be SEC teams, and that Alabama can't score against college defenses.

Never change, IAmRight, never change...stay golden, man.
 
2013-08-14 03:57:19 PM

oh_please: Dude, you're one of my favs on the Sports tab, because a) you know your stuff when it comes to football, but I mainly love you because b) you're such a Northwest/ Pac12 homer, you can't help but put out insane arguments such as that the playoff won't matter because all 4 will be SEC teams, and that Alabama can't score against college defenses.


In fairness, regarding the scoring comment, I was thinking more of two years ago and really more about LSU. The point is that, if anyone's ever talking about how a college team could compete with the pros, they'd never lead off with talking about how an SEC offense would kick ass. It's always about the defense.

/and I didn't say 4 SEC teams! But three is not unfathomable given recent history (1,2,6,9 in 2011; 2,3,7,8,10 in 2012), and two is all but a lock
//if a team dusts SEC1 in the first round by 30 and then loses by a FG to SEC2 in the final? SEC CONTINUES DOMINATION
 
2013-08-14 04:29:20 PM
I may hate Ohio State

but hubrismitter makes me want to put Brutus Buckeye down my pants

/Don't judge me
//Go Badgers!
 
2013-08-14 04:54:40 PM

IAmRight: But three is not unfathomable given recent history (1,2,6,9 in 2011; 2,3,7,8,10 in 2012), and two is all but a lock
//if a team dusts SEC1 in the first round by 30 and then loses by a FG to SEC2 in the final? SEC CONTINUES DOMINATION


Ok, in 2011, obviously LSU is #1, and ALA/OkSt are 2 and 3. Not sure who the 4th seed would be, but it certainly wasn't the #6 team in the country.

In 2012, it would have been ND #1, AL #2, and either Oregon or GA #3 or #4, depending on the criteria. Honestly, I think Oregon would have given the Tide a better game than ND last year, but they wouldn't have won...nobody was stopping that freight train, period.

Anyhoo, in either scenario, as you claim, 3 SEC teams wouldn't have gotten into the playoff...is it "fair" that two would have? Maybe not, they get the hype and the players, but so does Oregon and USC. Hell, Phil Knight throws more money at Oregon football than our government allocates to fix infrastructure in this country, FFS.
 
2013-08-14 06:22:22 PM

oh_please: Anyhoo, in either scenario, as you claim, 3 SEC teams wouldn't have gotten into the playoff...is it "fair" that two would have? Maybe not, they get the hype and the players, but so does Oregon and USC. Hell, Phil Knight throws more money at Oregon football than our government allocates to fix infrastructure in this country, FFS.


In Week 14 last year (after the regular season but prior to conference championship games), it was Notre Dame 1, Alabama 2, Georgia 3, Florida 4. I'm hardly being ridiculous.
 
2013-08-14 06:58:47 PM

IAmRight: oh_please: Anyhoo, in either scenario, as you claim, 3 SEC teams wouldn't have gotten into the playoff...is it "fair" that two would have? Maybe not, they get the hype and the players, but so does Oregon and USC. Hell, Phil Knight throws more money at Oregon football than our government allocates to fix infrastructure in this country, FFS.

In Week 14 last year (after the regular season but prior to conference championship games), it was Notre Dame 1, Alabama 2, Georgia 3, Florida 4. I'm hardly being ridiculous.


Week 14 is also irrelevant.  Week 15 is what matters, when it was Notre Dame 1, Alabama 2, Florida 3, Oregon 4.
 
2013-08-14 07:48:39 PM

IAmRight: /still mostly just bitter that we didn't have USC/SEC battles in '03 or '04 because Oklahoma had to get put into them despite being outmatched
//mainly because USC would've destroyed both LSU and Auburn


Uh, no. USC would not have "destroyed" Auburn that year.

Auburn had Jason Campbell at QB, Ronnie Brown/Cadillac Williams at RB, Marcus McNeill and King Dunlap on the OL, Jay Ratliff  DL, and Carlos Rogers CB, all of which had NFL careers, and several others got drafted as well. I hate Auburn but they got screwed that year...and would have given USC a great game.
 
Displayed 25 of 125 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report