Pac12 has 7-8 legit BCS teams, big10 has 3, SEC 4-5...

puppylove_sugarsteel

get the picture? TAMU isn't a bcs team. they're going to lose 4 games.

puppylove_sugarsteel

oh, the big12 has 2-3 bcs type teams. That's it.

[Deleted User]

That was a great point backed up with a plethora of evidence. Hard not to agree with you.

DerekJohnson

the evidence is indeed overwhelming.

HeretoBeatmyChest

There you go again...

CuntWaffle

I brought my flamethrower into this thread and then puppys argument was too overwhelming.

Well played.

IrishDawg22

CuntWaffle said:

I brought my flamethrower sandy vagina into this thread and then puppys argument was too overwhelming.

Well played.

HillsboroDuck

I think you're underrating the Pac by 4 or 5 teams, but otherwise your argument is airtight

Steve_Bowman

The only team is the PAC that won't finnish in the Top 10 is WSU and they might make it. (Don't let the math get in the way of a sound case.)

And the Dawgs have the inside track on the National Championship game. Bring on the pussies from Tuscaloosa!

RoadDawg55

The Pac 12 has 2 BCS teams, with the possibility a team from the South upset Oregon or Stanford in the title game, making them a BCS team. None of the teams in the Pac 12 South are looking like legit BCS, 10+ win type teams.

I would love to hear who the 8 you think are. I'm guessing every team but WSU, Colorado, Utah, and Cal. Only you would think the Arizona schools, Oregon St, and UW are anywhere near being a BCS team.

I enjoy watching you be an idiot, but you are pressing very badly. I doubt even the Pac 12 coaches would agree with you about the Pac 12 > SEC.

CuntWaffle

IrishDawg22 said:

CuntWaffle said:

I brought my flamethrower sandy vagina into this thread and then puppys argument was too overwhelming.

Well played.

Hey man not cool.

DerekJohnson

youtube.com/watch?v=OzXPWZ0HKts

Fire_Marshall_Bill

I hate the $EC as much as puppy corn syrup but c'mon. The PAC has two or maybe three. In reality the SEC has about the same but the espn-cbs cartel once again convincex everyone there are 6-9.

[Deleted User]

South Carolina, A&M, Bama, LSU, and Florida win the Pac-12 rather easily.

[Deleted User]

UGA wouldnt though. WAY too much hype this season in my opinion

[Deleted User]

[/proceeds to watch UGA win 2013 National Title}

[Deleted User]

Travis Morris said:

[/proceeds to watch UGA win 2013 National Title}

Don't worry about them making you look bad with Mark Richt as the head coach. I agree with your SEC picks.

CheersWestDawg

I like to blow the PAC 12 and say the SEC sucks when Oregon gets beat by Auburn and LSU and my Dawgs get clown fucked by LSU.

Tailgater

AP Preseason: 3) Oregon; 4) Stanford; 21) UCLA; 24) USC; 25) Oregon State. Preseason polls are highly political with regional biases favoring the hotbeads of collegiate football in the SEC, Big-12; ACC; and Big Ten. No Pac-12 schools ranked in the second ten and the bottom three of UCLA, USC, and Oregon State can be discounted as simply a very meager west coast bias.

The Pac-12 is more of a two-team conference than ever,...... which is what should be expected in any football association dominated by the likes of Oregon and Stanford. How many times does it have to be said that the Pac-12 (-10 or -8) can never be strong nationally until USC, UCLA, and UW are back on top of west coast collegiate football? That's just the nature of things.

DerekJohnson

Tailgater said:

AP Preseason: 3) Oregon; 4) Stanford; 21) UCLA; 24) USC; 25) Oregon State. Preseason polls are highly political with regional biases favoring the hotbeads of collegiate football in the SEC, Big-12; ACC; and Big Ten. No Pac-12 schools ranked in the second ten and the bottom three of UCLA, USC, and Oregon State can be discounted as simply a very meager west coast bias.

The Pac-12 is more of a two-team conference than ever,...... which is what should be expected in any football association dominated by the likes of Oregon and Stanford. How many times does it have to be said that the Pac-12 (-10 or -8) can never be strong nationally until USC, UCLA, and UW are back on top of west coast collegiate football? That's just the nature of things.

or USC, UCLA and Oregon

Tailgater

DerekJohnson said:

Tailgater said:

AP Preseason: 3) Oregon; 4) Stanford; 21) UCLA; 24) USC; 25) Oregon State. Preseason polls are highly political with regional biases favoring the hotbeads of collegiate football in the SEC, Big-12; ACC; and Big Ten. No Pac-12 schools ranked in the second ten and the bottom three of UCLA, USC, and Oregon State can be discounted as simply a very meager west coast bias.

The Pac-12 is more of a two-team conference than ever,...... which is what should be expected in any football association dominated by the likes of Oregon and Stanford. How many times does it have to be said that the Pac-12 (-10 or -8) can never be strong nationally until USC, UCLA, and UW are back on top of west coast collegiate football? That's just the nature of things.

or USC, UCLA and Oregon

When thinking about or discussing Pac-whatever football as a power conference, Oregon (or Stanford) simply doesn't fit with USC and UCLA. Outside of L.A., only UW qualifies and I'm not sorry to say that's the way it is and will always be. UW can stagger along for another Husky lifetime trying to find new ways to remain mediocre and Woodward can invent more Terraces for downsizing Husky Stadium capacity by another 4000 or seats, but the power structure of Pac football where it counts on the gridiron will never change. Until it's USC, UCLA, and UW dominating conference football again, nobody on the west coast need get excited about BCS playoffs.