5 Reasons *Our* Spartans beat Alabama

NeGgaPlEaSe said:

Tequilla said:

What a game by Bama ... not sure that they can play much better. I definitely underestimated the abilities of their front 4 and ability to get pressure.

On top of that, Sparty played scared and that the moment was too big for them. That really surprised me.

We are definitely getting the 2 best teams in college football in the title game

Ohio State would have something to say about that. Imagine UW playing Magna and Lindy this year

Yeah OSU would have had something to say, but they will be sitting their asses at home after losing to the team , at home, against a second string QB, that Bama just boatraced.

dnc said:

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

Well of course I called ole-miss rather easily, say 34-17, now im calling Clemson over Alabama, by a nose. Alabama is good, not #2 good but good. Clemson is blocking very well on the offensive line, shaq lawson will need to play for clemson to win, if not it could be trouble. The defense has risen to the occasion in EVERY big game, thats important.

Bama should be no different. Can Clemson shut Ridley down? Cokers play action deep ball? Henry's 4th quarter energy.? Watson, unlike Leaderless Cook, will loosen up Bama's defense, create some running room, and some play action.

Its a great matchup. I love the way alabama plays on both sides of the ball. Clemson can take them out of their comfort zone however, as they havent played anybody close to clemson in the SEC schedule. Ole miss is close (and they beat Alabama), but Kelly is a turdly comparison to Watson. Will be an awesome game.

Hey bama boofies, would you guys like to make a pick, and back it up with something other than "clemson sucks" or "alabama is just better". Why do you think your imaginary team will win?. I wont hold my breath with HH's 3 pony-tail tuggers moonlighting as grown men.

What's clear is Stanford would butt wipe either team, but the committee decided to make up for past wrongs by stiffing the best team in the country in favor of the big 12's affirmative action bastard child, Oklahoma. Imagine a head to head McCaffrey-henry dual. 348 all purpose yards in the rose bowl mean anything to you three amigas?? The real heisman and national champion is sitting at home next Monday.

I like to complain that LSU won a national title with two losses AND bitch that Stanford got left out of the playoff with two losses.

Oh, and BAMA by 13

Because everyone had at least 2 losses that year, otherwise they would not have won. Stanford lost to 2 bad teams and you think they deserve to be in, lol.

theciscoshow said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

Dardanus said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

You too Dardanus? wow...

I'm not always right and have never claimed to be. I thought Oklahoma would beat Clemson rather easily.

But to discredit a good team because they are in the SEC and therefore get more credit and recognition by national media (which is partly earned and partly because it drives ratings) is as dumb as blindly supporting any team or conference while ignoring facts to the contrary.

Yeah, but the avatar...

I picked Bammer because they're a good team with a good coach. That doesn't mean the SEC hasn't been overrated, overhyped, and has received some bogus credit over the last 10 years...

Yeah those 7 straight NT's were all hype! lol

Listen cisco you spawned out new fish. The SEC was auto-placed in those 7 bcs bowls. Odds were pretty good theyd win them when there were 8 teams from other conferences, licking their chops for a shot at the SEC, but sitting home because their respective AD's chose not to play 4 FCS schools in non conference play.

As puppy duly noted, on countless occasions, the SEC was the minority in championships won over the last 40 years. Magically they found themselves in 7 straight bcs "championship" games, one against each other.

Basically, Alabama had to win 1 difficult game a year to be in the silver spoon championship game, with a red-carpet reception. Beat Auburn (after playing an fcs tune-up g a me vs Charelston Southern prior, and they were in (didnt matter how good Auburn was). Teams like Stanford were playing Oregon and Notre Dame in week 11 and 12.

Bama's starters are all rested, healthy because they didnt have to play vs fcs teams, while their depth got significant and important playing time prior to their rivalry game vs 6-6 Auburn, and an auto bcs bid.

Now that 4 conferences get an actual opportunity, the SEC just lost their inherent advantage of the corrupt bcs past..

Mark my words, despite the outcome of Clemson-Alabama, you will see the SEC average out like the prior 30 years before their 7-straight bcs freebie titles.

If Auburn, Alabama and LSU actually traveled to solid power 5 stadiums out of conference, they wouldnt be 12-1 every single year, with a free ride to title. Other conferences earn the trip, Alabama just has to win 1 big game a year and theyre in. So cut the shit cissy, I aint buying it.

theciscoshow said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

Dardanus said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

You too Dardanus? wow...

I'm not always right and have never claimed to be. I thought Oklahoma would beat Clemson rather easily.

But to discredit a good team because they are in the SEC and therefore get more credit and recognition by national media (which is partly earned and partly because it drives ratings) is as dumb as blindly supporting any team or conference while ignoring facts to the contrary.

Yeah, but the avatar...

I picked Bammer because they're a good team with a good coach. That doesn't mean the SEC hasn't been overrated, overhyped, and has received some bogus credit over the last 10 years...

Yeah those 7 straight NT's were all hype! lol

Pretty easy to win a NC when you two teams in your conference play each other

Go look up SEC Heismans and NCs vs. other conferences from 2006-2015 vs. 1970-2005 newb. Then look up SEC TV contracts. Then see if you can piece it together.

RaceBannon said:

In another thread puppy has Bama beating USC already next year

Put Chris Petersen in control of USC's athletes 2 years ago (USC is a program that has equal, even better players at each position than any SEC team) and Alabama has no chance to open season with a win vs SC (incidentally , alabama of course refused to play a home and home with USC).

Helton isnt Nick Saban, but as of now and before spring ball, I see usc as a pickem to -3 right now as Saban again has no qb. Alabama an edge because of head coach, USC an edge with athletes and jr. max browne at qb. Oh, SC has 7-8 olinemen coming back, all backs and receivers. Who does bambi have coming back? Quick J, Clock starts now... thats what I thought.

Would you care to inject some examples of why you like Bammer in that game J? For once? Something? Anything? Puppy lays everything off top of head, ill give you 5 minutes to scramble around to support your position on bama vs usc. What I thought bitch. Name me the stadium B a ma plays in? The town? The defensive coordinator (trick question).

Puppy has made you his bitch for 2 straight years, did you make a resolution to finally defend yourself this year without your brilliant "your team sucks" analysis? Which team's wagon will you jump on this year J?

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

theciscoshow said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

Dardanus said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

You too Dardanus? wow...

I'm not always right and have never claimed to be. I thought Oklahoma would beat Clemson rather easily.

But to discredit a good team because they are in the SEC and therefore get more credit and recognition by national media (which is partly earned and partly because it drives ratings) is as dumb as blindly supporting any team or conference while ignoring facts to the contrary.

Yeah, but the avatar...

I picked Bammer because they're a good team with a good coach. That doesn't mean the SEC hasn't been overrated, overhyped, and has received some bogus credit over the last 10 years...

Yeah those 7 straight NT's were all hype! lol

Listen cisco you spawned out new fish. The SEC was auto-placed in those 7 bcs bowls. Odds were pretty good theyd win them when there were 8 teams from other conferences, licking their chops for a shot at the SEC, but sitting home because their respective AD's chose not to play 4 FCS schools in non conference play.

As puppy duly noted, on countless occasions, the SEC was the minority in championships won over the last 40 years. Magically they found themselves in 7 straight bcs "championship" games, one against each other.

Basically, Alabama had to win 1 difficult game a year to be in the silver spoon championship game, with a red-carpet reception. Beat Auburn (after playing an fcs tune-up g a me vs Charelston Southern prior, and they were in (didnt matter how good Auburn was). Teams like Stanford were playing Oregon and Notre Dame in week 11 and 12.

Bama's starters are all rested, healthy because they didnt have to play vs fcs teams, while their depth got significant and important playing time prior to their rivalry game vs 6-6 Auburn, and an auto bcs bid.

Now that 4 conferences get an actual opportunity, the SEC just lost their inherent advantage of the corrupt bcs past..

Mark my words, despite the outcome of Clemson-Alabama, you will see the SEC average out like the prior 30 years before their 7-straight bcs freebie titles.

If Auburn, Alabama and LSU actually traveled to solid power 5 stadiums out of conference, they wouldnt be 12-1 every single year, with a free ride to title. Other conferences earn the trip, Alabama just has to win 1 big game a year and theyre in. So cut the shit cissy, I aint buying it.

You wrote a lot. Fag.

And Pup. I don't need examples of why I know Bama is going to win. We're gonna Fournette that Clemson run game like we did to LSU, since soft ass Oklahoma could not. Then, we're gonna see what their QB is made of. Can he throw on our D? Not many can. Then, we're gonna pound the ball down their throat all game (you like ball in throat). We're going to do it all with a QB that everybody on this bored has been writing off this year, and we're gonna win. Big time.

RaceBannon said:

The SEC has been on espn since 1979

Their new contract is very lucrative, especially for an area void of big markets. Atlanta is about 11th or 12th. If you want to count Miami for Floriduh (big stretch) they're close to Atlanta. Most of those states have small TV markets. Gee, then ESPN helps create the SECN to hype its own product after the Longhorn Network flops. Interesting.

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

RaceBannon said:

The SEC has been on espn since 1979

Their new contract is very lucrative, especially for an area void of big markets. Atlanta is about 11th or 12th. If you want to count Miami for Floriduh (big stretch) they're close to Atlanta. Most of those states have small TV markets. Gee, then ESPN helps create the SECN to hype its own product after the Longhorn Network flops. Interesting.

Void of big markets? An entire region of the country is their market!

PurpleJ said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

RaceBannon said:

The SEC has been on espn since 1979

Their new contract is very lucrative, especially for an area void of big markets. Atlanta is about 11th or 12th. If you want to count Miami for Floriduh (big stretch) they're close to Atlanta. Most of those states have small TV markets. Gee, then ESPN helps create the SECN to hype its own product after the Longhorn Network flops. Interesting.

Void of big markets? An entire world is their market!

Soon the terrorists will chant SEC SEC SEC!

ThomasFremont said:

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

RaceBannon said:

The SEC has been on espn since 1979

Their new contract is very lucrative, especially for an area void of big markets. Atlanta is about 11th or 12th. If you want to count Miami for Floriduh (big stretch) they're close to Atlanta. Most of those states have small TV markets. Gee, then ESPN helps create the SECN to hype its own product after the Longhorn Network flops. Interesting.

It's almost as if companies invest money and resources into a successful product...weird.

Check the facts. I've been over this 40 0r 50 times.

Just how much does ESPN have invested in the SEC?

– The ESPN-SEC contract that runs till 2034 isn’t just the longest sports rights deal, it’s the longest deal in all of television.

– In 2008, ESPN signed a 15 year, $2.25 billion dollar deal with the SEC.

– This year, ESPN launched the SEC Network and the league’s revenue (and ESPN’s financial investment) is bound to skyrocket. ESPN owns the SEC Network and splits the profit with the SEC 50/50.

– ESPN worked directly with each individual school in the SEC to upgrade their broadcast facilities and capabilities for the SEC Network.

– ESPN runs the official website of the SEC – SECSports.com. On the homepage of the official website of the SEC, you’ll see links to ESPN.com, the SEC Network, and even The Paul Finebaum Show.

These factors go above and beyond any relationship that ESPN has with a league or conference, perhaps only outside the Longhorn Network and the University of Texas. ESPN may have relationships with the other conferences in college football, but nowhere near to this extent where they own a network and promote Finebaum on the league website.

http://awfulannouncing.com/2014/skepticism-healthy-espn.html

two different broadcasters on the network, analyst Brock Huard and anchor Cassidy Hubbarth, proclaimed that Florida State – one of only two teams in this week's AP top five not in the SEC – "barely escaped," "struggled" and took Wake Forest "down to the wire" in a game it won 43-3.

Jameis Winston is portrayed as an immature, piece of shit rapist. Nick Marshall is a thief and we never hear about it. Powerhouses St Penn and Ohio State get nailed in the past five years. Penn State situation was horrible, but they didn't gain any competitive advantage from that. When's the last time the SEC got nailed for shit? 1999? We all know they're the worst. It's a running theme here. I could go on and on...North Carolina... but I have to wake up at 6.

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/the-worldwide-cheerleader-espn-and-the-college-football-playoff-20141028

ThomasFremont said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Derek please delete this thread now.

CHRIST

Disagree. Another classic for the vault.

Agreed. Deleting threads is Kim territory, but considering that PGOS posted that I am not surprised. At all.

Test

Huh?

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

ThomasFremont said:

PurpleJ said:

ThomasFremont said:

PostGameOrangeSlices said:

Derek please delete this thread now.

CHRIST

Disagree. Another classic for the vault.

Agreed. Deleting threads is Kim territory, but considering that PGOS posted that I am not surprised. At all.

Maybe he's getting sick of all the notifications.

this

and the Bama avatars make my eyes bleed.

along with PLSS' poasts

and The Fire Marshall's

Sweet dreams