Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Greg Gaines: SEC is overrated
Comments
-
Change your fucking handle to SECquillaSecfans said:
TLDREwaDawg said:'Bama is not the SEC. However a 14 team SEC has A SINGLE TEAM WITH more than eight wins. A twelve team Pac 12 has five teams with at least 9 wins.
Since you are, you know, from the south - I will do the math for you...
So, yes, there is a chance that 'Bama (while a giant among midgets) is not totally unbeatable by a real team. -
Holy fuck.Secfans said:
What in the world does that have to do with anything? You have a bunch of teams who beat a bunch of trash PAC12 teams to get to a 9 win record. Since you're from, you know, the northwest...let me explain football to you. I'll even break down the math for you using my engineering degree.EwaDawg said:'Bama is not the SEC. However a 14 team SEC has A SINGLE TEAM WITH more than eight wins. A twelve team Pac 12 has five teams with at least 9 wins.
Since you are, you know, from the south - I will do the math for you...
So, yes, there is a chance that 'Bama (while a giant among midgets) is not totally unbeatable by a real team.
*** I noticed you include Utah in that group of "9 win teams" even though their 9th win came in a bowl and only one of the SEC's 5 8+ win teams have played their bowls so far...and LSU had to cancel their game with South AL that would have been a 6th 8 win team yet to play a bowl.
9 win teams UW played:
Stanford (9-3). Stanford opened with two wins over KSU and USC. Then went on to get wins against SEVEN CONSECUTIVE TEAMS with losing records. S-E-V-E-N. That's pitiful. They have 9 wins because they beat a bunch of teams everyone else beat. Including a one score win over ND and a nice season ender against Rice.
Colorado (10-4). 7 of Colorado's 10 wins were against 6 teams with losing records and 7-6 Colorado St. They also lost 45-28 to Michigan, and 38-8 to Okie St. They were 0-4 against the 4 good/decent teams they played this year.
USC (9-3). Ahh yes, the "resurgent" USC team who got their poo pushed in by Alabama to open the season. 7 of USC's 9 wins were against teams with losing records. After their 4 point win over a trash Colorado team, they finished the season against teams who averaged 4 wins this season, plus Washington. Woooooooooo. Before their win against Colorado, they beat 5-7 ASU, 4-8 Utah St, and had 3 losses. They good. They real real good.
Utah (9-4) Ahhh yes. Utah. EIGHT. E-I-G-H-T of Utahs 9 wins came against 6 teams with losing records, FCS Southern Utah, and a 1 point win over a BYU team who 5-7 Miss St took to overtime.
Now, let's have a look at Alabama shall we?
USC (9-3). We've already done them. They've beaten nobody besides UW in what may have been a fluke.
WKU (11-3). Beat the same trash Rice team by a wider margin than Stanford did. And a bunch of nobodies.
Tenn (8-4). Beat 6 teams with winning records, 1 trash FCS team, and 1 team with a losing record. Beat the crap out of ACC division winning Va Tech.
Texas A&M (8-4). Beat 3 teams with winning records, 1 FCS, and 4 teams with losing records.
LSU (7-4). Beat 3 teams with winning records, and Ole Miss (healthy Chad Kelly), FCS JVille St, 6-7 Miss St, and crappy Mizzou.
Auburn (8-4). Beat 3 teams with winning records, and Ole Miss w/a healthy Chad Kelly.
Florida (8-4). Beat 3 teams with winning records but honestly Florida is trash too. They won their division by default. Would probably be a 3 point favorite against Colorado.
So literally all of the 8 win conference wins for Bama won beat more teams with winning records than any of the 9+ conf wins for UW.
But congrats on all the 9 win teams. That extra conference game with a win over 5-7 cal or 3-9 Arizona is a really big deal!
None of this means UW is bad. UW beat the crap out of all these teams. It just means the PAC12 sucked this year.
You could have just posted the last sentence to get your point across, Tequila. -
First of all, you're only showing how stupid you are if you think people in the south know football better than anyone else. There are two reasons the sec has been successful at football: 1) fertile recruiting ground; and 2) zero emphasis on academics.Secfans said:
What in the world does that have to do with anything? You have a bunch of teams who beat a bunch of trash PAC12 teams to get to a 9 win record. Since you're from, you know, the northwest...let me explain football to you. I'll even break down the math for you using my engineering degree.EwaDawg said:'Bama is not the SEC. However a 14 team SEC has A SINGLE TEAM WITH more than eight wins. A twelve team Pac 12 has five teams with at least 9 wins.
Since you are, you know, from the south - I will do the math for you...
So, yes, there is a chance that 'Bama (while a giant among midgets) is not totally unbeatable by a real team.
Engineering degree from bama? LOL. So let me call on your prestigious engineering degree. What sense does it make to put so many of these structurally unsound dwellings in a region known for such extreme weather?
-
The NFL must hate them as prospects then.Secfans said:People keep gushing over these DTs because they're fat. I don't get it.
-
I don't even know how the SEC is considered overrated - everyone has been saying they're the worst conference America for a decade...Any time the SEC loses an OOC game everyone falls all over themselves to announce the demise of the SEC.Sledog said:Funny how they can blow up "the SEC as a whole may be a little overrated".
-
So you don't get ESPN then.Secfans said:
I don't even know how the SEC is considered overrated - everyone has been saying they're the worst conference America for a decade...Any time the SEC loses an OOC game everyone falls all over themselves to announce the demise of the SEC.Sledog said:Funny how they can blow up "the SEC as a whole may be a little overrated".
-
Neato math. Superficial analysis. Shit relevance.Secfans said:
What in the world does that have to do with anything? You have a bunch of teams who beat a bunch of trash PAC12 teams to get to a 9 win record. Since you're from, you know, the northwest...let me explain football to you. I'll even break down the math for you using my engineering degree.EwaDawg said:'Bama is not the SEC. However a 14 team SEC has A SINGLE TEAM WITH more than eight wins. A twelve team Pac 12 has five teams with at least 9 wins.
Since you are, you know, from the south - I will do the math for you...
So, yes, there is a chance that 'Bama (while a giant among midgets) is not totally unbeatable by a real team.
*** I noticed you include Utah in that group of "9 win teams" even though their 9th win came in a bowl and only one of the SEC's 5 8+ win teams have played their bowls so far...and LSU had to cancel their game with South AL that would have been a 6th 8 win team yet to play a bowl.
9 win teams UW played:
Stanford (9-3). Stanford opened with two wins over KSU and USC. Then went on to get wins against SEVEN CONSECUTIVE TEAMS with losing records. S-E-V-E-N. That's pitiful. They have 9 wins because they beat a bunch of teams everyone else beat. Including a one score win over ND and a nice season ender against Rice.
Colorado (10-4). 7 of Colorado's 10 wins were against 6 teams with losing records and 7-6 Colorado St. They also lost 45-28 to Michigan, and 38-8 to Okie St. They were 0-4 against the 4 good/decent teams they played this year.
USC (9-3). Ahh yes, the "resurgent" USC team who got their poo pushed in by Alabama to open the season. 7 of USC's 9 wins were against teams with losing records. After their 4 point win over a trash Colorado team, they finished the season against teams who averaged 4 wins this season, plus Washington. Woooooooooo. Before their win against Colorado, they beat 5-7 ASU, 4-8 Utah St, and had 3 losses. They good. They real real good.
Utah (9-4) Ahhh yes. Utah. EIGHT. E-I-G-H-T of Utahs 9 wins came against 6 teams with losing records, FCS Southern Utah, and a 1 point win over a BYU team who 5-7 Miss St took to overtime.
Now, let's have a look at Alabama shall we?
USC (9-3). We've already done them. They've beaten nobody besides UW in what may have been a fluke.
WKU (11-3). Beat the same trash Rice team by a wider margin than Stanford did. And a bunch of nobodies.
Tenn (8-4). Beat 6 teams with winning records, 1 trash FCS team, and 1 team with a losing record. Beat the crap out of ACC division winning Va Tech.
Texas A&M (8-4). Beat 3 teams with winning records, 1 FCS, and 4 teams with losing records.
LSU (7-4). Beat 3 teams with winning records, and Ole Miss (healthy Chad Kelly), FCS JVille St, 6-7 Miss St, and crappy Mizzou.
Auburn (8-4). Beat 3 teams with winning records, and Ole Miss w/a healthy Chad Kelly.
Florida (8-4). Beat 3 teams with winning records but honestly Florida is trash too. They won their division by default. Would probably be a 3 point favorite against Colorado.
So literally all of the 8 win conference wins for Bama won beat more teams with winning records than any of the 9+ conf wins for UW.
But congrats on all the 9 win teams. That extra conference game with a win over 5-7 cal or 3-9 Arizona is a really big deal!
None of this means UW is bad. UW beat the crap out of all these teams. It just means the PAC12 sucked this year. -
where and who has done thisSecfans said:
I don't even know how the SEC is considered overrated - everyone has been saying they're the worst conference America for a decade...Any time the SEC loses an OOC game everyone falls all over themselves to announce the demise of the SEC.Sledog said:Funny how they can blow up "the SEC as a whole may be a little overrated".
even the awful pac12 network doesn't do this -
Buzz off with this nonsense. Outside of Stanford, Northwestern, ND, Vandy, and a few others, EVERYONE offers the same players. Are PAC12 schools better, on average than SEC schools related to academics? Of course. But that doesn't mean the athletes are held to a higher academic standard. ESPECIALLY regarding entrance requirements.Passion said:
First of all, you're only showing how stupid you are if you think people in the south know football better than anyone else. There are two reasons the sec has been successful at football: 1) fertile recruiting ground; and 2) zero emphasis on academics.
In the Southeast, college football matters more. It just does. That's not a slight, the interests are just different. USC has one of the most front running fan bases in the history of the Americas. Hell you guys have had like 2-3 sellouts in 3 years. We have 100k at practice. We don't have the population density to have access to a lot of professional sports, so college football is top priority.
My degree is neither structural nor mechanical. I'd assume answers to your question require a combination of study in sociology and macroeconomics.Passion said:
Engineering degree from bama? LOL. So let me call on your prestigious engineering degree. What sense does it make to put so many of these structurally unsound dwellings in a region known for such extreme weather?
Also, looking down one's nose at southern academic institutions is just ignorant. Anyone can be successful, whether they went to school or not. A bunch of Harvard grads work for my former college roommate. His peers didn't think much of him either because he went to Bama. Until he started making more money than them.
But it sure is fun painting millions of good people with the broad brush of 'dumb redneck' ain't it?
-
I thought we were above academis smack talk on this bored?
