SEC And ACC

Advertisement
Helps if you watch the games, which you clearly don't.

Remember, this is the board that was predicting 450 yards and 40 points by Virginia Tech. These people seriously do not watch football.

Agreed. It cracks my **** up when people brag about Auburn's win over KState, and LSU over Wisconsin. Like, uh what?

You'll cowards living in a ferry tale world. The SEC West is undefeated against OOC opponents. LSU is probably the second or third worst team in the West this season and beat a Wisconsin team that may win the Big 10. Don't give me this "they dominated most of the game" bull****. Auburn still beat K. state too. Miami's ******** are still sore from the last time we played an "average" K. State team in Manhattan.

Stats are for losers.
 
i'm waiting for one team to be mentioned that would beat their SEC counterpart. even Vandy would crush Wake
 
i'm waiting for one team to be mentioned that would beat their SEC counterpart. even Vandy would crush Wake

You're making way too much sense for these CIS folk. Let's look at the best of each conference.

FSU vs Ole Miss/Miss St/Bama/Auburn = good game

Clemson lost to UGA

Are you'll cowards claiming we are the 3rd best? If that's the case, we would be matched up with Bama/Miss St/Auburn.

Jesus, God.
 
Um, as much as I hate the SEC hype, it's much much better than the ACC. I'd go:

SEC
PAC 12
ACC

Auburn would rush for 500 against us.
 
Advertisement
i'm waiting for one team to be mentioned that would beat their SEC counterpart. even Vandy would crush Wake

You're making way too much sense for these CIS folk. Let's look at the best of each conference.

FSU vs Ole Miss/Miss St/Bama/Auburn = good game

Clemson lost to UGA

Are you'll cowards claiming we are the 3rd best? If that's the case, we would be matched up with Bama/Miss St/Auburn.

Jesus, God.

Easy to say when they just play each other all year.
 
i'm waiting for one team to be mentioned that would beat their SEC counterpart. even Vandy would crush Wake

You're making way too much sense for these CIS folk. Let's look at the best of each conference.

FSU vs Ole Miss/Miss St/Bama/Auburn = good game

Clemson lost to UGA

Are you'll cowards claiming we are the 3rd best? If that's the case, we would be matched up with Bama/Miss St/Auburn.

Jesus, God.

Easy to say when they just play each other all year.

this argument is retarded. lucky for the ACC that the SEC only plays each other all year. clearly they do when two teams play Clemson this year.....one already kicking the crap out of them....
 
**** this ****.

Incestuous conference play/minimal noteworthy inter-conference play (across all of college football, not just within the SEC) and a short schedule make it impossible to accurately rank teams from different conferences against one and other. Add in preseason rankings which basically act as weights and you create a bias towards whoever happens to be ranked highly at the beginning of the season based on nothing but intuition (recently this has been the SEC) because nobody has done anything this season.

The strongest way to make accurate rankings, accepting the fact that you can't have 50 game football schedules, would be to kill preseason rankings, remove "conference play" altogether, create schedules focused on playing as many games as possible, randomly, between the top 64 (or however many) teams to build a highly connected network of results, and harness the powers of the transitive property (A>B & B>C therefore A>B) within that network.

200.gif
 
Advertisement
**** this ****.

Incestuous conference play/minimal noteworthy inter-conference play (across all of college football, not just within the SEC) and a short schedule make it impossible to accurately rank teams from different conferences against one and other. Add in preseason rankings which basically act as weights and you create a bias towards whoever happens to be ranked highly at the beginning of the season based on nothing but intuition (recently this has been the SEC) because nobody has done anything this season.

The strongest way to make accurate rankings, accepting the fact that you can't have 50 game football schedules, would be to kill preseason rankings, remove "conference play" altogether, create schedules focused on playing as many games as possible, randomly, between the top 64 (or however many) teams to build a highly connected network of results, and harness the powers of the transitive property (A>B & B>C therefore A>B) within that network.

View attachment 26803

lmao. therefore B<A and C<B
 
**** this ****.

Incestuous conference play/minimal noteworthy inter-conference play (across all of college football, not just within the SEC) and a short schedule make it impossible to accurately rank teams from different conferences against one and other. Add in preseason rankings which basically act as weights and you create a bias towards whoever happens to be ranked highly at the beginning of the season based on nothing but intuition (recently this has been the SEC) because nobody has done anything this season.

The strongest way to make accurate rankings, accepting the fact that you can't have 50 game football schedules, would be to kill preseason rankings, remove "conference play" altogether, create schedules focused on playing as many games as possible, randomly, between the top 64 (or however many) teams to build a highly connected network of results, and harness the powers of the transitive property (A>B & B>C therefore A>B) within that network.

View attachment 26803

lmao. therefore B<A and C<B
There for C<A and B<A
 
ACC is really bad this year but the SEC is way overrated. Teams dont go down in thw rankings in the SEC. And if an unraked sec teams beats a ranked one the unraked one just replace the other one in the rankings. While in other conferences if the same happens is because the ranked team wasnt that good.




:neonu:
 
Advertisement
People still in denial about SEC? SMH

I'll give you the SEC East is not all that great this year, but the SEC West is loaded from top to bottom.

And you want to know why SEC teams shoot up the rankings? It's because they have proven themselves so many times over the years. They basically have a body of work they have built up (championships, bowl games, etc.). When you do it on a consistent basis like they have, you're gonna get the benefit of the doubt. How about instead of *****ing about it, how about the rest of these conferences sack up beat these SEC teams on a consistent basis and that will end all this SEC talk.
 
**** this ****.

Incestuous conference play/minimal noteworthy inter-conference play (across all of college football, not just within the SEC) and a short schedule make it impossible to accurately rank teams from different conferences against one and other. Add in preseason rankings which basically act as weights and you create a bias towards whoever happens to be ranked highly at the beginning of the season based on nothing but intuition (recently this has been the SEC) because nobody has done anything this season.

The strongest way to make accurate rankings, accepting the fact that you can't have 50 game football schedules, would be to kill preseason rankings, remove "conference play" altogether, create schedules focused on playing as many games as possible, randomly, between the top 64 (or however many) teams to build a highly connected network of results, and harness the powers of the transitive property (A>B & B>C therefore A>B) within that network.

View attachment 26803

lmao. therefore B<A and C<B
There for C<A and B<A

A>C, my bad.
 
Advertisement
Our record against the mighty SEC (6-3)
Per year
W L T Win % PFPG PAPG
2013 1 0 0 100.0 21.0 16.0
2012 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2011 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2010 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2009 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2008 0 1 0 0.0 3.0 26.0
2007 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2005 0 1 0 0.0 3.0 40.0
2004 1 0 0 100.0 27.0 10.0
2003 1 1 0 50.0 22.0 21.5
2002 2 0 0 100.0 33.5 9.5
2001 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2000 1 0 0 100.0 37.0 20.0
 
Last edited:
Our record against the mighty SEC (6-3)
Per year
W L T Win % PFPG PAPG
2013 1 0 0 100.0 21.0 16.0
2012 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2011 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2010 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2009 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2008 0 1 0 0.0 3.0 26.0
2007 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2006 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2005 0 1 0 0.0 3.0 40.0
2004 1 0 0 100.0 27.0 10.0
2003 1 1 0 50.0 22.0 21.5
2002 2 0 0 100.0 33.5 9.5
2001 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2000 1 0 0 100.0 37.0 20.0

Wow awesome we've played one game against a 4-8 SEC team in 5 years. That dispels the idea that the SEC is king.

Anyone trying to dismiss the SEC as anything but the nations top conference is retarded. It's always delusional idiots throwing out pointless arguments trying to discredit what that conference has done. Their out of conference and bowl records over the last decade speak for themselves. And then this idiot Hughhoney is trying to sit here and throw out a bunch of "if" and "yea, but" statements to detract from their wins this year. They've kicked the **** out of almost everyone they've played OOC this year.

Kansas State might be the favorite in the Big 12 and the 3rd highest ranked team in the SEC walked into their house and beat them.
Georgia, and if you want to talk about turnover at Clemson UGA broke in a new QB and defensive staff, pounded Clemson, our second best team.

FSU winning a national championship by the skin of their teeth over Auburn last year does nothing to discredit the SEC, and doesn't add any legitimacy to the ACC as a whole.

Only a delusional ****** would think otherwise.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top