montypython said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

So if your upset about Mizzou ranking does that make you upset Okie St was ranked

---

I'm not upset about it.

I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of the system that has been in place for decades and how the SEC benefits the most from it.

---

When you have most of the best teams you get the benefit of the doubt.

---

When you don't have most of the best teams (2000-2012) why get the benefit of the doubt?

---

What more does the SEC have to do to demonstrate it has multiple teams with great programs?

---

As related to the BCS era, what exactly did the sec demonstrate during the 2 team invitational era? You would probably say they won more MNC's, right? Anyone can see the results, it's obvious right?

Well, it's simple really. They were invited more often. That doesn't mean they were the best conference, it just means they had more opportunity to play.

You cannot win if you aren't being allowed to play. It's as simple as that.

---

Who do you think the best conference has been the past 7 years?

---

To me it's pretty clear the sec has surge ahead. If we look at MNC's, here are the totals since 2016:

SEC - 5 MNCs
ACC - 2 MNCs
B10 - 1 MNC

If we grade conference vs conference: SEC is 98-77 since 2016 vs the (other) P5 conferences. That's not as eye opening of a difference, but they are ahead.

2023 12-13
2022 17-9
2021 13-10
2020 5-2
2019 16-8
2018 14-9
2017 10-12
2016 11-14

The top end of the SEC has been really stout of late. I think the rest of the conference is piggy backing off Georgia and Alabama, though. Look how fast LSU stumbled / cratered - they went from first to worst in their division in 2 years. They saw what was happening and made a change. They literally canned their coach 2 years after a title. That's called paying attention to what is going on in your program and having a high standard.

As far as that specific LSU team, that was lightning in a bottle for them that year. Other teams could have been lightning in a bottle over the last 20 years and won a title, but since the sec gets the benefit of the doubt, we won't ever know

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

montypython said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

So if your upset about Mizzou ranking does that make you upset Okie St was ranked

---

I'm not upset about it.

I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of the system that has been in place for decades and how the SEC benefits the most from it.

---

When you have most of the best teams you get the benefit of the doubt.

---

When you don't have most of the best teams (2000-2012) why get the benefit of the doubt?

---

What more does the SEC have to do to demonstrate it has multiple teams with great programs?

---

As related to the BCS era, what exactly did the sec demonstrate during the 2 team invitational era? You would probably say they won more MNC's, right? Anyone can see the results, it's obvious right?

Well, it's simple really. They were invited more often. That doesn't mean they were the best conference, it just means they had more opportunity to play.

You cannot win if you aren't being allowed to play. It's as simple as that.

---

Who do you think the best conference has been the past 7 years?

---

To me it's pretty clear the sec has surge ahead. If we look at MNC's, here are the totals since 2016:

SEC - 5 MNCs
ACC - 2 MNCs
B10 - 1 MNC

If we grade conference vs conference: SEC is 98-77 since 2016 vs the (other) P5 conferences. That's not as eye opening of a difference, but they are ahead.

2023 12-13
2022 17-9
2021 13-10
2020 5-2
2019 16-8
2018 14-9
2017 10-12
2016 11-14

The top end of the SEC has been really stout of late. I think the rest of the conference is piggy backing off Georgia and Alabama, though. Look how fast LSU cratered. They literally canned their coach and had a losing season not long after 2019. So that to me is lightning in a bottle. Other teams could have been lightning in a bottle over the last 20 years and won a title, but since the sec gets the benefit of the doubt, we won't ever know

---

LSU has not cratered as a program. They've fallen below some of their SEC brethren but are still a solid program. They're probably 3rd tier SEC behind GA, AL, TX, TN, Ole Miss, and possibly Missouri. They still recruit really well and likely have plenty of NIL $ to offer. Still a top 25 caliber team that can reload quickly.

Agreed

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

montypython said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

So if your upset about Mizzou ranking does that make you upset Okie St was ranked

---

I'm not upset about it.

I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of the system that has been in place for decades and how the SEC benefits the most from it.

---

When you have most of the best teams you get the benefit of the doubt.

---

When you don't have most of the best teams (2000-2012) why get the benefit of the doubt?

---

What more does the SEC have to do to demonstrate it has multiple teams with great programs?

---

As related to the BCS era, what exactly did the sec demonstrate during the 2 team invitational era? You would probably say they won more MNC's, right? Anyone can see the results, it's obvious right?

Well, it's simple really. They were invited more often. That doesn't mean they were the best conference, it just means they had more opportunity to play.

You cannot win if you aren't being allowed to play. It's as simple as that.

---

Who do you think the best conference has been the past 7 years?

---

To me it's pretty clear the sec has surged ahead. If we look at MNC's, here are the totals since 2016:

SEC - 5 MNCs
ACC - 2 MNCs
B10 - 1 MNC

If we grade conference vs conference: SEC is 98-77 since 2016 vs the (other) P5 conferences. That's not as eye opening of a difference, but they are ahead.

2023 12-13
2022 17-9
2021 13-10
2020 5-2
2019 16-8
2018 14-9
2017 10-12
2016 11-14

The top end of the SEC has been really stout of late. I think the rest of the conference is piggy backing off Georgia and Alabama, though. Look how fast LSU cratered. They literally canned their coach and had a losing season not long after 2019. So that to me is lightning in a bottle. Other teams could have been lightning in a bottle over the last 20 years and won a title, but since the sec gets the benefit of the doubt, we won't ever know

---

LSU has not cratered as a program.

---

LSU went from 15-0 and an MNC in 2019 to finishing last in their division, getting pounded in their bowl game, finishing 6-7 and firing their coach in 2021.

That is cratering in every sense of the word to LSU. They fired their coach 2 years after a title. The performance was unacceptable. He was fired.

We should have standards that high and not accept the BS that is allowed to go around here.

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

montypython said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

So if your upset about Mizzou ranking does that make you upset Okie St was ranked

---

I'm not upset about it.

I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of the system that has been in place for decades and how the SEC benefits the most from it.

---

When you have most of the best teams you get the benefit of the doubt.

---

When you don't have most of the best teams (2000-2012) why get the benefit of the doubt?

---

What more does the SEC have to do to demonstrate it has multiple teams with great programs?

---

As related to the BCS era, what exactly did the sec demonstrate during the 2 team invitational era? You would probably say they won more MNC's, right? Anyone can see the results, it's obvious right?

Well, it's simple really. They were invited more often. That doesn't mean they were the best conference, it just means they had more opportunity to play.

You cannot win if you aren't being allowed to play. It's as simple as that.

---

Who do you think the best conference has been the past 7 years?

---

To me it's pretty clear the sec has surged ahead. If we look at MNC's, here are the totals since 2016:

SEC - 5 MNCs
ACC - 2 MNCs
B10 - 1 MNC

If we grade conference vs conference: SEC is 98-77 since 2016 vs the (other) P5 conferences. That's not as eye opening of a difference, but they are ahead.

2023 12-13
2022 17-9
2021 13-10
2020 5-2
2019 16-8
2018 14-9
2017 10-12
2016 11-14

The top end of the SEC has been really stout of late. I think the rest of the conference is piggy backing off Georgia and Alabama, though. Look how fast LSU cratered. They literally canned their coach and had a losing season not long after 2019. So that to me is lightning in a bottle. Other teams could have been lightning in a bottle over the last 20 years and won a title, but since the sec gets the benefit of the doubt, we won't ever know

---

LSU has not cratered as a program.

---

LSU went from 15-0 and an MNC in 2019 to finishing last in their division, getting pounded in their bowl game, finishing 6-7 and firing their coach in 2021.

That is cratering in every sense of the word.

---

Yeah that''s basically falling off a cliff.

Did we end up hiring ogre as a consultant? I swear I saw a picture of him on the field wearing Baylor gear sometime this past year.

I think his son was on staff

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

montypython said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

So if your upset about Mizzou ranking does that make you upset Okie St was ranked

---

I'm not upset about it.

I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of the system that has been in place for decades and how the SEC benefits the most from it.

---

When you have most of the best teams you get the benefit of the doubt.

---

When you don't have most of the best teams (2000-2012) why get the benefit of the doubt?

---

What more does the SEC have to do to demonstrate it has multiple teams with great programs?

---

As related to the BCS era, what exactly did the sec demonstrate during the 2 team invitational era? You would probably say they won more MNC's, right? Anyone can see the results, it's obvious right?

Well, it's simple really. They were invited more often. That doesn't mean they were the best conference, it just means they had more opportunity to play.

You cannot win if you aren't being allowed to play. It's as simple as that.

---

Who do you think the best conference has been the past 7 years?

---

To me it's pretty clear the sec has surged ahead. If we look at MNC's, here are the totals since 2016:

SEC - 5 MNCs
ACC - 2 MNCs
B10 - 1 MNC

If we grade conference vs conference: SEC is 98-77 since 2016 vs the (other) P5 conferences. That's not as eye opening of a difference, but they are ahead.

2023 12-13
2022 17-9
2021 13-10
2020 5-2
2019 16-8
2018 14-9
2017 10-12
2016 11-14

The top end of the SEC has been really stout of late. I think the rest of the conference is piggy backing off Georgia and Alabama, though. Look how fast LSU cratered. They literally canned their coach and had a losing season not long after 2019. So that to me is lightning in a bottle. Other teams could have been lightning in a bottle over the last 20 years and won a title, but since the sec gets the benefit of the doubt, we won't ever know

---

LSU has not cratered as a program.

---

LSU went from 15-0 and an MNC in 2019 to finishing last in their division, getting pounded in their bowl game, finishing 6-7 and firing their coach in 2021.

That is cratering in every sense of the word.

---

That's a bad season. Doesn't mean their program is toast.

Is coach O still hanging around our campus?

IowaBear said:

---

Mizzou plays and beats a ranked BC team and now that BC team suddenly sucks. No winning when arguing with the SEC haters club

---

"beats a ranked BC team"

Ranked? The ranking system is illogical - we guess who is good based on a prior season and whatever bias is currently present.

Boston college was 6-6 last year and lost 3 straight to end the season. They perhaps don't suck, but they are average at best. They never should have been ranked to begin with.

Case in point - they are losing to WKU, a CUSA team, 14-0 at the moment.

BTW, BC isn't ranked anymore. So shouldn't MIzzou drop because of that, since that was a 'good' win?

Mizzou hasn't beaten anyone.

Mizzou was 11-2 last year. A 3rd grader could comprehend why they're ranked high right now. WKU is going to win. 10 games this year btw.
When Mizzou loses then you can ***** and moan.

Ole Miss is currently struggling with UK's D. Some really hard hits being delivered by both teams.

IowaBear said:

---

Mizzou was 11-2 last year.

---

You fail to comprehend the fallacy of ranking. Last year has little if anything to do with this year.

You pointed to BC being ranked and how Misery beat them.

Well guess what - BC isn't ranked and is currently losing to a CUSA team.

It was a ranked win at the time Mizzou returned a huge chunk of their team. I'm done arguing. You think Mizzou sucks and that's fine. 15-2 since 23 start says otherwise. Have a good day

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

Mizzou was 11-2 last year.

---

You fail to comprehend the fallacy of ranking. Last year has little if anything to do with this year.

You pointed to BC being ranked and how Misery beat them.

Well guess what - BC isn't ranked and is currently losing to a CUSA team.

---

Anyone who thinks the ranking system should mean anything has an extra chromosome.

However, you may be as dumb for arguing with him about it for so long

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

montypython said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

So if your upset about Mizzou ranking does that make you upset Okie St was ranked

---

I'm not upset about it.

I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of the system that has been in place for decades and how the SEC benefits the most from it.

---

When you have most of the best teams you get the benefit of the doubt.

---

When you don't have most of the best teams (2000-2012) why get the benefit of the doubt?

---

What more does the SEC have to do to demonstrate it has multiple teams with great programs?

---

As related to the BCS era, what exactly did the sec demonstrate during the 2 team invitational era? You would probably say they won more MNC's, right? Anyone can see the results, it's obvious right?

Well, it's simple really. They were invited more often. That doesn't mean they were the best conference, it just means they had more opportunity to play.

You cannot win if you aren't being allowed to play. It's as simple as that.

---

Who do you think the best conference has been the past 7 years?

---

To me it's pretty clear the sec has surge ahead. If we look at MNC's, here are the totals since 2016:

SEC - 5 MNCs
ACC - 2 MNCs
B10 - 1 MNC

If we grade conference vs conference: SEC is 98-77 since 2016 vs the (other) P5 conferences. That's not as eye opening of a difference, but they are ahead.

2023 12-13
2022 17-9
2021 13-10
2020 5-2
2019 16-8
2018 14-9
2017 10-12
2016 11-14

The top end of the SEC has been really stout of late. I think the rest of the conference is piggy backing off Georgia and Alabama, though. Look how fast LSU cratered. They literally canned their coach and had a losing season not long after 2019. So that to me is lightning in a bottle. Other teams could have been lightning in a bottle over the last 20 years and won a title, but since the sec gets the benefit of the doubt, we won't ever know

---

---

That's apparently cratering according to this thread.

---

Going from 15-0 to 6-7 and getting pounded in your bowl game is cratering to LSU. They saw what was going on and canned their coach.

We should take notes.

We went from 12-2 to 6-7 and got pounded in our bowl game but instead of firing our coach, we let him come back and lead us to a 3-9 season.

IowaBear said:

---

It was a ranked win at the time

---

It doesn't matter who was ranked or when. Rankings don't mean anything.

** rankings don't mean anything when discussing the SEC is what you meant to say. Btw BC won the game. Probably should wait until score are final before talking crap. Makes you look even more ******ed

Preseason rankings are meaningless but rankings later on certainly do matter. They will factor in determining the postseason. And the final rankings of the season matter most. For Baylor, the 2020-21 season ended with a #5 ranking, our best ever.

IowaBear said:

---

** rankings don't mean anything when discussing the SEC is what you meant to say. Btw BC won the game. Probably should wait until score are final before talking crap. Makes you look even more ******ed

---

Your communication style mimics that of 7th grader. I know because my brothers kid is in 7th grade and you talk just like him and his 7th grade buddies.

If my nephew doesn't agree with something, his replies are all sorts of fallacies such as red herrings, extending to the extremes, absurdist arguments, absolutist arguments or just flat out making stuff up - which are all things that you do.

That or perhaps you have mental health issues. If that is the case, let us know so that we don't make you feel like hurting yourself or something else.

Lame diss attempts. Gotta love them. You sat and dogged on Mizzou for beating BC and brought up BC being down to WK as your reasoning, yet they WON the game. I get it you think no one should be ranked until week 5. You've made your views clear as day.

IowaBear said:

---

** rankings don't mean anything when discussing the SEC is what you meant to say.

---

That is a straw man argument - I never said that nor implied it. My disdain for rankings applies to all of FBS football.

IowaBear said:

---

Mizzou plays and beats a ranked BC team and now that BC team suddenly sucks.

---

Extending to the extreme. It's another style of argument. You are trying to make my position extreme, so that it appears weak.

I never said BC sucked.

IowaBear said:

---

Last year has EVERYTHING to do with pre season rankings. It's been that way since I don't forever…Mizzou is a good team. If you want to think they suck

---

Extending to the extreme, again. Just part of your style.

You talked non stop yesterday about them being down to WK as some negative point. You've made it clear you don't think they or Mizzou are good.
We've been arguing for like 6 pages. I'm done responding. We're never going to agree and that's fine.

IowaBear said:

---

Yeah because you're NEVER wrong….

---

Hyperbole, or passive aggressive or both.

You replied to bear2be2 on that one.

IowaBear said:

---

And no has said Mizzou is elite. That's something you made up for the purpose of arguing.

---

You are replying to bear2be2 on that one.

He never said mizzou was elite, yet you are making that up to bolster your argument and weaken his.

IowaBear said:

---

Yes most likely. Those 4 squads were damm good and proved it all year

---

I asked you if the sec had to play 9 conference games, if those 4 11-win teams would still have won 11 games.

Your answer is quoted above.

Making assertions of outcomes is absolutist. You speak in absolutes, a lot.

Like I said, as related to sports and in my experience with you on that, you communicate like a 7th grader.

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

Mizzou plays and beats a ranked BC team and now that BC team suddenly sucks. No winning when arguing with the SEC haters club

---

"beats a ranked BC team"

Ranked? The ranking system is illogical - we guess who is good based on a prior season and whatever bias is currently present.

Boston college was 6-6 last year and lost 3 straight to end the season. They perhaps don't suck, but they are average at best. They never should have been ranked to begin with.

Case in point - they are losing to WKU, a CUSA team, 14-0 at the moment.

BTW, BC isn't ranked anymore. So shouldn't MIzzou drop because of that, since that was a 'good' win?

Mizzou hasn't beaten anyone.

---

Boston College had to start its third string Quarterback against WKU. Still pulled it out in the end.

So Ole Miss and Missouri are exactly what I said they were.

This is why SEC fluffing is stupid.

Give Alabama and Georgia their flowers. They've earned them. So has LSU for the most part, though they're down a bit now.

Stop overrating everybody else. Make them earn their rankings.

No one claims they are the end all of all things but compare them to the other conferences.

Since the Big 12 imploded the SEC and B1G took over. The Pac played in a time zone most viewers couldn't watch.

The BIG has been a snoozer since tOSU is totally dominating. Occasional hick ups like Michigan or Penn State happen but not very often.

Look at todays game in College Station. 100k in the stands. That is not unusual in the SEC and unheard of in the Huge Big 12. That is all that matters to the networks and advertisers.

Until another conference can win the NC the SEC will continue to dominate viewers

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

No one claims they are the end all of all things but compare them to the other conferences.

Since the Big 12 imploded the SEC and B1G took over. The Pac played in a time zone most viewers couldn't watch.

The BIG has been a snoozer since tOSU is totally dominating. Occasional hick ups like Michigan or Penn State happen but not very often.

Look at todays game in College Station. 100k in the stands. That is not unusual in the SEC and unheard of in the Huge Big 12. That is all that matters to the networks and advertisers.

Until another conference can win the NC the SEC will continue to dominate viewers

---

Those teams aren't anything special. Period. Stop trying to make them special because they play in a league with a few teams that are.

bear2be2 said:

---

So Ole Miss and Missouri are exactly what I said they were.

This is why SEC fluffing is stupid.

Give Alabama and Georgia their flowers. They've earned them. So has LSU for the most part, though they're down a bit now.

Stop overrating everybody else. Make them earn their rankings.

---

Whether or not Missouri can beat A&M and Ole Miss can beat Kentucky has no bearing on whether those teams are better than whatever comes out of the Big 12.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

So Ole Miss and Missouri are exactly what I said they were.

This is why SEC fluffing is stupid.

Give Alabama and Georgia their flowers. They've earned them. So has LSU for the most part, though they're down a bit now.

Stop overrating everybody else. Make them earn their rankings.

---

Whether or not Missouri can beat A&M and Ole Miss can beat Kentucky has no bearing on whether those teams are better than whatever comes out of the Big 12.

---

Blah, blah, blah.

Fluff, fluff, fluff.

Rinse.

Repeat.

morethanhecouldbear said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

Mizzou was 11-2 last year.

---

You fail to comprehend the fallacy of ranking. Last year has little if anything to do with this year.

You pointed to BC being ranked and how Misery beat them.

Well guess what - BC isn't ranked and is currently losing to a CUSA team.

---

It can definitely lead into some strange logic. We're basically operating on the unproven premise that the early rankings are more or less close which then colors everything else. I agree but you need early rankings to drum up interest. I do think returners, proven coaching, and supposed aggregate talent level can give some tells but you have to watch them on the field to really determine.

You saw some of it with the big 12 in basketball last year, when the league wasn't all that great and lacked top end talent outside of a raw Bu. Beat a "highly ranked" team and then prop up your rank. They "beat each other up" when middle of the league kept losing. It isn't sound logic.

The Sec does get the benefit of the doubt in cases bc their very top tier (most years) is the among the best and they have the best overall talent level. Ga and Bama are among the very very best.. I think that is proven. But when you watch the play on the field, outside of the top two / three, it isn't that impressive. Now granted, the big 12's "tape" this year is pretty bad outside of a healthy Utah defense and three players on CU.