GarySJ Posted December 23, 2007 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 2,661 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/14/2000 Share Posted December 23, 2007 I'm just glad any time a college football observer rates the conferences on their actual success in winning football games, instead of their pre-conceived notions.I don't buy all the "lack of speed" arguments about the Big Ten. But it's undeniable that the Big Ten was awful this year.And the article makes a salient point about the Big Ten having three guaranteed New Year's Day slots, while Rutgers' 10-win team has to go to some first-year bowl on a network nobody gets, and Cincinnati's Top 25 9-win team has to go to the Papa Johns Bowl.The Outback Bowl: rewarding Big Ten mediocrity since 1993. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smazza Posted December 23, 2007 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 66,091 Reputation: 2,434 Days Won: 172 Joined: 01/01/2001 Share Posted December 23, 2007 I'm just glad any time a college football observer rates the conferences on their actual success in winning football games, instead of their pre-conceived notions.I don't buy all the "lack of speed" arguments about the Big Ten. But it's undeniable that the Big Ten was awful this year.And the article makes a salient point about the Big Ten having three guaranteed New Year's Day slots, while Rutgers' 10-win team has to go to some first-year bowl on a network nobody gets, and Cincinnati's Top 25 9-win team has to go to the Papa Johns Bowl.The Outback Bowl: rewarding Big Ten mediocrity since 1993.how do you explain the collective assss whooping at the expense of faster teams for last 25 yearsbig ten still means lots of people and media attention and that is why they get choice spots Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smazza Posted December 23, 2007 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 66,091 Reputation: 2,434 Days Won: 172 Joined: 01/01/2001 Share Posted December 23, 2007 How many No. 2s lost in the BCS this season. Taking care of business is easier said than done. That's why the games are played. Our Bulls have matched the most wins in a season. They are going to the secondest oldest bowl game in college football against a BCS team. A win probably gets them ranked in the first AP and USA/Today polls next season. And the Bulls will probably have three first day draft picks. If only a NC satisfies your Bull fanatacism, you are going to have a rough ride as a fan. This program has been playing at the top level of football for three seasons (D1A - BCS). Our team doesn't even have a complete five seasons of recruiting the states best athletes as a BCS contender. So please, dial it back it bit bro.you are in fantasy landanother 4-3 finish in big east isnt top level of footbALLi expect usf to compete for a big east championship.they havent done it yet.they came close but ru dashed our hopes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarySJ Posted December 23, 2007 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 2,661 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/14/2000 Share Posted December 23, 2007 how do you explain the collective assss whooping at the expense of faster teams for last 25 yearsEasy: you don't know what you're talking about. As usual.Since 2000, the Big Ten is 16-22 vs the Pac-10, and 12-14 vs the SEC. Those numbers hardly suggest an overall inability to compete. And many of the losses to "fast teams" were close games against strong competition. The Michigan-Texas Rose Bowl comes to mind.And nobody was making this argument in the 1980s or 1990s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smazza Posted December 24, 2007 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 66,091 Reputation: 2,434 Days Won: 172 Joined: 01/01/2001 Share Posted December 24, 2007 how do you explain the collective assss whooping at the expense of faster teams for last 25 yearsEasy: you don't know what you're talking about. As usual.Since 2000, the Big Ten is 16-22 vs the Pac-10, and 12-14 vs the SEC. Those numbers hardly suggest an overall inability to compete. And many of the losses to "fast teams" were close games against strong competition. The Michigan-Texas Rose Bowl comes to mind.And nobody was making this argument in the 1980s or 1990s.you are kidding,right?you need to do better than thatwhy dont you state specific games?we will start this year and go bACKWARDSMICHIGAN V APP STOSU V ILLLAST YEARS BOWL GAMESUF VOSUMICH V USCMARYLAND V PURDUEAS USUAL,YOU ARE PROVEN WRONG and you make it sooooooooo easythe bottom feeders v bottom feeders doesnt mean anythingit is best against best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smazza Posted December 24, 2007 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 66,091 Reputation: 2,434 Days Won: 172 Joined: 01/01/2001 Share Posted December 24, 2007 you are one of a few people in america thAT DOESNT RECOGNIZE BIG TEN IS SLOW and plays an outdated game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarySJ Posted December 24, 2007 Group: Member Topic Count: 0 Content Count: 2,661 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/14/2000 Share Posted December 24, 2007 OSU V ILL :DuhMARYLAND V PURDUEthe bottom feeders v bottom feeders doesnt mean anythingit is best against best :DuhMICHIGAN V APP STYou forgot Oregon. :Duh Smazza, one of these days I'm going to buy the court transcript from one of your cases just to see if you're as obtuse in real life as you are on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.