re: TAMU sticks out like a sore thumb

I know exactly how the polls work douchebag. If we had Bama and LSU at home this year we would be ranked about 7 spots higher and LSU would be about 4 lower.

ETA: frick it, I'm rooting for Oregon now. Gonna laugh my arse off when you lose this game.

quote:

---

, I'm rooting for Oregon now.

---

by all means geaux right ahead. I do not beleive in this stupid root for the SEC crap.

quote:

---

Gonna laugh my arse off when you lose this game

---

I can see why, it would horribly embarassing to lose to a top 5 team at a neutral site possibly with a QB that has not been working with the 1st team.

quote:

---

Come back when you're IN the SEC.

---

LSU is already in the SEC. Why don't you come back when UK carries mens football.

Congrats on all those Music City Bowl wins though

quote:

---

Are you fricking serious??? You can't be right?

---

Yes, and yes. Just look at the preseason polls historically. If they thought Ark was a top 10 team they would be in the top 10. ARk is not being pushed down because of their schedule and A&M is not being pushed up because of theirs.

quote:

---

more worried about losing the A&M game than the LSU game. We beat ya'll by two touchdowns. Sig quote it.

---

wow, you are really hurting my feelings

quote:

---

So along this line of reasoing, you're saying that Boise St. would be ranked in the top 10 as well if they were in the SEC

---

Why would Boise be in the SEC? The logic fail is on you. Only SEC tards would even think that the outside world ranks all teams based on how they would or would not do in the SEC. The teams are ranked on their own merit. Based on SECtrad logic, Boise would not be ranked at all. How they would afare vs in SEC schedule is irrelevant as they do not have the benefits of being in the SEC.

The rest of the world respects the SEC as the best conference, but they do not think, well, if team X was in the SEC they would be 7-5, but in the Big 12-2 they can go 10-2, so we will ranked them #8. It doesn't work that way.

quote:

---

I'm sorry I had to respond to this twice b/c it's one of the dumbest things I've seen in awhile.

---

I view that as compliment from a cluesless, sectard.

quote:

---

. I would say you're about 16 but since you've been posting since 2003 I don't think it's possible.

---

then you would be woefully mistaken. Its only near adolecents like you that have the SECcentric view, that temas like Miss State or Ark would win every other conference because they are in the SEC.

A&M is ranked in the top 10 BECAUSE of its schedule and the odds of winning all of the games on it. Those odds will go down A LOT if A&M were to play an SEC schedule. It's a fact.

quote:

---

Please say Boise St. would be ranked in the top 10 also

---

what are you talking about? Boise is ranked #5. How they'd do vs an SEC schedule is pointless. They are not, if they were in the SEC, they have the advantages of being in the SEC, namely much greater revenue and access to a deeper pool of talent. I guarentee you no one that ranks teams thinks in terms of how Team X would do in the SEC.

A&M is ranked #8 right now bacause they went 9-4, but played very well late in the year, the Bowl aside and have 8 and 9 starters back. They would be in about the same boat if they were in the SEC last year.

They problem with SECtards if you see they lost to LSU and Ark and play in weaker conference, so you assume they would have lost more games. Well, that's not necessarily so. Aside from those 2 games, they lost to Ok State and Mizzo, both won 10 games and were ranked in the top 20. now if A&M was in the SEC W, they also would have played Bama and AU. Ah ha says the SECtard they would have lost games as well. And that's very likly, but that's still only 4 loses (which they had anyway) because they would not have played OSU and Mo. Would they have beaten Miss State? I was say it depends on where they would have played. For that matter, they did not play LSU or Ark at home and they did beat OU and Nebraska at home, the only team I'd say they for sure would not have beaten, even if they played at CS would be Auburn. They could have beaten anyone else in the SEC at home. Please note could does not mean would. Who would they have gotten out of the East? Where would they have played? What bowl would they have gone to and who would they have played. Obviously it would not have been LSU. Maybe they would have played OSU or that crappy Michigan team State killed.

Bottom line, if A&M was in the SEC in 2011, they probalby finsih with about the same record and possibly a bowl win, which would put them preseason in the top 10 with 17 or 18 retrurning starters.

I d

quote:

---

on't give a shite about the page long response you just posted
b/c it deflects from the earlier post

---

what deflects from the the eariler post is bringing up boise and other ridicuouls hypotheticals. Its a clear sign you have no argument. Other than S#C #1

quote:

---

you said preseason rankings wouldn't be different if A&M was in the SEC. How is this different than if Boise was in the SEC?

---

because A&M and Boise are different schools.

quote:

---

Their schedules would be completely different

---

yes

quote:

---

so would their preseason rankings

---

not really

quote:

---

A&M would not be ranked in the top 10 if they had to play an SEC schedule.

---

You don't know that. You are only looking at one side of the equation. If they were in the SEC, they would play Bama and LSU, but not OU and OSU. a loss is a loss is a loss. they do not count double in the SEC. You also don't know where they games would be played, who they'd play out of the east or what OOC games they'd play.

quote:

---

OU wouldn't be ranked # 1

---

Then why is Bama ranked #2? Why were they ranked #1 last year with games at LSU, Arky, vs Auburn, Florida and USCe? You are making no sense. SEC teams are ranked in the top 5 EVERY year. If you think the reason they are not ranked #1 is because the voters think the other team (OU, USC or whoever) has an easier schedule, you are even more delusional than I thought.

You are just exposing your SECcentric view of the world. OU is ranked #1 because they are loaded with Talent and have a lot of returning stars, most notably their QB.

Look buddy, all you've done is make yourself look like more of an arse with each post. I've got A&M fans agreeing with me here, maybe that should've been a clue to just stop.

You are wrong. DWI

ETA: And the reason LSU is ranked #4 is b/c they are loaded at every position. You would be ranked #1 if you had Saban still, but you don't, you've got Lesticles and thus you'll lose 1 or 2 games you shouldn't most likely.