re: As the season draws closer and closer, Oregon fans get crazier and crazier

Since y'all like to throw around that stat, you should note that LSU is undefeated.

So nice I had to say it twice.

This is hilarious! UO fans can't stand USC but they sure as hell ride their coattails when discussing conference strength. The PAC1 vs SEC matchups would be lopsided if it wasn't for SC. Nobody said the best in the PAC1 isn't as good as the best in the SEC. But everyone knows the PAC1 AS A WHOLE is nowhere near the SEC AS A WHOLE. Most people, not just SEC fans, wouldn't even put the PAC1 as the closest to the SEC.

But you ramble about having a decent record against the SEC. Thanks to your "best" beating up on some SEC "lessers", the record is respectable. If you look at the SEC losses on your matchups, you will see a lot of Miss. St., Allbarn (when they were not good), and Tenn. Grats on your best beating our mid tier (at best). But unfortunately for you that doesn't mean the conference as a whole.

I've gone down this road before. I know the whole routine. I even had a website showing the comparison between the two conferences. This argument has been done over and over many times with countless Trojan fans. It never ends well for the PAC1.

You want to talk OCs? You only get 3? Like thats some achievement. For the PAC1 playing less OCs is actually a good thing since the average OC opponent is usually tougher than what they have IC. You mention 9 straight conference games without a creampuff? Half the teams in the conference ARE creampuffs. I understand the biases, but get real. If you are going to spew that non-factual biased bullshite around, then I'm not even going to waste my time putting your mis-informed arse in place. The PAC1 entire schedule is a creampuff... other than the 1 or 2 (sometimes) tough teams. Thats why they have to schedule tougher OCs just to get the strength of schedule up. Even then you can go thru the PAC1s OC schedule and see lots of East Wash., Wyoming, UNLV, etc... so don't make it seem like EVERY OC is tough. And don't make it seem like the SECs OC is always easy either. We have played several PAC1 teams ya know. Thought you said PAC1 is good... yet we play scrub OCs? We also play the likes of WVU, UNC, several PAC1 teams, and upcoming games like TCU, Oklahoma.

So on top of playing a much tougher in conference schedule, our OOC is as tough or tougher than most PAC1s.

At the time I did the research and had this same debate the SEC played about 60% more games against ranked opponents than the PAC1. So regardless of in or out of conference... the SEC blows the PAC1 out of the water. You would do well to not even mention schedules. You might just want to stick to head to head matchup and hope nobody notices the obvious that the PAC1 is aided tremendously by the fact that the majority of head to head PAC1 wins is from your elites playing our mid to lowers.

But I'm not going to waste any more time on this subject as I have invested dozens of hours into this debate a few years ago and I knew all the numbers at that time. I hardly think the numbers have changes much in the last couple seasons.

And besides, arguing over the internet is like competing in the special olympics... you may win, but you are still a retard.

Now i'll leave you to believe your own spin and not the facts.

Good bye and good luck this coming season

quote:

---

LSU fans will be very happy with how their team has done vs the PAC, however that was mostly against our weakest members. But still, LSU has not lost this last Century yet.

BCS era started in 1998. Did not meet in'98,'99.

2000 UCLA .......... vs Alabama .......W 35-24
2001 UCLA ........... @ Alabama .......W 20-17
2002 Oregon ........ vs Mississippi St W 36-13
2002 USC ............ vs Auburn .........W 24-17
2003 Oregon ......... @ Mississippi St W 42-34
2003 USC ............. @ Auburn ........ W 23-00
2003 Arizona ........ vs LSU .............. L 13-59
2004 Oregon St ..... @ LSU .............. L 21-22 (ot)
2005 Arizona St .... vs LSU .............. L 31-35
2005 USC ............. vs Arkansas ..... W 70-17
2006 California ...... @ Tennessee .... L 18-35
2006 USC .............. @ Arkansas ..... W 50-14
2006 Washington St @ Auburn .......... L 14-40
2006 Arizona ......... @ LSU .............. L 03-45
2007 California ..... vs Tennessee ... W 45-31
2008 UCLA ........... vs Tennessee ... W 27-24 (ot)
2008 Arizona St .... vs Georgia ........ L 10-27
2009 Washington .. vs LSU .............. L 23-31
2009 UCLA ............ @ Tennessee ... W 19-15
2009 Arizona St ..... @ Georgia ........ L 17-20
2010 Oregon ......... @ Tenn ............ W 48-13
2011 Oregon(BCS Title)Auburn .........L 22-19

---

Ducksfly,

Just as you said LSU beat up against your "weaker" members, the same could be said for the games in which PAC 10 teams beat SEC teams. The schedules are made years in advance, thus it is almost impossible to project how strong a particular program will be in a given year.

That being said, I agree with you that there should be no excuses concerning this year's Oregon v. LSU matchup considering each team's personnel coupled with each team's pre-season expectations. On paper, the game appears to be very evenly matched.

Dude I think they anchored the thread......

quote:

---

New Mexico (1-11 in the mwc)
Tennessee (only 2 sec teams had a worse record)
Portland State (2-9 in the big sky)

---

When New Mexico was scheduled they had just had a great season and were in a bowl game. It looked like a good game back then.

When Tenn was scheduled, they were a good team, how would anyone know they would have a down year?

Portland State was a fill-in for a team who backed out of a game. I don't recall who it was, but they were much better competition. We have holes in our schedule where both Georgia and Kansas or Kansas State (one or the other) backed out of their home and home series with us. Those may not be perennial powers, but not necessarily creampuffs either. Some teams don't want to play the better teams, they would rather have a win. I imagine you have the same problem trying to schedule good games.

I do respect LSU for having no fear of playing the best in other conferences. It is one of those things that makes LSU an elite team instead of a pretend team. (hi Georgia, you digested chicken feed)(don't want to be crude and say chickenshits)

quote:

---

LSU can man up in the secondary and go after that QB's arse! I dont see Oregon's WR challenging the secondary down the field.

---

The key will be stopping the read option. If LSU does this well, we are pretty screwed. Your secondary is 10x more talented than our WR corp. Our saving grace is that Barner is going to play a lot of slot, and we have a bevy of TEs.

outta curiosity, who will be replacing Maehl? Link?

I've got alot of respect for you duck fans. You've convinced me that you guys aren't overrated one bit heading into this season.

Damn. No other Duck defending the PAC 10? Damn.

Geaux Tahel, your a deceiver and a jack-wagon. I know you like to smack talk, but you wonder why no one takes you serious. This will be the very last time I respond to any of your delirious posts. I said in my last one for you to "read every single word of mine carefully and do not twist any single one of my words."

You were not able to do so.

First you called the PAC 10 a "Shitty Conference". Then you lied twisting a fellow Ducks words and now the PAC are "creampuffs".

You have as much access to stats as I do. Why do you not look at the stats from the modern football era (1998)and look for the Conference for the most AQ team wins of any single Conference. You know, AQ's are the big boys, not little children of the poor teams, and not lower D-2 schools. Percentage wise, The PAC 10 has beat more AQ teams then any single Conference.

That kind of blows your, "its all USC" myth doesn't it. And speaking of USC, they only played 4 times vs the SEC in this time frame. LSU played 5. So, kind of ironic that you say, "take out USC's wins against our worst and they have nothing". OH really. LSU played the PAC- 10 five times, even worse in total then the USC games in playing the strong vs the weak. In the 2003 USC-AU game for instance, USC was ranked #8, AU #6, and AU was the favorite. But USC UPSET them. True LSU did upset ASU that one year, however LSU was ranked #5, while ASU was #15. In total LSU played more weaker PAC then USC did SEC, and even more games of them, but nice spin!

And also: I never said I do not count USC's wins in the PAC. We do not however call USC "us" nor see them as "us" but of course they are in our Conference so of course we count them, as Other SEC's count your even more wins vs the PAC. And btw, UO has 3 wins vs USC in Pete Carrol era. Also of note, USC has not won in the whole state of Oregon for the last 5-6 years(cant remember which)all while playing every year in the state of Oregon.

Also, I never was boasting of UO's record last year. And like another LSU guy said, one never knows how good a team will be per say. I will now however boast...When we scheduled Tenn, at the time, it looked very hard.
And, last years schedule was not our norm. I will tell you UO's pattern and norm. We try to get at least 1 really tough OC game, I medium hard, and one cupcake per year but it is more rare that cupcake is a D-2 school. Sometimes we get 2 out of the 3 games even that are really challenging like this year(LSU and Nevada-the only team to beat BSU last year) and the year before last-BSU-who beat us and Utah- who had been on a record setting win streak and just months before beat Bama. We ended their win streak in a very close game.) So the year before last and this year we are playing 2 thirds(or 66 percent) of our whole OC schedule with a tough battle to win. Also if you want to know, this LSU game is not foreign to us. We played Michigan season starting back when they were still really good at #3 in the nation.(and beat them) And you boast about LSU's schedule for this year. Yes you are playing 2 as well,THIS YEAR- UO and W.Vir. However, that is only 2 out of 4 this year, which is a 50 percent grade of playing teams that factor to be possible tough games. And well, well, well... Since you are the spin master, I looked at LSU's previous schedules and what did I find? All the way back to 2002 is as far as I checked and I found that in all years except for this current season, LSU's schedule always had 3 cupcakes and 1 decent team to face. So every single year(except for this year) you have only played 25 percent of your whole OC schedule that was a challenge. And UO plays min 33 percent and often times 66 percent. Thus, there are no comparisons, apples to oranges buddy. But nice try.

Oh, all this data... I know the truth must be getting to your head... But these are just two teams one can see. (but you boasted of your teams schedule and you knocked UO's is only why I bring it up and I proved your a deceiver[AGAIN].)

I claimed the Pac 10 has always scheduled harder then any other Conference by a country mile. And that claim is true. But you try, and claim the SEC's is much harder OC. Really now...In the SEC you have some teams that only play 4 little sisters of the poor like OleMiss(who lost to a D-2 school) and Kentucky was near close. And look at Kentucky. All they had to do was win those 3 cupcakes plus Louisville and then ONLY WIN 2 SEC games, and Merry Christmas, they go to a bowl. Then the SEC gets to boast on their records and how good they are and how many SEC teams made bowls.

And then you have teams like Oregon St in the PAC who played not only Louisville but also TCU and BSU. Ya, when you schedule as hard as TCU and BSU you may not win, and in their case, they lost those both. And then they did the normal PAC 10 thing that happens every single year, the PAC 10 beats up on each other, and tons of Parity and guess what? They did not make a bowl. UW lost to BYU and Nebraska. ASU lost to Wisky in a super close one. OSU lost to TCU/BSU. Just think if the PAC played all those little sisters of the poor and other D-2 schools each year like the SEC does. And you wonder why PAC teams do not send many to bowl games. The PAC not only schedules the hardest of any Conference but they internally play 9 Conference games all in a row. And any single CF fan who even remotely follows PAC football knows in the PAC, any team can loose to each other. It is always, ALWAYS Canabolism internally every single year! Even in the great years of USC, they did not loose to anybody in the Country hardly but they did loose to several fellow PAC 10 schools. They dominated the whole freaking Country but yet the only teams who could beat them were fellow PAC teams. Also, if the SEC played 9 Conference games, that = 6 automatic losses for the whole SEC each year. Plus, play them all in a row(no cupcake to take a rest with at the end of the season), and you look and see how marvelous the SEC's records are not.

I have been, and will be the first to say the SEC is a strong Conference! However, your knowledge of College Football is piss poor at best.

(sorry for the long rant to others, part 2 next)