- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Herbstreit praising the SEC on the radio...
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:22 pm to KillerNut9
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:22 pm to KillerNut9
quote:
Didn't your mother teach you violence never solves anything?
You failed to quote the part where I said I hope not, I just have that feeling.
1
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:29 pm to MJRuffalo
quote:
You failed to quote the part where I said I hope not, I just have that feeling.
Hope you're not the kind who doesn't comprehend friendly trash talking.
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:34 pm to MJRuffalo
It is you that is disturbed and its already been explained in this thread...plus how about do your own due dilegence for a change...
Your "simple" math leaves out the simple equations of every ranked team winning that 9th conference game, which on average the SEC has had 4 to 5 ranked teams any given week during the season and if they do not win it does not necessarily mean they would fall out the rankings...
Yeah, simple math...
quote:
I am mearly pointing out a fact that with every team in the PAC-10 playing 9 conference games as opposed to 8, then the overall records of the conference will suffer therfore leading to less "ranked" teams. Simple math, well simple for most of us at least.
Your "simple" math leaves out the simple equations of every ranked team winning that 9th conference game, which on average the SEC has had 4 to 5 ranked teams any given week during the season and if they do not win it does not necessarily mean they would fall out the rankings...
Yeah, simple math...
This post was edited on 7/31/08 at 9:36 pm
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:39 pm to KillerNut9
quote:
Hope you're not the kind who doesn't comprehend friendly trash talking.
Not at all and welcome it. I could be wrong but I have this feeling that I may run into some loudmouth buckeye fan looking for a problem after his team loses. Whatever, I'll try and bring a video recorder so at least I can put it on Youtube.
I am 99.9% sure this will occur the following year in Columbus. Usually away fans are more generally well behaved as most are Alumni, home games are a different story.
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:40 pm to LSURulzSEC
quote:
It is you that is disturbed and its already been explained in this thread...plus how about do your own due dilegence for a change...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am mearly pointing out a fact that with every team in the PAC-10 playing 9 conference games as opposed to 8, then the overall records of the conference will suffer therfore leading to less "ranked" teams. Simple math, well simple for most of us at least.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your "simple" math leaves out the simple equations of every ranked team winning that 9th conference game, which on average the SEC has had 4 to 5 ranked teams any given week during the season and if they do not win it does not necessarily mean they would fall out the rankings...
Yeah, simple math...
I need someone to translate Cajun jibberish into English
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:43 pm to MJRuffalo
Nice side step after having your "simple math" equation debunked...
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:45 pm to MJRuffalo
quote:
I am 99.9% sure this will occur the following year in Columbus.
If a Michigan fan can get away with flipping off and taunting a house full of drunk OSU students in 2006 without getting a drop of beer on him then I don't think any OSU fan would waste their time trying to start something with a USC fan.
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:46 pm to KillerNut9
quote:
If a Michigan fan can get away with flipping off and taunting a house full of drunk OSU students in 2006 without getting a drop of beer on him then I don't think any OSU fan would waste their time trying to start something with a USC fan.
Well I don't go around doing anything like that at all, I just don't put up with too much. I remeber seeing some video after a home loss of these clowns in Columbus doing all kinds of stupid shite.
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:47 pm to LSURulzSEC
quote:
Nice side step after having your "simple math" equation debunked...
I didn't side step anything. You are just making no sense at all.
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:50 pm to MJRuffalo
quote:
I just don't put up with too much
Yeah you should like your chances of kicking an OSU fan's arse in Columbus
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:52 pm to KillerNut9
quote:
Yeah you should like your chances of kicking an OSU fan's arse in Columbus
A fan, no problem. Bunch of fans, problem.
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:58 pm to MJRuffalo
Your statement...
Your 8 conference games you are referring to is the 8 the SEC plays except the 2 participants in the SEC title game which end up playing 9 conference games...
My Response...
Your statement suggest that with the 9th game you will have less ranked teams which is not necessarily true, just because a rank teams loses does not necessarily mean they will fall out of the rankings...yes the conference W-L records suffer more but it does not necessarily mean you have less ranked teams just because of that one extra game...
Now what is so confusing about that?
quote:
I am mearly pointing out a fact that with every team in the PAC-10 playing 9 conference games as opposed to 8, then the overall records of the conference will suffer therfore leading to less "ranked" teams. Simple math, well simple for most of us at least.
Your 8 conference games you are referring to is the 8 the SEC plays except the 2 participants in the SEC title game which end up playing 9 conference games...
My Response...
quote:
Your "simple" math leaves out the simple equations of every ranked team winning that 9th conference game, which on average the SEC has had 4 to 5 ranked teams any given week during the season and if they do not win it does not necessarily mean they would fall out the rankings...
Your statement suggest that with the 9th game you will have less ranked teams which is not necessarily true, just because a rank teams loses does not necessarily mean they will fall out of the rankings...yes the conference W-L records suffer more but it does not necessarily mean you have less ranked teams just because of that one extra game...
Now what is so confusing about that?
Posted on 7/31/08 at 9:59 pm to LSURulzSEC
quote:
2. I am mearly pointing out a fact that with every team in the PAC-10 playing 9 conference games as opposed to 8, then the overall records of the conference will suffer therfore leading to less "ranked" teams. Simple math, well simple for most of us at least.
Wrong.
In-conference records are the same for every conference, every year, whether 2 teams or 100 teams, and that's 50%. For every win there is a loss.
Where it becomes a problem for a conference's teams in terms of rankings is when there is so much parity in a conference that no team can get through a season without losing games so that its teams tend to get shorted on rankings and bowl games.
Top heavy conferences, like the PAthetiC-10, have 1 or maybe 2 teams that dominate every year and tend to look stronger than they really are, but do it on the backs of the scrubs in their conference, kind of like OSU did last year. I'd say SC did the same, but I think mighty Stanford exposed them.
I think you need to retake remedial math.
This post was edited on 7/31/08 at 10:00 pm
Posted on 7/31/08 at 10:00 pm to MJRuffalo
quote:Here are facts, (history worth), that proves USC would be much worse if it played southern teams and LSU would be much better if it played western teams...............
First off I never said head and shoulders better than everyone else. I just said the #1 program right now.
Secondly USC has had a tougher overall SOS than any SEC team over the past 6 years. Accordinf to Sagarin our SOS average for the past 6 years is 11. No SEC team comes close to that. Our SOS last year was the weakest this decade, with Idaho being so bad, and Nebraska and Notre Dame all having historically horrible years that is not typical for those programs. USC plays 6 home and 6 road games. That is already much tougher than the typical 8 and 4 you get in the SEC.
USC would be just as dominant anywhere. In our 4 games with SEC teams we have had 1 which was competitive. Every other one was a blowout. Our 2 wins over Arkasnas were far worse than any SEC team could do to them. In fact in 2005 USC beat Arkansas by more points than the rest of the SEC COMBINED!!!
USC vs Pac10 (Current members) 389 - 155 - 29 .704
USC vs SEC (Current members) 17 - 10 - 1 .625
USC vs Pac10 (Members time of game) 242 - 84 - 8 .737
USC vs SEC (Members time of game) 14 - 10 - 1 .580
USC vs West Region 560 - 196 - .74
USC vs South Region 27 - 18 - .60
LSU vs Pac10 (Current members) 12 - 3 - 0 .800
LSU vs SEC (Current members) 308 - 232 - 25 .567
LSU vs Pac10 (Members time of game) 11 - 2 - 0 .846
LSU vs SEC (Members time of game) 264 - 196 - 22 .571
LSU vs West Region 31 - 7 - .82
LSU vs South Region 520 - 292 - .64
Posted on 7/31/08 at 10:00 pm to MJRuffalo
Maybe you could find someone to translate "cajun jibberish" if they thought you could spell. The word is "merely," not "mearly." Oh, I forgot about how bad the schools are in CA. A fairly well-kept secret! I never get tired of looking at the photo of one of your big USC men bawling his eyes out because he wasn't man enough to take Saban's criticism. Maybe "soft" explains why USC can lose to a 40-pt underdog?
Posted on 7/31/08 at 10:06 pm to MJRuffalo
Hey Muffalo, USC Has not played the cream of the crop of the SEC. When you speak of winning against the SEC, you do not speak of playing Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, or some team named LSU. That Arkansas game out there was their first game of the season after losing Matt Jones as Qb the year before, and they were not much, especially early in the year. And McFadden basically played with a recently re-sewn on big toe in the other game, also Qbacked by some guy named Johnson who did not Qb another game all year. And when you beat Auburn out there, you won by a whopping touchdown, and in 03, I think Auburn lost 4 games on the year, including 31-7 to us, when we led 21-0 in the first quarter and Saban called of the dogs. But anyway, the one fact that you are cluless on though is that USC would be as dominant as you and ESPN think they have been, no matter what conference they played in. That is a fricking joke, and even you know it. Also, who is the next USC player that we are all gonna find out about who has been recieving money and benefits from somebody on the outside? Just thought you might have some insight, since you have enlightened us all on so many other areas. Hell, USC players like Ellis wait a long time time to sign, cause they generally take a pay cut to play pro ball after leaving USC. 
Posted on 7/31/08 at 10:20 pm to kclsufan
quote:
Wrong.
In-conference records are the same for every conference, every year, whether 2 teams or 100 teams, and that's 50%. For every win there is a loss. Exactly so the best/worst the confernce could do by adding the 9th conference game is .500. Conversely, when the 12th game was added most conferences, not just the SEC added some creampuff at home. Winning percentage for those games are .800+. So in the PAC-10 you are going to have a few either 7-5 or 8-4 teams that would have otherwise been 8-4 or 9-3 and thus "ranked". Capiche?
Where it becomes a problem for a conference's teams in terms of rankings is when there is so much parity in a conference that no team can get through a season without losing games so that its teams tend to get shorted on rankings and bowl games. Pretty much the PAC-10.
Top heavy conferences, like the PAthetiC-10, have 1 or maybe 2 teams that dominate every year and tend to look stronger than they really are, but do it on the backs of the scrubs in their conference, kind of like OSU did last year. Incorrect. I'd say SC did the same, but I think mighty Stanford exposed them. But you are wrong of course. Look at the middle of the PAC-10 last year, Oregon, Oregon St., Arizona, Cal. Those teams are just going to beat each other. Replace one of those games with some rent-a-win and voila you have 5-6 ranked teams.
I think you need to retake remedial math.
Posted on 7/31/08 at 10:23 pm to tigerstros
The point is, USC can beat a SEC team every once in a while when you play them, but you are NOT going to beat SEC teams week in and week out. You can gloat all you want about beating a SEC team now, but you leftcoasters wouldn't if you were in the SEC. Just be glad that you are in the PAthetiC 10, it makes you look better than you really are. 6 home and 6 away, eh? That's funny. Try doing that in the SEC, you would be glad if you were ranked ANYWHERE after the season. You USC clowns amuse me.
Posted on 7/31/08 at 10:24 pm to LSURulzSEC
quote:
Your statement suggest that with the 9th game you will have less ranked teams which is not necessarily true, just because a rank teams loses does not necessarily mean they will fall out of the rankings...yes the conference W-L records suffer more but it does not necessarily mean you have less ranked teams just because of that one extra game...
Now what is so confusing about that?
Because that is exactly what happens. An otherwise 8-4 team that could be ranked is now 7-5 and unranked. Same thing with a 9-3 team going to 8-4. That is the major difference with replacing a confernce game with a scrub game. Really The PAC-10 only plays 3 ooc games per team compared to 4 for most other conferences (5 for the big easy). On top of that we play the toughest ooc slate in the nation bar none.
Posted on 7/31/08 at 10:25 pm to Daigeaux
quote:
The point is, USC can beat a SEC team every once in a while when you play them, but you are NOT going to beat SEC teams week in and week out. You can gloat all you want about beating a SEC team now, but you leftcoasters wouldn't if you were in the SEC. Just be glad that you are in the PAthetiC 10, it makes you look better than you really are. 6 home and 6 away, eh? That's funny. Try doing that in the SEC, you would be glad if you were ranked ANYWHERE after the season. You USC clowns amuse me.
You are a fool, a classic ranter. I guess beating the SEC W champions like a drum on their own home field, worse than any SEC team could do BY FAR counts for nothing. It is the SEC teams that want no part of USC, not the other way around.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News