SEC vs. Top 25 OOC games on the road in the last 15 years

#26
#26
sickemsmokey10 said:
Kindda interesting to see who in the SEC has done well and who hasn't done so good against Top 25 OOC teams on the road over the last 15 years. If you take away UGA and Tennessee's records, the SEC would be 2-22

Georgia (2-1)
W Clemson, '03, 30-0
L Ga Tech, '99, 51-48
W Ga Tech, '97, 27-24

LSU (0-4)
L Va Tech, '02, 26-8
L Notre Dame, '98, 39-36
L Texas A&M, '95, 33-17
L Texas A&M, '93, 24-0

Alabama (0-1)
L Oklahoma, '02, 37-27

Florida (1-6-1)
W Fla State, '04, 20-13
L Miami, '03, 38-33
L Fla State, '02, 31-14
L Fla State, '00, 30-7
L Fla State, '98, 23-12
L Fla State, '96, 24-21
T Fla State, '94, 31-31
L Fla State, '92, 45-24

Auburn (0-2)
L USC, '02, 24-17
L Syracuse, '01, 31-14

Vanderbilt (0-4)
L Michigan, '06, 27-7
L Navy, '04, 29-26
L TCU, '03, 30-14
L Notre Dame, '95, 41-0

Tennessee (3-1)
L Notre Dame, '05, 41-21
W Miami, '03, 10-6
W Syracuse, '98, 34-33
W UCLA, '97, 30-24

Arkansas (1-1)
L USC, '05, 70-17
W Texas, '03, 38-28

South Carolina (0-2)
L Virginia, '02, 34-21
L Clemson, '00, 16-14

Kentucky (0-2)
L Louisville, '06, 59-28
L Louisville, '04, 28-0

Neither Mississippi State or Ole Miss has played a top-25 team out-of-conference on the road in the past 15 years.
Click to expand...

As a huge Vol fan I hate to tell you this, but what about the '02 Miami game when we got our azzes handed to us?

And what about last year's Cal game?

'96 UCLA game?
 
#28
#28
GregAmsler said:
It's simple- where does the talent go? Looking at the recruiting rankings every year, it's plain to see that more talent goes to the SEC BY FAR than the Pac 10 or anywhere else.
Click to expand...

There are 5 or 6 pac-10 team regurally in the top-25 of recruiting.

edit: last year the SEC had it greatest season ever in recruiting. don't expect that to continue forever and please don't act like the SEC has always had 5 teams in the top-15 of recruiting because that happened once in 50 years.
 
#29
#29
droski said:
There are 5 or 6 pac-10 team regurally in the top-25 of recruiting.
Click to expand...

How nice. The SEC had 7 ranked in the TOP 10 this past season. The Pac 10 had 1 in the top 10 (although Oregon checked in at #11):

http://tennessee.rivals.com/TeamRank.asp?postype=0&sort=0&year=2007

Big difference.

Don't expect it to continue? Why not? Actually, the SEC had 8 teams in the top 25 in 2005 (2 of top 10) and 2006 (4 of top 10), but only 7 this year (though they were all in the top 10). The SEC had 7 of the top 25 in 2002 (3 of top 10), 2003 (5 of top 10) and 2004 (3 of top 10, with UT at #11) too. Why shouldn't it continue? The SEC routinely outrecruits the rest of the nation...has done so for years. The SEC not only outrecruits the rest of the nation- it blows the rest of the nation away on signing day. That's the main reason it's far and away the best conference.
 
#30
#30
droski said:
You are really going to quote what a bunch of sportwriters think as some sort of evidence of SEC superiority? You are right stats and scores of actual games mean nothing, growing up an SEC fan, and not watching non SEC games, and in particular reading ESPN, makes you guys experts on all things pac-10.
Click to expand...


Funny thing is, but it is the truth, the SEC is a better basketball league as well. Hate to be a homer, but the SEC pretty much dominates the NCAA in both men's and women's sports.

Check the CWS over the past ten years, check the track, check golf
 
#31
#31
truefan said:
Funny thing is, but it is the truth, the SEC is a better basketball league as well. Hate to be a homer, but the SEC pretty much dominates the NCAA in both men's and women's sports.

Check the CWS over the past ten years, check the track, check golf
Click to expand...

:sick:

you are a homer if you really believe that. take a look at the directors cup standings.
 
#33
#33
droski said:
THIS PAST SEASON. You guys are great about taking one data point and turning that into a trend.
Click to expand...

Okay, take two, since you didn't see me disprove that theory earlier:

"Don't expect it to continue? Why not? Actually, the SEC had 8 teams in the top 25 in 2005 (2 of top 10) and 2006 (4 of top 10), but only 7 this year (though they were all in the top 10). The SEC had 7 of the top 25 in 2002 (3 of top 10), 2003 (5 of top 10) and 2004 (3 of top 10, with UT at #11) too. Why shouldn't it continue? The SEC routinely outrecruits the rest of the nation...has done so for years. The SEC not only outrecruits the rest of the nation- it blows the rest of the nation away on signing day. That's the main reason it's far and away the best conference."
 
#34
#34
droski said:
:sick:

you are a homer if you really believe that. take a look at the directors cup standings.
Click to expand...

Agree with you there. Stanford seems to win that thing every year. However, I believe that they are participating in more sports than SEC schools are, which makes it virtually impossible for an SEC school to win the Director's Cup...or at least more difficult.
 
#35
#35
GregAmsler said:
Okay, take two, since you didn't see me disprove that theory earlier:

"Don't expect it to continue? Why not? Actually, the SEC had 8 teams in the top 25 in 2005 (2 of top 10) and 2006 (4 of top 10), but only 7 this year (though they were all in the top 10). The SEC had 7 of the top 25 in 2002 (3 of top 10), 2003 (5 of top 10) and 2004 (3 of top 10, with UT at #11) too. Why shouldn't it continue? The SEC routinely outrecruits the rest of the nation...has done so for years. The SEC not only outrecruits the rest of the nation- it blows the rest of the nation away on signing day. That's the main reason it's far and away the best conference."
Click to expand...

As you can see there hasn't been a year that compares to this year. Of course the SEC outrecruits the rest of the nation, BUT the pac-10 regurally has top-25 recruiting classes. It should also be noted you have more teams, so generally the pac-10 has a higher % of teams in the top-25 than the SEC. Once again, my mantra. . . the SEC is the best, but the gap between the SEC and pac-10 isn't what you think it is. :good!:
 
#36
#36
GregAmsler said:
Agree with you there. Stanford seems to win that thing every year. However, I believe that they are participating in more sports than SEC schools are, which makes it virtually impossible for an SEC school to win the Director's Cup...or at least more difficult.
Click to expand...

right, the sec generally only cares about the major sports. which is how it should be btw. I couldn't care less about our waterpolo championships. But, the pac-10 is king of the total NCAA, for whatever that is worth.
 
#37
#37
droski said:
As you can see there hasn't been a year that compares to this year. Of course the SEC outrecruits the rest of the nation, BUT the pac-10 regurally has top-25 recruiting classes. It should also be noted you have more teams, so generally the pac-10 has a higher % of teams in the top-25 than the SEC. Once again, my mantra. . . the SEC is the best, but the gap between the SEC and pac-10 isn't what you think it is. :good!:
Click to expand...

In a way, I agree with you. With USC included, the gap between the two conferences is not that huge. But my beef is with what USC has to play in their conference. I wish Tennessee could switch places with them and see what happens. If the top competition on our regular schedule were Cal, UCLA, and Notre Dame, I'd venture to say winning a National Title would happen a LOT more frequently. Conversely, if USC had to play Florida, Georgia, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, or Auburn and the usual tough OOC opponent UT plays every year, National Titles would come much less frequently for the Trojans. And now it looks like South Carolina will be a real chore.

All the more reason we need a playoff...which, ironically, is opposed most adamantly by the Big 10 and Pac 10. That's because they have an advantage over SEC teams under the current setup and they know it.
 
#41
#41
sickemsmokey10 said:
I think LSU was considered the home team in that game if I'm not mistaken
Click to expand...

That's correct. It was moved because of Hurricane Katrina. But nonetheless, it was played in Sun Devil Stadium in Tempe, AZ against the Arizona State Sun Devils. That's a road game, regardless of what the record books say. But I can see why you omitted it.
 
#42
#42
GregAmsler said:
That's correct. It was moved because of Hurricane Katrina. But nonetheless, it was played in Sun Devil Stadium in Tempe, AZ against the Arizona State Sun Devils. That's a road game, regardless of what the record books say. But I can see why you omitted it.
Click to expand...

Yep, the game was played in AZ meaning it reallywas an ASU home game
 
#44
#44
droski said:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From pete carroll himself:

"Our toughest games by far last season were in our conference," USC coach Pete Carroll explained. "This is an extraordinary conference. There's great coaching and excellent offenses and excellent football players. We're challenged every week. Our score spreads make it obvious."

Rivals.com College Football - Pac-10 Notes: Dixon returns to Ducks early
Click to expand...

What would you expect PC to say?

"We play in a crappy conference. If we didn't play in a major media market against lesser competition, we would be a very mediocre team. Thank God we don't have to play a SOUTHEASTERN CONFERENCE schedule"
 
#45
#45
droski said:
a) He's right. Pac-10 teams have played USC FAR more competively over the last couple of years than their nonconference opponents. THis is obvious both by records and by the margin of victory. I've been saying this exact thing for months btw.

b) Stanford has played USC far more competively than the SEC has over the last 5 years.
Click to expand...


Just goes to show that the "who plays who better" is irrelevant. Just 2 years ago (2005), Stanford went 4-4 in the Pac 10, but lost to Cal Davis, who lost to New Hampshire, Portland State, South Dakota State, Stephen F. Austin and Eastern Washington. We could do this all day.
 
#46
#46
GregAmsler said:
In a way, I agree with you. With USC included, the gap between the two conferences is not that huge. But my beef is with what USC has to play in their conference. I wish Tennessee could switch places with them and see what happens. If the top competition on our regular schedule were Cal, UCLA, and Notre Dame, I'd venture to say winning a National Title would happen a LOT more frequently. Conversely, if USC had to play Florida, Georgia, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, or Auburn and the usual tough OOC opponent UT plays every year, National Titles would come much less frequently for the Trojans. And now it looks like South Carolina will be a real chore.

All the more reason we need a playoff...which, ironically, is opposed most adamantly by the Big 10 and Pac 10. That's because they have an advantage over SEC teams under the current setup and they know it.
Click to expand...

how fantastic would it be if we swapped like one team every season. next year you guys get SC, we get Georgia. Each team plays a full conference schedule. The year afer we get tenn, you get cal. it would never happen but it sure would be interesting.
 
#48
#48
If Georgia wasn't afraid to leave the South, they would win the Pac 10, too if USC wasn't present.
 
#49
#49
droski said:
how fantastic would it be if we swapped like one team every season. next year you guys get SC, we get Georgia. Each team plays a full conference schedule. The year afer we get tenn, you get cal. it would never happen but it sure would be interesting.
Click to expand...

That would be fun. I'm glad I'm a fan of a program that will play tough OOC competition, though.

One of my biggest contentions for installing a playoff is that it would not only make the post season more fun (and a fair champ determined), but we'd see more big time match ups in the regular season. Under the current setup, a loss or two knocks you out of the championship picture, so programs are afraid to schedule many big time OOC opponents. With a playoff (consisting of all the conference champions, let's say), losing an OOC game wouldn't hurt, so you'd see teams scheduling big time match ups. A team like Tennessee might schedule 3 of its 4 OOC games against top 25 teams because it could still get in the playoffs by winning its conference. And winning 2 of those three OOC games could really help its seeding in that playoff. Seems there'd be a lot more tv $$$ to be made because of those big time regular season match ups (not to mention the $$$ that a playoff would make).

Of course, what do I know? Apparently, the Presidents (especially those in the Big 10 and Pac 10) know what's best for college football, so my idea is absurd. :ermm:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top