Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

(It's late...I'm tired...sorry for any gramme r errors)

As I have read this forum over the last month it has become evident that some of my fellow Duck fans have a skewed view of the PAC10 conference and how tough it has been in recent memory. In this post you will read the most detailed and comprehensive comparison to the conference that is widely viewed as being “dominant.”


Before I start the analysis and comparison, it is important that I go over a few things. First, some details about the perimeter of the comparison:

1) The data must be relevant. People really seem to struggle with this one! I always see people using situational stats to judge something in its entirety. Its called cherry picking and it's unacceptable for this type of comparison.

2) Relevant data must then be gathered, analyzed, and compared, with the intention of finding what the truth is. Most people just look for proof of what they want to be true.

3) Every piece of data must be viewed as a small piece of a large puzzle. Some pieces are bigger then others and some pieces affect the size of others. When finished, all the pieces will start to put together the truth. The more pieces you have, the more clear the puzzle looks.

4) Conference strength can not be defined by one team. Conference strength must include the entire conference. Some just want to look at the top 2-3 teams. However, those top 2-3 teams are viewed as “great teams” because they beat those teams that some are attempting to disguard. Conference strength means exactly what it sounds like....the whole conference.

5) While the balance of a conference can be judged by inter conference play, Conference strength cannot. At the end of each season all conferences end the season with a .500 against each other. For every win, there is a loss.

6) Rankings will be disregarded when comparing on field strength! Unless you are willing to debate that the BCS system is a great system for judging the strength of teams that have no common opponents and/or no head-to-head match ups, then rankings are completely irrelevant in that aspect. That also makes the title of the bowl games irrelevant as well. However, the teams they played in those bowls, and the level of competition of those teams is very relevant.

7) Rankings will only be referred to when showing who and how they earned and kept those rankings.

8) Only games vs. teams from BCS conference will be used in this comparison due to that fact that the SEC plays WAY more then the PAC10 did, and the PAC10 plays an extra inter conference game.

This is a list of what I consider relevant data in order to find out if last year the SEC was as dominant as they claim:
1) head-to-head match ups.
2) Common opponents
3) Similar levels of competition, the winning % vs those opponents, and margin of victory.

Well, that all being said let's get started!

The first thing I look at is similar levels of competition, meaning how the conference did vs. the other BCS conferences. If one conference is indeed “dominant” then they will have a better record and larger margin of victory. I will also look at the level of competition that was played. If one conferences has a better winning % and larger margin of victory, but faced low end teams, that must be considered. Also, since this is geared toward investigating rankings, I did not include bowl games (yet) because these teams were ranked before the bowls were played. Here are the numbers for the PAC10 and SEC OOC schedule for 2010:

· The PAC10 played 31 OOC games last season.
o 14 vs. teams from BCS AQ conferences
o 17 vs. teams from non-BCS AQ conferences (3 of which were BSU, Nevada, & TCU)

· The SEC played 48 OOC games last season.
o 16 vs. teams from BCS AQ conferences
o 32 vs. teams from non-BCS AQ conferences
What immediately stands out to me is how many more OOC games the SEC played in total and yet the SEC only played 2 more game2 against teams from BCS AQ conferences. That sends a red flag up immediately! Here is Something else that stands out:

-Out of the 14 teams the PAC10 played that were from BCS AQ conferences, 9 were from the BIG10, Big12, or SEC.
-Out of the 16 teams the SEC played that were from BCS AQ conferences, only 5 of were from the Big10, PAC10, or Big12. The rest were from the ACC and Big East

The ACC and Big E are typically the weakest conferences out of the AQ’s, and this year was certainly not an exception. Below are the records of the Big E & ACC vs BCS teams:
-The Big E was just 6-13 vs teams from BCS conferences in 2010
-The ACC was just 6-19 vs. teams from BCS conferences in 2010

This is a large part as to why SEC teams come out highly ranked and stay highly ranked throughout the season. While PAC10 teams were facing quality high profile teams in which they lost a lot of them, SEC teams were moving up the polls because outside of a few games, they schedule what appear to be guaranteed W's. They also put seasons best stats on both offense and defense because those count toward where your offense and defense rank in the nation (they look at averages) and apply that toward the ranking formula. It's smart scheduling while working in the BCS system.

Another thing the SEC does that no other conference does is schedule a cup-cake game late in the season. This benefits them in several ways:
-It's like having an extra Bye week late in the season when you player might be banged up.
-It greatly reduces the chances of potential BCS teams from losing late in the season and dropping in the ranking because of it. Remember, if any opponent drops in the rankings, your teams win does not look as good.
-While all the other conferences are going 5-5 or 6-6 (1 team wins and 1 team loses), virtually the entire SEC goes undefeated and jumps all the losing teams in the polls. It makes the top teams in the SEC look even better for beating a higher ranked team and the losses look not so bad for the same reason. Remember, late losses will kill a team in this system!

The SEC is never punished in the polls for this. That makes it smart scheduling!
As if allll that were not enough, we now get to the PAC10 9-round robin schedule. While other conferences are scheduling W's, we are guaranteed to go .500. This is not only bad for the teams that lost, it hurts the teams the won as well and it dose it for the entire season. The six teams that lost fall in the polls and now beating those six teams don't look impressive because of there dropped rankings. Also, because the PAC10 was one of the most balanced teams in the nation last year (fact), when an ASU, UCLA, CAL, or somebody like that pulled a (not so)upset, it was devastating!

Well there you have it! This is why the SEC teams come out ranked high, stay ranked high, and end ranked high...no pun...and you can't blame them. They are operating with in the rules that they were given. A wise man once said, “don't hate the player. Hate the Game.”

Now let's move onto the on the field strength comparison. Let's take from where we broke down the OOC schedules of both conferences. We have already shown beyond the shadow of any reasonable doubt that the PAC10 played a much harder schedule then the SEC last year. Lets dive back into that and take a look at how each conference did:
PAC10:
10-4 Average margin of victory-9pts-(PAC10-34pts/25pts-opponents)

SEC:
10-6 Average margin of victory 5pts.-(SEC-28/23-opponents)

Another thing that is hard to miss is who the conferences lost to:
The PAC10 losses are to Nebraska, Oklahoma St, @Wisconsin, and @Kansas St.
The SEC losses are to @Colorado, @S. Florida, Oregon, @UCON, WF, and NW.

This brings me to common opponents. There were three common consonants in 2010:
Colorado:
vs UGA-UC wins 29-27
@ Cal - Cal wins 52-7

Louisville:
vs. UK-UK wins 23-16
@ OSU-OSU wins 35-28

WF:
@ Stanford – Stanford wins 68-24
@ Vanderbilt-WF wins 34-13

Both UK and OSU ended up with around the same record as did UGA and Cal. All this shows me is that the athleticism between these two teams is VERY comparable.

WF played one of the best teams in the PAC and the worst team in the SEC. (correction: Ole Miss was the worst team in the SEC. Vandy beat them, but Ole Miss beat UK so...I don't know. I just wanted to give Vandy a little love) That game is irrelevant.

Last but not least is head-to-head matches. The only PAC10 team to face an SEC team last year was Oregon and they faced two:

@ Tennessee-Oregon wins 48-13 (worst loss of the year by Tennessee)
vs Auburn-Auburn wins 23-19
**Oregon heal Auburn to less points then any SEC defense could. The only team that held Al burn better then Oregon in yards per play and yards per rushing attempt was Alabama. Oregon also forced Auburn to throw the ball for more than 30 times all year held Cam Newton to his lowest completion % as well. Before that Auburn had only been forced to throw the ball 25 time or more in 2 games.
**Auburn returned the favor though by holding Oregon to the fewest rushing yards and the 2nd (Cal being 1st) fewest points of the entire season. Auburn also forced D. Thomas to through the ball for a season high 40 attempts. However, Thomas completed 28 (68% completion rate) of them for 378 yards (season high for him and 2nd most ever in a “NC”), 2 TD, and 2 INT's.

My personal conclusion:
The PAC10 had a better winning % against a much tougher OOC schedule, a better record vs. common opponents with a larger margin of victory as well, and they handed Tennessee their worst loss of the year before losing to Auburn by a last second FG. That FG was set up be the famous “everybody thought he was down play and Oregon destroyed the myth of “the SEC being bigger, stronger and faster” as well as the myth “they can't tackle Cam Newton..”

IMO...there is not enough data to conclude that the PAC10 is better then the SEC in Strength on the field. However, there is plenty of evidence that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the SEC is in no way dominant too the PAC10 last season!

(* I did not include bowl games because both conferences were .500. While this is another piece of evidence that the SEC is not “dominant” and it may shift the margin of victory a few points, it would not be enough for the SEC to claim “dominance”...plus, im tired!!)
If I forgot anything and/or left anything out, please let me know.

More fun facts:

PAC10 vs SEC over last decade: (also includes their final record by seasons end and where they finished in there conference)

2000 Sept 01: UCLA 35 (7-4/6th in PAC10) @Alabama 24 (7-5/6th in SEC)
Even match-PAC10 Wins

2001 @UCLA 20 (7-4/6th in PAC10) Alabama 17 (7-5/9th in SEC)
Fairly even match-PAC10 Wins

2002 Aug 31: @Oregon 36 (7-6/8th in PAC10) Mississippi State 13 (3-9 /12th in SEC)
2002 Sept 02: @USC 24 (11-2/2nd in PAC10) Auburn 17 (9-4/3rd in SEC)
Fairly even match-PAC10 Wins

2003 Aug 30: USC 23 (12-1/1st in PAC10) @Auburn 0(8-5/6th in SEC)
2003 Aug 30: Oregon 42 (8-5/3rd in PAC10) @Mississippi State 34(2-10/12th in SEC)
2003 Sept 06: LSU 59 (13-1/1st in SEC) @Arizona 13(2-10/10th PAC10)

2004 Sept 09: @LSU 22 (9-3/4th in the SEC) Oregon State 21(7-5/4th PAC10)
Fairly even match-SEC Wins by 1 pt

2005 Sept 09: LSU 35 (11-2/1st in the SEC) @ASU 31(7-5/5th in the PAC10)
Mismatch-LSU only wins by 4pts
2005 Sept 17: @USC 70 (12-1/1st in PAC10) Arkansas 17(4-7/9th in the SEC)

2006 Sept 02: USC 50 (11-2/1st in PAC10) @Arkansas 14(10-4/2nd in SEC)
Even match-PAC10 wins (blowout!)
2006 Sept 02: @Tennessee 35 (9-4/5th in SEC) California 18(10-3/2nd in PAC10)
Fairly even match-SEC Wins
2006 Sept 02: @Auburn 40 (11-2/3rd in SEC) Washington State 14(6-6/7th in PAC10)
2006 Sept 09: @LSU 45 (11-2/3rd in SEC) Arizona 3(6-6/6th in PAC10)

2007 Sept 01: @California 45 (7-6/7th in PAC10) Tennessee 31(10-4/2nd in SEC)
Mismatch-PAC10 Wins

2008 Sept 01: @UCLA 27 (4-8/8th in PAC10) Tennessee 24(5-7/8th in the PAC10)
Even match-PAC10 Wins
2008 Sept 20: Georgia 27 (10-3/3rd in SEC) @ASU 10(5-7/7th in PAC10)

2009 Sept 05: LSU 31 (9-4/3rd in SEC) @Washington 23(5-7/7th in PAC10)
2009 Sept 12: UCLA 19 (7-6/8th in PAC10) @Tennessee 15 (7-6/5th in SEC)
Fairly even match-PAC10 Wins
2009 Sept 26: @Georgia 20 (8-5/4th in the SEC) ASU 17(4-8/9th in PAC10)
Mismatch-SEC only wins by 3pts

2010 Sept 11: Oregon 48 (12-1/1st in PAC10) @Tennessee 13(6-7/8th in SEC)
2011 Jan 10: @Auburn 22 (13-0/1st in SEC) Oregon 19(12-1/1st in PAC10)
Even match-SEC Wins

(The PAC10 is 2-1 vs. teams that played in the SEC title game)

What immediately stands out to me is how many more OOC games the SEC played in total and yet the SEC only played 2 more game2 against teams from BCS AQ conferences. That sends a red flag up immediately! Here is Something else that stands out:

I tried to explain this yesterday…it fell on death ears…I’ll try again.

We play a 4th OOC game. As fans…we think that means that extra game should go to a high quality opponent, a game we want to watch. However, we are fans not ADs. The AD is looking to fill that game with a money making one and done. That game is almost always going to be a “cupcake” or sometimes a neutral site game like LSU has done two years in a row. I promise you the Pac would do the same if they had that 4th game…don’t believe me? I challenge you to find me a BCS conference that plays 8 conference games and a title matchup at the end of the season that doesn’t fill that 4th game with a cup cake…go ahead, I have not done any research, this is your chance to blast me.

Another thing the SEC does that no other conference does is schedule a cup-cake game late in the season. This benefits them in several ways:

I will say this shocked the sh*t out of me when I realized y’all didn’t…just seems like good scheduling to put one of your cupcake games between two big matchups.

The SEC is never punished in the polls for this.

Not so fast…I’ve seen LSU drop after a win against a cupcake.

-Out of the 14 teams the PAC10 played that were from BCS AQ conferences, 9 were from the BIG10, Big12, or SEC.
-Out of the 16 teams the SEC played that were from BCS AQ conferences, only 5 of were from the Big10, PAC10, or Big12. The rest were from the ACC and Big East

Also to be fair, remember where we are located…it makes a lot more sense to schedule the ACC and The Big East. They are closer for the most part…same reason it makes more sense for you to schedule the BIG10 and the BIG 12. Games that are geographically closer equals more ticket sales, less expenses, etc.

For the record, I’m not saying the SEC has a tougher OOC schedule, I’m saying the leagues are too different to compare. I’m also saying…why the hell does it matter?

ETA: I’m not taking a shot at you with the “why the hell does it matter” statement, I’m just being sincere. I’ve read a lot of post here recently saying that are schedule is fluffed with cupcakes, thus our win percentage is higher, therefore that is why we are ranked higher, and is the reason why there is an illusion of SEC dominance.

However you want to cut it…however we get into the big game...no matter “what if” and “but for” statements you throw out there…since ’98 we have won all 7 titles games that we have been to. No other conference comes close to matching that number. Taking the vacated win by USC in consideration the Pac is 0-3, take in account what happened on the field despite the vacated win and you are still 1-2 and 2 of those visits are by the same team, 5 teams made our 7 trips.

Just saying....we get results. You want bragging rights that you have the toughest OOC schedule…it is yours.

Keep this in mind when it comes to conference scheduling though….y’all may play one more game…but every year for the past 5 years over half of our conference has either played that year’s national champion, or the national champion form the year before, or both.

The SEC is never punished in the polls for this.

Not so fast…I’ve seen LSU drop after a win against a cupcake.

Ummmm Auburn JUST got pushed out of the polls after a win over a cupcake. Tell me that ain't punishment.

JohnnyAuburn wrote:

The SEC is never punished in the polls for this.

Not so fast…I’ve seen LSU drop after a win against a cupcake.

Ummmm Auburn JUST got pushed out of the polls after a win over a cupcake. Tell me that ain't punishment.

Good point…there has been other times in the past few years that the cupcake games late in the year caused a shift in the BCS poll. Unless I’m crazy I’m pretty sure LSU has dropped on a bye week too…the BCS factor in the games as they happen, so the cupcakes don’t factor in until they happen (causing a decrease or increase of schedule).

I tried to explain this yesterday…it fell on death ears…I’ll try again.

We play a 4th OOC game. As fans…we think that means that extra game should go to a high quality opponent, a game we want to watch. However, we are fans not ADs. The AD is looking to fill that game with a money making one and done. That game is almost always going to be a “cupcake” or sometimes a neutral site game like LSU has done two years in a row. I promise you the Pac would do the same if they had that 4th game…don’t believe me? I challenge you to find me a BCS conference that plays 8 conference games and a title matchup at the end of the season that doesn’t fill that 4th game with a cup cake…go ahead, I have not done any research, this is your chance to blast me.

I don't want to blast you..

"Why" is irreverent.

I will say this shocked the sh*t out of me when I realized y’all didn’t…just seems like good scheduling to put one of your cupcake games between two big catchups.

It is smart! I explained why is the original post.

Not so fast…I’ve seen LSU drop after a win against a cupcake.

Certainly not last year. Stanford played a game vs. ASU while LSU played Slowkids St.. Both won, but LSU held on to their #5 ranking and Stanford sat just behind them. Teams that play cup-caks that are sitting ahead of teams that play quality opponents that same week, should drop. I don't care if they beat them by a 1000 pts...and yet, I think this has only happened a hand full of times.

Also to be fair, remember where we are located…it makes a lot more sense to schedule the ACC and The Big East. They are closer for the most part…same reason it makes more sense for you to schedule the BIG10 and the BIG 12. Games that are geographically closer equals more ticket sales, less expenses, etc.

"Why" is irrelevant.

For the record, I’m not saying the SEC has a tougher OOC schedule, I’m saying the leagues are too different to compare. I’m also saying…why the hell does it matter?

The PAC10's tougher OOC schedule is relevant for two reasons:

1) How can people say the SEC is "dominant" when the PAC10 had a better winning % and a larger margin of victory against that schedule? (and)
2) Why are so many teams SEC ranked despite the PAC10's this?

Also:

3) Every piece of data must be viewed as a small piece of a large puzzle. Some pieces are bigger then others and some pieces affect the size of others. When finished, all the pieces will start to put together the truth. The more pieces you have, the more clear the puzzle looks.

Just saying....we get results. You want bragging rights that you have the toughest OOC schedule…it is yours.

Keep this in mind when it comes to conference scheduling though….y’all may play one more game…but every year for the past 5 years over half of our conference has either played that year’s national champion, or the national champion form the year before, or both.

I was referring to on field strength...not BCS success. The two are very different. There is no "NC" in college football. There never has been and their never will be without a playoff.

JohnnyAuburn wrote:

The SEC is never punished in the polls for this.

Not so fast…I’ve seen LSU drop after a win against a cupcake.

Ummmm Auburn JUST got pushed out of the polls after a win over a cupcake. Tell me that ain't punishment.

1) the BCS polls have not come out yet and;
2) I probably should have been more specific. The SEC as a whole is not punished for their weak OOC scheduling and rarely, almost never, are they punished for the late season cup-cake. However, I have not seen a good SEC team almost lose one in a while.

I don't want to blast you

I know…I was speaking to the others.

It is smart! I explained why is the original post

I know…just saying I’m shocked y’all don’t

"Why" is irreverent.
"Why" is irreverent.

Fair enough on both…just throwing the info out there

The PAC10's tougher OOC schedule is relevant for two reasons:

1) How can people say the SEC is "dominant" when the PAC10 had a better winning % and a larger margin of victory against that schedule? (and)
2) Why are so many teams SEC ranked despite the PAC10's this?

OOOO…ok…I see.


On unrelated topic…anyone got the pics of Miss Columbia’s vajayjay

Certainly not last year. Stanford played a game vs. ASU while LSU played Slowkids St.. Both won, but LSU held on to their #5 ranking and Stanford sat just behind them. Teams that play cup-caks that are sitting ahead of teams that play quality opponents that same week, should drop. I don't care if they beat them by a 1000 pts...and yet, I think this has only happened a hand full of times.

The rankings are subjective... there is a human element to the polls, its called the eyeball test. Just because Stan beat a mediocre ASU team doest mean they're better than an LSU team that beat Cupcake St. The rankings dont happen in a vacuum.

Not all wins (and losses for that matter) are created equal...

Last season when we were #1 and Auburn #2... we got jumped by Auburn after we both won... Auburn beat #11 Bama on the road, we beat #21 Arizona at home. Both teams won, both teams were undefeated, but Auburns win was more impressive and voters liked Auburns win/resume better.

Just sayin...

uodux1212 wrote:

Certainly not last year. Stanford played a game vs. ASU while LSU played Slowkids St.. Both won, but LSU held on to their #5 ranking and Stanford sat just behind them. Teams that play cup-caks that are sitting ahead of teams that play quality opponents that same week, should drop. I don't care if they beat them by a 1000 pts...and yet, I think this has only happened a hand full of times.

The rankings are subjective... there is a human element to the polls, its called the eyeball test. Just because Stan beat a mediocre ASU team doest mean they're better than an LSU team that beat Cupcake St. The rankings dont happen in a vacuum.

Not all wins (and losses for that matter) are created equal...

Last season when we were #1 and Auburn #2... we got jumped by Auburn after we both won... Auburn beat #11 Bama on the road, we beat #21 Arizona at home. Both teams won, both teams were undefeated, but Auburns win was more impressive and voters liked Auburns win/resume better.

Just sayin...

Which is why we need a playoff…but until then we have to make good with what we got. I’m happy with it for now.


The reason why you shouldn’t drop a team for playing a cupcake the same week that someone else played a big team is because you shouldn’t isolate that one game. In ranking a team one should look at the entire body of work, not just what they did that week. Example…If LSU already played half our SEC schedule and took out Bama at their place..should we really drop in the after beating one of the two cupcakes we have on the schedule this year just because whoever is behind us just beat a better opponent that same week?

What immediately stands out to me is how many more OOC games the SEC played in total and yet the SEC only played 2 more game2 against teams from BCS AQ conferences. That sends a red flag up immediately! Here is Something else that stands out

I tried to explain this yesterday…it fell on death ears…I’ll try again.

We play a 4th OOC game. As fans…we think that means that extra game should go to a high quality opponent, a game we want to watch. However, we are fans not ADs. The AD is looking to fill that game with a money making one and done. That game is almost always going to be a “cupcake” or sometimes a neutral site game like LSU has done two years in a row. I promise you the Pac would do the same if they had that 4th game…don’t believe me? I challenge you to find me a BCS conference that plays 8 conference games and a title matchup at the end of the season that doesn’t fill that 4th game with a cup cake…go ahead, I have not done any research, this is your chance to blast me.

The reason the SEC (or any BCS conference) schedules a 4th OOC game is to play a cupcake. It isn't because teams can't get a good game, it is because cupcakes are easy to beat.

Also to be fair, remember where we are located…it makes a lot more sense to schedule the ACC and The Big East. They are closer for the most part…same reason it makes more sense for you to schedule the BIG10 and the BIG 12. Games that are geographically closer equals more ticket sales, less expenses, etc.

The SEC is close to the Big XII and B1G, in fact many ACC and BigEast teams are farther away. The difference in distance is negligible, the difference between 30 minutes on a plane. I don't buy this as the reason that the SEC plays so many ACC and BigEast teams. Check out a map and you can see how many Big XII and B1G teams are just as close to SEC teams as BigEast and ACC teams.

The SEC is never punished in the polls for this.

Not so fast…I’ve seen LSU drop after a win against a cupcake.


Ummmm Auburn JUST got pushed out of the polls after a win over a cupcake. Tell me that ain't punishment.

Auburn wasn't punished for playing a cupcake. They were punished for the game going to the wire at home against a cupcake that should have been an easy win. That isn't punishment, its a rare case of justice in the polls. When people are questioning if you should even be ranked in the first place and then you almost lose the game to a complete cupcake, it is impossible to ignore. It was all over SportsCenter, so everybody saw it. If Auburn would have won by 10 and still struggled no one would have noticed and Auburn would have retained a ranking or slipped only slightly.

Black_and_Yellow

You know what…you’re right…the only reason why we do anything in the SEC is because we are all scared little girls that are just soooooooo scared to play anyone.

It is a little disheartening to come to that realization, so I am going to go comfort myself by propping one foot on each crystal ball we got while enjoying the highlight reel from the Cowboy Classic. Later.

Bud Lee wrote:

Black_and_Yellow

You know what…you’re right…the only reason why we do anything in the SEC is because we are all scared little girls that are just soooooooo scared to play anyone.

It is a little disheartening to come to that realization, so I am going to go comfort myself by propping one foot on each crystal ball we got while enjoying the highlight reel from the Cowboy Classic. Later.

Were any of the things I said untrue? Look at a map, the SEC is right next to the Big XII and B1G. You contention that the SEC has no choice but to schedule cupcakes in the 4th OOC game is laughable. You don't like the facts that are presented. You keep saying the SEC has to play cupcakes in their 4th OOC game. They choose to schedule the cupcake. When teams went to 12 regular season games in 2006 the PAC choose to add a league game and the SEC choose to add an OOC games. The SEC has used that game to schedule patsies. Bring some facts and quit whining when you don't like the info other people's facts.

You need to work on your reading skills. I didn’t say the SEC has no choice but to schedule cupcakes in the 4th OOC…I said this:

The AD is looking to fill that game with a money making one and done. That game is almost always going to be a “cupcake” or sometimes a neutral site game like LSU has done two years in a row.

And my point is, and always has been that every conference would do the same…your stance that the Pac wouldn’t is what is laughable around here.

as to this statement...

The SEC has used that game to schedule patsies. Bring some facts and quit whining when you don't like the info other people's facts.

I’m not whining because I don’t like your fact’s … I just find your posts argumentative and styled is a way to piss me off. You constantly put words in my mouth and argue issues that I am not taking a stance on.

But you go ahead…CLING to the FACT that your conference schedules a tougher OOC like the butt hurt Pac 12 fan you are…go ahead...tell me how horrible we schedule...argue away...cause…well…it all you got to brag about. Is it not?

They choose the 4th OOC game for money. Money rules all. The SEC has it figured out... the 4th OOC game is 99% a home game, home games = money. Its really not that hard to figure out.

uodux1212 wrote:They choose the 4th OOC game for money. Money rules all. The SEC has it figured out... the 4th OOC game is 99% a home game, home games = money. Its really not that hard to figure out.

See…anyone with a ounce of common sense gets what I’m trying to say…you hard headed sack of duck pellets.