2011/2012 NCAA Football Thread

[Jagger69]

I had a wild idea that would pretty much end the debate on the Big 12(9).

The SEC takes Texas A&M, Kansas, Kansas State and Missouri.

The Pac 12 takes Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State.

This leaves Iowa State and Baylor. The SEC can pay off one of them, the Pac 12 pays off the other and then the other conferences can start their hunt for more teams.

Iowa State should (I doubt this will ever happen) join the Big 10 and Baylor can shop around to see who wants to give them an invite.

Interesting take. However, I don't see the PAC-16 or the SEC giving free money away to anyone so Iowa State and Baylor would pretty much be left to fend for themselves. Iowa State would be a great fit and natural rival with Iowa to join the Big 10 if (or, more appropriately, when) it expands to 16 teams. In fact, since there are now 12 teams, who would the other candidates be to fill out the Big 10 to include 16 teams? Iowa State, Notre Dame, BYU....and maybe Baylor?? The math on this thing could work out just right for realignment if things fall right. That is, unless you subscribe to BI's insistence that only "yankee" schools be a part of the conference. :1orglaugh Otherwise, I see Baylor and even perhaps Iowa State being logical candidates for Conference USA.

On another note, did anyone else hear about Texas possibly being interested in joining the ACC???

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/09/15/2610429/texas-emerges-in-acc-expansion.html

 

[rwill25]

LOL... Texas to the ACC!? That would be crazy.

I still say Texas goes Independent.

 

[Baill Inneraora]

Interesting take. However, I don't see the PAC-16 or the SEC giving free money away to anyone so Iowa State and Baylor would pretty much be left to fend for themselves. Iowa State would be a great fit and natural rival with Iowa to join the Big 10 if (or, more appropriately, when) it expands to 16 teams. In fact, since there are now 12 teams, who would the other candidates be to fill out the Big 10 to include 16 teams? Iowa State, Notre Dame, BYU....and maybe Baylor?? The math on this thing could work out just right for realignment if things fall right. That is, unless you subscribe to BI's insistence that only "yankee" schools be a part of the conference. :1orglaugh Otherwise, I see Baylor and even perhaps Iowa State being logical candidates for Conference USA.

On another note, did anyone else hear about Texas possibly being interested in joining the ACC???

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/09/15/2610429/texas-emerges-in-acc-expansion.html

Laugh it Jagger, but it’s not just me. Seriously, in C-bus it is a serious concern and I suspect it would be in other Big 10 stated. There was talk last year, granted not too serious, to call the Big 10 the Lincoln Conference because the tie ins to all the Big 10 states. The people that settled these states settled an area that was the first to outlaw slavery (Northwest Ordinance) and many are still proud of that. Illinois the land of Lincoln, Lincoln Nebraska, Grant, Sheridan, Chase, Sherman were all from Ohio. Lincoln carried every Big 20 state in ’60 and ’64. I could go on and on….

I heard a caller just last week on the OSU radio station say if they expanded into a southern state he would never get season tickets again.

I know some guys that went to Penn St that know live in C-Bus. At the bar we all go to they call the second level “Buford country”. It’s a reference to Col. John Buford seizing the high ground and setting in motion the win at Gettysburg.

The fact that the Big 10 faces the SEC in several bowls is not a coincidence.

 

[Connor Macleod]

On another note, did anyone else hear about Texas possibly being interested in joining the ACC?

I heard about it, but thought it was a joke as there has been some talk of schools in the ACC leaving for the SEC and/or Big East.

Laugh it Jagger, but it’s not just me. Seriously, in C-bus it is a serious concern and I suspect it would be in other Big 10 stated. There was talk last year, granted not too serious, to call the Big 10 the Lincoln Conference because the tie ins to all the Big 10 states. The people that settled these states settled an area that was the first to outlaw slavery (Northwest Ordinance) and many are still proud of that. Illinois the land of Lincoln, Lincoln Nebraska, Grant, Sheridan, Chase, Sherman were all from Ohio. Lincoln carried every Big 20 state in ’60 and ’64. I could go on and on….

I heard a caller just last week on the OSU radio station say if they expanded into a southern state he would never get season tickets again.

I know some guys that went to Penn St that know live in C-Bus. At the bar we all go to they call the second level “Buford country”. It’s a reference to Col. John Buford seizing the high ground and setting in motion the win at Gettysburg.

The fact that the Big 10 faces the SEC in several bowls is not a coincidence.

IMO, this is part of the mentality that has caused the Big Ten schools to fall behind the SEC. This is the 21st century, not the 19th, and it's football, not the civil war.

 

[Baill Inneraora]

I heard about it, but thought it was a joke as there has been some talk of schools in the ACC leaving for the SEC and/or Big East.


IMO, this is part of the mentality that has caused the Big Ten schools to fall behind the SEC. This is the 21st century, not the 19th, and it's football, not the civil war.

That’s not it all. Dude, I have been to SEC games in Baton Rouge, Starkville, Knoxville, Gainesville, Athens and Nashville. They think it’s a civil war reenactment waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than the Big 10 does. That statement of yours is just ignorant and asinine.

How many fucking confederate flags do you see at any given home game? Answer: It’s more than one.

There are many reasons why the SEC is dominant, but the biggest are population shifts, diet, they care more, weather, home field advantage and lack of a second tier D-1 conference.

 

[Jagger69]

Laugh it Jagger, but it’s not just me. Seriously, in C-bus it is a serious concern and I suspect it would be in other Big 10 stated. There was talk last year, granted not too serious, to call the Big 10 the Lincoln Conference because the tie ins to all the Big 10 states. The people that settled these states settled an area that was the first to outlaw slavery (Northwest Ordinance) and many are still proud of that. Illinois the land of Lincoln, Lincoln Nebraska, Grant, Sheridan, Chase, Sherman were all from Ohio. Lincoln carried every Big 20 state in ’60 and ’64. I could go on and on….

I heard a caller just last week on the OSU radio station say if they expanded into a southern state he would never get season tickets again.

I know some guys that went to Penn St that know live in C-Bus. At the bar we all go to they call the second level “Buford country”. It’s a reference to Col. John Buford seizing the high ground and setting in motion the win at Gettysburg.

The fact that the Big 10 faces the SEC in several bowls is not a coincidence.

OK BI but that's a pretty high-and-mighty attitude from a conference that hasn't accomplished much in recent years I would say. If they aren't willing to change that perspective (and the fans' views obviously don't reflect those of the regents who run the conference), who could they take in to fill out 16 teams? Iowa State, Notre Dame....maybe BYU....and who else?

A ridiculous and snooty attitude to say the least. Do you want to protect narrow-minded provincialism or do you want the strongest conference you can possibly get? Just dumb IMO....the Civil War has been over for almost 150 years! Take your corn-fed Midwest heads out of your collective asses and realize that the USA is one nation for Christ's sake.

And I sure as hell wish they would have named the divisions after Lincoln and Sherman instead of the moronic names they were given. Is there anyone out there who really likes the names "Leaders" and "Legends"?? What a joke....

 

[Baill Inneraora]

Notre Dame: No
BYU: No
Iowa St: No Way
Oklahoma & Oklahoma St: Yes
Missouri: No
Texas: No
Pittsburgh: Yes
Rutgers: Yes

 

[Jagger69]

Notre Dame: No
BYU: No
Iowa St: No Way
Oklahoma & Oklahoma St: Yes
Missouri: No
Texas: No
Pittsburgh: Yes
Rutgers: Yes

No way is OU going to the Big 10....and it they don't go, neither does OSU (besides, you already have an OSU in the Big 10 I think, don't you? ) Besides, Oklahoma would have been a slave state in if it had been part of the Union back then and it hadn't been so busy rounding up Indians to keep penned up on reservations. Go ahead and take Pitt and Rutgers and maybe you can fill it in with Central Michigan and Northern Illinois or whatever.....

Honestly, if that's the way you guys are REALLY thinking, you're idiots (present company excluded ). Texas wants to join the Big 10 and you say no because of the Civil War??? You'd rather have the Tulsa and Oklahoma City TV markets instead of Houston and Dallas??? Again....just dumb. Whatever....

 

[Baill Inneraora]

No way is OU going to the Big 10....and it they don't go, neither does OSU (besides, you already have an OSU in the Big 10 I think, don't you? ) Go ahead and take Pitt and Rutgers and maybe you can fill it in with Central Michigan and Northern Illinois or whatever.....

Honestly, if that's the way you guys are REALLY thinking, you're idiots (present company excluded ). Texas wants to join the Big 10 and you say no because of the Civil War??? You'd rather have the Tulsa and Oklahoma City TV markets instead of Houston and Dallas??? Again....just dumb. Whatever....

.........and Texas murdered our President. Hell your governor doesn't even want to be in the union!

 

[titsrock]

Texas at UCLA
UL-Monroe at TCU
Arizona St. at Illinois
Auburn at Clemson
Florida A&M at USF
Baylor BYE
West Virginia at Maryland
Ohio St. at Miami (FL)
Tennessee at Florida
Michigan St. at Notre Dame
Troy at Arkansas
Arkansas St. at Virginia Tech
Missouri St. at Oregon
Navy at South Carolina
Washington at Nebraska
Idaho at Texas A&M
Oklahoma St. at Tulsa
Wisconsin BYE
Stanford at Arizona
Oklahoma at Florida St.
Boise St. at Toledo
LSU at Mississippi St.
North Texas at Alabama

 

[D-rock]

Being fast and rushing are not equal.

Rushing is what you do precisely because you aren't fast (enough) at what you're doing.:2 cents:

Inefficiency by it's nature begets rushing. Being fast though, means you've necessarily rooted out the inefficiencies in your process and have it distilled to it's functional essence for your capabilities.

Give it some thought.

I thought that was kind of what I said,...maybe in a round about way though. Somebody that's more competent can do things quicker and do them right while doing it. So I think we mean the same thing. :dunno:

 

[MILF Man]

Good win for the LSU Tigers last night.

 

[Connor Macleod]

That’s not it all. Dude, I have been to SEC games in Baton Rouge, Starkville, Knoxville, Gainesville, Athens and Nashville. They think it’s a civil war reenactment waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than the Big 10 does. That statement of yours is just ignorant and asinine.

How many fucking confederate flags do you see at any given home game? Answer: It’s more than one.

There are many reasons why the SEC is dominant, but the biggest are population shifts, diet, they care more, weather, home field advantage and lack of a second tier D-1 conference.

I come in here, try to be nice and you want to resort to name calling with your opinion. Why is that? A sign of weak mind trying to express itself forcefully?

Let's examine your statements.

As for the confederate flag, the state flags of Alabama, Florida, Mississippi and Georgia are based off designs of that flag, so games at Ole Miss, Miss. St., Georgia, Alabama, Auburn & Florida don't count. As for the rest of the SEC, a few individuals may, and this is not confined to the SEC, adopt the flag as a symbol of defiance, because in a very simplistic way, that was what the flag was intended to represent. I've seen a few games on TV where the confederate flag was spotted at North Carolina games.

Now let's look at your reasons why the SEC is better than the Big 10:

Weather: This makes no sense. I'm assuming your reason is in reference to games during the winter in Big 10 areas, but I can counter with SEC games played in the heat. I've been to a number games where the temperature is over 100 and the humidity is horrible, so weather works both ways.

Home field adavantage: Are you saying Big 10 teams never play home games?

Population shifts: This is just a weak way of saying Big 10 coaches don't know how to recruit outside of the northern areas of the country.

Diet: So you're saying that southern people are smarter in regards to knowing what to eat.


If you want a real reason as to why the SEC is doing better, it's because Big 10 coaches are stupid. When it comes to linemen, both offense and defense, Big 10 coaches are mainly concerned with size, and SEC coaches know that size has to be balanced with speed. I remember some years ago, one Big 10 school having an offensive line that averaged almost 350 per man, but that line did not fare well against an SEC team as the defense ran around them instead of through them.

 

[Hot Mega]

I thought that was kind of what I said,...maybe in a round about way though. Somebody that's more competent can do things quicker and do them right while doing it. So I think we mean the same thing. :dunno:

I keyed on you saying, being fast and rushing are essentially the same thing.

If you believe that then I disagree based on what I stated in my previous post.

 

[rwill25]

Damn, I wish Syraider was here so I could trash talk to him. Oh well.

I think it's going to be a great game between OU and FSU.... for the first half. After that, I think OU will pull away and win by 17+. I just think OU has too much fire power on offense for Florida St to keep up. I would like to see OU give Finch (might be the fastest RB in the country) a lot of cares, but for some reason he's listed 3rd on the depth chart. Whaley did look good against Tulsa, I just don't think there's anything physically special about him.

And even though OU has key players not playing on defense, we might has the best CB tandem (sharks!) in the country, and I see them getting about 2 INTs. Plus, an amazing pass rush. I just don't know about our DTs.... they might struggle against the run.

I see a final score of 45-28 OU.

Boomer Sooner!!!

 

[Jon S.]

I saw the discussions on conference shifts in this thread, and I just heard earlier this morning that the Big East might just be joining the Big-12 on life support (near death really). The reports are that my Pittsburgh Panthers & Syracuse (who ironically had been slated to leave for the ACC earlier before Boston College did instead) have applied to join the ACC. For me, being a Penn State alum, but a Pitt fan, I think it would be a good move for Pitt. It would definitely be a MAJOR step up in football IMHO, better television exposure, and not a bad move per se in basketball either (which, as much as I'd love to see them playing conference games....or games period....against Penn State in football.....the Big-"10" would be a MAJOR drop basketball wise). I kind of feel sad to see the Big East die (especially in basketball), which will happen if Pitt and Syracuse do leave for the ACC, but I'm excited at the same time for Pitt, because I don't see the Big East, as it is today anyway, ever being a power conference in football......and football is where the real money is!

From an educational standpoint, there are some top notch research schools in the ACC too, so that's would be an added plus for Pitt also.

Should be interesting to see how everything plays out, & how the landscape looks after the dust settles.

 

[Connor Macleod]

I saw the discussions on conference shifts in this thread, and I just heard earlier this morning that the Big East might just be joining the Big-12 on life support (near death really). The reports are that my Pittsburgh Panthers & Syracuse (who ironically had been slated to leave for the ACC earlier before Boston College did instead) have applied to join the ACC. For me, being a Penn State alum, but a Pitt fan, I think it would be a good move for Pitt. It would definitely be a MAJOR step up in football IMHO, better television exposure, and not a bad move per se in basketball either (which, as much as I'd love to see them playing conference games....or games period....against Penn State in football.....the Big-"10" would be a MAJOR drop basketball wise). I kind of feel sad to see the Big East die (especially in basketball), which will happen if Pitt and Syracuse do leave for the ACC, but I'm excited at the same time for Pitt, because I don't see the Big East, as it is today anyway, ever being a power conference in football......and football is where the real money is!

From an educational standpoint, there are some top notch research schools in the ACC too, so that's would be an added plus for Pitt also.

Should be interesting to see how everything plays out, & how the landscape looks after the dust settles.

ABC-TV just reported the ACC commissioner stated that 10 schools have contacted him about joining the ACC. No school names were mentioned, but I find this very interesting.

 

[Jon S.]

ABC-TV just reported the ACC commissioner stated that 10 schools have contacted him about joining the ACC. No school names were mentioned, but I find this very interesting.

Yep, I heard there were 10 schools who have applied to the ACC also. I've been watching the Pitt-Iowa game on ESPN-2, and ESPN is reporting that Pittsburgh and Syracuse are two of the schools who have applied.....but Pittsburgh & the ACC are going the "no comment" route. I agree that it's very interesting indeed.

 

[BCT]

If anyone wants a good laugh take a look at the Kansas defense on the ESPN Highlights tonight! :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

 

[lurkingdirk]

lol Auburn