I don't see the SEC as any better than the ACC or the Big Ten (11 actually).
I agree. I have no idea why USC put Arkansas on their schedule :o).
Cup Cake Schedule?
USC has beaten the #5, #8, and #16 teams and will play the #11 team in two weeks.
Yeah, I hear you. Playing a rough group like Arkansas, Vanderbilt, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State would keep any coach up at night. /sarc.
You're right about needing a playoff system, but wrong about the schedules. Both USC and Texas have had to get through some tough teams. Texas beat the #5 and #7 teams, and a couple low-ranked ones as well.
Texas' second game was at Ohio State, a non-conference game most contending teams wouldn't even think of putting on the schedule.
The top 3 teems in the Pac-10 are 30-2. Nuff Said.
Bull *#%^
Fresno St has proven over and over again that they belong. Their "Anyone, Anywhere, Anytime" motto isn't an empty slogan. They now have a problem scheduling anyone in BCS conferences. If the SEC had any balls they would schedule Fresno St, but they are too busy playing the Louisianna Tech School for the Blind during their non conference schedules!!! I say this and I hate Fresno St with a passion, because of past transgressions involving my beloved New Mexico Lobos, but I respect the hell out of what they are able to do.
>> Just look at the suppose football power houses these two play. Baylor, Rice, SMU, and schools I have never heard of. <<
Neither t.u. (Texas) nor USC played SMU. While Rice is pitiful, Baylor would likely beat no less than a third, and maybe half, of the SEC, as they have the same or a better record than: Vandy, UK, Tenn, Arkansas, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State. The latter two teams are just about as bad as Rice, and Baylor easily could have beaten OU and A&M with slightly better coaching.
If you've never heard of the schools t.u. and USC played this year, then you know nothing of college football.
>>If half the SEC teams had the same schedule, then I am quite confident they would be undefeated too.<<
What team in the SEC had a tougher schedule than either t.u. or USC? Alabama? Nope. Utah State and Middle Tennesse aren't exactly powers. Neither are Missouri State, Louisiana-Monroe, Ball State, Western Kentucky, Louisiana Tech, Wyoming, Idaho State, Indiana, North Texas, Appilachian State, Memphis, The Citadel, Murray State, Tulane, Houston, Central Florida, Troy, Wake Forest, and Richmond. These were the VAST majority of teams SEC teams played in non-conference competition. Which one of these teams is a power in your mind?
Yes, they did play a few good ones, including USC, Notre Dame, Georgia Tech, and Clemson, but by and large, they lost these games. But keep in mind that t.u. played Ohio State, and USC played Fresno and Notre Dame, and they won all these games. Both played in conferences that, even though down in the case of the Big 12, are vastly superior to the SEC this year.
I hate Texas worse than anyone on this planet, and I've criticized their non-conference schedule in years past, but they didn't play a "cupcake" schedule and neither did USC. Asserting as much is either totally dishonest or ignorant.
Texas played Oklahoma, Ohio State, Colorado and Texas Tech. I noticed Arkansas (4-6), Mississippi State (2-8), Kentucky (3-7) and the perennial powerhouse Middle Tennessee on some of those Southeastern Conference schedules.
Texas played Oklahoma, Ohio State, Colorado and Texas Tech. I noticed Arkansas (4-6), Mississippi State (2-8), Kentucky (3-7) and the perennial powerhouse Middle Tennessee on some of those Southeastern Conference schedules.