CF Resource's attempt to slam the SEC for nonconference scheduling
Look, I'm not going to say that the SEC is a bastion of guts when it comes to nonconference scheduling, but let's be honest here: with the annual USC - ND tradition, when was the last time SC actually trekked out to South Bend in, say, November? When it's not 70 and sunny out?LSU travelled to Va Tech three seasons ago, Va Tech promptly postponed the return trip which was originally scheduled for last year. THAT's why we had the home-only agreement with Oregon State; we just needed to fill that slot left open by the pansies in Blacksburg.
And the referenced jab from SI's John Walters at the SEC's measly 3-3 bowl record last year is a bit unfounded. Try comparing the bowl records of every conference over the past decade. Then let's see where the SEC falls. (Note, a friend of mine's done this research before, which I don't have the time to do at this moment, but suffice it to say, the SEC turned up golden.)
Incidentally, I absolutely LOVE how the media and Pac-10 fans in general like to make such a huge deal out of Oregon State's near-upset against LSU last year. There is no way we should have won that game. OSU played their hearts out. Alexis Serna had an awful day kicking (and I'm happy to see that he's since convinced The Sporting News to list him among the nation's best clutch kickers). But let's view it in at least a little bit of context (and yes, I know OSU was a huge dog in the game): LSU was the defending national champs, yes, but we lost 1) our starting QB, Matt Mauck, 2) Our two best WRs, Michael Clayton and Devery Henderson, 3) Chad Lavalais and Marquise Hill on the D-Line, both of whom could have started most anywhere in the country, and 4) three out of four starters in the secondary.
If the Pac-10 fans are going to use the "any given Sunday" argument to explain the Cal-Texas Tech bowl game debacle last year, then they should be willing to allow the SEC that excuse on occasion as well.
posted by Publius @ 6:49 PM
2 Comments:
Pac-10 fans should look at their bowl record since 1996 (the year the Big 12 formed) before ripping any other conference.
(Hint: It's gawdawful.)
(Fact: It's the worst one of any of the BCS conferences.)
How does the result of one (or sometimes two) teams at the top of a conference indicate the overall strength of a conference?
The results of the BCS games only indicate the strength of the very best team in a given conference. They don't indicate anything regarding the conference as a whole.
By your logic, the Big East was one of the best conferences during Miami's run of dominance when, in fact, the conference had very little of substance beyond the Hurricanes. You couldn't possibly be arguing that the Big East was a dominant conference from 2000-2003 because Miami beat Florida, Nebraska and Florida State in BCS bowls, could you be?
Post a Comment
<< Home