Started By
Message
re: Because tRant has suddenly become a Big 8/12/11(?) hotbed, a history lesson.
Posted on 1/17/17 at 2:30 pm to AshleySchaeffer
Posted on 1/17/17 at 2:30 pm to AshleySchaeffer
SWC was GOAT
1
Posted on 1/17/17 at 3:08 pm to AshleySchaeffer
quote:
The evidence is clear. No matter how hard you try, no matter how long you troll, the traditions and power of Oklahoma and the Big 8 has never and will never match up to the historical powerhouse that is the SEC.
[Sooner]
But but but what did Aggie do to contribute to that?
[/Sooner]
Posted on 1/17/17 at 3:43 pm to AshleySchaeffer
quote:
ll, the traditions and power of Oklahoma and the Big 8 has never and will never match up to the historical powerhouse that is the SEC.
How do you explain this?
OU vs SEC 14-7-2
Nebraska vs SEC 17-8-1
Texas vs SEC: 35-8-2
No taking away what the SEC has accomplished, but I find it disingenuous to say they can't match up "historically" when they "historically" have a winning record against the conference. I mean that is a fact that seems to contradict your conflated analysis. Also not arguing that the Big 8 might not have had an easier route to the championship, but that doesn't negate their performance against the metric you established which is performance historically against SEC.
BTW not sure if you guys have found this site but it looks pretty good for statistical comparisons:
NCAA statistical comparison
Posted on 1/17/17 at 3:53 pm to AshleySchaeffer
Nebraska was legit
62-24 ring a bell?
They normally beat everybody on the regular, don't pretend like they were soft like they are today. FSU and Miami gave them trouble, but NU peaked in the 90s.
In 1997, they scorched Peyton's Vols 42-17. Those 90s NU teams should NEVER be compared to modern Nebraska teams
62-24 ring a bell?
They normally beat everybody on the regular, don't pretend like they were soft like they are today. FSU and Miami gave them trouble, but NU peaked in the 90s.
In 1997, they scorched Peyton's Vols 42-17. Those 90s NU teams should NEVER be compared to modern Nebraska teams
This post was edited on 1/17/17 at 5:47 pm
Posted on 1/17/17 at 4:43 pm to Saddletramp
quote:
How do you explain this?
Texas vs SEC: 35-8-2
Undefeated Texas was 8-7-1 vs LSU after getting their arse beat by the Tigers in the 1962-63 Cotton Bowl, and chickened out of scheduling them ever again.
That would explain part of it anyway.
By 1995 here are the SEC teams Texas had played 10 or more games against:
LSU 16 games (8-7-1)
Tulane 17 games (15-1-1)
Vandy 12 games (3-8-1)
Half of Texas' wins came against Tulane and Vandy.
Posted on 1/17/17 at 5:18 pm to AshleySchaeffer
That's pretty pathetic OP. 
Thus therefore??
You win national titles by beating a national title contender from another conference, moron. And you're comparing OU and Nebraska's BIG 8 conference accomplishments against the modern era of the SEC which is bullshite and you know it. The SEC wasn't shite back in the 70s and 80s and it's reverting back to the mean as we speak now that all the great coaches are gone.
BTW: The SEC East is no better than the former BIG XII North so go sell crazy somewhere else.
quote:
These numbers not only demonstrate that Nebraska and Oklahoma were the two dominant forces of the conference, but that the conference as a whole was weak, soft, and safer, thus therefore paving the way for Oklahoma and Nebraska to claim 10 national titles in the conference before the implementation of the BCS.
Thus therefore??
You win national titles by beating a national title contender from another conference, moron. And you're comparing OU and Nebraska's BIG 8 conference accomplishments against the modern era of the SEC which is bullshite and you know it. The SEC wasn't shite back in the 70s and 80s and it's reverting back to the mean as we speak now that all the great coaches are gone.
BTW: The SEC East is no better than the former BIG XII North so go sell crazy somewhere else.
This post was edited on 1/17/17 at 5:28 pm
Posted on 1/17/17 at 6:16 pm to CharlotteSooner
quote:
The SEC wasn't shite back in the 70s and 80s
It was more competitive and therefore harder to produce an undefeated team.
Further, Alabama won 3 titles in the 70s, Georgia won a title in 1980, and Florida should've been in the mix in 84, and 85, but we were on sanctions. Your lack of knowledge is disturbing.
Posted on 1/17/17 at 6:18 pm to MizzouTrue
quote:
62-24 ring a bell
That was 1995. Did I or did I not specify the downfall was after the merger? I think I did.
And you're right, the 90s were a different time with an easier schedule until 97 and have haven't been significant since. So yes you're right in proving that I am right.
Posted on 1/17/17 at 6:28 pm to Saddletramp
quote:
OU vs SEC 14-7-2
I get 14-6-2 not 14-7-2
OU vs SIX
3-1-1 Alabama (3 bowls and a H&H series)
2-0-0 Auburn (Sugar Bowl)
0-1-0 Florida (BCS win for Gators)
1-1-0 LSU (split 2 Sugar Bowls)
0-0-0 Georgia (never played)
3-1-0 Tennessee (2 wins were against Butch and split 2 Orange Bowls)
9-4-1 Just not that much history between OU and SIX
OU vs remaining CHARTER
2-1-0 Kentucky (Sooners took H&H but Cats won Sugar Bowl)
2-0-1 Vanderbilt (Sooners to 70's H&H but Vandy played to tie in 30's @ Normon
0-1-0 Ole Miss (Sooners lost bowl game)
1-0-0 State
0-0-0 Georgia Tech
0-0-0 Tulane
0-0-0 Sewanee
5-2-1 Even less history between OU and core SEC
OU vs realignment schools
66-25-5 Missouri
19-12-0 Texas A&M
10-04-1 Arkansas
00-00-0 South Carolina
NU vs SIX
2-3-0 Alabama (3 bowls and a H@H series)
3-1-0 Auburn (H&H and 2 bowlsl)
2-0-0 Florida (2 bowls)
5-0-1 LSU (H&H and 4 bowls)
2-1-0 Georgia (3 bowls)
2-1-0 Tennessee (3 bowls)
16-6-1 Just not that much history between OU and SIX
NU vs remaining CHARTER
0-0-0 Kentucky (Sooners took H@H but Cats won Sugar Bowl)
0-0-0 Vanderbilt (Sooners to 70's H@H but Vandy played to tie in 30's @ Normon
0-1-0 Ole Miss (Cornhuskers lost bowl game)
1-0-0 State (Sun Bowl)
0-1-0 Georgia Tech (GT had already moved to ACC)
0-0-0 Tulane
0-0-0 Sewanee
1-2-0 Even less history between OU and core SEC
NU vs realignment schools
65-36-3 Missouri
10-04-0 Texas A&M
00-01-0 Arkansas
03-01-0 South Carolina (2 games in Lincoln, 1 in Columbia, and Cocks won Cap One)
Posted on 1/17/17 at 6:33 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
SWC was GOAT
Before the salary cap maybe.
Posted on 1/17/17 at 6:35 pm to Cdawg
quote:
SWC was GOAT
Hard to be the GOAT when you are a collection of private schools in TX
Posted on 1/17/17 at 7:13 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
3-8-1 Texas vs Vanderbilt
Texas only played 4 games in TN and lost all 4. Most of the rest were played in Dallas until the shame became too great and they swapped for Oklahoma at the State Fair.
All our games are played in Texas
cause I'm afraid of Tennessee
(to the tune of you know)
Posted on 1/17/17 at 9:03 pm to gthog61
Oklahoma and Nebraska ALWAYS scheduled tough non-conference games while in the Big 12 and Big 8. Not to mention OU still played Texas every season as a non-conference game when Texas was in the SWC.
Colorado was a legitimate program before the rape issue and the downfall also. OU will always schedule the big name programs for non-conference home and home series.
Colorado was a legitimate program before the rape issue and the downfall also. OU will always schedule the big name programs for non-conference home and home series.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 11:23 am to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
By 1995 here are the SEC teams Texas had played 10 or more games against:
Again, the metrics for his premise is "historically." I was unaware that "historical" is confined to since 1995. Why is 10 games or more significant, being that the there was no qualifier to his premise. Solely "historically." Or are we to believe the historical analysis requires 10 or more points to establish contextual analysis?
He also measures a single team, "OU and Nebraska," against the entirety of a conference as the standards. I would never do such but he established the context of his hypothetical. It would be better to argue historical performance against a single team. Were Vandy, Tulane, LSU etc not in the SEC? What does it matter what the record was against a single opponent from a conference when the contextual qualifier is the conference. Your argument is a logical false equivalency fallacy it adheres to neither the premise nor the contextual question. I have provided empirical or measurable evidence based on his established premise, you keep changing them to get the answer you want.
No denying the superior performance of the SEC (arguably one of the greatest runs in college football history) over the last decade when it comes to championships and overall performance.
This post was edited on 1/19/17 at 11:26 am
Posted on 1/19/17 at 11:54 am to CharlotteSooner
quote:
The SEC East is no better than the former BIG XII North
The Big 12 North won 0 BCS titles and appeared in 1.
The SEC East has won 3 BCS titles and appeared in 3.
Posted on 1/19/17 at 12:38 pm to gthog61
That's actually pretty funny
Posted on 1/19/17 at 2:06 pm to SunUvABitchMarcos
So, what Ashley is saying is if either OU, NU, or TX were in the SEC, they'd be second in national titles behind Alabama?
Looks accurate to me :)
Looks accurate to me :)
Posted on 1/20/17 at 9:13 am to Oklahomey
Oklahoma maybe
Texas would be a no
Nebraska would be a no
Texas would be a no
Nebraska would be a no
Posted on 1/20/17 at 9:15 am to AshleySchaeffer
My God did someone piss in your cheerios.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News