Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/5/15 at 8:01 pm to inadaze
2012 isn't exactly arbitrary, it's the last expansion, just like people use 1992 a lot for metrics, when the SEC expanded and began the title game.
But in a way, yes it is arbitrary.
But last 5 years, 10 years, that's arbitrary too, just doesn't sound as much since round numbers.
But in a way, yes it is arbitrary.
But last 5 years, 10 years, that's arbitrary too, just doesn't sound as much since round numbers.
Posted on 1/5/15 at 8:08 pm to inadaze
quote:
3. South Carolina - 29-10 (.744)
Not good enough.
We should have won at least three more games this past season, two more the previous two ... 34-5 and I'd have no complaints right now.
As it were, Spurrier is on the damn hot seat in my book.
Posted on 1/6/15 at 3:38 am to IAmReality
quote:
But in a way, yes it is arbitrary.
In what way?
You know why I used this time frame. What do you think would be a better (more non-arbitrary) time frame for the fourteen SEC teams?
Posted on 1/6/15 at 4:24 am to scrooster
quote:
As it were, Spurrier is on the damn hot seat in my book.
South Carolina is on the hot seat in Spurrier's book. Dude about to go golfing for a loooong time.
Posted on 1/6/15 at 4:28 am to tiderider
quote:you seem upset about something.
I DEMAND A RECOUNT! ALABAMA IS CLEARLY A DECLINING PROGRAM AND COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE THE BEST RECORD SINCE 2012!
Posted on 1/6/15 at 4:48 am to deeprig9
quote:
Theyve only won 11 since then
Let's start from 1992 instead.
Posted on 1/6/15 at 4:49 am to inadaze
quote:
3. South Carolina - 29-10 (.744)
Not too shabby considering where we started out at!
Posted on 1/6/15 at 4:50 am to inadaze
quote:
Texas A&M - 28-11 (.718)
I'll definitely take that, given the general public's prognostications about our SEC move
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News