Started By
Message
re: SEC now all counting independents as P5 games
Posted on 3/19/15 at 12:39 pm to Dr RC
Posted on 3/19/15 at 12:39 pm to Dr RC
apparently this was done to help MSU schedule. I'd guess it was tough to get a P5 opponent this late
quote:
@McMurphyESPN
Mississippi State, BYU agree to home/home series; 2016 at BYU, 2017 at MSU sources told @ESPN
0
Posted on 3/19/15 at 12:39 pm to dcbl
I'd probably smoke a little bit, but really just want to check out Denver. Been planning a trip up there for a while. It's on my short list of places to move to.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 12:52 pm to Dr RC
quote:
nah man, Army is just awful and absolutely worse than all of those schools on the reg.
Last 5 years:
ISU - 22-40 (5 seasons below .500)
Purdue - 21-41 (4 seasons below .500)
Wake Forest - 21-40 (5 seasons below .500)
Indiana - 19-41 (5 seasons below .500)
Colorado - 15-46 (5 seasons below .500)
Kansas - 12-48 (5 seasons below .500)
Army - 19-42 (4 seasons below .500)
They all look pretty similar to me.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 12:56 pm to RB10
quote:
Last 5 years:
ISU - 22-40 (5 seasons below .500)
Purdue - 21-41 (4 seasons below .500)
Wake Forest - 21-40 (5 seasons below .500)
Indiana - 19-41 (5 seasons below .500)
Colorado - 15-46 (5 seasons below .500)
Kansas - 12-48 (5 seasons below .500)
Army - 19-42 (4 seasons below .500)
You can't be serious. Did you compare schedules?
Posted on 3/19/15 at 12:59 pm to boxedlunch
quote:
You can't be serious. Did you compare schedules?
Don't care. My point stands. Army isn't great by any measure, but they aren't any worse than the bottom feeders of the P5 conferences.
ETA: I do hope you people realize I'm talking about them in terms of their weight on the schedule, and not how good or bad their football team is compared to the others.
This post was edited on 3/19/15 at 1:04 pm
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:00 pm to boxedlunch
Army lost to Yale... maybe the Ivy League is more their speed nowadays
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:01 pm to Korin
quote:
BYU shouldn't count either.
BYU shouldn't count but Wake Forest would? kansas? Cal?
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:13 pm to RB10
quote:
Don't care. My point stands. Army isn't great by any measure, but they aren't any worse than the bottom feeders of the P5 conferences.
ETA: I do hope you people realize I'm talking about them in terms of their weight on the schedule, and not how good or bad their football team is compared to the others.
Your point might stand to anybody that's an idiot, but it doesn't fly to anybody else.
Army played 2 teams that finished ranked over the last 5 years, lost to both Iowa State played 19, beat 2, Wake Forest played 19, beat 1, Purdue played 15, Indiana played 13, beat 1, Colorado and Kansas played 19 and 18 respectively. Do you think playing mid-majors with a losing record instead of ranked teams might make a difference in winning percentage?
Opponents winning percentage:
Iowa St. (440-294-0)--0.599
Kansas (416-295-0)--0.585
Colorado (412-315-0)--0.567
Purdue (404-321-0)--0.557
Indiana (388-320-0)--0.548
Wake Forest (390-325-0)--0.545
Army (337-365-0)--0.480
Army had the second worst winning percentage against mid-majors who failed to end with a winning record, beating only Wake Forest with a 3-2 record. They played 19 mid-majors that finished without a winning record, the most any of the others played was 7. Army got 12 of their 19 wins over that period against these weak teams that the other teams were not playing. Had the other teams played such a schedule, their winning percentage would have soared way up.
Schedules matters. I'm not dumb enough to be fooled by that.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:15 pm to boxedlunch
Hey, division III LaGrange went 20-30 over the last 5 years. Some P5 schools don't have as good a record, let's count LaGrange as a P5 school while we're being dumb.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:16 pm to boxedlunch
quote:
Your point might stand to anybody that's an idiot, but it doesn't fly to anybody else.
For any SEC team, a 30 point win over Army would be looked at exactly the same as a 30 point win over the other schools listed in this thread., which is the whole point of what we're discussing.
No one gives a frick how many ranked teams ISU has lost to compared to Army when the polls come out. Only that the SEC team took care of business against a lesser opponent.
You're an idiot.
This post was edited on 3/19/15 at 1:18 pm
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:18 pm to Dr RC
Army's phone is ringing off the hook right now with Dan Merlins on the line
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:19 pm to RB10
quote:
Don't care. My point stands. Army isn't great by any measure, but they aren't any worse than the bottom feeders of the P5 conferences.
Your point is complete shite. Start over and try again.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:19 pm to kilo
quote:
Your point is complete shite. Start over and try again.
Only to idiots who don't comprehend what we're discussing.
See my above post.
This post was edited on 3/19/15 at 1:20 pm
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:21 pm to RB10
Right...
Its ok to admit you were wrong bro. You look like a fool right now anyway. Just own it.
Its ok to admit you were wrong bro. You look like a fool right now anyway. Just own it.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:22 pm to kilo
quote:
Its ok to admit you were wrong bro. You look like a fool right now anyway. Just own it.
Nah, that would be you.
Unless you're going to tell me a win over Iowa State or Kansas means more than a win over Army for an SEC team. I know you aren't actually that dumb, but you could surprise me I guess.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:24 pm to RB10
quote:
Nah, that would be you.
Unless you're going to tell me a win over Iowa State or Kansas means more than a win over Army for an SEC team. I know you aren't actually that dumb, but you could surprise me I guess.
You are a complete moron. You are moving the argument as you go to try and cover your bullshite.
Hilarious.
This post was edited on 3/19/15 at 1:25 pm
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:28 pm to kilo
quote:
You are a complete moron. You are moving the argument as you go to try and cover your bullshite.
I'm not moving shite.
This is a thread about scheduling. My original statement was that Army is no worse than the bottom feeders of the P5 conferences, which is a fact when is comes to who is on the schedule. Army = Kansas, ISU, Wake Forest, etc. IN TERMS OF SCHEDULING. I'm sorry you and a few other are too dumb to realize what I was talking about.
In any evert, why would I argue that Army is as good a football team as those others? Football is about 5th on this list of priorities to those boys.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:33 pm to RB10
quote:
This is a thread about scheduling. My original statement was that Army is no worse than the bottom feeders of the P5 conferences, which is a fact when is comes to who is on the schedule. Army = Kansas, ISU, Wake Forest, etc. IN TERMS OF SCHEDULING. I'm sorry you and a few other are too dumb to realize what I was talking about.
Nope. This is a nice attempt to move the "goal posts" but you were talking about competitive level when you originally brought up the notion that bottom P5 teams were equal to Army. That was then and is now complete bullshite. No one in this thread is buying your nonsense.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:34 pm to RB10
quote:
In any evert, why would I argue that Army is as good a football team as those others?
I dont know, why did you?
Posted on 3/19/15 at 1:37 pm to kilo
quote:
move the "goal posts"
I see your point(s) RB10, but this is exactly what's happening here.
Anytime you have to clarify your argument repeatedly, chances are it isn't a good one dude.
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News