JohnStOnge
| Favorite team: | McNeese State  |
| Location: | Prarieiville, LA |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | Fishing. |
| Occupation: | Environmental Science |
| Number of Posts: | 132 |
| Registered on: | 2/8/2008 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
Florida's players an embarrassment
Posted by JohnStOnge on 1/2/13 at 11:12 pm
At least some of them. By the middle of that game I was pulling hard for Louisville because Florida's players are such a bunch of jerks. Meanwhile Louisville's players were just letting their play do the talking. Nothing but class.
Like when Florida was down 30-10 and lucky to be that close and their defensive players were mouthing off and making weird hand gestures and such. They're getting completely schooled yet their out there thumping their chests like they're "all that."
By the time it was over I was SO glad they got clocked. Only disappointment is that the final score didn't reflect the extent to which they got outplayed.
Like when Florida was down 30-10 and lucky to be that close and their defensive players were mouthing off and making weird hand gestures and such. They're getting completely schooled yet their out there thumping their chests like they're "all that."
By the time it was over I was SO glad they got clocked. Only disappointment is that the final score didn't reflect the extent to which they got outplayed.
7
What I think happened when Tyrann Mathieu went to McNeese
Posted by JohnStOnge on 8/19/12 at 8:13 am
Because of criticism McNeese got for talking to Tyrann Mathieu I feel compelled to type what I think happened when TM went to McNeese. I think he went there thinking it was just a matter of him showing up and McNeese saying "we will take you." But I don't think that happened. I think what happened when he got there is that head coach Matt Viator was non-committal and took a "we need to both make sure we really want to do this" approach.
I say that because of feedback I got from former McNeese beat reporter Gary Laney (now with GeauxNation and who goes by "McBeat" on the McNeese Delphi board as well as some others). Someone had posted an article including a quote Gary got from Coach Viator (LINK ... ate-source). The quote I saw that made me think what I think is:
After reading that I posted the following:
Shortly thereafter Gary responded to my post by writing:
Now, there's some message board stuff there and message boards contain a lot of unreliable information. But it's confirmed as a belief shared by a reporter who has a good, long standing relationship with coach Viator and who interviewed him shortly after the meeting.
I say that because of feedback I got from former McNeese beat reporter Gary Laney (now with GeauxNation and who goes by "McBeat" on the McNeese Delphi board as well as some others). Someone had posted an article including a quote Gary got from Coach Viator (LINK ... ate-source). The quote I saw that made me think what I think is:
quote:
Mathieu did visit McNeese State on Friday night, Cowboys coach Matt Viator told GeauxNation's Gary Laney. However, Mathieu left without a commitment.
"It's very important for both us and Tyrann to make the right decision and Tyrann agreed," Viator said. "It was a long day. We both needed to back off a bit and make the best decision. Especially him. He needs to catch his breath and make sure he makes the right decision."
After reading that I posted the following:
quote:
From the quotes McBeat got from Coach Viator I got the impression that Coach Viator did not give him the "we will take you" response he and those close to him may have expected. I think Coach Viator had a "we both really have to think about whether or not we want to do this" type of attitude.
Shortly thereafter Gary responded to my post by writing:
quote:
I think what you gathered about Matt's handling of this is pretty spot on.
Now, there's some message board stuff there and message boards contain a lot of unreliable information. But it's confirmed as a belief shared by a reporter who has a good, long standing relationship with coach Viator and who interviewed him shortly after the meeting.
re: Doen't McNeese have the same standards as LSU? or any at all?
Posted by JohnStOnge on 8/11/12 at 9:29 am
I think if you asked the LSU coaching staff and athletic department administration as well as the LSU players they would unanimously say that they hope some school gives the guy a second chance.
Having said that, McNeese's experience with SEC "discipline" type transfers has not been good. I can only think of two: Cecil Collins and Jantzen Jackson.
Cecil Collins played two games then got busted on a drug test. Jantzen Jackson played one season then declared for the draft. I've seen the assertion that he hurt McNeese's APR. Neither broke into the starting lineup before they left. I'm sure they would have if they'd stayed around long enough to learn the systems. But neither really contributed all that much as players while they were there; though Collins did score the winning touchdown in the game before he got busted.
So from McNeese's standpoint there may be some reluctance to do it again provided they really do have the opportunity. Me, I'd hope they take him. But I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't.
Having said that, McNeese's experience with SEC "discipline" type transfers has not been good. I can only think of two: Cecil Collins and Jantzen Jackson.
Cecil Collins played two games then got busted on a drug test. Jantzen Jackson played one season then declared for the draft. I've seen the assertion that he hurt McNeese's APR. Neither broke into the starting lineup before they left. I'm sure they would have if they'd stayed around long enough to learn the systems. But neither really contributed all that much as players while they were there; though Collins did score the winning touchdown in the game before he got busted.
So from McNeese's standpoint there may be some reluctance to do it again provided they really do have the opportunity. Me, I'd hope they take him. But I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't.
re: Watched about 5minutes
Posted by JohnStOnge on 12/31/11 at 6:52 pm
All this time a playoff tournament could've been going on with meaningful games. I know it's a dead horse being beaten again but it's true.
Of course this year there wouldn't be anything for LSU to gain from something like that since the Tigers are one of the two teams picked for the championship game by the current system. But the top level of college football would be SO much better if they had a playoff tournament.
And not just a "plus one" either. It's pretty obvious from other playoff systems including other levels of NCAA football that teams outside of what people THINK are the top four are capable of winning such playoff tournaments.
Of course this year there wouldn't be anything for LSU to gain from something like that since the Tigers are one of the two teams picked for the championship game by the current system. But the top level of college football would be SO much better if they had a playoff tournament.
And not just a "plus one" either. It's pretty obvious from other playoff systems including other levels of NCAA football that teams outside of what people THINK are the top four are capable of winning such playoff tournaments.
re: "It's hard to beat a team twice."
Posted by JohnStOnge on 12/31/11 at 6:36 pm
quote:
The theory is that the losing team will change its strategy and the winner won't make adjustments. Both teams will adjust. Les is real good at adjustments generally.
I think there might be a LITTLE something to that theory; but I don't know how much it applies to this game. I don't think LSU came away from that game thinking everything was swell. I'm sure their coaching staff feels it has to do some things differently.
re: SEC has had problems with PAC 10 teams
Posted by JohnStOnge on 12/12/10 at 9:58 am
quote:
LSU 5-0
Yes. But in every case the Tigers were playing teams that finshed with poorer PAC 10 records than LSU's record in the SEC. They played two games against teams that finished with winning records in the PAC 10 (Oregon State and Arizona State each finished at 5-3). LSU finished 6-2 and 7-1 during the SEC regular seasons those years (7-2 after losing the SEC championship game after one of them). Both games were very competetive and could've gone either way. There was no suggestion of substantial LSU superiority; particularly in the Oregon State game that was won because Oregon State's placekicker couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.
SEC has had problems with PAC 10 teams
Posted by JohnStOnge on 12/12/10 at 9:32 am
As Oregon vs. Auburn approaches I am reminded that I have frequently heard/seen SEC fans opine that the PAC 10 is weak. But if the SEC is strong, it is hard to make the "PAC 10" is weak case using that league's performance against the SEC during the BCS era. The PAC 10 is 12-9 vs. the SEC since the start of the BCS even though the majority of the games involved situations in which SEC teams finished with better records in their own conference than the PAC 10 teams did. Here are some highlights:
There have been three games such that the PAC 10 team and the SEC team had the same conference record. The PAC 10 is 3-0 in those games. The average score is 35-18 PAC 10.
There have been 12 games such that the SEC team finished with a better conference record than the PAC 10 team did. The PAC 10 is 3-8 in those games. The average score is 32-20 SEC.
There have been 7 games such that the PAC 10 team finished with a better conference record than the SEC team did. The PAC 10 is 6-1 in those games. The average score is 37-19 PAC 10.
One interesting matchup was the 2006 USC/Arkansas game. USC went on to finish 7-2 in the PAC 10. Arkansas went on to finish 7-1 during the SEC regular season then lost to Florida in the SEC championship game by 38-28. The game was played at Arkansas. USC won 50-14.
Below are the actual results. The record of each team in its own conference is in parenthesis. * means the SEC team's conference record includes the result of the SEC championship game. Home team underlined. Winning team bold.
Games where teams had equal records in their own conference:
Year 2000 UCLA (3-5) 35, Alabama (3-5) 24
Year 2001 UCLA (4-4) 24, Alabama (4-4) 17
Year 2006 USC (7-2) 50, Arkansas (7-2*) 14
Games where the SEC team finished with the better record in its own conference:
Year 2003 Arizona (1-7) 13, LSU (8-1*) 59
Year 2004 Oregon State (5-3) 21, LSU (6-2) 22
Year 2005 Arizona State (5-3)31, LSU (7-2*) 35
Year 2006 Washington State (4-5), Auburn (6-2) 40
Year 2006 Arizona (4-5)3, LSU (6-2) 45[/b]
Year 2007 [u]California (3-6) 45, Tennessee (6-3*) 31
Year 2008 UCLA (3-6) 27, Tennessee (3-5) 24
Year 2008 Arizona State (4-5) 10, Georgia (6-2)27
Year 2009 Washington 23(4-5) , LSU (5-3) 31
Year 2009 UCLA (3-6) 19, Tennessee (4-4) 15
Year 2009 Arizona State (2-7) 17, Georgia (4-4) 20
Games where the PAC 10 team finished with the better record in its own conference:
Year 2002 Oregon (3-6) 36, Mississippi State (0-8) 13
Year 2002 USC (7-1) 24, Auburn (5-3) 17
Year 2003 Oregon (5-3) 42, Mississippi State (1-7) 34
Year 2003 USC (7-1) 23, Auburn (5-3) 0
Year 2005 USC (8-0) 70, Arkansas (2-6) 17
Year 2006 California (7-2) 18, Tennessee (5-3) 35
Year 2010 Oregon (9-0) 48, Tennessee (3-5) 13
There have been three games such that the PAC 10 team and the SEC team had the same conference record. The PAC 10 is 3-0 in those games. The average score is 35-18 PAC 10.
There have been 12 games such that the SEC team finished with a better conference record than the PAC 10 team did. The PAC 10 is 3-8 in those games. The average score is 32-20 SEC.
There have been 7 games such that the PAC 10 team finished with a better conference record than the SEC team did. The PAC 10 is 6-1 in those games. The average score is 37-19 PAC 10.
One interesting matchup was the 2006 USC/Arkansas game. USC went on to finish 7-2 in the PAC 10. Arkansas went on to finish 7-1 during the SEC regular season then lost to Florida in the SEC championship game by 38-28. The game was played at Arkansas. USC won 50-14.
Below are the actual results. The record of each team in its own conference is in parenthesis. * means the SEC team's conference record includes the result of the SEC championship game. Home team underlined. Winning team bold.
Games where teams had equal records in their own conference:
Year 2000 UCLA (3-5) 35, Alabama (3-5) 24
Year 2001 UCLA (4-4) 24, Alabama (4-4) 17
Year 2006 USC (7-2) 50, Arkansas (7-2*) 14
Games where the SEC team finished with the better record in its own conference:
Year 2003 Arizona (1-7) 13, LSU (8-1*) 59
Year 2004 Oregon State (5-3) 21, LSU (6-2) 22
Year 2005 Arizona State (5-3)31, LSU (7-2*) 35
Year 2006 Washington State (4-5), Auburn (6-2) 40
Year 2006 Arizona (4-5)3, LSU (6-2) 45[/b]
Year 2007 [u]California (3-6) 45, Tennessee (6-3*) 31
Year 2008 UCLA (3-6) 27, Tennessee (3-5) 24
Year 2008 Arizona State (4-5) 10, Georgia (6-2)27
Year 2009 Washington 23(4-5) , LSU (5-3) 31
Year 2009 UCLA (3-6) 19, Tennessee (4-4) 15
Year 2009 Arizona State (2-7) 17, Georgia (4-4) 20
Games where the PAC 10 team finished with the better record in its own conference:
Year 2002 Oregon (3-6) 36, Mississippi State (0-8) 13
Year 2002 USC (7-1) 24, Auburn (5-3) 17
Year 2003 Oregon (5-3) 42, Mississippi State (1-7) 34
Year 2003 USC (7-1) 23, Auburn (5-3) 0
Year 2005 USC (8-0) 70, Arkansas (2-6) 17
Year 2006 California (7-2) 18, Tennessee (5-3) 35
Year 2010 Oregon (9-0) 48, Tennessee (3-5) 13
re: LHSAA 5A: West Monroe 14 - Acadiana 21, Final
Posted by JohnStOnge on 12/12/10 at 7:57 am
quote:
I think it's safe to safe, again, that Evangel Christian Academy is the best team in Louisiana.
I think Acadiana was. Remember, Evangel did lose to St. Thomas More. Also they were playing a Curtis team that lost to Salmen. I realize Acadiana not only lost but lost big to St. Thomas More the first time they played them but got payback big time in a totally dominant performance and at the end of the season that was one heck of a football team. We'll never know but I don't think Evangel would pounded teams like East St. John and St. Thomas More the way Acadiana did during its playoff run.
I also think West Monroe was fortunate the score was as close as it was last night. Basically they had a kickoff return for a TD and one 37 yard play just before halftime for their two scores and that was it. Not a single real scoring drive where they put a few plays together and got into the end zone.
re: McNeese students who will be wearing purple on Sat...
Posted by JohnStOnge on 10/14/10 at 6:39 pm
Not a direct answer to the question about academic programs but there was a news report last year indicating that McNeese graduates had the highest average income among graduates of public universities in Louisiana. Maybe one of the other McNeese guys can link it. Tulane grads were #1 in average (or maybe median) income while McNeese graduates were number 2.
So, on average, people who have graduated from McNeese have done OK.
On the game thing: I grew up in Lake Charles and my Dad would take me to McNeese games. My high school counselor recommended that I go to LSU so I went for one semester. Back then a student could get into LSU games with just their ID card but I never went to one. I drove back to Lake Charles and went to McNeese games instead.
Me, I can't understand why somebody would say that going through three close "win or die" playoff games like McNeese did in 1997 or 2002 including a last second field goal to get into the 1997 championship game via an actual playoff tournament isn't exciting. But different strokes for different folks.
I have one word for someone who goes to McNeese or Southeastern or anywhere else and feels like they have to wear some other school's jersey to class:
"Wannabe."
Me, I went to school where I wanted to go to school. No place else I wanted to be. If you're going to one school when you really want to be somewhere else that's kind of pathetic.
So, on average, people who have graduated from McNeese have done OK.
On the game thing: I grew up in Lake Charles and my Dad would take me to McNeese games. My high school counselor recommended that I go to LSU so I went for one semester. Back then a student could get into LSU games with just their ID card but I never went to one. I drove back to Lake Charles and went to McNeese games instead.
Me, I can't understand why somebody would say that going through three close "win or die" playoff games like McNeese did in 1997 or 2002 including a last second field goal to get into the 1997 championship game via an actual playoff tournament isn't exciting. But different strokes for different folks.
I have one word for someone who goes to McNeese or Southeastern or anywhere else and feels like they have to wear some other school's jersey to class:
"Wannabe."
Me, I went to school where I wanted to go to school. No place else I wanted to be. If you're going to one school when you really want to be somewhere else that's kind of pathetic.
re: Why do SEC fans think the Pac 10 is weak?
Posted by JohnStOnge on 1/11/09 at 9:44 am
[/quote]Why do this? USC is above and beyond any other PAC-10 team, they could do well in the SEC. LSU is not the dominate force in the SEC like USC is in the PAC-10.[quote]
Because, sometimes when I've had this discussion in the past, people say the Pac 10 just has the edge because of USC. However, LSU's 4-0 record against the Pac 10 is just as "important" to the numbers as USC's 4-0 record against the SEC is.
But you're right. It's not quite the same thing. I do think LSU may have been the top SEC program overall during the 2003-2006 period during which it played its four games against Pac 10s but it's obviously not the same as the way in which USC has dominated the Pac 10.
Because, sometimes when I've had this discussion in the past, people say the Pac 10 just has the edge because of USC. However, LSU's 4-0 record against the Pac 10 is just as "important" to the numbers as USC's 4-0 record against the SEC is.
But you're right. It's not quite the same thing. I do think LSU may have been the top SEC program overall during the 2003-2006 period during which it played its four games against Pac 10s but it's obviously not the same as the way in which USC has dominated the Pac 10.
re: Why do SEC fans think the Pac 10 is weak?
Posted by JohnStOnge on 1/11/09 at 8:53 am
quote:
In all seriousness though, as you probably already know, Mark Twain wrote one time something about lies, damned lies , and statistics. The point being of course that you can 'gerrymander' statistics to justify just about any position in a debate.
I don't think that's true. I think statistical "lying" can be detected and exposed.
But the perception is why I listed all the results including the record of each team within its own conference. It's objectively true that the record is 10-7 Pac 10. It's objectively true that the series involved more SEC teams with winning conference records (11) than Pac 10 teams of that type (7). It's objectively true that there were 9 games such that the SEC team had a better record in its own conference than the Pac 10 team did vs. 5 games where the reverse is true. It's objectively true that there were three games where the teams had identical conference records and the Pac 10 won all three of those games. So on and so forth.
Can you see any possible way to interpret the results, while taking how well each team did within its own conference into account, as suggesting SEC superiority?
re: Why do SEC fans think the Pac 10 is weak?
Posted by JohnStOnge on 1/11/09 at 8:46 am
quote:
This is why WE the SEC think that we are the strongest conference and every other conference is weaker than ours.
Conference Championships Schools BCS Championship Game Record
SEC 5 Tennessee (1998), LSU (2003, 2007), Florida (2006, 2008) 5-0 (1.000)
Big 12 2 Oklahoma (2000), Texas (2005) 2-4 (0.333)
Pac-10 1 USC (2004) 1-1 (0.500)
Big Ten 1 Ohio State (2002) 1-2 (0.333)
ACC 1 Florida State (1999) 1-2 (0.333)[6] (2-4 current alignment)
Big East 1 Miami (2001) 1-2 (0.333)[7] (0-0 current alignment)
The BCS championship game is not a good measure because the teams that get there aren't there because they went through a tournment involving all of the top teams from the various leagues.
None of those SEC BCS championships involved beating a top Pac 10 team.
If they ever go to a tournament with a field big enough so that all of the top teams from what are now BCS leagues are included a league winning five of those tournaments in 11 years or 3 in a row will provide a pretty compelling argument that at least the top teams from that league tend to be the strongest. But that hasn't happened.
In this case, no SEC champ has had to play USC because USC tends to get knocked off by teams in its own league so that it usually doesn't quite make it into the top 2 in the end. But they're getting knocked off by teams in a league that has clearly had the better of its head to head series with the SEC.
re: Why do SEC fans think the Pac 10 is weak?
Posted by JohnStOnge on 1/11/09 at 8:31 am
Now some numbers on how the Pac 10 has done against other BCS leagues in general during the BCS era. Here are the records for the Big 12 vs. each other league:
Vs. SEC 10 - 7
Vs. Big 10 34 - 22
Vs. Big 12 27 - 27
Vs. Big East 10 - 7
Vs. ACC 6-6
Total w/l vs. other BCS conferences: 87 - 69
In short, at this point during the BCS era, no other BCS conference has a winning record in head to head competition against the Pac 10.
If you're thinking it's all because of USC, it's not. Here is how the group of Pac 10 teams OTHER than USC did in games against other BCS conference teams:
Vs. SEC 6 - 7
Vs. Big 10 26 - 22
Vs. Big 12 23 - 24
Vs. Big East 10 - 7
Vs. ACC 4 - 5
Total w/l vs. other BCS conferences: 69 - 65
So, even with its top program left out of the equation , teams from that league have held their own against teams from every other BCS conference. Yes, if you leave USC out, they've lost more than they've won against three other leagues. But in no case are they more than 1 game below 0.500. And, overall, they have a winning record in non conference play against other BCS leagues WITHOUT USC.
If you think the Pac 10 is a weak league, you're in "don't confuse me with the facts" mode.
Vs. SEC 10 - 7
Vs. Big 10 34 - 22
Vs. Big 12 27 - 27
Vs. Big East 10 - 7
Vs. ACC 6-6
Total w/l vs. other BCS conferences: 87 - 69
In short, at this point during the BCS era, no other BCS conference has a winning record in head to head competition against the Pac 10.
If you're thinking it's all because of USC, it's not. Here is how the group of Pac 10 teams OTHER than USC did in games against other BCS conference teams:
Vs. SEC 6 - 7
Vs. Big 10 26 - 22
Vs. Big 12 23 - 24
Vs. Big East 10 - 7
Vs. ACC 4 - 5
Total w/l vs. other BCS conferences: 69 - 65
So, even with its top program left out of the equation , teams from that league have held their own against teams from every other BCS conference. Yes, if you leave USC out, they've lost more than they've won against three other leagues. But in no case are they more than 1 game below 0.500. And, overall, they have a winning record in non conference play against other BCS leagues WITHOUT USC.
If you think the Pac 10 is a weak league, you're in "don't confuse me with the facts" mode.
Why do SEC fans think the Pac 10 is weak?
Posted by JohnStOnge on 1/11/09 at 8:28 am
I ask that because I hear that belief all the time on local sports talk radio but what's happened during the BCS era in interconference games between BCS league teams just doesn't support that perception. Take the Pac 10's head to head performance vs. the SEC, for example. The Pac 10 is 10-7 and it's not because it's been some of the better teams in the Pac 10 playing some of the poorer teams in the SEC. In fact, if anything, it's been more the other way around.
Below are the results of BCS era (1998 - 2008) games between the PAC 10 and SEC. The conference record of each team is in parenthesis. For example: The last line under "PAC 10 WINS" indicates that, in 2007, California, which finished 3-6 in Pac 10 play, had a 45 - 31 win over Tennessee, which finished 6-3 in SEC play. Then there's a note to indicate that one of Tennessee's three losses was in the SEC championship game.
PAC 10 WINS
2006 USC (7-2) 50, Arkansas (7-2) 14* - One UA loss in SEC championship
2005 USC (8-0) 70*, Arkansas (2-6) 17
2003 USC (7-1) 23, Auburn (5-3) 0*
2002 USC (7-1) 24*, Auburn (5-3) 17
2008 UCLA (3-6) 27*, Tennessee (3-5) 24
2001 UCLA (4-4) 20, Alabama (4-4) 17*
2000 UCLA (3-5) 35*, Alabama (3-5) 24
2003 Oregon (5-3) 42, Mississippi State (1-7) 34*
2002 Oregon (3-5) 36*, Mississippi State (0-8) 13
2007 California (3-6) 45*, Tennessee (6-3) 31 - One UT loss in SEC championship
SEC WINS
2008 Georgia (6-2) 27, Arizona State (4-5) 10*
2005 LSU (7-2) 35, Arizona State (4-4) 31*
2006 LSU (6-2) 45*, Arizona (4-5) 3
2003 LSU (8-1) 59, Arizona (1-7) 13*
2006 Tennessee (5-3) 35*, California (7-2) 18
2006 Auburn (6-2) 40*, Washington State (4-5) 14
2004 LSU (6-2) 22*, Oregon State (5-3) 21
*-Home Team
SEC teams involved have a slightly better overall conference winning rate (0.579) than the Pac 10 teams do (0.549).
There were 3 games such that the Pac 10 team and the SEC team had identical records within their respective conferences. Pac 10 teams won all 3 of those games.
There were 5 games such that both the Pac 10 team and the SEC team had winning records in their own conferences. The Pac 10 was 3-2 in those games.
There were 4 games such that neither team finished with a winning record in its own conference. The Pac 10 was 4-0 in those games.
There were 7 games involving Pac 10 teams that finished with winning conference records. The Pac 10 was 5-2 in those games. In comparison, there were 11 games involving SEC teams that finished with winning conference records (i.e., more of the games involved the SEC's better teams than involved the Pac 10's better teams). The SEC was 7-4 in those games.
Pac 10 teams that did NOT finish with winning Pac 10 conference records went 5-5 against the SEC. SEC teams that did not finish with winning SEC conference records went 0-6 against the Pac 10.
Pac 10 teams other than USC went 6-7 vs. the SEC. SEC teams other than LSU went 3-10 against the Pac 10.
Or look at it in your own ways. There's no way you're going to be intellectually honest and say that the head to head record suggests SEC superiority. I personally believe the SEC has generally been a little tougher (though not every year) because of power ratings and the small edge the SEC has in NFL players (26 to 22 per conference team averages). But I don't think the difference has been anything like people in this area seem to think it's been. If it had been, I don't think there's any way you could see head to head results like those above.
Below are the results of BCS era (1998 - 2008) games between the PAC 10 and SEC. The conference record of each team is in parenthesis. For example: The last line under "PAC 10 WINS" indicates that, in 2007, California, which finished 3-6 in Pac 10 play, had a 45 - 31 win over Tennessee, which finished 6-3 in SEC play. Then there's a note to indicate that one of Tennessee's three losses was in the SEC championship game.
PAC 10 WINS
2006 USC (7-2) 50, Arkansas (7-2) 14* - One UA loss in SEC championship
2005 USC (8-0) 70*, Arkansas (2-6) 17
2003 USC (7-1) 23, Auburn (5-3) 0*
2002 USC (7-1) 24*, Auburn (5-3) 17
2008 UCLA (3-6) 27*, Tennessee (3-5) 24
2001 UCLA (4-4) 20, Alabama (4-4) 17*
2000 UCLA (3-5) 35*, Alabama (3-5) 24
2003 Oregon (5-3) 42, Mississippi State (1-7) 34*
2002 Oregon (3-5) 36*, Mississippi State (0-8) 13
2007 California (3-6) 45*, Tennessee (6-3) 31 - One UT loss in SEC championship
SEC WINS
2008 Georgia (6-2) 27, Arizona State (4-5) 10*
2005 LSU (7-2) 35, Arizona State (4-4) 31*
2006 LSU (6-2) 45*, Arizona (4-5) 3
2003 LSU (8-1) 59, Arizona (1-7) 13*
2006 Tennessee (5-3) 35*, California (7-2) 18
2006 Auburn (6-2) 40*, Washington State (4-5) 14
2004 LSU (6-2) 22*, Oregon State (5-3) 21
*-Home Team
SEC teams involved have a slightly better overall conference winning rate (0.579) than the Pac 10 teams do (0.549).
There were 3 games such that the Pac 10 team and the SEC team had identical records within their respective conferences. Pac 10 teams won all 3 of those games.
There were 5 games such that both the Pac 10 team and the SEC team had winning records in their own conferences. The Pac 10 was 3-2 in those games.
There were 4 games such that neither team finished with a winning record in its own conference. The Pac 10 was 4-0 in those games.
There were 7 games involving Pac 10 teams that finished with winning conference records. The Pac 10 was 5-2 in those games. In comparison, there were 11 games involving SEC teams that finished with winning conference records (i.e., more of the games involved the SEC's better teams than involved the Pac 10's better teams). The SEC was 7-4 in those games.
Pac 10 teams that did NOT finish with winning Pac 10 conference records went 5-5 against the SEC. SEC teams that did not finish with winning SEC conference records went 0-6 against the Pac 10.
Pac 10 teams other than USC went 6-7 vs. the SEC. SEC teams other than LSU went 3-10 against the Pac 10.
Or look at it in your own ways. There's no way you're going to be intellectually honest and say that the head to head record suggests SEC superiority. I personally believe the SEC has generally been a little tougher (though not every year) because of power ratings and the small edge the SEC has in NFL players (26 to 22 per conference team averages). But I don't think the difference has been anything like people in this area seem to think it's been. If it had been, I don't think there's any way you could see head to head results like those above.
re: Anyone else excited about FLA vs BAMA
Posted by JohnStOnge on 11/29/08 at 6:14 pm
quote:
I think this will be a great game. I will be shocked if it is a blowout either way.
I'm looking forward to the game and wouldn't be completely shocked if Alabama wins. After all, Ole Miss beat Florida and Oregon State beat USC. Things happen.
But I think Florida is a much better team and wouldn't be surprised at all to see them win in a blowout. I don't think there's any way Alabama is the best team in the country. I think they'd be underdogs to USC, Oklahoma, Texas, and of course, Florida at the least. They might even be underdogs to Penn State. They've done what they've had to but I think they're living on borrowed time.
re: Georgia-3 losses
Posted by JohnStOnge on 11/29/08 at 6:02 pm
quote:
i think they lost, bad, to the two best teams in the sec and than layed a giant egg today against georgia tech.. i think they are still a pretty good team that had a killer schedule..
Georgia Tech's a pretty good team that's in the process of debunking the myth that a good option offense like Paul Johnson's won't work at the BCS level. They've played two SEC teams and rushed for 438 and 410 yards. If they're clicking the only team in the SEC I'd be surprised to see them beat is Florida. Alabama would have its hands completely full with them because they're stout up front on defense.
Today's game could've gone either way but it was no fluke. They averaged over 7 yards per rush against the Bulldogs and that was not unusual. If you've been following them or if you watched the graphics today you know that in spite of being a running team they're at the top of the FBS heap when it comes to making big plays and striking quickly. They break off a lot of long runs with that offense.
Johnson's an option football genius. What he's doing this year he's doing with 65 scholarship players who were mostly recruited to run a completely different offense. Watch out after he gets back to full scholarship strength and has players he recruited to fit his offense.
re: LSU will win this game.
Posted by JohnStOnge on 11/15/08 at 11:08 pm
Well, thank goodness they won because losing to Troy would've been really bad. Troy came into the game 3-23 against BCS league schools with the average score being 35-15. The only road win they had...and have...against a BCS league opponent was over an awful Mississippi State team in 2001. And even in that one Mississippi State dominated the stats but lost because of turnovers and mistakes.
Losing to Troy...which make no mistake about it is a bad FBS team...would've been the biggest disgrace in LSU football history. I think it would've been the weakest opponent LSU ever lost to.
Didn't happen though. Thank goodness.
Losing to Troy...which make no mistake about it is a bad FBS team...would've been the biggest disgrace in LSU football history. I think it would've been the weakest opponent LSU ever lost to.
Didn't happen though. Thank goodness.
re: Les Miles a step up from Saban
Posted by JohnStOnge on 9/21/08 at 8:41 pm
quote:
I guess a big win against a team that was down 21 pts to La-Monroe gives one great confidence.
They did dominate Clemson at Clemson. But I think they'll really get their "oil check" next week at Georgia. We'll have a lot better line on how good they are after that one.
re: Les Miles a step up from Saban
Posted by JohnStOnge on 9/21/08 at 8:34 pm
This is how I look at stuff like this:
Many times in life, something you see as bad happens. Then you look back years later and conclude, "You know, that thing that happened led to things being better than they otherwise would've been. It seemed really bad at the time, but it turned out being a real blessing."
And so, in my opinion, it's looking to be with the thing where Nick Saban decided to leave LSU. The LSU football program actually got better.
Additionally, I think Miles is committed to LSU. If he does leave, I think it's going to be because he has some bad years and the fans want him out. I think LSU has a real chance at some relatively long term stability at a high level for the program.
Many times in life, something you see as bad happens. Then you look back years later and conclude, "You know, that thing that happened led to things being better than they otherwise would've been. It seemed really bad at the time, but it turned out being a real blessing."
And so, in my opinion, it's looking to be with the thing where Nick Saban decided to leave LSU. The LSU football program actually got better.
Additionally, I think Miles is committed to LSU. If he does leave, I think it's going to be because he has some bad years and the fans want him out. I think LSU has a real chance at some relatively long term stability at a high level for the program.
re: Be Honest - When Lee dropped back on the last drive
Posted by JohnStOnge on 9/21/08 at 8:27 pm
quote:
Not totally convinced he "placed" it there, so much as it "ended up" there. Not 100% sold on Lee's accuracy yet, but he got the job done, so it's good enough for me
You could be right. But I think you have to admit:
If you hadn't seen the first half and had never heard of Lee but saw how athletic and fast Auburn's defense is...and you just saw the second half and Lee playing...I think any football fan would've said, "That's a good quarterback."
Popular
38
