Official Missouri Regrets leaving Big 12 but Tries Really Hard to Justify Thread

[Rage Against the McKee]

so are you arguing that the teams i have listed are ranked too high because they did not all necessarily play each other? that is a ridiculously stupid argument. you can't just say a team is overrated because it did not play another team. did florida state play alabama or auburn or missouri? nope, so i guess we can't have Florida state #1, because they might lose one or more of those hypothetical games. GMAFB.

I'm just saying that the SEC is genius in the way they schedule. An 8 game conference schedule in a 14 team conference is just ridiculous if you want your best team to win the championship, but it's great if you want computer models and pollsters to think your teams are a whole lot better than teams in other conferences that are guaranteed losses because they have to play all of the other good teams in their conference.

[sonofdaxjones]

snowbrag rates the SEC as far and away the best conference.

2 Alabama
5 Missouri
11 Auburn
14 South Carolina
20 LSU
29 Georgia
36 Texas A&M
45 Mississippi
49 Mississippi State
50 Vanderbilt

75 Tennessee
80 Florida
100 Arkansas
102 Kentucky

that's a crap load of top 50 teams

The eye test says the SEC just isn't that good this year.   AtM looked like a team that was just going through the motions last Sat. night, and they still hung with MU.

i do not input "hype" into the stats database

Those stats would not look nearly as impressive if all of those good teams actually played each other.

oh crap, you know what? i forgot to consider that. snowbrag this whole time has been assuming that all SEC teams play each other. 

Snowbrag factors in wins and losses as well as actual on the field performance, so there would be a substantial difference in your rankings.

so are you arguing that the teams i have listed are ranked too high because they did not all necessarily play each other? that is a ridiculously stupid argument. you can't just say a team is overrated because it did not play another team. did florida state play alabama or auburn or missouri? nope, so i guess we can't have Florida state #1, because they might lose one or more of those hypothetical games. GMAFB.

No, but it does play along with the age old question in divided conferences, and that question is a legitimate one.   Missouri didn't have to play Auburn, Bama or LSU this year during the regular season.   They played one truly legitimate good team and lost, and then the rest were mediocre to bad.

[mocat]

FSU's schedule looks about equally as difficult as those SEC schools' do.

yes it does. that is also accounted for in the database. there's no sec conspiracy going on here man.

The #1 most difficult schedule this year in the snowbrag belongs to Florida:

1 Florida State
5 Missouri
14 South Carolina
20 LSU
21 Miami (FL)
29 Georgia
50 Vanderbilt
55 Toledo
75 Tennessee
100 Arkansas
102 Kentucky

do you have any issue with that?

The #2 most difficult schedule belongs to Notre Dame (no SEC teams on ND's schedule!!!!!)

6 Michigan State
9 Stanford
12 Arizona State
19 Oklahoma
23 USC
25 BYU
40 Michigan
46 Navy
62 Pittsburgh
110 Temple
112 Air Force
114 Purdue

[yoga-like_abana]

how many national championships would we have if we would've left for the SEC, Big 10 or Pac?
Probably at least 2

[mocat]

so are you arguing that the teams i have listed are ranked too high because they did not all necessarily play each other? that is a ridiculously stupid argument. you can't just say a team is overrated because it did not play another team. did florida state play alabama or auburn or missouri? nope, so i guess we can't have Florida state #1, because they might lose one or more of those hypothetical games. GMAFB.

I'm just saying that the SEC is genius in the way they schedule. An 8 game conference schedule in a 14 team conference is just ridiculous if you want your best team to win the championship, but it's great if you want computer models and pollsters to think your teams are a whole lot better than teams in other conferences that are guaranteed losses because they have to play all of the other good teams in their conference.

i mean, a team's schedule is what it is, and is accounted for appropriately in any database. Now, as to the overall ranking of a "conference", yes, you have a point. the SEC which is a loose collection of teams, has an inflated rating. But each team's rating is what it is. You can't argue that a team is overrated because of who that team did NOT play. You can only assess a team based on who it DID play. Which is what snowbrag does.

Bitching about a team being overrated because it did not play alabama is utterly Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). Only 12 teams out of 125 played alabama this year. Missouri, just like every other team not on Alabama's schedule, does not get credit for playing Alabama.

[cDubya]

This is the conversation I always end up winning with people who want to tell me the SEC is so much better than all the other conferences.

That conference is set up so perfectly to make good teams look great. It gives the Alabamas, the LSU's, etc. the yellow brick road to a Championship. I won't discount for a second that there are, and have been before, very legitimate great teams in the SEC.

HOWEVER

When the teams at the top only play one other team on their side of the conference during conference play, while the rest of their schedule is made up of cupcakes who just haaaaaaapen to be "in the conference" it makes them look infinitely better.

You can win your conference, go undefeated, and be touted as a top 5 team, all while you played MAYBE 3 top tier teams. The SEC has essentially set up a farm league and a pro league. "We went undefeated in the conference that contains LSU, 'Bama, Auburn, and three other top 20 teams!" Yeah, but you didn't play them!

Sorry for the rant, but until the SEC champ plays EVERYONE in their conference, then it's smoke and mirrors, and ESPN will continue to get on their knees and fellate an over-hyped conference.

Watch, next year's playoffs will have two SEC teams. And I'd almost be willing to bet they won't have played each other during the regular season.

You take the top 3 in the SEC, throw them into the Big12 and see what happens.

[mocat]

This is the conversation I always end up winning with people who want to tell me the SEC is so much better than all the other conferences.

That conference is set up so perfectly to make good teams look great. It gives the Alabamas, the LSU's, etc. the yellow brick road to a Championship. I won't discount for a second that there are, and have been before, very legitimate great teams in the SEC.

HOWEVER

When the teams at the top only play one other team on their side of the conference during conference play, while the rest of their schedule is made up of cupcakes who just haaaaaaapen to be "in the conference" it makes them look infinitely better.

You can win your conference, go undefeated, and be touted as a top 5 team, all while you played MAYBE 3 top tier teams. The SEC has essentially set up a farm league and a pro league. "We went undefeated in the conference that contains LSU, 'Bama, Auburn, and three other top 20 teams!" Yeah, but you didn't play them!

Sorry for the rant, but until the SEC champ plays EVERYONE in their conference, then it's smoke and mirrors, and ESPN will continue to get on their knees and fellate an over-hyped conference.

Watch, next year's playoffs will have two SEC teams. And I'd almost be willing to bet they won't have played each other during the regular season.

You take the top 3 in the SEC, throw them into the Big12 and see what happens.

I won't argue that the media fellates the SEC. but you can't argue with the unbiased snowbrag. For example, Texas A&M and Georgia i believe only briefly cracked the top 25 in the snowbrag. meanwhile both were being jerked off incessantly.

But if you don't think the SEC is the best conference, which one is?

[kim carnes]

we can go ahead and put this thread on ice

Why because they won the weak ass SEC East?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because they're in a better position now than they ever have been, hence they don't regret leaving.  Also, i would love to have their talent.  Those receivers 

[mocat]

Texas had the most difficult schedule of any team in the Big 12. It is the #30 SOS in FBS (should go up a bit higher once they play Baylor tho)

8 Oklahoma State
19 Oklahoma
25 BYU
44 Kansas State
45 Mississippi
66 Texas Tech
81 TCU
93 West Virginia
103 Iowa State
106 Kansas
118 New Mexico State

[cDubya]

I won't argue that the media fellates the SEC. but you can't argue with the unbiased snowbrag. For example, Texas A&M and Georgia i believe only briefly cracked the top 25 in the snowbrag. meanwhile both were being jerked off incessantly.

But if you don't think the SEC is the best conference, which one is?

Yeah, sorry about the SEC rant, I actually have no problem with sonowbrag. Keep up the good work, mocat.

The best conference? I couldn't honestly say, simply because of my points above. Some conferences do it the right way, playing everyone. While others, who I won't mention again, beef up their better teams by playing the nobodies at the bottom of their own conference while never playing the top half.

And before anyone says "Well the Big 12 has us play WVU, ISU, and KU!!" take a look at the parity (over a few year's span) between the top and bottom of those two conferences.

[Rage Against the McKee]

This is the conversation I always end up winning with people who want to tell me the SEC is so much better than all the other conferences.

That conference is set up so perfectly to make good teams look great. It gives the Alabamas, the LSU's, etc. the yellow brick road to a Championship. I won't discount for a second that there are, and have been before, very legitimate great teams in the SEC.

HOWEVER

When the teams at the top only play one other team on their side of the conference during conference play, while the rest of their schedule is made up of cupcakes who just haaaaaaapen to be "in the conference" it makes them look infinitely better.

You can win your conference, go undefeated, and be touted as a top 5 team, all while you played MAYBE 3 top tier teams. The SEC has essentially set up a farm league and a pro league. "We went undefeated in the conference that contains LSU, 'Bama, Auburn, and three other top 20 teams!" Yeah, but you didn't play them!

Sorry for the rant, but until the SEC champ plays EVERYONE in their conference, then it's smoke and mirrors, and ESPN will continue to get on their knees and fellate an over-hyped conference.

Watch, next year's playoffs will have two SEC teams. And I'd almost be willing to bet they won't have played each other during the regular season.

You take the top 3 in the SEC, throw them into the Big12 and see what happens.

I won't argue that the media fellates the SEC. but you can't argue with the unbiased snowbrag. For example, Texas A&M and Georgia i believe only briefly cracked the top 25 in the snowbrag. meanwhile both were being jerked off incessantly.

But if you don't think the SEC is the best conference, which one is?

I don't really think there is much differentiating any of the BCS conferences. The thing about ranking conferences is that people see it and use it to justify where teams in those conferences should be ranked, even if those teams haven't played the other good teams in the conference. If SEC teams are not playing a harder schedule than ACC teams, then they should not be given the benefit of the doubt against schools from the ACC with the same record simply because of conference affiliation, and sadly, that happens.

[mocat]

cdubya 


I will say a few key events probably hurt the Big 12 a lot his year.

-#59 Maryland losing 0-63 to Florida State immediately after destroying West Virginia 37-0.

-West Virginia beating Oklahoma State, who went on to clown suit the conference's best team.

-Texas getting blown out by its only 2 good-to-average noncon opponents (BYU and Mississippi)

-KSU and ISU losing to FCS teams at home

[cDubya]

I will say a few key events probably hurt the Big 12 a lot his year.

-#59 Maryland losing 0-63 to Florida State immediately after destroying West Virginia 37-0.

-West Virginia beating Oklahoma State, who went on to clown suit the conference's best team.

-Texas getting blown out by its only 2 good-to-average noncon opponents (BYU and Mississippi)

-KSU and ISU losing to FCS teams at home

Nicely put. Sadly, WVU's best win probably did, as you say, hurt the conference more than help it. Sorry guys!

[Tobias]

a transitive 100-0 loss to florida state doesn't seem that far out there

[Nick Florences Beard]

Florida State:

W - 18 Clemson
W - 21 Miami (FL)
W - 54 Boston College
W - 59 Maryland
W - 62 Pittsburgh
W - 67 Syracuse
W - 88 Wake Forest
W - 98 North Carolina State

Would be interested in seeing Ohio State to compare likely MNC opponents. 

[mocat]

Good question Nick Florences Beard.

The answer is absolute woof city bitch woof woof city bitch.

Ohio State (#80 SOS)

15 Wisconsin
34 Iowa
40 Michigan
53 Buffalo
57 Penn State
64 Indiana
77 San Diego State
79 Northwestern
96 Illinois
114 Purdue
116 California

if they handle 6 Michigan State on Saturday, we can feel a little better about it I guess.

[AbeFroman]

Buffalo is better than 5 big 10 schools. Just get rid of that conference.

[Nick Florences Beard]

Buffalo is better than 5 big 10 schools. Just get rid of that conference.

No kidding.

Nice to see SNOWBRAG confirm my thoughts. Woof city bitch indeed mocat.

[mocat]

aside from arguing over conferences and SOS's and everything else, I am really really excited for this weekend's slate of games. In most of the conference championship games, each team involved will play the best team it has faced all season. So we will learn a lot about ohio state, michigan state, missouri, bowling green, northern illinois, even duke.

and the BG - N. Ill game tomorrow night is huge for the BCS, so tune in everybody! 

[Nick Florences Beard]

That game is tomorrow night. Too bad since it will be better to watch than Jags Texans. I think the only college game tonight is Louisville Cincinnati.

[mocat]

thanks, typo 

[mocat]

there is absolutely zero on the line for the Louisville - Cincy game 

[The_Wippuh]

How do you propose that an SEC team plays everyone in the SEC?  14 teams.  You play all 13 of them for your season?  That doesn't make a lot of sense.

I guess I can understand the hate for the SEC (winning breeds coverage and contempt), but Cdub needs to calm down and better educate on why some teams have it easy.  The SEC is divided into two divisions, East and West both composed of 7 teams.  You play all 6 teams in your division and two out of division games.  One of those two games is a traditional opponent (Auburn vs UGA, 'Bama vs Tennessee).  The winners of their respective divisions go to Atlanta.

West: Arkansas, Ole Miss, Miss State, Auburn, Alabama, LSU, Texas A&M
East: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Mizzou, Vandy, Kentucky, South Carolina

Missouri will never have a season, under the current set up, where they play LSU, Bama and Auburn.  They will get their traditional matchup vs a West team (Texas A&M I think) and one out division opponent (this season it was Ole Miss, next season it's Arkansas, jeezus, that's easy). 

Right now, because Missouri is in the East, they're having an easier time of it.  Georgia and Florida have been decimated by injuries that go above and beyond the average team's hit.  South Carolina is good and the rest of the teams (Vandy, Kentucky, Tennessee) SUCK.  The West is the dominate division.  A long time ago, Tennessee and Florida use to be the national powers that made the East so dominate.  It will come back around.

With the divisions set up like this, you have a less likely scenario for them to have met in the regular season.  I don't see how that sugar coats it for anyone.  How did the Big 12 do it when they actually had 12 teams?  Was that some magical recipe that the SEC can't figure out? 

The SEC has won the last 7 BCS championships and 9 of the overall 15.  The Big 12 has 2 titles.  They also have 5 losses in championship games, 3 of which were to SEC schools, oops.  Interestingly enough, the Big 12 has never beaten an SEC team in the BCS championship game.  I went through all of the Big 12 BCS bowl games wins and it doesn't look like a current Big 12 team has ever beaten an SEC team (Nebraska did beat UT a long time ago).  And guess what, we actually provide some variety in our title wins.  Bama, Auburn, Florida, Tennessee and LSU won those titles.  We don't just lean on our top two teams.

Pulling up an old article (2012), it seems that the SEC is going off at a nearly 65 win percentage over the Big 12 in head to heads the last 15 years. 

In the BCS era, the SEC has gone to 25 BCS bowl games, they've won 17 of them (.680).  The Big 12 has gone to 20, they've won 9 (.450).

What else do you need to understand why the SEC is seen as the best?  The numbers don't lie, just you to yourself.  I don't think I would ever come in here and talk smack about how the SEC is a better basketball conference than the Big 12 without doing some research first (thank goodness for Kentucky).

[Rage Against the McKee]

How do you propose that an SEC team plays everyone in the SEC?  14 teams.  You play all 13 of them for your season?  That doesn't make a lot of sense.

I guess I can understand the hate for the SEC (winning breeds coverage and contempt), but Cdub needs to calm down and better educate on why some teams have it easy.  The SEC is divided into two divisions, East and West both composed of 7 teams.  You play all 6 teams in your division and two out of division games.  One of those two games is a traditional opponent (Auburn vs UGA, 'Bama vs Tennessee).  The winners of their respective divisions go to Atlanta.

West: Arkansas, Ole Miss, Miss State, Auburn, Alabama, LSU, Texas A&M
East: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Mizzou, Vandy, Kentucky, South Carolina

Missouri will never have a season, under the current set up, where they play LSU, Bama and Auburn.  They will get their traditional matchup vs a West team (Texas A&M I think) and one out division opponent (this season it was Ole Miss, next season it's Arkansas, jeezus, that's easy). 

Right now, because Missouri is in the East, they're having an easier time of it.  Georgia and Florida have been decimated by injuries that go above and beyond the average team's hit.  South Carolina is good and the rest of the teams (Vandy, Kentucky, Tennessee) SUCK.  The West is the dominate division.  A long time ago, Tennessee and Florida use to be the national powers that made the East so dominate.  It will come back around.

With the divisions set up like this, you have a less likely scenario for them to have met in the regular season.  I don't see how that sugar coats it for anyone.  How did the Big 12 do it when they actually had 12 teams?  Was that some magical recipe that the SEC can't figure out? 

The SEC has won the last 7 BCS championships and 9 of the overall 15.  The Big 12 has 2 titles.  They also have 5 losses in championship games, 3 of which were to SEC schools, oops.  Interestingly enough, the Big 12 has never beaten an SEC team in the BCS championship game.  I went through all of the Big 12 BCS bowl games wins and it doesn't look like a current Big 12 team has ever beaten an SEC team (Nebraska did beat UT a long time ago).  And guess what, we actually provide some variety in our title wins.  Bama, Auburn, Florida and LSU won those titles.  We don't just lean on our top two teams.

Pulling up an old article (2012), it seems that the SEC is going off at a nearly 65 win percentage over the Big 12 in head to heads the last 15 years. 

In the BCS era, the SEC has gone to 25 BCS bowl games, they've won 17 of them (.680).  The Big 12 has gone to 20, they've won 9 (.450).

What else do you need to understand why the SEC is seen as the best?  The numbers don't lie, just you to yourself.  I don't think I would ever come in here and talk smack about how the SEC is a better basketball conference than the Big 12 without doing some research first (thank goodness for Kentucky).

Just kick Kentucky, Ole Miss, and MSU out of the conference.

[The_Wippuh]

Just kick Kentucky, Ole Miss, and MSU out of the conference.

Kentucky's here so we can talk smack about basketball and so Cal can keep compliance levels consistent with the football programs.

Ole Miss is only allowed in because of the Grove and their hot women.

MSU sticks around because that is how you judge your season, if you lose to them, you truly suck.  That and their fans are so nice, they know they suck but they still love their team so very, very much.