2009 College Football Thread

[Ghost of Dave Rosello]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

[Slaky]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

I understand some of your point but are you really trying to say that Big Ten is as good as the SEC? Because you're smoking some awesome shit if you are.

[SKO]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

Okay. Well how about when that conference goes 6-2 in bowl games while another conference goes 1-6?

[Chuck to Chuck]

And that "tougher schedule" is based on win loss records. Which those teams got by playing other crappy Big Ten teams.

No one is arguing that Iowa can beat them, just that they deserve to play them if the beat Arizona (20) at home and Penn State (12), Ohio State (17), and Wisconsin (29) on the road.

[SKO]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

And throw out the 5 wins of the FCS Northern Iowa, and then look at some of the wins by Iowa's "tough opponents":

Penn State (Akron, Syracuse, Illinois, Eastern Illinois)
Michigan (Western Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Indiana, Delaware State)
Wisconsin (Northern Illinois, Wofford)

Not that other team's don't have cookie non-conference schedules as well, I'm just saying that using win-loss records and toughest schedules as an indicator of anything in college football is far more of a crapshoot than in the NFL. The Big Ten's bowl record over the last half decade speaks for itself.

Edited: Also, going back all the way to 1995, records in bowl games-

SEC W/L: 1995 2-4, 1996 5-0, 1997 5-1, 1998 4-4, 1999 4-4, 2000 4-5, 2001 5-3, 2002 3-4, 2003 5-2, 2004 3-3, 2005 3-3, 2006 6-3, 2007 7-2, 2008 5-2 TOTALS 61-40 60% Winning Percentage

BIG EAST: 1995 1-0, 1996 2-1, 1997 1-4, 1998 1-3, 1999 2-2, 2000 4-3, 2001 5-2, 2002 3-3, 2003 0-3, 2004 4-4, 2005 2-2, 2006 4-1, 2007 5-1, 2008 4-2 TOTALS 38-31 55%

BIG 12: 1995 6-1, 1996 2-3, 1997 2-3, 1998 3-4, 1999 3-3, 2000 4-3, 2001 3-5, 2002 5-3, 2003 2-6, 2004 4-3, 2005 5-3, 2006 3-5, 2007 5-3, 2008 4-2 TOTALS 51-47 52%

ACC: 1995 4-1, 1996 2-4, 1997 3-2, 1998 4-3, 1999 3-4, 2000 5-3, 2001 5-3, 2002 5-4, 2003 7-2, 2004 3-4, 2005 4-3, 2006 3-4, 2007 1-6, 2008 4-6 TOTALS 51-49 51%

PAC-10: 1995 1-4, 1996 1-4, 1997 5-1, 1998 1-4, 1999 1-4, 2000 3-2, 2001 2-3, 2002 2-4, 2003 4-2, 2004 3-2, 2005 3-2, 2006 2-3, 2007 4-2, 2008 5-0 TOTALS 37-37 50%

BIG TEN: 1995 2-4, 1996 4-3, 1997 2-5, 1998 5-0, 1999 5-2, 2000 2-3, 2001 2-4, 2002 5-2, 2003 3-5, 2004 3-3, 2005 3-4, 2006 2-5, 2007 3-5, 2008 1-6 TOTALS 42-51 45%

Taken from famed SEC polesmokers MGOblog, the most popular Michigan blog on the internet.

[Eli]

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

Plus, if you throw out all of the SEC's wins in bowl games during the last three years, they haven't won a single bowl game.

[Ghost of Dave Rosello]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

I understand some of your point but are you really trying to say that Big Ten is as good as the SEC? Because you're smoking some awesome shit if you are.

My point is that people like to pile on the Big 10 because it supposedly sucks yet Florida gets to play sacks of shit like Arkansas, Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Not to mention its dogshit non-conference schedule - Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International and the shittiest team FSU has fielded in 30 years.

Meanwhile, Iowa's played a ranked FCS team and two BCS conference teams and gets to run a road conference schedule of Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan State and Ohio State. And they don't get to play Illinois.

If Iowa runs the table they would most certainly deserve to be in the national championship game ahead of a one-loss SEC team.

[SKO]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

I understand some of your point but are you really trying to say that Big Ten is as good as the SEC? Because you're smoking some awesome shit if you are.

My point is that people like to pile on the Big 10 because it supposedly sucks yet Florida gets to play sacks of shit like Arkansas, Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Not to mention its dogshit non-conference schedule - Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International and the shittiest team FSU has fielded in 30 years.

Meanwhile, Iowa's played a ranked FCS team and two BCS conference teams and gets to run a road conference schedule of Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan State and Ohio State. And they don't get to play Illinois.

If Iowa runs the table they would most certainly deserve to be in the national championship game ahead of a one-loss SEC team.

Vanderbilt went 7-6 last year and finished ahead of the South Carolina team the Hawkeyes beat. Arkansas is 3-4 with 3 losses to ranked teams. They are hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams Iowa gets to play. And Northern Iowa isn't ranked.

[Ghost of Dave Rosello]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

I understand some of your point but are you really trying to say that Big Ten is as good as the SEC? Because you're smoking some awesome shit if you are.

My point is that people like to pile on the Big 10 because it supposedly sucks yet Florida gets to play sacks of shit like Arkansas, Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Not to mention its dogshit non-conference schedule - Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International and the shittiest team FSU has fielded in 30 years.

Meanwhile, Iowa's played a ranked FCS team and two BCS conference teams and gets to run a road conference schedule of Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan State and Ohio State. And they don't get to play Illinois.

If Iowa runs the table they would most certainly deserve to be in the national championship game ahead of a one-loss SEC team.

Vanderbilt went 7-6 last year and finished ahead of the South Carolina team the Hawkeyes beat. Arkansas is 3-4 with 3 losses to ranked teams. They are hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams Iowa gets to play. And Northern Iowa isn't ranked.

So if the mid-level SEC teams are, in your words "hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams", then I guess the SEC isn't that much better than the Big 10.

[R-V]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

I understand some of your point but are you really trying to say that Big Ten is as good as the SEC? Because you're smoking some awesome shit if you are.

My point is that people like to pile on the Big 10 because it supposedly sucks yet Florida gets to play sacks of shit like Arkansas, Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Not to mention its dogshit non-conference schedule - Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International and the shittiest team FSU has fielded in 30 years.

Meanwhile, Iowa's played a ranked FCS team and two BCS conference teams and gets to run a road conference schedule of Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan State and Ohio State. And they don't get to play Illinois.

If Iowa runs the table they would most certainly deserve to be in the national championship game ahead of a one-loss SEC team.

Vanderbilt went 7-6 last year and finished ahead of the South Carolina team the Hawkeyes beat. Arkansas is 3-4 with 3 losses to ranked teams. They are hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams Iowa gets to play. And Northern Iowa isn't ranked.

When will people learn not to argue football with SKO?

The Big Ten sucks skunk taint. I'm making my abused foster kids go to a warm weather school that's good at football so they're not stuck rooting for a school that's been coached by shitty Rons for the last decade.

[SKO]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

I understand some of your point but are you really trying to say that Big Ten is as good as the SEC? Because you're smoking some awesome shit if you are.

My point is that people like to pile on the Big 10 because it supposedly sucks yet Florida gets to play sacks of shit like Arkansas, Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Not to mention its dogshit non-conference schedule - Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International and the shittiest team FSU has fielded in 30 years.

Meanwhile, Iowa's played a ranked FCS team and two BCS conference teams and gets to run a road conference schedule of Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan State and Ohio State. And they don't get to play Illinois.

If Iowa runs the table they would most certainly deserve to be in the national championship game ahead of a one-loss SEC team.

Vanderbilt went 7-6 last year and finished ahead of the South Carolina team the Hawkeyes beat. Arkansas is 3-4 with 3 losses to ranked teams. They are hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams Iowa gets to play. And Northern Iowa isn't ranked.

So if the mid-level SEC teams are, in your words "hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams", then I guess the SEC isn't that much better than the Big 10.

Actually I'm saying that a Florida victory over a 3-4 Arkansas team with three losses to ranked teams is hardly less legitimate than an Iowa victory over a 4-4 Michigan State team that's lost to three unranked teams and had half its wins come against Montana State and Northwestern, no matter how "gritty" said win was. I'm also saying that the fact that the Big Ten hasn't had a winning bowl record since 2002 while the SEC hasn't had a Losing one since that same year probably makes the SEC better. Or the fact that it has a 60% winning % in bowl games since 1995 vs. 45% is probably a decent sample size proving the Big Ten inferior to the SEC. Or the fact that four of the last six national champions have been SEC teams (with two of those championships being blowouts of the outright Big Ten champion) kinda adds credence to that fact. But go ahead and twist my words because you know Iowa is better since their opponents have a better winning % since Wisconsin can beat Wofford.

[Slaky]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

I understand some of your point but are you really trying to say that Big Ten is as good as the SEC? Because you're smoking some awesome shit if you are.

My point is that people like to pile on the Big 10 because it supposedly sucks yet Florida gets to play sacks of shit like Arkansas, Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Not to mention its dogshit non-conference schedule - Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International and the shittiest team FSU has fielded in 30 years.

Meanwhile, Iowa's played a ranked FCS team and two BCS conference teams and gets to run a road conference schedule of Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan State and Ohio State. And they don't get to play Illinois.

If Iowa runs the table they would most certainly deserve to be in the national championship game ahead of a one-loss SEC team.

Vanderbilt went 7-6 last year and finished ahead of the South Carolina team the Hawkeyes beat. Arkansas is 3-4 with 3 losses to ranked teams. They are hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams Iowa gets to play. And Northern Iowa isn't ranked.

So if the mid-level SEC teams are, in your words "hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams", then I guess the SEC isn't that much better than the Big 10.

Actually I'm saying that a Florida victory over a 3-4 Arkansas team with three losses to ranked teams is hardly less legitimate than an Iowa victory over a 4-4 Michigan State team that's lost to three unranked teams and had half its wins come against Montana State and Northwestern, no matter how "gritty" said win was. I'm also saying that the fact that the Big Ten hasn't had a winning bowl record since 2002 while the SEC hasn't had a Losing one since that same year probably makes the SEC better. Or the fact that it has a 60% winning % in bowl games since 1995 vs. 45% is probably a decent sample size proving the Big Ten inferior to the SEC. Or the fact that four of the last six national champions have been SEC teams (with two of those championships being blowouts of the outright Big Ten champion) kinda adds credence to that fact. But go ahead and twist my words because you know Iowa is better since their opponents have a better winning % since Wisconsin can beat Wofford.

Yeah but the Big Ten is in the midwest where real folks live. And it gets cold sometimes. And I like Iowa a lot so that counts.

Sincerely,
Poopie McDumbass

[JD]

The Red Wolves are better than their record indicates! 

[air2300]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

I understand some of your point but are you really trying to say that Big Ten is as good as the SEC? Because you're smoking some awesome shit if you are.

My point is that people like to pile on the Big 10 because it supposedly sucks yet Florida gets to play sacks of shit like Arkansas, Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Not to mention its dogshit non-conference schedule - Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International and the shittiest team FSU has fielded in 30 years.

Meanwhile, Iowa's played a ranked FCS team and two BCS conference teams and gets to run a road conference schedule of Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan State and Ohio State. And they don't get to play Illinois.

If Iowa runs the table they would most certainly deserve to be in the national championship game ahead of a one-loss SEC team.

Vanderbilt went 7-6 last year and finished ahead of the South Carolina team the Hawkeyes beat. Arkansas is 3-4 with 3 losses to ranked teams. They are hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams Iowa gets to play. And Northern Iowa isn't ranked.

So if the mid-level SEC teams are, in your words "hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams", then I guess the SEC isn't that much better than the Big 10.

Actually I'm saying that a Florida victory over a 3-4 Arkansas team with three losses to ranked teams is hardly less legitimate than an Iowa victory over a 4-4 Michigan State team that's lost to three unranked teams and had half its wins come against Montana State and Northwestern, no matter how "gritty" said win was. I'm also saying that the fact that the Big Ten hasn't had a winning bowl record since 2002 while the SEC hasn't had a Losing one since that same year probably makes the SEC better. Or the fact that it has a 60% winning % in bowl games since 1995 vs. 45% is probably a decent sample size proving the Big Ten inferior to the SEC. Or the fact that four of the last six national champions have been SEC teams (with two of those championships being blowouts of the outright Big Ten champion) kinda adds credence to that fact. But go ahead and twist my words because you know Iowa is better since their opponents have a better winning % since Wisconsin can beat Wofford.

SEC! SEC! SEC! 

[SKO]

Iowa has played only one sub-.500 team -- Arkansas State -- and the Hawkeyes' opponents have a .633 winning percentage (38-22) that is by far the best of any team in ranked in the AP top 10

But that doesn't seem to matter for some reason.

And it's always funny how the SEC pole smokers talk about how tough their league is right up until one of their schools gets beat in a bowl game. Then it's just "they only beat a 6th place team."

I understand some of your point but are you really trying to say that Big Ten is as good as the SEC? Because you're smoking some awesome shit if you are.

My point is that people like to pile on the Big 10 because it supposedly sucks yet Florida gets to play sacks of shit like Arkansas, Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Not to mention its dogshit non-conference schedule - Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International and the shittiest team FSU has fielded in 30 years.

Meanwhile, Iowa's played a ranked FCS team and two BCS conference teams and gets to run a road conference schedule of Penn State, Wisconsin, Michigan State and Ohio State. And they don't get to play Illinois.

If Iowa runs the table they would most certainly deserve to be in the national championship game ahead of a one-loss SEC team.

Vanderbilt went 7-6 last year and finished ahead of the South Carolina team the Hawkeyes beat. Arkansas is 3-4 with 3 losses to ranked teams. They are hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams Iowa gets to play. And Northern Iowa isn't ranked.

So if the mid-level SEC teams are, in your words "hardly anymore of a sack of dogshit than any of the mid-tier Big Ten teams", then I guess the SEC isn't that much better than the Big 10.

Actually I'm saying that a Florida victory over a 3-4 Arkansas team with three losses to ranked teams is hardly less legitimate than an Iowa victory over a 4-4 Michigan State team that's lost to three unranked teams and had half its wins come against Montana State and Northwestern, no matter how "gritty" said win was. I'm also saying that the fact that the Big Ten hasn't had a winning bowl record since 2002 while the SEC hasn't had a Losing one since that same year probably makes the SEC better. Or the fact that it has a 60% winning % in bowl games since 1995 vs. 45% is probably a decent sample size proving the Big Ten inferior to the SEC. Or the fact that four of the last six national champions have been SEC teams (with two of those championships being blowouts of the outright Big Ten champion) kinda adds credence to that fact. But go ahead and twist my words because you know Iowa is better since their opponents have a better winning % since Wisconsin can beat Wofford.

SEC! SEC! SEC!  

Guh. I'm not even an SEC partisan. I like Florida because back when I was 8 Illinois really blew (believe it or not), and Florida kicked a lot of ass with Danny Wuerrffel and had the same team colors as Illinois, so I figured it was okay. Plus Florida Spurrier was a diabolical genius, whereas SC Spurrier just looks like he'd rather be golfing. So since then I've been a bandwagon fan of the Gators. But other than that the rest of that conference has obnoxious, redneck fans (ELL ESS YOUUU) and I'd sooner see any Big Ten, Big 12, or PAC 10 team win the title if logic dictated that those teams deserved a shot at it over the SEC champion. But every major statistic (beside BCS computer rankings which overrate strength of schedule based on w-l records, as mentioned) is in their favor, and I side with the numbers.