|
Replies: 32
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [11435]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14500
Joined: 1/2/11
|
If we have to go 12-1 cause of SOS
Jun 28, 2012, 11:27 PM
|
|
To get over a 10-2 SEC team or Big 12 wouldn't it be easier to do the 12-1 with the easier schedule than 10-2 vs tougher schedule? If you're all worried cause we have to go 12-1 cause of Sos then what makes you think we can do 10-2 in harder schedule? Just don't get this, we shouldn't have to go 11-1,12-1 to get over 10-2 sec team. Shouldn't we if the schedule is easier
Message was edited by: Bryanttiger®
What is easier to do [Results]
| |
 |
12 -1 in ACC |
|
10-2 SEC or Big 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [11435]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14500
Joined: 1/2/11
|
Unless you have Georgia's schedule in sec***
Jun 28, 2012, 11:31 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [872]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 2360
Joined: 8/17/11
|
haha POINT! Nice default there!***
Jun 29, 2012, 9:21 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17854]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8917
Joined: 12/24/96
|
I suppose ther will always be those who just want Cheerwine
Jun 29, 2012, 7:57 AM
|
|
even though Coke and Pepsi still rule.
If you don't understand what I mean, don't worry about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [247]
TigerPulse: 33%
Posts: 335
Joined: 5/14/12
|
Since when was the big 12 elite?
Jun 29, 2012, 8:21 AM
|
|
ok, oklahoma should be pretty good this year. wvu will be good but will probably have growing pains in the new conference all other teams should be average.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1363]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2255
Joined: 8/29/08
|
it's still better than the Pac 12, Big 10, ACC, etc.***
Jun 29, 2012, 8:34 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14451]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 22868
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Since when was the big 12 elite?
Jun 29, 2012, 8:36 AM
[ in reply to Since when was the big 12 elite? ] |
|
You mean the conference that was almost extinct just 1 year ago and has no full time commish
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7913]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13703
Joined: 1/8/02
|
I'm sure the Stanford AD would leave his job for something
Jun 29, 2012, 8:44 AM
|
|
about to fall apart today
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [576]
TigerPulse: 46%
Posts: 1919
Joined: 7/30/11
|
Re: Since when was the big 12 elite?
Jul 1, 2012, 2:57 PM
[ in reply to Re: Since when was the big 12 elite? ] |
|
The Big 12 has made a complete 180 compared to last year, IMO. Yes the conference was on the brink of folding with the loss of A&M and Mizzou, with the additional rumors of OU, OSU, Texas, and TT leaving for another conference. I think what saved the Big 12 is that the remaining members met and decided to stick it out and make the best of it. I keep hearing from a lot of people that "why would you want to join the Big 12 when they are not stable?" The truth is that they are the opposite...they are stable at this point in time. "Well how can you say that"? Well, if they were about to fold, why would TCU and WVU join the conference? Yes, I know that they are two teams that would be hard to replace Nebraska and A&M but they are two solid football schools that has played very well over the last few years and has been focused on getting better. The second point is why are espn working huge tv deal if they are going to tank? As far as the commish, why would he leave from Stanford and being in a stable conference to go to a dying conference?
Now I'm not saying that the Big 12 is right up there with the SEC or Big 10 but I would say they are the 4th best conference out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55256]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58331
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: Since when was the big 12 elite?
Jul 1, 2012, 4:03 PM
[ in reply to Re: Since when was the big 12 elite? ] |
|
I couldn't agree with you more. IMO, I do believe that Clemson and FSU would have made the B12 a much stronger conference. Also Clemson as in FB, I think we are a better program than ND. ND gets to pick who they play and mostly where they want them in their schedule. And they still have 8/4 seasons. I feel sure that is why Texas would rather have ND over us. Clemson could and would be a pain in the Texass. Regardless of what some say or think about Dabo Swinney. He is turning 20 years of sucky FB around for the better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1363]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2255
Joined: 8/29/08
|
it's not about which is easier
Jun 29, 2012, 8:36 AM
|
|
it's about the ACC lacking respect (and with good reason). the better question is
11-1 in ACC or 10-2 in SEC/Big 12: Which one would people think is more impressive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19537]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17240
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Thank you...
Jun 29, 2012, 8:38 AM
|
|
Is it easier to go 12-0 in ACC or 11-1 in SEC or Big 12.....def the latter. It is hard to go undefeated in ANY CONFERENCE due to the mental aspect of it....
easier to go 11-1 in ACC or 10-2 in SEC or Big12....about the same, but the latter gives a better chance at jumping other 10-2 or even 11-1 teams...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1552]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 2453
Joined: 2/10/06
|
if it is all about perception and your perception is that
Jun 29, 2012, 8:48 AM
|
|
they are "about the same" then why do you think people will find one more impressive than the other?
If people think they are "about the same", then they will weigh them "about the same." If they weigh them, "about the same", then they will think of them as "about the same."
If they think of 11-1 in ACC as "about the same" as 10-2 in SEC, then 11-1 in ACC = 10-2 in SEC. In that case there is just as good a chance of the ACC team being in over the SEC team. 50-50 odds is a dumb reason to make huge changes and risk of instability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19537]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17240
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: if it is all about perception and your perception is that
Jun 29, 2012, 8:52 AM
|
|
I didn't say anyone weighed them the same....I said going 11-1 in ACC or 10-2 in SEC or Big12 is about the same IN DIFFICULTY....
The perception for the longest time has been a bias towards those conference and against the ACC. Why in years when 2 loss teams made the top 4 like 2006, 2005 and 2003 you had teams with less wins and the same losses way ahead of ACC teams in the rankings....
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5912]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8567
Joined: 11/30/98
|
EVERYTHING
Jun 29, 2012, 8:49 AM
[ in reply to Thank you... ] |
|
is relative to the re cord of the other 119 teams.
To argue 13-0 vs 12-1 vs 10-2 vs 11-2 is fruitless unless you know what the records for the other teams are and when and against who the losses are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19537]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17240
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Exactly what our point is....
Jun 29, 2012, 8:54 AM
|
|
And the ACC schedule, especially when the 9 game conf kicks in and other conferences stop scheduling tough OOC games, will not be enough to jump teams playing Bama, LSU, Ark, FLa, UGA etc....or Texas, OK, OKSt. TT, TCU, WV etc....
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11435]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14500
Joined: 1/2/11
|
Re: it's not about which is easier
Jun 29, 2012, 2:36 PM
[ in reply to it's not about which is easier ] |
|
No the question is I. REALITY what is more likely to happen?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19537]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17240
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: If we have to go 12-1 cause of SOS
Jun 29, 2012, 8:36 AM
|
|
Come on man, why are you trying to manipulate the poll? 12-1 over 10-2? No one has ever made that argument.....not once....11-1 to 10-2, yes....come on man...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
He is the "Dabo's great!" and "Stay in ACC, just win"
Jun 29, 2012, 2:24 PM
|
|
postinest person there is.
There should be rules about starting thread after thread after thread about the same topic wihtout at least coming at it from a different perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93582]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95370
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Re: He is the "Dabo's great!" and "Stay in ACC, just win"
Jul 1, 2012, 12:36 PM
|
|
Dabo is great (for the time being) and 'just win,' will work if we can just, WIN.
However, though I believe the ACC is the place to be until the playoff starts, I don't like the low pay and lighter SOS. I'm not all in with the ACC so don't lump everyone who like Dabo's recruiting of players and coordinators, moral attitude, and coach's training wheels in the same bunch with the 'ACC, ACC, ACC,' crowd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55256]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58331
Joined: 7/18/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40866]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42923
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Why do we play an extra game in the ACC
Jun 29, 2012, 8:50 AM
|
|
I'm assuming in the ACC you make it to the title game at 11-1 and you don't in the SEC at 10-2?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19537]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17240
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Why do we play an extra game in the ACC
Jun 29, 2012, 8:56 AM
|
|
He's trying to spin the argument in his favor....by starting a different argument with different factors...
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11435]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14500
Joined: 1/2/11
|
No im not, 11-1 would be ACC title game and just
Jun 29, 2012, 2:39 PM
|
|
Assuming we win. 10-2 in the sec more then likely won't win sec.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1578]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 1506
Joined: 9/6/05
|
Re: Since when was the big 12 elite?
Jun 29, 2012, 9:00 AM
|
|
Yeah and Venanbles couldn't stop them with 5 stars. We expect him to do it with 3?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6577]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 5733
Joined: 12/31/06
|
Change "easier" to "what's the better perception"***
Jun 29, 2012, 1:01 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
I think the difficulty level is the same
Jun 29, 2012, 1:35 PM
|
|
I'd sort of prefer 10-2 in the Big12 or SEC because that means there are more big games every year and less matchups with mediocre to bad teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82946]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80104
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Reading that gave me a headache.***
Jun 29, 2012, 2:15 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [51]
TigerPulse: 25%
Posts: 157
Joined: 6/24/12
|
Re: EVERYTHING
Jul 1, 2012, 11:17 AM
|
|
How about 12-1 with a season ending loss to ###?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [551]
TigerPulse: 48%
Posts: 403
Joined: 7/28/11
|
Re: If we have to go 12-1 cause of SOS
Jul 1, 2012, 11:22 AM
|
|
I don't care which one is easier...which one pays us more????...because bottom line its all about money to survive and be a winning program in college football
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11435]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14500
Joined: 1/2/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16212]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12765
Joined: 11/14/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16212]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12765
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Stronger schedules make stronger teams. Better games =
Jul 1, 2012, 4:18 PM
|
|
bigger crowds. What's to stop the three top teams in the league from going 11-1 one season, where FSU, Va. Tech and us all swap a loss and all beat Ga. Tech, Pitt, BC and Miami like we ought to? Plus the three games in the other division?
I'd like a stronger schedule not so much for SOS as for the extra excitement and prestige of Saturdays in Death Valley. We'd also get an extra home game a year, or two even if we punked out on a quality OOC for an extra homer. That's serious revenue for Clemson, big time, as it is for Va. Tech and FSU, plus any program that was playing more competitive football. The increase in SOS is really just a by-product of the arrangement.
A stronger schedule would provide significant financial resources in addition to more exciting games overall, with a minimum of 7 home games each year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 32
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
