In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1104
Online now 348 Record: 7224 (2/22/2012)
The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns
The place for off topic discussion on Hookem
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
pretty much has been my take on it for several years now. The formula plays into the polls which plays into the perception which plays into the polls which....well and then add your personal national PR firm in ESPN. The top 6 teams going 30-0 against the bottom of the league is eye opening. but it helps get you to 10 wins and continues the perception.
That is the tally of the last 10 Cotton Bowls. The sole win for the Big 12 was by Missouri in 2008, so there isn't a team currently in the Big 12 that has won a Cotton Bowl in the last ten years.
Can we please shut up about SEC propaganda until the Big 12 gets some wins against the SEC's better teams?
Cotton usually takes the SEC 3 or possibly 4. No one has suggested they aren't top heavy and neither does Tramel. But cool rant.
I know, but I get so weary of people trying to find ways to demystify the aura of the SEC.
When other conferences' better teams beat the SEC's better teams in bowls or in early season matchups, then the mystique will vanish, but it's going to stay until then.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by bierce 11 months ago
Just look at draft picks. Again, I'm not sure why anyone would care to compare the crappy teams in a conference.
Big 12 is 7-21 in bowl games vs SEC since the BCS started (Cotton. BCS and Independence bowls were the ones I checked).
This post was edited by PDX Horn 11 months ago
Maybe because they are in the conference? Just talking about NC is ridiculous. Using that argument you would have said The Big West was the best basketball conference when the Running Rebs were winning the NCAA tourney.
Here's what I don't get.
Nobody argues that the top half of the SEC, whomever it is that year, is on an extremely high level.
Nobody argues that the SEC has by far the best record in intra-conference bowl games and other matchups.
Nobody argues that the SEC,using lower conference ranked teams, has destroyed the Big 12 in the Cotton Bowl.
So why is there some transitive property that people think demonstrates the bottom half of the Big 12 can compete with the bottom half of the SEC? The fact that those SEC teams at the bottom can't be the top of the SEC is self evident.
But there is zero evidence that the bottom half of the Big 12 can beat lower lever SEC teams. In fact the evidence suggests the opposite.
So what is the argument from Stoops? "We're all on the same level in the Big 12 so that means we're a better conference?"
Just don't get it.
God...y'all have certainly swallowed the koolaid. You've already begun the whole SEC,SEC, SEC thing without winning a thing on your own.
Aggies. You just can't get them to stop claiming victory when they play themselves.
I would. Did Georgia look great? They looked OK in conference. Defense got lit up like a Christmas tree by Nebraska, but ended up beating them. Same team Wisconsin beat by 50 the game before. What did Florida do? Barely beat a MAC team at home and got controlled vs Louisville in a bowl. nice win vs FSU. LSU? Pretty much the same. Aggies had a great bowl win. I think the SEC is a great conference, but the meme that it is always the greatest is out of control. 4-5 teams in the top 10 to start every season? That is out of control. Auburn, Ark, and UK were absolutely horrid. All of them quit.
Nobody but sports geeks usually care if the big 12 on whole including the bad teams are better or worse than the SEC. People look at the big bowls and mainly NCGs and see then winning it every year since Vince clowned USC. That's all the majority of people care about, and until that stops they're going to be the golden boy conference in the public's eye. Once the big 12 or 10 or PAC 10 or whoever start beating them in the title games consistently it'll go away.
Wins on the big stage is the answer. However, A&M proved that the SEC is no better than the Big 12. And when OU and Texas get it rolling again, the Big 12 will be better.
Good lord. Let's just pretend I didn't type that.
Saban on Bob Stoops' SEC comment:
“I didn’t even know he said it, so you’re going to have to tell me what he said,” Saban said. “I’ve got more important things to do than sit around and read what Bob Stoops has to say about anything. But I like Bob Stoops, and I respect him as a coach, but I’m really trying to manage our business.
“Well, we don’t play everybody in the Big 12 or whatever it is, so I really don’t know much about their league,” Saban said. “We have a lot of respect for what they do at Oklahoma, and I really don’t think that people that don’t play in our league really don’t understand the quality of our league from top to bottom.
“I think there’s probably a lot of animosity out there because of the success that we have in our league, but I think that kind of goes with the territory. I understand that. But we certainly respect the great program that they have at Oklahoma and the other good programs that they have in the Big 12.”
This post was edited by papa horn 11 months ago
Agreed. A mistyping only.
But I'm never forgetting your LHN/Frankenstein comparison.
What's ironic is that was an Oklahoma writer's blog post and here we are in another thread about an article in an Oklahoma paper. Ha.
All I care about is Texas winning games, period. When that happens, the conference affiliation will not matter to us. Texas doesn't need a conference we just need to take care of business.
Being in a conference has to be much better than not.
Yes but how many of those losses were by Choke U?
275-0 scoring margin
Dana X Bible's National Championship team
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports