College Gameday Thread: Bowl Games

[RealityCheck]

Originally Posted by JHL6719

perhaps even Mississippi St. would beat Oregon.

GTFO, I'm the one who trolls that way around here.

[JoeJoeBrown]

Originally Posted by fear the elf

that's so sad...

When your self worth is based on how well your college football conference performs, this world view makes sense.

[JHL6719]

Originally Posted by fear the elf

Really, because the best team from the SEC...you know, the one that went undefeated during conference play and won the SEC championship game...only beat them by 3 points on a last second FG. I think that Oregon might have done OK against those other teams. Arrogant as ****.

I think Oregon might have done "OK" against those other SEC West teams too, but I think Bama, LSU, and Auburn all beat Oregon... and I think it's 50/50 with Mississippi St. and Arkansas.

Hell, Auburn only beat Mississippi St. by 3 points. Auburn only beat Kentucky by 3 points.

Auburn had to score almost 70 points to beat Arkansas, and that was an Arkansas team playing without Ryan Mallett after the 1st quarter. Tyler Wilson came in an threw for over 330+ yards and 4 TD passes in 3 quarters against Auburn.

LSU needed TWO scrubs at quarterback who neither could complete a pass that day to lose to Auburn by a touchdown.

Auburn only beat Bama by a single point. Alabama should've been up 31-0 in the 2nd quarter if Trent Richardson simply catches a pass in the endzone that hit him right in the hands with nobody standing within 5 yards of him. Or if Mark Ingram's fumble goes out of bounds in that situation like it normally would have 99% of the time, instead of bouncing forward into the endzone and having an Auburn defender jump on it at the last possible fraction of an inch before it rolled out of the back of the endzone.


Now, Auburn won these games. It doesn't matter HOW they won... they won, period. It doesn't matter how you go undefeated in the SEC, all that matters is you did, because running the gauntlet in the SEC is quite different than going undefeated in ANY other conference, and they prove it every year.

The point is, I think several of these SEC West teams would prove an incredibly difficult matchup for Oregon, and I think 3 of them would come out on top without a doubt (Bama, LSU, Auburn)... with 2 others being a coin flip (Arkansas, Mississippi St.).

The final score doesn't in any way indicate how much Auburn dominated that game against Oregon, particularly defensively. It looked like both quarterbacks were rusty, especially in the 1st quarter, both kids were just a hair off on routine throws that were leading to turnovers.

Bottom line is, I think Oregon comes out at BEST with a 3-3 record if they played the SEC West... I'll give them the benefit of the doubt in the two games that are in my opinion, coin flips.

[Smooth Criminal]

First, Auburn did not dominate the game. At all. They won on a last second field goal. How you're going to say thats dominant is beyond me. If anything, it proves the game with Auburn, supposedly the best SEC team, is closer to a coin flip than a sure thing.

It is definitely not "without a doubt" that LSU or Bama can beat Oregon. I would bet on Bama, but that LSU team isn't anywhere near as great as you're making them out to be.

If Oregon played these games, I'd guess 4-2 with losses to Auburn and Bama. No ones disputing that the SEC is very good, mainly at the top, but you are really overrating their lower teams.

[Saints-Tigers]

Originally Posted by JoeJoeBrown

When your self worth is based on how well your college football conference performs, this world view makes sense.

Could be worse, we could be bragging about winning a war that no one on earth was even alive for.

[JHL6719]

Originally Posted by Saints-Tigers

Could be worse, we could be bragging about winning a war that no one on earth was even alive for.

How ironic is it that arguably the best coach in Michigan history (Fielding Yost) was the son of a Confederate Soldier?

[Brent]

Originally Posted by JHL6719

The Civil War was over the South's RIGHT TO GOVERN THEMSELVES.... not slavery... the Union had slaves too.

If you honestly believe that literally hundreds of thousands of soldiers on EITHER side of the war were all willing to go out and die over a slave, you most certainly deserve to be re-educated on the subject of The Union vs. The Confederacy.

the issue of state's rights was regarding slavery.

Oh, and, uh, sorry you lost, Oregon.

[LizardState]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHL6719
The Civil War was over the South's RIGHT TO GOVERN THEMSELVES.... not slavery... the Union had slaves too.

If you honestly believe that literally hundreds of thousands of soldiers on EITHER side of the war were all willing to go out and die over a slave, you most certainly deserve to be re-educated on the subject of The Union vs. The Confederacy.
the issue of state's rights was regarding slavery.

Nobody gave a **** about slaves when the Civil War occurred except a few Abolitionist fanatics most of whom had never seen a slave or black person in their entire lives, or maybe the slaves themselves, assuming they had even heard of the war at all who were kept about 98% illiterate & ignorant of anything (by most Southern states' law -- you could go to prison for teaching a slave to read).

States rights & the way the Constitution was interpreted regarding that issue was the #1 issue in every Presidential election from Washington's re-election to Abe Lincoln winning over 5 other major candidates in 1860.

Then came the Civil War......

Amazing how states rights disappeared once R. E. Lee affixed his signature to the surrender at Appomattox in April, 1865 isn't it? The Federal Gov't became this overwhelming juggernaut & state govts. have been obsolete ever since. Yetthey still continue to eff things up & tax people out the wazoo & give back little or nothing, amazing.

[BuckNaked]

So how about that Senior Bowl comin up...