Tiger Season!

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 16, 2007, 1:18 am

Winnow wrote:There's a lot of bowls mixed in there. And that's from two teams that aren't the "glamour" teams of their conference. Not bad a all. I could give a fuck if you think they're important. When UofA ruined the perfect season for ASU (the year we beat down Michigan in the Rose Bowl), you bet your ass it meant something.

The highlighted games meant more nationally but it's all about beating the fucking Wildcats every year no matter what's at stake. That's a rivalry and there's obvious consequences.

No, there aren't a lot of mixed bowls in there. There are five. In 28 years. Between two teams. That's like one of those sad "did you know?" trivia questions.

Post by **Sylvus** » October 16, 2007, 2:07 am

Winnow wrote:Michigan/OSU may mean the Big Ten title lately (only two teams in the conference worth a damn recently so it's kind of a given in that conference) but all it means is who's going to go on to get crushed in a bowl game afterwards.

What do you mean by lately exactly? The chart you show ends in 96, and since then, both Michigan and Ohio State have won a National Championship. So your chart illustrating virtually meaningless things from 78-96 is relevant, and the last 5 years (which includes an Ohio State National Championship) when ASU and Arizona have done virtually nothing is relevant, the few years in between are not? Just trying to figure out our metrics here. While that win in '79 sure was impressive, perhaps you should check the history of the Fiesta Bowl and why it was started. Disregarding the occasional anomaly, until the late 90s, it wasn't even a premiere bowl.

Michigan and Ohio State are the only good teams in the Big 10? Besides this year who the fuck is good in the Pac 10 other than USC? Check out the Rose Bowl, the traditional "East-West" bowl, when USC is playing a National Championship the last few years, the rest of your piece of shit conference doesn't even get invited anymore. And, since we're talking about recent history (though history is only relevant on select odd-numbered years that host presidential elections or world's fairs or whatever arbitrary bullshit fucking timeframe you're pulling out of your ass this post), in the past 20 Rose Bowls, the Big 10 has won 9, Pac 10 has won 7, the Big 12 has won 3 and Miami won one.

How fucking laughable is "Michigan/OSU may mean the Big Ten title lately but all it means is who's going to go on to get crushed in a bowl game afterwards." WE'RE COMPARING MICHIGAN/OSU TO ARIZONA/ASU. Guess what, idiot, IF EITHER OF THOSE FUCKING TEAMS WERE WORTH A SHIT, THE WINNER OF THAT GAME WOULD ACTUALLY GO TO THE SAME FUCKING ROSE BOWL, BY DEFINITION OF WHAT THE ROSE BOWL IS. In the last 10 years, while your team is not making bowl games, or losing in bowls with names like "Holiday" and "Aloha" to teams like Wake Forest, my team goes to a bowl every year, has one 4 game win streak, a couple years of where we won one year and lost the next, and our current 4 game losing streak that includes at least 2 of those losses to USC and Texas who went on to be the National Champions the next year. (read: not Wake Forest) I'd prefer that we were best team in football every single year, but the fact of the matter remains that it is impossible to be, and if you aren't the best every year, you're going to lose to the best. Oh well!

SHUT THE FUCK UP. YOU DON'T NEED TO RUIN THE FUCKING SPORTS FORUM LIKE IT'S A CONVERSATION ABOUT PS3 VS. XBOX. WE ALL KNOW YOU LIVE IN ARIZONA, WHEN A SPORTS TEAM FROM THERE DOES SOMETHING MEANINGFUL, FEEL FREE TO START A THREAD ABOUT IT. UNTIL THEN STOP SHITTING ON EVERY THREAD PLEASE.

I'm sorry to everyone besides Winnow (who is a total fucking jackass) for using so many caps. I'm just trying to emphasize certain things that Winnow apparently can't understand. Yeah, I know it's futile, humor me.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 16, 2007, 2:29 am

Zamtuk wrote: No, there aren't a lot of mixed bowls in there. There are five. In 28 years. Between two teams. That's like one of those sad "did you know?" trivia questions.

Might be because we don't play Kent State's half way into our schedule. Makes it a little hard to rack up those fancy records to get to the bowl games.

You've got to cram other Pac-10 teams like...oh, USC in there for Bowl Games.

USC beats the crap out of Big Ten teams so you really can't complain about ASU's 5 Bowls or so in a conference with a team that crushes the Big Ten every opportunity it gets.

Pac-10 has a 3-0 record against the Big-10 in recent BCS games

Rose Bowl record since 1970
Pac 10 24 wins
Big 10 11 wins

How else can I spell it out that the Pac-10 dominates the Big Ten?

You've got a nice little rivalry going but ASU vs UofA is every bit as intense for the locals here. Your game is big because it marks the last big game one of the teams will win before getting pummeled in a bowl. Even when OhioSU beat ASU in the Rose Bowl, they only played spoilers to ASU's National Title hopes, and didn't win the National Title themselves.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 16, 2007, 2:34 am

USC for the past 3 years would have pissed all over the PROFESSIONAL football teams in AZ...

Not really, but... The PAC-10 is not a bad conference, and I'm of the opinion that USC the past few years has elevated the stature of the conference as a whole, but seriously... AZ has had nothing to do with it. The only reason the Pac-10 has been in the conversation as a good league has been the play from USC, and a few good games from Cal, Oregon and UCLA... AZ has nothing to do with any of that. If SC weren't riddled with injuries, they'd still be in the top 10, and they'd be wiping their asses on the state of AZ just like they have for the last X years.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » October 16, 2007, 12:36 pm

I also like how winnow's started using the top 15 instead of the Top 25 to avoid the uncomfortable fact that 7 SEC teams are ranked. Yeah, it's a down year for the SEC all right. Over half the conference is ranked, and, at this rate, only 3/4 of the conference will see the post season.

Post by **Sylvus** » October 16, 2007, 12:45 pm

noel wrote:USC for the past 3 years would have pissed all over the PROFESSIONAL football teams in AZ...

Not really, but... The PAC-10 is not a bad conference, and I'm of the opinion that USC the past few years has elevated the stature of the conference as a whole, but seriously... AZ has had nothing to do with it. The only reason the Pac-10 has been in the conversation as a good league has been the play from USC, and a few good games from Cal, Oregon and UCLA... AZ has nothing to do with any of that. If SC weren't riddled with injuries, they'd still be in the top 10, and they'd be wiping their asses on the state of AZ just like they have for the last X years.

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to make disparaging remarks about any conference, including the Pac 10. I'm not trying to belittle any other rivalry in football (outside of Arizona/ASU), as we've had those discussions before. I'm still not prepared to concede anything to Alabama/Auburn, Texas/Oklahoma, Army/Navy, etc., but at least those are all welcome in the conversation. I'm merely trying to point out how little Winnow knows about college football in general, and how inconsistent and hypocritical his remarks always are. I'm sure he does it on purpose as part of his antisocial personality disorder and I should ignore it, but sometimes I have time that I want to kill, and that coupled with me being an eternal optimist makes me feel like maybe someday I'll be able to get through to him.

He'll make a statement about the Big 10, and how Michigan and Ohio State are historically the only strong teams in the conference, and back it up by pointing to the Pac 10 who only has USC as its historically strong contender. He'll mention how something isn't relevant lately then go on to back it up with stats that are less contemporary than those he's trying to belittle. He'll try to say that one rivalry is as intense as another, and then when confronted with the fact that in addition to the elements of hatred between the teams, proximity, same conference, etc. that the one rivalry has approximately 25 more meetings, is between the two strongest members of the conference (not to mention, historically, all of college football), has been played as the two schools' last game of the year for the last 70+ years, and has determined which of the two teams would be the conference champions in 21 of those meetings, he'll turn around and say that Arizona/ASU are shittier members of the conference so what's the big deal or that USC is great so blah blah blah or [insert other meaningless, irrelevant misdirection here]. The point is that those statistics were being referenced specifically to refute your assertion that "It doesn't matter what the record is of teams in rivalry games. ASU/UofA is just as intense as Michigan/OSU no matter what each teams' record is coming in." It is a preposterous statement, and not a single person here in a board full of people where the vast majority hate Michigan or Ohio State or (more generally) the Big 10 has supported you on.

Christ, can the fucking NBA season start soon so I can go back to ignoring the Suns thread and not having to read this shit on a daily basis?

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 16, 2007, 1:07 pm

I view USC as I did OU, both overrated and babied by the media. Year in and year out they are given lofty rankings, and while they each lived up to them for about 2-3 years a piece, they never really panned out. Yeah, yeah, the same can almost be said about OSU, but we did only lose one bcs championship game (same as two above) and aside from last year, don't really get top 5 preseason ranking much. I have grown up disliking the Pac Ten, because for years, that was our end game after osu/um if we went to the Rose Bowl. That was our main competition for every year leading up to the BCS system, and even a few years beyond. So I am the first to say I am biased, but listening to some ASU fan harp about how elite his conference is and make mind boggling arguments that he disproves with his own links is ridiculous. And yes, to a certain degree, I hate the Pac Ten more because of it.

That said, SEC is still the best conference hands down.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 16, 2007, 1:38 pm

Zamtuk wrote:So I am the first to say I am biased, but listening to some ASU fan harp about how elite his conference is and make mind boggling arguments that he disproves with his own links is ridiculous. And yes, to a certain degree, I hate the Pac Ten more because of it.

I'm claiming the Pac-10 is on the same level, and not some third rate conference compared to the Big Ten. Arizona State is far from the best team in the Pac 10 which makes their accomplishments even better since typically USC gets all the glory. (and beats Big Ten teams on a regular basis)

Head to head, Arizona State is 1-1 vs Michigan and Ohio State in bowl games and the one loss came in the last minutes and wasn't anywhere close to a blowout so you have nothing special to brag about when it comes down to actual match ups. Since there is a big Michigan fan and a big OhioSU fan here, it makes sense to compare their head to head match ups with Arizona State.

USC is in the Pac 10. Get over it. Other Pac 10 teams do play (and win) in the Rose Bowl, just check the history.

Since 1978 when ASU joined, Rose Bowl Pac Ten participants:

1/2/1978 Washington 27 Michigan 20
1/1/1979 Southern California 17 Michigan 10
1/1/1980 Southern California 17 Ohio State 16
1/1/1981 Michigan 23 Washington 6
1/1/1982 Washington 28 Iowa 0
1/1/1983 UCLA 24 Michigan 14
1/2/1984 UCLA 45 Illinois 9
1/1/1985 Southern California 20 Ohio State 17
1/1/1986 UCLA 45 Iowa 28
1/1/1987 Arizona State 22 Michigan 15
1/1/1988 Michigan State 20 Southern California 17
1/2/1989 Michigan 22 Southern California 14
1/1/1990 Southern California 17 Michigan 10
1/1/1991 Washington 46 Iowa 34
1/1/1992 Washington 34 Michigan 14
1/1/1993 Michigan 38 Washington 31
1/1/1994 Wisconsin 21 UCLA 16
1/2/1995 Penn State 38 Oregon 20
1/1/1996 Southern California 41 Northwestern 32
1/1/1997 Ohio State 20 Arizona State 17
1/1/1998 Michigan 21 Washington State 16
1/1/1999 Wisconsin 38 UCLA 31
1/1/2000 Wisconsin 17 Stanford 9
1/1/2001 Washington 34 Purdue 24
1/3/2002 Miami (FL) 37 Nebraska 14
1/1/2003 Oklahoma 34 Washington State 14
1/1/2004 Southern California 28 Michigan 14
1/1/2005 Texas 38 Michigan 37
1/4/2006 Texas 41 Southern California 38

EXCLUDING USC, Pac 10 teams are 9-9 in the Rose Bowl so they are no slouches vs Big Ten teams

Post by **Sylvus** » October 16, 2007, 1:51 pm

And with your point about it being only Ohio State and Michigan in the Big 10...

I see Michigan State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue and Northwestern in that list. But thank you for once again providing statistics that hurt an earlier position of yours.

Minnesota and Indiana are the only Big 10 teams that haven't had at least a year of competing at the top of the Big 10 in the last 20 years.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 16, 2007, 2:02 pm

Sylvus wrote:And with your point about it being only Ohio State and Michigan in the Big 10...

I see Michigan State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue and Northwestern in that list. But thank you for once again providing statistics that hurt an earlier position of yours.

Point is the Pac-10 demonstrates clearly it's on the level of the Big Ten and isn't deserving of the shit it gets from you Big Ten people as you lose more than you win overall and are .500 against the rest of the Pac 10 not counting USC which you people bring up every time in arguments about the strength of the Pac 10.

Arizona State is 1-1 against the Big Ten's elite two teams so even with a a non USC Pac 10 team, it's nothing to write home about for the Big Ten.

BTW, non USC Pac Ten teams are 4-3 against Michigan in the Rose Bowl so yet again, this USC crap is bogus. (4-4 against combined OhioSU and Michigan)

Sabek · Post by **Sabek** » October 16, 2007, 2:44 pm

I don't think you can seem to grasp that no one is saying PAC 10 sucks.
I certainly am not saying PAC 10 isn't good or isn't on the same ground as the Big Ten.

I am simply saying you need to quit inhaling Arizona cawk long enough to realize pac 10 = big ten isn't the same as saying pac 10 > big ten.

This whole thread you have been spouting that PAC 10 crushes teh shit out of Big ten and Pac ten is teh bestest conference in teh whole worldz.

Now you are saying Pac 10 is on the same level as big ten.

Which is it?

masteen · Post by **masteen** » October 16, 2007, 3:31 pm

I'm saying the PAC-10 sucks. Every year, they bring 1 good team (USC) and 2 mediocre teams, all of whom look much better than they are because of the weak ass shit they pass off as a conference schedule.

I also say the Big 11 sucks, just not nearly as much as the PAC-10. Last season was the exception in that both of their traditional powers were pretty average, but the rest of the conference sucks balls pretty consistently.

SEC teams usually look worse in the regular season because of the meat grinder they have to go through, but I love watching the #3 and 4 teams in other conferences struggle against the #5, 6, and sometimes 7 SEC teams.

Post by **Sylvus** » October 16, 2007, 4:14 pm

masteen wrote:I also say the Big 11 sucks, just not nearly as much as the PAC-10. Last season was the exception in that both of their traditional powers were pretty average, but the rest of the conference sucks balls pretty consistently.

SEC teams usually look worse in the regular season because of the meat grinder they have to go through, but I love watching the #3 and 4 teams in other conferences struggle against the #5, 6, and sometimes 7 SEC teams.

Except for the Big 10's #3 and 4 teams vs. #5, 6 and 7 SEC teams in bowl games last year. #3 Wisconsin (7-1 Big 10) beat Arkansas (7-1 SEC), #4 Penn State (5-3 Big 10) beat Tennessee (5-3 SEC). No recollection of exactly where Arkansas and Tennessee finished up in the SEC, were they #5, 6 or 7?

Meat grinder, indeed. I'm just sayin'.

Arguing about conferences is about as fruitful as arguing about religion. The only thing that I think we can all agree on is that the state of Arizona is mostly irrelevant when it comes to the overall sports landscape. Though I do hear it's fast gaining on Florida as the #1 retirement hotspot for America's senior citizens. So it's got that going for it, which is nice.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 16, 2007, 4:57 pm

masteen wrote:I'm saying the PAC-10 sucks. Every year, they bring 1 good team (USC) and 2 mediocre teams, all of whom look much better than they are because of the weak ass shit they pass off as a conference schedule.

If they were weaker due to the conference schedule, they wouldn't win their bowl games and I've shown that not to be the case (see above)

Sabek wrote:I don't think you can seem to grasp that no one is saying PAC 10 sucks.
I certainly am not saying PAC 10 isn't good or isn't on the same ground as the Big Ten.

If that was the case for everyone, this thread would be a lot shorter. People are saying the Pac 10 sucks which definitely isn't the case. The Big Ten fans, of all conferences, shouldn't be talking smack about the Pac 10 with their record vs the Pac 10 unless Michigan's helmets somehow count for a win to bring them up to 4-4 vs the crap non USC teams in the Pac 10. You don't even want to blow out your eyeballs looking at the stats if I throw in USC. I have to compare the "scraps" of the Pac 10 to with the two "elite" teams in the Big Ten to come up with a .500 record, saving face for the east coasters.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 16, 2007, 5:19 pm

Wow, I wonder why there were so many Pac10 participants in the Rose Bowl...

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 16, 2007, 5:57 pm

Boogahz wrote:Wow, I wonder why there were so many Pac10 participants in the Rose Bowl...

Same reason there are so many Big Ten participants.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 16, 2007, 6:10 pm

Winnow wrote:
Boogahz wrote:Wow, I wonder why there were so many Pac10 participants in the Rose Bowl...
Same reason there are so many Big Ten participants.

So, what does the Rose Bowl have to do with the overall strength of the conference? Did you change the subject again? At least point out that nobody has lost more Rose Bowls than Michigan! It's not like the best from the east and west were always the teams to play there.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 16, 2007, 8:20 pm

Boogahz wrote: So, what does the Rose Bowl have to do with the overall strength of the conference? Did you change the subject again? At least point out that nobody has lost more Rose Bowls than Michigan! It's not like the best from the east and west were always the teams to play there.

No, but in a discussion about Pac 10 vs Big Ten it's relevant since it was the crowning bowl for years and years between the two conferences.

The sub discussion is about how Arizona State is relevant and holds its own face to face vs the Big Ten "elite" teams since we're not allowed to mention USC's absolute dominance over the Big Ten, we discuss the rest of the Pac 10 being equal to Michigan head to head.

Michigan vs USC = losing record
Michigan vs rest of Pac Ten in Rose Bowl = losing record

"Elite" teams in the two conferences: Michigan & OhioSU combined vs USC head to head = losing record for the Big Ten

The Pac Ten is at minimum, equal to the Big Ten with or without USC. How's the Big Ten minus Michigan vs the Pac 10? Well, Michigan seems to lose all the big games so I'm assuming the rest of the Big Ten's average, while still below .500, is better than what Michigan has mustered.

Arizona State recently vs Big Ten:

2005 ASU 52 Northwestern 21 ASU Wins
2004 ASU 30 Northwestern 21 ASU Wins
2004 ASU 44 Iowa 7 ASU Wins

win win win ...how far do I need to go back?

and these past few years have been aweful for ASU yet victories are still notched vs the Big Ten.

These arguments that the Pac 10 is somehow a lessor conference than the Big Ten are a joke and ASU plays it's part in the Pac Ten dominance over the Big Ten that really has eleven teams and still can't come out ahead of the Pac Ten.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 16, 2007, 8:38 pm

Sorry, but YOU are the one that started the Pac10 vs Big10(11) comparisons...after you started the Pac10>all...just before Pac10>all but SEC.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 16, 2007, 8:51 pm

Boogahz wrote:Sorry, but YOU are the one that started the Pac10 vs Big10(11) comparisons...after you started the Pac10>all...just before Pac10>all but SEC.

Ah, so we are all agreed that the Big Ten isn't a better conference than the Pac Ten and Arizona State isn't some ass backwards team, having dealt out its share of wins in big games and small vs the Big Ten?

If so, all is well. Somehow, I doubt it even with the stats plain to see that the Big Ten is nothing special head to head vs the Pac Ten.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » October 16, 2007, 8:58 pm

If we all agree with you, will you stop shitting all over the Sports forum with your Arizona stink nuggets?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 16, 2007, 9:07 pm

Spang wrote:If we all agree with you, will you stop shitting all over the Sports forum with your Arizona stink nuggets?

The Nuggets are located in Colorado! It would put an end to this debate yes. I've laid out enough stats to prove my point but would be happy to debate it more.

After researching it, I feel the Pac Ten is actually better than the Big Ten where it counts, in head to head games, but will settle for acknowledgment that they are at least equal and that USC isn't the only team in the Pac Ten that has had success vs the Big Ten, the same being said for non Michi-Ohio teams in the Big Ten vs Pac Ten teams.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 16, 2007, 10:18 pm

Winnow wrote:I've laid out enough stats to prove my point...

ORLY?

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 16, 2007, 11:34 pm

You know what, check that, the Pac Ten fucking blows. You want to compare stats? Let's have a go at that.

OSU vs. Pacific-10 Conference 49-21-2

That includes Rose Bowls, yeah, a whole lot of competition out there.

UM vs. Pacific-10 Conference 44-21-1

Oh yeah, right, those are our elite teams. Let's take a look at the conference as a whole!

Big Ten vs. Pacific-10 Conference 266-251-13

I'm sorry, but where the fuck are you pulling your bullshit stats from? This is all of the games played, nothing omitted, no parsing through random years, just pure and simple statistics. And while I won't wave my dick in that air against SEC which, at the moment, is a superior conference, the Big Ten has a record of 94-87-7 against them (though, OSU has a losing record against them). In fact, the Big Ten doesn't have a losing record against any other conference. Which means no other conference can say the same thing about themselves. We have a few bad years and you call us shit? When your pithy conference can boast such statistics, then you can come thumping your chest. Until then, just stay in your corner masterbating furiously at all the Arizona sports teams could-have-beens.

Fun Fact! OSU vs. ASU 2-0. Stings a bit doesn't it?

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 16, 2007, 11:52 pm

Winnow wrote:2005 ASU 52 Northwestern 21 ASU Wins
2004 ASU 30 Northwestern 21 ASU Wins
2004 ASU 44 Iowa 7 ASU Wins

win win win ...how far do I need to go back?

how 'bout you go back to 1997 jerkoff.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » October 17, 2007, 1:18 am

Sylvus wrote:Except for the Big 10's #3 and 4 teams vs. #5, 6 and 7 SEC teams in bowl games last year. #3 Wisconsin (7-1 Big 10) beat Arkansas (7-1 SEC), #4 Penn State (5-3 Big 10) beat Tennessee (5-3 SEC). No recollection of exactly where Arkansas and Tennessee finished up in the SEC, were they #5, 6 or 7?

Meat grinder, indeed. I'm just sayin'.

Arky was technically the #2 SEC team, but UT was the 6 or 7. I still stand by my statement, as y'all went 2-5 overall (including the drubbing of OSU by Florida for the title), while the SEC was 6-3.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 17, 2007, 1:49 am

Christ. How big of a choking conference can the Big Ten be to have more overall wins but be so far behind the Pac 10 when it counts in head to head bowl games? What's with showing the "elite" teams of the Big Ten vs the entire Pac 10 conference? What does that prove? That's like me showing...oh nm, I'm not allowed to show any stats for USC in this argument...you go right ahead with your OSU/Michigan stats!

Well, that pretty much wraps up this thread. I'm done with this one.

Since I can't present USC stats, here's the Michigan Cheerleaders vs the USC Song Girls:

# seamus Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 1:24 pm

The Michigan ones all seem to be white Munchkins.
# Matt Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 1:31 pm

Is this a trick question?
# Juice Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 1:37 pm

Without question SC Cheerleaders.
# Anton Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 1:38 pm

Michigan can not possibly have the hottest cheerleaders. That school is full of nothing but ugly chicks and at best mediocre chicks. The only really hot chicks go there to work the economic situation to artificially increase their rating from a 7 to a 10 by entering a market with a extreme shortage of supply. Michigan cannot even be included in this contest. Mich St or Western Mich would easily crush UM in this category along with 95% of the schools with cheerleaders.
# Johnny Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 1:40 pm

I’ll have to inspect each individually before I can make a judgement.
# matthew Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 2:11 pm

USC doesn’t have cheerleaders! We have Song Girls! Get it right. And they’re way hotter than any “cheerleaders” anywhere.
# girard31 Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 2:48 pm

Anton, please remember this is about the cheerleaders shown, not the smart chicks who inhabit rat lab. And Western Michigan? Please. Don’t bring that weak shit into it.
# Tim Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 2:53 pm

As a third option, I recommend voting for the cheerleaders from the school that beat both of these teams in the two previous Rose Bowls and that have an affinity for ass-less chaps.

http://images.burntorangenation.com/ima ... schaps.jpg
# Bad Becks Says:
December 29th, 2006 at 2:54 pm

USC wins in a landslide. Half of the horses in blue above even look chunky.
# Biff Scooter Says:
December 30th, 2006 at 2:09 am

USC in a walk…but even they take a backseat to the babes at UCLA. USC are a bit too inbred and white as snow. If you want some spice and exoticism…UCLA baby!

ASU's Cheerleaders don't compare to USC's but we have hot lesbians in the stands.

All Arizona State has of note is the former ASU cheerleader that shot a porno shoot in her uniform:

No more ASU talk out of me until after the ASU vs Cal game Oct 27th. ASU has a well deserved bye week (they should have played Kent State for an easy win though to pad their record)

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 17, 2007, 1:58 am

Winnow wrote:Christ. How big of a choking conference can the Big Ten be to have more overall wins but be so far behind the Pac 10 when it counts in head to head bowl games? What's with showing the "elite" teams of the Big Ten vs the entire Pac 10 conference? What does that prove? That's like me showing...

Winnow wrote: Arizona State recently vs Big Ten:

2005 ASU 52 Northwestern 21 ASU Wins
2004 ASU 30 Northwestern 21 ASU Wins
2004 ASU 44 Iowa 7 ASU Wins

win win win ...how far do I need to go back?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 17, 2007, 2:11 am

Zamtuk wrote:
Winnow wrote:Christ. How big of a choking conference can the Big Ten be to have more overall wins but be so far behind the Pac 10 when it counts in head to head bowl games? What's with showing the "elite" teams of the Big Ten vs the entire Pac 10 conference? What does that prove? That's like me showing...

Winnow wrote: Arizona State recently vs Big Ten:

2005 ASU 52 Northwestern 21 ASU Wins
2004 ASU 30 Northwestern 21 ASU Wins
2004 ASU 44 Iowa 7 ASU Wins

win win win ...how far do I need to go back?

Yeah, ASU is 3-0 vs the Big Ten its last three games, but I also showed

Pac Ten Scrap Team Arizona State vs Big Ten Elite Teams in Rosebowl:

Arizona State vs Michigan (ASU Win)
Arizona State vs Ohio State (ASU Loss)

Arizona State is 1-1 vs the Big Ten's Elites

What I didn't show (to save you some embarrassment) was USC's record vs Big Ten "Elite" teams, or any teams in the important games.

Here's one your daddy might remember:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i99nER5c ... ed&search=

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 17, 2007, 7:29 am

Goddamn you are fucking stupid. How is ASU 1-1 vs UM and OSU when OSU is 2-0 against you? YOU ARE FUCKING INEPT AT THIS DISCUSSION, STOP NOW.

USC is 11-9 against OSU, yeah, that is real fucking embarrassing. Not sure how OSU could ever possibly suit up for another game with that kind of shadow looming over them. (A whopping 6-4 against UM, OUCH!)

I can't tell what you even argue about, you waffle so much. Are you talking about ASU? Are you talking about USC? Are you talking about the Pac Ten? Who can tell anymore? Hell, you can't even get your own arguments in a row, it's pathetic. The stats speak for themselves. You have one good team in a shit conference (not ASU!), and that's it. Period. You can sit here and twist the facts until they suit you, but it doesn't hide the fact that the Big Ten owns the Pac Ten. Stats are posted above. I'm not sure why you keep going on about it, it's done, you lost, give it up like you said you were, just one post ago.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » October 17, 2007, 9:09 am

And bragging about USC winning a whopping 2 more games over OSU when the Rose Bowl is a fucking home game is kinda sad really.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 17, 2007, 10:31 am

the Big10 even had provisions against sending the same game to the Rose Bowl twice in a row, but the Pac10 didn't. I would imagine that might have had something to do with the "best of the east" not always being there...then again, we're not talking about the Rose Bowl. We're not talking about USC. We're not talking about ASU. Hell, next week he will have not even been referring to the Pac10 at all!

Maybe someday Winnow will find the right med-cocktail to keep one line of reasoning open at a time. He sure as shit cannot seem to do it now.

Momopi · Post by **Momopi** » October 17, 2007, 11:05 am

Eventhough they lost, I feel LSU is still the best team in the country. Playing at kentucky in those condiditons I doubt any team would have beaten them that night. As the season goes on the PAC 10 is becomming more and more irrelevant to the national championship picture. As far as Ohio State goes, I really don't think they should be #1 with who they have played thus far, but once they prove themselves after the tough games coming up then its ok to be ranked #1.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 17, 2007, 12:51 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:And bragging about USC winning a whopping 2 more games over OSU when the Rose Bowl is a fucking home game is kinda sad really.

Who in the name of fuck would want to go to Michigan or Ohio in January?

Bowl games (the big ones) take place in warm climates during that part of the year.

I see others on this thread frantically trying to show that the Big Ten comes close to the Pac 10 in wins (Ohio Almost with as many wins as USC, etc). This is more like it and my point. The Pac 10 and Big Ten (11) are competitive and the Big Ten certainly isn't better than the Pac Ten yet can make a case for being on the same level in bowl games.

Here's hoping for a few Pac 10/Big Ten bowl match ups this year.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » October 17, 2007, 1:07 pm

What special conditions made Kentucky unbeatable for a #1 team?

Momopi · Post by **Momopi** » October 17, 2007, 1:38 pm

Basically it was an atmosphere like when the saints had that first home game vs the falcons on monday night and you could tell that there was no denying them the victory that day. You put that with the crowd who were really into it with a future pro qb for kentucky taking over the game there really wasnt much of a chance for LSU or any college team for that game. The best they could do was a last minute field goal attempt from 55+ yards and once that didnt go through it was all but over. Despite that LSU is still the best team in the country but sometimes the best team doesnt win.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » October 17, 2007, 1:55 pm

So you basically say that Kentucky was completely unstoppable, but LSU is the best team.

I'm not an LSU or SEC hater, those comments just seem contradictory. It's OK to say "Wow, they played a rough game and we lost."

Edit: I didn't watch the game, I was waiting for circumstances like "Our first string quarterback was knocked unconscience in the first quarter" or "The LSU team were all suffering from food poisoning from a bad batch of crawfish etoufee". "Home Field Advantage" doesn't equal a special circumstance that makes a team unassailable for a #1 team.

OSU lost year to Florida when they outplayed them. While I didn't think that our team even bothered to show up, I didn't proclaim Florida as unbeatable and insist we were still #1. I accepted we lost it on our own.

Momopi · Post by **Momopi** » October 17, 2007, 2:17 pm

Ashur wrote:So you basically say that Kentucky was completely unstoppable, but LSU is the best team.

I'm not an LSU or SEC hater, those comments just seem contradictory. It's OK to say "Wow, they played a rough game and we lost."

Edit: I didn't watch the game, I was waiting for circumstances like "Our first string quarterback was knocked unconscience in the first quarter" or "The LSU team were all suffering from food poisoning from a bad batch of crawfish etoufee". "Home Field Advantage" doesn't equal a special circumstance that makes a team unassailable for a #1 team.

OSU lost year to Florida when they outplayed them. While I didn't think that our team even bothered to show up, I didn't proclaim Florida as unbeatable and insist we were still #1. I accepted we lost it on our own.

I'm not making excuses why LSU lost. They just couldn't hold off the momentum of kentucky as the game went along and lost because kentucky was better on this day in the end. I'm not saying home field advantage makes a team unbeatable, i'm saying when a team is hanging in there vs someone and the game is going into the 3rd or 4th quarter, home field advantage can create a momentum that makes a team unbeatable and It was clearly seen in the kentucky/lsu game. It's much the same with LSU beating florida the week before. You can be the best all around team and still not win, you just werent the team that played the best on that day. I judge the best team on the entire body of work and not just one game. Would you say that because Kentucky beat LSU that means Kentucky is the best team in the country because LSU was the #1 team? I don't have sour grapes or anything like that, I knew we would have a tough game so I wasn't shocked when we lost. If OSU runs the table then I would definatly say they are the best team in the nation.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » October 17, 2007, 2:29 pm

LSU was spent from the game against Florida the previous week. UK coming off a humbling loss to the OBC, and they had nothing to lose and everything to gain. That game had "TRAP" written all over it, and Brooks and the 'Cats sprung it, shur'nuff.

Momopi · Post by **Momopi** » October 17, 2007, 2:31 pm

Thats a good point as well. Kentucky is also a quality team too from what I've seen so far this season.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » October 17, 2007, 2:52 pm

Losing to the #8 team in the country on their field is far less shameful than dumping one to Stanford or App. State in your own house.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » October 17, 2007, 3:08 pm

I concur!

P.S. OMG!

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » October 18, 2007, 1:02 pm

Get your excuses in line, winnow. ASU's top RB Torain is out for the year with a broken big toe.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 18, 2007, 1:19 pm

Zamtuk wrote:Get your excuses in line, winnow. ASU's top RB Torain is out for the year with a broken big toe.

He was out early in the game against Washington.

He's our big "bruiser" back but we have two other very good RBs. I don't think this will hurt us. The other two RBs both had 50+ yard runs for TDs last game. No excuses here but it will hurt maybe on short yardage 1st down pickups. We'll compensate!

vs Washington after Torain went down:

Keegan Herring 10-124, 1TD
Dimitri Nance 13-94, 1TD

218 yards combined w/out Torain. Torain also missed an entire game earlier in the season.

Sabek · Post by **Sabek** » October 18, 2007, 2:19 pm

Hahaha

Just looking at the bowl predictions for this season and something struck me as very funny.

espn.com wrote:Bell Helicopter Armed Forces
(Mountain West vs. Pac-10 No. 6) Air Force vs. Indiana* Air Force vs. Purdue*

If you notice it says the Pac-10s 6th best team should be in that game, but wait there is an asterisk next to two Big Ten teams.
What can it all mean?

espn.com wrote:* Pac-10 not projected to qualify enough teams for postseason

They are projected to have to get a Big Ten team to fill in because not enough Pac-10 teams are projected to be bowl eligible.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 18, 2007, 2:45 pm

Raistin · Post by **Raistin** » October 18, 2007, 6:01 pm

I do have to chime in here about Penn State.

PSU's record vs Pac 10 is 22-11.

Thank you.

ps. If you want to do current since joining the Big 10

5-1 vs Pac 10

We may get beat down by Random_Big10 sometimes, but at least we pull our weight in Bowl Games and rep the Big Ten as it should. Nice interview at the end if you don't want to watch the entire clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMKbZm96dL0

Tenn lost to National Champs, Florida by 1 point, LSU by 4 points and lost to the SEC west champ, and had a 5-3 record in the SEC. Not to mention slaughtering Cal 35-18. I think any team Penn State played that day, we would have won. Many won't agree,but jesus we laid the wood on some back hilled bitches during that game!

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » October 18, 2007, 8:13 pm

They are projected to have to get a Big Ten team to fill in because not enough Pac-10 teams are projected to be bowl eligible.

That's because the Pac 10 is so evenly good that they keep knocking each other off. Plus the fact that half you conference is scheduling horrid teams means they have free wins. (Except when they play App State.) *I am just trying to save someone work, minus the spashly pictures.

Seriously though, it is nice to see the other teams in the Pac 10 improving to the point that the conference is getting strong. I will readily admit we had a several year run where it was pretty bleak. With the exception of the SEC, I think that is the norm for most major conferences. I think the Big Ten is down, to a degree so is the Big 12. In a year or two, they could be the stronger conferences. Even the Big East is becoming decent again.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » October 19, 2007, 12:42 am

and #2 down

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 19, 2007, 12:46 am

Ashur wrote:and #2 down

ASU should move up in the rankings on their bye week! Not too many undefeated teams left.