From a W/L stanpoint, would we be better in the SEC?
- Thread starter cyrocksmypants
- Start date
Actually there's a lot of data and numbers suggesting we'd have more easy games in the SEC. We'd have 4 non-conf instead of just 3, one of them late in the year to take a break from conference play. There is generally more than one bad team in the SEC lately.
It might be much less likely for ISU to ever win 10 games with an SEC schedule, but it would be more likely for us to get to six wins every year, look at Vanderbilt.
Mizzou fell off a lot last year, didn't they finish 7-5? They did not finish strong and it continues this season.
I have been questioning the SEC since about week 3 or 4. What have they done in non con? Their best wins include Washington and Michigan. Those teams are not good if you have not noticed. Look at Alabama, their schedule is actually pretty weak. I think the SEC is overrated, this year anyways. The SEC has losses to Western Kentucky and Rutgers.
Agreed,but at least we found out who our QB is and found 51 points of offense.:twitcy:
IMO people are deluding themselves if they think ISU could do any better in the SEC than Missouri has done this year.
The SEC is such a strong conference because of the number of HS BSC FB players each of those states produce each year. Missouri is going to struggle in the SEC because everyone has big, quick lineman.
I get a chuckle how people focus on the strength of Big 12 offenses and the points we put up. The reason is the defenses are pretty weak. OU's offense can score 40+ against just about any Big 12 defense- yet they can't score 20 against the Irish.
Rhoads in on the right track by building a strong defense in the Big 12. He now just needs to find an above average QB.
The SEC is such a strong conference because of the number of HS BSC FB players each of those states produce each year. Missouri is going to struggle in the SEC because everyone has big, quick lineman.
I get a chuckle how people focus on the strength of Big 12 offenses and the points we put up. The reason is the defenses are pretty weak. OU's offense can score 40+ against just about any Big 12 defense- yet they can't score 20 against the Irish.
Rhoads in on the right track by building a strong defense in the Big 12. He now just needs to find an above average QB.
If Alabama stays at #1 all year, then I hope Oregon ends up at #2. I want to see what a high powered offense could do against a great defense.
KSU would be ok too, but if we get Alabama vs. ND... I will throw up and probably not even watch. An Alabama vs. ND game could very well end up being a 7-6 final score or something like that? Just horribly painful to watch.
KSU would be ok too, but if we get Alabama vs. ND... I will throw up and probably not even watch. An Alabama vs. ND game could very well end up being a 7-6 final score or something like that? Just horribly painful to watch.
Me, too.
If a smart expansion to 12 (or more) comes into play at some point, I'll support that, but I'm in no rush to lose the round-robin.
Big 12 is much more balanced than the SEC. K-State and OU don't have the ridiculous levels of talent that Bama/LSU/Georgia have. KU/UK are probably pretty similar but Tennessee/Arkansas/Auburn are all pretty much garbage and much worse than Baylor. You'd think people might notice when teams like Tennessee are giving up 700 yards to middle of the pack Sun Belt teams but SEC SEC SEC SEC!
It seems like Big 12 teams are punished in the polls when they lose to ranked teams while SEC teams are excused because of the perception of their league. OU has 2 losses to #3 and #4 but are still ranked 14th and way behind 2 2-loss SEC teams.
It seems like Big 12 teams are punished in the polls when they lose to ranked teams while SEC teams are excused because of the perception of their league. OU has 2 losses to #3 and #4 but are still ranked 14th and way behind 2 2-loss SEC teams.
