Jump to content
The Smoakhouse Forums

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, WETSU said:

I’ll stop. It’s just a slow time of year for sports and there isn’t really a thread for debates like this. Maybe I should just create an SEC bash thread and we can have all these discussions there. 

Go for it. You and DB can go at it there. This is getting real old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ETXfan16 said:

Go for it. You and DB can go at it there. This is getting real old.

Look man if you just want Texas talk go to hookem. In a mixed fan base board stuff like this is going to happen in July... My apologies for contributing, but without debates like this the board is dead. Literally like 3-5 post on the entire college forum for an entire day dead. I’ve seen it all too often. I’ll try to start limiting the amount I let DB bait me into though on this Texas topic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn’t bait you into anything.  I posted an awful post (about a Texas recruit)from an Aggie on another board and it started after that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, WETSU said:

Look man if you just want Texas talk go to hookem. In a mixed fan base board stuff like this is going to happen in July... My apologies for contributing, but without debates like this the board is dead. Literally like 3-5 post on the entire college forum for an entire day dead. I’ve seen it all too often. I’ll try to start limiting the amount I let DB bait me into though on this Texas topic. 

Some debates just aren't worth the time though. That's all I'm saying.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wet and I aren’t done on one more topic he asked me a question about revolving around this whole deal before we completely get off of it and it’ll at least bring us back to Big 12 talk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, WETSU said:

Excuse me? 3 have actually played for national titles in the past 5 years, so how can only two be on that level? I’ll give you LSU. 

And quality teams. You think they are only 3-4 “quality” teams in the sec? Give me your list of quality teams in the sec, then give the other conferences. I want to see which conference you think has the most.

Ok, you asked me to list teams from each conference I feel are quality teams. Earlier I actually said high quality so some of these I’m about to list don’t qualify for that, in my opinion.

However, I decided to put teams I feel are are quality teams in each conference and year to year could make some noise I. Their conference and beyond just depending on how new players do, etc.

 

SEC

Alabama, UGA, LSU, Florida, Auburn, TAMU, MSU

Big 12

OU, UT, Okla St, WVU, TCU, TTU

BIG

Ohio State, Michigan, Penn St, Mich St, Wisc

PAC 12

Washington, Oregon, Stanford, WSU, Colorado

ACC

Clemson, Miami, Florida State

 

Now, with that being said there are some teams who I feel definitely are more apt to have greater success and more often than other teams in the quality list. Example, I am 1,000 times more confident Ohio State will have greater success and success more often in the BIG conference than I am in Washington State having success in the PAC 12.

Also, teams like Florida State I’ve put in here even though they’ve fallen tremendously last year. Our original discussion was over the past 3-4 years or so. So, I’d say in recent history FSU still deserves to be considered a quality team.

Likewise, I put A&M in the quality list even though they’ve done absolutely nothing in the SEC the past five years. However, they do have the potential to be good and have a breakout season just depends on how the season plays out and what happens in-game from game to game. 

May have reached just a tiny little tad with a few, maybe not. 

Whatchy’all think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, HearEmaGrowlin said:

Ok, you asked me to list teams from each conference I feel are quality teams. Earlier I actually said high quality so some of these I’m about to list don’t qualify for that, in my opinion.

However, I decided to put teams I feel are are quality teams in each conference and year to year could make some noise I. Their conference and beyond just depending on how new players do, etc.

 

SEC

Alabama, UGA, LSU, Florida, Auburn, TAMU, MSU

Big 12

OU, UT, Okla St, WVU, TCU, TTU

BIG

Ohio State, Michigan, Penn St, Mich St, Wisc

PAC 12

Washington, Oregon, Stanford, WSU, Colorado

ACC

Clemson, Miami, Florida State

 

Now, with that being said there are some teams who I feel definitely are more apt to have greater success and more often than other teams in the quality list. Example, I am 1,000 times more confident Ohio State will have greater success and success more often in the BIG conference than I am in Washington State having success in the PAC 12.

Also, teams like Florida State I’ve put in here even though they’ve fallen tremendously last year. Our original discussion was over the past 3-4 years or so. So, I’d say in recent history FSU still deserves to be considered a quality team.

Likewise, I put A&M in the quality list even though they’ve done absolutely nothing in the SEC the past five years. However, they do have the potential to be good and have a breakout season just depends on how the season plays out and what happens in-game from game to game. 

May have reached just a tiny little tad with a few, maybe not. 

Whatchy’all think?

We need to set clear dates. Because for instance, Texas has been “good” only 1 year in the last 5. If that’s enough to get you in the category, then we should add several teams in each conference. Kentucky was good last year too. Do they fit? Purdue has a solid year? See my point? Now I do want to say though that I believe Texas belongs simply on potential alone, but if we are talking about results you can see where I was going with this... I hope...

But I’ll accept your list. I do however have a few additions. 

SEC that list is accurate I suppose. I have a few arguments but I can accept it. 

Big 12 list also looks fine. Though TCU is falling fast. 

Big 10, Iowa needs to be added. They have had some decent years in there. Id even make a case for northwestern as well. They have finish ranked a couple of times in the last 5 years if I’m not mistaken (I could be.) 

Pac 12 I think usc must be added on potential alone. Yes it’s been a down couple of years, but they are still talented and still pose a threat every single season. They are at the least as deserving as Colorado. Utah as well. They compare to several teams you listed from other conferences. 

ACC needs Vtech in there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WETSU said:

We need to set clear dates. Because for instance, Texas has been “good” only 1 year in the last 5. If that’s enough to get you in the category, then we should add several teams in each conference. Kentucky was good last year too. Do they fit? Purdue has a solid year? See my point? Now I do want to say though that I believe Texas belongs simply on potential alone, but if we are talking about results you can see where I was going with this... I hope...

But I’ll accept your list. I do however have a few additions. 

SEC that list is accurate I suppose. I have a few arguments but I can accept it. 

Big 12 list also looks fine. Though TCU is falling fast. 

Big 10, Iowa needs to be added. They have had some decent years in there. Id even make a case for northwestern as well. They have finish ranked a couple of times in the last 5 years if I’m not mistaken (I could be.) 

Pac 12 I think usc must be added on potential alone. Yes it’s been a down couple of years, but they are still talented and still pose a threat every single season. They are at the least as deserving as Colorado. Utah as well. They compare to several teams you listed from other conferences. 

ACC needs Vtech in there. 

See what you are saying.

PAC: add SC and Utah

ACC: add VaTech

SEC: Wildcats I just don’t trust them....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, HearEmaGrowlin said:

See what you are saying.

PAC: add SC and Utah

ACC: add VaTech

SEC: Wildcats I just don’t trust them....

I don’t either, but like I said what are the parameters for this debate. That determines who goes on. 

Let me give you my definition. My definition is a team that is talented enough and has the pieces in place that it wouldn’t be a end of the world scenario for them to be a 10+ win team. A lot of that depends on scheduling as well. For instance, I believe A&M 100% is a 10 win team in every other conference this year, but playing at clemson Bama at Georgia and at LSU is a very difficult task to get there. They could very easily go 8-4 with this schedule, but could just as easily have gone 10-2 or 11-1 with some of the other schedules of teams you mentioned. So defining success varies. If we are strictly talking wins or losses or if we factor strength of a team based off sos too. 

 

My point is, this debate could be extremely detailed and is not near as simple as hype of one conference or another. I think things like espn FPI is a very useful tool. It factors in team efficiencies and opponents efficiencies. So you can’t just do well against weak opponents and still score high in that. It takes your schedule and your schedules schedule into account. That to me is a better judge of how strong a team is rather than simply comparing records. It’s like apples to oranges comparing some schedules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, WETSU said:

I don’t either, but like I said what are the parameters for this debate. That determines who goes on. 

Let me give you my definition. My definition is a team that is talented enough and has the pieces in place that it wouldn’t be a end of the world scenario for them to be a 10+ win team. A lot of that depends on scheduling as well. For instance, I believe A&M 100% is a 10 win team in every other conference this year, but playing at clemson Bama at Georgia and at LSU is a very difficult task to get there. They could very easily go 8-4 with this schedule, but could just as easily have gone 10-2 or 11-1 with some of the other schedules of teams you mentioned. So defining success varies. If we are strictly talking wins or losses or if we factor strength of a team based off sos too. 

 

My point is, this debate could be extremely detailed and is not near as simple as hype of one conference or another. I think things like espn FPI is a very useful tool. It factors in team efficiencies and opponents efficiencies. So you can’t just do well against weak opponents and still score high in that. It takes your schedule and your schedules schedule into account. That to me is a better judge of how strong a team is rather than simply comparing records. It’s like apples to oranges comparing some schedules. 

I hear you, I am pretty satisfied with the list of teams we came up with. 

What you’re saying about schedules I agree with. 

I actually brought up the same thing over in the high school section when comparing Argyle’s number of wins over the past five years with Carthage’s number of wins. Carthage plays an extremely more difficult schedule every year than Argyle does. Makes a big difference. Just because Argyle went 14-1 and Carthage went 13-2 in the same year that doesn’t mean Argyle was better. In fact, Carthage won state that year and Argyle - nope.

Again, I think we pretty much agree on the list of teams from each conference who have the talent and potential to have success any given year in their respective conferences.

Good conversation Wetsu! 👌🏻

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, HearEmaGrowlin said:

I hear you, I am pretty satisfied with the list of teams we came up with. 

What you’re saying about schedules I agree with. 

I actually brought up the same thing over in the high school section when comparing Argyle’s number of wins over the past five years with Carthage’s number of wins. Carthage plays an extremely more difficult schedule every year than Argyle does. Makes a big difference. Just because Argyle went 14-1 and Carthage went 13-2 in the same year that doesn’t mean Argyle was better. In fact, Carthage won state that year and Argyle - nope.

Again, I think we pretty much agree on the list of teams from each conference who have the talent and potential to have success any given year in their respective conferences.

Good conversation Wetsu! 👌🏻

Exactly. Schedules can make the difference in a good team looking average and an average team looking good. Lots of 7 win teams would have won 10 and lots of 10 win teams would have won 7 if we flipped schedules... and that’s what I’m saying in other arguments. There are only maybe 4-5 elite teams that no matter the schedule would still be that level. Then about 30 teams that could be ranked anywhere from 5th to 35th depending on scheduling and injuries. That’s why I get so worked up over people including mid majors into the discussion. Utah st got brought up as a top 25 team and they didn’t beat a single power 5 team last year...

 

I believe the top 25 should be the true top 25 teams. If advanced metrics and the eyeball test show me a 8-4 team is better than a 10-2 team, I think they should be ranked higher. Be ranked what you truly are, not punished for a harder schedule. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, WETSU said:

Exactly. Schedules can make the difference in a good team looking average and an average team looking good. Lots of 7 win teams would have won 10 and lots of 10 win teams would have won 7 if we flipped schedules... and that’s what I’m saying in other arguments. There are only maybe 4-5 elite teams that no matter the schedule would still be that level. Then about 30 teams that could be ranked anywhere from 5th to 35th depending on scheduling and injuries. That’s why I get so worked up over people including mid majors into the discussion. Utah st got brought up as a top 25 team and they didn’t beat a single power 5 team last year...

 

I believe the top 25 should be the true top 25 teams. If advanced metrics and the eyeball test show me a 8-4 team is better than a 10-2 team, I think they should be ranked higher. Be ranked what you truly are, not punished for a harder schedule. 

This all points back to my opinion we should increase the playoff to at least 8 teams. 

First, I think the playoff needs to ha e more than four in it and it needs to be large enough a team with two losses can still make it depending on their quality wins throughout the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lhornfan said:

Man, checked in to get rumors and info on my team only to find the latest #### contest. And none of it has anything to do with the Longhorns.

Sorry that that happened (and sorry on behalf of any Aggies that instigated/continued it). I know the feeling of just wanting to talk football and seeing the same suspects in the same #### contests over and over again. 😕 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JohnnyFootball said:

Sorry that that happened (and sorry on behalf of any Aggies that instigated/continued it). I know the feeling of just wanting to talk football and seeing the same suspects in the same #### contests over and over again. 😕 

Don’t apologize for me.  I am fully capable of using the ignore feature, I just don’t want to. Nobody gets news on this site. We come for the stupid #### contest. If we want news we go to the recruiting sites. This is just a local fighting pit. 

I would love to talk football. And me and Growl did have a productive convo earlier. There’s just one person on this site not capable of it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jahari Rogers to Florida.  ####, was hoping he'd be the 2nd CB in this class to go with Crawford. Looks like the staff will now target Jordan Pouncey's bro from Florida.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, WETSU said:

Don’t apologize for me.  I am fully capable of using the ignore feature, I just don’t want to. Nobody gets news on this site. We come for the stupid #### contest. If we want news we go to the recruiting sites. This is just a local fighting pit. 

I would love to talk football. And me and Growl did have a productive convo earlier. There’s just one person on this site not capable of it. 

I told you why I thought auburn wasn’t top 25 right now.  I’m sorry but losing 5 conference games doesn’t make you worthy of that notoriety.  It was valid points, you just wanted to argue, that is all.  There are several teams I’d have up there in their place and even listed them.  It’s just your sec blinders make you think otherwise.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Red90fly said:

Jahari Rogers to Florida.  ####, was hoping he'd be the 2nd CB in this class to go with Crawford. Looks like the staff will now target Jordan Pouncey's bro from Florida.

This actually may help with Pouncey (who I like more than Rogers) because Florida was his likely destination. 

http://www.hudl.com/v/2APbkh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Red90fly said:

Jahari Rogers to Florida.  ####, was hoping he'd be the 2nd CB in this class to go with Crawford. Looks like the staff will now target Jordan Pouncey's bro from Florida.

I don’t think his recruitment will shut down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×