I would hardly call St. John's a middle of the pack Big East team, they didn't even make the conference tournament last year. They've been a doormat in the conference in recent years, Marist beat them last year at the Garden. Normally I pull for Big East over ACC, but I root for Maryland since I lived there for a long time, and I hate St. John's. So this score made me happy.
I have actually watched Wisconsin play this year. It is safe to assume you haven't watched them. The team is good. You are absolutely impossible, sir.
Okay then. Name some teams that have not played nobody. You have a problem with so many of these top teams. It's unbelievable.
West Virginia and the Big East lead in the hot cheerleader department, too. http://www.athlonsports.com/college-football/8054/sideline-spirit?action=gallery&participant=7
St. John's was picked 9th of 16 in the BE preseason polls, that's middle of the pack and Maryland was chosen 7th in the ACC. http://www.bigeast.org/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/102506aab.html http://www.theacc.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/102206aac.html
I have wateched Wisconsin play a few gams and I have not been impressed, they played better earlier in the season but have not played well the last month and regardless of that they haven't beaten a quality team. The one game they were tested in(against Mich) they were blown out. Okay then. Name some teams that have not played nobody. You have a problem with so many of these top teams. It's unbelievable. Let's look at the non BE/B10 BCS Top 10: -3 USC has played Arkansas, Nebraska and Orgeon and will play Cal and ND. I don't think another team has played a tougher sched. -4 Florida has played at ten, LSU and Auburn and much like UL they get burned w/ FSU being bad. Normally that's a tough game. Not quite USc's sched but muuch tougher than what any BE or B10 team has faced. -5 ND has played at ga tech, Michigan, and will play at USC. Not unbelievable but better than the BE and B10 schools. -7 Arkansas played USC, Auburn, Tennessee and will play LSU. If the BE and B10 were better they wouldn't have 3 teams each in the top 10 of the BS polls. They would knock each other off like in other major conferences.
Rutgers "Beat reporter" Lenn Robbins has multiple articles on the Mich-OSU game today, they also have the back page of the Post and part of the front page BEFORE the game. I guess this is tuning into a Mich-OSU town:wink:
Yes, on Southern California. The only thing there is that only two of those opponents are out of conference/traditional rival opponents. Cal and Oregon are in their conference and Notre Dame is a traditional rival. They probably scheduled Arkansas and Nebraska based on results from six or so years ago. The same applies to Florida and Arkansas. Notre Dame is a special case because they don't play in a conference, but they do have a number of traditional rivals. Their schedule strength is okay. They have two top teams on there, a couple decent ones, and the rest are pretty bad. If you put the phrase "I think" in there I wouldn't mind as much. I'm just not a fan of you writing that like it's fact. I don't know that WV, Rutgers, and Louisville would lose to Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana State, Arkansas and Auburn. They might, but I just don't know. Hopefully, we'll see at least one head-to-head Big East vs SEC bowl game involving these particular teams. Same applies with Big Ten vs SEC. Note: I do consider the SEC to be the strongest conference, but that doesn't necessarily mean their top teams would beat the top teams from the Big East or Big Ten.
Cincy took care of this thread. Rutgers gets vlown out by Cincy and you think Rutgers would have 0 or 1 losses in the SEC? The top 3 in the BE are quality tams but none of them are great.
Wow. So the SEC teams can beat on each other and that means the league is good. The Big East can beat on each other and that means the league sucks. If you think this thread is over... I thought you said Rutgers was good only a few days ago.
Even the mid of the pack SEC teams are good, Cincy is not good. W/ RUs first big time win in forever it made this week's game difficult no matter who the opponent. RU isn't used to success and they were eating up the publicity insetad of working hard to win. They are clearly better than Cincy but they enjoyed their press clipoings too much. Are you seriously comparing the BE to the SEC?
Yeah, you just haven't paid any attention at all. I have always stated I feel the SEC is the best conference. My earlier post of this hour was to point out your inconsistencies which have run rampant in this thread.
Cincinnati does have the toughest schedule in the country. If you go back you can even find a post where I stated that I felt they could give WVU trouble in Morgantown. Cincinnati is not a bad team at all.
I don't have any inconsistencies, things do change. Clemson was playing great when they beat up a good Ga tech team. Maryland is not good and that was proven yesterday where they didn't even compete w/ BC. I never said Cincy was bad, I just don't think they are very good. They are medicore, they did play a rough sched and 4 of 5 losses are to good teams but they did get blown out at home by Pitt. If not for the Pitt loss I'd feel differently about cincy, w/ that brutal sched you can't afford to blow games at home to a team like Pitt.
This is an amazing post. Two Big East teams play each other. The one with the better record loses the game. Therefore, the ACC is better than the Big East and this thread is over! Wow. Just wow. Heretofore, this was a good debate until you came with the above post. Now you are just a caricature of yourself. *** Big East: 6 of 8 teams are bowl eligible ACC: 7 of 12 teams are bowl eligible Big East: better record in out of conference games I am not sure exactly what constitutes being the better conference in your mind, but the above stuff is pretty hard evidence. You applaud the SEC for having a bunch of good teams beating on one another. Then with the Big East the same thing happens and you condemn the conference. You never answered this when I asked previously. Why such hatred for a conference? I've never had hatred of a conference. It just doesn't make any sense for me to hate on a conference. It seems to be a ridiculous thing to hate. I can't wait till bowl season. The bowls will cement the Big East as the better conference unless the Big East teams perform horribly in the bowls. Now, if they all suck, you'll "win" the thread. I won't be able to say anything. If the good ones (Louisville, West Virginia) do well, you're the thread "loser." Mixed results? Then the debate will rage on. But, also note this. You stated that although the Cardinals won the World Series it does not mean the National League was the better league, which I was in agreement. Therefore, if Louisville or West Virginia lose bowl games you will not be able to say the Big East sucks unless you want that word "inconsistent" to be slapped on you again. I'll start referring to you as "inconsistent nyjunc". At this point, you're going to need to root for a few things here to be able to say the ACC was better than the Big East in 2006: 1. Louisville and WVU to both lose bowl games and probably in blowout fashion 2. the other Big East bowl teams to perform less than adequately in bowls 3. The ACC to tear up the bowls
Where did I say the ACC was better than the BE? The ACC is an embarrassment this year. I forgto the title of the thread, when I was saying Cincy took care of this thread I was referring to the arguments about RU taking NYC by storm and posibly playing for a title. The rest of your post wasn't neccessary, I never said anywhere afcter the first few games of the season that the ACC was better. You could have figured that out.
That changes it then. I thought you were talking specifically about the actual title of the thread. EDIT: Upon further review, this doesn't add up, either.
Junc, are you retarded? OSU-Michigan was the biggest game of the year, pretty much every paper and news outlet had their top guys on it and led with it. What point exactly are you trying to make here? I can't believe I'm even wasting my time with this, but here is the Post's Rutgers coverage from this week: Saturday, game day article, Brian Lewis Sunday, game article, Brian Lewis They were also in Friday's and Monday's paper with articles from Lewis but the Post's archives aren't working right for those issues. But because the Post changed up the writer they assigned, it somehow doesn't count as coverage? Please man, just drop it. You're wrong.
Preseason polls dpon't elevate you from the bottom to middle of the pack, performance on the court does. St. John's didn't even make the Big East tournament and they've lost a couple guys this year already. They aren't close to a middle of the pack Big East team as of now.
