SEC Bowl record of 6-6 was worst of Power 5 other than PAC12. Top SECCG teams both manhandled

Author: BaronVonZemo (23972 Posts - Joined: Nov 19, 2010)

Posted at 10:33 pm on Jan 8, 2019

Clemson could have scored n the high 50’s had they not decided to show mercy as Alabama went belly up like a submissive dog, and Texas man handled Georgia far more than the score shows.

Watching the SEC network is hilarious. Their analysis goes, “refs, turnovers, coaching....but we don’t make excuses”.
Looks like the ACC is the dominant conference. After all, they have been giving the SEC credit for being good during many years when they actually only had one good team.


Replies to: SEC Bowl record of 6-6 was worst of Power 5 other than PAC12. Top SECCG teams both manhandled


Thread Level: 2

Re: SEC Bowl record of 6-6 was worst of Power 5 other than PAC12. Top SECCG teams both manhandled

Author: mmclaug580 (10 Posts - Joined: Oct 19, 2017)

Posted at 3:25 pm on Jan 10, 2019

I'm an Irish fan so I get irritated at the constant conference p**sing contests. I have no dog in the fight but the SEC has 7 teams ranked in the top 19 of ESPN's power poll. Does ESPN hype the SEC due to their contract? Oh yeah. But I cannot disagree with those rankings much. Throw in the amount of Nattys won by different teams and they are hands down the best. Are they overhyped? Sometimes. Not debatable that over the last 15 or so years they are the dominant conference in the country and it's not even close.

Thread Level: 2

Been saying this for a while..............

Author: murph92675 (339 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:53 am on Jan 9, 2019

The SEC is not the "Unbelievable Conference" that they are marketed as. Every year the top 1 or 2 teams are really good, there's another 2 that are good, and the rest of the conference sucks. The bottom end is bad. They get great marketing from ESPN and they schedule perfectly, and have a deal with the Sun Belt conference to play their crap programs. I'm not ragging on them - I think it's genius. ND just needs to do the same.

Take this year - Alabama, Georgia - really good, LSU, Florida - good, the next best team is Kentucky - really? and then what? Auburn, Texas AM, and then it drops off like a rock -Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, , Arkansas, Mississippi, Mississippi State. Any other year looks the same. Since it's split into east/west - each side has 2 good teams, and 5 not very good teams.

They still might be the best conference - but they are not light years ahead of the Big 10, and Big 12. I think those 3 are closer than ESPN would have you believe.

They schedule great - they open up with crap to warm up, then they go on a 2 or 3 games in conference and either a bye week or a Sun Belt team. So in reality, they play 9 games - and after every 3 they get a bye or a Sun Belt team to take a break.

ND really needs to look at the SEC and schedule the same. Make a deal with Conference USA to open up with them every year - and then the rest of the year play 2 games, and then a bye or a crap team the rest of the year. That keeps your kids fresh, helps injuries heel, gives back-ups a chance to play, and you look great beating the Citadel 50 - 7 (I guess).


This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 3

This is pretty much accurate, but no one will believe it.

Author: oldirish (3816 Posts - Joined: Oct 8, 2011)

Posted at 8:18 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

I will say that they are the best conference but they are not off the charts great. Obviously,

Author: THEISMANCARR (9482 Posts - Joined: Aug 10, 2007)

Posted at 5:27 pm on Jan 9, 2019

Alabama, and Georgia are excellent teams. LSU is very good too, but I do not understand the love affair with Florida who lost 3 games. I do think Texas A&M is strong and will get better. Auburn I also consider strong generally and they have had some great moments. Mississippi State has been tough in the past but not now. South Carolina can be dangerous but inconsistent. This is not a description of teams in a conference that make it out of this world.

This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 3

Four teams in the Top 10

Author: WoodstockIrish (9702 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 3:08 pm on Jan 9, 2019

Yeah, they suck

Thread Level: 3

I think the SEC was strong this season, and is usually the best conference.

Author: Napoleon (2761 Posts - Joined: Apr 23, 2015)

Posted at 2:57 pm on Jan 9, 2019

It wasn't as strong this season as we expected, but still . . . quite a few good teams. Top-to-bottom, I'd take the SEC over probably any other conference even in this "down" year.

Thread Level: 3

Won't exactly work for ND. Without the conference championship, ND needs a strong SOS.

Author: TakethetrainKnute (16737 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:43 pm on Jan 9, 2019

ND could obviously schedule better in terms of spacing and travel.

Not scheduling the early bye week next season for the week before Georgia is the stupidest thing I have ever seen. (So they can play Louisville on Labor Day night? Really?)


Thread Level: 3

Several SEC

Author: WoodstockIrish (9702 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:23 pm on Jan 9, 2019

Schools had stronger SOS than ND this year....so they must being doing something right. We played Michigan and then you saw what that crappy team from the SEC did to them....

I think they finished the year with 6-7 teams in the Top 25

At least you acknowledged they were still the best conference

It's funny how everyone bad mouths the Big Ten, the schedule OSU plays, that Michigan plays, and then you conveniently forget that.

Clemson's opponent in their ACC championship game was Pitt with a 6-6 record. Tough conference.


Thread Level: 4

In fairness, though, ND's weaker SOS was unexpected.

Author: Napoleon (2761 Posts - Joined: Apr 23, 2015)

Posted at 2:54 pm on Jan 9, 2019

It's not like ND lined up a bunch of soup cans. Nobody could have anticipated that Stanford, USC, Virginia Tech, and FSU would all be down this season. ND scheduled a very tough slate. That looked like a top 5 type schedule just a couple of years ago. It turned out to not be that great, though still respectable.

Thread Level: 5

Agree

Author: WoodstockIrish (9702 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 3:07 pm on Jan 9, 2019

But it is what it is for 2018. 2019 doesn't look much better.

Odd to0 that a down year for the SEC is only 4 teams in the Top 10 and 6-7 in the top 25.

Sounds like a real wuss conference to me too.

We really didnt know exactly how good we were going into the CFP since we didnt play too many tough games. Same could be said for Clemson. Turns out beating Michigan really didnt mean much since Florida destroyed them.


Thread Level: 2

the ACC conference prepared Clemson for the playoffs.

Author: DonMiller (729 Posts - Joined: Dec 20, 2016)

Posted at 11:23 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

Apparently it half-prepared Notre Dame for the playoffs...

Author: TakethetrainKnute (16737 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:00 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

Exactly, knocking off 6-6 Pittsburgh in the conference championship was a real nail biter for them

Author: WoodstockIrish (9702 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:28 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 4

But it was mental preparation. Part of the don’t smile to much while kicking their ass training.

Author: whatsamataU (16416 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 5:47 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

Ironic

Author: WoodstockIrish (9702 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 8:59 am on Jan 9, 2019

that you would make that comment since that is all that has been happening here at UHND since we got blown out

One excuse after another....


Thread Level: 3

Did anyone here claim what they have? No.

Author: BaronVonZemo (23972 Posts - Joined: Nov 19, 2010)

Posted at 9:28 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

Where are the excuses? I see mostly, we are good enough posts

Author: NDNEIL (5473 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 9:17 am on Jan 9, 2019

Some indicating a few breaks and it wouldn't have been as embarrassing but all those post say ND still would lose.

Would love to see the abundance of excuses


Thread Level: 4

Just search on TheismannCarr...and several others but he is the biggest offender

Author: WoodstockIrish (9702 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 9:35 am on Jan 9, 2019

A lot of woulda, coulda, shoulda's......

Thread Level: 5

All I said was if the 3 calls that were overturned were not overturned which they should not have

Author: THEISMANCARR (9482 Posts - Joined: Aug 10, 2007)

Posted at 10:41 am on Jan 9, 2019

been according to the NFL top expert in a tweet then maybe it would have made a closer game or possible difference. That is hardly making excuses. I also acknowledged that we would have to play a very good game and that Clemson was a better team than us in order to beat them. You are something else Woodie but you got my response to your pro SEC, Georgia bias so I guess you won this round. But I think people see through you.

Thread Level: 6

What are the 3 calls that shouldn't have been overturned?

Author: Chrisb (9839 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 4:36 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 7

The three calls according to Mike Peralta or Ferrara or whatever his name is

Author: THEISMANCARR (9482 Posts - Joined: Aug 10, 2007)

Posted at 5:31 pm on Jan 9, 2019

were the initial fumble by Book that no one really possessed and should have been ruled down because the ball was dead under him, the fumble after our kickoff which could not be confirmed as definitely out of bounds, and the drop or not drop so called lack of football move by Mack on a pass to the 31 yard line of Clemson that would have been close to a first down and put us in 3rd and less than 1, in 4 down territory at that point in the game.

Thread Level: 8

I'll give you 1.5 of those and while that may have kept us in it longer..

Author: Chrisb (9839 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 9:47 pm on Jan 9, 2019

It had nothing to do with what they did to our D when Love went out, and wasn't going to change the outcome of a blowout where they had backups in nearly the entire 4th quarter.

1 - the ball rulled a fumble we recovered on the kickoff that was overturned was definitely a bad reversal as there was nothing to show conclusively the ball touched the sideline and math and angles and what not say a curved ball with only maybe a half inch hanging over the sideline like 99.9% didn't actually touch the sideline.
They got that one wrong.

2 - the Mack catch/drop is debatable...I thought it was a catch and a fumble, but it was close and there was great video angles of it so this isn't a definite they got it wrong, but I think it was wrong so this is where I give you a half.

3 - the Book fumble was absolutely 100% a fumble and Clemson did 100% recover it in a timely manner and Book absolutely 100% can not regain possession of a ball while laying on his back and putting his leg over it...that IS NOT possession and was actually something that happened earlier this year in one of our games but went our way as the other team tried to just lay a body part on the ball and we recovered it.
They got that one correct regardless of what whatshisname said.


Thread Level: 9

That seems fair but I wonder if the ball lying prone under Book, similar to a punt that dies

Author: THEISMANCARR (9482 Posts - Joined: Aug 10, 2007)

Posted at 3:01 pm on Jan 10, 2019

with no one touching it before it comes to a complete rest, qualifies as a dead ball and as such remains with who had it, and was it indeed prone. Just not sure of rules now or if that idea was indeed the case. Your 1.5 seems fair although I think 2.0 is more accurate, because of the screwed up Mack ruling. Once again if Mack makes the catch cleanly and clearly holds on we have the ball in good position. But like I have said before on Mack, he blows the easy catches somehow.

Whatever, they were clearly the better and more talented team, especially in terms of playing up to their capability. If the two were not overturned it probably had the effect of only making it a closer game at which point maybe the ability to perform under pressure comes into play. We have no reason to think they would not have been able to perform under pressure.


This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 8

The “ review Refs “ were out toget us. Blatant as hell it was....

Author: whatsamataU (16416 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 5:49 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 6

Says the guy

Author: WoodstockIrish (9702 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:24 am on Jan 9, 2019

Going around calling Tim Tebow an idiot

Thread Level: 7

Tim Tebow is an idiot, but that's besides the point.

Author: Chrisb (9839 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 4:35 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 6

No

Author: WoodstockIrish (9702 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:21 am on Jan 9, 2019

I see through most of the bullshit on this site including yours.

Thread Level: 7

He has a point, and here's why

Author: cubsfanin16 (790 Posts - Joined: Aug 25, 2016)

Posted at 1:45 pm on Jan 9, 2019

I have noticed a very disturbing trend, both in the NFL,and college to overturn calls on replay, the replay officials substituting their judgment for the on field officials, and ignoring the "inconclusive" or " Indisputable " evidence" standard..In fact, Ive rarely heard "replay is inconclusive " in games this year....the ND-Clemson game just being the LATEST EXAMPLE..No way , all those calls were conclusive..

So, if those standards are now out the window, Id like to see replay, (I know it wont be) sharply curtailed....Give one to each coach PER GAME, one to the field officials when they are sharply divided, one to replay officials, 4 in total per game...if I was boss, lol, that be it..


Thread Level: 2

“Their analysis goes, “refs, turnovers, coaching....but we don’t make excuses”. wow, they must post

Author: whatsamataU (16416 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 8:18 am on Jan 9, 2019

here ! Same crap after we got beat...

Thread Level: 2

Come on? Do you really think Alabama wanted to be in that bowl game?

Author: NDNEIL (5473 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 7:32 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

Lol

Author: BaronVonZemo (23972 Posts - Joined: Nov 19, 2010)

Posted at 9:27 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

Check 2018 and 2017 its worse

Author: murph92675 (339 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:05 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

Expect it to continue.

Author: guiness4everyone (1280 Posts - Joined: Jan 19, 2011)

Posted at 11:56 pm on Jan 8, 2019

(no message)