Sign in to follow this  
ONUV

SEC/ESPN logo

Recommended Posts

I THINK Jigga was speaking a little tongue in cheek. However, I think the Big 12 is going to show itself as sharing that top conference label with the SEC this year. At least as exciting game to game given the last couple of year's offensive explosiveness that seems to only get better and better.

Except nobody wanted to watch the Arena football league either. Oh well...another few January Jutlands and we'll eventually learn the fallacy of OFFENSE OFFENSE OFFENSE! when paired with no defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The SEC will be irrelevant once Teblow leaves

Ummmm.....no. Rich Brooks, who Oregon named their field after, also thinks that is bull :censored:

I understand you are angry nobody gives the Pac 10 credit. Of course, posting a losing record in the regular season against the Mountain West might have something to do with that.

The SEC will continue to be a solid conference for the foreseeable future.

So let me get this straight, ESPN, CBS, and the SEC Network will all carry SEC games?

Talk about bias

How exactly is it "bias"?

I'll tell you exactly why it's biased!

ESPN, CBS, and the SEC Network only care about making money. They don't care about showing all of college football. That's not fair! They're only going after the most rabid and loyal fanbases, the conference who plays the best football (and it ain't even close) in the nation top to bottom, and have some of the best coaching minds nationally! Plus, there are so many rivalries, so many big games, so many colorful figures...plus at least for this year, there's still Tim Tebow! They need to look past all that and showcase the little guys! Who cares if no one wants to watch WAC and Mountain West football, they should jam it down our throats like they did with the WNBA and Arena Football!

I think these networks should be more concerned about equity in the college football landscape than they are about great football, great players, great coaches, great rivalries, and huge amounts of money!

You forgot that the SEC pays their players more money than other conferences... they need the extra revenue stream to keep the big name players coming in, as well as paying off professors for grades.

That is not a SEC-only phenomenon. Please save your righteous indignation (or was that sarcasm too?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, I was only half serious guys, didn't mean to offend all of you guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SEC needed this. I am a Vols fan and watching all the games on Raycom sports got really boring. The only SEC games that were shown on good channels was Florida and Georgia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I THINK Jigga was speaking a little tongue in cheek. However, I think the Big 12 is going to show itself as sharing that top conference label with the SEC this year. At least as exciting game to game given the last couple of year's offensive explosiveness that seems to only get better and better.

Maybe once they learn to play defense. Excitement yes, but week after week of shootouts can get old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all this is doing is replacing Raycom SEC football right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So all this is doing is replacing Raycom SEC football right?

The "SEC Network" is. It's not a new channel, rather, a package sold to stations - more than likely the same ones who carried Raycom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is funny, when offenses succeed it is a poor defensive conference... when defenses succeed it is a poor offensive conference. This applies to any league... Powerful offenses does not mean the defenses are necessarily poor. This is always my beef with spring games. When an offense or defense is strong there is worry about the other side of the ball. I guess a conference is only good when every game is decided by 7 points or less?

Now if you were to argue the Big 12 has struggled in bowl games then you have a good argument. But to say offense offense offense means no defense is to short change the potency of some of these offenses. When you have 2 teams with potent offenses going after each other the defenses are going to give up big numbers.

Didn't plan on this turning into the proverbial my conference vs your conference argument. Defense IS important and I think Pelini will show the rest of the Big 12 what they have been ignoring as his tenure increases... But to make it sound like offenses like Texas, Oklahoma, OK State, and even Missouri last year and Nebraska are a waste because of how defenses perform against them isn't giving the offenses credit.

Like I said, when an offense puts up big numbers and stats people assume the defenses suck, when they should consider that the offenses know how to exploit the defenses or the other coaches haven't figured out how to stop the offenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is funny, when offenses succeed it is a poor defensive conference... when defenses succeed it is a poor offensive conference. This applies to any league... Powerful offenses does not mean the defenses are necessarily poor. This is always my beef with spring games. When an offense or defense is strong there is worry about the other side of the ball. I guess a conference is only good when every game is decided by 7 points or less?

Now if you were to argue the Big 12 has struggled in bowl games then you have a good argument. But to say offense offense offense means no defense is to short change the potency of some of these offenses. When you have 2 teams with potent offenses going after each other the defenses are going to give up big numbers.

Didn't plan on this turning into the proverbial my conference vs your conference argument. Defense IS important and I think Pelini will show the rest of the Big 12 what they have been ignoring as his tenure increases... But to make it sound like offenses like Texas, Oklahoma, OK State, and even Missouri last year and Nebraska are a waste because of how defenses perform against them isn't giving the offenses credit.

Like I said, when an offense puts up big numbers and stats people assume the defenses suck, when they should consider that the offenses know how to exploit the defenses or the other coaches haven't figured out how to stop the offenses.

I will simply point out Ole Miss' obliteration of Tech's defense, Oregon's overwhelming of Oklahoma State, Missouri's overtime victory over a mediocre Missouri team, Nebraska's narrow victory over Clemson, Texas' near loss to Ohio State, and Florida's neutering of Oklahoma's "record-setting" offense suggests that the flashy offensive stats may have come at the expense of some rather poor defenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is funny, when offenses succeed it is a poor defensive conference... when defenses succeed it is a poor offensive conference. This applies to any league... Powerful offenses does not mean the defenses are necessarily poor. This is always my beef with spring games. When an offense or defense is strong there is worry about the other side of the ball. I guess a conference is only good when every game is decided by 7 points or less?

Now if you were to argue the Big 12 has struggled in bowl games then you have a good argument. But to say offense offense offense means no defense is to short change the potency of some of these offenses. When you have 2 teams with potent offenses going after each other the defenses are going to give up big numbers.

Didn't plan on this turning into the proverbial my conference vs your conference argument. Defense IS important and I think Pelini will show the rest of the Big 12 what they have been ignoring as his tenure increases... But to make it sound like offenses like Texas, Oklahoma, OK State, and even Missouri last year and Nebraska are a waste because of how defenses perform against them isn't giving the offenses credit.

Like I said, when an offense puts up big numbers and stats people assume the defenses suck, when they should consider that the offenses know how to exploit the defenses or the other coaches haven't figured out how to stop the offenses.

I will simply point out Ole Miss' obliteration of Tech's defense, Oregon's overwhelming of Oklahoma State, Missouri's overtime victory over a mediocre Missouri team, Nebraska's narrow victory over Clemson, Texas' near loss to Ohio State, and Florida's neutering of Oklahoma's "record-setting" offense suggests that the flashy offensive stats may have come at the expense of some rather poor defenses.

What, a spring game? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is funny, when offenses succeed it is a poor defensive conference... when defenses succeed it is a poor offensive conference. This applies to any league... Powerful offenses does not mean the defenses are necessarily poor. This is always my beef with spring games. When an offense or defense is strong there is worry about the other side of the ball. I guess a conference is only good when every game is decided by 7 points or less?

Now if you were to argue the Big 12 has struggled in bowl games then you have a good argument. But to say offense offense offense means no defense is to short change the potency of some of these offenses. When you have 2 teams with potent offenses going after each other the defenses are going to give up big numbers.

Didn't plan on this turning into the proverbial my conference vs your conference argument. Defense IS important and I think Pelini will show the rest of the Big 12 what they have been ignoring as his tenure increases... But to make it sound like offenses like Texas, Oklahoma, OK State, and even Missouri last year and Nebraska are a waste because of how defenses perform against them isn't giving the offenses credit.

Like I said, when an offense puts up big numbers and stats people assume the defenses suck, when they should consider that the offenses know how to exploit the defenses or the other coaches haven't figured out how to stop the offenses.

I will simply point out Ole Miss' obliteration of Tech's defense, Oregon's overwhelming of Oklahoma State, Missouri's overtime victory over a mediocre Missouri team, Nebraska's narrow victory over Clemson, Texas' near loss to Ohio State, and Florida's neutering of Oklahoma's "record-setting" offense suggests that the flashy offensive stats may have come at the expense of some rather poor defenses.

What, a spring game? :D

Ooopsie. Let's change that to Northwestern. Who in turn lost to Indiana.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All those 10-9, 14-12 SEC puntfests each week could get old, too.

Unfortunately for you, with 9 of the 12 SEC teams starting relatively-inexperienced QB's, it should be a defensive-driven league this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The SEC will be irrelevant once Teblow leaves

Gah, that was a great laugh. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll tell you exactly why it's biased!

ESPN, CBS, and the SEC Network only care about making money. They don't care about showing all of college football. That's not fair! They're only going after the most rabid and loyal fanbases, the conference who plays the best football (and it ain't even close) in the nation top to bottom, and have some of the best coaching minds nationally! Plus, there are so many rivalries, so many big games, so many colorful figures...plus at least for this year, there's still Tim Tebow! They need to look past all that and showcase the little guys! Who cares if no one wants to watch WAC and Mountain West football, they should jam it down our throats like they did with the WNBA and Arena Football!

I think these networks should be more concerned about equity in the college football landscape than they are about great football, great players, great coaches, great rivalries, and huge amounts of money!

Your argument makes zero sense. So you're saying ESPN shouldn't care about great games, players and coaches? Networks care about ratings, it's how they attract advertising dollars and yes, ultimately make money. Why else would a business operate other than to make money? So why would ESPN not show games that are going to get them the highest ratings? The SEC has arguably the most passionate and loyal fans in college football and SEC football games are probably the highest rated games in the country. So why wouldn't ESPN and CBS want to show these games? You really think ESPN is going to show the New Mexico/Utah State game over a Florida/LSU game on a Saturday night? Come on. It's the same reason FOX shows American Idol twice a week instead of running infomercials during primetime, ratings.

Who cares if no one wants to watch WAC and Mountain West football
Why would a network put on a game that no one wants to watch?

Epic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this