dynasty mode "custom schedules"

[KillerHog471]

My only justification for the SEC teams scheduling weaklings all the time is we talk **** all the time to each other before the year, during the year, after the year, in the street, at a funeral, everywhere. I just want to relax a little and watch some obscure team get to travel to a nice stadium(except going to Neyland ), getting paid, having exposure, and being beat. It is one of the few times backups come out and there is no pressure except to win(which always doesn't happen) and to pad stats. When Arkansas has played OOC teams such as Texas and USC we have been throttled. But when we play Texas A&M it is awesome. It's liking living old rivalries. It is kinda cheap but if we scheduled the toughest games the other conferences would pick at something else.

I hate the whole high and mighty SEC thing. It surprises me we actually get along! Every fan thinks they're teams and conferences are the best thing ever. If we don't bring a NC again I think it's deserved cause we aren't very modest.

BTW My dad is from California and SC so he is always "guess who the only couple of teams who haven't scheduled a lower division team?", "USC, UCLA, Washington State, Notre Dame, and lists some more)". Then he goes to brag about the times we played in the past and SC's past NC's.

It's dust in the wind. So when the season starts grow some balls and let the new season speak.

[bassist250]

Quote: Originally Posted by Chef J2

Unfortunately, your argument is pointless because the SEC wins national titles... 5 straight to be exact. Not to mention, there are more current NFL players that played in the SEC, which illustrates the talent that stems from the league. The only debate in college football is which conference is 2nd best.

You're right, the joke OOC is gonna happen whether we talk about it or not. I like that your stance is "the lousiness of the OOC isn't even up for debate." I guess you gotta pick and choose your battles, and OOC is one that you will always lose.

The non-sec community would like to see all conferences prove their worth every week.

[bassist250]

Quote: Originally Posted by KillerHog471

My only justification for the SEC teams scheduling weaklings all the time is we talk **** all the time to each other before the year, during the year, after the year, in the street, at a funeral, everywhere. I just want to relax a little and watch some obscure team get to travel to a nice stadium(except going to Neyland ), getting paid, having exposure, and being beat. It is one of the few times backups come out and there is no pressure except to win(which always doesn't happen) and to pad stats. When Arkansas has played OOC teams such as Texas and USC we have been throttled. But when we play Texas A&M it is awesome. It's liking living old rivalries. It is kinda cheap but if we scheduled the toughest games the other conferences would pick at something else.

If you want a nice warm feeling of non-hostility and unity conference-wide then schedule more BCS caliber opponents.

[KillerHog471]

Quote: Originally Posted by bassist250

If you want a nice warm feeling of non-hostility and unity conference-wide then schedule more BCS caliber opponents.

Not asking for anything.

My message was to convey my view on the "controversy" about not scheduling BCS opponents. You think your right and won't change your view on that. Most people want to think their team or conference is the greatest thing ever. And why does it matter what was in the past? The fact is that people are gonna bicker or whatever if we schedule more "BCS" quality opponents you will either a) say we didn't do it good enough b) you change your target c) or you complain some more about something else.

You know the pro's for non-bcs teams? More exposure, they get paid, get to travel to different places, and many more "pro's".The kids have fun and sometimes even get to upset people. We aren't doing it out of charity but it's not like they're held against their will. We schedule games to win them.

[jwmcards]

I mentioned this a while ago in a thread that came up when people went nuts about Notre Dame losing a star on the game. I think the SEC gets a lot of extra credit for being the SEC. Just like UNC & Duke get some extra credit in basketball sometimes because they're UNC & Duke.

I think the SEC is extremely top heavy. Yeah, they have the last 5 championships with Florida having 2, LSU, Alabama on probation, and Auburn may wind up having to pull a USC and give it back in a couple of years (which is just stupid, but that's another story).

In the last 10 years, it's pretty much ALWAYS the same few teams for SEC championship. Hell, even in the last 20 years, Florida has won the SEC almost half the time (8).

So while I freely admit they are a good conference, I don't think they're that much different from the other power conferences; pretty much the same top teams year in & year out with a an oddball thrown in every now and then, 3 or 4 decent teams, and then the usual bottom dwellers.

[dochalladay32]

Quote: Originally Posted by jwmcards

I mentioned this a while ago in a thread that came up when people went nuts about Notre Dame losing a star on the game. I think the SEC gets a lot of extra credit for being the SEC. Just like UNC & Duke get some extra credit in basketball sometimes because they're UNC & Duke. I think the SEC is extremely top heavy. Yeah, they have the last 5 championships with Florida having 2, LSU, Alabama on probation, and Auburn may wind up having to pull a USC and give it back in a couple of years (which is just stupid, but that's another story). In the last 10 years, it's pretty much ALWAYS the same few teams for SEC championship. Hell, even in the last 20 years, Florida has won the SEC almost half the time (8). So while I freely admit they are a good conference, I don't think they're that much different from the other power conferences; pretty much the same top teams year in & year out with a an oddball thrown in every now and then, 3 or 4 decent teams, and then the usual bottom dwellers.

8 different teams have been in the last 6 SEC title games. The only ones missing are the obvious Vandy and Kentucky and then Ole Miss and MSU, who have been up and down the last decade. Seems no different than any other conference that has it's yearly contenders, occasional contenders, and bottom-feeders. In that same span, only 4 teams have been in the Big 12 title game and only 6 teams in the ACC.

[buckeye02]

Are all the mods in the break room right now? This has gotten way off base.

[jwmcards]

Yeah, we have gone a tad askew. I'll put my last 2cents in and be done . However, on topic, I'm having a hard time with changing schedules in an online dynasty.

True, but it's still the same teams winning it. Florida won 3 of those 6. I'm just saying that it's similar to a lot things. The good, decent, the not so pretty. Here's an example going back to 2000 for the SEC Championship game.

2010 South Carolina vs Auburn
2009 Florida vs Alabama
2008 Florida vs Alabama
2007 Tennessee vs LSU
2006 Florida vs Arkansas
2005 Georgia vs LSU
2004 Tennesse vs Auburn
2003 Georgia vs LSU
2002 Georgia vs Arkansas
2001 Tennesse vs LSU
2000 Florida vs Auburn

In that span, you have Florida 4, LSU 4, Tenn 3, GA 3, Auburn 3, Ala 2, Ark 2, S Carolina 1.

So you still have 8 different teams making it, but 5 schools still make up 17 of those 24 involved.

Now, back to NCAA 12.