By your logic, Arizona is the 2nd best PAC 12 team. So is Wisconsin the Big 10's 2nd best? Missouri in the SEC? Was UCLA better than Oregon in 2012? How about ASU in 2013?
PM to Boobie
- Thread starter RoadDawg55
- Start date
I actually think Missouri is second best by default if nothing else. Wisconsin and Michigan State are clearly the second best in the B1G.
Arizona has a clear logical on the field claim to second in the PAC. Not sure why that is so difficult to accept.
Arizona has a clear logical on the field claim to second in the PAC. Not sure why that is so difficult to accept.
They beat Oregon for sure, but they were gifted wins by Cal and us (sorry Damone)
You can do that for every team. That's why I'll stick with what actually happened
You will stick with it because you need to hang onto anything to continue the PAC 12 sucks mantra.
I think I was quite clear as to why I am sticking with it. I don't insist that everyone agrees. They can be wrong. It's cool.
I'd say it if Arizona had won.
dnc
New Fish
Record against Pac12 teams? Arizona was second best.
National ranking? Arizona was second best.
Placement in conference bowel hierarchy? Arizona was second best.
Arizona was the second best team in the conference by every possible metric. This isn't some statistical fluke or relic of being in a worse division. They were the second best Pac12 team this year.
BallSacked
New Fish
Such a fag Bannon
If you can't dig a little deeper to see they weren't the 2nd best team, I can't help you. They won't end up ranked 2nd best. I was unaware bowl games don't count. There are five Pac 12 teams ranked 10-25, including two Arizona lost against.
Missouri made the SEC title game, therefore they are better than Georgia, even though Georgia beat them 34-0 in Missouri.
Last edited:
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Arizona isn't the second best team because it won the South. Arizona is the second best team because it won the South AND because every but Oregon in the North is clearly worse than Arizona.
If you somehow want to say that wins over UW, UCLA, and Maryland somehow make Stanford the second best team in the conference, you hate the Pac-12 more than I do.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
It appears that there are a lot of Sark clones on this bored who think that almost winning games means more than actually winning games.
So what happens on the field matters?
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Arizona got a much tougher opponent than USC and Stanford did, but Doogs hate facts.
I didn't know you considered yourself a doog?
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
You've been hating facts all over this thread. I'm glad you think beating Maryland somehow proves Stanford is a good team though.
BallSacked
New Fish
Stanford was shit early in the year and lost games. Now they look like the 2nd best team in the Pac12
Arkansas was shit early in the year and lost games. Now they look like the 2nd(?) best team in the SEC
Beating Maryland is not a big fucking deal, neither is beating Texas. Both those teams seasons were really similar.
It's this FS logic that prevented Carroll's SC from ass fucking the SEC. Great teams get better as the season progresses, that's when the best football is played by the most cohesive units.
Zona is not the second best team in the Pac, fuck your records. Don James sucked as head coach until january 1992 too.
Zona is not the second best team in the Pac, fuck your records. Don James sucked as head coach until january 1992 too.