****The Official NEW new new conference realignment & shit talk thread****

[Saul Good]

Let's do it.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Mizzou has 3 wins this year that tell me they are absolutely legit.

Beating Ol' Miss on the road and really doing so in convincing fashion. The 14 point score was closer than the game; it never felt like Mizzou was challenged in that game.

The A&M win over an angry Manziel looking to put his stamp on his career.

The Vandy win. They housed an 8-4 football team on the road. That game was a slaughter and another one where Mizzou dicked around and let the score get a little closer than it was.

Mizzou's legitimately good. In fact, I'm not ready to say they're not as good as FSU. FSU has one good win and have otherwise dominated an awful ACC.

Any Saturday a team can have a bad game and watch their season go up in a puff of smoke. It could happen this Saturday as well. But Missouri is still a very good football team. They have a plus quarterback and the best group of skill position players (WR and RBs) in the country. If anyone disagrees with me there, go ahead and make your argument because I don't see anybody with the size, speed and skill, not to mention depth, that Mizzou has at WR and at RB. Going 5 deep with potential NFL WRs and 3 deep with HR hitters at RB is pretty damn uncommon.

We have a solid LB corps, the best DEs in the conference (arguably the country) and an experienced, healthy OL. Missouri is legitimately good.

I thought we were challenged plenty. OM had the ball inside the 20 three different times and got no points. Mizzou to their credit answered all of them.

IDK about FSU. They haven't played a defense yet worth anything but they look the part.

Aub has as impressive a resume as anyone in CFB.

Manziel didn't look himself...there must be something to him being hurt. Regardless MU held him to his lowest total yardage output to date & I largely agree w/ what you said about that game & the Vandy game.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Cochise

It's really too bad that the automatic qualifier conferences can't have more than two teams, but that's a shortcoming of the BCS system. For this season, the fact that the smouldering wreck of the Big East is still automatic qualifier is a joke.

It will sting for Missouri to get left out while UCF gets in because of the moronic BCS structure if that's the way it plays out. But with the playoff coming and the future bright for our program, I don't think it's that big of a deal. Either you are in the title game or you're not.

You have to see the BCS for what it is. It doesn't pit ALL of the best teams due to the qualifiers. That's not to say it isn't a great accomplishment to get there but getting left out so to speak doesn't necessarily speak to the type of season one team had vs another or who's better.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

Good to see you got the point on this, because some MU fans are having trouble with it.

It's not really comparable to '07 as MU wouldn't have beaten either school in that scenario.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

It's not really comparable to '07 as MU wouldn't have beaten either school in that scenario.

It's exactly and perfectly comparable. Identical in fact. If Auburn gets leapfrogged by Alabama it's 2007 all over again. What will the SEC do?

[warpaint*]

Oh...well it is for them. I was just thinking from MU's POV sorry. I'm sure Bammer would jump them. Why should I care?

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

It's exactly and perfectly comparable. Identical in fact. If Auburn gets leapfrogged by Alabama it's 2007 all over again. What will the SEC do?

It is not exactly comparable. Even after MU lost in the Big 12 Championship game they were still ranked ahead of KU in all the polls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NC...tball_rankings

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

Oh...well it is for them. I was just thinking from MU's POV sorry. I'm sure Bammer would jump them. Why should I care?

Exactly the point, nobody cares. Just like nobody cared in 2007. There is no secret conspiracy by the conferences, no secret buyouts or bribes by bowl officials

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

Exactly the point, nobody cares. Just like nobody cared in 2007. There is no secret conspiracy by the conferences, no secret buyouts or bribes by bowl officials

The schools involved care, we wouldn't be in that scenario.

Conspiracy? That's absurd but ticket guarantees happen routinely. It's not a conspiracy nor was it unique to KU & the OB in '07 (I can't tell for sure if you're comment has to do w/ KU's supposed 30k ticket guarantee or whatever it was), but it's how business is done in that regard. Schools regularly guarantee an allotment of ticket purchases for a bowl game whether they can actually sell them or not. In fact I would venture to say it happens in the case of every bowl it's written into the contracts, just a matter of haggling on the #'s.

Obviously it's conjecture if that is what tipped the scales in KU's favor to get that bid. No one will ever actually be able to prove that one way or the other but it would or could certainly be enough motivation for a bowl to pick one school over another depending on circumstances that they necessarily wouldn't have otherwise. It would speak to Alden and the MU AD as a whole getting beat to the punch by Perkins and the KU AD if it did occur and frankly wouldn't surprise me although to be honest that's driven in part by my less than sterling opinion of Mike Alden.

Too many people don't understand or accept how bowls work and also have bought into this BCS end all bill of goods. Is Central Fla better than Mich St b/c the latter will be in the CapOne and the former the Sugar?! Or South Carolina who beat them but will be in the CapOne or Outback Bowl! Obviously not.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

It is not exactly comparable. Even after MU lost in the Big 12 Championship game they were still ranked ahead of KU in all the polls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NC...tball_rankings

Exactly. Missouri was ranked ahead of Kansas in the BCS and beat Kansas head to head, which is the root of the controversy. PB doesn't seem to remember that.

[Ebolapox]

Originally Posted by Cochise

Exactly. Missouri was ranked ahead of Kansas in the BCS and beat Kansas head to head, which is the root of the controversy. PB doesn't seem to remember that.

how convenient

[Pasta Little Brioni]

The winner of the SEC title game is the national champ in my mind

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by PGM

The winner of the SEC title game is the national champ in my mind

Eyeballin' it again?

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Cochise

Exactly. Missouri was ranked ahead of Kansas in the BCS and beat Kansas head to head, which is the root of the controversy. PB doesn't seem to remember that.

That is probably why he has ignored it

[Pitt Gorilla]

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by Cochise

Exactly. Missouri was ranked ahead of Kansas in the BCS and beat Kansas head to head, which is the root of the controversy. PB doesn't seem to remember that.

Auburn beat Ala head to head so that's already addressed. If you're saying head to head doesn't matter now as with this, then that's a new argument I never heard in 2007.

Obviously there's the division win plus the fact Auburn has to go play again while Bama sits home arguments. Got those covered. So we are left with polls. We don't know what the polls will be yet so it's speculation. I'll go along that Auburn will likely fall below but it won't be by much at all and it's tight just like 2007. The situations can't be more similar.