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

[Saul Good]

Let's do it.

[Sassy Squatch]

Originally Posted by Bambi

I would have paid money to have mizzou's 2013 schedule. Talk about soft...

Accordng to your butt buddy Prison Bitchs Sagarin scale, Kansas had the 28th SOS while MU had the 24th. Soft indeed.

[kchero]

Originally Posted by Superturtle

Accordng to your butt buddy Prison Bitchs Sagarin scale, Kansas had the 28th SOS while MU had the 24th. Soft indeed.

Time for hypocrite, to find something else to troll...ass handed to him again

[Al Bundy]

Originally Posted by Bambi

I would have paid money to have mizzou's 2013 schedule. Talk about soft...

KU still would have lost all those games, and gotten their asses handed to them in most.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by TomBarndtsTwin

The difference is Mizzou "avoids" playing those teams because they're in the SEC East and the SEC sets the schedule.

KU avoids playing MU because they're butthurt and cowards. Plain and simple.

It's been so rewarding watching Mizzouchebags explain how conference scheduling works. Back in 2007, they didn't understand it apparently. But now they do. It's great theatre watching the 180-degree change in logic.

[TomBarndtsTwin]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

It's been so rewarding watching Mizzouchebags explain how conference scheduling works. Back in 2007, they didn't understand it apparently. But now they do. It's great theatre watching the 180-degree change in logic.

Shiny. Red. Ball.


Divert, divert, divert . . . .

[blake5676]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

It's been so rewarding watching Mizzouchebags explain how conference scheduling works. Back in 2007, they didn't understand it apparently. But now they do. It's great theatre watching the 180-degree change in logic.

Since cold hard facts usually shut you imaginary birds up until you move on to the next inaccuracy, let's review some indisputable numbers:

Kansas SOS 2007: 74
Mizzou SOS 2007: 25
Mizzou SOS 2013: 24

In case you can't add, Mizzou's SOS this year was 50 spots higher than your "magical" year.

Kansas opponents in 2007
Central Michigan: 8-6 with a 86 SOS
SE Louisiana: 3-8 with a 151 SOS
Toledo: 5-7 with a 100 SOS
Florida International: 1-11 with a 66 SOS ***REAL impressive non-con there***
Kansas State: 5-7 with a 38 SOS and 3-5 in Big 12 play
Baylor: 3-9 with a 39 SOS and 0-8 in Big 12 play
Colorado: 6-7 with a 14 SOS and 4-4 in Big 12 play
Texas A&M: 7-6 with a 26 SOS and 4-4 in Big 12 play
Nebraska: 5-7 with a 4 SOS and 2-6 in Big 12 play
Oklahoma St: 7-6 with a 18 SOS and 4-4 in Big 12 play
Iowa St: 3-9 with a 20 SOS and 2-6 in Big 12 play
Missouri: 12-2 with a 25 SOS and 7-1 in Big 12 play
Virginia Tech: 11-3 with a 36 SOS

So as a recap you beat 4 teams with a winning record in 2007 (Cen Mich, A&M, Ok St, V Tech). The three teams you DID NOT play in conference this year were Texas (10-3/5-3) Oklahoma (11-3/6-2) and Texas Tech (9-4/4-4). There is your evidence. The 3 teams you played from the South were far and away the 3 worst teams that year. Nobody you played from the north and beat finished the year above .500. There is ZERO combinations of scheduling that could have resulted in an easier path.

Missouri oppenents in 2013
Murray St: 6-6 with a 126 SOS
Toledo: 7-5 with a 77 SOS
@Indiana: 5-7 with a 36 SOS
Arkansas St: 8-5 with a 110 SOS ****also not a murderer's row, but definitely better...also played one on the road while all 4 KU were home***
Vanderbilt: 9-4 with a 50 SOS and 4-4 in SEC
Georgia: 8-5 with a 8 SOS and 5-3 in SEC
Florida: 4-8 with a 19 SOS and 3-5 in SEC
South Carolina: 11-2 with a 6 SOS and 6-2 in SEC
Tennessee: 5-7 with a 10 SOS and 2-6 in SEC
Kentucky: 2-10 with a 14 SOS and 0-8 in SEC
Ole Miss: 8-5 with a 9 SOS and 3-5 in SEC
Texas A&M: 9-4 with a 26 SOS and 4-4 in SEC
Auburn: 12-2 with a 13 SOS and 7-1 in SEC
Oklahoma St: 10-3 with a 22 SOS and 7-2 in Big 12

Mizzou beat 7 teams that finished the year with a winning record. The teams they did NOT play in the SEC were Alabama (11-2/7-1) Arkansas (3-9/0-8) LSU (10-3/5-3) and Miss St (7-6/3-5). We played the 1,4,5,6 teams out of 7 in the SEC West. We missed the 2,3 and 7th teams.

So for a recap, so we can put your argument to bed as the crap it really is:

KU's dream season saw them go 11-1 and finish the year ranked #7 (Mizzou ranked #4 that year) in the country. They beat one ranked team, Virginia Tech and lost to the only ranked team they played in conference play, Mizzou. They had an absolutely pathetic non-con schedule where they never left the comfort of their home. They missed the 1,2,3 teams in the South, instead playing against the absolute easiest possible combinations of teams. All of this equaled a 74th ranked strength of schedule. And after this "perfect storm" of a season, things return to normal on campus and you're now back to setting other records, only this time they involve losing 20 something consecutive conference games and barely even having what you could call an actual football team.

Mizzou finishes 2013 with ANOTHER top 5 ranking in the country. They were AGAIN one win away from playing in the national championship. Our SOS was 24 this year, compared to 74 for KU in 2007. We played a tougher non-con, had a much more difficult conference schedule against better opponents. We beat multiple ranked opponents and played in a conference who's overall SOS easily trumps that of the Big 12 in 2007.

We beat you AND finished with a higher ranking in your golden year, all while playing a more difficult schedule. We did even better this year.

Please help me out and explain any other way to interpret all of these actual FACTS....

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by blake5676

Since cold hard facts usually shut you imaginary birds up until you move on to the next inaccuracy, let's review some indisputable numbers:

Kansas SOS 2007: 74
Mizzou SOS 2007: 25
Mizzou SOS 2013: 24

In case you can't add, Mizzou's SOS this year was 50 spots higher than your "magical" year.

Kansas opponents in 2007
Central Michigan: 8-6 with a 86 SOS
SE Louisiana: 3-8 with a 151 SOS
Toledo: 5-7 with a 100 SOS
Florida International: 1-11 with a 66 SOS ***REAL impressive non-con there***
Kansas State: 5-7 with a 38 SOS and 3-5 in Big 12 play
Baylor: 3-9 with a 39 SOS and 0-8 in Big 12 play
Colorado: 6-7 with a 14 SOS and 4-4 in Big 12 play
Texas A&M: 7-6 with a 26 SOS and 4-4 in Big 12 play
Nebraska: 5-7 with a 4 SOS and 2-6 in Big 12 play
Oklahoma St: 7-6 with a 18 SOS and 4-4 in Big 12 play
Iowa St: 3-9 with a 20 SOS and 2-6 in Big 12 play
Missouri: 12-2 with a 25 SOS and 7-1 in Big 12 play
Virginia Tech: 11-3 with a 36 SOS

So as a recap you beat 4 teams with a winning record in 2007 (Cen Mich, A&M, Ok St, V Tech). The three teams you DID NOT play in conference this year were Texas (10-3/5-3) Oklahoma (11-3/6-2) and Texas Tech (9-4/4-4). There is your evidence. The 3 teams you played from the South were far and away the 3 worst teams that year. Nobody you played from the north and beat finished the year above .500. There is ZERO combinations of scheduling that could have resulted in an easier path.

Missouri oppenents in 2013
Murray St: 6-6 with a 126 SOS
Toledo: 7-5 with a 77 SOS
@Indiana: 5-7 with a 36 SOS
Arkansas St: 8-5 with a 110 SOS ****also not a murderer's row, but definitely better...also played one on the road while all 4 KU were home***
Vanderbilt: 9-4 with a 50 SOS and 4-4 in SEC
Georgia: 8-5 with a 8 SOS and 5-3 in SEC
Florida: 4-8 with a 19 SOS and 3-5 in SEC
South Carolina: 11-2 with a 6 SOS and 6-2 in SEC
Tennessee: 5-7 with a 10 SOS and 2-6 in SEC
Kentucky: 2-10 with a 14 SOS and 0-8 in SEC
Ole Miss: 8-5 with a 9 SOS and 3-5 in SEC
Texas A&M: 9-4 with a 26 SOS and 4-4 in SEC
Auburn: 12-2 with a 13 SOS and 7-1 in SEC
Oklahoma St: 10-3 with a 22 SOS and 7-2 in Big 12

Mizzou beat 7 teams that finished the year with a winning record. The teams they did NOT play in the SEC were Alabama (11-2/7-1) Arkansas (3-9/0-8) LSU (10-3/5-3) and Miss St (7-6/3-5). We played the 1,4,5,6 teams out of 7 in the SEC West. We missed the 2,3 and 7th teams.

So for a recap, so we can put your argument to bed as the crap it really is:

KU's dream season saw them go 11-1 and finish the year ranked #7 (Mizzou ranked #4 that year) in the country. They beat one ranked team, Virginia Tech and lost to the only ranked team they played in conference play, Mizzou. They had an absolutely pathetic non-con schedule where they never left the comfort of their home. They missed the 1,2,3 teams in the South, instead playing against the absolute easiest possible combinations of teams. All of this equaled a 74th ranked strength of schedule. And after this "perfect storm" of a season, things return to normal on campus and you're now back to setting other records, only this time they involve losing 20 something consecutive conference games and barely even having what you could call an actual football team.

Mizzou finishes 2013 with ANOTHER top 5 ranking in the country. They were AGAIN one win away from playing in the national championship. Our SOS was 24 this year, compared to 74 for KU in 2007. We played a tougher non-con, had a much more difficult conference schedule against better opponents. We beat multiple ranked opponents and played in a conference who's overall SOS easily trumps that of the Big 12 in 2007.

We beat you AND finished with a higher ranking in your golden year, all while playing a more difficult schedule. We did even better this year.

Please help me out and explain any other way to interpret all of these actual FACTS....

I don't think anyone has ever disputed that MU was the "better team" in 2007. Kansas was the better team the next year in 2008.

KU was awarded the Orange Bowl because they are a bigger draw nationally. No one here has ever changed on that position.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

It's been so rewarding watching Mizzouchebags explain how conference scheduling works. Back in 2007, they didn't understand it apparently. But now they do. It's great theatre watching the 180-degree change in logic.

From mu fans for the last 5 years all I've heard is "you didn't have to play Texas, OU, etc etc"

Not one person on the MU side has ever brought up the same "dream scenario" happened for them this year.

Unfortunately on the biggest stage it was a whitewash for Auburn which showed what would have happened this season if they would have had to play Auburn, LSU and Alabama.

It keeps Pinkel there for another decade which I know MU fans are thrilled about.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by Bambi

I don't think anyone has ever disputed that MU was the "better team" in 2007. Kansas was the better team the next year in 2008.

KU was awarded the Orange Bowl because they are a bigger draw nationally. No one here has ever changed on that position.

Mizzou was 4th in the BCS computers and Kansas was 5th so I can see why they felt they should have been selected. It's too bad for them that Illinois got into a BCS Bowl when they didn't. They were hoping a conference change would get them better protection when bowl selections were made, but unfortunately they ended up in the exact same place: picking Cotton.

[TribalElder]

KU bought the orange bowl after Mizzou refused to commit to ticket purchases

[blake5676]

Originally Posted by Bambi

I don't think anyone has ever disputed that MU was the "better team" in 2007. Kansas was the better team the next year in 2008.

KU was awarded the Orange Bowl because they are a bigger draw nationally. No one here has ever changed on that position.

I'd argue that NEITHER team was all that good in 2008, even though you're deflecting because no one ever discusses that year in this thread or just in general.

But to show you again:

2007 Mizzou 12-2 with the 25 ranked SOS ***finished year #4 in country
2008 Mizzou 10-4 with the 45 ranked SOS ***finished year #19 in country

2007 Kansas 11-1 with the 74 ranked SOS ***finished year #7 in country
2008 Kansas 8-5 with the 39 ranked SOS ***finished year....UNRANKED

[blake5676]

Originally Posted by Bambi

From mu fans for the last 5 years all I've heard is "you didn't have to play Texas, OU, etc etc"

Not one person on the MU side has ever brought up the same "dream scenario" happened for them this year.

Unfortunately on the biggest stage it was a whitewash for Auburn which showed what would have happened this season if they would have had to play Auburn, LSU and Alabama.

It keeps Pinkel there for another decade which I know MU fans are thrilled about.

Which part of 74<24 is so difficult for you to understand? Arguing against facts laid out in front of you is cute.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by blake5676

Which part of 74<24 is so difficult for you to understand? Arguing against facts laid out in front of you is cute.

I don't really care about 2007. I'm talking about this year. I would have loved for KU to avoid the football flagships this year like MU did.

However that's impossible being that in the Big 12 there is no dodging. The way the game is supposed to be played.

[Prison Bitch]

Mizzou fans spend more time worrying about going Cotton in 2007 than 2013. It's really weird. They promised the SEC wouldn't treat them like "Big Bevo" did but look now.

[kchero]

They keep getting their ass handed to them with legitimate facts and they keep defecting and trying something else until they eventually go back to the same statement thus repeating the cycle again and again.