Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Pac 12 vs Big 12

Better conference?

  • Pac 10(12)

    Votes: 27 51.9%

  • Big 12

    Votes: 18 34.6%

  • Who gives a ****?

    Votes: 6 11.5%

  • It don't make a ****.

    Votes: 1 1.9%
  • Total voters
    52
NashBuff said:
Big 12 is the stronger conference...no debate necessary.

In the years 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, and 2009 saw a Big 12 team in the BCS title game. The PAC-10 saw three trips in the same span. One of USC's titles isn't without reading about Reggie Bush. The SEC had six berths compared to the Big 12's seven berths.
Click to expand...

You obviously value the top of the conference over the competitiveness and depth of the entire conference. Not saying that's wrong. But it does leave a lot of room for debate. Your stats just show that the Big 12 has a few elite programs in Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas.

With the Pac-12, you've got Cal that hasn't made a top bowl since the 50s. But only 3 other programs haven't made a BCS bowl game since 2000. And all of them did it in the 90s.

Arizona - 1994 Fiesta Bowl
Arizona State - 1997 Rose Bowl
Cal - [not since the 1950s]
Colorado - 2002 Fiesta Bowl
Oregon - 2002 Fiesta Bowl, 2010 Rose Bowl, 2011 BCS Championship
Oregon State - 2001 Fiesta Bowl
Stanford - 2000 Rose Bowl, 2011 Orange Bowl
UCLA - 1998 Rose Bowl
USC - 2003 & 2005 Orange Bowl, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008 & 2009 Rose Bowl
Utah - 2005 Fiesta Bowl, 2009 Sugar Bowl
Washington - 2001 Rose Bowl
Washington State - 2003 Rose Bowl

In the Big 12, you've got programs like Baylor, Iowa State, Missouri, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech that have never played in one.
 
NashBuff said:
Big 12 is the stronger conference...no debate necessary.

In the years 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, and 2009 saw a Big 12 team in the BCS title game. The PAC-10 saw three trips in the same span. One of USC's titles isn't without reading about Reggie Bush. The SEC had six berths compared to the Big 12's seven berths.
Click to expand...

As I said, they're around the same at the top, but the Pac is deeper. And the reason, as I said before, that the old Big 12 and SEC have so many teams in the title game is because they have 9 less conference losses a year (since they played an 8 game schedule instead of 9 as the Pac does) and their 4 non-conference games are riddled with patsies.

If your only metric is NCG appearances, then you're right. But that's a flawed metric.
 
Big 12 - 2 is designed around the Red River Showdown. The winner of that de facto conference championship has the inside track for a BCS bid and possible appearance in the mNC game. The casino is rigged against everyone else in the conference due to revenue disparity, tv time slot disparity, recruiting disparity, academic difference, and a back breaking facilities arms race. The foundation of the new Big 12 is shaky like an unbalanced tire that is designed to benefit the Whorn-Land Thief axis of fecal. The top two of the Mack 10 play each other in a neutral location and eleven underdogs. The top-heavy wobble if left unchecked will shake the conference apart. Missouri was begging to leave before, but held hostage along with Iowa State and the two Kansas teams. These schools are bound to the fickel television viewers of the Lone Star State, who basically couldn't care less about their welfare, other than fodder that somehow legitimizes the championship bids of UT, A&M, and those damn Sooners. Every school in the south has outlandish athletic facilities that place financial strains on their respective universities. Oklahoma State is one heart beat away from losing an irreplaceable booster. Baylor's power is centered on state politics. Texas Tech is too far from Interstate 35 to out recruit the big boys, no matter how nice their stadium might be. Tuberville can't feel too secure seeing how Tech found a way to force the Pirate to walk the plank. With Leach, it wasn't really about electrical cabinets and concussions; the mad genius who ran the spread to perfection was forced out due to money. Any one who argues the B12 is the better conference is clearly a Texas or OU fan who needs the rest of the conference prison brides to legitimize their title shot. End of story.
 
Unleash Hell said:
What reductions?:rolling_eyes:
Click to expand...

It has been rehashed over and over again. When the NCAA rules on USC's appeal in the near future (likely to reject it), then the Trojans are going to have scholarships reductions over the next three classes. They essentially loaded up this year and appealed their punishment to delay the reductions for a year.

In the 2011 class, they took 30 kids. The 2012 class will likely be 12-13.
 
Boulder Buff said:
It has been rehashed over and over again. When the NCAA rules on USC's appeal in the near future (likely to reject it), then the Trojans are going to have scholarships reductions over the next three classes. They essentially loaded up this year and appealed their punishment to delay the reductions for a year.

In the 2011 class, they took 30 kids. The 2012 class will likely be 12-13.
Click to expand...

Well, I have a 2 month old baby I've been watching so I haven't been around much to hear it rehashed over and over, so excuse me. Ok, thanks that makes sense now. I was wondering how the hell they signed 67 freshmen this year.
 
Unleash Hell said:
Well, I have a 2 month old baby I've been watching so I haven't been around much to hear it rehashed over and over, so excuse me. Ok, thanks that makes sense now. I was wondering how the hell they signed 67 freshmen this year.
Click to expand...

Which is not to say USC will be going away by any stretch, but they will be diminished. The biggest difference is teams like Washington, Cal, Stanford, and Oregon are getting some of the talent that USC had a stranglehold on during the Pete Carroll era.
 
The Big-12 has obviously been better over the last ten years top to bottom. Every team has made some noise during this decade. The Pac-10 has been the USC show. That being said, I believe USC would have trounced every Big-12 champion we've produced
 
buffaloflyer said:
The Big-12 has obviously been better over the last ten years top to bottom. Every team has made some noise during this decade. The Pac-10 has been the USC show. That being said, I believe USC would have trounced every Big-12 champion we've produced
Click to expand...

I'm guessing 2005 USC would have had trouble with 2005 Texas, but who knows.
 
Boulder Buff said:
I'm guessing 2005 USC would have had trouble with 2005 Texas, but who knows.
Click to expand...

That doesn't count because VY was an anomaly. While he was technically a longhorn, in actuality he was a god who should have not have been eligible according to NCAA restrictions on deities.
 
sackman said:
In football, I'd say the conferences are remarkably similar. One or two elite teams at the top, 4-5 decent teams in the middle, and some bottom feeders.
Click to expand...
Sacky, I have to disagree with you on that one. Like it or not the SEC will probably end up with 3 teams in the Top 10 final poll again, plus a few more in the Top 25. One thing is going to happen - the better teams have stockpiled so much talent that I don't think you are going to see any undefeated SEC teams for the next few years. I think OU Sooners have a good chance to go undefeated this year. I don't think any SEC team will do that - too much competition.
 
77buff said:
Sacky, I have to disagree with you on that one. Like it or not the SEC will probably end up with 3 teams in the Top 10 final poll again, plus a few more in the Top 25. One thing is going to happen - the better teams have stockpiled so much talent that I don't think you are going to see any undefeated SEC teams for the next few years. I think OU Sooners have a good chance to go undefeated this year. I don't think any SEC team will do that - too much competition.
Click to expand...

Dude, you are seriously brainwashed by the SEC that when someone isn't even talking about that conference you go to it. btw, the SEC wont be how they are now forever.
 
Unleash Hell said:
Dude, you are seriously brainwashed by the SEC that when someone isn't even talking about that conference you go to it. btw, the SEC wont be how they are now forever.
Click to expand...
I thought I said OU was going to go undefeated. As far as the PAC 10 and Big 12 go - both will win because of the increased competition in the SEC. You should be happy, while they are beating up on each other, the PAC 10 and Big 12 will move up in the polls. As far as the last part of your quote - I agree with you for the reasons I have already stated. My apology to Sacky - I misunderstood. I thought he was talking about conferences in general. My bad.
 
Last edited:
Maxer said:
As I said, they're around the same at the top, but the Pac is deeper. And the reason, as I said before, that the old Big 12 and SEC have so many teams in the title game is because they have 9 less conference losses a year (since they played an 8 game schedule instead of 9 as the Pac does) and their 4 non-conference games are riddled with patsies.

If your only metric is NCG appearances, then you're right. But that's a flawed metric.
Click to expand...

I did point out in the past that every Pac-12 team has won their conference within the last 18 years while NO OTHER conference in the land has done that.
 
NashBuff said:
I did point out in the past that every Pac-12 team has won their conference within the last 18 years while NO OTHER conference in the land has done that.
Click to expand...

Thats a bit misleading...I don't consider the Sundevils co-champions with USC in 2007 after the trojans humiliated them on their home turf 44-24

Same in 2006, Cal loses 23-9 to USC but is crowned co champion

2002 - Wazoo beats USC 30-27 but shares the conference title with them?

good teams no doubt, but the conference championship should not be split when their has always been a head to head matchup.
 
Don't care. All that matters is that the 12pac is better for CU. We are hitched to the rising star instead of the aging cowtowns of the midwest.
 
2010 Active NFL Players by Conference

SEC - 22.4 per member
B10 - 19.7
ACC - 19.1
P10 - 18.2
B12 - 15.3
BEC - 11.9

MWC - 7.9
WAC - 6.0
CUSA- 5.1
MAC - 4.4
SBC - 2.9
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top