Go Back   Sports Central Message Boards > Collegiate Sports Discussion > College Football

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-25-2003, 02:33 PM   #1
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default Why the Big 8/12 was a better conference then the SEC from 1994-99...

Ok Joey, this is war here...LOL. I can't concede anything to the SEC. They dodge teams and fall into greatness all the time. So I am going to prove you wrong on why the Big 8/12 were better then the SEC during the time frame you say otherwise. And don't worry, I have the Big 8 to 12 time period under intense scrutiny, as not to make a mistake in adding or substracting things when those teams weren't in it yet. Ratios will be given to make it fair, as the SEC had 4 more teams for two years in this time frame.

1.Number of times a team from their conference finished in the top 25 in BOTH polls from 94-99( I don't think the Auburn " cheatin' Tigers should get a nod here for being in one poll and not the other)

SEC............28 out of 72 possible teams, .388888%
Big 8/12.....25 out of 64 possible teams, .390625%

WINNER...Big 8/12, but close, and I'll concede it is pretty much a wash when looking at it in the big picture.

2. National Champions

SEC..........2
Big 8/12...3

WINNER...Big 8/12

3. Teams that finished ranked in the Top 10 IN ATLEST ONE POLL..

SEC..........13 out of 72 possible teams, 18%
Big 8/12...13 out of 64 possible teams, 20%

WINNER...Big 8/12

4. SEC vs. Big 8/12 head to head in bowl games...

Big 8/12 4-3 over SEC

WINNER...BIG 8/12
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2003, 02:58 PM   #2
tigereyes33
War Damn Eagle!!!!
 
tigereyes33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dunwoody, GA
Posts: 663
tigereyes33 is on a distinguished road
Default

Buckeye, most sportwriters over the years have said the SEC was the best conference. Now, you can pull up all the stats you want, but the problem with that is if the SEC is better, than they play better teams within their conference, so they may come out with the same record or similar ranking as a school from some other conference simply because a team with 3 losses or so just can't be in the top ten.

Maybe NCAA football should do what basketball does, except make an SEC vs. Big Ten challenge. Because over the years of the ACC vs. Big Ten challenge, we have now seen that the ACC is a level above the big ten in basketball. I say they should settle it that way in football on every team's opening game. It would be really fun, because these teams in the SEC and Big Ten aren't playing against the same opponents, so to compare stats is somewhat pointless. It makes sense to compare stats between in conference teams because they play against the same teams.

But to compare teams out of conference by stats and rankings just seems pretty dumb to me. Especially when the stats are close like the ones you are comparing. Like teams finishing in the top 10 in each conference has a difference of 2%. That is so close, that it doesn't even matter because the SEC may be playing better teams in conference which will bring the good teams down in the rankings. And if you add on one or two years to that span, Alabama won the title in 92, so it's tied in the National Championship category.

All of the stats you put up were incredibly close and none of those prove a thing because of how close they are. I mean 1% more in the top 25, 2% more in the top 10, one more national title, and one more head to head win means nothing it is so close.
__________________
2 in a row over those dawgs
AND 4 IN A ROW OVER THE TIDE!!!!!!!!
Doesn't get any better than that
tigereyes33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2003, 03:45 PM   #3
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

My point exactly 33...so how was the SEC a " better" conference then the Big 8/12 during this time if the stats are so close?
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2003, 03:48 PM   #4
tigereyes33
War Damn Eagle!!!!
 
tigereyes33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Dunwoody, GA
Posts: 663
tigereyes33 is on a distinguished road
Default

It is impossible to tell through stats. And I have watched many SEC games and Big Ten games and the SEC teams just look better and seem like they had better teams.
__________________
2 in a row over those dawgs
AND 4 IN A ROW OVER THE TIDE!!!!!!!!
Doesn't get any better than that
tigereyes33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2003, 04:05 PM   #5
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Well then that's just opinion 33. And I don't agree with it. Joey likes to point to the SEC's rankings, national titles, and bowl wins, however the SEC is comparable to the Big 8/12 in these categories. The thing is, over the years, the Big 8/12 has been EVEN WORSE then the SEC when scheduling creampuffs. See, that's how you get all that attention and high rankings.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2003, 04:08 PM   #6
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

This last point that 78 makes
Quote:
The thing is, over the years, the Big 8/12 has been EVEN WORSE then the SEC when scheduling creampuffs. See, that's how you get all that attention and high rankings.
just doesn't seem to be well understood in the southern quandrant of the nation, nor in the plains and Rockies. I don't think this point can be drummed home hard enough.

Look at how teams have generally attained national championship status, and how they generally attain Top-whatever finishes. With one exception (and this only sometimes, but far more often than not, no matter how hard it is for me to admit), teams play soft/uncontrollable-conference schedules. The Big 12 powers have always had at least five and sometimes 9 truly embarrassingly bad teams to thrash in attaining a regular season Top 5 finish. The SEC generally has 6 to 8 non-starters that two and sometimes three teams beat up on. These two conferences have dominated the polling for all the time I've been alive (with the Pac 10 usually a non-issue, the Big 10 almost always decried as having a "down year," and the Big East having only one team a year show that they have TRUE national merit; don't bring up the ACC, bum of the Big 6 conferences). And they've done it on the backs of La-Monroe (78's favorite minor school whipping boy), and Tulsa. Having 5 wins in week two of October counts more to the sportswriters (who, let's face it, don't know anymore than we do) with AP votes than playing some teams of substance and having only three wins. Pollsters from Miami have a strong compunction to vote Miami #1 sight-unseen, and when the Canes drop two in the first month, they immediately job up to Tallahassee or Gainesville and vote them #1, sight-unseen.
Coaches quit, if they ever did, voting when ESPN took over, and athletics departments made whatever wierd decisions regarding rankings that helped their case that week.

At the end of the day, the polls really don't mean anything. Which is why the BCS is such a sham.

I'll say this for the BCS, though. AT LEAST they have a strength of schedule component to the ranking.

Nebraska and Oklahoma always had tons of wins, so they were always ranked highly.

Florida and Florida State always had tons of wins, so they were always ranked highly.

I'm not saying that these schools didn't churn out quality teams. I'm saying they left the case unfinished by failing to play quality opposition.

Joey keeps pointing to his Gators, which is fine. But he neglects the Big Red powerhouse during the 94-99 year span. To be specific, Big Red was a combined 70-7 over those six years. Grant that OU was down in this period, but that the K State juggernaut was turning in its one and two-loss seasons during this period, as well; most of their losses to Nebraska, of course.
Florida was 63-12-1, with a demonstrative loss to Big Red in 1995.

Now, I will present the real rationale for the SEC ducking big-time non-conference games. IT COSTS TOO MUCH TO TRAVEL. If you recognize that college football is a business, and you have at least as good a chance of making a top bowl by staying home, or nearby, and not scheduling national powers outside of your conference, what motivation is there to do so? Once a reputation is built, why spend the money to travel, when you can goad impoverished small schools to coming to your house for a pounding?

So, this rationale works for Nebraska and Oklahoma in the mid-late 90s, because they know without looking that one or both will be in the preseason Top 5. Why jeopardize a ranking by scheduling tough non-conference games when its more profitable to destroy Tulsa or Eastern Illinois? This same period of the '90s, though, such behavior doesn't wash for FSU and Florida. But, note that the majority of non-conference scheduling in the SEC (and everywhere throughout the Big 4+2) is of home opponents, and when travel is required, that travel stays relatively nearby. Florida doesn't do much work across the Mississippi River, and rarely if ever finds itself north of the Mason-Dixon Line.

A similar geography actually appears in the OSU research I've done, although it's kind of wierd. The Buckeyes like to stay home, but when they do travel, it's to the West Coast or right next door, like to Cincy, or Akron, or the occasional trip 78 never made into WV. I'd venture a guess that OSU west coast trips are sponsored by the Pac 10 opponents they play when they make the trip.

Remember, like it or not, it's a business. And, like it or not, sportswriters don't have a better idea than any of us regarding who's #what any given week. IF they did have a truly better idea, would there have been any debate about whether Nebraska deserved their shot against Miami in 2001. IF they truly had a better idea about anything, would there be an incessant crying for playoffs? Oh, wait. Of course there would be, since the ones crying for it are the ones who are in line to make the most money.

Dave
__________________
mountaineerdave on twitter
mountaineerdavem on AIM
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2003, 09:13 PM   #7
I OWN THIS
The True Titan
 
I OWN THIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Southaven, Mississippi
Posts: 2,634
I OWN THIS is on a distinguished road
Default

Dave, I agree that Nebraska was the best team during that time span. I would put Florida as the #3 team during that span behind both Nebraska and FSU, and that is something I posted in another thread last night.

I am not sure if I would say Florida and FSU did not play quality competition during that span, therefore, leaving the case unfinished as you put it. But I do see a few things the way you do after your last post.

Florida will probably never schedule more than 2 good teams out of conference now that every team in college football can schedule 4 out of conference games. Florida will pretty much always play 2 cupcakes every season, and I have no problem with that, for I think their schedule is pretty solid overall with a tough conference schedule. You are right that Florida never goes to the West Coast and basically never North either, and truth be told, Florida never really went anywhere during the 90s but to Doak Campbell Stadium to play FSU. I do buy your rationale about SEC teams avoiding tough opposition from certain parts of the country due to cost of travel. The SEC feels as though they have formed an elite conference, that being said, they don't have to prove anything by playing strong opposition in nearly every out of conference football game. So, we are on the same page on a few things.

I will go back and state that even though Florida didn't travel to decent schools and play on the road in the 90s, only scheduled one good opponent out of conference every year basically, they still had some of the toughest overall schedules in college football during that span.

Nebraska never had to run across a FSU in non conference game every season. We all knew that if Nebraska didn't lose within their conference, that there was no way they were going to lose. Nebraska, although not playing tough competition during the season, proved that when they did play tough competition in bowl games, they destroyed them and were very competitive. I do also feel that the competition within the SEC was a little bit tougher than that of the Big 12 during that time frame.

So, I think we agree that we are not saying these teams were not great, but we would have liked to have seen them play better competition out of conference wise. We also think they could have beat those out of conference opponents, but because they did not play them, that left the door open for those to say they didn't play tough teams out of conference.

Florida has built themselves a great reputation, and until that reputation is lost, they won't be traveling to UCLA, Virginia Tech, or Texas. Once they start to become a middle of the pack team again, if that ever happens, then they might feel compelled to schedule tougher teams to get themselves back into the national spotlight if the SEC lets them. I am not sure the SEC wants them to schedule tough out of conference opponents every game like you said Dave. I do feel that the SEC does want the best records their teams can have, and by saying that they only let the schools within their conference play in rivalry games out of conference(which are tough), and then cupcakes the rest of the way. Like you said, their product has proved itself over the years, so why go out and prove themselves, take losses during the season, when they can have great records and beat those tough teams in bowl games for money and national prestige right?

Joey
__________________
Tennesse Titans Superbowl Champs 2003...Steve Mcnair for NFL MVP...Hopefully the Gators can compete in the SEC
I OWN THIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2003, 11:19 AM   #8
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

A few random thoughts here...

Joey and Dave, don't forget about Kordell's Colorado teams in the 94 and 95 campaigns. Big Red handed Colorado their only loss of the season once during the mid 90s, Florida once in the blowout Natl. Title game, and did the same to K St. TWICE. They handed Tennesse their only loss of the season as well one year. That is very impressive to me. Giving FIVE teams their only loss of the season over a 6 year span 94-99. Your Gators did just that too Joey, five times, however there did it to Bama once, FSU TWO times ( that one time in the rematch for the Natl. Title), and Tennessee TWICE. Good showing there.

Dave...

AGREE completely on the polls, however Joey has been using them heavily in his arguments here, so I am trying to beat him at his own game basically...LOL.

Joey...

Sure the SEC can do as they please and rack up the wins like you say. It's fine, but don't expect me to give them more credit then they already get and I will call them out from time to time.

What makes this debate interesting Joey is the fact that Florida, the top SEC dog for the better part of the 94-99 era, has just now gone to scheduling both MIAMI and FSU. Now, that is a good showing for them. And to be honest with you, I think they may have gone overboard there a little. Historically, they scheduled FSU and 2 cupcakes, and now have got FSU and Miami now. I would let them off the hook with the regular FSU battle, a cupcake, and 2 average schools from the Big East or Big Ten or whoever else.

The thing is Joey, since this has taken place, Florida has fallen off the map. That's what happens when you start to schedule harder.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2003, 12:25 PM   #9
I OWN THIS
The True Titan
 
I OWN THIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Southaven, Mississippi
Posts: 2,634
I OWN THIS is on a distinguished road
Default

Florida has not fallen off the map because they scheduled tougher teams Buckeye. They have fallen off the map because they are not as good as they once were. I wish more than anything that Florida would have scheduled Miami, FSU and whoever else in the 90s, because I know they could have beaten most of them on a consistent basis. It just so happens that now Florida is not that good, but are scheduling tougher competition at the same time. Bad timing if you ask me, but like we have discussed on here before, scheduling is done way in advance, and who knew Florida would not be good at this point and that Spurrier was going to leave.

Buckeye, Nebraska never gave Tennessee their only loss of a season. UT played Nebraska in 1997 after losing to Florida earlier in the year, and UT's final record that year was 11-2. UT played Nebraska again in 1999 and lost to them, but that was after losing to Florida and Arkansas during the season.

Florida only gave UT their only loss in 1995 during the time frame of 1994-1999. As UT went 8-4 in 1994, 11-1 in 1995, 10-2 in 1996, 11-2 in 1997, 13-0 in 1998, and 9-3 in 1999.

So, this cuts Florida down to only giving 4 teams their only loss, as well as Nebraska only giving 4 teams their only loss.

Joey
__________________
Tennesse Titans Superbowl Champs 2003...Steve Mcnair for NFL MVP...Hopefully the Gators can compete in the SEC
I OWN THIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2003, 12:45 PM   #10
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

My fault on the stat error Joey. I was going strictly by memory, and as you can see, I should have checked the books. Pretty close though for memory only...LOL.

I think it's a combo of bad timing and bad play for Florida Joey the last two or three years. Still, FSU has been down in the last year or too, so that should have helped them, and still could this upcoming year.

I think you have something Joey when you talk about growing up in a certain place giving you your outlook on it. You seem not to mind so much that the SEC and Florida really don't travel out of the south, while I enjoy the fact that OSU and the rest of the Big Ten venture out of the Midwest alot. And like Dave eluded too earlier, and as I said before, it has been common practice for the PAC 10 and Big 10 to match up alot in the regular season due to their Rose Bowl connection. All those years, and those two being the only conferences that were really connected, bonded them into scheduling each other alot.

And furthermore, it seems like in recent years, without checking stats, that the Big Ten has stayed closer to home more, and adopted a more Big 12/ SEC way of thinking. This to me is a direct result of the BCS. The Big 10 is just recently playing the game the way the Big 12 and SEC have done for years as they chased the National Titles while the Big Ten has chased that HUGE Rose Bowl payout, one that the Orange Bowl never even came close to matching.

Just another reason to hate the BCS.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2003, 01:47 PM   #11
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Curiosity got the best of me here and I looked up who the Big Ten has played on the road out of conference against teams not in the Midwest. So this excludes Notre Dame and any other non-Big Ten team who makes their home in the Midwest. I also threw out the Indiana-Kentucky annual duel, as that is basically the same as scheduling close to home, and no one cares really...LOL.

So, from 2000-03, the Big Ten played 18 teams out of the Midwest on the road. Here's the breakdown of what conference they came from...

Pac 10.............6 ( as I expected in the earlier posts)
Mount. West...5
ACC.................3
Conf. USA........2
Big 12..............1
Independant...1

Here's the SEC's in same time frame against non-conf. teams on the road who didn't reside south of the Mason-Dixon and east of the Mississippi River. Total of 9 games played and conf. breakdown...

Pac 10............3
Big 12.............2
Big East..........2
Mount. West...1
Ind. ( ND)........1

So, the SEC, with one more team in their conf., played 9 LESS games on the road outside of their geographic area. BTW...here's the records of the SEC and Big Ten in these games...

SEC......1-8, only win was Tennessee at Notre Dame
Big 10...8-10

Wow, and I thought the Big Ten was catching up to the SEC when it came to sticking close to home, but they have a long way to go from what I see here. And out of the 12 member SEC, only SIX teams made up those 9 games played in question. 8 out 11 Big Ten teams played a road game outside of the Midwest since 2000.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2003, 02:38 PM   #12
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

I think these numbers are representative of each conference, 78. I don't think the Big East (aside from trips to Miami) really gets around that much either, considering most Big East teams have games against the Rust Belt conference and northern ACC teams, with the occasional south of the Virginia C-USA team thrown in for fair measure. The Big 12 doesn't like to leave the Texas-border states, and the Pac 10 must have more Mtn West and WAC match-ups than other conferences as well.

Has this worsened since 1998? I don't know off the top of my head. Actually, I think the Big 10 has worsened since the advent of the BCS, but that's just an impression. I haven't checked the history books. But the SEC? No. Big 12? No. Big East? Not really. Pac 10? With two obvious exceptions, no. (UW will travel almost anywhere, as will SoCal). I think the unwillingness to travel aspect has long been overlooked. People note it, but don't make a big deal of it. Auburn's trip to the Left Coast was extraordinary for an SEC team, while SC's trip to Auburn this year is an intriguing matchup, it's not THAT rare to find the Trojans on this side of the Rockies.

Dave
__________________
mountaineerdave on twitter
mountaineerdavem on AIM
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2003, 03:58 PM   #13
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Dave...

I'm with you in the impression of the Big 10 sticking closer to home since the BCS ate college football up in 1998, yet, they still do a better job in getting out of the Midwest then the SEC does getting out of the south. Pre BCS, I'm with you in saying I believe the Big Ten was getting out more then they are now, but still, they are doing a better job even now then the other conferences.

My stats here are from the last 3 years, and we have had 5 years of BCS so far.

For the record Dave, since 00, Ohio St. has gone out to Arizona and UCLA and is 1-1 in that time. Michigan has gone out to UCLA and Washington. Interestingly enough, the Big Ten team with the most frequent flier miles is Northwestern. The Cats have gone down to Waco to play TCU, out to Vegas for a rumble with the Rebels, and a trip to Colorado Springs against Air Force. Penn St. went to Virginia to take on the Cavaliers as their only game outside of Happy Valley that wasn't against Pittsburgh in this time frame.

One team to be held to high standards is Bama in all of this. They went out to UCLA and Norman to face the Sooners in the last three years. Didn't win either game, but I LOVED seeing these all time greats do battle, as it's a rarity. Give credit to Bama for having guts here. Sure they were on probation for atleast one, if not both games, but I recall both games being real treat.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2003, 05:48 PM   #14
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Once again Dave, you've got me to look up stats out of curiosity. Here are the road records of each conference against teams out of their region since 1998, the beginning of the evil BCS. Now, I have used my own discretion here in some games, and I hope no one minds. But I have been fair. For instance, I have given an LSU trip up to Virginia Tech as a game against someone not in your region, despite Virginia and Louisiana being technically, the South. I have also not included some games that technically DO count. One case would be Arkansas traveling over to Dallas to play their old SWC foe, S. Methodist. I don't think that game should count as a road game vs. a team " out of region", despite Texas not fitting in with the original definition of the South, technically. Indiana vs. Kentucky is another one, like I calculated before. I'm not counting that here either. I think we all know what we are getting at here. Road games where you are playing in unfamiliar territory and are atleast somewhat disadvantaged for being in this situation. Ok, to the records.

SEC..........3-9 ( Tenn. wins at ND and Cuse, Miss. St. beat BYU)

Big 10......17-13 ( I didn't count OSU at WVU either Dave...LOL)

Big 12......12-17 ( perhaps the Big 12's central location makes going east or west easier, hence just one fewer game then the Big Ten, however, they do have one more team in their conference)

Big East...8-23 ( Ouch ! In all fairness, Temple and Rutgers took the brunt here in this showing. Props to B.C. , who accounted for 3 of the 8 total wins by the 8 team Big East Conference)

Pac 10....18-21 ( led all the conferences here in games played and wins. 9 games into Big Ten territory, 7 into Big 12 territory, and atleast a half dozen games at ND for the Pac Ten teams)

WINNING PERCENTAGE...

Big Ten........17-13, 57%
Pac Ten.......18-21, 46%
Big 12.........12-17, 41%
Big East...... 8-23, 26%
SEC............. 3-9, 25%

I think this shows a few things.

1. The Big 12's central geographic location allows them to go east and west out of the way a little to play some teams. Thus not breaking the bank, as Dave has eluded too.

2. The Pac 10 and Big 10 like to play each other alot at each others house, again proving my Rose Bowl friendship connection. More props to the Pac 10 for being all alone out west, and still getting out of " the house" alot.

3. The Big East rarely travels and when they do, they lose alot. Interestingly enough, Miami's lone loss one year came at the hands of Washington, in Seattle.

4. The SEC rarely travels, rarely wins, and looks like they have no interest in doing so.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2003, 08:03 AM   #15
awefullspellare
Guy in Omaha
 
awefullspellare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Omaha, Neb
Posts: 511
awefullspellare is on a distinguished road
Default

Nebraska man here ... to defend my team ill dig out the 'ol Media Guide
since '93
top 25 teams played.. home and road.. and records
Home-11-2 i think
Road-9-8 i think
Nuetral-8-5
overall-29-15... a 66% winning perecent... pretty good since not even 1/3 of the top 25 games were at home... dont know how this compares to the other teams...
__________________
My Teams-[Chicago Cubs] [Denver Broncos] [Colorado Avalanche] [Milwaukee Bucks] [Nebraska Cornhuskers] [Creighton Bluejays] [MILLARD NORTH MUSTANGS]
awefullspellare is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:57 PM.