Pick6 wrote:
The SEC wasn't finishing with less than half of their teams below .500.
Yes, pardon me, I mistyped. Obviously we know which conference had more than half its teams below .500.
Pick6 wrote: Oh and your talking about that Northwestern team...that it took overtime for Auburn to beat them (even though northwestern had a shit load of turnovers in scoring position). And was this that same Auburn team that just about and should have beaten Alabama..who were national champions?
The difference here is that you are saying "almost" and "almost". Wins are what counts. Northwestern lost to the worst team in what many say is the worst major conference. Then they beat a would-be Big Ten champ. Then they lost to an SEC team. What is your point?
Pick6 wrote:Fact is, the SEC is still probably the best conference in the country.
Ah, see, thats really all there is to it.
Pick6 wrote:But by nowhere near as far as it was a couple years ago.
Again, what is the point? Your statement really illustrates that desperation that Big Ten fans feel. Now the argument isn't "they aren't the best", it is "they aren't (this much) better". The best is the best. Period.
Pick6 wrote:Once/if Michigan ever gets back, I believe there will be no question that the Big 10 will be the best again.
More ifs. Good argument.
Pick6 wrote:Also it shows how deep the Big 10 is that one of the bottom teams, in Purdue, can beat the top team.
It
would...IF...Purdue hadn't been beaten by a MAC team. You are seriously going to try and prove depth when your champion couldn't beat a team that was beaten by a mid-level MAC team?