Who have the big-time SEC contenders (Auburn, Florida, Arkansas) beaten out of conference? Cal hasn't beaten anyone out of conference. USC's big win was at home over Nebraska. Very few teams have significant out-of-conference victories these days.
If you're talking conferences, the SEC (Tennessee) has beaten Cal. USC beat Nebraska (whatever that's worth) and Arkansas. Ohio State beat Texas. Michigan beat Notre Dame. Florida (if they win out) will have beaten Florida State. But the point is that if a team like Arkansas wins out, they'll have beaten teams like Tennessee that had big wins out of conference. That doesn't apply to Texas. No one that Texas will have beaten has beaten anyone of note. If we're going to blast the Big East for not beating anyone, then the Big 12 has to fit in that same pile.
Except Corso was wrong. Off the top of my head, both Kentucky and K-State are in the top halves of their conferences in addition to Maryland. There may be others. But it *does* apply to the Big 12, because the same people who are saying the Big East is overrated because they didn't play anyone are saying the Big 12 is good. But the Big 12's out of conference success is far worse than the Big East.
Why is it that Vandy's close losses are impressive while win over a top 10 team in their home stadium is a mediocre win?
Did you just throw in 5-4 Florida State into the mix as a potential quality win? Pretty sad. While wins out of conference are great, there just aren't enough interconference power matchups year to year to justify using the conference opposition as a good barometer. Does one game against Arkansas justify calling the PAC-10 a great conference? If they hadn't played that game, would you say they suck? A conference's reputation can't be based on a one season run. You have to look to history, success in bowl games, the continued success of flagship programs to see a conference's worth. The Big XII has multiple national titles in the past few years, has appeared in and won bigtime BCS matchups, including last years' title game. That has to count for something.
WV has been ranked top 6 all year before they lost. This was by coaches and journalists and others. This was a team off a 1 loss team the year before that won the Sugar Bowl over the SEC champ and had more returning starters than any other top 10 from last year. Had WV won out they would have had an excellent 2 year subjective/voter resume, in addition to field results/computers/objective. Lou resume would have only been slightly behind. I do agree the conference nonconference record is misleading. For one, these games happen early. Cal, Tex, Ark--IMO they are all a lot better than when they started. In my subjective view WV or Lou would be at the top of the Big 12 if they were there. They are not as talented as Texas, but they are as talented as any other Big 12 team (once AP and Bomar were gone) and have played much better than any other Big 12 team other than Texas (not that Texas didn't struggle versus TOSU and not so special NU and Tech teams). Further, it isn't liked they squeeked by these upper middle non-conference teams like Maryland, Miami, UK, KSU--they slaughted them.
In the Sugar, WV jumped out to a 28-point lead (by the beginning of the 2nd qtr) against a Georgia team that was caught sleeping. Then Georgia outscored them 35-10 in the next 3 qtrs. Georgia still lost, but if they had played 10 more times, I think WV would have been lucky to win once more. Rutgers...at the tip-top of this tough big east conference of yours... was 1-11 in 2002, they had their first winning season since 1992 last year and their first bowl since 1979, had not beaten a ranked team in almost 20 years, and ranked 41st by Coaches poll at the start of the season. woo hoo You think UT is better than these, yet BCS ranked WV higher, then they lost to Lousiville so Lou got ranked higher. Now Lou has lost, and if Rutgers wins out, it not inconceivable that they get ranked higher. Their conference is unproven / they are overrated.
See, this is just silly. You excuse Georgia getting down by 28 because they were "caught sleeping". Why doesn't WV get excused because they relaxed when ahead by 28 and let Georgia get the momentum (in their hometown)? Why doesn't WV get credit for blowing them out early? You spin everything to be negative for the Big East and then say the Big East sucks. I fully agree that if you ignore all their wins then yes, the Big East sucks. If you believe they are overrated, where do you realistically think UL, WV, and Rutgers should be ranked?
