UCLA is 6th in the Pac 12.  That is the definition of an average team.  Is beating an average team a good win?  Now I suppose if you were on the road and beat UCLA by 4 touchdowns that would tell you something  and maybe then you call it a good win (but that is more about the how than the who).

Heck even teams that are near the top of their conference may not be a good win - see Arkansas, which is currently the 3rd team in the SEC.  Arkansas lost to Toledo and Texas Tech.  Is losing to Arkansas a good win?  Now maybe you argue that Arkansas isn't the same team it was at the beginning of the year, or maybe just maybe Arkansas isn't very good which means the teams it is beating now aren't very good either.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2015 4:54:00 PM (view original):
UCLA is a not a top 10 team.   They're are a middle of the PAC12 team.   Honestly, once you get past the top 3-5 in the Power 5, teams get a little sketchy.   Penn State, WSU, Ole Miss, Texas, Pitt, meh, I don't know that beating them is a quality win. 

Who the hell is a quality win for you?  Only top 10?  This is ridiculous it's like talking to a 10 year old who has watched 3 football games

Posted by the0nlyis on 11/16/2015 4:47:00 PM (view original):
if you don't call ucla a good win then there is nothing thats a good win besides beating top 10 oppoents thats ridiculous, noone is saying Penn State is a world beater or a top 10 team, but they are a team you go back at the end of the season and say hey we beat a penn state squad thats a good win.

Do you understand what you post or do you just ramble on with nonsense?

"If UCLA is not a good win....nothing is a good win beside beating top 10 opponents"

Seriously, step away for a day, collect your thoughts and come on back.   I doubt you'll make more sense but, hopefully, you won't make less sense.

LOL.  Editing your dumbassery doesn't mean it's still not dumbassery.

Posted by all3 on 11/15/2015 6:17:00 PM (view original):
The SEC schools need to stop harping on that "We play in the best Conference." BS, and stop scheduling so many OOC games against FCS and historically horrible schools. At least play MAC or AAC schools for crying out loud. Traveling North of the Mason-Dixon or West of Texas once in a while wouldn't hurt either.

Was extremely glad to see some of the ESPN talking heads discussing this today. The SEC's OOC games this weekend are not only an embarrassment, but stupidity. They could win all of them by 50 and they still won't be "good" wins that benefits them or the League, but if they lose or even win a close game, it makes them and the League look bad.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2015 9:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 11/16/2015 4:47:00 PM (view original):
if you don't call ucla a good win then there is nothing thats a good win besides beating top 10 oppoents thats ridiculous, noone is saying Penn State is a world beater or a top 10 team, but they are a team you go back at the end of the season and say hey we beat a penn state squad thats a good win.

Do you understand what you post or do you just ramble on with nonsense?

"If UCLA is not a good win....nothing is a good win beside beating top 10 opponents"

Seriously, step away for a day, collect your thoughts and come on back.   I doubt you'll make more sense but, hopefully, you won't make less sense.

Seriously it's not that hard to understand?

If you don't consider UCLA a good win, than what do you consider good wins?  Only top 10 teams?  If thats what you believe you make no sense.

people need to quit harping on the SEC scheduling cupcakes as if they are the only ones doing it......Clemson has beaten noted toughnecks Wofford and Appalachian St this year...Ohio State has tackled Hawaii, N. Illinois, and W. Michigan


up and down the power conferences, you see these games ,but people only SEE the ones that make the case they want to make

and quickly OSU defenders will point out that Northern Illinois is not exactly the School for the Blind, but it certainly isn't close to the needed "good" win status every week as defined by those so deeply in the know

Posted by the0nlyis on 11/16/2015 10:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2015 9:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 11/16/2015 4:47:00 PM (view original):
if you don't call ucla a good win then there is nothing thats a good win besides beating top 10 oppoents thats ridiculous, noone is saying Penn State is a world beater or a top 10 team, but they are a team you go back at the end of the season and say hey we beat a penn state squad thats a good win.

Do you understand what you post or do you just ramble on with nonsense?

"If UCLA is not a good win....nothing is a good win beside beating top 10 opponents"

Seriously, step away for a day, collect your thoughts and come on back.   I doubt you'll make more sense but, hopefully, you won't make less sense.

Seriously it's not that hard to understand?

If you don't consider UCLA a good win, than what do you consider good wins?  Only top 10 teams?  If thats what you believe you make no sense.

Is there a level between top 10 and UCLA?

Posted by edsortails on 11/17/2015 12:10:00 AM (view original):
people need to quit harping on the SEC scheduling cupcakes as if they are the only ones doing it......Clemson has beaten noted toughnecks Wofford and Appalachian St this year...Ohio State has tackled Hawaii, N. Illinois, and W. Michigan


up and down the power conferences, you see these games ,but people only SEE the ones that make the case they want to make

I'll agree with this.   Scheduling and beating a low level Power 5(Kentucy, SC, Maryland, Washington, Purdue, etc, etc) isn't much different than beating North Dakota State or the best from the Sunbelt.

Posted by edsortails on 11/17/2015 12:10:00 AM (view original):
people need to quit harping on the SEC scheduling cupcakes as if they are the only ones doing it......Clemson has beaten noted toughnecks Wofford and Appalachian St this year...Ohio State has tackled Hawaii, N. Illinois, and W. Michigan


up and down the power conferences, you see these games ,but people only SEE the ones that make the case they want to make

I think the issue is that the SEC notoriously schedules FCS schools towards the end of the year.  Most of the other conferences play those games at the beginning of the year when you get more of a pass for doing so (i.e. starting the year off with a cupcake is seen as a warm up type game but doing it at the end of the year just seems silly).

Some of the SEC schools schedule well, some of them do not.  Alabama consistently begins the year with a better than average power 5 team.  Florida, South Carolina, and Georgia always end the year with their ACC rival.  Tennessee does a good job of mixing in at least one solid power 5 team.  A&M is pretty good about scheduling Pac 12 or Big 12 schools.  Most of the rest of the SEC however schedules like the Big 12.  That normally works out fine because the conference as a whole is usually pretty good and pretty deep, but this year that is not the case.  When a team that lost to Toledo and Texas Tech is currently 3rd in the conference, you can't just rely on the conference schedule to boost you.  Plus, FCS teams should never be scheduled by a major power 5 team.  The Big Ten has in fact banned that practice going forward.  It is quite embarrassing that the SEC has that many schools on the schedule this weekend.  At least play a Sunbelt or CUSA school.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/17/2015 6:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by edsortails on 11/17/2015 12:10:00 AM (view original):
people need to quit harping on the SEC scheduling cupcakes as if they are the only ones doing it......Clemson has beaten noted toughnecks Wofford and Appalachian St this year...Ohio State has tackled Hawaii, N. Illinois, and W. Michigan


up and down the power conferences, you see these games ,but people only SEE the ones that make the case they want to make

I'll agree with this.   Scheduling and beating a low level Power 5(Kentucy, SC, Maryland, Washington, Purdue, etc, etc) isn't much different than beating North Dakota State or the best from the Sunbelt.

Sure it is.  The Power 5 schools have a lot more depth and talent than the schools you are referring to.  In fact, just last page you made that type of argument as to why the AAC schools aren't elite.  The grind as you put it is a lot more difficult if you have power 5 schools, even crappy ones, as compared to the Sunbelt (that isn't to say in any given year a Sunbelt school might be better than a low level power 5, but year to year and historically that isn't the case).

I don't really care about year to year.   We've already disagreed on that fact.    No one gets credit for beating UCF because they were good two years ago.

There is the grind.   But the grind is beating similar depth/talent from week to week.   The teams I mentioned do not have the depth/talent of the top Power 5 teams.   There a reason those teams might have the occasional good run but can't maintain the consistency of a Bama/OSU.    It's the same reason a Memphis/UCF can be on top for a few years.  They have a couple of good recruiting classes and make the most of it.  But, when they don't get those classes, they are no different than a top Group of 5 team.   Beating SC this year is akin to beating a top MAC team.   If that. 

But back to the "quality win" question.    I think you have to give up the Top 25.   I think it gets a little sketchy around Utah, Navy, Northwestern but they are AP Top 25.   That's top 20% of all schools at this level.   So, given that, let's look at "Others receiving votes".

Toledo 39
Arkansas 35
Memphis 32
Mississippi St. 25
UCLA 18
Pittsburgh 15
Temple 13
Georgia 8
Texas A&M 8
Bowling Green 4
W. Kentucky 4
Air Force 1
Arkansas St. 1

Working backwards, I think you look at Georgia/TAMU and say "NO".   I've already said "NO" to Temple/Pitt/UCLA but I guess that's where the argument could start.   I'd add Miss St to "NO" and give a "YES" to Memphis/Ark/Toledo while admitting I haven't seen a single play of a Toledo game.   So I'm giving quality wins to Top 28 teams.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/17/2015 8:51:00 AM (view original):
I don't really care about year to year.   We've already disagreed on that fact.    No one gets credit for beating UCF because they were good two years ago.

There is the grind.   But the grind is beating similar depth/talent from week to week.   The teams I mentioned do not have the depth/talent of the top Power 5 teams.   There a reason those teams might have the occasional good run but can't maintain the consistency of a Bama/OSU.    It's the same reason a Memphis/UCF can be on top for a few years.  They have a couple of good recruiting classes and make the most of it.  But, when they don't get those classes, they are no different than a top Group of 5 team.   Beating SC this year is akin to beating a top MAC team.   If that. 

Yeah prior years don't matter, but a power 5 school is much more likely to go from 7-6 to 10-0 in one year (see Iowa) than a non-power 5 school.  It isn't like you schedule the game after the season has already started.  They are often scheduled years in advance.  And your right South Carolina is terrible, but if you scheduled a game against South Carolina or Toledo three years from now, which one is most likely going to be the better game.  Heck, which one is most likely to be the better game even as early as next year.  That is the difference between scheduling those games.  Ohio State couldn't know that Virginia Tech was going to fall off the deep end when that game was scheduled 5 years ago, it happened and it made what should have been a good win, a bad win, but that is still different than scheduling a non-power 5 team years in advance when there is a pretty good chance that game is going to be a bad win.