itty bitty living space
Yes, that was an Aladdin reference, and I made it for a reason. All too often, when discussing the power schools from non-auto-qualifying conferences like Boise State or TCU, one uses the flawed argument, " If they played in the SEC, they've have multiple losses by now!" Yeah, and if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle. It's the reverse of Jafar wishing to be a genie and having to take the shackles that go along with it: Those who make this claim instead want to attribute the shackles of the power conference's tougher schedule without affording the school the great cosmic power that comes from being in such a conference. The statement may be accurate if you were to drop the 2010 Boise State Broncos into the 2010 SEC (and quite frankly, I'm not even thoroughly convinced of that) but if Boise State were in the SEC, they'd also have access to the resources, budgets, etc. that current members of the SEC enjoy. If you consider that they are doing what they're doing now with WAC resources (double entendre noted) imagine what they'd do with SEC loot!
In related double standards, some folks are choosing to get on their high horse about definitions as they relate to athletic conferences. With recent talk of TCU potentially joining the Big East (for the record, my oft-stated opinion of this is YES YES THIS NEEDS TO HAPPEN YESTERDAY) Some scoff at the liberal interpretation of "East" Oh yeah? Consider:
-The Big Ten has 11 and soon 12 teams
-The Big XII will soon have ten teams
-The SEC and Pac-10 reportedly both considered Texas schools. Texas is neither in the Southeast nor does it touch the Pacific
-The Pac-12 will contain Colorado and Utah, and already contains Arizona schools, all landlocked states
-Outside the BCS: Some of the Atlantic 10's 14 schools are quite a ways from the Atlantic; one even lies across the Mississippi!
Yes, that was an Aladdin reference, and I made it for a reason. All too often, when discussing the power schools from non-auto-qualifying conferences like Boise State or TCU, one uses the flawed argument, " If they played in the SEC, they've have multiple losses by now!" Yeah, and if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle. It's the reverse of Jafar wishing to be a genie and having to take the shackles that go along with it: Those who make this claim instead want to attribute the shackles of the power conference's tougher schedule without affording the school the great cosmic power that comes from being in such a conference. The statement may be accurate if you were to drop the 2010 Boise State Broncos into the 2010 SEC (and quite frankly, I'm not even thoroughly convinced of that) but if Boise State were in the SEC, they'd also have access to the resources, budgets, etc. that current members of the SEC enjoy. If you consider that they are doing what they're doing now with WAC resources (double entendre noted) imagine what they'd do with SEC loot!
In related double standards, some folks are choosing to get on their high horse about definitions as they relate to athletic conferences. With recent talk of TCU potentially joining the Big East (for the record, my oft-stated opinion of this is YES YES THIS NEEDS TO HAPPEN YESTERDAY) Some scoff at the liberal interpretation of "East" Oh yeah? Consider:
-The Big Ten has 11 and soon 12 teams
-The Big XII will soon have ten teams
-The SEC and Pac-10 reportedly both considered Texas schools. Texas is neither in the Southeast nor does it touch the Pacific
-The Pac-12 will contain Colorado and Utah, and already contains Arizona schools, all landlocked states
-Outside the BCS: Some of the Atlantic 10's 14 schools are quite a ways from the Atlantic; one even lies across the Mississippi!
Comments