(09-21-2019 03:36 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(09-21-2019 03:26 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2019 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(09-21-2019 01:46 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-21-2019 08:44 AM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  Kind of missing the point. First, the fact that Utah was a dog on the road against an unranked team while being ranked #10 in the country shows that they never should have had the ranking, especially after they predictably lost. Their ranking is whats laughable. Second I wasn't calling the Pac weak, quite the contrary. Its a very competitive league. However, the league is also struggling with its perception. What the Pac needs more than parity is for USC, Oregon, or maybe Stanford to put together some excellent seasons and make the Pac a player in the playoff era. Conferences live and die by their best teams (i.e. OU, Bama, OSU, and Clemson). The Pac cannibalizing year after year is laughable because its so predictable.

Clemson is the best team. Does anyone perceive the ACC as the best conference, or even a good one?

If you are now reduced to arguing that Utah's ranking was what made the score laughable, well you've given up the ghost.

except here are the rules... from week 1
The rules as to what qualifies:

DII over DI always
FCS over FBS always
G5 over P5, unless it is a ranked G5
Unranked over ranked always

Lastly, a Vegas spread getting blown out of the water (off by more than 3 TDs).


In general, it's good form to wait until the 2nd quarter until posting a score.

Except ....those are the rules if you want to post a score in the 'laughable scores' thread. They mean nothing in other threads.

Hint: this isn't the laughable scores thread.

hint, it sure as hell ain't the Utah/USC thread either.... You said that it didn't belong in the laughable score thread, and to that I say you are wrong.