The Blue Board

The only thing I know for sure is that the Ca. AQ4 would behind Bama, Florida, aTm, LSU and Georgia this year. Fact.

I told my friend that it was probably 3 things

1 - The talent pool in California is rich. More NFL HOF'ers, NFL 1st Rd Draft Picks and Current NFL players than any other state.

2- Coaching has probably been a factor. Coaches like McKay, Walsh, Vermeil, Robinson, and of late Harbaugh and Carroll have all had success in the NFL. Compare that to the coaches in the south like Spurrier, Saban, or a guy like Petrino, who have only been able to win in college.

3- I told him perhaps the southern boys are intimidated by the way football players on the best coast are able to play smash mouth hard nosed football and still mix in some offense at the same time.

Finally, I told him, I think it just comes down to the huge advantage the fans give our teams here in Cali as compared to the south. Like the 31,000 crazed maniacs that packed Stanford's stadium for the PAC CCG
win over UCLA. Rabid fan bases.

I got a good laugh out of him with the last one.

Nope, 64-44-7 vs past and current members of the SEC. (Still 59% wins)
And by past I mean Tulane & GaTech, but I only counted the games
that were played against Tulane up until the mid 60's when they left the SEC, nothing after that.

No games were played vs Miss State, Ole Miss, and Kentucky.
Also no games vs Louisville or USF.

LSU hasn't lost to a pac school since 1979.. Don't count us in this crap

22-6 is 79% . There you go - Feel better?

for one thing, those 4 stand on usc's record for the most part. at least with the sec.

1. USC (22-11-1)--0.66176
2. Stanford (4-2-1)--0.64286
3. UCLA (17-14-4)--0.54286
4. California (9-11-1)--0.45238

stanford has a good win%, but can you really say that's dominating? ucla is ok, and cal is sub .500.

those 3 are standing on usc for being dominant (as would all but a handful of teams across the country)

same as au, arky and a&m hanging on coattails of lsu vs the pac 10.

au has a good win%, but few games. (7-3)

a&m is right at .500. (14-15) (that means close for those who would like to know)

and arky is sub .500. (4-6-1)

but lsu is 22-4.

put them together and they've won 60%+. but it's all because of lsu.

i choose those 4 cause i was trying to get something similar to the 4 you chose. the better teams from same division. i swapped out bama for a&m, which made it more favorable for the pac, and also cause the records are more comparable.

was going to use the alabama and miss 4, but somehow ole miss has never played a pac12 team.

it's the same thing with the acc, btw.

USC (23-10-0)--0.69697 - dominant
UCLA (17-14-0)--0.54839 - not bad, not great
California (12-12-1)--0.50000 - what can you say
Stanford (9-10-0)--0.47368 - sub .500

"right at" as a figure of speech meaning close. bad habit of mine.

i didn't have the records on there at first, and went back and put them on after. also somehow forgot au and arky's, will edit.

would close be better for you?

point is they would all be hanging on lsu's coattails, dispite the fact that combined they'd have a good win%, cause it would all be because lsu.

Just giving crap.

Like this thread, I don't think the majority of my posts should be taken to serious.

So you wouldn't feel dominated by your opponent if you had won only 64 times out of 166 games?

Here is a little breakdown of the numbers.

Match-Ups Between Elite Teams
(Elite=75% or better season win %)
===========================
Ca AQ 4 (18-9-3) 65% 30 games
===========================

Home & Away
Ca. AQ 4 vs Southern AQ
=====================
43-19-2 home (69%) 68g
31-33-4 away (49%) 68g
20-12-2 neutral(62%) 34g
=====================
94-64-8 overall (59%) 166g
----------------------------------
Ca. AQ 4 won 66% of their
home and neutral site games.

Avg. Score/Margin of Victory
------------------------------------
California AQ.....21.5 ppg
Southern AQ......17.9 ppg
====================
CA AQ +3.6 PPG MOV
====================

Out of the 166 games, 110 were match-ups between either
2 winning teams or 2 losing teams(relatively even match-ups)
===============================================
Ca AQ 4 (54-37-5) 59% between winning teams.
Ca AQ 4 (10-4-0) 71% between losing teams.
Ca AQ 4 (64-41-5) 60% overall in even match-ups.

The other 56 games, were split. Each played 28 games
vs the other with a heavy advantage as a team that had
a winning season vs a team that finished .500 or below.
============================================
Ca AQ 4 (26-2-0) 93%
South AQ (21-4-3) 80%
===================

In games between winning teams only
every Ca. school had a winning record.
===============================
USC (23-13-0) 64%
UCLA (15-11-4) 57%
CAL (9-7-0) 56%
Stanford (7-6-1) 54%
==================
Ca AQ 4 (54-37-5) 59%

If it bothers you that much, don't read it. This is a board to discuss college football. This is a thread about the all-time history between California and the South on the gridiron.

Some people might like to know the truth that the mess they talk here on tBB about SEC speed and SEC Defense, is just a myth, and don't mean ishh to the big 4 in California. It's just fact, the big California 4 have dominated the schools that primarily comprise the OG's from the Southern Conference (SEC/ACC teams)

The only thing pathetic is the former leadership at your school and how some of you defend still defend that POS Paterno and anyone else that helped cover up for that sick scumbag Sandusky.

I don't care.. LSU absolutely has owned the Pac the last 30 years