Your predictions

[Finishempty Fred]

1. Who wins conference other than your team?
2. Dark horse other than your team.

[Finishempty Fred]

Re: Your predictions

1. SAU
2. Southeastern

[Redready]

Re: Your predictions

Harding
ECU

[bandguy11]

Re: Your predictions

To keep it in Arkansas and since you said other than my team: HSU. (They rebound from last year surely)!!

And dark horse: I have 2: representing Oklahoma: Oklahoma Baptist (why not)... representing Arkansas I pick the SAU rival UAM!!

[abrackins]

Re: Your predictions

1. SAU
2. Southeastern

Ditto. SEO almost did it last year, they had better not be overlooked this year.

[Mulerider]

Re: Your predictions

1.Harding
2.Henderson State

[Divisiontwo]

Re: Your predictions

1.) SAU
2.) Is Henderson a dark horse? Hard to call them that. Still have concerns about their qb play.

[Mulerider]

Re: Your predictions

What is considered a dark horse for this conference? I mean Henderson is probably going to be 4th in the conference. You could argue SE OK or Arkansas Tech.

[ReddieMade]

Re: Your predictions

1. Harding
2. SWOSU. I think the new coach there could get them going a little bit. They've been solid in the past.

[Armo Wood]

Re: Your predictions

What is considered a dark horse for this conference? I mean Henderson is probably going to be 4th in the conference. You could argue SE OK or Arkansas Tech.

The bolded part is what I think is the issue here. How do you define dark horse? Or, since Fred started this thread, how does Fred define dark horse?

To me there are three ways one can look at what qualifies as a dark horse.
1) Dark horse in terms of competing for the conference title.
2) Dark horse in terms of competing for a postseason spot--either playoffs or bowl game.
3) Dark horse in terms of having a better than expected finish.

Considering each end of the spectrum, sometimes there is a team (or two) that fits all three categories, other times you have a team (or two) for each category.

For example, based on any combo of the following: recent trends, personnel returning, level of talent, off-season build up, etc. I think you could make the following arguments for dark horses:
1) Dark horse in terms of competing for the conference title: ATU
2) Dark horse in terms of competing for a postseason spot--either playoffs or bowl game: SE
3) Dark horse in terms of having a better than expected finish: ECU

[Mulerider]

Re: Your predictions

The bolded part is what I think is the issue here. How do you define dark horse? Or, since Fred started this thread, how does Fred define dark horse?

To me there are three ways one can look at what qualifies as a dark horse.
1) Dark horse in terms of competing for the conference title.
2) Dark horse in terms of competing for a postseason spot--either playoffs or bowl game.
3) Dark horse in terms of having a better than expected finish.

Considering each end of the spectrum, sometimes there is a team (or two) that fits all three categories, other times you have a team (or two) for each category.

For example, based on any combo of the following: recent trends, personnel returning, level of talent, off-season build up, etc. I think you could make the following arguments for dark horses:
1) Dark horse in terms of competing for the conference title: ATU
2) Dark horse in terms of competing for a postseason spot--either playoffs or bowl game: SE
3) Dark horse in terms of having a better than expected finish: ECU

VERY VERY WELL PUT. The only thing I am curious with Arkansas Tech is they have such a brutal road schedule. They have more talent and experience than last year, but will it show?