"What do people see in the SEC? How do they get a pass when they lose to their lower-tiered teams like Vandy or Ole Miss, yet that same pass is not extended to USC when they lose to Stanford?"
While I agree that USC's is/was a great team and their numbers are amazing - I still believe that the SEC is much deeper top to bottom than any other conference. That doesn't mean that the Pac 10 or Big Ten is top heavy - that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the SEC is deeper top to bottom - "top to bottom" being the key phrase. This will all change most likely, it just takes time. But, you know how the NFL almost anyone can beat anyone (unless you are the Colts or Patriots)? Well, that is what goes on in the SEC. It doesn't mean that they can beat every other team in the country outside of the SEC. It means that the league is very competitive, once again, top to bottom. Personally, I disagree with the Heisman and NC arguments but that's just me. That's another subject for another day.
Just my thoughts. Thanks for publishing this article, Ben, on behalf of Brandon.
I suggest you take a look at some un-biased data when comparing conferences. Heisman trophy winners, national championships, and number of top 25 teams are all based on polls.
Of the 6 BCS computers that use only win and loss data, the following rank SEC first this year:
Wolfe, Colley, Massey, Anderson/Hester, and Sagarin.
The other ranking, Billingsly, has Pac-10 over the SEC. I would recomend taking Billingsly with a grain of salt though. His rankings are designed to mimic the polls and incorparte things like Pre-Season-Rankings and other silly things.
Isn't it a little bit suspicious that five different computers models, each with their own method, all say the same thing? That the SEC truly is the best conference?
Isn't it a little suspicious that 85 % of the Harris Poll members have direct ties to the college football association movement considering Vince Dooley and Chuck Neinas (the founding fathers of the CFA movement created the Harris Poll after the AP Writers pulled out of the equation after the 2002, 2003 and 2004 debacles.
The reason the SEC teams (as well as the Big-12 teams are ranked so high in the polls is because the CFA cronies own the polls and this includes the coaching polls since Chuck Neinas now works as a consultant hiring most of the Division I-A coaches for the major powers, who once again all supported the CFA movement.
The whole purpose of Brandon's article and my article is superiority shouldn't be determined by a poll, especially one as grossly inept as the college football polls have been over the last 30 years. It should be determined by head-to-head match-ups and when you look at the results of these head-to-head match-ups, the numbers speak for themselves...running antagonistically against the theory that the SEC is the best.
5-5 against BCS opponents doesn't lend me to believe that your conference is clearly the best.
check the BCS Bowl record
check LSU's game against "the best team in the history of college football" in 2004 BCS Championship game
check Florida's game against "the best team in the history of college football" last year
check out the rosters of NFL teams
use any objective measure you want to. and you and I both know that second-tier bowl game results are not the best way to judge
or, keep using your Heisman trophy winner calculation, as if that means anything at all. or the "national championships", which have always been decided by the same people who almost matched Michigan and Ohio State in the NC game last year.
also, check the # of teams in the SEC vs the population of the states in the conference vs other major conferences. Big XII MIGHT match up with the SEC as far as #people/#teams, but the Pac10 and Big10 have a much higher population to team ratio. People dont pay attention to that, but potential talent pool is a huge factor.
Not to mention that one of our schools (the one that demolished Ohio State last year) has to compete with 2 other major conference traditionally powerful football schools in its own state. If either FSU or Miami didnt exist, UF would be unstoppable.
So explain to me a couple of things. If you clearly have the best players and the best coaches...why have you only won two Heisman's and two national championships in the last 25 years when just about every other conference has won more national championships and more Heisman's?
Sounds to me like either the coaching is bad, or the players don't play as a team, or maybe all the thundering noise of the SEC is the best is just a little of base. Now I'm certainly not saying your conference is bad, but what I am saying is that it is about equal to a bunch of other equally deserving conferences for what you have this year is one elite team and a bunch of solid, but not elite teams and the numbers (not the polls or some 50 year accumulation of the number of guys running around on Sundays, or how many of your coaches have won national championship games) will bear this out.
I said three weeks ago that Florida will end up an 8-4 club and you folks laughed at me. I thought it was ridiculous that you and the media were pumping the Gators for the national title after the Kentucky win...you guys thought I was an idiot. Now your telling me that if Georgia beats LSU it won't be because of Les Miles, it will be due to solid play. You laugh at UCLA leading the PAC-10 (up until last week) after losing to Utah and Notre Dame...but now you have Tennessee in control of their own destiny to play for the SEC title. The people in Knoxville want to fire their coach.
The SEC is just like every other conference. Parity has arrived at all levels of the college football world and when everything all shakes out, your conference will have one elite teams, 4 very good teams, 4 very average teams and two to three inept programs and the only people who think otherwise are SEC fans or media types who want to sell millions of dollars of hard copy and advertising.
As long as we are checking things out? Check out this article...just another idiot who doesn't see things the SEC way. http://leftyloon.blogspot.com/2007/10/in-case-you-missed-it-week-9.html
How about some more dope from a Big-10 Fan: The Big-10 over-rated? The SEC much better? Here is the results of the last 5 bowl seasons.
While Big 10 bashing is always in vogue, it seems to be at an all-time high since Ohio State ascended to number 1 in the rankings. There the SEC sits, as usual, with all its highly ranked teams. The pollsters love the SEC, no doubt about it. And there's the Big 10, hearing about how "overrated" it is, as usual. Since these two behemoths frequently meet during bowl time due to tie-in's there are usually always 2-3 matchups per year. So what usually happens?
Since SEC fans don't like it when you go too far back into history (because they don't have much), I'll stick to the last 5 years.
2003 2002
Iowa 37 UF 17 Mich 38 Fla 30
UGA 34 Pur 27 Aub 13 PSU 9
Aub 28 Wis 14 Minn 29 Ark 14
SEC 2-1 (a rarity) B10 2-1
Looks to me like the mighty SEC has gotten the better of the Big 10 a whopping 1 time over the last 5 years. A total tally in favor of the Big 10 at 8-6. Sure, not a "dominant" figure. But I would bet most people would be stunned to see the Big 10 has any edge at all based on what we constantly here in the media.
I also find it funny that even frequent Big 10 cellar dweller Minnesota b*tchslaps the SEC when given the opportunity (2-0).
So what do we make of all this? Well, my guess would be that this year once again there will undoubtedly be a few Big 10/SEC matchups. And once again we will hear all the talk about how the SEC is the greatest conference. And once again the majority of the SEC teams will go home with their tails between their legs after being taught another lesson by a Big 10 team!
If you include the regular season match-ups between the two conferences in the last 5 years, its 11-10 in favor of the SEC. Wow - the SEC is just so tough you know, We ARE CLEARLY THE BEST!
Now wait a minute... Tennessee may have blown a 21 point lead, but did they not beat a ranked team ahead of them. The reason USC won more national championships and had more heisman winners than anyone in the SEC is for a couple reasons... one because the Pac-10 was much weaker 5 years ago and Reggie Bush, Carson Palmer, and Matt Leinart were able to put up those Heisman numbers, you know kind of like Colt Brennan out in Hawaii.... Oh and didn't USC split one of those NC with LSU from the SEC and then the other one they won was when Auburn went 13-0 as well... just didn't get that respect and I think Auburn would have beaten USC that year, but they didn't play and Auburn won the SEC championship game, whereas USC didn't even have to play a conference championship game. And if you are going with the last ten year... Tennessee in 1998, LSU in 2003, Florida in 2006... thats three... USC = 2... if you are gonna say you have stats make sure you have the right ones
You are absolutely right the PAC-10 was so weak in 2001 that Oregon State and Washington went to BCS bowls and beat over-ranked CFA foes like Notre Dame 41-9. CFA grand poo-baugh Florida State played CFA godfather Oklahoma. The only problem was Miami beat Florida State who had the same record as Florida and Washington (those pansies out west) beat Miami and had the same record as all three programs at 11-1. Both Washington and Oregon State won their BCS Bowls, while Oregon (a pathetically weak 10-2 team who beat Washington, but lost to Oregon State) beat Texas who whined about being voted out of the BCS.
In 2002, an 11-1 Oregon team totally dominated Big-12 champion Colorado, who didn't even get to play in the national championship game because another totally over hyped elite CFA member Nebraska was voted into the national championship game by the same coaching and voting alliance that holds the SEC in such high regard today. Washington State (that putrid program who plays in the middle of nowhere) beat Texas in the Holiday bowl again. As a matter of fact, the Cougars were so bad, they had the best winning percentage in the entire country during this same time period you describe as similar to Hawaii beating up on New Mexico State and Louisiana Tech.
In 2003, USC was voted out of the BCS game (again, due to the CFA alliance evidenced in the coaches poll and writers poll) after kicking the wholly crap out of the same Auburn team a year earlier 23-0 (on the road) and CFA members LSU and Oklahoma (CFA Godfather) played for the title. But you are right, with almost the same members returning for both teams (Auburn and USC) I'm sure Auburn would have become the first team outside of the PAC-10 conference to actually beat USC that season, especially considering that USC beat Auburn the year before that as well, and absolutely bitch slapped your conference runner up Arkansas (and did you know they have a Heisman candidate at Arkansas) with back to back scores of 70-14 and 50-14.
And USC was so over-rated that Oklahoma and the rest of the media was hyping just minutes before the national championship game how the PAC-10 was going to find out just how physical the game was going to be played in the south. It was 38-10 at half time guys and I don't think Oklahoma was whistling Dixie. As a matter of fact the Trojans were signing in the locker room at half-time while the Sooners may as well have been showering because most of their front running fans - like yourself - left at halftime and the final score was 55-19. By the way, California (a team who actually could beat USC) lost to Texas A&M due to back to back turnovers right before the half, not because of the superiority of the Big-12 or SEC.
But you are exactly right...the PAC-10 was the pathetic-10 during this time period especially considering that the only team to beat USC, other than Vince Young and Texas who had to come from 16 points down in the final quarter, was PAC-10 schools. Nebraska couldn't do it, Arkansas couldn't do it, Auburn Couldn't do it, Notre Dame couldn't do it, Virginia Tech couldn't do it and I don't think Auburn in 2003 despite an outstanding season could do it either.
You are absolutely right the PAC-10 was so weak in 2001 that Oregon State and Washington went to BCS bowls and beat over-ranked CFA foes like Notre Dame 41-9. CFA grand poo-baugh Florida State played CFA godfather Oklahoma. The only problem was Miami beat Florida State who had the same record as Florida and Washington (those pansies out west) beat Miami and had the same record as all three programs at 11-1. Both Washington and Oregon State won their BCS Bowls, while Oregon (a pathetically weak 10-2 team who beat Washington, but lost to Oregon State) beat Texas who whined about being voted out of the BCS.
In 2002, an 11-1 Oregon team totally dominated Big-12 champion Colorado, who didn't even get to play in the national championship game because another totally over hyped elite CFA member Nebraska was voted into the national championship game by the same coaching and voting alliance that holds the SEC in such high regard today. Washington State (that putrid program who plays in the middle of nowhere) beat Texas in the Holiday bowl again. As a matter of fact, the Cougars were so bad, they had the best winning percentage in the entire country during this same time period you describe as similar to Hawaii beating up on New Mexico State and Louisiana Tech.
In 2003, USC was voted out of the BCS game (again, due to the CFA alliance evidenced in the coaches poll and writers poll) after kicking the wholly crap out of the same Auburn team a year earlier 23-0 (on the road) and CFA members LSU and Oklahoma (CFA Godfather) played for the title. But you are right, with almost the same members returning for both teams (Auburn and USC) I'm sure Auburn would have become the first team outside of the PAC-10 conference to actually beat USC that season, especially considering that USC beat Auburn the year before that as well, and absolutely bitch slapped your conference runner up Arkansas (and did you know they have a Heisman candidate at Arkansas) with back to back scores of 70-14 and 50-14.
And USC was so over-rated that Oklahoma and the rest of the media was hyping just minutes before the national championship game how the PAC-10 was going to find out just how physical the game was going to be played in the south. It was 38-10 at half time guys and I don't think Oklahoma was whistling Dixie. As a matter of fact the Trojans were signing in the locker room at half-time while the Sooners may as well have been showering because most of their front running fans - like yourself - left at halftime and the final score was 55-19. By the way, California (a team who actually could beat USC) lost to Texas A&M due to back to back turnovers right before the half, not because of the superiority of the Big-12 or SEC.
But you are exactly right...the PAC-10 was the pathetic-10 during this time period especially considering that the only team to beat USC, other than Vince Young and Texas who had to come from 16 points down in the final quarter, was PAC-10 schools. Nebraska couldn't do it, Arkansas couldn't do it, Auburn Couldn't do it, Notre Dame couldn't do it, Virginia Tech couldn't do it and I don't think Auburn in 2003 despite an outstanding season could do it either.
and Ben I think the reason that you don't want to go too far back in history is because the SEC has a 63-45-2 record all time against the Big 10... that's a .582 winning percentage, so I guess the SEC doesn't have history... but they do have the Big 10's number all time there buddy.
That's some super stats. I just exactly what is the give shit factor on that? And just exactly what does that have to do with anything happening on the field this season?
And when you turn the ball over repeatedly you will get bitch slapped, just like UCLA did against Notre Dame, just like California did against Oregon State (or USC last year for that matter), just like Tennessee did against California, Just like Kentucky did against Mississippi State, just like Oklahoma did against Colorado, Just like Missouri did against Oklahoma, Just like Florida did against Georgia, Just like West Virginia did against South Florida, Just like Michigan did against Appy State or Oregon for that Matter and just like Oregon did against California and just like Louisville did against Utah.
Anyone see a pattern of behavior here.
Does it mention anywhere here (the reality of the game) that UCLA lost because they are from the PAC-10, or that South Florida won because they have only been in existence for 11 years? They ought to build an island for people who continually think its all about the conferences you play in. And did you ever notice how SEC fans always sign in with anonymous? I mean Judas Priest fellas...at any moment I expect the Klan to come out in white robes and start burning crosses in my lawn.
one game doesn't make a history of being the best. great article. fact of the matter is, have a little respect for the rest of the country, because there is good football being played all over.
hey man, i was just saying they were weaker than they are this year, i didnt say they were pathetic... no need to get all bitchy on me... just because I made a point of two in there that you don't agree with
Hey, Ben. Have you ever thought that a team with 2 losses is better than a team with one loss because maybe the 2 loss team has played better competition? The SEC doesn't get credit as far as records go because they beat up on each other!
In other conferences like the Pac-10 or the Big 10, you essentially get a week off when you play a team like Washington or Minnesota. That doesn't happen in the SEC. You see underdogs winning all the time. The bottom 3 teams in the SEC, Arkansas, Ole Miss and Vandy combine for 12 wins, which is more than any other major conference.
The SEC's top dogs may not be as dominant this year, but their middle-tier teams would take that of any other conference to the cleaners!
In the last 25 years, the SEC has won 5 national championships, 2006(Florida), 2003(LSU), 1998(Tennessee), 1996(Florida), 1992 (Alabama). SEC spends more time beating themselves up then really playing anyone outside the confrence, never really got that. If you look the history of college football and look at the elite teams, theres really only one that comes out of the SEC, and thats Alabama. 3 out of the Big 12, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Texas. 1 out of the Pac 10 in USC. Notre Dame of coarse out of the Independents. and Michigan out of the Big 10 and you could even throw in Ohio St, maybe.
This guy does not know what he is talking about. He starts talking about Missouri, look at Missouri and tell me what quality wins they have. They have not played anybody tough except for Oklahoma which they lost. They do not deserve to be any higher than what they are. Look at LSU on the other hand, one upset which came against Kentucky and no matter what this guy says everyone with a good sense of college football knows Kentucky is a good football team with one of the top Qbs around. Then he goes on to prove himself wrong without even realizing it. He starts talking about how the SEC hasn't won a lot of National Titles. HELLO. The SEC is so deep that it is almost impossible to go undefeated and get a shot at a national title. Look at how far ahead Florida was of Ohio St last year. They were the best team in the Big Ten and Florida made them look like a high school team. Put USC into the SEC and they wouldn't be dominating like they do in the Pac 10. Don't get me wrong they would still be competing for a title every year but not like what they have done in the pac 10 for the past 6 years. You can't judge how good a team is by looking at their one upset. Stanford is not better than USC, App St is not better than Michigan, and Kentucky is not better than LSU. Any given Saturday. You really can't grasp this concept completely if you have never played or coached college football. SEC is the toughest conference that is why it is so hard to go undefeated in it. Any given Saturday a team can rise up and win a football game.
Your absolutely right. Please read this article. Next question please! And by the way, you contradicted yourself by stating the SEC dominance over Ohio State and then five sentences later said that you can't judge a team by their one upset. Once again, in SEC land, the dial only spins in one direction.
Your absolutely right I can't grasp this concept if I haven't played high school or college football. I was an ALL-STATE athlete in Oregon at the high school level, who was an All-American baseball player at Oregon State University, who was drafted in the 29th Round by the Pirates Organization, and has spent 15 years coaching high school football and baseball, as well as at the college level at Willamette University. Throughout my athletic career as a coach and player, I have competed in 7 state championship events, winning 5 state titles, and have coached 13 All-State football players by position, 11 All-State baseball players by position, 5 who were drafted and have signed professional baseball contracts.
I have personally coached with Marty Lees (current baseball assistant at Oregon State University), Donny Harrell (current baseball assistant at Washington) and Trevor Brown (current baseball assistant at Oklahoma State). My best friend is Spencer Graham - the west coast cross checker for the Kansas City Royals - who I scout for as well, and my college assistant coach Kurt Kemp is now the director of minor league operations with the Atlanta Braves. I have spent 4 years writing a book manuscript researching this very issue. But you're right...I'm a complete schmuck who has never been around athletics or ever had any kind of success in sports. I've never played with Brett Boone in Alaska with the Gold panners, never played in the Cape Cod League along with other elite athletes who are now millionaires playing professional baseball and I never played football in the same high school program that produced Chris Miller, Mike Walter and Todd Christensen. The same high school football program that currently has a 55 game regular season win streak and is nationally ranked.
While I do believe the SEC is the best conference by a pretty wide margin, I do think the conference's dominance has been overblown this season (mostly by media people who were embarrassed to be so very, very wrong about Ohio State and shocked by the speed and strength they saw from the Gators that night.)
However, many of your points are unreasonable. Here are a few things you might consider:
It's hypocritical and illogical to say the polls have overrated SEC teams but cite poll rankings as reasons to respect teams from other conferences.
It's also hypocritical to give a team like Syracuse credit for beating a then-ranked Louisville team and slam LSU for losing to a now-unranked (though ranked when the game was played) Kentucky team. Use the same standards to judge everyone if you don't want to come across as biased.
LSU is in no way guaranteed a spot in the BCS title game, even if the Tigers win out. Check the BCS standings and look at the remaining teams on the contenders' schedules. If ASU or Oregons wins out, they could very well jump LSU.
SEC teams are ranked higher because they play tougher teams as a result of belonging to the SEC. So their losses hurt them less and their wins count for more.
Yeah, Missouri lost only to Oklahoma. But Oklahoma is also the only ranked team they have played. Check the current top 25 and you'll see 4 teams that LSU has beaten. Why should Missouri rank ahead of LSU when they failed the only test they have faced?
I don't believe one time I have ever mentioned rankings. I have mentioned head-to-head victories against the SEC and called out ridiculous stats that are meaningless. Like the 12 wins between Arkansas, Vandy and Ole Miss combined or the 30-5 garbage spewed by Verne Lundquist on national television. If you can show me where I have mentioned the rankings, other than the CFA teams that are continually protected in the polls, then I will apologize.
The point you're not getting is that the SEC is the top conference due to the depth of talent and competition in the league. There are no "easy outs." This is why there are no top teams, not as many national championships, and very few Heisman winners. It is tough to establish dominance and sustain success in the SEC because it's a season-long meat grinder. It's incredibly rare for an SEC team to go undefeated in conference. It's rare for a player to put up heroic stats when facing SEC defenses week after week. Put Darren McFadden in the Big XII and see if he doesn't win the Heisman.
When a team must face such tough teams week in and week out as part of its conference schedule, it's unreasonable to ask that team to play a lot of tough opponents out of conference to prove their worth, especially in today's college football world where one loss hurts and a second kills your national title hopes. Still, most SEC teams answer the call and play at least one opponent from another BCS conference each year.
As far as bowl records, you should consider that the SEC has many teams qualify for bowls. Because the SEC always has one and sometimes has two teams in the BCS, in many cases the teams getting into the conference tie-in bowls get "bumped up" into a bowl they may not truly qualify for. Look at Notre Dame if you want an indication of how a team does in such a game. Use the bowl record against the SEC, and this SEC fan would love to see it improve, but please recognize that in many cases you're seeing something like the #5 team from the SEC against the #2 team from another conference. And the games aren't blowouts.
There are 8 teams in the Big-12 who would kick the holy crap out of Arkansas. Arkansas is bad because Houston Nutt is a bad coach. What was Arkansas record when they were in the Southwest Conference. They were good with Frank Broyles and Lou Holtz, but havent been anywhere close since, and this was nearly 30 years ago now.
My father lived in Springdale and Muskogee...I do know a little about the South after all, contrary to popular opinion with SEC fans.
Ben, I don't understand your method here bud. Do you really think that a Pac-10 team could go through a SEC schedule and be unscathed? Try playing Florida LSU Georgia Tennessee Auburn Alabama Kentucky and South Carolina, without a break between them. Try that. Welcome to the SEC. And you want to go to the out of conference games? Did you see LSU beat V. Tech this year? OK how bout Tennessee beat the crap out of Cal the year before? And when did South Carolina not take a blow after loosing to Vandy? USC didn't really drop that far down. South Carolina apparently isnt that good either. They have lost to LSU Vandy and Tennessee, so they were apparently overrated. I didnt see them in the top ten after they lost to Vandy but I did see USC somewhere around there. And speaking of Vandy, They really arent that bad as the public takes them to be. They produced star QB Jay Cutler. In the past 3 years they have beaten Tennessee Georgia and South Carolina. And both of the past 2 years vandy has kept within a touchdown against Florida, which is something Ohio State didnt do. And lets compare all of the teams that have been in a bowl game the past years instead of just the big ten matchups and check that record eh?
No Clay, I actually believe they would perform just the same as your other teams do in the SEC because there is very little difference between the conferences and the statistics support this.
Did you see East Carolina almost beat Virginia Tech this year and how about that offense against Boston College. Virginia Tech is a CFA team protected in the polls. Put an Arizona Sticker on the Virginia Tech helmets and they would fall like an absolute rock in the polls. Virginia Tech, like Michigan and Tennessee is a television darling who supported the CFA movement. They are protected in the Polls and are simply over-rated.
Vandy can't even match Oregon State bowl record in the last decade and this after Oregon State had a string of 38 consecutive losing seasons. And the Cougs suck to don't they. Three years ago they had the best 5 year record in the country with four consecutive 10 win seasons. And by the way, to equate Vandy as superior to Ohio State is simply moronic considering they will likely play in their third national championship game this decade.
Ben, I don't understand your method here bud. Do you really think that a Pac-10 team could go through a SEC schedule and be unscathed? Try playing Florida LSU Georgia Tennessee Auburn Alabama Kentucky and South Carolina, without a break between them. Try that. Welcome to the SEC. And you want to go to the out of conference games? Did you see LSU beat V. Tech this year? OK how bout Tennessee beat the crap out of Cal the year before? And when did South Carolina not take a blow after loosing to Vandy? USC didn't really drop that far down. South Carolina apparently isnt that good either. They have lost to LSU Vandy and Tennessee, so they were apparently overrated. I didnt see them in the top ten after they lost to Vandy but I did see USC somewhere around there. And speaking of Vandy, They really arent that bad as the public takes them to be. They produced star QB Jay Cutler. In the past 3 years they have beaten Tennessee Georgia and South Carolina. And both of the past 2 years vandy has kept within a touchdown against Florida, which is something Ohio State didnt do. And lets compare all of the teams that have been in a bowl game the past years instead of just the big ten matchups and check that record eh?
Would you like me mention the current NFL players that Oregon State has developed since 2001 - I'm sure you would be shocked. Tell you what I'll let you figure out that one yourself. LOL - nice analogy with the one player Vandy has managed to produce. I'm sure you will call me out on this one and rightly so because it is very disrespectful towards Vandy, but give me some credit here, that is the most ridiculous analogy I have read this month because I have already compared the records for the SEC since 1990 when the scholarship reductions really began to level the playing field.
You must be living in a cave. Did you see the Oregon - Washington game? It was tied at 31-31 entering the 4th quarter. Did you see the USC - Washington game? The final was 27-24. Did you see the Washington - Boise State game? Washington won. Did you see the Stanford - USC game? Stanford won. Can you imagine that? Stanford did what the better teams in your conference in the last 7 years couldn't do. Actually beat USC...along with Oregon, Oregon State and California. But your right - every week is a Carnival ride in the PAC-10.
And lets take a look at the 12 wins between Arkansas, Ole Miss and Vandy:
Arkansas has beaten Troy, North Texas, Tennessee-Chattanooga, Florida International and Mississippi.
Ole Miss has beaten Memphis and Louisiana Tech (Thats it!!!!!!!!) and lost to Missouri (a team you claim the SEC would take to the cleaners), another team the SEC ridicules the system for because they are in the national championship picture.
Vandy has beaten Richmond, Mississippi (there's that name again), Miami (OH) and South Carolina. That's exactly ONE quality win out of the 12, but nice try with the great statistics again - 12 wins..boy am I impressed, kind of like Verne Lundquist hyping the 30-5 non-conference slate.
That's one legitimate win out of the 12 and speaking of taking those other conference teams the Middle Teir SEC teams would take to the cleaners...what happened when Mississippi State played West Virginia? I believe the score was 31-0 before the Bulldogs woke up from their week off and figured out there was actually a game in town. What happened when Tennessee played California (auspiciously funny since both programs are middle of the road conference teams...who took who to the cleaners)? South Florida (like Auburn) will finish in the middle of the Big-East, as will Auburn in the SEC...what was the score of that South Florida - Auburn game again? Alabama who currently is at the Top of the SEC couldn't handle one of those middle of the road conference teams in Florida State...A team that is 19-15 in the last 4 years! Do you have a memory problem...some sort of SEC amnesia...some sort of phobia against reality, or are you simply drinking too much of that media Koolaid because the networks make an absolute killing off of idiots like yourself who believe all of this garbage...Is Gundy in the house?
Do you like Apples? How do you like them friggin Apples?? NEXT QUESTION YOU MORON!
By the way, 8 of the twelve teams have been ranked this year at some point, being Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, LSU, South Carolina and Tennessee. No shortage there. With that happening to be the nearly the same percentage as those huge powerhouses in the Big East. Boy how great Louisville turned out to be huh? And if you look at those BCS Ratings look whos on the watch, VANDY! Of all the teams you would think, look at that. The usual cellar of the SEC on the watchlist. No other conference has to take the same punishment week in and week out like they do in the SEC. You play a powerhouse this week and Oh look you play one the next week and the next! And I would love to see the Pac-10 or the Big-10 have a Championship game like the SEC does but I guess they are to amazing to have one of those. And by the way, Robert H., Ole Miss hasnt beaten an SEC team this year. And dont forget their game in the 03 season when they were the only team to beat LSU that year.
And your saying how Pac-10 teams are having close games? Ok as if the SEC doesn't. And apparently USC isnt the best in the conference any more so they're not that great team that you are saying Stanford beat
There so bad that the best in the SEC or Big-12 for that matter can't even come close to beating them. PAC-10 teams, by the way, can beat the mighty Trojans...and I don't see any teams lining up to schedule the Trojans other than Fresno State. USC is so bad they are 8 points away from playing for yet another national championship at this point.
And for the last time, I am not saying the SEC is bad or the PAC-10 is better than the SEC. I am simply saying that the SEC is not - absolutely not any better than the other conferences. 5 and 5 against the BCS pretty much says it all!
The SEC always has the most teams with top 10 recruiting classes. It also has 4 coaches who have won National Championships (Steve Spurrier, Phil Fulmer, Urban Meyer and Nick Saban) plus a coach who went 13-0. So yes, they have the best players and the best coaches.
The reason players don't win Heisman's in the SEC is because you have 2-3 games all season to pad stats. Playing a top 25 team every week makes it nearly impossible to amount the stats, as well as the wins, needed to win the award.
With Bowl games, they often mean more to one team than the other. For example, Oklahoma when playing Boise State. Boise State wanted to prove to the world that they were deserving of being a top-tier team. On the other hand, Oklahoma, whose goal year-in and year-out is to win a National Championship, felt there wasn't much to play for. At least not compared to Boise State. Obviously every bowl game is not like this but it happens so often that the records are slightly skewed.
On top of all that I mentioned, the stadiums, on average, are bigger and louder and more intimidating in the SEC. There are some great stadiums scattered across the country but head down south and nearly every team has something to impress you with.
It's nearly impossible to rank conferences but with all of the above factors in favor of the SEC, it's hard not to understand why they are ranked so highly in the eyes of the voters.
Your players are always on national television playing on a media hyped elite stage. The 2-3 games to pad stats is the most absurd thing I have read in this entire comments section. Do you realize the scouts in professional sports don't give a rats ass what a teams recruiting class is rated. Look at Tennessee for Christ sakes...they rank in the Top-5 every year and couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.
Speaking of bigger and louder stadiums - there are none louder than my hometown Autzen Stadium and it only holds sixty thousand. It is a good thing South Florida, West Virginia, Missouri, Florida State and California factored in ridiculous things like the recruiting rankings, the 4 coaches will never make a single play on the field who have won national championships or the 100,000 drunk, obnoxious poor sport fans who boo their own team, throw whiskey bottles on the field or head home at half time if their team is losing, or try to fire their coach when their team is the leading candidate to play in the SEC title game. It is a good thing those opponents factored in those invalid things that actually create the rankings and determine the results on the field.
You truly believe the SEC doesn't produce Heisman players because the players in the SEC are not good? Put McFadden on any team in the nation outside of the SEC and his numbers increase by 10-20%. As a QB or RB, it is ridiculous to have to play a combo of LSU, Auburn, Georiga, Tennessee, Florida, South Carolina, Arkansas and the rest. There is no way to put up big weeks every single game.
However, you put a good player like Troy Smith in a conference with weak defenses like the Big 10 last year and what do you get? A Heisman regular season and an 84 yard game against an SEC team.
Of course NFL scouts don't care about recruiting rankings. They do care about the skill level of the player when they are eligible for the NFL. Which is why there are more players in the NFL than from any other conference.
USC is ranked preseason top 3 every year because of their recruiting rankings and their coach. Same with SEC schools.
Like I said, there are a handful of great stadiums across the country. You came with one. The Pac-10 stadiums do not compete with the SEC venues, just like the fans don't compare. You think it's the same to go into Stanford's stadium and win as it is to go to Ole Miss and win?
Coaches don't make plays? I mean, they don't physically but if you truly believe coaches don't play huge factors in games, then I don't really even know why I am commenting back to you.
LSU may end up beating 6 top-20 teams this season and losing to a top-10 at the time team on the road. BC may end up beating 3 top 20 teams, one of them being Georgia Tech who is no longer ranked. When they both played VT, BC won by 4 on a miracle final 2 minutes while LSU won 45-0. If BC were to play LSU, I know where my money is going.
The venue doesn't win the game Kevin...Look at Boise State. Saban was run out of dodge at Michigan State, but as soon as he goes to the SEC, all of a sudden he's super coach. The players determine the outcome, not the coaches and if you've ever coached the game you would know that you could be the greatest coach in the world and without talent, no one would ever know. The coaches role is within recruiting and setting up the game plan Sunday through Friday. Players win on Saturday. Just ask MAC Brown at Texas...without Vince Young he's just another guy and Texas is just another program. I don't think Houston or Hawaii is concerned in the least about Nick Saban or Les Miles or Phil Fulmer. I do think they are concerned about the players on the field. You equate far too much importance into the coach, especially on game days. Of course, if you were actually an elite athlete yourself, you would probably know this.
So coaches recruit the players and set up the game plan and then the players, who were recruited by the coach, execute the game plan, which was set up by the coach, but the coaches have nothing to do with the action on the field? And on Sunday-Friday, the coaches are teaching those players how to properly play the game but once again, they don't affect the game on Saturday in any way. That makes a lot of sense to me. You know what, why even have coaches? I mean, they can organize practices but they aren't needed on Saturdays. So I say save the money. Use it on cooler uniforms. Oregon has some sweet ones.
Spurrier (one of the best coaches in the NCAA) said it best when he said, "Every year, you guys rank Georgia's recruiting class ahead of ours yet after every win, it's because we have better players." Great coaches can win with average talent a lot more than average coaches can win with great talent.
Kevin, its about the players. Once you step between the lines, the players determine the outcome. Yes you can screw up a game as a coaching staff much more than you can actually out coach the other guy. The coaches in the game today are outstanding on many levels. The difference is the players. Sure motivation, a good game plan, making good recruiting decisions is very important, but the players have to take responsibility and accountability to go out and execute the game plan.
MAC Brown is the same coach he was with or without Vince Young. Nick Saban is the same coach he was at Michigan State, Miami (Dolphins) and Alabama. Pete Carroll is the same guy he was while winning all those championships as he is this season when his team is struggling. The difference is the players. They play the games. The coach may know every tendency on offense throws at him or every coverage a defense may throw at his offense because he watches hours and hours of film everyday of the year, but he is powerless to do anything about it. The players have to do it. A coach may have all the answers and many do, but its the players who have to execute and yes a coach impacts that - again on Sunday through Friday, but once game time rolls around a coaches impact is not as great as you might think, and I'm stating that from experience Kevin, not something I heard from an announcer or read in a book.
And Kevin, I don't think you ever played collegiate sports, let alone professional sports and I doubt if you have even won one state championship or coached and impacted as many athletes to success as I have. And if we are comparing athletic pedigree's, I'll take mine everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. You may call that arrogance, but I'm simply stating a fact.
I will admit that players can make mistakes which lead to losses but overall, there is a reason Pete Carroll and Mac (not like the conference) Brown and Bob Stoops and Urban Meyer and Steve Spurrier and all the great coaches have their teams in position to compete for the conference championship every year. If coaches didn't matter, their teams would fluctuate a lot more.
For example, the Gators in 2001 had 2 losses and nearly made it to National Championship game. Steve Spurrier was the coach. The next season, Ron Zook comes in and they lose 5 games. Still had the same QB and core players. Zook then goes on to get top ranked recruiting classes but still lost 5 games a season. He is fired in 2004 and Urban Meyer comes in. He loses only 3 games the next season and then wins the National Championship the year later. You're really going to say coaching had nothing to do with any of that?
Maybe you were a player, maybe you played in the NFL, but I have never ever heard any player say that coaching means nothing so your argument is not winning me over. Coaching matters.
And I dont believe that Arkansas and Ole Miss really are any good to begin with so Im not saying that the lower tier of the SEC is dominant just that the rest of the conference is pretty tough. I really wish someone over in the could understand how it is. and again non-conference? UCLA gave Notre Dame their first win of the season. Oregon beat Michigan. (as did app. state) Arizona State gets to play San jose state and San diego state. brutal. Oregon gets to play houston and Fresno. Cal gets to play Louisiana Tech and Colorado state. also brutal. And yea, Cal beat Tennessee this year but did you see that game last year? A 35-18 whooping in favor of UT
What the SEC really has is an unbelievable slew of rivalry games that are unmatched with any other conference. That I will grant you, but it doesn't make the excellence on the field any better, especially in this era of 85 scholarships. Some years it is, most years it isn't any different than any other conference around the country.
You're right, Houston will likely win C-USA and Fresno State will likely finish second in the WAC - brutal teams...I believe Houston gave SEC POWER South Carolina all it could handle in the bowl game last year, losing by 8 due to a late interception, while Oregon blew out Houston in the season opener this year after a close game in the first half.
Yes, and like I've said a million times before - IT's Called Turnovers which is the single most important factor affecting the games in the 85 scholarship level.
I wasnt really trying to compare. Just stating that Vandy isnt so horrible anymore. And you want NFL talent? Remember these names: Earl Bennett, Chris Williams, Brian Stamper and Johnathon Goff.
How about Chad Johnson, Steven Jackson, Derek Anderson, Nick Barnett, TJ Houschmandzadeh, Reggie Tongue, Esera Tuaolo (The Gay Wonder himself), James Allen, Keith Ellison and Tim Euhus.
First off I dont believe I said South Carolina is a powerhouse, plus these are two different years. Everybody shoud be playing better in their bowl games.
You're contradicting yourself, You've stated over and over how the SEC is clearly the best conference due to all the power house teams and then you tell me that S. Carolina is not a power house. If South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn and Mississippi State are not power house teams, then who exactly is a power house in the SEC.
You have three teams that qualify: LSU, Florida and Georgia and each of these teams has had their struggles just like every other elite team in every other conference around the country. Get over it guys - you're running about average.
God, I'm so effing tired of this argument. "Oh, the SEC gets no respect because we all beat each other because we're all so good and we don't lose to anyone else EVER."
If you read the article, you'd see that the Big East had 75% of the league ranked this year, and three teams in the top 10. Guess what? West Virginia lost to South Florida, who lost to Connecticut, and Rutgers lost to Cincy, but beat South Florida... Oh wait. That sounds like the only people beating the Big East is US.
We don't whine about it. You're as good as your record, no matter what conference you're in. The SEC is suspect, and has been for some time.
Once again, I never compared, I was stating that Cutler isnt the only thing that comes from Vandy. Im not sure you do but do you remember Corey Chavous or Shelton Quarles? Do you know who Hunter Hillenmeyer or Jovan Haye are? Maybe you dont but all of these guys are or were solid starters on proffesional football teams
Great point and thanks for the info, but what team couldn't say the exact same thing? Every team has a few players who play in the NFL like Vandy does. How does this make the SEC the unquestioned best conference in the country?
Youve contradicted yourself too. You say that USC has been so dominate over the years. I guess Tennessee, BAMA and Auburn have never been good since they havent been up to par this year
Alabama hasn't been very good this entire decade, other than a couple of 10 win seasons. Tennessee hasn't been dominant since 1998 when they won the title. Auburn was been probably the most consistent team in the SEC, but they've lost a number of games outside the conference. Yes, 2003 was bad when the Tigers were held out of the championship game, but I believe I covered that in the other article. The BCS doesn't reward one year wonders. It really takes a two to three year run to get into the title game and the bottom line is that USC shut out the Tigers on the road in the previous season. It is pretty hard to over look that. Do I feel bad for Auburn - absolutely - but I don't feel any worse for them than I do with Oregon, since they were voted out of the championship game to a team who didn't even win their division, much less the conference championship game.
The WAC? really? k. you call us east coast bias but then you will be one of the only people that say that the WAC is really a legitimate conference to reckon with. (west coast bias)
Kind of like Wyoming owning Mississippi. If Mississippi deserves a BCS check, then I guess Utah (who has actually played in and won a BCS game - unlike half the teams in the SEC) and BYU, Wyoming and New Mexico deserve one to.
Listen Ben, I was talking about the guy who wrote the article not you. Don't be so defensive. Calm down. Whatever you have accomplished in your life then good for you. Honestly I really do not care. From reading this article it seems to me this guy doesn't understand the concept of any given Saturday. Also when I was talking about judging how good a team is by one game I meant when a team like USC loses to Stanford. I'm talking about upsets. When a team rises up out of nowhere and shocks a team who is better than them. When Florida played OSU, Florida wasn't a team who wasn't better that just happened to pull off an upset. Florida was 10 times better than Ohio St. and they proved it. Ohio State wasn't upset on that day. They were thrashed.
I am perfectly calm. I am simply responding to your comments. I am not defensive in any way. I am simply putting the same thing your spewing out of your mouth right back in your face, for every excuse or comment on here could be used by every conference in America, which really supports the whole notion that the BCS is a bunch of BS and is supported by the same folks who created the College Football Association, trying to uphold the elite.
You and several people have called me an idiot...a person who isn't capable by experience to make the claims I am making...a person who hasn't ever played the sport or competed at elite levels. I simply threw this back in your face as I am quite competent in sports, have most likely achieved more in athletics and coaching than 99 percent of the people posting on this forum and am quite capable due to my research to making the kind of controversial statements I am making. It isn't like I'm pulling a rabbit out of a hat. I've got a pretty good clue about what it takes to compete at elite levels, and follow college football and amateur baseball in greater detail than half the pundits around the country who get paid millions of dollars to do the same.
At least now the folks who have called me an idiot and a person who obviously doesn't know sports know and understand my background and level of success in sports. I am perfectly calm when writing this information and am not upset in the least bit. I think half of the people posting (specifically SEC fans) are perhaps the biggest idiots I have ever encountered who wouldn't have a clue what it takes to actually compete and coach at the elite levels of sport, but again that is my personal opinion. Somehow I think that bothers you more than it upsets me.
Hey Ben, what conference championship game did USC ever win, same thing with that Oregon team left out of the NC?? And how come you never admit to your mistakes... i.e. saying that USC has won more championships than the SEC in the past 10 years, wrong... another thing... the SEC will have 11... yes count them 11 bowl eligible teams this year (Ole Miss is left out) not many conferences can say that all but 1 team in the conference are bowl eligible how come we are all considered wrong when we say something, but you are always right... you are from the West, so obviously you show bias and you are not God's gift to college football either
Once again, we play every team in our conference, why do we need a championship game at the expense of the student athlete when we have already gone through a nine game round robin. Only two teams in your conference play nine conference games and every team doesn't play every team. The conference championship game had nothing to do with establishing a conference champion and everything to do with making more revenue for the conference. Your conference championship game doesn't even match up the two best teams in your conference. Take last year for example. Florida beat Arkansas, but I would guess 95% of the fans of this conference would agree that LSU was the better team on the field. So much for that theory.
And this is a question for Brandon Schwartz, not Ben Johnson because I didn't write the article.
Hi Ben. Thanks for your service in Iraq. I have just a few comments/questions concerning your article.
1. LSU has already played five Top 25 teams (No. 9 Va Tech; No. 12 South Carolina; No. 9 Florida; No. 17 Kentucky; No. 17 Auburn). This weekend it plays Alabama (No. 17). Missouri has only played three Top 25 teams (No. 25 Nebraska; No. 6 Oklahoma; and No. 24 Texas Tech). This is the reason that the Tigers are ranked higher than Missouri, not some wacky SEC conspiracy.
2. There is a reason that SEC schools don't schedule that many Top 25 non-conference teams. If they do, they find themselves in the same position that LSU is in this year. Before the Tigers can contend for the national title, they have to play six Top 25 teams and win the SEC championship against a seventh Top 25 school. Conferences, such as the Big Ten and the Pac-10, that do not have championship games probably feel that it is wise move for them to schedule some tough non-conference teams.
3. I'm not sure where you got your info regarding the SEC's bowl victories over the past five years, but I calculated the SEC at 20-15, not 18-16.
2006
Florida beat Ohio State by 27
LSU beat Notre Dame by 27
Auburn beat Neb by 3
Georgia beat Va Tech by 7
South Carolina beat Houston by 8
Kentucky beat Clemson by 8
Wisconsin beat Arkansas by 3
Penn State beat Tennessee by 10
Oklahoma State beat Alabama by 3
2005
Alabama beat Texas Tech by 3
Florida beat Iowa by 7
LSU beat Miami by 37
West Virginia beat Georgia by 3
Wisconsin beat Auburn by 14
Missouri beat South Carolina by 7
2004
Auburn beat Virginia Tech by 3
Georgia beat Wisconsin by 3
Tennessee beat Texas A&M by 31
Iowa beat LSU by 5
Miami beat Florida by 17
Minnesota beat Alabama by 4
2003
LSU beat Oklahoma 7
Mississippi beat Oklahoma State by 3
Georgia beat Purdue by 7
Arkansas beat Missouri by 13
Auburn beat Wisconsin by 14
Clemson beat Tennessee by 13
Iowa beat Florida by 20
2002
Mississippi beat Nebraska by 4
Auburn beat Penn State by 4
Georgia beat Florida State by 13
Minnesota beat Arkansas by 15
Texas beat LSU by 15
Maryland beat Tennessee by 27
Michigan beat Florida by 8
If I shouldn't be counting a few of these games for some reason, please let me know, but as far as I can tell, they should all be included. If you add up the points to calculate win/loss margins, the SEC won their games by a combined 229 points, but their losses totaled only 164 points. If you only look at the last four years, SEC teams won their games by a combined 208 points but only lost by 99. This means that the SEC schools are handing out the beat downs far more often than they are receiving the them.
4. What about Auburn in 2004? If the SEC bias is so strong, how was Auburn passed over for the national championship despite not losing a single game and winning the SEC championship? I agree that USC and Oklahoma were both talented teams that year, but if we are all so blinded by our SEC biases, why was Auburn not playing for the championship that year?
5. Counting Heisman trophy winners is a poor way to measure the strength of an entire conference, in my opinion. That's kinda like saying the South isn't conservative because some folks down in New Orleans like to party every now and then.
6. Unless I am mistaken, USC has not won more national titles than the SEC over the past 10 years. The Trojans won in 2004 and split with LSU in 2003. National titles from SEC schools come from Florida in 2006, the LSU/USC split in 2003, and Tennessee in 1998. Regardless, you are correct in implying that the SEC's purported dominance doesn't seem to be supported by the Conference's total number of championship appearances; however, it is the strength of the teams throughout the Conference coupled with the presence of the SEC championship game that often keeps any single SEC team from playing for the title.
7. Finally, I think that a far better way to measure the overall strength of the different conferences might be to look at which schools are currently staffing the NFL rosters. Former SEC players are more likely to be playing professionally than players from any other conference. This remains the case even if you remove two of the SEC's traditionally weak teams, such as Vanderbilt and Kentucky, so that comparisons with the PAC-10 can be made. I've posted the information that I found on the SEC's website below. I think that the last sentence is especially pertinent.
From secsports.com
The Southeastern Conference had 263 players on the 2007 National Football League opening day active rosters, which led all conferences.
The Atlantic Coast Conference was second with 238 players, followed by the Big Ten with 234 players, Pac-10 with 183 players, Big 12 with 176 players and the Big East with 84 players.
Among SEC schools, Georgia was first with 37 former players on NFL rosters, followed by Tennessee with 36, LSU with 33, Florida with 31 and Auburn with 30. Alabama had 21 players on NFL rosters, while South Carolina had 19, Ole Miss and Mississippi State had 17 each, Arkansas had 12, Kentucky six and Vanderbilt with five.
The SEC had five of its schools with 30-or-more-players on NFL rosters. No other conference had two.
And what exactly does the fact that the SEC has more NFL players than the entire world have to do with this year, and the fact that all of your great coaching and players are 5 and 5 against the other BCS Conferences?
Your questions should be directed at Brandon. I simply tried to help him out with more exposure. You can find his blog over at CNNsi.
To all SEC fans: Try to actually come up with something that actually relates to this season and the actual game on the field. Not ridiculous stats occurring over a 50 year period, the number of fannies your stadiums hold (anyone ever been to Norman, Columbus, Austin, Lincoln, Los Angeles, Seattle, Berkely, Tallahassee, Blacksburg...there is just as much atmosphere there as can be found in the SEC?), or the fact that your coaches have national championship rings - lets all stop the game, bow down and bend over because Steve Spurrier, or Nick Saban have actually won a single championship in their entire coaching career - of which is highly controversial because of the invalid nature of the polling system. Do you understand the Joe Paterno has been screwed out of more championships than your current collection of national championship coaches have won combined? This will be my final post here on The Bleacher Report - I've got better things to do with my time.
HEY I DID COME UP WITH SOMETHING FOR THIS YEAR!!! The fact that the SEC will have 11 out of their 12 teams bowl eligible... did you not read that or did you just decide to pass that fact up there??? Not any other conference can say that over 90% of their teams made a bowl... that's something to hang your hat on bud!
Syracuse beat Louisville who was 18th in the country at the time!!!! Yet LSU loses to Kentucky and it doesn't matter that Kentucky was a top 10 team in the country during this season. Way to only apply logic to the argument that supports your point of view.
Just like the guy above me says 11 of 12 SEC teams will be bowl eligible. No other conference can say that.
I find it amusing you talk about the media overhyping the SEC, but then brag about USC. USC is the absolute epitome of media overhyping. "Is USC the best college football team of all time?" Remember that?
You also talk about the Heisman like it's actually awarded to the best player in the nation. Yeah, Troy Smith sure was something, eh? Until he actually played against the SEC and was devoured. Glenn Dorsey is probably the best player in the nation this year but won't win the Heisman because he's a lineman.
And I think the fact that you use USC for all your arguments (national title appearances, Heismans, etc.) goes to show how weak the rest of the Pac 10 is - to where one team can pretty much run the table every year. Kudos to the Pac 10 this year for not being USC and the 9 Dwarfs. But how long will that last?
Already mentioned was that you claim LSU lost to unranked Kentucky (who was highly ranked at the time) but give Syracuse credit for beating a "strong" Louisville team based on where they were ranked at the time. Wonderfully done.
I'm sorry that the SEC has made Pac 10 homers feel so small that they have to create blogs and newspaper articles and message board fodder just to try and convince people the SEC isn't the best conference.
Ben,
First of all let me thank you for your service. I, too, have done my time over there as well. I just can't see where you have the time to do all this so called research and still do your job that the Army or whatever branch of service you're requires you to do. I know I certainly wouldn't have had the time. My hats off to you, if you do. I would think your obligation there is much more important than spreading crap about the SEC.
On that note, have you ever heard of the word "parity"? It mean Equal! That is why everyone believes the SEC is the class of college football. Every year more SEC teams become bowl eligible than any other conference in the nation. Take your beloved PAC-10. USC has dominated that conference for years. I'm so glad to see Oregon and ASU begin to catch up with them. Maybe their rein is about over. I read a good post prior to writing this which basicly said remember what Florida did to Ohio State last year in the BSC championship game. No one in the country gave Florida a chance, but the certainly silenced the crowd on the field. So, let's talk national championships. Go back 50 years. What conference owns the most? THE SEC! What team own more than any one team in the land? ALABAMA! ROLL TIDE FOREVER!!
how the HELL does a conference have 11 of 12 teams bowl eligable? That's not right at all. i mean, if it happens, then the bowl system should just be taken out, cause that is flat out wrong. lets leave all those other conferences on the shelf. yeah, real nice.
this is bullshit. all you SEC fans have no respect whatsoever for the rest of the country. i will admit, this year you are the best football conference. but as far as class, you are dead last in my book. i hope you feel better in your hearts knowing that.
If LSU runs the table from here on out, they will have beaten 6 top 20 teams. OSU, by contrast, hasn't played one of those yet. BC has played one. I prefer a "what have you done" approach, rather than "have you beaten every community college in ohio and rampaged your way through an anemic Big 10. The only way the NC game is going to be entertaining is if OSU chokes tremendously, and loses to a subpar Wisky, or a Michigan team that Oregon spanked by 32 at home. Not to mention 1aa teams. Oregon or LSU would pull OSU's pants down and spank them like the bad little girls they are.
Go USC...play your players! I hope the NCAA finds Reggie Bush & the beloved Trojans guilty of violating the rules. What a scandal this would be for the (supposed) greatest team of all time, prompting USC to forfeit all games from the 2004 and 2005 seasons including A National Championship, & possible Bush's Heisman Trophy.
Are you kidding me? You guys are doing all the hating. You guys ever think you're just a bunch of okay teams that can beat each other... and that makes you the best? Hardly. Why is it when teams in the Big 10 beat each other it's because they suck, but when the almighty SEC teams beat each other it's because all the teams are so good and there's so much "parity"...
Chrisakes, give it a break. I usually avoid this argument but it's so tiring seeing it. The SEC is not a dominant conference any way you wanna' put it. I mean, yea it's a good conference. It produces some pretty interesting games, but so are and do other conferences as well.
All your guys' argument contain the same thing: Oh, Florida beat Ohio State by 27.. They made them look like a high school team, that proves the SEC is dominant. First off, get off of Florida's nuts, seriously. How do base a whole
comments (87) write a comment »
write a new comment
10 months ago
agree here and if usc gets a pass against stanford then michigan gets a pass around app state
10 months ago
"What do people see in the SEC? How do they get a pass when they lose to their lower-tiered teams like Vandy or Ole Miss, yet that same pass is not extended to USC when they lose to Stanford?"
While I agree that USC's is/was a great team and their numbers are amazing - I still believe that the SEC is much deeper top to bottom than any other conference. That doesn't mean that the Pac 10 or Big Ten is top heavy - that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the SEC is deeper top to bottom - "top to bottom" being the key phrase. This will all change most likely, it just takes time. But, you know how the NFL almost anyone can beat anyone (unless you are the Colts or Patriots)? Well, that is what goes on in the SEC. It doesn't mean that they can beat every other team in the country outside of the SEC. It means that the league is very competitive, once again, top to bottom. Personally, I disagree with the Heisman and NC arguments but that's just me. That's another subject for another day.
Just my thoughts. Thanks for publishing this article, Ben, on behalf of Brandon.
-R.
10 months ago
I suggest you take a look at some un-biased data when comparing conferences. Heisman trophy winners, national championships, and number of top 25 teams are all based on polls.
Of the 6 BCS computers that use only win and loss data, the following rank SEC first this year:
Wolfe, Colley, Massey, Anderson/Hester, and Sagarin.
The other ranking, Billingsly, has Pac-10 over the SEC. I would recomend taking Billingsly with a grain of salt though. His rankings are designed to mimic the polls and incorparte things like Pre-Season-Rankings and other silly things.
Isn't it a little bit suspicious that five different computers models, each with their own method, all say the same thing? That the SEC truly is the best conference?
10 months ago
Isn't it a little suspicious that 85 % of the Harris Poll members have direct ties to the college football association movement considering Vince Dooley and Chuck Neinas (the founding fathers of the CFA movement created the Harris Poll after the AP Writers pulled out of the equation after the 2002, 2003 and 2004 debacles.
The reason the SEC teams (as well as the Big-12 teams are ranked so high in the polls is because the CFA cronies own the polls and this includes the coaching polls since Chuck Neinas now works as a consultant hiring most of the Division I-A coaches for the major powers, who once again all supported the CFA movement.
The whole purpose of Brandon's article and my article is superiority shouldn't be determined by a poll, especially one as grossly inept as the college football polls have been over the last 30 years. It should be determined by head-to-head match-ups and when you look at the results of these head-to-head match-ups, the numbers speak for themselves...running antagonistically against the theory that the SEC is the best.
5-5 against BCS opponents doesn't lend me to believe that your conference is clearly the best.
10 months ago
check the BCS Bowl record
check LSU's game against "the best team in the history of college football" in 2004 BCS Championship game
check Florida's game against "the best team in the history of college football" last year
check out the rosters of NFL teams
use any objective measure you want to. and you and I both know that second-tier bowl game results are not the best way to judge
or, keep using your Heisman trophy winner calculation, as if that means anything at all. or the "national championships", which have always been decided by the same people who almost matched Michigan and Ohio State in the NC game last year.
also, check the # of teams in the SEC vs the population of the states in the conference vs other major conferences. Big XII MIGHT match up with the SEC as far as #people/#teams, but the Pac10 and Big10 have a much higher population to team ratio. People dont pay attention to that, but potential talent pool is a huge factor.
Not to mention that one of our schools (the one that demolished Ohio State last year) has to compete with 2 other major conference traditionally powerful football schools in its own state. If either FSU or Miami didnt exist, UF would be unstoppable.
from 10 months ago
So explain to me a couple of things. If you clearly have the best players and the best coaches...why have you only won two Heisman's and two national championships in the last 25 years when just about every other conference has won more national championships and more Heisman's?
Sounds to me like either the coaching is bad, or the players don't play as a team, or maybe all the thundering noise of the SEC is the best is just a little of base. Now I'm certainly not saying your conference is bad, but what I am saying is that it is about equal to a bunch of other equally deserving conferences for what you have this year is one elite team and a bunch of solid, but not elite teams and the numbers (not the polls or some 50 year accumulation of the number of guys running around on Sundays, or how many of your coaches have won national championship games) will bear this out.
I said three weeks ago that Florida will end up an 8-4 club and you folks laughed at me. I thought it was ridiculous that you and the media were pumping the Gators for the national title after the Kentucky win...you guys thought I was an idiot. Now your telling me that if Georgia beats LSU it won't be because of Les Miles, it will be due to solid play. You laugh at UCLA leading the PAC-10 (up until last week) after losing to Utah and Notre Dame...but now you have Tennessee in control of their own destiny to play for the SEC title. The people in Knoxville want to fire their coach.
The SEC is just like every other conference. Parity has arrived at all levels of the college football world and when everything all shakes out, your conference will have one elite teams, 4 very good teams, 4 very average teams and two to three inept programs and the only people who think otherwise are SEC fans or media types who want to sell millions of dollars of hard copy and advertising.
10 months ago
As long as we are checking things out? Check out this article...just another idiot who doesn't see things the SEC way. http://leftyloon.blogspot.com/2007/10/in-case-you-missed-it-week-9.html
10 months ago
How about some more dope from a Big-10 Fan: The Big-10 over-rated? The SEC much better? Here is the results of the last 5 bowl seasons.
While Big 10 bashing is always in vogue, it seems to be at an all-time high since Ohio State ascended to number 1 in the rankings. There the SEC sits, as usual, with all its highly ranked teams. The pollsters love the SEC, no doubt about it. And there's the Big 10, hearing about how "overrated" it is, as usual. Since these two behemoths frequently meet during bowl time due to tie-in's there are usually always 2-3 matchups per year. So what usually happens?
Since SEC fans don't like it when you go too far back into history (because they don't have much), I'll stick to the last 5 years.
2006 2005 2004
PSU 20 Tenn 10 Wisc 24 Aub 10 Iowa 30 LSU 25
Wisc 17 Ark 14 UF 31 Iowa 24 Minn 20 Bama 16
UF 41 OSU 14 Split 1-1 UGA 24 Wisc 21
B10 2-1 B10 2-1
2003 2002
Iowa 37 UF 17 Mich 38 Fla 30
UGA 34 Pur 27 Aub 13 PSU 9
Aub 28 Wis 14 Minn 29 Ark 14
SEC 2-1 (a rarity) B10 2-1
Looks to me like the mighty SEC has gotten the better of the Big 10 a whopping 1 time over the last 5 years. A total tally in favor of the Big 10 at 8-6. Sure, not a "dominant" figure. But I would bet most people would be stunned to see the Big 10 has any edge at all based on what we constantly here in the media.
I also find it funny that even frequent Big 10 cellar dweller Minnesota b*tchslaps the SEC when given the opportunity (2-0).
So what do we make of all this? Well, my guess would be that this year once again there will undoubtedly be a few Big 10/SEC matchups. And once again we will hear all the talk about how the SEC is the greatest conference. And once again the majority of the SEC teams will go home with their tails between their legs after being taught another lesson by a Big 10 team!
If you include the regular season match-ups between the two conferences in the last 5 years, its 11-10 in favor of the SEC. Wow - the SEC is just so tough you know, We ARE CLEARLY THE BEST!
from 10 months ago
I love it :)
10 months ago
Sorry about the formatting there. I retyped it. Hope this helps.
2006
PSU 20 Tenn 10
Wisc 17 Ark 14
UF 41 OSU 14
(B-10: 2-1)
2005
Wisconsin 24 - Auburn 10
Florida 31- Iowa 24
(1-1 Split)
2004
Iowa 30 - LSU 25
Minnesota 20 - Bama 16
Georgia 24 - Wisconsin 21
(B-10: 2-1)
2003
Iowa 37 UF 17
UGA 34 Pur 27
Aub 28 Wis 14
(SEC 2-1) (Wow - The Best team in the Universe actually won the bowl match-up)
2002
Michigan 38 - Florida 30
Auburn 13 - Penn State 9
Minnesota 29 - Arkansas 14
(B-10: 2-1)
10 months ago
Now wait a minute... Tennessee may have blown a 21 point lead, but did they not beat a ranked team ahead of them. The reason USC won more national championships and had more heisman winners than anyone in the SEC is for a couple reasons... one because the Pac-10 was much weaker 5 years ago and Reggie Bush, Carson Palmer, and Matt Leinart were able to put up those Heisman numbers, you know kind of like Colt Brennan out in Hawaii.... Oh and didn't USC split one of those NC with LSU from the SEC and then the other one they won was when Auburn went 13-0 as well... just didn't get that respect and I think Auburn would have beaten USC that year, but they didn't play and Auburn won the SEC championship game, whereas USC didn't even have to play a conference championship game. And if you are going with the last ten year... Tennessee in 1998, LSU in 2003, Florida in 2006... thats three... USC = 2... if you are gonna say you have stats make sure you have the right ones
from 10 months ago
You are absolutely right the PAC-10 was so weak in 2001 that Oregon State and Washington went to BCS bowls and beat over-ranked CFA foes like Notre Dame 41-9. CFA grand poo-baugh Florida State played CFA godfather Oklahoma. The only problem was Miami beat Florida State who had the same record as Florida and Washington (those pansies out west) beat Miami and had the same record as all three programs at 11-1. Both Washington and Oregon State won their BCS Bowls, while Oregon (a pathetically weak 10-2 team who beat Washington, but lost to Oregon State) beat Texas who whined about being voted out of the BCS.
In 2002, an 11-1 Oregon team totally dominated Big-12 champion Colorado, who didn't even get to play in the national championship game because another totally over hyped elite CFA member Nebraska was voted into the national championship game by the same coaching and voting alliance that holds the SEC in such high regard today. Washington State (that putrid program who plays in the middle of nowhere) beat Texas in the Holiday bowl again. As a matter of fact, the Cougars were so bad, they had the best winning percentage in the entire country during this same time period you describe as similar to Hawaii beating up on New Mexico State and Louisiana Tech.
In 2003, USC was voted out of the BCS game (again, due to the CFA alliance evidenced in the coaches poll and writers poll) after kicking the wholly crap out of the same Auburn team a year earlier 23-0 (on the road) and CFA members LSU and Oklahoma (CFA Godfather) played for the title. But you are right, with almost the same members returning for both teams (Auburn and USC) I'm sure Auburn would have become the first team outside of the PAC-10 conference to actually beat USC that season, especially considering that USC beat Auburn the year before that as well, and absolutely bitch slapped your conference runner up Arkansas (and did you know they have a Heisman candidate at Arkansas) with back to back scores of 70-14 and 50-14.
And USC was so over-rated that Oklahoma and the rest of the media was hyping just minutes before the national championship game how the PAC-10 was going to find out just how physical the game was going to be played in the south. It was 38-10 at half time guys and I don't think Oklahoma was whistling Dixie. As a matter of fact the Trojans were signing in the locker room at half-time while the Sooners may as well have been showering because most of their front running fans - like yourself - left at halftime and the final score was 55-19. By the way, California (a team who actually could beat USC) lost to Texas A&M due to back to back turnovers right before the half, not because of the superiority of the Big-12 or SEC.
But you are exactly right...the PAC-10 was the pathetic-10 during this time period especially considering that the only team to beat USC, other than Vince Young and Texas who had to come from 16 points down in the final quarter, was PAC-10 schools. Nebraska couldn't do it, Arkansas couldn't do it, Auburn Couldn't do it, Notre Dame couldn't do it, Virginia Tech couldn't do it and I don't think Auburn in 2003 despite an outstanding season could do it either.
from 10 months ago
You are absolutely right the PAC-10 was so weak in 2001 that Oregon State and Washington went to BCS bowls and beat over-ranked CFA foes like Notre Dame 41-9. CFA grand poo-baugh Florida State played CFA godfather Oklahoma. The only problem was Miami beat Florida State who had the same record as Florida and Washington (those pansies out west) beat Miami and had the same record as all three programs at 11-1. Both Washington and Oregon State won their BCS Bowls, while Oregon (a pathetically weak 10-2 team who beat Washington, but lost to Oregon State) beat Texas who whined about being voted out of the BCS.
In 2002, an 11-1 Oregon team totally dominated Big-12 champion Colorado, who didn't even get to play in the national championship game because another totally over hyped elite CFA member Nebraska was voted into the national championship game by the same coaching and voting alliance that holds the SEC in such high regard today. Washington State (that putrid program who plays in the middle of nowhere) beat Texas in the Holiday bowl again. As a matter of fact, the Cougars were so bad, they had the best winning percentage in the entire country during this same time period you describe as similar to Hawaii beating up on New Mexico State and Louisiana Tech.
In 2003, USC was voted out of the BCS game (again, due to the CFA alliance evidenced in the coaches poll and writers poll) after kicking the wholly crap out of the same Auburn team a year earlier 23-0 (on the road) and CFA members LSU and Oklahoma (CFA Godfather) played for the title. But you are right, with almost the same members returning for both teams (Auburn and USC) I'm sure Auburn would have become the first team outside of the PAC-10 conference to actually beat USC that season, especially considering that USC beat Auburn the year before that as well, and absolutely bitch slapped your conference runner up Arkansas (and did you know they have a Heisman candidate at Arkansas) with back to back scores of 70-14 and 50-14.
And USC was so over-rated that Oklahoma and the rest of the media was hyping just minutes before the national championship game how the PAC-10 was going to find out just how physical the game was going to be played in the south. It was 38-10 at half time guys and I don't think Oklahoma was whistling Dixie. As a matter of fact the Trojans were signing in the locker room at half-time while the Sooners may as well have been showering because most of their front running fans - like yourself - left at halftime and the final score was 55-19. By the way, California (a team who actually could beat USC) lost to Texas A&M due to back to back turnovers right before the half, not because of the superiority of the Big-12 or SEC.
But you are exactly right...the PAC-10 was the pathetic-10 during this time period especially considering that the only team to beat USC, other than Vince Young and Texas who had to come from 16 points down in the final quarter, was PAC-10 schools. Nebraska couldn't do it, Arkansas couldn't do it, Auburn Couldn't do it, Notre Dame couldn't do it, Virginia Tech couldn't do it and I don't think Auburn in 2003 despite an outstanding season could do it either.
10 months ago
The Big 10 got bitchslapped on the biggest stage of them all anyway... by an SEC team... remember that one Buckeye fans?
10 months ago
and Ben I think the reason that you don't want to go too far back in history is because the SEC has a 63-45-2 record all time against the Big 10... that's a .582 winning percentage, so I guess the SEC doesn't have history... but they do have the Big 10's number all time there buddy.
from 10 months ago
That's some super stats. I just exactly what is the give shit factor on that? And just exactly what does that have to do with anything happening on the field this season?
10 months ago
And when you turn the ball over repeatedly you will get bitch slapped, just like UCLA did against Notre Dame, just like California did against Oregon State (or USC last year for that matter), just like Tennessee did against California, Just like Kentucky did against Mississippi State, just like Oklahoma did against Colorado, Just like Missouri did against Oklahoma, Just like Florida did against Georgia, Just like West Virginia did against South Florida, Just like Michigan did against Appy State or Oregon for that Matter and just like Oregon did against California and just like Louisville did against Utah.
Anyone see a pattern of behavior here.
Does it mention anywhere here (the reality of the game) that UCLA lost because they are from the PAC-10, or that South Florida won because they have only been in existence for 11 years? They ought to build an island for people who continually think its all about the conferences you play in. And did you ever notice how SEC fans always sign in with anonymous? I mean Judas Priest fellas...at any moment I expect the Klan to come out in white robes and start burning crosses in my lawn.
10 months ago
one game doesn't make a history of being the best. great article. fact of the matter is, have a little respect for the rest of the country, because there is good football being played all over.
10 months ago
A fucking Men!
10 months ago
Population to Team ratio? Atlanta has more people then the entire state of Oregon!!
10 months ago
hey man, i was just saying they were weaker than they are this year, i didnt say they were pathetic... no need to get all bitchy on me... just because I made a point of two in there that you don't agree with
10 months ago
Hey, Ben. Have you ever thought that a team with 2 losses is better than a team with one loss because maybe the 2 loss team has played better competition? The SEC doesn't get credit as far as records go because they beat up on each other!
In other conferences like the Pac-10 or the Big 10, you essentially get a week off when you play a team like Washington or Minnesota. That doesn't happen in the SEC. You see underdogs winning all the time. The bottom 3 teams in the SEC, Arkansas, Ole Miss and Vandy combine for 12 wins, which is more than any other major conference.
The SEC's top dogs may not be as dominant this year, but their middle-tier teams would take that of any other conference to the cleaners!
10 months ago
In the last 25 years, the SEC has won 5 national championships, 2006(Florida), 2003(LSU), 1998(Tennessee), 1996(Florida), 1992 (Alabama). SEC spends more time beating themselves up then really playing anyone outside the confrence, never really got that. If you look the history of college football and look at the elite teams, theres really only one that comes out of the SEC, and thats Alabama. 3 out of the Big 12, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Texas. 1 out of the Pac 10 in USC. Notre Dame of coarse out of the Independents. and Michigan out of the Big 10 and you could even throw in Ohio St, maybe.
10 months ago
This guy does not know what he is talking about. He starts talking about Missouri, look at Missouri and tell me what quality wins they have. They have not played anybody tough except for Oklahoma which they lost. They do not deserve to be any higher than what they are. Look at LSU on the other hand, one upset which came against Kentucky and no matter what this guy says everyone with a good sense of college football knows Kentucky is a good football team with one of the top Qbs around. Then he goes on to prove himself wrong without even realizing it. He starts talking about how the SEC hasn't won a lot of National Titles. HELLO. The SEC is so deep that it is almost impossible to go undefeated and get a shot at a national title. Look at how far ahead Florida was of Ohio St last year. They were the best team in the Big Ten and Florida made them look like a high school team. Put USC into the SEC and they wouldn't be dominating like they do in the Pac 10. Don't get me wrong they would still be competing for a title every year but not like what they have done in the pac 10 for the past 6 years. You can't judge how good a team is by looking at their one upset. Stanford is not better than USC, App St is not better than Michigan, and Kentucky is not better than LSU. Any given Saturday. You really can't grasp this concept completely if you have never played or coached college football. SEC is the toughest conference that is why it is so hard to go undefeated in it. Any given Saturday a team can rise up and win a football game.
from 10 months ago
Your absolutely right. Please read this article. Next question please! And by the way, you contradicted yourself by stating the SEC dominance over Ohio State and then five sentences later said that you can't judge a team by their one upset. Once again, in SEC land, the dial only spins in one direction.
Your absolutely right I can't grasp this concept if I haven't played high school or college football. I was an ALL-STATE athlete in Oregon at the high school level, who was an All-American baseball player at Oregon State University, who was drafted in the 29th Round by the Pirates Organization, and has spent 15 years coaching high school football and baseball, as well as at the college level at Willamette University. Throughout my athletic career as a coach and player, I have competed in 7 state championship events, winning 5 state titles, and have coached 13 All-State football players by position, 11 All-State baseball players by position, 5 who were drafted and have signed professional baseball contracts.
I have personally coached with Marty Lees (current baseball assistant at Oregon State University), Donny Harrell (current baseball assistant at Washington) and Trevor Brown (current baseball assistant at Oklahoma State). My best friend is Spencer Graham - the west coast cross checker for the Kansas City Royals - who I scout for as well, and my college assistant coach Kurt Kemp is now the director of minor league operations with the Atlanta Braves. I have spent 4 years writing a book manuscript researching this very issue. But you're right...I'm a complete schmuck who has never been around athletics or ever had any kind of success in sports. I've never played with Brett Boone in Alaska with the Gold panners, never played in the Cape Cod League along with other elite athletes who are now millionaires playing professional baseball and I never played football in the same high school program that produced Chris Miller, Mike Walter and Todd Christensen. The same high school football program that currently has a 55 game regular season win streak and is nationally ranked.
from 10 months ago
Forgot the article: http://bcsbusters.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/pac-10-conference-2007-predictions-football/
10 months ago
While I do believe the SEC is the best conference by a pretty wide margin, I do think the conference's dominance has been overblown this season (mostly by media people who were embarrassed to be so very, very wrong about Ohio State and shocked by the speed and strength they saw from the Gators that night.)
However, many of your points are unreasonable. Here are a few things you might consider:
It's hypocritical and illogical to say the polls have overrated SEC teams but cite poll rankings as reasons to respect teams from other conferences.
It's also hypocritical to give a team like Syracuse credit for beating a then-ranked Louisville team and slam LSU for losing to a now-unranked (though ranked when the game was played) Kentucky team. Use the same standards to judge everyone if you don't want to come across as biased.
LSU is in no way guaranteed a spot in the BCS title game, even if the Tigers win out. Check the BCS standings and look at the remaining teams on the contenders' schedules. If ASU or Oregons wins out, they could very well jump LSU.
SEC teams are ranked higher because they play tougher teams as a result of belonging to the SEC. So their losses hurt them less and their wins count for more.
Yeah, Missouri lost only to Oklahoma. But Oklahoma is also the only ranked team they have played. Check the current top 25 and you'll see 4 teams that LSU has beaten. Why should Missouri rank ahead of LSU when they failed the only test they have faced?
from 10 months ago
I don't believe one time I have ever mentioned rankings. I have mentioned head-to-head victories against the SEC and called out ridiculous stats that are meaningless. Like the 12 wins between Arkansas, Vandy and Ole Miss combined or the 30-5 garbage spewed by Verne Lundquist on national television. If you can show me where I have mentioned the rankings, other than the CFA teams that are continually protected in the polls, then I will apologize.
from 10 months ago
I wouldn't rank Missouri ahead of LSU.
I would rank Missouri ahead of every other team in the SEC at this point in the season.
10 months ago
The point you're not getting is that the SEC is the top conference due to the depth of talent and competition in the league. There are no "easy outs." This is why there are no top teams, not as many national championships, and very few Heisman winners. It is tough to establish dominance and sustain success in the SEC because it's a season-long meat grinder. It's incredibly rare for an SEC team to go undefeated in conference. It's rare for a player to put up heroic stats when facing SEC defenses week after week. Put Darren McFadden in the Big XII and see if he doesn't win the Heisman.
When a team must face such tough teams week in and week out as part of its conference schedule, it's unreasonable to ask that team to play a lot of tough opponents out of conference to prove their worth, especially in today's college football world where one loss hurts and a second kills your national title hopes. Still, most SEC teams answer the call and play at least one opponent from another BCS conference each year.
As far as bowl records, you should consider that the SEC has many teams qualify for bowls. Because the SEC always has one and sometimes has two teams in the BCS, in many cases the teams getting into the conference tie-in bowls get "bumped up" into a bowl they may not truly qualify for. Look at Notre Dame if you want an indication of how a team does in such a game. Use the bowl record against the SEC, and this SEC fan would love to see it improve, but please recognize that in many cases you're seeing something like the #5 team from the SEC against the #2 team from another conference. And the games aren't blowouts.
from 10 months ago
There are 8 teams in the Big-12 who would kick the holy crap out of Arkansas. Arkansas is bad because Houston Nutt is a bad coach. What was Arkansas record when they were in the Southwest Conference. They were good with Frank Broyles and Lou Holtz, but havent been anywhere close since, and this was nearly 30 years ago now.
My father lived in Springdale and Muskogee...I do know a little about the South after all, contrary to popular opinion with SEC fans.
10 months ago
Ben, I don't understand your method here bud. Do you really think that a Pac-10 team could go through a SEC schedule and be unscathed? Try playing Florida LSU Georgia Tennessee Auburn Alabama Kentucky and South Carolina, without a break between them. Try that. Welcome to the SEC. And you want to go to the out of conference games? Did you see LSU beat V. Tech this year? OK how bout Tennessee beat the crap out of Cal the year before? And when did South Carolina not take a blow after loosing to Vandy? USC didn't really drop that far down. South Carolina apparently isnt that good either. They have lost to LSU Vandy and Tennessee, so they were apparently overrated. I didnt see them in the top ten after they lost to Vandy but I did see USC somewhere around there. And speaking of Vandy, They really arent that bad as the public takes them to be. They produced star QB Jay Cutler. In the past 3 years they have beaten Tennessee Georgia and South Carolina. And both of the past 2 years vandy has kept within a touchdown against Florida, which is something Ohio State didnt do. And lets compare all of the teams that have been in a bowl game the past years instead of just the big ten matchups and check that record eh?
from 10 months ago
No Clay, I actually believe they would perform just the same as your other teams do in the SEC because there is very little difference between the conferences and the statistics support this.
Did you see East Carolina almost beat Virginia Tech this year and how about that offense against Boston College. Virginia Tech is a CFA team protected in the polls. Put an Arizona Sticker on the Virginia Tech helmets and they would fall like an absolute rock in the polls. Virginia Tech, like Michigan and Tennessee is a television darling who supported the CFA movement. They are protected in the Polls and are simply over-rated.
Vandy can't even match Oregon State bowl record in the last decade and this after Oregon State had a string of 38 consecutive losing seasons. And the Cougs suck to don't they. Three years ago they had the best 5 year record in the country with four consecutive 10 win seasons. And by the way, to equate Vandy as superior to Ohio State is simply moronic considering they will likely play in their third national championship game this decade.
10 months ago
Ben, I don't understand your method here bud. Do you really think that a Pac-10 team could go through a SEC schedule and be unscathed? Try playing Florida LSU Georgia Tennessee Auburn Alabama Kentucky and South Carolina, without a break between them. Try that. Welcome to the SEC. And you want to go to the out of conference games? Did you see LSU beat V. Tech this year? OK how bout Tennessee beat the crap out of Cal the year before? And when did South Carolina not take a blow after loosing to Vandy? USC didn't really drop that far down. South Carolina apparently isnt that good either. They have lost to LSU Vandy and Tennessee, so they were apparently overrated. I didnt see them in the top ten after they lost to Vandy but I did see USC somewhere around there. And speaking of Vandy, They really arent that bad as the public takes them to be. They produced star QB Jay Cutler. In the past 3 years they have beaten Tennessee Georgia and South Carolina. And both of the past 2 years vandy has kept within a touchdown against Florida, which is something Ohio State didnt do. And lets compare all of the teams that have been in a bowl game the past years instead of just the big ten matchups and check that record eh?
from 10 months ago
Would you like me mention the current NFL players that Oregon State has developed since 2001 - I'm sure you would be shocked. Tell you what I'll let you figure out that one yourself. LOL - nice analogy with the one player Vandy has managed to produce. I'm sure you will call me out on this one and rightly so because it is very disrespectful towards Vandy, but give me some credit here, that is the most ridiculous analogy I have read this month because I have already compared the records for the SEC since 1990 when the scholarship reductions really began to level the playing field.
http://bcsbusters.wordpress.com/2007/07/24/hello-world/
10 months ago
Ryan,
You must be living in a cave. Did you see the Oregon - Washington game? It was tied at 31-31 entering the 4th quarter. Did you see the USC - Washington game? The final was 27-24. Did you see the Washington - Boise State game? Washington won. Did you see the Stanford - USC game? Stanford won. Can you imagine that? Stanford did what the better teams in your conference in the last 7 years couldn't do. Actually beat USC...along with Oregon, Oregon State and California. But your right - every week is a Carnival ride in the PAC-10.
And lets take a look at the 12 wins between Arkansas, Ole Miss and Vandy:
Arkansas has beaten Troy, North Texas, Tennessee-Chattanooga, Florida International and Mississippi.
Ole Miss has beaten Memphis and Louisiana Tech (Thats it!!!!!!!!) and lost to Missouri (a team you claim the SEC would take to the cleaners), another team the SEC ridicules the system for because they are in the national championship picture.
Vandy has beaten Richmond, Mississippi (there's that name again), Miami (OH) and South Carolina. That's exactly ONE quality win out of the 12, but nice try with the great statistics again - 12 wins..boy am I impressed, kind of like Verne Lundquist hyping the 30-5 non-conference slate.
That's one legitimate win out of the 12 and speaking of taking those other conference teams the Middle Teir SEC teams would take to the cleaners...what happened when Mississippi State played West Virginia? I believe the score was 31-0 before the Bulldogs woke up from their week off and figured out there was actually a game in town. What happened when Tennessee played California (auspiciously funny since both programs are middle of the road conference teams...who took who to the cleaners)? South Florida (like Auburn) will finish in the middle of the Big-East, as will Auburn in the SEC...what was the score of that South Florida - Auburn game again? Alabama who currently is at the Top of the SEC couldn't handle one of those middle of the road conference teams in Florida State...A team that is 19-15 in the last 4 years! Do you have a memory problem...some sort of SEC amnesia...some sort of phobia against reality, or are you simply drinking too much of that media Koolaid because the networks make an absolute killing off of idiots like yourself who believe all of this garbage...Is Gundy in the house?
Do you like Apples? How do you like them friggin Apples?? NEXT QUESTION YOU MORON!
10 months ago
By the way, 8 of the twelve teams have been ranked this year at some point, being Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, LSU, South Carolina and Tennessee. No shortage there. With that happening to be the nearly the same percentage as those huge powerhouses in the Big East. Boy how great Louisville turned out to be huh? And if you look at those BCS Ratings look whos on the watch, VANDY! Of all the teams you would think, look at that. The usual cellar of the SEC on the watchlist. No other conference has to take the same punishment week in and week out like they do in the SEC. You play a powerhouse this week and Oh look you play one the next week and the next! And I would love to see the Pac-10 or the Big-10 have a Championship game like the SEC does but I guess they are to amazing to have one of those. And by the way, Robert H., Ole Miss hasnt beaten an SEC team this year. And dont forget their game in the 03 season when they were the only team to beat LSU that year.
10 months ago
Thanx for actually answering the questions there bud
from 10 months ago
I'm not your bud!
10 months ago
And your saying how Pac-10 teams are having close games? Ok as if the SEC doesn't. And apparently USC isnt the best in the conference any more so they're not that great team that you are saying Stanford beat
10 months ago
There so bad that the best in the SEC or Big-12 for that matter can't even come close to beating them. PAC-10 teams, by the way, can beat the mighty Trojans...and I don't see any teams lining up to schedule the Trojans other than Fresno State. USC is so bad they are 8 points away from playing for yet another national championship at this point.
And for the last time, I am not saying the SEC is bad or the PAC-10 is better than the SEC. I am simply saying that the SEC is not - absolutely not any better than the other conferences. 5 and 5 against the BCS pretty much says it all!
10 months ago
The SEC always has the most teams with top 10 recruiting classes. It also has 4 coaches who have won National Championships (Steve Spurrier, Phil Fulmer, Urban Meyer and Nick Saban) plus a coach who went 13-0. So yes, they have the best players and the best coaches.
The reason players don't win Heisman's in the SEC is because you have 2-3 games all season to pad stats. Playing a top 25 team every week makes it nearly impossible to amount the stats, as well as the wins, needed to win the award.
With Bowl games, they often mean more to one team than the other. For example, Oklahoma when playing Boise State. Boise State wanted to prove to the world that they were deserving of being a top-tier team. On the other hand, Oklahoma, whose goal year-in and year-out is to win a National Championship, felt there wasn't much to play for. At least not compared to Boise State. Obviously every bowl game is not like this but it happens so often that the records are slightly skewed.
On top of all that I mentioned, the stadiums, on average, are bigger and louder and more intimidating in the SEC. There are some great stadiums scattered across the country but head down south and nearly every team has something to impress you with.
It's nearly impossible to rank conferences but with all of the above factors in favor of the SEC, it's hard not to understand why they are ranked so highly in the eyes of the voters.
from 10 months ago
Kevin,
Your players are always on national television playing on a media hyped elite stage. The 2-3 games to pad stats is the most absurd thing I have read in this entire comments section. Do you realize the scouts in professional sports don't give a rats ass what a teams recruiting class is rated. Look at Tennessee for Christ sakes...they rank in the Top-5 every year and couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag.
Speaking of bigger and louder stadiums - there are none louder than my hometown Autzen Stadium and it only holds sixty thousand. It is a good thing South Florida, West Virginia, Missouri, Florida State and California factored in ridiculous things like the recruiting rankings, the 4 coaches will never make a single play on the field who have won national championships or the 100,000 drunk, obnoxious poor sport fans who boo their own team, throw whiskey bottles on the field or head home at half time if their team is losing, or try to fire their coach when their team is the leading candidate to play in the SEC title game. It is a good thing those opponents factored in those invalid things that actually create the rankings and determine the results on the field.
from 10 months ago
You truly believe the SEC doesn't produce Heisman players because the players in the SEC are not good? Put McFadden on any team in the nation outside of the SEC and his numbers increase by 10-20%. As a QB or RB, it is ridiculous to have to play a combo of LSU, Auburn, Georiga, Tennessee, Florida, South Carolina, Arkansas and the rest. There is no way to put up big weeks every single game.
However, you put a good player like Troy Smith in a conference with weak defenses like the Big 10 last year and what do you get? A Heisman regular season and an 84 yard game against an SEC team.
Of course NFL scouts don't care about recruiting rankings. They do care about the skill level of the player when they are eligible for the NFL. Which is why there are more players in the NFL than from any other conference.
USC is ranked preseason top 3 every year because of their recruiting rankings and their coach. Same with SEC schools.
Like I said, there are a handful of great stadiums across the country. You came with one. The Pac-10 stadiums do not compete with the SEC venues, just like the fans don't compare. You think it's the same to go into Stanford's stadium and win as it is to go to Ole Miss and win?
Coaches don't make plays? I mean, they don't physically but if you truly believe coaches don't play huge factors in games, then I don't really even know why I am commenting back to you.
LSU may end up beating 6 top-20 teams this season and losing to a top-10 at the time team on the road. BC may end up beating 3 top 20 teams, one of them being Georgia Tech who is no longer ranked. When they both played VT, BC won by 4 on a miracle final 2 minutes while LSU won 45-0. If BC were to play LSU, I know where my money is going.
from 10 months ago
The venue doesn't win the game Kevin...Look at Boise State. Saban was run out of dodge at Michigan State, but as soon as he goes to the SEC, all of a sudden he's super coach. The players determine the outcome, not the coaches and if you've ever coached the game you would know that you could be the greatest coach in the world and without talent, no one would ever know. The coaches role is within recruiting and setting up the game plan Sunday through Friday. Players win on Saturday. Just ask MAC Brown at Texas...without Vince Young he's just another guy and Texas is just another program. I don't think Houston or Hawaii is concerned in the least about Nick Saban or Les Miles or Phil Fulmer. I do think they are concerned about the players on the field. You equate far too much importance into the coach, especially on game days. Of course, if you were actually an elite athlete yourself, you would probably know this.
from 10 months ago
So coaches recruit the players and set up the game plan and then the players, who were recruited by the coach, execute the game plan, which was set up by the coach, but the coaches have nothing to do with the action on the field? And on Sunday-Friday, the coaches are teaching those players how to properly play the game but once again, they don't affect the game on Saturday in any way. That makes a lot of sense to me. You know what, why even have coaches? I mean, they can organize practices but they aren't needed on Saturdays. So I say save the money. Use it on cooler uniforms. Oregon has some sweet ones.
Spurrier (one of the best coaches in the NCAA) said it best when he said, "Every year, you guys rank Georgia's recruiting class ahead of ours yet after every win, it's because we have better players." Great coaches can win with average talent a lot more than average coaches can win with great talent.
Ben, I bet you are a world-class athlete.
from 10 months ago
Kevin, its about the players. Once you step between the lines, the players determine the outcome. Yes you can screw up a game as a coaching staff much more than you can actually out coach the other guy. The coaches in the game today are outstanding on many levels. The difference is the players. Sure motivation, a good game plan, making good recruiting decisions is very important, but the players have to take responsibility and accountability to go out and execute the game plan.
MAC Brown is the same coach he was with or without Vince Young. Nick Saban is the same coach he was at Michigan State, Miami (Dolphins) and Alabama. Pete Carroll is the same guy he was while winning all those championships as he is this season when his team is struggling. The difference is the players. They play the games. The coach may know every tendency on offense throws at him or every coverage a defense may throw at his offense because he watches hours and hours of film everyday of the year, but he is powerless to do anything about it. The players have to do it. A coach may have all the answers and many do, but its the players who have to execute and yes a coach impacts that - again on Sunday through Friday, but once game time rolls around a coaches impact is not as great as you might think, and I'm stating that from experience Kevin, not something I heard from an announcer or read in a book.
And Kevin, I don't think you ever played collegiate sports, let alone professional sports and I doubt if you have even won one state championship or coached and impacted as many athletes to success as I have. And if we are comparing athletic pedigree's, I'll take mine everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. You may call that arrogance, but I'm simply stating a fact.
from 10 months ago
I will admit that players can make mistakes which lead to losses but overall, there is a reason Pete Carroll and Mac (not like the conference) Brown and Bob Stoops and Urban Meyer and Steve Spurrier and all the great coaches have their teams in position to compete for the conference championship every year. If coaches didn't matter, their teams would fluctuate a lot more.
For example, the Gators in 2001 had 2 losses and nearly made it to National Championship game. Steve Spurrier was the coach. The next season, Ron Zook comes in and they lose 5 games. Still had the same QB and core players. Zook then goes on to get top ranked recruiting classes but still lost 5 games a season. He is fired in 2004 and Urban Meyer comes in. He loses only 3 games the next season and then wins the National Championship the year later. You're really going to say coaching had nothing to do with any of that?
Maybe you were a player, maybe you played in the NFL, but I have never ever heard any player say that coaching means nothing so your argument is not winning me over. Coaching matters.
10 months ago
And I dont believe that Arkansas and Ole Miss really are any good to begin with so Im not saying that the lower tier of the SEC is dominant just that the rest of the conference is pretty tough. I really wish someone over in the could understand how it is. and again non-conference? UCLA gave Notre Dame their first win of the season. Oregon beat Michigan. (as did app. state) Arizona State gets to play San jose state and San diego state. brutal. Oregon gets to play houston and Fresno. Cal gets to play Louisiana Tech and Colorado state. also brutal. And yea, Cal beat Tennessee this year but did you see that game last year? A 35-18 whooping in favor of UT
from 10 months ago
What the SEC really has is an unbelievable slew of rivalry games that are unmatched with any other conference. That I will grant you, but it doesn't make the excellence on the field any better, especially in this era of 85 scholarships. Some years it is, most years it isn't any different than any other conference around the country.
10 months ago
You're right, Houston will likely win C-USA and Fresno State will likely finish second in the WAC - brutal teams...I believe Houston gave SEC POWER South Carolina all it could handle in the bowl game last year, losing by 8 due to a late interception, while Oregon blew out Houston in the season opener this year after a close game in the first half.
Yes, and like I've said a million times before - IT's Called Turnovers which is the single most important factor affecting the games in the 85 scholarship level.
10 months ago
I wasnt really trying to compare. Just stating that Vandy isnt so horrible anymore. And you want NFL talent? Remember these names: Earl Bennett, Chris Williams, Brian Stamper and Johnathon Goff.
from 10 months ago
Thanks,
How about Chad Johnson, Steven Jackson, Derek Anderson, Nick Barnett, TJ Houschmandzadeh, Reggie Tongue, Esera Tuaolo (The Gay Wonder himself), James Allen, Keith Ellison and Tim Euhus.
10 months ago
First off I dont believe I said South Carolina is a powerhouse, plus these are two different years. Everybody shoud be playing better in their bowl games.
10 months ago
You're contradicting yourself, You've stated over and over how the SEC is clearly the best conference due to all the power house teams and then you tell me that S. Carolina is not a power house. If South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn and Mississippi State are not power house teams, then who exactly is a power house in the SEC.
You have three teams that qualify: LSU, Florida and Georgia and each of these teams has had their struggles just like every other elite team in every other conference around the country. Get over it guys - you're running about average.
10 months ago
God, I'm so effing tired of this argument. "Oh, the SEC gets no respect because we all beat each other because we're all so good and we don't lose to anyone else EVER."
If you read the article, you'd see that the Big East had 75% of the league ranked this year, and three teams in the top 10. Guess what? West Virginia lost to South Florida, who lost to Connecticut, and Rutgers lost to Cincy, but beat South Florida... Oh wait. That sounds like the only people beating the Big East is US.
We don't whine about it. You're as good as your record, no matter what conference you're in. The SEC is suspect, and has been for some time.
10 months ago
Once again, I never compared, I was stating that Cutler isnt the only thing that comes from Vandy. Im not sure you do but do you remember Corey Chavous or Shelton Quarles? Do you know who Hunter Hillenmeyer or Jovan Haye are? Maybe you dont but all of these guys are or were solid starters on proffesional football teams
from 10 months ago
Great point and thanks for the info, but what team couldn't say the exact same thing? Every team has a few players who play in the NFL like Vandy does. How does this make the SEC the unquestioned best conference in the country?
10 months ago
Youve contradicted yourself too. You say that USC has been so dominate over the years. I guess Tennessee, BAMA and Auburn have never been good since they havent been up to par this year
from 10 months ago
Alabama hasn't been very good this entire decade, other than a couple of 10 win seasons. Tennessee hasn't been dominant since 1998 when they won the title. Auburn was been probably the most consistent team in the SEC, but they've lost a number of games outside the conference. Yes, 2003 was bad when the Tigers were held out of the championship game, but I believe I covered that in the other article. The BCS doesn't reward one year wonders. It really takes a two to three year run to get into the title game and the bottom line is that USC shut out the Tigers on the road in the previous season. It is pretty hard to over look that. Do I feel bad for Auburn - absolutely - but I don't feel any worse for them than I do with Oregon, since they were voted out of the championship game to a team who didn't even win their division, much less the conference championship game.
10 months ago
I wouldn't say suspect, but I agree it is over-hyped and over-rated.
10 months ago
...Just stating that Vandy is getting to be more and more competitive every year
10 months ago
The WAC? really? k. you call us east coast bias but then you will be one of the only people that say that the WAC is really a legitimate conference to reckon with. (west coast bias)
10 months ago
Kind of like Wyoming owning Mississippi. If Mississippi deserves a BCS check, then I guess Utah (who has actually played in and won a BCS game - unlike half the teams in the SEC) and BYU, Wyoming and New Mexico deserve one to.
from 10 months ago
Who coached that Utah team and where were they before he got there and where are they now that he is gone? Hmm...coaching matters.
10 months ago
Listen Ben, I was talking about the guy who wrote the article not you. Don't be so defensive. Calm down. Whatever you have accomplished in your life then good for you. Honestly I really do not care. From reading this article it seems to me this guy doesn't understand the concept of any given Saturday. Also when I was talking about judging how good a team is by one game I meant when a team like USC loses to Stanford. I'm talking about upsets. When a team rises up out of nowhere and shocks a team who is better than them. When Florida played OSU, Florida wasn't a team who wasn't better that just happened to pull off an upset. Florida was 10 times better than Ohio St. and they proved it. Ohio State wasn't upset on that day. They were thrashed.
10 months ago
I am perfectly calm. I am simply responding to your comments. I am not defensive in any way. I am simply putting the same thing your spewing out of your mouth right back in your face, for every excuse or comment on here could be used by every conference in America, which really supports the whole notion that the BCS is a bunch of BS and is supported by the same folks who created the College Football Association, trying to uphold the elite.
You and several people have called me an idiot...a person who isn't capable by experience to make the claims I am making...a person who hasn't ever played the sport or competed at elite levels. I simply threw this back in your face as I am quite competent in sports, have most likely achieved more in athletics and coaching than 99 percent of the people posting on this forum and am quite capable due to my research to making the kind of controversial statements I am making. It isn't like I'm pulling a rabbit out of a hat. I've got a pretty good clue about what it takes to compete at elite levels, and follow college football and amateur baseball in greater detail than half the pundits around the country who get paid millions of dollars to do the same.
At least now the folks who have called me an idiot and a person who obviously doesn't know sports know and understand my background and level of success in sports. I am perfectly calm when writing this information and am not upset in the least bit. I think half of the people posting (specifically SEC fans) are perhaps the biggest idiots I have ever encountered who wouldn't have a clue what it takes to actually compete and coach at the elite levels of sport, but again that is my personal opinion. Somehow I think that bothers you more than it upsets me.
10 months ago
Hey Ben, what conference championship game did USC ever win, same thing with that Oregon team left out of the NC?? And how come you never admit to your mistakes... i.e. saying that USC has won more championships than the SEC in the past 10 years, wrong... another thing... the SEC will have 11... yes count them 11 bowl eligible teams this year (Ole Miss is left out) not many conferences can say that all but 1 team in the conference are bowl eligible how come we are all considered wrong when we say something, but you are always right... you are from the West, so obviously you show bias and you are not God's gift to college football either
10 months ago
Once again, we play every team in our conference, why do we need a championship game at the expense of the student athlete when we have already gone through a nine game round robin. Only two teams in your conference play nine conference games and every team doesn't play every team. The conference championship game had nothing to do with establishing a conference champion and everything to do with making more revenue for the conference. Your conference championship game doesn't even match up the two best teams in your conference. Take last year for example. Florida beat Arkansas, but I would guess 95% of the fans of this conference would agree that LSU was the better team on the field. So much for that theory.
And this is a question for Brandon Schwartz, not Ben Johnson because I didn't write the article.
10 months ago
Hi Ben. Thanks for your service in Iraq. I have just a few comments/questions concerning your article.
1. LSU has already played five Top 25 teams (No. 9 Va Tech; No. 12 South Carolina; No. 9 Florida; No. 17 Kentucky; No. 17 Auburn). This weekend it plays Alabama (No. 17). Missouri has only played three Top 25 teams (No. 25 Nebraska; No. 6 Oklahoma; and No. 24 Texas Tech). This is the reason that the Tigers are ranked higher than Missouri, not some wacky SEC conspiracy.
2. There is a reason that SEC schools don't schedule that many Top 25 non-conference teams. If they do, they find themselves in the same position that LSU is in this year. Before the Tigers can contend for the national title, they have to play six Top 25 teams and win the SEC championship against a seventh Top 25 school. Conferences, such as the Big Ten and the Pac-10, that do not have championship games probably feel that it is wise move for them to schedule some tough non-conference teams.
3. I'm not sure where you got your info regarding the SEC's bowl victories over the past five years, but I calculated the SEC at 20-15, not 18-16.
2006
Florida beat Ohio State by 27
LSU beat Notre Dame by 27
Auburn beat Neb by 3
Georgia beat Va Tech by 7
South Carolina beat Houston by 8
Kentucky beat Clemson by 8
Wisconsin beat Arkansas by 3
Penn State beat Tennessee by 10
Oklahoma State beat Alabama by 3
2005
Alabama beat Texas Tech by 3
Florida beat Iowa by 7
LSU beat Miami by 37
West Virginia beat Georgia by 3
Wisconsin beat Auburn by 14
Missouri beat South Carolina by 7
2004
Auburn beat Virginia Tech by 3
Georgia beat Wisconsin by 3
Tennessee beat Texas A&M by 31
Iowa beat LSU by 5
Miami beat Florida by 17
Minnesota beat Alabama by 4
2003
LSU beat Oklahoma 7
Mississippi beat Oklahoma State by 3
Georgia beat Purdue by 7
Arkansas beat Missouri by 13
Auburn beat Wisconsin by 14
Clemson beat Tennessee by 13
Iowa beat Florida by 20
2002
Mississippi beat Nebraska by 4
Auburn beat Penn State by 4
Georgia beat Florida State by 13
Minnesota beat Arkansas by 15
Texas beat LSU by 15
Maryland beat Tennessee by 27
Michigan beat Florida by 8
If I shouldn't be counting a few of these games for some reason, please let me know, but as far as I can tell, they should all be included. If you add up the points to calculate win/loss margins, the SEC won their games by a combined 229 points, but their losses totaled only 164 points. If you only look at the last four years, SEC teams won their games by a combined 208 points but only lost by 99. This means that the SEC schools are handing out the beat downs far more often than they are receiving the them.
4. What about Auburn in 2004? If the SEC bias is so strong, how was Auburn passed over for the national championship despite not losing a single game and winning the SEC championship? I agree that USC and Oklahoma were both talented teams that year, but if we are all so blinded by our SEC biases, why was Auburn not playing for the championship that year?
5. Counting Heisman trophy winners is a poor way to measure the strength of an entire conference, in my opinion. That's kinda like saying the South isn't conservative because some folks down in New Orleans like to party every now and then.
6. Unless I am mistaken, USC has not won more national titles than the SEC over the past 10 years. The Trojans won in 2004 and split with LSU in 2003. National titles from SEC schools come from Florida in 2006, the LSU/USC split in 2003, and Tennessee in 1998. Regardless, you are correct in implying that the SEC's purported dominance doesn't seem to be supported by the Conference's total number of championship appearances; however, it is the strength of the teams throughout the Conference coupled with the presence of the SEC championship game that often keeps any single SEC team from playing for the title.
7. Finally, I think that a far better way to measure the overall strength of the different conferences might be to look at which schools are currently staffing the NFL rosters. Former SEC players are more likely to be playing professionally than players from any other conference. This remains the case even if you remove two of the SEC's traditionally weak teams, such as Vanderbilt and Kentucky, so that comparisons with the PAC-10 can be made. I've posted the information that I found on the SEC's website below. I think that the last sentence is especially pertinent.
From secsports.com
The Southeastern Conference had 263 players on the 2007 National Football League opening day active rosters, which led all conferences.
The Atlantic Coast Conference was second with 238 players, followed by the Big Ten with 234 players, Pac-10 with 183 players, Big 12 with 176 players and the Big East with 84 players.
Among SEC schools, Georgia was first with 37 former players on NFL rosters, followed by Tennessee with 36, LSU with 33, Florida with 31 and Auburn with 30. Alabama had 21 players on NFL rosters, while South Carolina had 19, Ole Miss and Mississippi State had 17 each, Arkansas had 12, Kentucky six and Vanderbilt with five.
The SEC had five of its schools with 30-or-more-players on NFL rosters. No other conference had two.
10 months ago
And what exactly does the fact that the SEC has more NFL players than the entire world have to do with this year, and the fact that all of your great coaching and players are 5 and 5 against the other BCS Conferences?
Your questions should be directed at Brandon. I simply tried to help him out with more exposure. You can find his blog over at CNNsi.
To all SEC fans: Try to actually come up with something that actually relates to this season and the actual game on the field. Not ridiculous stats occurring over a 50 year period, the number of fannies your stadiums hold (anyone ever been to Norman, Columbus, Austin, Lincoln, Los Angeles, Seattle, Berkely, Tallahassee, Blacksburg...there is just as much atmosphere there as can be found in the SEC?), or the fact that your coaches have national championship rings - lets all stop the game, bow down and bend over because Steve Spurrier, or Nick Saban have actually won a single championship in their entire coaching career - of which is highly controversial because of the invalid nature of the polling system. Do you understand the Joe Paterno has been screwed out of more championships than your current collection of national championship coaches have won combined? This will be my final post here on The Bleacher Report - I've got better things to do with my time.
10 months ago
HEY I DID COME UP WITH SOMETHING FOR THIS YEAR!!! The fact that the SEC will have 11 out of their 12 teams bowl eligible... did you not read that or did you just decide to pass that fact up there??? Not any other conference can say that over 90% of their teams made a bowl... that's something to hang your hat on bud!
10 months ago
That's awesome logic you use there.
Syracuse beat Louisville who was 18th in the country at the time!!!! Yet LSU loses to Kentucky and it doesn't matter that Kentucky was a top 10 team in the country during this season. Way to only apply logic to the argument that supports your point of view.
Just like the guy above me says 11 of 12 SEC teams will be bowl eligible. No other conference can say that.
Look at the strength of schedule:
http://realtimerpi.com/football/ncaaf_conf_Men.html
Look at the Sagarin Ratings... 7 out of the top 23 teams are SEC. Look at the RPI, look at the BCS, look at every poll, and every SOS.
The SEC dominates all of them.
10 months ago
I find it amusing you talk about the media overhyping the SEC, but then brag about USC. USC is the absolute epitome of media overhyping. "Is USC the best college football team of all time?" Remember that?
You also talk about the Heisman like it's actually awarded to the best player in the nation. Yeah, Troy Smith sure was something, eh? Until he actually played against the SEC and was devoured. Glenn Dorsey is probably the best player in the nation this year but won't win the Heisman because he's a lineman.
And I think the fact that you use USC for all your arguments (national title appearances, Heismans, etc.) goes to show how weak the rest of the Pac 10 is - to where one team can pretty much run the table every year. Kudos to the Pac 10 this year for not being USC and the 9 Dwarfs. But how long will that last?
Already mentioned was that you claim LSU lost to unranked Kentucky (who was highly ranked at the time) but give Syracuse credit for beating a "strong" Louisville team based on where they were ranked at the time. Wonderfully done.
I'm sorry that the SEC has made Pac 10 homers feel so small that they have to create blogs and newspaper articles and message board fodder just to try and convince people the SEC isn't the best conference.
10 months ago
Ben,
First of all let me thank you for your service. I, too, have done my time over there as well. I just can't see where you have the time to do all this so called research and still do your job that the Army or whatever branch of service you're requires you to do. I know I certainly wouldn't have had the time. My hats off to you, if you do. I would think your obligation there is much more important than spreading crap about the SEC.
On that note, have you ever heard of the word "parity"? It mean Equal! That is why everyone believes the SEC is the class of college football. Every year more SEC teams become bowl eligible than any other conference in the nation. Take your beloved PAC-10. USC has dominated that conference for years. I'm so glad to see Oregon and ASU begin to catch up with them. Maybe their rein is about over. I read a good post prior to writing this which basicly said remember what Florida did to Ohio State last year in the BSC championship game. No one in the country gave Florida a chance, but the certainly silenced the crowd on the field. So, let's talk national championships. Go back 50 years. What conference owns the most? THE SEC! What team own more than any one team in the land? ALABAMA! ROLL TIDE FOREVER!!
10 months ago
how the HELL does a conference have 11 of 12 teams bowl eligable? That's not right at all. i mean, if it happens, then the bowl system should just be taken out, cause that is flat out wrong. lets leave all those other conferences on the shelf. yeah, real nice.
this is bullshit. all you SEC fans have no respect whatsoever for the rest of the country. i will admit, this year you are the best football conference. but as far as class, you are dead last in my book. i hope you feel better in your hearts knowing that.
10 months ago
If LSU runs the table from here on out, they will have beaten 6 top 20 teams. OSU, by contrast, hasn't played one of those yet. BC has played one. I prefer a "what have you done" approach, rather than "have you beaten every community college in ohio and rampaged your way through an anemic Big 10. The only way the NC game is going to be entertaining is if OSU chokes tremendously, and loses to a subpar Wisky, or a Michigan team that Oregon spanked by 32 at home. Not to mention 1aa teams. Oregon or LSU would pull OSU's pants down and spank them like the bad little girls they are.
10 months ago
Oh, and Ben, you won't be missed.
10 months ago
Go USC...play your players! I hope the NCAA finds Reggie Bush & the beloved Trojans guilty of violating the rules. What a scandal this would be for the (supposed) greatest team of all time, prompting USC to forfeit all games from the 2004 and 2005 seasons including A National Championship, & possible Bush's Heisman Trophy.
10 months ago
It's so good to be in the SEC. I love it! We rule and everyone else hates us because of it. What a great place to be in. Suckers!
10 months ago
Are you kidding me? You guys are doing all the hating. You guys ever think you're just a bunch of okay teams that can beat each other... and that makes you the best? Hardly. Why is it when teams in the Big 10 beat each other it's because they suck, but when the almighty SEC teams beat each other it's because all the teams are so good and there's so much "parity"...
Chrisakes, give it a break. I usually avoid this argument but it's so tiring seeing it. The SEC is not a dominant conference any way you wanna' put it. I mean, yea it's a good conference. It produces some pretty interesting games, but so are and do other conferences as well.
All your guys' argument contain the same thing: Oh, Florida beat Ohio State by 27.. They made them look like a high school team, that proves the SEC is dominant. First off, get off of Florida's nuts, seriously. How do base a whole