Erick England pointed out sarcastically that, “I guess the fact the LSU continues to schedule the PAC-10 for out-of-conference games (home and home with ASU, AU, and Washington, and OSU three years ago) is only more proof that the SEC does indeed schedule weak out-of-conference.”
I guess the fact that Arizona was 2-10 and 6-6 in 2003 and 2006, respectively. Oregon State was 7-5 in 2004 and LSU won in overtime. Arizona State was 7-5 in 2005 and LSU beat them 35-31. LSU plays Washington in 2009; Washington has gone 2-9, 5-7, and 4-9 the past three seasons.
There’s a reason that LSU only schedules certain Pac-10 teams: they are the bottom of the league.
My favorite friend Jordan Coleman said, “The Pac-10 has to schedule a couple good out of conference games because the conference games are pretty weak at best compared to the SEC. The SEC always has 5-7 teams ranked in the top 25 in conference so it all equals out.”
This is maybe the argument that makes me the most upset out of anything. As my main man Terence Moore at AJC.com puts it: “There are 12 SEC teams, and the only thing brutal about half of them (South Carolina, Arkansas, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Kentucky and Vanderbilt) is the way that they’ve played in recent years.”
- B/R Ticket Guide
There are also arguments that an individual SEC team will never play all the top SEC schools in a single season due to the SEC’s 12-team format. For example, this year Mississippi State does not even have to play Florida or South Carolina.
SEC fans want to believe they play a tough in-conference schedule week in and week out, but the truth of the matter is there are weak teams in the conference. The other truth is that SEC teams do not even play all the other SEC teams, so they do not play as many “tough” games as SEC fans claim they do.
SEC fan Stephen Williams, who is apparently going to earn a “degree” from Union College (what are professor credentials there, a pre-school education?), said the following: “The Pac-10 has been a top-heavy conference riding the success of USC.
"Other than them, none of the other schools have consistently competed for a national title year in and year out, as opposed to Florida, Georgia, and LSU, who are always in the hunt for the national title.”
Stephen, Georgia is not a perennial national championship contender. Maybe in the last couple of years, but not always.
You named three SEC schools that have been high in the rankings the past couple of years (even though Georgia is questionable). Let me name you three Pac-10 schools: USC, Oregon, and California. USC is obvious.
Oregon finished the year at No. 2 in 2001. They would have won the national championship last year had Dennis Dixon not gotten injured. Oregon finished #10 in 2005. California was up to No. 4 in 2004, and No. 2 before their giant landslide last year. Case closed.
Beyond the top three, there have been arguments that the SEC is somehow a deeper conference than the Pac-10. With schools such as Auburn, South Carolina, and Tennessee, the SEC is rolling deep.
But not as deep as the Pac-10. Arizona State finished 9-3 last year and was ranked No. 6 at one point. Oregon State has finished with 9-4 and 10-4 records in 2006 and 2007, respectively.
Even when you look at the bottom, it is clear that the Pac-10 is better from top to bottom. Last place Stanford took down USC. Ole Miss had zero conference wins. That is not parity in the SEC, when your last-place school has zero conference wins.
comments (6) write a comment »
write a new comment
3 months ago
LET ME BE THE FIRST TO SAY SHOULDA WOULDA ALMOST AND MAYBE DONT ADD UP TO WINS. AND IN THE LAST 20YRS YALL HAD A SHARE CHAMP AND USC THATS TWO OUT OF 10 ALMOST EVERBODY IN OUR CONFERENCE HAS WON OR PLAYED IN THE TITLE GAME AND IN THE LAST 9 YRS WE WON 5. SO PLAYING THE USC AND THE 9DWARFS YALL CALL THE PAC10 FOR WAT IT DONT MAKE US BETTER. WE NEED TO PLAY A CONFERENCE AND PEOPLE WHO MAKE US BETTER PLAYING A CONFERENCE WHO CRIES ABOUT DENNIS DIXON OUR SAVIOR WE WOULD OF GONE TO THIS BOWL IS A SIGN OF A WEAK TEAM AND FAN. GLEN DORSEY PLAYED HURT ALL YR. AND WAS DOUBLE TEAMED ITS CALLED SUK IT UP GET SOME RECUITS AND TALENT IT CREATES DEPTH. IT SHOULDNT BE HARD THEY PREACH PHIL KNIGHT AND NIKE ON RECUITING TRIPS. THE POINT IS NUMBERS DONT LIE AND U TALKN ALL THAT FINISHED THIS N THAT THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE WIN THE BIGG ONE. IF WE SENT AUBURN TO THE PAC OF CHOKE ARTIST 10 THEY WOULD BE CO CHAMPS IF NOT WIN IT EVERY YR. AND IN OUR CONFERENCE THEY WONT EVEN BE 5TH PLACE U DO THE MATH
3 months ago
"Georgia is not a perennial championship contender. Maybe in the last couple of years, but not always."
After an 8-4 season in Richt's first year(2001), UGA has had the following final rankings in the AP and Coaches Poll:
2002: #3 in both(13-1/SEC champs - lost one game by a TD...unlike many other years, two unbeatens played for the national title that year)
2003: #7 AP/#6 Coaches
2004: #7 AP/#6 Coaches
2005: #10 AP and Coaches(SEC champs, but lost by 3 to WVU in Sugar Bowl)
2006: #23 AP(9-4 season, beating Va Tech in bowl game)
2007: #2 AP/#3 Coaches
THAT'S TWO TOP 3 FINISHES IN THE PAST 6 YEARS AND 6 TOP 10 FINISHES IN THE PAST 7 YEARS. In Richt's two "bad" years, UGA went 8-4(2001) and 9-4(2006).
You were saying?
3 months ago
Excuse me, that's 5 top 10 finishes in the past 6 years....I was thinking ahead to this season in making it 6 of 7!
from 3 months ago
Yea, were they even had a chance to be national champions in 2000-2005?
3 months ago
If you're in the top 10 every year, you're giving yourself a chance. Like I said, that 2002 UGA team was every bit as good as some of the teams that have won recent national championships...at least a dozen of the starters from that team went on to play in the NFL for at least a couple of years and many are still playing in the league now. They just had the misfortune of playing in a year that two BCS teams went unbeaten.
Are you going to even try to compare a Pac 10 team outside of SC to that UGA resume' since 2002? No, I didn't think so. Richt is 72-19 at UGA. Pete Carroll has been at SC since 2001 and his record is 76-14. Not a whole lot of difference, even when compared to the one and only elite team in the PAC 10. Starting to get the picture yet, boys? Probably not. Believe what you want to believe. The FACTS speak for themselves.
2 months ago
USC will crush OSU, can't wait to see ASU shock Georgia. Hopefully SC will see some SEC team in the national championship, upon which we can dispel this red neck myth that the SEC is somehow better then the pac-10. SEC is competitive in the top third the rest is east coast bias. After this year all this SEC strongest conference bull---- will cease, get your excuses ready.
write a new comment