CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

Take away Saban, and is the SEC that good the last ten years? Mizzou and A&M were bottom feeders in the Big 12, now they're top teams in the SEC.

Yes and no.

It depends on how you define "good." The media makes it sound like they are, as a collective, one step ahead of college football and a step behind the NFL. It's why the term "SEC-caliber" somehow snuck into the lexicon, when calling a defense "good" would suffice. If you want to talk top-to-bottom over the last decade, I would agree that they have been better because they usually have four teams or so in the top 15 on a yearly basis which I don't many other conferences can say that.

I don't think A&M and Missouri prove that the SEC is weak just because they weren't coming off of big seasons in the Big 12. A&M with Manziel was basically a completely different team than they were with Mike Sherman the previous year. Missouri may have done better in SEC play if they stayed healthy, but they would have been average regardless. The way this team was made up, they would have had a big season in any conference in the country. Also a completely healthy Georgia probably would have beaten them, I would imagine. But that is speculation on my part.

I think what A&M's and Missouri's success does suggest is that good teams are good and they can come from any part of the country.

I view things the same way, although most others certainly do not. Even with Saban, the reality of the SEC is not in accord with the general perception. The conference has one of the best teams in the country, probably the best, and several decent teams that really cannot challenge Bama or probably any legit top 5 team. That sounds suspiciously like the perception of the B1G, or some other AQ conferences that get berated for that perception. I cannot find any rational basis for ranking 2-loss SEC teams (TAMU, LSU, SC) above many of the current 1-loss (or unbeaten) teams in the Top-25, or even above 2-loss UCLA and Wisconsin. I'm not saying these teams are poor or anything of the sort, but clearly they have not for whatever reason (e.g., injuries, whatever) EARNED their current ranking this year, while there are many other teams, even lesser teams, that have actually earned higher rankings this year.

Therefore, when being honest with myself, I must conclude rampant SEC-bias exists. I do not want to make that conclusion, I do not like it, and I certainly do not know the reasons why, but the examples are so legion and so obvious in the face of reality, at least in 2013, I'm left with nothing else.

As an aside, I've also been watching more B1G games this year, and I think they suffer from the reverse perception. Nearly everyone says B1G is extremely week this year, while SEC is extremely strong (with 8 top 25 teams at one point), but actual statistics and other available metrics tell a different story. In a match-up between the two conferences, I think B1G would fair much better than most think. Excluding the top dogs, Bama and OSU, what I see is that generally the level of talent of the SEC is better, but most teams in the SEC continually are suspect to very sloppy play at least on one side of the ball or the other. In some cases, there's a legitimate reason why that is so, but the fact that it is so makes it difficult for the SEC teams to claim superiority over teams from other conferences. And with the push to play more in-conference games coming, such will be easier to disguise in the future.

While I don't think bowl season is a great indicator of a team's strengths relative to watching them during the season, the SEC could suffer some defeats in bowl season. The defenses have been awful for some of these schools. A&M, Georgia, and LSU have stunk and now Florida with some of their injuries have been reeling on that side of the football. Auburn's unit is nothing to write home about either. Missouri's front four is good, but overall it's a decent-not-great unit. South Carolina and Alabama are the only teams that have consistent, great defensive performances. It should certainly level the playing field on New Year's and I think the Big 10 has a good shot at not embarrassing themselves like they have over the last three years.

Good points.

I have switched my allegiance from ESPN to Fox One. ESPN obviously promotes the SEC and Fox One obviously promotes the Big 12.

Much like why I watch Fox News

I don't have much of an allegiance to a network...I watch the game that I want regardless of who is televising it...just like I do when I watch non sports TV.

If you want to watch Big 12 football, you will be watching some Fox1 obviously.

I installed Direct TV at the cabin and to my chagrin, I find that my basic package includes the BTN but not ESPNU.....

billybud wrote:I don't have much of an allegiance to a network...I watch the game that I want regardless of who is televising it...just like I do when I watch non sports TV.

If you want to watch Big 12 football, you will be watching some Fox1 obviously.

I installed Direct TV at the cabin and to my chagrin, I find that my basic package includes the BTN but not ESPNU.....

I have both. I like both for sports other than football. I don't care what netwock it is on as long as if it carries something I want to see.

I only get Pathé News. I hear they are going to add sound soon.

Do you get to see a 25 cent movie after?

Spence wrote:Do you get to see a 25 cent movie after?

Double Feature

Abbott and Costello? They are my favorite.

billybud wrote:I don't have much of an allegiance to a network...I watch the game that I want regardless of who is televising it...just like I do when I watch non sports TV.

If you want to watch Big 12 football, you will be watching some Fox1 obviously.

I installed Direct TV at the cabin and to my chagrin, I find that my basic package includes the BTN but not ESPNU.....

Obviously, the matchup trumps what network it is on...

But the rest of the week, you will find the analysis skewed away from the SEC, in contrast to what ESPN will be promoting.

I hope that Fox improves its production values...I found the Texas-WVU game to be not as sharp as CBS or ESPN games...It is almost like the game was in standard definition with the color turned down.

And that stupid transformer graphic is beyond annoying....

Fox isn't great. The do the B10 network. The B10 network does show lots of "off" sports wrestling, soccer, and things like that. I watch them not for the schools playing, just for the sports value.

My family likes watching soccer...we had been involved in soccer for many years.

But wrestling? I don't have an affinity for that. Now, us Harley guys at rallies might watch a couple of women in bikinis wrestle in cole slaw or mud or jello. That I get.