A few thoughts on the SEC

[PDXsooner]

First off, I find the whole conference argument not only a waste of time, but really hard to gauge due to all the inconsistencies in how we measure it and how it gets judged - however -- it's hard for any rational or reasonable college football fan to deny that over the last 5 or 10 years it's been the toughest conference.

Has the SEC always been the toughest? Absolutely not.

Will it always be the toughest? Probably not.

Either way, it lead me to a few conclusions -- first of all, the Big Ten has been getting a terrible rap due to their bowl performance. How would any conference fare if they were matched up with the SEC in so many bowls? Not very well.

Secondly, what is the main reason OU and Ohio State got the "can't win the big one" rap lately? Losses to SEC teams (Ohio St against Florida and LSU in NC games, OU against LSU and Florida in NC games).

Lastly, how would the Pac 10 do against SEC teams? USC made a reputation out of clobbering Big 10 teams in their bowls (Yes, OU was party of that). But Oregon gets it's chance -- not only tomorrow vs. Auburn, but next year vs. LSU in their opener.

[CORNholio]

The SEC is on top right now because of good business sense first and foremost. They signed a top notch tv contract where every team has the funds to afford top notch facilities as well as hire a top notch coach (#1 reason for SEC success). In turn those high paid coaches are smart enough to recruit the kind of players that create problems for opposing teams (mostly fast DL and nimble yet big OL) that the second rate coaches don't recruit because they are stuck in 1988. Yes, most of their schools lye in fertile recruiting ground but so do most power conference schools. They were B- for most of their history but when the superconference/TV age arose they took over. It is the result of nothing more than business smarts.

[yermom]

plus, they can recruit over their limits and then cut the chaff loose when they don't work out

[CORNholio]

The illusion of the SEC is that by playing in the SEC it therefore makes a bad/average team better. Which it does not. They have more quality teams than the average conference. That is it; they go deeper. 7-8 teams deep. That does not mean that their top teams are all powerful nor does it mean that their 5th team would dominate any other conference as their ignorant homers claim. They just go deeper. That's it. Very solid conference. What any conference would like to become, but the ignorant hyperbole involving that conference is sickening to the rest of the nation.

[agoo758]

Isn't the SEC like 4-4 in bowls so far or something? :confused:

[CORNholio]

Florida is by MHO the best recruiting ground. But look at the florida schools. for a brief period they dominated college football. They all had good coaches. Miami, Fla, FSU. Take that away and what happens. Miami--avg, Fla--avg, FSU--avg. That is what has made the SEC the SEC. And what made that happen was $$$. And what made the $$$ happen was good conf leadership and business smarts.

[Leroy Lizard]

plus, they can recruit over their limits and then cut the chaff loose when they don't work out

This could be a big deal, IMO. Someone needs to investigate this on a per-conference basis. If they are even oversigning an average of three more recruits than their rivals that can add up to a significant talent advantage over a five-year period. It would be easy to tabulate as well for anyone having the time.

[yermom]

i think there was a video in the other thread. the Big 10 apparently has rules in place, and their numbers were way lower

[Leroy Lizard]

i think there was a video in the other thread. the Big 10 apparently has rules in place, and their numbers were way lower

And how do they do against the SEC in bowl games?

[yermom]

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5935634&categoryid=3286128/

about 5 minutes in

i'd think that this would eventually start hurting recruiting

[Leroy Lizard]

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5935634&categoryid=3286128/

about 5 minutes in

i'd think that this would eventually start hurting recruiting



According to the graphic, SEC schools signed on average 103 over four years in comparison to 86 for the Big 10. That would be huge advantage. I'm no Big 10 fan and hate siding with them, but I can understand some of their struggles.

The Big XII doesn't come off so well either, averaging 97. According to SoonerSports, we had 92 verbal commits on national signing day over the past four years, but I don't know how that translates to signings.

Essentially, oversigning is like being allowed in poker to draw more cards then your opponent, then discarding the ones you don't want. Who couldn't win under those conditions?

[OrlandoSooner]

According to the graphic, SEC schools signed on average 103 over four years in comparison to 86 for the Big 10. That would be huge advantage. I'm no Big 10 fan and hate siding with them, but I can understand some of their struggles.

The Big XII doesn't come off so well either, averaging 97. According to SoonerSports, we had 92 verbal commits on national signing day over the past four years, but I don't know how that translates to signings.

Essentially, oversigning is like being allowed in poker to draw more cards then your opponent, then discarding the ones you don't want. Who couldn't win under those conditions?

Ole Miss? Vandy? Baylor? ISU?

[jkjsooner]

First off, I find the whole conference argument not only a waste of time, but really hard to gauge due to all the inconsistencies in how we measure it and how it gets judged - however -- it's hard for any rational or reasonable college football fan to deny that over the last 5 or 10 years it's been the toughest conference.

Has the SEC always been the toughest? Absolutely not.

Will it always be the toughest? Probably not.

Either way, it lead me to a few conclusions -- first of all, the Big Ten has been getting a terrible rap due to their bowl performance. How would any conference fare if they were matched up with the SEC in so many bowls? Not very well.

Secondly, what is the main reason OU and Ohio State got the "can't win the big one" rap lately? Losses to SEC teams (Ohio St against Florida and LSU in NC games, OU against LSU and Florida in NC games).

Lastly, how would the Pac 10 do against SEC teams? USC made a reputation out of clobbering Big 10 teams in their bowls (Yes, OU was party of that). But Oregon gets it's chance -- not only tomorrow vs. Auburn, but next year vs. LSU in their opener.

Some comments:

1. The SEC is the best conference. This year the gap is even greater than normal. However, they are nowhere near where many of the fans think they are. If you spend time talking to SEC fans (or just listen to the Finebaum callers if you have satellite radio) they leave the impression that the SEC is almost at NFL levels.

2. You may have forgotten the USC game. I know, I've tried to forget it also. That also had a lot to do with the "can't win the big one" label. Plus, even in supposed mismatches in BCS games we didn't show up.

3. USC in '04 would have beaten any SEC team.

4. For those who think the SEC was always the toughest conference, look up Nebraska's record against the SEC in the '70s through the '90s. In many cases this was the Big 8's #2 team playing the SEC champion. In the early '70s it wasn't even close as theh SEC was still not fully open to recruiting black players.

[OUEngr1990]

OU is 64% over the SEC (overall), not so much the last decade or so:

http://www.soonerstats.com/football/series/index.cfm?Affiliation=SEC

Just sayin...

[Danielyork]

The illusion of the SEC is that by playing in the SEC it therefore makes a bad/average team better. Which it does not. They have more quality teams than the average conference. That is it; they go deeper. 7-8 teams deep. That does not mean that their top teams are all powerful nor does it mean that their 5th team would dominate any other conference as their ignorant homers claim. They just go deeper. That's it. Very solid conference. What any conference would like to become, but the ignorant hyperbole involving that conference is sickening to the rest of the nation.

That's what she said!!

[PDXsooner]

Isn't the SEC like 4-4 in bowls so far or something? :confused:

Yeah, maybe. But the way that the top 4 or 5 teams from the SEC play versus the top 4 or 5 teams from other conference is what separates them. The teams that lost those 4 bowl games aren't what gives them their reputation.

[OrlandoSooner]

Yeah, maybe. But the way that the top 4 or 5 teams from the SEC play versus the top 4 or 5 teams from other conference is what separates them. The teams that lost those 4 bowl games aren't what gives them their reputation.

The SEC is so good that 5 bowl losses actually counts as 2 wins...

[IndySooner]

I 100% disagree that the SEC is heads-and-shoulders above the rest. I have a few reasons:

1) After the Auburn "snub" in '04, the SEC has been GUARANTEED a spot in the BCS Championship Game by the media if their team has an equal record to anyone else. Getting there is 95% of the battle. They've been handed a couple of those championships.

2) They play NO ONE out of conference. Their bowl performance is 4-4. There is ZERO reason for anyone to buy into the hype until they start playing people out of conference, but they won't do that because of my point #1.

E$PN has mind control of college football. They will make sure that any $EC team looks better than they are, etc., because it's financially beneficial to them. Once again, I think anyone NOT in the SEC should be for a playoff for these exact reasons. Auto-berths for SEC teams suck. There's no way Auburn would have deserved, for example, a berth over Oregon or OU this year had both run the table. They would have gotten it, though.

[IndySooner]

Yeah, maybe. But the way that the top 4 or 5 teams from the SEC play versus the top 4 or 5 teams from other conference is what separates them. The teams that lost those 4 bowl games aren't what gives them their reputation.

I disagree with this, too. That's like saying the Mountain West is better than the Big 12 because TCU is better than Oklahoma.

Depth is what makes conferences strong. This year, the SEC was not that deep. Beyond Auburn, Alabama & LSU, there wasn't much.

[Soonermagik]

I will copy and paste what I wrote on another thread.

The SEC isn't magic. They just believe in being physical up front and it works well. They can be beaten like any other team. Most SEC teams use the NFL recipe: Establish the run and play good defense and you will likely win.

[OUEngr1990]

I will copy and paste what I wrote on another thread.

The SEC isn't magic. They just believe in being physical up front and it works well. They can be beaten like any other team. Most SEC teams use the NFL recipe: Establish the run and play good defense and you will likely win.


Kinda reminds you of the Switzer championship teams doesn't it?

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Another interesting stat to look at would be JUCO transfers. Because I know K-State and a few others in the Big 12 recruit A LOT of JUCO kids, that would increase your load of players by quite a bit. I know Cam Newton is a JUCO kid but does that occur in the SEC a lot? I do think it is ridiculous that Alabama has 8 scholarships for next year and 14 at the most, yet they have 24 kids already signed. I know Stoops doesn't do that and as far as I can remember, Mack Brown also does not do that. That just doesn't seem fair.

[SoonerLB]

I 100% disagree that the SEC is heads-and-shoulders above the rest. I have a few reasons:

1) After the Auburn "snub" in '04, the SEC has been GUARANTEED a spot in the BCS Championship Game by the media if their team has an equal record to anyone else. Getting there is 95% of the battle. They've been handed a couple of those championships.

2) They play NO ONE out of conference. Their bowl performance is 4-4. There is ZERO reason for anyone to buy into the hype until they start playing people out of conference, but they won't do that because of my point #1.

E$PN has mind control of college football. They will make sure that any $EC team looks better than they are, etc., because it's financially beneficial to them. Once again, I think anyone NOT in the SEC should be for a playoff for these exact reasons. Auto-berths for SEC teams suck. There's no way Auburn would have deserved, for example, a berth over Oregon or OU this year had both run the table. They would have gotten it, though.

Just to add to the above, the SEC was 1-5 against the Big East in bowl games up to 2008. Says a lot about how powerful the SEC is don't it?
The SEC is over-rated, over-hyped, and not one bit better than any of the other major conferences, PERIOD!

[PDXsooner]

Just to add to the above, the SEC was 1-5 against the Big East in bowl games up to 2008. Says a lot about how powerful the SEC is don't it?
The SEC is over-rated, over-hyped, and not one bit better than any of the other major conferences, PERIOD!

I'll bet the 8th and 9th place SEC teams were matched up against the top 3 or 4 teams from the Big East.

That's why the Pac 10 always has a decent bowl record. Their matchups are mostly in their favor.