Why SEC Isn't As Great In Football As You Think - Chuck Thompson

[LovelandBuckeye]

What We Think About The 50 States Based On Google Searches

Check out Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, and South Carolina

You forgot Kentucky and a few others, but what about this gem?

Why is Michigan...1. so poor.



EDIT: And this one. Why is Wisonsin...1. so stupid.

 

[Zurp]

First, my opinion is that the SEC is the best conference in college football. However, I don't think that they are as good as they are hyped. Also, when I say that a team is good, it means that they win the games. We can argue until Mark May is done doing things to 5 guys at Pitt the reasons/excuses for why this team won or this team lost.

That said, I started this scoring system a few years ago. I made it to see how Ohio State compares to other teams when it comes to BCS bowl games. Since the BCS began (1998 season), I give 3 points to a team for winning a BCS bowl game, and they get 1 point for losing a BCS bowl game. (Making it to, and losing, a BCS bowl game, I decided, was better than not making it to one.) If the BCS bowl game is the National Championship bowl game, those points are doubled (6 for a win, 2 for a loss).

I did not take away USC's bowl games that they have vacated, because, well, those games were played. So when Ohio State vacated their Sugar Bowl win, I didn't take it away. Same deal with Penn State's bowl win.

As expected, Ohio State was doing well. I don't remember what year I started it, or how they were ranked against other teams, but they are currently in first place, with 26 points. But that is irrelevant to this thread.

I also split the results by conference, and that's where I saw a big difference between the SEC and the rest. (That's also why I began posting this in the thread called "Some BCS facts for your SEC friends.") In 14 years of the BCS bowls, the SEC has 80 points, which is an average of 5.71 points per year, and 3.478 points per game. Yeah - when Florida beat Cincinnati in some BCS bowl game, their average went down. Second place in total points is the Big Ten with 54 points. The Big Ten averages 3.86 points per year, and 2.160 points per game. The next-best average-per-game is the Big 12, with 2.526.

This really just means that the SEC wins their BCS bowl games, and that they tend to get an at-large spot (in 14 years, they missed an at-large spot only 5 times). It also means that they get in to that national championship game, and they tend to win it.

Again, reasons for winning these games can be argued. Maybe even SHOULD be argued. But I just figured I'd throw out some FACTS into a discussion that has been dormant for a couple of days.

The end.

 

[Bestbuck36]

Until we beat one of them in a meaningful bowl game again, I will say nothing about their streak. We contributed to it more than any other school. That sucks.

 

[BigWoof31]

Georgia Native, Lawyer and Contributor to SB Nation blog has a piece by piece takedown of the Thompson post. It's a pretty thoughtful counter argument doesn't have any cheapshots or low brow attacks. Warning, it's fairly lengthy.

http://atlanta.sbnation.com/2012/8/16/3246553/chuck-thompson-sec-espn-college-football-2012


Two of the counter arguments I liked the most (one pertinent to Ohio State):

In 2010, for example, the Auburn Tigers began the season with a consensus ranking of #23, behind SEC rivals Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, and Georgia. The only way a team regarded so lightly early in the season can possibly climb into the national championship game -- which Auburn did that year -- is to beat a slew of highly ranked opponents, which Auburn also did that year. Because polls are arranged from the outset so that SEC teams will face the most highly ranked opponents over the course of a season, only teams from the SEC are time and again able to manage this feat.

"Did anyone dispute that 13-0 Auburn deserved one of the two spots in the BCS Championship Game? No? Then what's your point? And regarding the earlier point about SEC teams benefiting from playing bowl games at home, Auburn beat Oregon in a Pac-Ten state for the national title. Finally, the only teams other than Auburn to win a national title in the BCS era when starting the season outside of the AP top ten were Oklahoma in 2000 (preseason #19) and Ohio State in 2002 (preseason #13). So Auburn was in fact the only SEC team to "manage this feat" and it is not something that has happened "time and again." I guess these are the rigorous research skills and commitment to precise language that one learns as the features editor of Maxim."

It certainly isn't on-field performance. Judging by inter-conference records -- that is to say actual games as opposed to media guesswork and bestowed rankings -- the SEC plays other BCS conferences about equally. Witness the record since the start of the BCS era in 1998:
SEC vs. PAC-12 regular season: 10-12
SEC vs. PAC-12 bowl games: 1-0
SEC vs. Big 12 regular season: 6-10
SEC vs. Big 12 bowl games: 21-8
SEC vs. ACC regular season: 42-36
SEC vs. ACC bowl games: 16-9
SEC vs. Big 10 regular season: 7-4
SEC vs. Big 10 bowl games: 19-19
SEC vs. Big East regular season: 16-15
SEC vs. Big East bowl game: 3-8
The record is clear. In head-to-head match-ups against other major conferences, the SEC has either a combined losing record or one that's generally only a little better than even.

Head-to-head match-ups can be subject to all sorts of vagaries, such as a phenomenon of lower-tier SEC teams playing upper tier teams from other conferences. It also has sample size issues. Let's use a measuring stick that: (1) considers the entire sample size as opposed to a small sliver; (2) uses scoring margin, just like the big boys in Las Vegas would; and (3) is truly unbiased and views teams based simply on scores, without any subjective sense as to who is better. I give you the Simple Ranking System-based pages at College Football Reference and Jeff Sagarin's ratings. Here are the average conference ranks from 1998 to 2011 according to SRS:

SEC - 2.36
Big XII - 3
Pac Ten - 3
Big Ten - 3.78
ACC - 4.14
Big East - 4.71

And according to Sagarin:
SEC - 2.36
Big XII - 3
Pac Ten - 3
ACC - 3.78
Big Ten - 4.07
Big East - 4.78
So yes, it is true that the SEC's on-field performance has been better than that of other conferences

 

[buxfan4life]

Head-to-head match-ups can be subject to all sorts of vagaries, such as a phenomenon of lower-tier SEC teams playing upper tier teams from other conferences.

This statement is a load of shit. This happens with every single conference. Add to the fact we are talking one "rank" for the majority of the time (Conference A's #5 vs Conference B's #4). Not to mention the fact that if the SEC is as dominant from top to bottom as people tend to spout, then I would figure that SEC #5 should be on the same level, if not a higher level, than the opposing conference's #4.

Until there are no preseason rankings (there should be no rankings until after the 3rd week IMO), then this argument is totally moot due to the fact that certain teams (some just happen to be in the SEC currently) get a ton of unwarranted love before games even begin, thereby inflating their rank throughout the year.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to discredit the fact that the SEC has been THE conference lately, but don't bring a strawman to the table to support your side.

 

[Nutriaitch]

This statement is a load of shit. This happens with every single conference. Add to the fact we are talking one "rank" for the majority of the time (Conference A's #5 vs Conference B's #4). Not to mention the fact that if the SEC is as dominant from top to bottom as people tend to spout, then I would figure that SEC #5 should be on the same level, if not a higher level, than the opposing conference's #4.

Until there are no preseason rankings (there should be no rankings until after the 3rd week IMO), then this argument is totally moot due to the fact that certain teams (some just happen to be in the SEC currently) get a ton of unwarranted love before games even begin, thereby inflating their rank throughout the year.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to discredit the fact that the SEC has been THE conference lately, but don't bring a strawman to the table to support your side.

I think the SEC is deeper than other conferences.
But not in the traditional sense of "our 5th best team would win any other conference"

More in the sense of we have 5 or so schools that on any given year can compete for a Nat title.

No, all 5 won't do it the same year, but LSU, Bama, Florida, Auburn, Georgia have all shown the ability to consistently field a team capable of competing for titles.

So on any given year, one of those teams should be in the mix.

Other conferences don't have that many.
Look at the Big Ten.
Y'all got OSU and Wiscy.
If both of those schools have off years, there is no one else to step up. (Michigan looks to be close to that level again).

Where in the SEC, if any 1,2, or even 3 falters, we still have teams capable of taking the reigns.

 

[Buckeye Maniac]

I think the SEC is deeper than other conferences.
But not in the traditional sense of "our 5th best team would win any other conference"

More in the sense of we have 5 or so schools that on any given year can compete for a Nat title.

No, all 5 won't do it the same year, but LSU, Bama, Florida, Auburn, Georgia have all shown the ability to consistently field a team capable of competing for titles.

So on any given year, one of those teams should be in the mix.

Other conferences don't have that many.
Look at the Big Ten.
Y'all got OSU and Wiscy.
If both of those schools have off years, there is no one else to step up. (Michigan looks to be close to that level again).

Where in the SEC, if any 1,2, or even 3 falters, we still have teams capable of taking the reigns.

 

[brodybuck21]

I think the SEC is deeper than other conferences.
But not in the traditional sense of "our 5th best team would win any other conference"

More in the sense of we have 5 or so schools that on any given year can compete for a Nat title.

No, all 5 won't do it the same year, but LSU, Bama, Florida, Auburn, Georgia have all shown the ability to consistently field a team capable of competing for titles.

So on any given year, one of those teams should be in the mix.

Other conferences don't have that many.
Look at the Big Ten.
Y'all got OSU and Wiscy.
If both of those schools have off years, there is no one else to step up. (Michigan looks to be close to that level again).

Where in the SEC, if any 1,2, or even 3 falters, we still have teams capable of taking the reigns.

huh?

 

[Muck]

I think the SEC is deeper than other conferences.
But not in the traditional sense of "our 5th best team would win any other conference"

More in the sense of we have 5 or so schools that on any given year can compete for a Nat title.

No, all 5 won't do it the same year, but LSU, Bama, Florida, Auburn, Georgia have all shown the ability to consistently field a team capable of competing for titles.

So on any given year, one of those teams should be in the mix.

Other conferences don't have that many.
Look at the Big Ten.
Y'all got OSU and Wiscy.
If both of those schools have off years, there is no one else to step up. (Michigan looks to be close to that level again).

Where in the SEC, if any 1,2, or even 3 falters, we still have teams capable of taking the reigns.

While I agree with your general argument I have to ask...when in the hell has Georgia competed for a national title?

To be blunt TSUN, Nebraska & even PSU have had teams that were in the national picture more recently than Georgia (for that matter so has Tennessee).

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Y'all beat me to it Re: UGA It's been since Herschel Walker left, more or less.

 

[Nutriaitch]

While I agree with your general argument I have to ask...when in the hell has Georgia competed for a national title?

'07 Georgia was one of the 5 teams being discussed for the BCS CG.
they were #2 in the final polls (after bowls).

'02 only loss was by 7 to Florida. putting them just outside the BCS CG that year.

'05, their 2 losses were by a combined 5 points.


this year, their schedule sets up nicely for them if LSU and Bama fall short of expectations.





my point was simply if the SEC's preseason favorite (or even top 2-3 teams) falter, SOMEBODY always seems to step up.

that hasn't been the case for other conferences.

 

[jwinslow]

my point was simply if the SEC's preseason favorite (or even top 2-3 teams) falter, SOMEBODY always seems to step up.

it helps that it's almost always a self fulfilling prophecy, and not just for the good teams. teams like south Carolina swap places with the team that upset them or vice versa.

The real shame is that we never got to see the SEC take on the outrageous USC squads for the title. Kiffin has done well but those Carroll squads were legendary.

there really isn't much competition at this point in terms of conference prestige. What goes largely.unnoticed is how the lower tier teams fare in bowl games against the B1G. Throughout the NC streak they have had their hands full in the outback and capital one bowls, even during the year of the disaster in the desert that kickstarted the hyperbole train, which not so coincidentally coincided with the fallout between ESPN and the B10, which resulted in the BTN.

 

[Nutriaitch]

LSU fans have dreamed of a game against USC ever since 2003.

as for the self fulfilling prophecy, I'm calling BS.

At the end of the season, which SEC team was unjustly put in the title game?

Florida '06? That was Pre-ESPN love fest.
Us in '07? maybe since there were so many teams in mix
Florida '08? Taking a non division champ Texas over them?
Bama '09? Undefeated
Auburn '10? Undefeated
LSU '11? Undefeated
Bama '12? Ok, I agree with this one.

So of the 7 teams to get invites, you got 1 team for sure who got in when they shouldn't.

And 1 maybe.

 

[jwinslow]

I don't think there were unworthy SEC teams other than LSU 07 and no one deserved it that year.

I have blocked out the entire 11 season I didn't even watch the rematch, and I am a guy who loves to watch Kentucky Tennessee or Texas Baylor if I have free time ,. A tribute to ESPN's grand efforts to ruin the sport they help make so great.

My comment was based more on the South Carolina, Arkansas, Georgia types that fly up 10-18 spots if they take out a top ten ranked SEC team, thereby preserving the prestige of the conference. It's not a conspiracy but it is quite cyclical early in the year.

You will not see an undefeated Penn State team leap up to #9 in the country from the low teens or twenties after giving top ten Michigan their first loss.

you especially will not see northwestern, Purdue or Illinois soar up if they were the team that upset them and were undefeated since they hadn't really played many teams of consequence yet.

 

[brodybuck21]

I don't think there were unworthy SEC teams other than LSU 07 and no one deserved it that year.

My comment was based more on the South Carolina, Arkansas, Georgia types that fly up 10-18 spots if they take out a top ten ranked SEC team, thereby preserving the prestige of the conference. It's not a conspiracy but it is quite cyclical early in the year.

You will not see an undefeated Penn State team leap up to #9 in the country from the low teens or twenties after giving top ten Michigan their first loss.

you especially will not see northwestern, Purdue or Illinois soar up if they were the team that upset them and were undefeated since they hadn't really played many teams of consequence yet.

bingo