***2010-2011 College Football Thread***

[Dirtbag59]

I knew the SEC was overrated. Little doubt that they're the best conference with their top teams, however the idea that their bottom feeders could easily beat other conferences is a bit of an overstatement.

Anyway, there were no SEC - Big Ten match ups this year during the regular season. Coming into the Bowl season, over the past five years, the Big Ten had an 8-7 lead over the SEC (after going 2-1 against the SEC in the 2006-2007 bowls).

The SEC leads the Pac-10 62-39-5 (.608). However, over the past 12 years (1998 - 2009), the Pac-10 actually leads the SEC 11-9 (.550).

VS Big XII: Over the past 12 years ('98 -'08) the SEC holds a 24-17-0 (.585) advantage.

VS ACC: Over the past 12 years ('98 -'08) the SEC holds a 24-17-0 (.585) advantage.

So there you have it. The SEC has dominated the ACC and Big XII in recent years but has had problems against the Pac-10 and Big 10. They're the best conference in college football but I'm tired of the idea that the SEC is the only conference that has a tough conference schedule. This argument becomes more prominent when an SEC team isn't selected for the National Championship game.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

I knew the SEC was overrated. Little doubt that they're the best conference with their top teams, however the idea that their bottom feeders could easily beat other conferences is a bit of an overstatement.










So there you have it. The SEC has dominated the ACC and Big XII in recent years but has had problems against the Pac-10 and Big 10. They're the best conference in college football but I'm tired of the idea that the SEC is the only conference that has a tough conference schedule. This argument becomes more prominent when an SEC team isn't selected for the National Championship game.

Good job with the last one, if a SEC team goes undefeated they will be choosen for the title game.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

I knew the SEC was overrated. Little doubt that they're the best conference with their top teams, however the idea that their bottom feeders could easily beat other conferences is a bit of an overstatement.


So there you have it. The SEC has dominated the ACC and Big XII in recent years but has had problems against the Pac-10 and Big 10. They're the best conference in college football but I'm tired of the idea that the SEC is the only conference that has a tough conference schedule. This argument becomes more prominent when an SEC team isn't selected for the National Championship game.

Are a lot of people saying that the only tough conference schedules out there are in the SEC? I haven't seen any of that. I have and will continue to believe the SEC is the best conference in football, but it's absolutely idiotic to think that any school outside the SEC doesn't have a difficult conference schedule. I'm not someone who thinks that a team like Mississippi State could waltz into the Big 10 and beat everybody.

I mean, Big XII teams play the likes of Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Ok State, Texas Tech, etc etc. Those teams have tough schedules for sure. The Big 10 this year has some tough outs in Michigan, Ohio State, Iowa, and Wisconsin.

Those are tough conferences, but I maintain that the athletic ability in the SEC is simply a cut above. Since the AP poll made it's debut, these past four seasons are the first time any conference has ever won the national title four times in a row. Not to mention that those four titles came from three different schools. Oh yeah, in the 12 years the BCS has been in existence, the SEC is 6-0 in the title game. And right now, the SEC represents about a 1/4 of the top 25, with 6 ranked programs.

Look, say what you want about the SEC. When someone else wins a title, then maybe we can revisit this.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Are a lot of people saying that the only tough conference schedules out there are in the SEC? I haven't seen any of that. I have and will continue to believe the SEC is the best conference in football, but it's absolutely idiotic to think that any school outside the SEC doesn't have a difficult conference schedule. I'm not someone who thinks that a team like Mississippi State could waltz into the Big 10 and beat everybody.

I mean, Big XII teams play the likes of Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Ok State, Texas Tech, etc etc. Those teams have tough schedules for sure. The Big 10 this year has some tough outs in Michigan, Ohio State, Iowa, and Wisconsin.

Those are tough conferences, but I maintain that the athletic ability in the SEC is simply a cut above. Since the AP poll made it's debut, these past four seasons are the first time any conference has ever won the national title four times in a row. Not to mention that those four titles came from three different schools. Oh yeah, in the 12 years the BCS has been in existence, the SEC is 6-0 in the title game. And right now, the SEC represents about a 1/4 of the top 25, with 6 ranked programs.

Look, say what you want about the SEC. When someone else wins a title, then maybe we can revisit this.

Like I said, I have no problem with calling the SEC the best conference in college football. Maybe it's just a Georgia thing but the bias against non-SEC teams down here can get downright ugly. Especially in 2005 when Georgia won the SEC. There were people down here complaining about the Texas/USC National Championship (both 12-0 teams) because "Dey didn't have to play no SEC schedule" "Oh if they was in the SEC they would have lost 3 or 4 games." Same thing the year before when Georgia won the SEC after a 9-2 season. "Oh if Oklahoma and USC was in the SEC blah blah blah."

Last year when Texas was selected to play in the National Championship game over Florida there were SEC fans talking about how Florida should be in the National Championship. Then of course when Alabama beat Texas the Bama fans wouldn't shut up about how bad the Big XII was. It was like 'of course you beat them, you knocked out their star QB in the first half.' Not saying Texas would have won but it obviously would have been a much closer game had Texas not been forced to resort to a True Freshman QB.

A much smaller example was when I was on campus last year and I picked up on a phone conversation from a Georgia Bulldog fan where he talked about how he was glad that South Carolina beat Clemson because it helped prove that the SEC was the best conference in college football. Please if you ever hear me say that I'm glad the Cowboys/Eagles/Giants won because it proved that the NFC East was the best division in football feel free to slap me. In fact beat me with a 2X4.

I feel like if the stereotypical SEC Homer was in charge of the AP polls the top 15 would look like this.

1. Alabama
2. Florida
3. Arkansas
4. South Carolina
5. Auburn
6. LSU
7. Georgia
8. Tenneesee
9. Miss State
10. Alabama 2nd Team
11. Florida 2nd Team
12. Ole Miss
13. Kentucky
14. Vanderbilt
15. Ohio State

You seem more reasonable Scud and maybe it's only the more extreme examples that stick out in my memory, but in my experience the level of homerism can get pretty bad down here. Above all I think this proves that College football needs a playoff of some kind. The BCS system is a joke, the fat cats can talk all they want about the idea that every game matters and it's a year long playoff but I have a hard time seeing the significance of Southwest Southern State Juco vs BCS powerhouse.

ACC basketball is similar to SEC football but I think people don't make as big a deal about it because

1. College basketball is less popular
and
2. March Madness settles everything beyond a reasonable doubt.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

I hate that bias also, its such BS the garbage they spew from their mouth.

[mlmpetert]

Beavers temporarily join the Blue Field Group for Boise State - Dr. Saturday - NCAAF - Yahoo! Sports