Bradley H
Posts: 303
Joined: 9/9/2014
From: SoCal
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JT2 I don't get why people get so worked up about best conference discussions. We have finally made some progress in formulating an on-field answer to who the best team is, we will never be able to do that with conferences. Why would we? SEC football is a different breed. It really is. Sometimes the teams underachieve, but it is never for a lack of talent. I've been to Iron Bowls in three different decades. Still the best non-Bowl, Bowl game in the nation. Hell, for that matter, the Egg Bowl, often meaningless in terms of determining a National Champion, is one of the most insane, passionate, exciting, great football games of the year. If you haven't been, you go to Tuscaloosa, Birmingham, Starkville, Baton Rouge, Oxford or Athens, and I bet you will have a completely different opinion and understanding of SEC football. Again, I respectfully disagree. The fan bases in the SEC are amazing. Nobody questions that. However, when it comes to football, the difference between the SEC and the Pac 12 is minimal when it comes to results. The Pac 10/12 was .500 against the SEC during the BCS era. There is no spinning results when you have a large sample size. The hype, however, was one-sided. Now, in terms of styles, there is a huge difference. The SEC has always been a great defensive conference. If you look over the past 15 years, however, the teams that have risen from the SEC to win titles have been the ones that could muster some offense (often times quirky, but effective). Florida with Tebow. Auburn with Newton. Bama with all their running backs. LSU with Jamarcus Russell for a couple of seasons. The mentality in the SEC has become...put 20 points on the board and see if it will stick. The bottom line is, if a program is going to be a factor for a national title, they are going to need to have solid quarterback play. It doesn't have to be great, but it has to be solid in crunch time. The SEC has a very small gathering of good quarterbacks this season. Outside of Prescott, Wallace and Sims, the cupboards are pretty bare. And truth be told, I'm not sure any of those guys are going to become household names on Sunday. I know it is early, but I like what I see from the committee so far. I think Ole Miss scheduling Florida State to start the season is a sign that SEC schools are getting the message. They can no longer claim to play a great schedule by scheduling The Citadel, Florida A&M and Presbyterian College. They are also looking at going from seven to eight conference games. IMO, they shouldn't even have a say in it. If they don't like it, leave the conference. You can't have it both ways. Nobody is forcing them to play in the SEC. Personally, I think they should have to play every team in the conference. Can you imagine a season where the Red Sox don't play the Yankees? It wasn't long ago that Georgia was a highly-ranked team. Look at their schedule. Clemson (W) decent team, South Carolina (L) shit team, Troy (W) shit team, Tennessee (W) shit team, Vanderbilt (W) shit team, Missouri (W) decent team, Arkansas (W) shit team, Florida (L) shit team, Kentucky (W) shit team. They finally get a legit opponent this week with Auburn before finishing with Charleston Southern (shit team) and Georgia Tech (solid program). In essence, they have gone 7-2 playing a pretty poor schedule. Conversely, Ohio State has gone 8-1 against a similar schedule and has never sniffed the top-5. Michigan State is a far superior program to anything Georgia has faced all season. Nobody questions the top two or three teams in the SEC. The problem is, nobody ever makes light of the eight shitty teams in the conference. Don't even get me started on the travel thing. Some of these programs haven't traveled more than 500 miles for a non-conference game in a decade.
< Message edited by Bradley H -- 11/15/2014 10:03:07 AM >
_____________________________
Defense starts at the corners!
|