College Football 2012

[Winslow]

Some of the SEC fans I know were very vocal about the idea that the the 2007 game might be a Big 10 rematch. In fact, it got a LOT of heated discussion in here.

All that changed last year, apparently.

If you look at the past decade, the Big 10-SEC Bowl game records are 15-13 in favor of SEC. It's not the dominating conference everyone genuflects to. If you look at the past five years, however, it ain't so pretty.

Granted, the Big 10 has had a string of weak seasons, including this year. So I am not going to flex my "fan guns" anytime soon.

[Dreadstar]

Slam said it best last year. Not only did you *NOT* win your conference, you didn't even win *your division* of your conference. Welcome to the BCS.

[Nick Soapdish]

For the same reason, I didn't really want to see Oregon make it in if Notre Dame lost. Which leaves Kansas State?

In somewhat related news, I think that Ohio State (and specifically Tressel) deserves a shout-out for concealing violations and going to a bowl game last year so that their one year bowl ban is this year when they're undefeated and probably could've gotten a national title shot. I'm sure that some voters are penalizing them for being banned. It can't all be their really weak schedule because FSU's was the about the same prior to their loss (one better team, but fewer middlin' teams and more terrible ones) and they were ranked about as high.

[Slam_Bradley]

Slam said it best last year. Not only did you *NOT* win your conference, you didn't even win *your division* of your conference. Welcome to the BCS.

That's because I'm wise. Or crazy. One of those.

I also recognize that I'm far in the minority, but I'm not ever going to change my mind.

I'll agree that the SEC has been the best conference for a few years. I'll also say without fear that they aren't that much better. If you look at the strength of schedule for the zero and one loss teams, Alabama's is second worst, at least until they play in the SEC Championship. Georgia's schedule has been fairly soft this year (worst of the one-loss teams thus far). The grind of playing in the SEC isn't significantly worse than playing in any of the other big conferences no matter how much they want to believe that.

[Dreadstar]

For the same reason, I didn't really want to see Oregon make it in if Notre Dame lost. Which leaves Kansas State?

In somewhat related news, I think that Ohio State (and specifically Tressel) deserves a shout-out for concealing violations and going to a bowl game last year so that their one year bowl ban is this year when they're undefeated and probably could've gotten a national title shot. I'm sure that some voters are penalizing them for being banned. It can't all be their really weak schedule because FSU's was the about the same prior to their loss (one better team, but fewer middlin' teams and more terrible ones) and they were ranked about as high.

What happened was that the NCAA assured the university that they'd be done with the investigation in the first few weeks of the season last year. That didn't happen. The NCAA is a ponderous old glacier. Instead, they didn't post findings until after OSU had accepted a bowl bid. THAT is the bitch-worthy portion of the situation. But, you say, why didn't the university self-impose a bowl ban last year? Because there would be no guarantee that that would satisfy the NCAA, and a second bowl ban for this year as well might be something along the odds of a coin-flip. Yeah, it would have been nice to see the NCAA finish in a timely manner last year, instead of chasing a lot of he said-she said leads that were dead ends, but that's the way it goes.

As it is, we got another division championship, an undefeated season finishing with UM, and a likely top 5 finish in the AP. And the vast majority of fans here are pretty happy at that considering what everyone prognosticated before the season. Life goes on, and all that.

[Dreadstar]

The grind of playing in the SEC isn't significantly worse than playing in any of the other big conferences no matter how much they want to believe that.

I always loved seeing a team go into conference play undefeated, ranked in the top 5 or 10, lose to a conference opponent, and drop to say... 17.

Then I watch a team from the SEC perform the same 1-loss gyration and drop . . . 2 spots.

[Nick Soapdish]

That's because I'm wise. Or crazy. One of those.

I also recognize that I'm far in the minority, but I'm not ever going to change my mind.

I'll agree that the SEC has been the best conference for a few years. I'll also say without fear that they aren't that much better. If you look at the strength of schedule for the zero and one loss teams, Alabama's is second worst, at least until they play in the SEC Championship. Georgia's schedule has been fairly soft this year (worst of the one-loss teams thus far). The grind of playing in the SEC isn't significantly worse than playing in any of the other big conferences no matter how much they want to believe that.

Not true! The Big East and ACC are still (technically speaking) among the big conferences.

[Nick Soapdish]

What happened was that the NCAA assured the university that they'd be done with the investigation in the first few weeks of the season last year. That didn't happen. The NCAA is a ponderous old glacier. Instead, they didn't post findings until after OSU had accepted a bowl bid. THAT is the bitch-worthy portion of the situation. But, you say, why didn't the university self-impose a bowl ban last year? Because there would be no guarantee that that would satisfy the NCAA, and a second bowl ban for this year as well might be something along the odds of a coin-flip. Yeah, it would have been nice to see the NCAA finish in a timely manner last year, instead of chasing a lot of he said-she said leads that were dead ends, but that's the way it goes.

As it is, we got another division championship, an undefeated season finishing with UM, and a likely top 5 finish in the AP. And the vast majority of fans here are pretty happy at that considering what everyone prognosticated before the season. Life goes on, and all that.

I was shocked that the NCAA investigation was as fast as it was (how many years did it take them to investigate Southern Cal?) and a bit surprised that anybody believed their predictions. (Although I have to admit that I believed they might by half-assing the investigation and still think that's how they finished as fast as they did.)

I agree that there wasn't a guarantee that the bowl ban would be enough. I saw a lot of predictions (I typed "most" at first, but I have no idea if that was correct) that it would be multiple years and more scholarships. I think that it was a pretty sure thing that it'd be at least one year so that Ohio State wouldn't be wasting a bowl ban so the calculus becomes whether Ohio State would be at a better bowl and which players get impacted. There's also the question of perception. I've always assumed that the NCAA is a bit more lenient on schools that fall on their swords and start imposing penalties, gambling that they won't be worse than what the NCAA does. But I'm not sure if that's backed up at all.

[macul]

Some of the SEC fans I know were very vocal about the idea that the the 2007 game might be a Big 10 rematch. In fact, it got a LOT of heated discussion in here.

All that changed last year, apparently.

No, it didn't. The majority of us SEC fans (excluding biased LSU and Alabama fans of course) did not want an all SEC title game last season. It was a sham in 2007 when ESPN tried to promote an Ohio State v. Michigan rematch and it was a sham last season as well.

[Nick Soapdish]

No, it didn't. The majority of us SEC fans (excluding biased LSU and Alabama fans of course) did not want an all SEC title game last season. It was a sham in 2007 when ESPN tried to promote an Ohio State v. Michigan rematch and it was a sham last season as well.

I guess it varies a bit. Most of the Florida fans that I talked with about it (and it wasn't many) loved the idea. And same with a few LSU fans - which I would've thought would be opposed to playing a rematch. But they were arguing that Alabama was the only one worthy to play them.

[marvell2100]

The thing is win and you're in. And when you lose and who you lose to plays a big factor. The SEC gets the benefit of the doubt because they've performed well over the years and playing in the conference is a grind. It's because of the defenses in the SEC that people consider it a grind to play in. Big 12 is a good conference that ranks high as well. But a knock against them is that there is no defense, just high scoring shoot-outs. The Big 10 is the opposite not enough offense. Pac-12 has the west coast thing working against them becasue their games are so late.

The play-off scenario should take of alot of peoples complaints, although 8 teams would be the ideal number. The top 8 regardless of whether they won their conference or not. This year: Big East Champ? Not hardly. ACC Champ? Only if FSU wins.

[Nick Soapdish]

The thing is win and you're in. And when you lose and who you lose to plays a big factor. The SEC gets the benefit of the doubt because they've performed well over the years and playing in the conference is a grind. It's because of the defenses in the SEC that people consider it a grind to play in. Big 12 is a good conference that ranks high as well. But a knock against them is that there is no defense, just high scoring shoot-outs. The Big 10 is the opposite not enough offense. Pac-12 has the west coast thing working against them becasue their games are so late.

The play-off scenario should take of alot of peoples complaints, although 8 teams would be the ideal number. The top 8 regardless of whether they won their conference or not. This year: Big East Champ? Not hardly. ACC Champ? Only if FSU wins.

That's varied pretty widely. The SEC hasn't always been known for solid defense although they've usually had a few good defensive teams. And the Big 12's offensive rep has also been recently obtained. Plus, that performance by the SEC hasn't actually been that stellar. As Winslow pointed out, they're barely above .500 against the Big 10+.

Look at their record against various conferences from the unbiasedly-titled Why the SEC Isn't as Great in Football as You Think.

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

[jesse_custer]

I think most people rank the SEC highly because its teams have won several national championships in a row.

I'm not sure if SEC teams are tougher all around, but I can tell you that SEC home games are fucking nuts. These are hard places to play in.

[Winslow]

I think most fans agree that the SEC is the best conference simply because of all the back to back national champions they have produced, as well as the talent being farmed out into the NFL. It's the same reason most college football fans thought Miami was the best team in the 80's.

For whatever it's worth, I would not support a playoff system that bypassed conference champions. If you don't win your conference, then you don't get an invitation to the playoff.

[Winslow]

coke to jesse ....