Sizing Up The SEC: Part III
March 13, 2008 by bcsbusters
Last summer, with a new college football season on the horizon as we headed into late July, the very week before fall camp opened, I wrote an article summing up the two most over-rated programs inside the BCS era.
Michigan certainly qualified, as Wolverine Nation quickly tired of a Lloyd Carr era fittingly described as the under-achieving all-stars. Tennessee was the other team that earned the dubious and dreaded under-achieving tab, and if the restlessness and ill contempt on display inside Vol Nation is any indicator, I was certainly justified with my opinion.
EDSBS has repeatedly placed coach Phillip Fulmer’s under-achieving all stars in the Top-10 for their criminal disposition and dishonorable sensibilities, and combined with their offensive history of ineptitude without Offensive Coordinator David Cutcliff (the new coach at Duke) at the helm of the ship, things could get a bit dicey this season. Coach Fulmer had better win the SEC outright, or at least drop another couple million on a campus library project if he expects to stay in the good graces of Vol Nation.
To read more of this article click the following link and visit the new BCS Buster website!
6 Responses to “Sizing Up The SEC: Part III”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I read Sizing up the SEC and SEC Speed Kills!. First, I will note that Tennessee has not lost to Kentucky in the BCS era.
Also, as a side note, the SEC has 2 teams in the Baseball Elite 8 and the south has 4. The Pac 10 has 1 and 2 West teams. Just because there are more schools in California, doesn’t mean that the teams are better.
Next, the West Coast (Pac 10) did not want to change the BCS format to add a playoff and the South did (SEC and ACC). It may not be your format, but it would give more teams a shot.
A couple of stats on your articles were off but your point is clear. Tennessee is not the best team during the BCS era. You also believe the SEC is over hyped and gives the other teams the shaft. Here is where you are wrong:
The top recruiting classes are predominately and perennially SEC, aka the best players. Also, refer to NFL draft day(s) where it is proven that they have developed.
SEC National Championships during the era: 5 Tennessee, LSU (2), Auburn (shared AP 2004), Florida. More than any other conference during this time period (Next closest is Big 12 with 2 or USC (aka the entire Pac 10) with 2). I will give USC credit for their impressive run of 10+ win seasons and being screwed out of a two games for a BCS national championship vs LSU. However, Auburn was slighted one year too and ONE team doesn’t make a conference elite. Having 4 different teams win the national championships proves that the conference is powerful. The SEC may not have stellar performances in lesser bowl games, but who would, when your forced to play teams that have lost to a Div II team or never played a quality opponent until they faced you. Where is Hawaii, Boise St., and other teams that have 1-2 decent years playing 1 ranked opponent before falling off the radar into obscurity? The pageantry and rivalry between SEC teams have existed in some cases for over 100 years (each team no matter the record wants to win badly). Who would you rather give your all against, if it meant losing a shot at the SEC crown or National Spotlight?
In reference to your playoff system, it eliminates the traditional conference championship format which undermines regular season play (Note: Georgia lost to Tennessee and never should have been ranked higher even if Tennessee struggled late in 2007. So, why do they play LSU in your format, Tennessee played a good game vs LSU).
I DO agree the BCS is flawed and a playoff is needed. Why can’t every Div. I conference have a Championship and have their team enter a Playoff? That would eliminate the uproar over SO MANY SEC teams getting better bowl bids. If you didn’t make your conference championship and your good then you should have won during the regular season. No second chances (Michigan vs Ohio St II in 2007, yeah right)
I hate it when people get upset at the powerful SEC and even insult the people/agriculture of the region. The institutions in the south do not run on oil, tobacco, alcohol, etc.. They run on tuition, and donation from alumni that are typically former players or old couples. The neighboring communities might utilize these things or produce these items. However, every area of the United States use these industries and are “just as guilty”. Before one stereotypes an area to try to prove a point such as “Southern Drunk Hicks” or “West Coast pot-heads”, they should do some research on the topic and see that there is no correlation between better football programs and where the money came from/how much (if there was Vanderbilt and Ole Miss would be the biggest SEC powerhouses, with the most successful alumni).
I myself came from a football background, now I’m in education. I have the state ring, sideline knowledge, and information on behind the scene controversy that exists everywhere. It is wrong to correlate a teams record vs some players actions caught in public. Cases go deeper than Alabama recruiting violations, Colorado/New York rape allegations, or past players at USC/Oklahoma/schools that don’t get caught receiving money. It happens everywhere. How many of your friends, athletes and common folk get caught for doing bad things? Tennessee and the SEC just doesn’t hide it as well, and that still does not affect the traditional power that South Eastern Conference Arm flexes.
The dominance of the General Neyland 71 quarters of opponents with no score in the 30s. Auburn/LSU in the 40s. The Vols again in the 50s. The Bear Bryant Era of championships 60s and 70s. Herchel Walker leading the Dawgs into the 80s. The Steve Spurrier/Gene Stallings/Phil Fulmer in the 90s. The LSU Tigers under 2 different coaches in 2Ks. All of these times have passed, but the SEC continues to show its might.
So, next time when you ask yourself “Why the SEC won the national championship and that life sucks because I didn’t get the game I wanted?” refer to this post to see that no team, system, person is perfect, but the SEC football is pretty damn close.
Randy,
I spent about an hour typing a response tonight and before I saved I hit tab and lost everything I just typed. I will type a response to this in the next couple of days, and I do recognize that the Tennessee - Kentucky record should have stated 10-0 and not 10-1, which I believe was a simple typo that I didn’t catch. Until later…
Regards and thanks for commenting,
Ben
Randy,
Sorry I have taken a couple of days to get back at you but I have been extremely busy with end of the year grade reports…540 of them to be exact since I teach Elementary PE.
I mentioned above the Tennessee - Kentucky snafu where I had the records down as 10-1 rather than 10- 0. That is my mistake, which I believe was a typo that I didn’t catch as why would I give Tennessee ten wins and a loss since there have only been 10 years of the BCS. My mistake, my apologies.
Secondly, I have never said one time that I have questioned the results of college baseballs greatest show on dirt. A team that survives a double elimination 4 team tournament and then a three game super-regional, as well as the college world series 8 team double-elimination, plus the championship three game series will be the TRUE champion of college baseball. There should be no questioning this format and to compare the BCS to college baseball is ludicrous.
What I do question is the SEC yearly getting nine teams into the regional format, or a team like Oklahoma, who finishes tied for dead last in the 10-team Big-12, yet gets a tournament birth over a team like Oregon State or the College of Charleston.
I have also questioned the quality of the regular season opponents for most of the SEC programs, as well as the Big-12 and ACC. There is a significant difference in my mind, when comparing a non-conference match-up between Oregon State and Long Beach, as compared to LSU versus Troy, or even NC State versus Elon.
Cal-St. Fullerton, Long Beach State, Pepperdine and Fresno State are regulars in Omaha. Which non-BCS teams from the south are regulars in Omaha? I can think of two (Rice and Wichita State), and is Wichita State even from the South?. If you take them out of the equation you are down to one.
Oklahoma played Arkansas Pine-Bluff, North Dakota State, Western Illinois, Texas-Arlington and Southern Nazarene. Oregon State played Vanderbilt, Georgia, San Diego, San Diego State, Long Beach State, Pepperdine, Loyola-Marymount and Arizona State in the non-conference. It isn’t about the record.
Cal-Irvine, a world series participant last year, was two outs away from going to the world series this year. That isn’t exactly embarrassing themselves now is it? LSU won the series based on a gutsy and miraculous comeback which was a fitting ending for Alex Box Stadium. I have a great deal of respect for LSU and the manner in which they won their series. They earned it on the field. I have zero respect for the LSU Football championship, or any other college football championship for that matter since the champions do not have to play the best teams in the country to get to the championship, let alone winning it. It is a complete farce and this years BCS results with Ohio State, Hawaii and Kansas earning BCS bids is a classic example.
The record is the whole deal now days, and it doesn’t matter how you achieve it. Ohio State played a woeful schedule this year, which was similar to the Kansas schedule. Why is it that Ohio State is rewarded with a BCS final for losing to Illinois when Kansas lost to Missouri, who beat Illinois? Kansas and Ohio State played virtually the same schedule. The traditional powers; Tennessee, LSU, Ohio State, Georgia, USC, Texas, Michigan, Florida, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Miami and Florida State hold such a grotesque advantage over all the other teams that it really isn’t much of a playoff system. It is more of a back-scratching good ol-boy network.
My point for comparing college baseball scheduling with college football is the fact that the SEC and the traditional football powers also get the benefit of the doubt in this sport as well.
Oklahoma finished 33-22 overall, but just 9 and 17 in the Big-12. Both Kansas, who swept Oklahoma and Texas Tech (who lost two of three to OU) finished in a three way tie with Oklahoma for dead last in the conference. Oklahoma played three PAC-10 schools this year: UCLA (1-1), Washington State (1-3) and Arizona State (0-2) to finish 2 and 6 against these schools.
Oregon State on the other hand won two of three against both UCLA and Arizona State while getting swept in Pullman (4-5 record against the same teams). Try visiting Pullman in early spring, especially this winter with all the snow. It isn’t a picnic.
Oklahoma got in supposedly because they finished 11-5 against the Top-100, with most of these teams finishing in the 65-100 range. The Beavers won 5 of the three game series contest against programs who made the tournament, including Georgia (SEC Champions) and Arizona State (who was a potential #1 overall seed). The fact that ASU lost to Fresno State, or the fact that Arizona and Cal-Irvine lost to LSU and Miami, does not show the weakness of the west coast, but the fact that the majority of the teams in west have to cannibalize each other, or have to travel back to the east coast against a major power like LSU or Miami to get to Omaha. When was the last time LSU or Miami came out west to play one of the western teams on our turf?
When was the last time the west coast teams played someone like NC State or Wichita State to get to Omaha? The SEC teams rarely leave the region and when they do they usually get it handed to them, like Arkansas did in the Stanford regional this year. Irregardless the number of BCS conference teams that make the College World Seriesl is very cyclical. Some years the PAC-10 sends three or four teams, similar to the ACC this year with three, but on most occasions, it is usually one or two teams, again, which is similar for all the other conferences.
The point I was trying to make with the SEC is why do they get nine teams yearly when only one or two make it to Omaha, and usually, other than LSU’s reign from 1990 - 2000, they are done within two games when getting to Omaha?
This year is a classic example: The SEC had nine teams earn regional bids, yet here are the following results comparing each of the major BCS conferences:
Opening Day:
SEC (3-6)
ACC (4-2)
Big-12 (5-1)
PAC-10 (3-2)
Day Two:
SEC (8-9)
ACC (10-2)
Big-12 (7-5)
PAC-10 (7-3)
By the end of the double elimination round heading into the super-regionals that results were even more staggering:
SEC: (14-14)
ACC: (15-4)
Big-12 (10-
PAC-10 (10-3)
If the SEC is so dominant and so deserving of so many teams earning regional bids, why do they have the worst record of any of the major playing BCS conferences?
To provide even more food for thought why does the SEC get the most teams in the regional tournament when you consider the following numbers for the College World Series National Champions and National Runner-ups:
National Championships:
PAC-10: 25
Big-12: 10
Big-10: 6
SEC: 6
ACC: 0
Non-BCS: 8
National Runner-Ups:
PAC-10: 15
Big-12: 14
ACC: 9
SEC: 9
Big-10: 2
Non-BCS: 11
The PAC-10 has won more national championships and had more runner ups than most of the other conferences combined! Why is it that the PAC-10 has never had more than 5 teams invited to the national tournament, while the SEC who has the worst overall national championship and runner up record compared to all the other conferences gets nine fucking teams yearly?
To make a long story longer, your recruiting rankings are an illegitimate argument. Most of the experts will tell you that people should take these rankings with a grain of salt because most of the experts are proven wrong and never see these players in person when giving the recruiting grades. It is the classic hyperbole which surrounds the SEC and the holy grail recruiting rankings smell as rank as the supposed war on terror.
As far as the SEC in football, I think I have demonstrated that there are really only 5 legitimate powers in the SEC and they don’t play each other every year. Georgia, LSU, Tennessee, Florida and Auburn are the powers within this conference, and yet a large share of their victories every year come against the Sun-Belt, MAC and C-USA (the worst of the non-BCS conferences nearly every year). The remaining seven teams in the conference have woefully average and even below average records throughout the BCS era. Arkansas and Alabama have been very average programs during the last 10 years, yet they receive so much over-hype it is sickening. Arkansas won five games this year against pathetic opponents and didn’t even play Georgia and Florida, two of the better teams in the conference.
I believe I broke this information down in this article here if you’d like to visit the issue again.
http://www.ncaa-schedule.com
Read “The Final Analysis - The Quality Opponent Factor Rankings Article:
As far as my overall playoff scenario and why I chose to rank Georgia ahead of Tennessee in my tournament brackets, I believe I stated that you should focus on how the system works and not who I have chosen to advance for just like the March Madness affair, we all fill out our brackets and hope for the best, but rarely do we pick wisely in predicting the overall tournament.
Your bracket will undoubtedly look different than mine, but if you want this broken down in complete detail, you should visit the six part series on my national expansion recommendations which can be found here:
http://bcsbusters.wordpress.com/2007/08/05/national-expansion-for-college-football-part-i/
Stanford 16 - Florida State 5
Enough Said!
Stanford 8 - Miami 3
Fresno State 17 - Rice 5
Fresno State 5 - North Carolina 3
Anyone see a pattern of behavior here?