Why SEC Isn't As Great In Football As You Think

• vball10set

  cats gone wild;1249846 wrote:I heard it directly from the former Iowa assistant coach that the Big 10 cheats.

  You, my friend, are a liar.
  

  I know that theres one school school about 60 minutes south of Mansfield who has the most secondary violations in the whole country.

  link?
  

  Now I agree that Bama and LSU cheat because of so many things they have pulled, but others I can't say that they have.

  Finally, the truth.
• Pick6

  

  xKoToVxSyNdRoMe;1249990 wrote:Not saying you are right or wrong but you think he may just be pissed because his school gets molestered by the others on the field and in recruiting?

  I wouldn't see a reason for him to be pissed being that he doesn't work their anymore. Current recruiting coordinator at Akron
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  cats gone wild;1250038 wrote:USC, lol. In 14 BCS years they have ZERO titles to show for it. They cheated to get the one they got (that got stripped). And this year is laughable. They have NO depth at all and they werent that impressive last season. They always get hyped and they play a weak schedule this year.

  That USC team, in the early 2000s could rival any SEC team over the last few years. Plus, they showed that they will play anybody, any where. As they destroyed SEC teams during that time.
  And they weren't impressive last year? Did you watch them? At the end of the season, they would have stacked well against any of the top 3 teams.
  
  And their schedule is not a joke. The Pac-12 is a solid conference. They will probably have to play Oregon twice, @ Was (check out their QB), @ Utah (a team that will be ranked in the top 25), and @ Stanford.
• lhslep134

  

  As someone said on here the SEC's advantage can be parlayed into a single word: oversigning. Basically giving a coach a "do-over" when a recruit fails to live up to expectation (happens all the time) is more of a competitive advantage than any of the NCAA banned forms of cheating. I know not all SEC teams do it, but it's stupidly advantageous to the ones who do.
• Speedofsand

  

  Its been over a year since the SEC changed roster management rules to go along with the NCAA proposals. B1G fans gotta wear that oversigning excuse out while they still can.
  USC, one of the all time elite programs, is the go to team to compare vs. the SEC. Yeah that makes sense. Then you have the B1G wishing they were still great like 30 years ago.
• Crimson streak

  

  Speedofsand;1250166 wrote:Its been over a year since the SEC changed roster management rules to go along with the NCAA proposals. B1G fans gotta wear that oversigning excuse out while they still can.
  USC, one of the all time elite programs, is the go to team to compare vs. the SEC. Yeah that makes sense. Then you have the B1G wishing they were still great like 30 years ago.

  
  The big 10 is still an elite conference. The sec gets so over ranked in every poll it's ridiculous. Arkansas last year played a bunch of nobodies and were in the top5-10 the majority of the year despite getting blown out by every good team they played. Georgia at 6 this year? Do you really think Georgia is worth the number 6 ranking? The sec usually has 1-2 elite teams and a bunch of mediocre teams. And don't even get me started on their ooc games.
• Pick6

  

  Speedofsand;1250166 wrote:Its been over a year since the SEC changed roster management rules to go along with the NCAA proposals. B1G fans gotta wear that oversigning excuse out while they still can.
  USC, one of the all time elite programs, is the go to team to compare vs. the SEC. Yeah that makes sense. Then you have the B1G wishing they were still great like 30 years ago.

  So what you're saying is that there are still ~3 years of corrupt recruiting classes on the roster. After that is when the SEC will start to decline. And why are you so butthurt about the over signing claims when you claim your program doesn't do it?
  
  Oh I forgot.. SEC! SEC! SEC! SEC!
• lhslep134

  

  Pick6;1250185 wrote:And why are you so butthurt about the over signing claims when you claim your program doesn't do it?
  
  Oh I forgot.. SEC! SEC! SEC! SEC!

  Yeah that's kind of strange. Florida doesn't do it, so other than SEC nuthugging there's no reason for SOS to get his panties in a bunch.
  
  And Crimson, spot on. The cream of the crop in the SEC has proven to be the best, as evidenced by 6 straight titles, but that doesn't mean that the conference has depth. Using poll rankings as justification is just ignorant. Like you said, the polls are bloated with SEC bias.
• sleeper

  

  lhslep134;1250207 wrote:Yeah that's kind of strange. Florida doesn't do it, so other than SEC nuthugging there's no reason for SOS to get his panties in a bunch.
  
  And Crimson, spot on. The cream of the crop in the SEC has proven to be the best, as evidenced by 6 straight titles, but that doesn't mean that the conference has depth. Using poll rankings as justification is just ignorant. Like you said, the polls are bloated with SEC bias.

  Those teams have proven nothing. Here are the best team in the past 6 years:
  
  2011: Oklahoma State
  2010: TCU
  2009: Boise State
  2008: Utah
  2007: Hawaii
  2006: Boise State
• cats gone wild

  ptown_trojans_1;1250105 wrote:That USC team, in the early 2000s could rival any SEC team over the last few years. Plus, they showed that they will play anybody, any where. As they destroyed SEC teams during that time.
  And they weren't impressive last year? Did you watch them? At the end of the season, they would have stacked well against any of the top 3 teams.
  
  And their schedule is not a joke. The Pac-12 is a solid conference. They will probably have to play Oregon twice, @ Was (check out their QB), @ Utah (a team that will be ranked in the top 25), and @ Stanford.

  As I said, early 2000's- cheaters. And no title to show for it. Oh yeah, the PAC 12 is solid, lol. USC's schedule is sooooo tough. Wash and Utah are very dangerous, lol. You might want to look at their 2011 schedule and how "tough" they were last year, lol. Here, I will post it for ya.
  http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-11/pac-10/2011-usc-trojans-football-schedule.php
• Crimson streak

  

  I honestly think Oklahoma st would have beat lsu or Alabama last year. Either way it would have been a great game. It's too bad we had to watch that crap of a title game last year
• cats gone wild

  Crimson streak;1250226 wrote:I honestly think Oklahoma st would have beat lsu or Alabama last year. Either way it would have been a great game. It's too bad we had to watch that crap of a title game last year

  I honestly think Iowa State could beat OK St last year. Oh wait..........they did.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  cats gone wild;1250224 wrote:As I said, early 2000's- cheaters. And no title to show for it. Oh yeah, the PAC 12 is solid, lol. USC's schedule is sooooo tough. Wash and Utah are very dangerous, lol. You might want to look at their 2011 schedule and how "tough" they were last year, lol. Here, I will post it for ya.
  http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-11/pac-10/2011-usc-trojans-football-schedule.php

  Not all those early 2000 teams were cheaters, and they were dominate on the field, no question about it. Those offense and defensive units were stacked with NFL talent. I would take the 2004 (Yes, even with Bush cheating) USC team over any of the past 6 titles. I think next to the 2001 Miami team, one of the best this century thus far. That team was loaded.
  
  USC schedule last year was not a cakewalk. Did you forget? ASU and Arizona were hovering around the top 25 at that time.
  Stanford had Andrew Luck and went into triple OT. It was easily one of the best games of the year. USC hung with them the whole game.
  Oregon game, self explanatory. It was in Eugene, and I'd say that trumps when LSU played them in Dallas.
  Washington also nearly beat Baylor, a top 10 team. Was was and is underrated and their QB is sick, just sick.
  
  For this year, Utah will be ranked in the top 25 by the middle of the year. They have a solid D, and a capable offense.
  
  Come on, take off the blinders. The Pac-12 is a solid conference, 2nd or 3rd behind the SEC with some good teams. It is just the two conferences never play each other. (And when LSU visited Washington, they barely won in 2010, remember that one?).
  
  The whole point is that the SEC is not head and shoulders above other conferences. They are top, but the depth isn't as wide as believed. Hell, I'd say last year, the Big 12 overall was on par with the SEC. Ok St, Baylor, Oklahoma, and Texas would rival with LSU, Bama, Ark, Georgia (who lost to Boise), and Auburn.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  cats gone wild;1250229 wrote:I honestly think Iowa State could beat OK St last year. Oh wait..........they did.

  One game. Anything can happen in one game.
  That doesn't mean Iowa St was a better overall team than Ok St.
  I'd take Ok St. in the title game last year. It would have been better than the garbage fest last year. Good thing is, we won't see a replay of that garbage this year as no way will anyone vote 2 SEC teams again.
• cats gone wild

  Wow, your last 2 posts are so laughable. Seriously, you should reread what you post. You dont deserves replies.
• Crimson streak

  

  cats gone wild;1250243 wrote:Wow, your last 2 posts are so laughable. Seriously, you should reread what you post. You dont deserves replies.

  
  Lol but yet you always claim that game was just 2 great defenses do it was a good game. No it wasn't it was a game of 2 good defenses and 2 horrible offenses. No doubt in my mind Oklahoma state puts at least 21-28 on lsu's defense. Look what wvu offense did to lsu's defense. Where Oklahoma state had a top 3 qb in all of college football and the best receiver.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  cats gone wild;1250243 wrote:Wow, your last 2 posts are so laughable. Seriously, you should reread what you post. You dont deserves replies.

  Thanks.
  Last year, most college football analyst were saying USC was the most dangerous team. Their offense with Woods and Barkley were amazing late. The defense, yes thin, was still pretty solid.
  
  Did you even watch them at all late last year?
  There is football outside the SEC.......
  
  Thinking USC is overrated and not a title contender this year shows no understanding of college football.
• Crimson streak

  

  ptown_trojans_1;1250249 wrote:Thanks.
  Last year, most college football analyst were saying USC was the most dangerous team. Their offense with Woods and Barkley were amazing late. The defense, yes thin, was still pretty solid.
  
  Did you even watch them at all late last year?
  There is football outside the SEC.......
  
  Thinking USC is overrated and not a title contender this year shows no understanding of college football.

  
  Yea USC is stacked this year. As a nd fan we have them the last game do I'm hoping the injuries get to them because there depth sucks
• Speedofsand

  

  LOL you homers are the butthurt bunch. I don't have to nut hug the conference. Just saying you losers will need another excuse, which is already 25% weaker than last season. What was your excuse in '06 & '08 ?
  
  Yes Arkansas is always over rated. They couldn't even beat OSU and their cheaters in a bowl game.
  The poll rankings mean nothing? The poll rankings from 30 years ago and before mean nothing.
  SEC football is still the best and you fat pale northern yankees are jealous haters and you need to stop QQing.
• Crimson streak

  

  Speedofsand;1250277 wrote:LOL you homers are the butthurt bunch. I don't have to nut hug the conference. Just saying you losers will need another excuse, which is already 25% weaker than last season. What was your excuse in '06 & '08 ?
  
  Yes Arkansas is always over rated. They couldn't even beat OSU and their cheaters in a bowl game.
  The poll rankings mean nothing? The poll rankings from 30 years ago and before mean nothing.
  SEC football is still the best and you fat pale northern yankees are jealous haters and you need to stop QQing.

  
  SEC SEC SEC SEC
  
  Seriously though, I feel I'm a neutral perspective considering my team isn't in the big 10 or the sec. The sec has 1 or 2 elite teams a year, that's not debatable but does the over signing give them a competitive advantage? Hell yes it does. Everyone gives crap about urban Meyer but he never over signed. He may have taken some questionable characters but you can't really fault him for that. It's the Alabama's and the lsu's that people have a problem with.
• Speedofsand

  

  I'm neutral because I root for an SEC team and a B1G team. The SEC is unquestionably better. Best recruits, best teams, most draft picks, BCS rings, etc.
• vball10set

  Speedofsand;1250277 wrote: ...and you fat pale northern yankees are jealous haters and you need to stop QQing.

  ...and you inbred southern hilljacks are illiterate rednecks and you need to stop banging your daughters
• nd11

  The problem I have with this article, it is factoring all 14 years of the bcs. The sec only been the best conference for the past 6 or so years. So I wish I had the some stats covering the last 6 years. I think that would be more realistic indicator.
• sleeper

  

  Crimson streak;1250226 wrote:I honestly think Oklahoma st would have beat lsu or Alabama last year. Either way it would have been a great game. It's too bad we had to watch that crap of a title game last year

  That was the first title game I didn't even bother watching. I watched the first Alabama/LSU game and saw 6-7 misses field goals and decided that in the SEC, it's all hype no substance.
• Crimson streak

  

  Speedofsand;1250291 wrote:I'm neutral because I root for an SEC team and a B1G team. The SEC is unquestionably better. Best recruits, best teams, most draft picks, BCS rings, etc.

  
  And you could argue that all 4 of those are due to the sec teams being able to over sign.