The SEC continues to show it is king of college football! 3 of the top 4 ranked teams are SEC teams,,, BOOM!

No argument here. SEC is great in football is stating the obvious.

It all goes in cycles.

I don't follow college football but I went to Michigan and back then, the 3 Florida schools were dominant, but Florida was by far the weakest of the 3. The theory was that Florida has only 3 division 1 programs in a large state so they had a massive recruiting advantage.

Then USC was on top.

Then things were up in the air for a while.

Now the SEC is on top. It won't last. It's just about who's passing out the fattest envelopes.

stick with eharmony wrote:

I've been saying this for years and I'll say it again, the SEC is KING. All other conferences are inferior. Look an all SEC final and if Alabama can do well look for an all SEC Playoff.

I agree. My team is UF (That is where I went to school.) We suck right now, but won the national championship for the 2008-2009 season.

Congrats on the marriage btw.

Absolutely. I used to think the polls were biased but then I saw the records of the four top SEC teams. They've gone outside their storied conference to beat

Southern Miss

UAB

South Alabama

San Jose State

La. Tech

#9 Kansas State

Boise State

Lafayette

Memphis

#20 West Virginia

Florida Atlantic

Southern Mississippi

Now, if beating #9 and #21 doesn't convince you that they all belong in the top 6, they won fully half their bowl games last season! That's right, they whooped the tar out of both Rice and Georgia Tech. Only ranked opponents like Oklahoma and FSU were able to beat them. Let's don't forget Georgia which nearly beat Nebraska in the Gator Bowl. Why are they only #11? If Nebraska is 15th then Georgia should be at least 7th.

I can't argue with Brent Musburger. I'm an SEC believer now. Deal with it!

SEC 60 33 93 64.52%

Big East 32 20 52 61.54%

Pac-10 26 18 44 59.09%

Mountain West 29 21 50 58.00%

Big 12 43 42 85 50.59%

Sun Belt 11 12 23 47.83%

Conference USA 29 32 61 47.54%

ACC 40 46 86 46.51%

WAC 17 20 37 45.95%

Independents 10 12 22 45.45%

Big Ten 30 52 82 36.59%

MAC 15 32 47 31.91%

excuse the formatting, but the chart is:

Conference-Wins-Losses-Total Games- %

This is all bowl games since '03-04

Conference

Wins

Loss

Total Bowl Games

Winning %

SEC

60

33

93

64.52%

Big East

32

20

52

61.54%

Pac-10

26

18

44

59.09%

Mountain West

29

21

50

58.00%

Big 12

43

42

85

50.59%

Sun Belt

11

12

23

47.83%

Conference USA

29

32

61

47.54%

ACC

40

46

86

46.51%

WAC

17

20

37

45.95%

Independents

10

12

22

45.45%

Big Ten

30

52

82

36.59%

MAC

15

32

47

31.91%

definitely wrote:

SEC 60 33 93 64.52%

Big East 32 20 52 61.54%

That's right, the SEC is even better than the Big Least.

If 3 or even 2 SEC teams end up in the playoff, then the system is already broken. The playoff should be the 4 best conference champions of the 5 major conferences (at least until they expand to 8 or 16 teams in the future).

The point of the playoff is to eliminate teams to figure out who is the best. All the SEC west teams (Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, and Miss St) have to play each other and Georgia in the east plays Auburn, and as SEC East champs Georgia will play the best team from the SEC west. So what's the point in having 2 of these SEC teams in the 4 team playoff? What else does it prove? They would have already eliminated each other from consideration except for the conference champion.

The regular season is the playoffs, not just the last 4 teams.

not impressed wrote:

If 3 or even 2 SEC teams end up in the playoff, then the system is already broken. The playoff should be the 4 best conference champions of the 5 major conferences (at least until they expand to 8 or 16 teams in the future).

The point of the playoff is to eliminate teams to figure out who is the best. All the SEC west teams (Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, and Miss St) have to play each other and Georgia in the east plays Auburn, and as SEC East champs Georgia will play the best team from the SEC west. So what's the point in having 2 of these SEC teams in the 4 team playoff? What else does it prove? They would have already eliminated each other from consideration except for the conference champion.

The regular season is the playoffs, not just the last 4 teams.

If the SEC is the better conference, shouldn't they have more representation in the tournament? How is that broken? Isn't that how the NCAA xc works?

Everyone on this thread arguing how great the SEC is: you are a sheep. You follow what you are told as opposed to looking for yourself.

ESPN is where MOST of our sports coverage is from. They have a huge $ deal with the SEC. Thus, they promote the SEC. Nothing wrong with ESPN doing that, every major worldwide company promotes their products.

Its not pure hyperbole, the SEC has good teams just like every other power conference. However, if the deal was with the Big ten for example, 1 loss Michigan St, Ohio St and Nebraska would be ranked much higher and the 1 loss SEC teams would be lower.

Oklahoma and FSU proved a point in the big bowl games last year. The SEC is good, but them being the greatest conference ever is just ESPN marketing their product, and you sheep follow right along.

dial it up wrote:

Everyone on this thread arguing how great the SEC is: you are a sheep. You follow what you are told as opposed to looking for yourself.

ESPN is where MOST of our sports coverage is from. They have a huge $ deal with the SEC. Thus, they promote the SEC. Nothing wrong with ESPN doing that, every major worldwide company promotes their products.

Its not pure hyperbole, the SEC has good teams just like every other power conference. However, if the deal was with the Big ten for example, 1 loss Michigan St, Ohio St and Nebraska would be ranked much higher and the 1 loss SEC teams would be lower.

Oklahoma and FSU proved a point in the big bowl games last year. The SEC is good, but them being the greatest conference ever is just ESPN marketing their product, and you sheep follow right along.

Actually we are following the AP and BCS polls. I don't even watch ESPN. Unless ESPN owns the AP and BCS polls, you are an idiot and wrong.

Ummm, lazy sheep voters watch few of the games. They rely on the talking heads at ESecPN to tell them how to vote.

ESecPN: "Wow!!! Alabama beat a determined Arkansas team. Arkansas has improved so much in a single week, it is amazing. 'Bama deserves to climb back into the top four for their impressive victory."

ESecPN: "FSU wins but they struggled mightily against a team that was previously unranked. Is FSU a top five team? Not in our expert opinion."

FSU proved last night they are a vastly inferior team to all legit SEC teams.

stick with eharmony wrote:

FSU proved last night they are a vastly inferior team to all legit SEC teams.

By remaining undefeated against a team that was 6-2 (and both losses were 1 possession games)?

He is right, and no that is not how the NCAA XC works.

Every region is represented in every other sport. That can't as easily be the case with NCAA Football, particularly as long as Bowl Games exist (and they will continue to exist, as they make a lot of money) unless you further extend the season.

I agree with the other poster, if the SEC gets 3 teams in the playoffs then it's a joke - not because the SEC teams might be deserving, but because one conference is getting the opportunities at the cost of all the rest of the conferences.

IF there are two undefeated or 1-loss SEC teams that get in and everyone else has 2+ losses, then it's absolutely understandable. It would also be understandable if the SEC teams played and beat the other 1-loss teams. But if a 1-loss SEC or, worse, a 2-loss SEC team that isn't the SEC Champion gets in over an undefeated or 1-loss or maybe even 2-loss team from another power conference, particularly FSU or the Pac-12 Champion, then that's just disregarding the rest of the NCAA in favor of one conference. Who knows, the second or third SEC team might be the second or third best team in the nation - but if someone has a similar resume and WON their conference, given the extremely limited number of spots in the playoff, they HAVE to be invited over the other SEC teams.

The playoff should be at least 8, preferably 12 or 16 teams, and should include all 5 of the champions from major conferences. Until then, there should be a heavy bias towards teams that win their conferences and played more teams from major conferences and played more bowl-bound teams, particularly if they look a level above their competition in most if not all of their games.

Haha you did an excellent job of proving my point. "Actually we are following the AP and BCS polls."

1) the BCS doesnt exist

2) what do you the determines the AP poll? You think the voters watch all of the games meanwhile doing their job? No, they rely on espn and vote accordingly. You're a sheep.

No argument here, SEC is a superior conference. Florida State would be a 3 loss team in the SEC. Unfortunately, by the time the season ends, they will have all beat each other up. Whoever ends up with 1 loss will be the 1 SEC team to make the playoffs.

kdkdo wrote:

If the SEC is the better conference, shouldn't they have more representation in the tournament? How is that broken? Isn't that how the NCAA xc works?

Because the problem with the current system is that the top teams don't play each other enough so we rarely get to see matchups between the top 5 teams in the country head to head on the field. If the SEC teams have already met during the regular season or in their SEC title game, what good does it do to have 2 of them in the 4-team playoff to meet again? Just take the best one, the SEC champ. Why should a conference champion of the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, or Pac 10 get left out so a second SEC team should have a second chance when other conference champions haven't even had a first chance?

Miss sippi wrote:

No argument here, SEC is a superior conference. Florida State would be a 3 loss team in the SEC. Unfortunately, by the time the season ends, they will have all beat each other up. Whoever ends up with 1 loss will be the 1 SEC team to make the playoffs.

It doesn't matter if the SEC is considered a superior conference because of their HS recruiting or their NFL draft picks or their BCS titles in the past. The point of a 4-team playoff is to show who is the best on the field (not in your head). And if SEC teams have already faced each other and lost, why should they get a second chance in a 4-team playoff when other conference champions haven't even had a first chance to compete for the title?