[alleycat9]

thus far the sec has not faired terribly well. even the games they have won were not nearly blowouts. other than the georgia game which only got bad late.

michigan could have beaten south carolina
msu got smoked
florida looks terrible.
vanderbilt played better than any of the rest of them.
lsu lost

so we are talking about 2 and 2 headed for 2 and 3 against really not great opponents.

so can we please fucking stop saying how a loss in the sec is different than a loss in another conference, they dont have 5 of the top 10 teams in the country.

they in fact are a bit of a weak conference this year. get off their dick.

[Yisman]

Did Georgia leave the SEC?

And you're the only one talking about the SEC here, so if you stop talking about them, no one at TGG will be talking about the SEC. Look at this forum.

You act like you've been arguing with hordes of SEC fans and now you're gloating.

So I don't know who the "we" is and it would be nice if you'd be accurate with your records.

[displacedfan]

My favorite part of the Clemson win was my Twitter feed blew up with people writing "A-C-C, A-C-C" mocking all the SEC fans who root for rivals in bowl games and chant SEC after wins.

SEC has always been overrated and it's annoying that the way that BCS is setup, that SEC losses don't count as much as other losses even though as we see, a loss to FL or LSU is not impressive or a reason to rate one team over another. It's systematic BCS problem, something that the SEC has taken advantage of.

[RAMBO]

they are a very tough conference tho

[Yisman]

SEC now 4-3 after Texas A&M rolled OU

domination

[displacedfan]

Originally Posted by Yisman

SEC now 4-3 after Texas A&M rolled OU

domination

Does the BCS decide bowl game matchups? I think the Rose bowl is always Pac vs Big whatever but after that does the BCS decide?

Like how did #3 FL play #21 LOU but #4 ORE play #5 KSU?

[Yisman]

Originally Posted by displacedfan

Does the BCS decide bowl game matchups? I think the Rose bowl is always Pac vs Big whatever but after that does the BCS decide?

Like how did #3 FL play #21 LOU but #4 ORE play #5 KSU?

All AQ conferences except the Big East have contracts for their champions to participate in specific BCS bowl games. Unless their champion is involved in the BCS National Championship game, the conference tie-ins are:

Rose Bowl – Big Ten champion and Pac-12 champion
Fiesta Bowl – Big 12 champion
Orange Bowl – ACC champion
Sugar Bowl – SEC champion

The Big East champion takes one of the remaining spots.

If the Pac-12 or Big Ten champion is picked for the BCS National Championship Game, then the Rose Bowl must choose the highest-ranked school from a non-AQ conference instead of the respective conference's #2 team if there is a non-AQ school ranked at least #4 in the final BCS standings. This was the case in 2010, when the #2 Oregon Ducks made it to the national championship, permitting the #3 TCU Horned Frogs to attend, and win, the 2011 Rose Bowl. The Rose Bowl is permitted to override this provision if it has been taken within the previous four seasons.

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

So most of the slots are set (only three left open).

[displacedfan]

Originally Posted by Yisman

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

So most of the slots are set (only three left open).

Thanks, that's slightly annoying that it can't just be 1/2 3/4 5/6 and down the line

[Yisman]

SEC went 6-3 this bowl season.

7 straight national titles.

OP has disappeared.

[displacedfan]

Originally Posted by Yisman

SEC went 6-3 this bowl season.

7 straight national titles.

OP has disappeared.

I never liked the national title argument especially when it's based on a vote. Like the Heat won the title last year, the East wasn't better than the best and the Atlantic division was not better than other division even though you know the Atlantic division sent 5/6 Eastern finals representatives.

The losses hurt the SEC this year because they weren't bottom tier SEC teams losing, it was FL and LSU to 2 teams they should have beat imo

[Yisman]

Originally Posted by displacedfan

I never liked the national title argument especially when it's based on a vote. Like the Heat won the title last year, the East wasn't better than the best and the Atlantic division was not better than other division even though you know the Atlantic division sent 5/6 Eastern finals representatives.

The team that wins the national title often doesn't come from the best division/conference.

But when a conference wins SEVEN in a row...

Let's see an NBA division win seven titles in a row in the modern era (I know Boston won eight in a row in the '50s-'60s).

[displacedfan]

Originally Posted by Yisman

The team that wins the national title often doesn't come from the best division/conference.

But when a conference wins SEVEN in a row...

Let's see an NBA division win seven titles in a row in the modern era (I know Boston won eight in a row in the '50s-'60s).

That is true. 7 in a row does speak to putting out the best teams in the BCS system. But the whole overrated part was that a loss from SEC doesn't count as much as a loss from non SEC. I think that's not true and we have seen that over and over again. The SEC has some REALLY good teams, but that doesn't mean the whole conference should get the credit for those teams.

I guess my whole problem comes back to the BCS and how they seed and there is no playoff. Also the delay from last game to bowl season, is it for the students they do that?

The other thing that soured me on the SEC, that 9-6 championship game. Such a boring game with just putrid offenses.

[JetBlue]

Originally Posted by Yisman

The team that wins the national title often doesn't come from the best division/conference.

But when a conference wins SEVEN in a row...

Let's see an NBA division win seven titles in a row in the modern era (I know Boston won eight in a row in the '50s-'60s).

the difference is the SEC did not have to earn those seven opportunities in a row to play for the BCS Championship and instead were given the opportunity over teams with equal records because of the obvious SEC bias. there simply is no comparison to sports like the NBA where you actually have to earn it.

[Yisman]

Originally Posted by displacedfan

That is true. 7 in a row does speak to putting out the best teams in the BCS system. But the whole overrated part was that a loss from SEC doesn't count as much as a loss from non SEC. I think that's not true and we have seen that over and over again. The SEC has some REALLY good teams, but that doesn't mean the whole conference should get the credit for those teams.

I guess my whole problem comes back to the BCS and how they seed and there is no playoff. Also the delay from last game to bowl season, is it for the students they do that?

The other thing that soured me on the SEC, that 9-6 championship game. Such a boring game with just putrid offenses.

well obviously the BCS is a terrible system. Not getting any disagreement from me there. I've been arguing against it as long as I've been following college football.

but the SEC almost always does well in the bowl season. 6-3 this time.

So if you don't want to look at BS national titles, then look at overall performance. Look at how many teams the SEC has in the top 10 each year.

[JetBlue]

Originally Posted by Yisman

So if you don't want to look at BS national titles, then look at overall performance. Look at how many teams the SEC has in the top 10 each year.

you can't do that either. how many non SEC teams have the same record as those SEC teams but are placed behind the SEC teams by the self-feeding bias?

"we think the SEC is better so let's put them ahead of the other conferences into the Top 10. oh, hey, look, the SEC has more teams in the top 10, they are obviously better, just like we thought!"

it is silly.

[The Great American]

Originally Posted by Yisman

SEC went 6-3 this bowl season.

7 straight national titles.

OP has disappeared.

OP should disappear. At least five SEC teams could have beaten Notre Dame.

[JetBlue]

Originally Posted by The Great American

OP should disappear. At least five SEC teams could have beaten Notre Dame.

which is more of an indictment of Notre Dame than elevation of the SEC.

[The Great American]

Originally Posted by JetBlue

which is more of an indictment of Notre Dame than elevation of the SEC.

Which ended up with a top five ranking ... talk about a flawed system!!!

[displacedfan]

Originally Posted by Yisman

well obviously the BCS is a terrible system. Not getting any disagreement from me there. I've been arguing against it as long as I've been following college football.

but the SEC almost always does well in the bowl season. 6-3 this time.

So if you don't want to look at BS national titles, then look at overall performance. Look at how many teams the SEC has in the top 10 each year.

But the top 10 comes back to the BCS system. It's an endless cycle. I still don't understand how Oregon's loss is worse than Bama's loss and Florida's loss (before bowl games). So again my problem is coming back to the BCS. You also let coaches vote count when obviously coaches have the best interesting to overank their own team and teams from their conferences than accurately judging each team. And football is so much about matchups can you really say loss from team A to team B looks works than loss from Team c to team d. Hopefully the 4 team playoff eases some of these problems.

Looking back, the national championship one does hold more weight and is a good argument since usually the SEC team was the team that was "in" and not the team that was fighting other teams to be "in" the championship series.

[TNJet]

16 team playoff would answer this problem. However, the SEC would still win it.