SEC = AVERAGE OR AWESOME

[Gonzo]

I think there likely needs to be added context whenever there is discussion about an entire conference and the quality of the teams within. Sometimes it depends on the sport. Sometimes it depends on the academic expectations of the universities. Sometimes it depends on some sort of regional bias (voting for the Heisman winner comes to mind here, too). Is a conference awesome because it produces a national champion or is a conference great because every game is competitive AND played at a nationally significant level?

The easy answer seems to be that almost any conference is awesome. Some conferences have great history and have a better ability at controlling "the narrative" for whatever reason. So the SEC has produced great individual football champions recently, but I am not so sure that the entire conference is really any better than any other one. But they have been able to control the greatness narrative, so that seems to me to be why many pundits say they are impressed with the "it matters more" people.

They've had a few more elite programs in their top tier than other conferences have had in their top tiers, and the SEC's top-tier teams have been a little bit better than the rest over the past 10-15 years, up until a few years ago. IMO that's been the only real difference.

 

[VeloClone]

Priorities.

 

[Die4Cy]

Difficult to believe that precisely at the moment the SEC is forced by television contracts to add a 9th conference game, they immediately flip on the narrative that their conference is dominant in favor of scheduling more Chattanoogas and ECU's? You could knock me over with a feather.

They know it's all smoke and mirrors.

And Texas leading this parade is just the icing on the cake.

 

[MugNight]

Here’s the funny thing. Everything that SEC fans say about Indiana applies to Texas A&M. Look in the mirror, bubba.

 

[AlaCyclone]

Auburn has been pretty irrelevant the past 15 years. They haven't finished the season ranked since 2019, and have finished ranked just 5 times the past 15 years. I think this is part of the issue with the SEC myth is that people hear the name "Auburn" and envision them as this perennial powerhouse because they won a natty in 2010. In reality they've finished with a losing record the past 4 seasons and have had double-digit wins just 3 times in the past 15 years.

Same thing with Tennessee. They've turned things around recently, but over the past 15 years they've finished nearly half of those seasons with a losing record. But people think they're amazing every year just because they're in the SEC and won a natty in 1998.

Both AU and UT are up and down for sure. FTR, I like it better when they are BOTH down. Point is that within the SEC, they are two of the six teams that have won SEC Championships and National Championships since 1964.

Odd cutoff year, but Alabama has played Tennessee, Auburn and LSU every year since 1964 and no other team (with apologies to Kentucky's Retro 1976 Co-Championship) besides Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, LSU and Tennessee have won SEC and National Championships since that year.

FWIW, they all have up and down periods. Hell, Alabama couldn't beat Auburn or Tennessee for long stretches of time in the 80s, 90s and 00s. That is why longer periods are relevant.

At the end of the day, Alabama is 3rd, Tennessee is 11th, LSU is 12th and Auburn is 14th in All-Time wins (FBS Teams). That's really strong.

 

[CloneSt8]

Just watched Syracuse beat #13 Tennessee 62-60. This is the same Syracuse team that the Cyclones beat by 30!

 

[AlaCyclone]

Here’s the funny thing. Everything that SEC fans say about Indiana applies to Texas A&M. Look in the mirror, bubba.

My opinion?

Indiana is the real deal. I think they should be ranked #01 and should and will beat Ohio State. First Guess! Feel free to quote me after the B1G Fraud CCG.

Texas A&M, on the other hand, is fraud-ish from jump. I was not surprised at all that they lost @ Texas. I think they will lose in the first round of the Playoffs.

 

[AlaCyclone]

Been a lot of good discussion in this thread about S.E.C. teams. Just wanted to point out that my opinion on various SEC teams (historically), etc. is at least based on personal experience seeing the original (pre-1992 expansion) 10 teams play in person over the years:

Alabama Crimson Tide (39-9) including @ BDS and @ Legion Field
L.S.U. Tigers (16-9-1) including @ Tiger Stadium
Florida Gators (5-7-1) including @ Florida Field
Kentucky Wildcats (2-8) including @ Commonwealth Stadium
Tennessee Volunteers (5-4) including @ Neyland Stadium
Georgia Bulldogs (3-4) including @ Sanford Stadium
Miss. State Bulldogs (4-2) including @ Davis-Wade Stadium
Auburn Tigers (2-3) including @ Jordan-Hare Stadium and @ Legion Field
Vanderbilt Commodores (0-4) including @ Dudley Field
Ole Miss Rebels (1-1) including @ Mississippi Memorial Stadium in Jackson

Maybe my judgement is slanted and biased to an extent, but at least I have been there and done that.

 

[WartburgClone]

I think at one point, someone noodled out that Ohio St played Oklahoma more in the past 10 years than they'd played Iowa, who is in their conference. Don't think it's true anymore, but at one point it was.

It makes me want to seize power in a coup, and limit conferences to be only 10 teams and make them play a round robin.

9 football game round robin and 18 basketball game double round robin was perfect.