re: SEC "Not as Good as You Think"

quote:

---

In 2012, for instance, the SEC was able to even its BCS bowl record against the Big Ten at 19-19 when the Florida Gators beat Ohio State in the none-too-partisan Gator Bowl. The game was played in Jacksonville. No bowl games are played in Ohio.

---

Who the frick wants to go play a bowl game in fricking Ohio in January? Nobody. Ohio sucks 365 days of the year, but especially in the winter.

quote:

---

Better and greater media coverage helps but not nearly as much as you might think. The most important factor to determining where a recruit will play is going to be distance. The problem that the rest of the country has is that the SEC is geographically positioned to get the best recruits in the country. Politics, demographics, and economics better explain the rise of the SEC than its media contracts.

---

You could tell them this till you're blue in the face but they're convinced that "oversigning" and non existant academic standards are the only reasons the SEC dominates. They know the best athletes from the Southeast prefer to go to SEC schools and that's why you see the whiny blogs about oversigning so rampant among Big Ten fans. They literally HAVE to limit and restrict scholarships as much as possible to FORCE some of these elite athletes to play in their conference.

Despite commenters constantly shooting holes in the arguments made by oversigning.com the guy running the site kept rambling on about it. He simply disabled the comments section when it was obvious his arguments were being made to look stupid.

I say let them soak in their tears. This is why the SEC is the best damn conference in America, it's ok when we pick on our own, but when somebody else does it, we all want to kick their arse

Big picture, this arse hat just has an ax to grind and is completly full of shite other than Alabama's mulligan which stinks of bullshite.

He uses stats going way back to "prove" the SEC is not as good as advertised and the system is rigged, etc.

Well, the current BCS relies on 2/3 human polls 1/3 computer and has since 2004. From 1998-2003 it relied to a greater extent on formulas like schedule rank and loss record. The point is, the current formula is more favored toward humans and would in theory be more able to be munipulated.

Well, 2001, 2 loss Florida finsihed 5 in the BCS and Polls. 2-Loss UT was 8 in polls, 6 in BCS, meaning humans judged them harsher. 2-Loss CU was 3 in both.

2002, there were only 2 undefeated teams. But, 1-loss UGA was No. 4 in polls while 1-loss Iowa was 3. Again, computers valued SEC team more than humans.

2003, LSU was No. 2 in BCS and by humans. USC was 1 in the polls but 3 in human polls. Again, humans prefered non-SEC team.

2004, undefeated Auburn was 3rd behind the two other non SEC teams.

2005 no SEC teams in the top 6 of BCS.

2006, UF was No. 2 in both BCS and human polls ahead of 1-loss Michigan and 1-loss Louisville. So, SEC bias came from not wanted a rematch I guess.

2007, LSU was in ahead of 5 other 2-loss teams. But, LSU as conf champ of the SEC clearly had the best argument of the 5. Bias? Questionable at best. Oklahoma probably had the best case but did not have as many good wins and had bad losses. OU was 3 in human polls, 4 in the BCS, so again, the computers throught much less of the Sooners.

2008, the two 1 loss champs of the two toughest conferences split the human votes for No. 1 and OU was favored by computers. USC, as a conf champ was voted 4 and 5 by voters and 5 by BCS. Not sure what human bias pro the SEC existed here.

2009, you had again two undefeated teams from the two strongest conferences. Cinci, TCU, and Boise were also undefeated. Again, where is the bias?

2010, again the two highest ranked undefeated conf champs played in the championship game. Not sure the issue.

2011, UA was No. 2 in both polls and the BCS but this is really the only incedent where it could even be argued an SEC team was favored by humans and any bias existed.

In conclusion. You have 1 example that where you could even argue and SEC team was given favorable treatment.

How the frick is the b1g 19-19 in bcs games vs sec when the bcs has been here 14 years.

Max of two teams per conference per year.

Assume b1g and sec got two teams each year, and that we always played each other, which is absurd. That's a total of 28 games.

19+19 =/= 28

6 in a row is all that needs to be said

quote:

---

but the reason I think that the SEC has done so well in that period is by playing one less conference game than the PAC, and substituting it with a CUSA/SunBelt or FCS opponent. It basically guarantees everyone in the conference one less loss, unless you really screw it up (UAB, ULM and almost Troy.)

The SEC gamed the system well. When playoffs are implemented, the SEC will be forced to add that 9th conference game or risk losing out on playoffs due to SoS.

---

This is simply not true. Number one is that the SEC gamed the system. The SEC has played 8 conference games and had a championship game since 92. Except for Alabama last year, every SEC team that made it to the BCS championship game had to play nine conference games. The last game is always against a quality opponent and is often a rematch against a quality opponent. There is no argument that can be made that the SEC "gamed" the system.

quote:

---

As though empirical evidence is akin to fossil records and climate change data, it's as if no one in the evangelical South is capable of copping to the evidence at hand.

---

shite belongs on the Poli Board.

quote:

---

The most bald-faced example of poll rigging occurred in 2011 when the Pac-12's then number-three-ranked Oregon Ducks lost a September game in Dallas to then number-four-ranked LSU by a score of 40-27. Following the defeat, the Ducks dropped 10 spaces in the polls, to number 13.

With the demotion, Oregon's championship hopes were essentially obliterated from the first week of the season.

---

Ducks might have a good argument for a rematch last year if they hadn't lost to U$C.

Oregon had their chance to prove they were superior to the SEC twice. They failed twice. It really is as simple as that. Beating an unranked Tennessee (that finished that season with 6 wins) doesn't prove anything.

quote:

---

So, the score of the LSU/Oklahoma State game would have been one of the following:

32-31 LSU (using just offense)
45-13 LSU (using just defense)
32-13 LSU (using LSU stats)
45-31 LSU (using Oklahoma State stats)

Using a composite average, you get:

LSU 39
Oklahoma State 22

---

Precisely why we wanted to play them and not Bama.

But the way JJ was playing that night, he probably would have choked that game away too.

Spilled milk. Moving on...

quote:

---

Before the current run, it was the Pac 10/Big 10 getting all of the love. Then Florida demolished Ohio St.

---

This. I remember before the UF/OSU game having to listen to herbstreit act like Florida had NO chance.