re: Is there a consensus #2 football program in the SEC, historically?

quote:

---

Following the 2009 season, the Gators had 3 National Titles to Georgia’s 1.

---

2 for UGA, so they had the edge on us by 1.

They also only had 8 SEC titles compared to our 12. We had more wins, more bowls, more bowl wins, and owned the head to head record. You claim 1 extra national title is some massive chasm that puts them on top yet ignore than we have 1.5x more SEC titles than them.

It's obviously when people bring lazy arguments backed by an agenda, often times which is loud and clear from the jump.

One one hand, UGA led UF in jsut abotu every important metric on teh field at this point in time, except for national titels of which we trailed by 1. So by that logic you claim UF was a better "all time/historical" program than UGA.

Yet now that UGA has 4 national titles and is only behind albamaa in all time SEC titles, the conversation revolves aroudn strength of schedule, records against other big 6 teams, what happened pre-integration, blah blah blah. Basically looking for any argument possible to diminish our accomplishments now that national titles is no longer an anchor on our resume that is used ot be.

quote:

---

Nobody ever really agrees with these lists.

---

I knwo nobody is ever going to agree on a top to bottom list of course. It's just wild to me that using basic things like conference championships, national championships, and on field victories are somehow not a good meausring stick. I mean those are pretty good ways to comapre teams I'd think lol

quote:

---

Nebraska is probably one of the top 5 programs in all of CFB historically.

---

ehh I don't quite agree there

quote:

---

Until 20 years ago, I would have said top 2 or so.

---

man how old are you? Even at their peak, which you could probably say in 1997 was the highest point their program had ever been or would ever be, I doubt anyone woudl call them the 2nd best program in CFB history.

well I got through page 4 and had to stop - so if anyone put up the SEC All-Time Wins #s page 5 through 12 - my apologies for not reading on - anyways -

Georgia passed Tennessee a few seasons ago to move into 2nd behind Alabama in All-Time SEC football wins -

449 Alabama
374 Georgia
354 Tennessee
347 LSU
335 Auburn
332 Florida

those are your schools with 300+ SEC football wins -

Georgia is also 2nd all-time behind Alabama in SEC win % - (% prior to 2022 season)

.715 Alabama
.627 Georgia
.602 Tennessee
.589 LSU
.584 Florida
.558 Auburn

Georgia - within the conference - is now the 2nd best SEC football program historically by measure of games played against other SEC teams - it used to be Tennessee until it wasn't Tennessee anymore -

quote:

---

You put WAY too much weight on SEC Titles

---

it's funny that you put utmost importance on national titles but flippantly dismiss SEC titles.

We're comparing SEC programs. There are a metric frickton of variables that go into winning or not winnign (ie, being selected by some fricktard media goons) a national title. There are a whoooole lot less variables when it comes to winning the SEC title, which is only able to be won by the same teams we're caompring, and there isn't an actual vote considering it's won on the field.

If anything we should be putting mcuh higher priority on SEC titles and less on national titles.

quote:

---

I mean look at 1980 Georgia’s path to the SEC Championship. They defeated:

---

cool. Who cares. Yep it was a weak schedule, we also went 12-0 which nobody else in america did and we beat the consensus #1 team in america to do it. We're national champs regardless of whatever schedule asshurtedness you still carry about it.

quote:

---

Not all SEC titles are created equal. Sure you get to claim the trophy, but you can’t expect folks to think Georgia’s 1980 or 1981 team was just as deserving as those Gators teams in the ‘90s

---

UGA's SEC titles in 1980, 1981, and 1982 saw tyhem go undefeated in the SEC. As in, not a single other SEC program defeeated us during that time frame. The same can't be said for many of UF's titles. But yeah, I'm the crazy one.

quote:

---

And we have brains

---

I'm less convinced of that by the minute

quote:

---

Georgia has won more lackluster SEC titles than anyone.

---

Yet they all count the exact very same. It's funny how we somehow luck into playing a bunch of nobodies and tomato cans every year, yet we only have a losing record against 2 other SEC programs. We certainly don't have losing records against tech or clemson who we used to play regularly. I guess the universe has just cosmically decided to gift us wiht only playing sec teams when tehy're down en route to winning the sec when we do. Kinda miraculous when you think about it.

quote:

---

it's funny that you put utmost importance on national titles but flippantly dismiss SEC titles.

---

I don’t. All are subjective. But obviously a national title is worth way more than a conference title. National titles and AP poll performance are the best measuring stick for program success because it includes all teams.

When Oklahoma joins the SEC, they will on Day 1 be the second best program in the SEC and it won’t be close to whoever is #3. Obviously they don’t have any SEC Titles because they haven’t yet played in the SEC.

Texas A&M and Arkansas are better all time programs than Ole Miss. Yet the Rebels have 5 SEC Titles to their zero.

This is why SEC Championships is a factor to consider, but should never be the main factor.

quote:

---

There are a whoooole lot less variables when it comes to winning the SEC title

---

You’re wrong. It’s just as, and possibly more subjective, thanks to the varying schedule strengths played by teams throughout SEC history.

Compare 1972 Auburn with 1981 Georgia

1972 Auburn played (final AP ranking noted):

#7 Alabama (10-2)- won
#8 Tennessee (10-2)- won
#11 LSU (9-2-1)- lost
NR Georgia (7-4)- won
NR Florida (5-5-1)- won
NR Ole Miss (5-5)- won
NR Miss St (4-7)- won

We finished 6-1 but did not win the SEC because even though we beat them head-to-head, Alabama finished 7-1 because they played an extra game against Vanderbilt (3-8).

Meanwhile look at 1981 Georgia:

NR Tennessee (8-4)
NR Florida (7-5)
NR Auburn (5-6)
NR Ole Miss (4-6-1)
NR Vanderbilt (4-7)
NR Kentucky (3-8)

Georgia did win the SEC Title despite beating zero ranked teams. They didn’t have to play Alabama or #3 in the standings Miss St (8-4).

Georgia got an SEC Title. Auburn did not. Yet anyone would say 1972 Auburn was a far more impressive team. Obviously this proves SEC titles are highly subjective from year to year, and even within individual years as 1972 shows.

quote:

---

UGA's SEC titles in 1980, 1981, and 1982 saw tyhem go undefeated in the SEC. As in, not a single other SEC program defeeated us during that time frame.

---

Yes, we’re well aware. And it’s Exhibit A on why not all SEC Titles should be looked at with the same value. Georgia won three consecutive SEC titles playing 18 conference games and yet only beating 1 team that finished ranked in the AP poll, #14 Auburn in 1982.

This literally proves my point of what I said earlier in this thread, a couple days ago. Georgia has played BY FAR the easiest historical conference schedule of the Big 6 programs and it’s not close.

This fact has to be considered when weighting programs for all time strength which is why simply looking at SEC titles is not taking in the big picture.

UGA has gone back to back and yet a UGA poster says SEC titles are more important. Strange times.

quote:

---

Those numbers aren't accurate.

---

take it up with Birmingham and the SEC media guide folks then

https://a.espncdn.com/sec/football/2022/Record%20Book.pdf

page 111 - at the bottom - you can add everyone's 2022 record to the numbers for yourself - just like I did

you can knock off LSU's 20 SEC wins from 2012-15 if you want and put them below Auburn & Florida

quote:

---

Bama's forfeited and vacated wins.

---

included and noted in the SEC record book page 111 from the numbers pulled -

quote:

---

You're the one who doesn't recognize our vacated title

---

1984 is a you and B'ham problem too -

no