Percentage of SEC regular season games...

quote:

---

played against ranked opponents since 1992 (TAMU & MIZ are since '12):

50.2%- Arkansas
48.6%- Texas A&M
46.9%- LSU
46.4%- Vanderbilt
45.9%- Auburn
44.6%- Alabama
44.3%- Ole Miss
44.1%- Missouri
43.1%- Kentucky
42.8%- Mississippi St.
42.3%- Tennessee
41.8%- S. Carolina
39.5%- Florida
38.2%- Georgia

Six of the Top 7 are from the SEC West. This goes all the way back to 1992. Anyone who thinks there isn't major imbalance in the league right now is crazy. Imagine how lopsided this will look in another 5 years if nothing is done about it.

---

Did you get this from Wikipedia?

This is actually interesting, but it's all about LSU explaining why they won't accept Florida's offer to play Nov. 19th.

quote:

---

If our SEC brethren had been pulling their share of the load all these years, our percentage would none higher. We end up inflating everyone's average.

---

This is from '92 onward.

If you count SECC Games, Bowls, and BCS and CFP games, Bama will be at the top of that list.

quote:

---

This has already been proven to be a lie, but you can keep on trolling.

---

What is a lie? Those are the numbers.

quote:

---

Remove 4 teams and we have a 9 SEC games season. Kick out teams that don't belong. Kentucky, Mizzou, Aggies, and Auburn.

---

Yes, kicking out the program that brings in the most TV money for the conference (Texas A&M) and a Top 15 program in all of college football (Auburn) makes a ton of financial sense.

It makes sense why we would be the highest too, because we haven't been ranked as much as the others in the West. That would also account why teams in the East who played us didn't get credit for playing a ranked team. Now, that doesn't make up the total difference as we have been ranked, but it makes sense.

quote:

---

Yep. I'd eager that from 1992 to 2016, Alabama has been ranked more than most teams in that list...by a wide margin over some of them.

---

Might want to guess again before you "eager" too much money away

Number of official SEC regular season games played while ranked since 1992:

168- Florida
137- Georgia
135- LSU
135- Alabama
115- Tennessee
111- Auburn
64- South Carolina
57- Mississippi St.
43- Arkansas
41- Ole Miss
30- Texas A&M
11- Missouri
7- Kentucky
3- Vanderbilt

***Another stark reminder of the reality of the "Big 6"

quote:

---

It is relatively easy to fix. The teams in the east simply need to quit being so shaitty.

---

The problem is many of those programs are inherently shaitty and can't be fixed. Florida and Georgia are not a problem. Tennessee was a big problem for the East for about a decade, but its seems they are getting their stuff together now.

But South Carolina, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt are historically very weak football programs. The only program from the West that even comes close to those 3 is Mississippi State.

So essentially, in 1992 the conference office put 3 bottom feeders on the East side and just one real bottom feeder on the West side. Then in 2012, they doubled down by putting Texas A&M in the West and Missouri in the East.... Texas A&M is traditionally a much stronger program. Mizzou has played some decent football since entering the league, but they seem to now be regressing to their normal ways. And that's a real problem.

If you look at where each program ranks nationally in all-time AP Poll points, the West has six Top 25 programs all-time (#2 Alabama, #11 LSU, #12 Auburn, #19 Arkansas, #20 Texas A&M, #22 Ole Miss)

Meanwhile, the East has just three Top 30 programs all-time (#9 Tennessee, #13 Georgia, and #17 Florida).

Teams the in SEC ranked outside the national Top 30 all-time:

#32 Missouri (East)
#57 S. Carolina (East)
#58 Mississippi St. (West)
#63 Kentucky (East)
#84 Vanderbilt (East)

There is your imbalance. Not sure much is going to change with that group. That's why some re-shuffling appears to be necessary.

That LSU refused to play on 11/19.