Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/11/23 at 2:03 pm to BLG
(no message)
Posted on 1/11/23 at 2:06 pm to BLG
quote:
It's measuring SEC, not national and UGA has 2 more than LSU does, but you got a point, and if you want to measure it that way, fine by me. That took me like 3 minutes. It took way longer to type than to calculate it. It's all a little subjective anyway.
One issue is national titles component encompasses time further back than the life of the SEC, yet the SEC titles portion and winning percentage portion do not. Not sure how much that would change the numbers, but just something I noticed. For instance, total conference titles, LSU has 16 and Georgia 15, which would include conference titles when most of us were in the SoCon and SIAA. Alabama has 3 national titles and LSU 1 before the formation of the SEC using ncaa.com numbers.
My rough math would give LSU a total of 435 points and UGA 380 if you included all conference titles. If you started this with all numbers being when the SEC was founded, LSU's total goes down to 335 and Alabama's down to 520.
It's honestly crazy how close UGA and LSU are with pretty much every quantifiable metric, whether it be national titles, conference titles, SEC only titles, weeks ranked, weeks ranked in the top 10, weeks ranked at #1, all-time record, number of AAs, Heisman trophies, draft picks, 1st round picks, etc.
This post was edited on 1/11/23 at 2:07 pm
Posted on 1/11/23 at 2:09 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
More difficult to win than NC in a lot of ways.
With a 12 team playoff, I would likely agree. Even with the current CFP, I would say it is still harder to win the natty. BCS and prior it was undoubtedly harder to win the NC as you 100% had to win the SEC to even play for a national championship.
Posted on 1/11/23 at 2:14 pm to Basura Blanco
quote:
had to win the SEC to even play for a national championship.
You didn’t even have to win your division to play for a BCS NC (Bama 2011, Nebraska 2001) nor did you have to win your conference (Bama 2011, OU 2003, Nebraska 2001)
Posted on 1/11/23 at 2:22 pm to Basura Blanco
quote:
BCS and prior it was undoubtedly harder to win the NC as you 100% had to win the SEC to even play for a national championship.
Have you erased 2011 from your memory?
Posted on 1/11/23 at 2:32 pm to BLG
It’s your ranking, so you can weigh the variables as you like.
But from a logic standpoint, a natty should be worth more than a conference title.
As much as we all covet a conference title, every single fan, coach, and player would forego a conference title for a natty.
But from a logic standpoint, a natty should be worth more than a conference title.
As much as we all covet a conference title, every single fan, coach, and player would forego a conference title for a natty.
Posted on 1/11/23 at 3:23 pm to memphisplaya
quote:
One show’s consistency in being a top power.
Consistency would mean having a football history before 2000
Sorry LSU sucked arse in the 20th century compared to UGA.
We started playing football in 1892 and can track accomplishments from every major decade outside of a few.
Congrats on winning twice in the 00's and for a 1 hit wonder of recent vintage.
Enjoy the 20's. We're not done.
This post was edited on 1/11/23 at 3:24 pm
Posted on 1/11/23 at 4:08 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Have you erased 2011 from your memory?
Yeah, I fricked that up. I should've said prior to the BCS. And even then, without conference championship games even that wasn't 100% time the case.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News