re: Why is the SEC west so much better than the SEC east at football?

quote:

---

The SEC East is boring, rusted, and decaying. It isn't coming back because there isn't the population or talent-base that exists in the SEC West. People think of the SEC, they think of Alabama, Auburn, LSU. Nobody thinks of South Carolina.

---

This is why Florida is the second biggest team in the SEC, right? Because they're in the SEC West?

quote:

---

Not really. If UF is the only program in their state, I'd agree that the East has a chance. But Y'all have to compete with FSU and everyone else cherry picking talent.

LSU doesn't have to worry about that because they have the state on lock-down (except for Speedy). Alabama and Auburn recruit themselves at this point.


And Texas A&M, well,

---

You do realize that of the teams you just listed only Alabama is consistently ahead or even tied with Florida in recruiting right?

That if FSU competes with Florida for recruits being the second or third (behind Baylor- because lets be real Sumlin is at best a poor mans Briles) choice for most Texas recruits isn't exactly killing it?

quote:

---

have you ever been out of the state of texas?



No, I haven't. Don't see how that's relevant.


quote:
so florida and Georgia don't have the talent or population?



Georgia maybe, but that's it. Florida is too saturated with teams and they lose kids constantly to OOS programs. Maybe if they got it turned around and somehow got rid of FSU...

---

Just want to keep this quote for posterity, because even if Muschamp bombs I think almost everyone on here would agree Florida is going to do more over the next 10-15 years than TAMU-- hell, Muschamp as bad as he is has been to more BCS bowls than Sumlin and beat him head to head.

Better weed, bankrolled bagmen, somewhat tolerant local law enforcement, oh and Dodge Chargers and SEC headquarters.

Why are you fat?

quote:

---

Mark Richt still coaches at Georgia.

---

quote:

---

Why is the SEC west so much better than the SEC east at football?

---

It's not "so much better"

quote:

---

It is a product of better coaching, better facilities, better players, what? Maybe a combination of all three?

---

right now? players really.. that may reflect on the coach's (as a team) ability to identify and recruit key needs. but if I had to make cumulative scores for the east and west head coaches, they wouldn't be much different from each other.
Facilities.. mehh.

Football is inches and momentum anyhow. so.. in the future.
Eventually.. The east teams will get better assistant coaches and recruiters, and then the recruits, and Georgia, Florida, USC, and Tennesee(at some point) will be more than able to compete(not that they don't already) with Auburn, Bama, LSU, and A&M.

Nebraska, USC, and Michigan called.. they said.. it's some phenomenon called a "cycle??"

I'll say the main reason overall is better coaching in the West. Saban can be attributed for the the success of both LSU and Bama and the of course Malzahn at Auburn(even as OC) Plus, Cam went and stole a lap top. That probably definitely gives UF another East title, probably two under Urban since Cam would have been playing two years without the transfer. I also believe one SEC team getting a great coach may have actually helped weaken the East. Spurrier coming to South Carolina was good enough to take us from being a scrub to at least stealing several wins a year from the big three. Several big time players would have ended up at probably UGA or UT had Spurrier not arrived.