Is it really a surprise to anyone that the SEC is above the rest?

[BamaFanAlways]

No disrespect to the sec, but they won 8 games they were favored to win. I wouldn't jump out my drawers congratulating them. They met expectations. Nothing more, nothing less. It's a great conference, but they did what they were suppose to do. It's like rewarding your kid for making his bed. He's expected to that every day, applauding his performance is unnecessary. It's expected and he'll get an ass cutting if he doesn't get it done.

Klumpsen was expected to win the ACC, and Dabo threw them a Pizza party.

 

[Rebel]

That was against Eli Manning, I know he wanted to go there because of his dad, but still at least really good recruit at the right position can be all it takes.

QB for that game wasnt Eli, it was Romero Miller. Deuce McAllister had a good game to.

 

[offshore1509]

I didn't say a good coach, the point was coaches...and more ND and Michigan have and pay coaches at the SEC level...so your point is moot.

This is the staff that Alabama has for football...

Nick Saban, Head Coach 348-3600
Burton Burns, Associate Head Coach/Running Backs 348-3600
Lane Kiffin, Offensive Coordinator/Quarterbacks 348-3600
Bo Davis, Defensive Line 348-3600
Jeremy Pruitt, Defensive Coordinator 348-3600
Bobby Williams, Tight Ends/Special Teams Coordinator 348-3600
Mario Cristobal, Assistant Head Coach/Offensive Line 348-3600
Billy Napier, Wide Receivers 348-3600
Mel Tucker, Assistant Head Coach/Defensive Backs 348-3600
Tosh Lupoi, Linebackers 348-3600
Justin Dickens, Director of Football Operations 348-3600
Ellis Ponder, Associate Director/Football Operations 348-3600
Jody Wright, Director/Player Personnel 348-3600
Ashleigh Kimble, Assistant Director of Player Personnel 348-3646
Aazaar A. Rahim, Associate Director/Player Personnel 348-3600
Kerry Stevenson, Director of Player Development 348-3600
Freddie Roach, Director of Player Development 348-3600
Glen Schumann, Player Development/Player Personnel 348-3600
Asha Sowell, Recruiting Operations Coordinator 348-7934
Brandy Moore, Football Operations Coordinator 348-3600
Cedric Burns, Athletics Relations Coordinator 348-2308
Linda Leoni, Administrative Assistant 348-3600
Glenda Edwards, Administrative Secretary 348-3600
Dean Altobelli, Football Analyst 348-3600
Eric Kiesau, Football Analyst 348-3600
Keary Colbert, Football Analyst 348-3600
Brendan Farrell, Football Analyst 348-3600
Wes Neighbors, Football Analyst 348-3600
William Vlachos, Football Analyst 348-3600
Charlie Weis, Jr., Football Analyst 348-3600
Garrett Cox, Football Analyst 348-3600
Doug Belk, Graduate Assistant 348-3600
Alex Mortensen, Graduate Assistant 348-3600
JT Summerford, Athletics Intern 348-3600

At first glance there is not a big disparity between this listing and the 32 spots that Washington lists under the football program...until you actually look and see that half of Washington's positions are actually listed under separate departments on the Alabama website. For example, Washington lists all their strength and conditioning folks, while Alabama lists our S&C coach and his 14 staff members as a different department.

The reality is that Alabama has more than twice as many staff members dedicated to football as Washington does and we pay the ones we have much better as well.

But keep pretending it's because SEC...

Pretty much what I was saying about OU recruiting in another thread, they are going to have to make a commitment to recruiting, even if they have to hire more coaches and assistants to get it done. But you have to admit, the earned reputation of the SEC and the continual promotion of it by ESPN is also a big help for SEC recruiting, if an SEC school shows interest in a kid, he is most likely going, especially to one he thinks he might play right away, it's just the way things are these days. Until schools start beating them in the bowls it's going to be more of the same.

 

[offshore1509]

QB for that game wasnt Eli, it was Romero Miller. Deuce McAllister had a good game to.

I was thinking OU faced Eli Manning.

 

[Edisto_Tiger]

Klumpsen was expected to win the ACC, and Dabo threw them a Pizza party.

not even close to what we're talking about here.

 

[Rebel]

I was thinking OU faced Eli Manning.

Elis first game was in 2000.

 

[offshore1509]

Elis first game was in 2000.

I knew we played against a star player, I guess I was thinking it was Eli.

 

[Rebel]

I knew we played against a star player, I guess I was thinking it was Eli.

Its been so long ago that I had to go back and check to make sure I wasnt lying to you.

 

[BamaFanAlways]

They met expectations. Nothing more, nothing less. Your words.
Clemson was the early favorite for the ACC title. I believe (could be wrong) they were the favorites in every game until the playoffs.

It's like rewarding your kid for making his bed. He's expected to that every day, applauding his performance is unnecessary.
Yet Clemson should be applauded? You're not even the first team to win the ACC undefeated.
This IS the first time that a conference ever won 8 bowl games.

 

[offshore1509]

They met expectations. Nothing more, nothing less. Your words.
Clemson was the early favorite for the ACC title. I believe (could be wrong) they were the favorites in every game until the playoffs.

It's like rewarding your kid for making his bed. He's expected to that every day, applauding his performance is unnecessary.
Yet Clemson should be applauded? You're not even the first team to win the ACC undefeated.
This IS the first time that a conference ever won 8 bowl games.

SEC teams usually show up to play in the bowls, they have for several years, they are living up to expectations.

 

[4down20]

It's the benefit of being under-ranked during the season.

As such, not sure how it was meeting expectations.

 

[offshore1509]

It's the benefit of being under-ranked during the season.

As such, not sure how it was meeting expectations.

Maybe because they are favored more often than not.

 

[4down20]

Maybe because they are favored more often than not.

So Vegas knew they were under-ranked while everyone else was busy trolling about how bad the SEC was.

Not a surprise.

 

[offshore1509]

So Vegas knew they were under-ranked while everyone else was busy trolling about how bad the SEC was.

Not a surprise.

Look at all the grief USC, Fla. and OU received when they were on their runs, people just like to bitch about winners even if they have to make shit up.

 

[WizardHawk]

Your bowls are in your backyard as well. I would think the ACC, Big 12 and B1G would take issue with your assertion that we dictate everything. I guess according to you they're our bitches.

You obviously didn't see what I posed to RA. I said as much. If there was a bowl in SF we would probably have some leverage over it. However no one can deny that the SEC is where the lions share of the money in college football is generated from. Their cache is quite a bit higher. That's not a slam, it's a fact.

You don't think if the SEC had a bowl tie in somewhere down there and told them they would pull out and go to a different one if they didn't bring in a Pac that they wouldn't? Money talks and the SEC travels and pays for bowls very well, not to mention the tie to ESPN.

There are leverage plays from all of them I'm sure. You use what you can to get what your conference needs/wants. You'd be fired for not doing so. Stop being so fucking defensive.

Tell me I'm wrong that there aren't any Pac/SEC games because the SEC mostly plays in their back yard and bowl organizers are going to go for the ties that bring the easiest travel and the Pac is farther away.

This all came because RA continually accuses the Pac of being afraid to play them. The reality is we don't play the ACC either and it's because of travel and the agenda of making money by the bowl organizers. It has zero to do with conference desires. We are closer to the Big12 and Big10. We end up playing them. It's just that simple.

 

[4down20]

Tell me I'm wrong that there aren't any Pac/SEC games because the SEC mostly plays in their back yard and bowl organizers are going to go for the ties that bring the easiest travel and the Pac is farther away.

You are wrong.

It was the Rose Bowl that shut the SEC and others out.

Kind of like do I give a shit about 1978 that USC beat Alabama in the 1st game of the year but then Alabama won the national championship(split) after beating #1 Penn St in the Sugar Bowl. Do I give a fuck? No because the Pac decided it wanted to shut out everyone else, so USC got to play in the Rose Bowl against a Big10 team.

Alabama didn't have trouble traveling out to that bowl game even back in the 20's when it was much more difficult to travel.

The Sugar Bowl has had the SEC tie in for basically ever with an open end - going back to 78, that's how Alabama played Penn St. But you expect them to invite Pac12 #2 to play SEC #1? Because Pac12 #1 has always gone to the Rose Bowl. Now the Big12 is tied in starting this year to the Sugar Bowl. Sucks, but playoffs now so not a big deal.

So I really don't know how you can say all this stuff when it's been the Pac that has flung it's nose towards everyone else.

 

[BoiseMike19]

Oh look, people who think anytime someone is better than their team it must be because of cheating.

Because you know, it's impossible for other teams to just be better.

Even though I won't be surprised if Ole Miss gets nailed hard soon.

Show me a pic of this "Ole Miss" you speak of getting nailed hard. Got 4 beers in me, standards lowered considerably. Then of course show me the line to stand in.

 

[4down20]

Show me a pic of this "Ole Miss" you speak of getting nailed hard. Got 4 beers in me, standards lowered considerably. Then of course show me the line to stand in.

Sorry, I googled it and got distracted.

 

[WizardHawk]

You are wrong.

It was the Rose Bowl that shut the SEC and others out.

Kind of like do I give a shit about 1978 that USC beat Alabama in the 1st game of the year but then Alabama won the national championship(split) after beating #1 Penn St in the Sugar Bowl. Do I give a fuck? No because the Pac decided it wanted to shut out everyone else, so USC got to play in the Rose Bowl against a Big10 team.

Alabama didn't have trouble traveling out to that bowl game even back in the 20's when it was much more difficult to travel.

The Sugar Bowl has had the SEC tie in for basically ever with an open end - going back to 78, that's how Alabama played Penn St. But you expect them to invite Pac12 #2 to play SEC #1? Because Pac12 #1 has always gone to the Rose Bowl. Now the Big12 is tied in starting this year to the Sugar Bowl. Sucks, but playoffs now so not a big deal.

So I really don't know how you can say all this stuff when it's been the Pac that has flung it's nose towards everyone else.

Really all you did was prove my point.

You do know the Rose bowl is headed by a committee right? It's not controlled by the Pac, but it IS in the Pac footprint. I'm fully aware of the history of the RB and Bama's place in it. There probably isn't the SEC without bama coming out west and winning that bowl. Not as we know it today anyway. Put your brand on the map.

Who gets to decide which team goes from an open ended tie in? Right, it's the bowl organizers.

Why was the Rose Bowl once played against pretty much anyone and later made exclusive to the (then) Big 9? Because of political/racial differences with mostly the southern teams. They wanted to maintain the amateur status and were against keeping blacks off the field. This was after WWII. Didn't see blacks in the south at major universities until well into the 60's. Both conferences agreed to exclusive rights (presented by the bowl organizers, not created by themselves) and kept renewing it all the way up to the formation of the BCS. Even that took a hell of a lot of work to break the deadlock in voting against ending the tradition. They had a deal in place and both conferences continued to renew it. How is this anyone snubbing their nose?

All of the older bowls have their stories to tell and they too have long standing traditions.

Do you have any links to proof the Pac has blocked any particular team or region from being invited to that bowl? Didn't think so.

 

[4down20]

Really all you did was prove my point.

You do know the Rose bowl is headed by a committee right? It's not controlled by the Pac, but it IS in the Pac footprint. I'm fully aware of the history of the RB and Bama's place in it. There probably isn't the SEC without bama coming out west and winning that bowl. Not as we know it today anyway. Put your brand on the map.

Who gets to decide which team goes from an open ended tie in? Right, it's the bowl organizers.

Why was the Rose Bowl once played against pretty much anyone and later made exclusive to the (then) Big 9? Because of political/racial differences with mostly the southern teams. They wanted to maintain the amateur status and were against keeping blacks off the field. This was after WWII. Didn't see blacks in the south at major universities until well into the 60's. Both conferences agreed to exclusive rights (presented by the bowl organizers, not created by themselves) and kept renewing it all the way up to the formation of the BCS. Even that took a hell of a lot of work to break the deadlock in voting against ending the tradition. They had a deal in place and both conferences continued to renew it. How is this anyone snubbing their nose?

All of the older bowls have their stories to tell and they too have long standing traditions.

Do you have any links to proof the Pac has blocked any particular team or region from being invited to that bowl? Didn't think so.

Oh, so the Pac is unable to have pull, but the SEC is?

It's the UCLA stadium...

I don't think that's remotely the case.