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

[WizardHawk]

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.

Why do you ALWAYS get so fucking defensive that you entirely miss points never meant to take shots at the SEC to begin with? I mean like ALWAYS.

The Pac can't come forward and tell the RB they would back out if they didn't drop the Big, no more than the Big could do the same. They have iron clad contracts. Doubt any of the top could make those changes. Notice when I spoke to RA I suggested the 5th seeds suggesting lower tier bowls. They need the SEC far more than the SEC needs them and said if there were one on this side it would work similarly for the Pac.

You completely and entirely missed the point out of your need to overly defend any perceived slight toward the mighty SEC. There was none. There were no insults or suggestions of wrong doing. No claims of ducking the Pac. Chill out man and smoke a bowl.

RA said the Pac hides from the SEC. I suggested the bowls themselves invite who they think they can get the most money from. They decide who is most likely to bring in the travel money. Are we really shocked the most pick arraignments closer to those venues?

 

[WizardHawk]

I've now seen RA accuse the Pac of ducking the SEC and 4D20 accusing the Pac of flinging their noses at them? . And neither have any proof. Read up on it man. The history of the RB isn't nearly as sinister as you portray it to be. Prove that wrong.

 

[4down20]

Why do you ALWAYS get so fucking defensive that you entirely miss points never meant to take shots at the SEC to begin with? I mean like ALWAYS.

The Pac can't come forward and tell the RB they would back out if they didn't drop the Big, no more than the Big could do the same. They have iron clad contracts. Doubt any of the top could make those changes. Notice when I spoke to RA I suggested the 5th seeds suggesting lower tier bowls. They need the SEC far more than the SEC needs them and said if there were one on this side it would work similarly for the Pac.

You completely and entirely missed the point out of your need to overly defend any perceived slight toward the mighty SEC. There was none. There were no insults or suggestions of wrong doing. No claims of ducking the Pac. Chill out man and smoke a bowl.

RA said the Pac hides from the SEC. I suggested the bowls themselves invite who they think they can get the most money from. They decide who is most likely to bring in the travel money. Are we really shocked the most pick arraignments closer to those venues?

My 3 sentence reply pointing out the huge double standards you have towards the 2 conferences is me getting defensive?



It looks to me like you are the one getting overly defensive because you think people are attacking the Pac12.

I've now seen RA accuse the Pac of ducking the SEC and 4D20 accusing the Pac of flinging their noses at them? . And neither have any proof. Read up on it man. The history of the RB isn't nearly as sinister as you portray it to be. Prove that wrong.

The Pac12 and Big10 decided to cut everyone else out and they have done everything in their power over the past 50 years or whatever to keep it that way.

They tried to block the BCS system improvement and concessions had to be made to keep the Rose Bowl legitimate.

We couldn't get a playoff for many years for the exact same reason. Big10 and the Pac12 would always vote away from it to protect the Rose Bowl.

And yet whenever something is made towards the teams having any influence over the Rose Bowl, apparently - "NOPE!". They've exerted their efforts towards the opposite direction for over 50 years and we are supposed to believe that it's just that way because the conferences are helpless towards letting other teams in.

Bullshit.

It's been that way because the people at the top of both conferences wanted it that way.

 

[umichgradfan]

My 3 sentence reply pointing out the huge double standards you have towards the 2 conferences is me getting defensive?



It looks to me like you are the one getting overly defensive because you think people are attacking the Pac12.




The Pac12 and Big10 decided to cut everyone else out and they have done everything in their power over the past 50 years or whatever to keep it that way.

They tried to block the BCS system improvement and concessions had to be made to keep the Rose Bowl legitimate.

We couldn't get a playoff for many years for the exact same reason. Big10 and the Pac12 would always vote away from it to protect the Rose Bowl.

And yet whenever something is made towards the teams having any influence over the Rose Bowl, apparently - "NOPE!". They've exerted their efforts towards the opposite direction for over 50 years and we are supposed to believe that it's just that way because the conferences are helpless towards letting other teams in.

Bullshit.

It's been that way because the people at the top of both conferences wanted it that way.

 

[Runeman]

All season long, all I got from people outside of the SEC, was how shitty the SEC was. Well, I guess from the Bowl season results, the SEC is not so shitty. Michigan State and Iowa got blown out so one could make a case the Big1G needs to do better...just sayin.

 

[umichgradfan]

My 3 sentence reply pointing out the huge double standards you have towards the 2 conferences is me getting defensive?



It looks to me like you are the one getting overly defensive because you think people are attacking the Pac12.




The Pac12 and Big10 decided to cut everyone else out and they have done everything in their power over the past 50 years or whatever to keep it that way.

They tried to block the BCS system improvement and concessions had to be made to keep the Rose Bowl legitimate.

We couldn't get a playoff for many years for the exact same reason. Big10 and the Pac12 would always vote away from it to protect the Rose Bowl.

And yet whenever something is made towards the teams having any influence over the Rose Bowl, apparently - "NOPE!". They've exerted their efforts towards the opposite direction for over 50 years and we are supposed to believe that it's just that way because the conferences are helpless towards letting other teams in.

Bullshit.

It's been that way because the people at the top of both conferences wanted it that way.

A little history for you . . .

The Big Nine and PCC were of the same accord when it came to treating players as amateurs, as compared to the semi-professional status that the Southern Universities proposed. Also, the Big Nine and PCC both had the same attitudes towards desegregation and allowing African-Americans to play football. Many other universities were still segregated. None of the Southeastern Conference schools had an African American athlete until 1966. The Cotton Bowl, Orange Bowl, and Sugar Bowl would not be integrated until 1948, 1955, and 1956 respectively.

The Big Nine agreed, after eight years of negotiating over payments, rules, and ticket allocations, to a five-year exclusive deal with the Rose Bowl committee to send the conference champion to meet the PCC conference champion. UCLA, USC, Minnesota and Illinois all voted against it.

The Tournament of Roses committee selected from the former members of PCC and invited Washington, the first champion of the newly formed AAWU (Athletic Association of Western Universities, formerly the PCC) to play Big Ten champion Wisconsin in the 1960 Rose Bowl. The Big Ten authorized its members to accept any Rose Bowl invitation at their discretion.

The AAWU signed an agreement with the Rose Bowl that remained in force from the 1960 Rose Bowl until the advent of the BCS era in 1998. In 1962, after Minnesota changed its vote against pursuing a new agreement (resolving a 5–5 voting deadlock which had prevented any new negotiations for years), a Big Ten agreement was finalized, which went into effect with the 1963 Rose Bowl and lasted until the BCS era.

While the Big Ten supplied the "East" representative and the PCC, AAWU, or Pac-8/10 supplied the "West" representative from the 1947 Rose Bowl to the BCS era, statements about an "exclusive" Rose Bowl agreement existing during this period are not entirely accurate: the Big Ten was not part of any agreement for the 1961 and 1962 games and the status of the agreement for 1960 is questionable, at best. The fact that the 1961 Big Ten champion, Ohio State, declined the invitation to play in the 1962 Rose Bowl (without penalty) is the clearest evidence that this "exclusive agreement" did not exist in these years.

Both conferences also had "exclusive agreements" with the Rose Bowl game, in the sense that member schools were not allowed to play in any other bowl game. Both conferences abolished this rule before the 1975 college football season.

 

[Wild Turkey]

All season long, all I got from people outside of the SEC, was how shitty the SEC was. Well, I guess from the Bowl season results, the SEC is not so shitty. Michigan State and Iowa got blown out so one could make a case the Big1G needs to do better...just sayin.

No we are still shitty:

1. We only play bowls in our own backyard (might as well be our home stadiums because of all the summer homes we all have in Orlando, Tampa, Dallas and Jacksonville)
2. We stacked the deck against the other conferences and make sure we only play lesser opponents (this is very tricky since they all power 5 conferences but we are so powerful we get it done).
3. We own the media so they make sure every team is properly hyped and the opponents marginalized.
4. We cheat in recruiting so we have an unfair advantage to begin with.
5. We own the refs (doesn't matter if they are from a different conference we will pay them off regardless).

So you see the SEC success is one big farce and you can discount all the wins. At best we are the 4th maybe 5th best conference.

 

[Bayou Tiger]

No we are still shitty:

1. We only play bowls in our own backyard (might as well be our home stadiums because of all the summer homes we all have in Orlando, Tampa, Dallas and Jacksonville)
2. We stacked the deck against the other conferences and make sure we only play lesser opponents (this is very tricky since they all power 5 conferences but we are so powerful we get it done).
3. We own the media so they make sure every team is properly hyped and the opponents marginalized.
4. We cheat in recruiting so we have an unfair advantage to begin with.
5. We own the refs (doesn't matter if they are from a different conference we will pay them off regardless).

So you see the SEC success is one big farce and you can discount all the wins. At best we are the 4th maybe 5th best conference.

LOL ! Good one WT !

I am just reading some of the "whining" about how we played these bowl games in our "region".

That's a new one. I haven't seen that excuse before.

I do believe the players from both teams in a bowl game get plenty of rest from the last game of the season to post season play. The coaches also have plenty of time to prepare game plans for their opponent.

But I guess it's so much easier to point fingers and make excuses. Sad really !

 

[Tharvot]

All season long, all I got from people outside of the SEC, was how shitty the SEC was. Well, I guess from the Bowl season results, the SEC is not so shitty. Michigan State and Iowa got blown out so one could make a case the Big1G needs to do better...just sayin.

Kinda like how last year everyone was talking about how amazing the SEC was, especially the SEC West, and then their top teams went out and pooped the bed in their bowl games? It's a total crapshoot.

Schools like Iowa over-perform in conference play every year (I'd attribute it to familiarity with the opposing coaches, personnel, and tendencies). Sometimes they get into a bowl game vs a team that completely outclasses them and they get their doors blown off and sometimes they keep the momentum up. Much of the time bowl games are completely unpredictable due to coaching changes, injuries, people leaving for the draft, etc. In the end, things typically even out. If your conference has a really good bowl season like the SEC did this year, congrats. I guess yall were the best this year.

A few years back the B1G had a terrible bowl season and they were proclaimed dead. Now, I'd argue that they are in the top 2 conferences with lots of future promise.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Werent they favored by 7 in like 75% of the games and overall favored in all their bowl games except one. They did what they should have done, beat teams that were not as good as those SEC teams. That being said, they are still the best conference. With the Pac 12 and B1G not too far behind...still.

 

[Bayou Tiger]

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.

One long run on sentence of stupidity....

ESPN is owned by the SEC maybe ?

 

[Red_Alert]

The Alamo Bowl was up for contract negotiation just a couple years ago. The PAC was the first conference in. The unknown was who their opponent would be. The PAC was focused on the Big 12 the entire way.

Don't give me no shit about travel.

 

[TexasExes98]

Oh for fuck's sake, can we please stop being PC here? I'll go ahead and say it. The reason the SEC recruits so we'll has nothing to do with paying players, high salaries for coaching, etc.......It's b/c the SEC region of the U.S. holds the largest black population in the country. All of those fast, big as hell black athletes reside in that region. It's fucking common sense. If the Midwest had the highest black population, then the B1G would dominate in recruiting and football. There, I said it.....

 

[Wild Turkey]

Werent they favored by 7 in like 75% of the games and overall favored in all their bowl games except one. They did what they should have done, beat teams that were not as good as those SEC teams. That being said, they are still the best conference. With the Pac 12 and B1G not too far behind...still.

SEC is shitty and they shouldn't be favored but should win or they are really really shitty. Got it.

 

[WizardHawk]

My 3 sentence reply pointing out the huge double standards you have towards the 2 conferences is me getting defensive?



It looks to me like you are the one getting overly defensive because you think people are attacking the Pac12.




The Pac12 and Big10 decided to cut everyone else out and they have done everything in their power over the past 50 years or whatever to keep it that way.

They tried to block the BCS system improvement and concessions had to be made to keep the Rose Bowl legitimate.

We couldn't get a playoff for many years for the exact same reason. Big10 and the Pac12 would always vote away from it to protect the Rose Bowl.

And yet whenever something is made towards the teams having any influence over the Rose Bowl, apparently - "NOPE!". They've exerted their efforts towards the opposite direction for over 50 years and we are supposed to believe that it's just that way because the conferences are helpless towards letting other teams in.

Bullshit.

It's been that way because the people at the top of both conferences wanted it that way.

You may be the king of moving the goalposts, but I've never let you get away with it and I'm sure not doing so now.

Never did I say the Pac and B1G haven't both locked onto their deals with the Rose Bowl. Not once. I said the other major bowls had their tradition as well and had long standing tie ins. There is zero chance you are going to get a Pac 1 or 2 to have a perm tie in with a SEC 1 or 2. The playoff system and traditional tie ins wouldn't have room for it. You'd have to look to the 4th - 6th place team tie ins. Been talking about that all along, you just want to harp on the RB which has zero to do with the topic at hand.

Sure, neither wanted to let go of their very long standing tradition. What's wrong with that? How is that related to the Pac and SEC not having any bowls together? So the only way the SEC can have a regular game with the Pac is to somehow force the B1G out of their long standing relationship with it and give it to the SEC? That's what you are suggesting?

I'm the one calling bullshit.

There is ZERO agenda keeping the Pac away from playing the SEC. In fact Scott pushed hard after joining the Pac to try and get some kind of tie in, again probably in the mid level where it should be easier to make deals, and found no interest in making that happen. They have every incentive to want a game and no reason to keep one from happening. The SEC itself isn't keeping it from happening, at least that's not how I'd view it. They simply don't care. They have their ties and are making their money just fine without us.

 

[HammerDown]

SEC coaches are more aggressive at recruiting. Because you pay a coach 6,7,8 million dollars and the assistant coaches a million plus the number 1 goal is winning...everything else is secondary.

The top players want to go to the top conference. The best conference is, and always has been, the SEC.

This isn't rocket science.

 

[gpm1976]

Nearly every game was a total lopsided blowout. I just don't think the matchups were really very good. Make a few adjustments and who knows which conf would look like the best. There were just too many weird events this year that put teams in places they don't belong.

 

[gpm1976]

The top players want to go to the top conference. The best conference is, and always has been, the SEC.

This isn't rocket science.

Either you're just some young kid or your memory is as short as your dick, because this isn't even close to being true.

 

[HammerDown]

Either you're just some young kid or your memory is as short as your dick, because this isn't even close to being true.

Well, only since the Civil War. You're so old you remember before then.

 

[HammerDown]

Nearly every game was a total lopsided blowout. I just don't think the matchups were really very good. Make a few adjustments and who knows which conf would look like the best. There were just too many weird events this year that put teams in places they don't belong.

The Big Ten is dead.