bob stoops: SEC is not overwhelming

[TheLonestarDUCK]

I posted this back in the ole CBS days in 2007. Funny nothing has changed.

"The SEC has 6 teams, the others are used for scrimmage. Florida, LSU, Auburn, UGA, Bama & Tenn are the only ones that have won or shared a conf title since 1976 - yes that's right 1976. Kentucky shared a title that year. Before that? You have to go back to 1964 - yes that's right 1964, when one of the other six won a SEC title, it was Ole Miss. Holy Shit talk about top heavy.

That was 2007. Two new editions were added and both are competing a hell of a lot better than the bottom six, the SEC is great at the top, but not at the bottom.

 

[offshore1509]

The current ESPeNis supplied narrative is that the SEC is best because of one of the teams from the SEC winning the NCG for X amount of years. A Big XII team just defeated the flagship of that narrative.

The specific team that has spurred that belief is Alabama. Auburn bought one (everyone including all of the other SEC schools' fans are in agreement of that fact). Florida has a couple and LSU has one. Since 06, an SEC team has brought home the hardware. Impressive.

Should those facts loft all of the other SEC teams in regards to polls? LSU and Florida weren't representative of a NCG team this year. USCe benefits, Georgia benefits, now A&M and Mizzou are getting the benefit as well. What did Florida and Georgia do this past year? LSU? Yet time and time again they were given the benefit of some belief that, by merely being in the SEC...they were better than another similarly equipped team from another conference.

'Bama didn't win the NCG this year. Neither did Florida or LSU and Auburn remains to be seen. There are four teams in the SEC that have won it over the past 7 years. Impressive. But for all of these other teams to benefit from the successes of less than a third of the conferences' accomplishments stinks. You can't see it because you enjoy the benefit.

The SEC's partnership with ESPN has driven this and it's been proven time and time again that the sports programming monopoly of ESPN steers and spins the narrative toward a positive SEC slant.

There was no TEAM SEC until ESPN had a vested interest. The manipulation of "journalism" covering amateur athletics by a corporate entity will eventually destroy amateur athletics. The current ESPN driven groundswell of dismantling the NCAA is more evidence that they don't care about competition and development of young people (which is what our beloved CFB should be about), all they see is $$$.

So call us haters or jelly or whatever help you legitimize the facts. Enjoy your preseason unearned love, again while the majority of your conference hides behind the Mississippi River. Just realize the end is nigh.

Bravo!!

 

[MarkOU]

LOL. As I said to another post above, in other words, "I got nothing!" If you really don't think UGa in the Richt era hasn't contributed to the SEC's strength, you are college football ignorant. No, we don't have a NC ... but we've been a top program in the SEC and the nation. Do some research and then come back. My guess is you will just spew some more of your hate and name calling.

Ok here we go.

During this 7 streak lets take a look at what Georgia has done to add to the greatness.

L - Georgia Tech
L - Oklahoma State
L - Colorado
L - Central Florida
L - Bosie State
L - Michigan State
L - Clemson
L - Nebraska

Go on Lawdawg. Keep telling us about the greatness of the SEC.

 

[LawDawg]

The current ESPeNis supplied narrative is that the SEC is best because of one of the teams from the SEC winning the NCG for X amount of years. A Big XII team just defeated the flagship of that narrative.

The specific team that has spurred that belief is Alabama. Auburn bought one (everyone including all of the other SEC schools' fans are in agreement of that fact). Florida has a couple and LSU has one. Since 06, an SEC team has brought home the hardware. Impressive.

Should those facts loft all of the other SEC teams in regards to polls? LSU and Florida weren't representative of a NCG team this year. USCe benefits, Georgia benefits, now A&M and Mizzou are getting the benefit as well. What did Florida and Georgia do this past year? LSU? Yet time and time again they were given the benefit of some belief that, by merely being in the SEC...they were better than another similarly equipped team from another conference.

'Bama didn't win the NCG this year. Neither did Florida or LSU and Auburn remains to be seen. There are four teams in the SEC that have won it over the past 7 years. Impressive. But for all of these other teams to benefit from the successes of less than a third of the conferences' accomplishments stinks. You can't see it because you enjoy the benefit.

The SEC's partnership with ESPN has driven this and it's been proven time and time again that the sports programming monopoly of ESPN steers and spins the narrative toward a positive SEC slant.

There was no TEAM SEC until ESPN had a vested interest. The manipulation of "journalism" covering amateur athletics by a corporate entity will eventually destroy amateur athletics. The current ESPN driven groundswell of dismantling the NCAA is more evidence that they don't care about competition and development of young people (which is what our beloved CFB should be about), all they see is $$$.

So call us haters or jelly or whatever help you legitimize the facts. Enjoy your preseason unearned love, again while the majority of your conference hides behind the Mississippi River. Just realize the end is nigh.

So, it's ESPN that influences the coaches, the sports writers, and the programmers? Got it.

FWIW, I am sure there is a level of SEC bias at the beginning of each year. It is the same bias that teams like yours get - along with ND, UT, USCw, OSU, etc. - every year. Elite programs get the benefit of the doubt every year. So, for the time being, an elite conference gets the benefit of the doubt based on its success over the past decade. But, as my post showed above, there is other evidence that supports the SEC's reputation.

If you want to have a legitimate discussion, I won't call you a hater. I don't agree with a lot of what say here, but appreciate that you at least discussed the issue. But, when people come here and respond by calling me names, telling me that my team sucks, raising all sorts of red herrings, etc., I'll call them out for the haters they are.

 

[MarkOU]

And if you like ill add games back to 2000...

L - Georgia Tech
L - Boston College


Yup more greatness Georgia brings to the SEC

 

[yourTEAMreallySUCKS]

Shitty teams are usually the ones swinging from their conference's nut sack. Makes sense that Georgia and Florida are playing the sec card this year.

 

[MarkOU]

Shitty teams are usually the ones swinging from their conference's nut sack. Makes sense that Georgia and Florida are playing the sec card this year.

I can give Florida a pass. They have helped build the perception.

Georgia, as you can see in my post, has been getting their shit pushed in by the little brother universities and mid-majors during the SEC 7 streak.

It's pure comedy seeing a Georgia fan talk about the greatness of their conference.

 

[yourTEAMreallySUCKS]

I can give Florida a pass. They have helped build the perception.

Georgia, as you can see in my post, has been getting their shit pushed in by the little brother universities and mid-majors during the SEC 7 streak.

It's pure comedy seeing a Georgia fan talk about the greatness of their conference.

Florida is having a down year. Georgia is having a down 20+ years.

 

[LawDawg]

Ok here we go.

During this 7 streak lets take a look at what Georgia has done to add to the greatness.

L - Georgia Tech
L - Oklahoma State
L - Colorado
L - Central Florida
L - Bosie State
L - Michigan State
L - Clemson
L - Nebraska

Go on Lawdawg. Keep telling us about the greatness of the SEC.

Ok, I will.

First, whether my team is good or bad, doesn't mean I can't participate in discussions about conference strength.

Second, you show 8 losses over a period of time as proof of what? That we lost 8 games? Take GaTech - we've won 12 of the last 13 games and somehow you want to use the one loss against us? You list the BSU loss, but not the BSU win? You point to 3 bowl losses, but don't mention the 8 bowl games we won? That's weak sauce, even for you.

But, since you insist, here you go - in the Richt era:

If the measure is only NCs, then about 90% of all college football has fallen short in the BCS era, so we are in good company. Do I wish that the Dawgs had a BCS NC? Sure, don't we all. But, by this measure, only Bama, Auburn, LSU, UF, UT, Texas, USC, OSU, OU, Miami and FSU have succeeded.

To me the measure is a program that I can proud of, NC or not, that has a sustained level of success, runs a clean program, even though it will have the obvious ups and downs all programs go through. In the Richt era, here is what you have:

Winning percentage:
- 74% - 7th (excluding mid-majors). This places Richt in 1st place as the winningest UGa coach, all-time. I'd be shocked if that win percentage doesn't put him in the top 25 all-time for coaches of AQ-type schools.
- 8 of 12 seasons with 10 or more wins

Bowls:
- 3rd longest streak at 17 years, every year Richt has been there.
- 8-4 record
- 2-1 BCS Bowls

In 12 years:
- 2 SEC Titles
- 5 total CCG appearances (41%)
- 6 SEC East Championships (50%)
- Top 25 ranking 10 of 12 years
- Top 10 ranking 5 of 12 years
-Top 5 ranking 3 of 12 years

NFL draft picks:
- 93, which I am guessing puts him in the top 5 easily.

Probation Years:
- 0

To any rational observer of college football - not one who can't or won't debate an issue without name calling - it is clear that UGa has been part of the SEC greatness. Have we underwhelmed from time to time? Sure, but which program hasn't?

But again, I'd be open to a Kansas or Kentucky fan discussing it.

 

[occupant]

So, it's ESPN that influences the coaches, the sports writers, and the programmers? Got it.

FWIW, I am sure there is a level of SEC bias at the beginning of each year. It is the same bias that teams like yours get - along with ND, UT, USCw, OSU, etc. - every year. Elite programs get the benefit of the doubt every year. So, for the time being, an elite conference gets the benefit of the doubt based on its success over the past decade. But, as my post showed above, there is other evidence that supports the SEC's reputation.

If you want to have a legitimate discussion, I won't call you a hater. I don't agree with a lot of what say here, but appreciate that you at least discussed the issue. But, when people come here and respond by calling me names, telling me that my team sucks, raising all sorts of red herrings, etc., I'll call them out for the haters they are.

I don't have a problem with individual teams getting love. If a team has established themselves over a period of time, they should be recognized in some way until they falter. I have little problem with 'Bama being number one from poll to post this year. They fucking earned that recognition and deserved it.

But when you have teams with similar records, and EVERY SINGLE TIME the comparable SEC team gets the benefit of doubt for merely residing in the SEC? Without a good sample of OOC interactions? Come on...it's gotta stop.

We need to seriously look at rethinking the whole preseason ranking process as a whole to ensure the integrity of the game and the competitiveness of post-season matchups. One or two poll positions make big differences in bowl payouts and the like. A team losing their only game late in the season compared to losing their only game early in the season shouldn't be weighted any differently.

Anywho, that's my two cents. I'm just one fan. And I love the idea of amateur athletics and education happening at the same time...and it hurts to see it being gutted.

 

[LawDawg]

I can give Florida a pass. They have helped build the perception.

Georgia, as you can see in my post, has been getting their shit pushed in by the little brother universities and mid-majors during the SEC 7 streak.

It's pure comedy seeing a Georgia fan talk about the greatness of their conference.

Why is it comedy? What is comical is that you ignore all the good things that UGa has done, and that you think that one's team has to have done great things in order to discuss something. Yet, you still will not discuss the points that I laid out above. Why is it that you fail to discuss the issue and keep raising irrelevant crap?

I just posted what UGa has done in the Richt era. I am very comfortable with our bona fides when discussing conference strength.

 

[LawDawg]

I don't have a problem with individual teams getting love. If a team has established themselves over a period of time, they should be recognized in some way until they falter. I have little problem with 'Bama being number one from poll to post this year. They fucking earned that recognition and deserved it.

But when you have teams with similar records, and EVERY SINGLE TIME the comparable SEC team gets the benefit of doubt for merely residing in the SEC? Without a good sample of OOC interactions? Come on...it's gotta stop.

We need to seriously look at rethinking the whole preseason ranking process as a whole to ensure the integrity of the game and the competitiveness of post-season matchups. One or two poll positions make big differences in bowl payouts and the like. A team losing their only game late in the season compared to losing their only game early in the season shouldn't be weighted any differently.

Anywho, that's my two cents. I'm just one fan. And I love the idea of amateur athletics and education happening at the same time...and it hurts to see it being gutted.

Serious question: do you agree that the elite programs, like yours, get the benefit of the doubt based on past performance? See where I am going with that?

As to the preseason, it won't change. There is too much money involved. As to when people lose, etc., it's always been that way, and OU has profited from it in the past. The 4 team playoff will go a ways to making sure those get evaluated differently.

 

[LawDawg]

Georgia is having a down 20+ years.

Keep digging deeper. If what we have done in the Richt era, as I just posted, is a down period, then I hope we keep being down. You really don't follow college football, do you? Maybe you are 12 years old and just have no understanding of history. That has to be it, or now you are just trolling.

 

[trojanfight]

“A few years ago we [the Big 12] had all the quarterbacks and now all of a sudden we can play a little better defense and some other people can’t play defense,” said Stoops. “Funny how people can’t play defense when there’s pro-style quarterbacks over there.”
​

After Georgia and LSU piled up the points in a 44-41 shootout, the nation learned that the SEC boasts at least two elite signal-callers in Aaron Murray and Zach Mettenberger – not to mention Alabama’s A.J. McCarron and reigning Heisman winner Johnny Manziel.
At first, it doesn’t look like Stoops was talking about the SEC, per se. However, the man has been paying attention to the conference that has dominated his own for the last decade.
Close attention.

“How’s that happening playing all those SEC defenses?” Stoops asked the reporters. “I still don’t know how A&M was third in the country in total offense and scoring offense playing all those SEC defenses. I have no idea how that happened.”
“Oh, they’ve got a quarterback, that’s right
​

Read more at Bob Stoops takes another shot at the SEC, calls out league's defenses

 

[yourTEAMreallySUCKS]

Keep digging deeper. If what we have done in the Richt era, as I just posted, is a down period, then I hope we keep being down. You really don't follow college football, do you? Maybe you are 12 years old and just have no understanding of history. That has to be it, or now you are just trolling.

I'm a scar fan.... So I have a very good understanding of Georgia football. Georgia = Oklahoma State. If you think that is elite then I feel sorry for you, mr college football follower.

 

[BoomerNTX]

Summary:

BigXII was 3-3.
SEC is 7-2 so far.

But, BigXII's wins were better wins because SEC teams were favored in their games.

Funny thing is you guys want it both ways. SEC teams are overrated, you say. They shouldn't be top 10 teams, you say. We get all the breaks in the rankings, and our preseason rankings elevate the EOY rankings. But wait, when it works for your argument, those highly ranked SEC teams' wins aren't legit because they were ranked higher than their opponents and should have won. Got it.

By the way, no one has ever said that the SEC is unbeatable. That would be dumb. What has been said is that over the past 7 years the SEC has been the dominant conference. You guys keep changing the discussion baseline because you can't or won't counter the points I made above.

Either you don't understand the thread topic, or want a different one. My point was validation of Stoops point... the one that the thread is about. The SEC is not overwhelming. Not the SEC has won previous season championships. If I'm not mistaken, "is" is present tense....not past. The PAC is 7-2 in bowls as well, so if Aub loses, the PAC will have a better bowl season record, and by SEC logic, the better conference.

Once again, I stated I didn't think the B12 is better than the SEC. Just that the SEC is not overwhelming....once again, the thread topic. When a team(Bama) sits atop the college rankings for almost 3 seasons and loses to what many on these boards have called "overrated", "suckass" etc, it lends itself to discussion in regards to how overwhelming the former's conference really is if they can dominate it for 3 years running. I have posted on occasion that I felt the B12 was down this year. I didn't feel BU was what many did and this would be exposed by seasons end. I didn't think OU would be able to pull off the Sugar win, but perhaps I bought into the myth of SEC dominance. Not hard to do with the media hard-on for them. Obviously an "overrated" OU team had their way with the pride of the SEC this season.

When UGA wins a bowl of any significance, get back to me. OU has won all of the BCS bowls. The NCG, Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar. Which SEC team can make that claim? Since you like BCS history, included that just for you.

 

[Clayton]

The SEC hate is all over the place touching a little bit on each argument but failing to mention something important at every pass.

 

[LawDawg]

I'm a scar fan.... So I have a very good understanding of Georgia football. Georgia = Oklahoma State. If you think that is elite then I feel sorry for you, mr college football follower.

Being an USCe fan explains a lot.

I've now posted a detailed post about the SEC and why I think it gets the nod as the best conference. No one countered it, just attacked the messenger.

People starting attacking UGa, and I posted a detailed overview of the Richt era. You don't counter that post and what it contained, but once again name call.

I think my work here is done.

 

[trojanfight]

I thought this comment was pretty spot on about the defenses of the SEC. its not that the SEC defenses are hands down worse than they have been. Its the qb play. for years past in sec its been stack 8 or 9 guys and play single coverage on receivers and 90 percent of qbs in the sec cant make you pay for it. that or they don't have big play receivers to beat you deep. alabamas defense wasn't really that bad the other night vs Oklahoma. it would work on most offenses in sec in past years.

and with the success of Missouri and a&m it has non sec fans saying well what if this team or this team was in sec would they also win most of their games? im not going to say its anyone on sports SportsHoopla but during this 7 championship run seen plenty of sec fans that boast around saying oh if you put Vanderbilt or miss st or ole miss...in any other bcs conference they would win it...not saying every fan is that delusional but it exists.

now I see a lot of excuses to the success of a&m and Missouri....what just yesterday someone said winning sec east doesn't count

 

[BamaTee1]

I posted this back in the ole CBS days in 2007. Funny nothing has changed.

"The SEC has 6 teams, the others are used for scrimmage. Florida, LSU, Auburn, UGA, Bama & Tenn are the only ones that have won or shared a conf title since 1976 - yes that's right 1976. Kentucky shared a title that year. Before that? You have to go back to 1964 - yes that's right 1964, when one of the other six won a SEC title, it was Ole Miss. Holy Shit talk about top heavy.

That was 2007. Two new editions were added and both are competing a hell of a lot better than the bottom six, the SEC is great at the top, but not at the bottom.

Someone has to be bad in a conference, right? Name any conference the bottom teams aren't bad? So all those SEC teams you mention has won BCS titles,except Georgia (but right there several times) and many of them multiple ones. Please name another conference that is even close to that? Oregon has be very good lately. Have they won one? My point is it isn't easy. I imagine Kentucky,Vanderbilt,Ole Miss, Mississippi St will probably never win another. Outside of that, the other 11 could. Look at Auburn and Missouri this year. They were both two of the worst teams in the league last year. This Year the winner of the SEC game between those two was going to the NC game! Maybe Ole Miss might put it all together once? So that leaves 11 out of 14 teams that could win one. Name another conference that sniffs this.

Now it only makes sense if these top teams are some of the best consistently in the country the others have to play them which makes life very difficult for them. I would also say if you agree with the first part of this paragraph than you agree these bottom teams would do better if in other leagues. How much better? Who knows but definitely better. Ole Miss is 12-1 in its last 13 bowl games!!! 12-1 with wins over Oklahoma St., Texas Tech,Nebraska,West Virginia, Michigan, Georgia Tech! If they are so bad how is that happening? They are a bottom feeder, right?

The funny thing about all this is it's ridiculous! The bottom teams are not as good as the top teams and have not done much! Really! What a profound statement. Pretty weak argument to attack the SEC with but I guess that is all someone has!