Is the SEC really that dominant or overrated???

[Amoo316]

Quote: Originally Posted by seasprite

Conference pride is silly............especially from teams who have been the doormat of the conference for years

It puts a smile on my face every year when the familiar faces start reappearing on this forum again.

[seasprite]

Quote: Originally Posted by Amoo316

It puts a smile on my face every year when the familiar faces start reappearing on this forum again.

Get your wood away from me.....................

[Amoo316]

Quote: Originally Posted by lonewolf371

The Big Ten has the same problem. Are we going to adjust the Big Ten's bowl record because they always play teams slotted above them? The SEC sets up and schedules these bowls. If you're going to look at bowl records; look at bowl records. Or you could do the best thing and look at stuff like this: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei Which still confirms the SEC is on top, but it's a far better metric to use than bowl records.

I only brought up bowl records because dude was using rankings which determine bowl seeding. Either way did you just argue and say my bowl records were garbage, then say use this instead but you're still right?

[Amoo316]

Quote: Originally Posted by seasprite

Get your wood away from me.....................

OT

Spoiler

Put up your team thread, interested to see some thoughts and ask some questions with the new regime

Calm down sparky, there will be plenty of time for tussle in late September

[football200414]

Quote: Originally Posted by lonewolf371

By what metric? The ACC had the same bowl winning percentage as the SEC last year. The Big 12 had a better winning percentage in 2011-2012. The Big East was the only power conference to post a winning percentage above .500 in 2010-2011. The Big East also had a better winning percentage in 2009-2010. This perception is fabricated and fuelled only by the national championship games. In 2012, we couldn't even look at that because the system was so broken as to allow Alabama in.

Bowl winning percentages are a bad stat to use. Have you ever taken a close look at the bowl match-ups? In most SEC bowls the other conference they're playing assigns the bid to a higher-ranked team in their conference (i.e. the #3 team in another conference might play the #6 team in the SEC). Not to mention, our best team has yet to play in the Sugar Bowl in 7 years because they were playing in the title game. In 2011-12, our we had a loss out of the gate because the country's & SEC's #1 & #2 were playing each other in the title game. Point is - bowl records are bad stat because of the match-ups and other factors.

[salmonsobriquet734]

Bowl games played in the south are essentially home games for SEC teams against non-southern opponents. That has to be factored in the bowl record discussion as well. If the same games were held in Oregon, Indiana, New York etc. would the SEC win as many as they do now when so many are in Nascar country?

[Amoo316]

Quote: Originally Posted by salmonsobriquet734

Bowl games played in the south are essentially home games for SEC teams against non-southern opponents. That has to be factored in the bowl record discussion as well. If the same games were held in Oregon, Indiana, New York etc. would the SEC win as many as they do now when so many are in Nascar country?

I went to the UF vs Michigan Bowl game Tebow's first year as a starter and there were more UM fans then UF fans....

[football200414]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sportsforever

We can have this discussion every year, but all that has to happen is for an Oregon, a ND, or whoever to show up and beat an SEC team in the title game. Until that happens, this is going to be a pointless discussion.

I think even if that happens, it's still the SEC on top unless something drastically changes. It's going to take another conference proving themselves more than just one year.