Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

So now everyone is piling on the SEC (for good reason), so I thought I'd add a thought that has crossed my mind for some time...

The argument that conferences like to use to defend the toughness of their own conference schedule is "If you played a *insert conference here* schedule, you'd be lucky to go .500". We finally got to see this in action when 7-6 Texas A&M (2011 record) plays an SEC schedule and goes 10-2. Hmmm. One of their losses, BY THREE, to Florida in their first game with a frosh QB.

So, was aTm that much better this year? Certainly, they were entertaining, but c'mon. They had a total of one big win, that just so happened to be AT Alabama, unless you want to count a two-point win vs. La. Tech, or a win over over-rated Miss. St. (go ahead and look up their schedule...I dare you). Losses to Florida and LSU and wins over a bunch of patsies...yup, they played an SEC schedule.

I maintain that the SEC is unproven and we are seeing this in the bowl games. All the top teams played 8 home games and none played a serious contender OOC (unless you want to count Washington's trip to LSU). I know, I know...the Ducks didn't do much better (ah, but it turns out they DID with 2 conference champions in Fresno St. and Ark. St.).

The problem, in my eyes, is that all conferences need to get on the same platform for scheduling. Whether it be 8 or 9 conf. games, they need to be the same. Then, the power conferences need to play the power conferences in OOC games to validate a playoff system. The SEC rankings are a joke...Florida at #3? Unproven, and as we just found out, undeserving (with all due credit to UL and Teddy Bridgewater, stud). The system needs work prior to identifying the TRUE top 4 teams. Hopefully, we'll see an 8 team system soon and be able to see the TRUE top 8 teams, not the ones that scheduled best or had the conference's name getting them in. I want to see the best vs. the best, and the current system doesn't give us that.

Rant over.

Then why has the SEC won the last 6 titles? I think that is the opposite of unproven.

I don't put too much stock into conference bowl records because they are so different than regular season games. 5 week layoff, all the hype leading up to the games, and some teams come in unfocused or with extra motivation. Taking nothing away from Louisville for what was an amazing performance but I'd wonder what the outcome would be if the game was played in October, with 1 week to prepare, versus January with a 5 week layoff.

First of all, yes Texas A&M is that much better, they got this kid that y'all might not of heard but he broke all kind of records that two other Hiesman winners set and then won the Hiesman himself. One player like that can make a average team a great team quickly, as Cam did for AU.

Second of all what happens if they go on to win their bowl and then Bama wins the SEC's 7th straight title? Are we then proven?

Third, are you really bragging about beating those two teams because they won their little conferences? If so then they Florida lost should be forgiving since it was by a conference champion....right?

Lastly, the PAC has no room to talk , at this point at least, when it comes to bowl performances. You all have beaten Navy, barely inched by Nevada who controlled that game until the end, and beat a Big 10 champ that is only the Big 10 champ because the undeceated Big 10 member and another with a better record was ineligible.

By the way don't get me wrong, the gap between the SEC and everyone else is about as thick as a piece of paper right now. "We" are down as a conference this year, so is everyone else. If anyone stood out this year it is the smaller conferences.

Big 12 looks to be improving, so does the ACC, the bottom half of the SEC and PAC are bad and the top teams in both are not as good as previous years. This season as a whole was lack luster.

Until another league wins the Nat. Champ. two or three years running then the SEC deserves its accolades. All the rest is just envious blather. Now Go Ducks!

Bud Lee wrote:First of all, yes Texas A&M is that much better, they got this kid that y'all might not of heard but he broke all kind of records that two other Hiesman winners set and then won the Hiesman himself. One player like that can make a average team a great team quickly, as Cam did for AU.

Second of all what happens if they go on to win their bowl and then Bama wins the SEC's 7th straight title? Are we then proven?

Third, are you really bragging about beating those two teams because they won their little conferences? If so then they Florida lost should be forgiving since it was by a conference champion....right?

Lastly, the PAC has no room to talk , at this point at least, when it comes to bowl performances. You all have beaten Navy, barely inched by Nevada who controlled that game until the end, and beat a Big 10 champ that is only the Big 10 champ because the undeceated Big 10 member and another with a better record was ineligible.

No, not bragging at all...just comparing SOS as it turned out. Oregon took a lot of heat for their schedule, but it turns out that the SOS wasn't so bad. Florida is applauded for the strongest schedule...Bowling Green, La Lafayette, Jacksonville St. and Florida St. for OOC opponents.

My point is not that the SEC isn't good (I do feel they are the best conference overall), it's the system that leaves teams unproven based on the weak 4-game OOC schedule, leaving only 8 inter conference games (in a 14 team conference) to ascertain how good they are (Alabama didn't play SC or Fla, Georgia didn't play LSU or aTm, LSU didn't play UGa or SC...leaving a round robin effect of minimal losses and lingering top 10 rankings). This results in artificially inflated rankings that boost the teams, win or lose. Was Florida really the 3rd best team in the country? Was South Carolina a top 10 team? In an 8 game playoff, I wouldn't think either of these teams would hold up, but based on the current system, both would get in.

I never brought the PAC into the argument. The SEC makes my point better (flawed system) because they are lauded as the best conference, yet when playing against better competition in bowl games, some have been exposed. Would it be different if they were playoff games set two weeks after the regular season? Perhaps.

The SEC's top team is definitely proven based on the the string of championships. But the system has given those teams the opportunity (through the rankings) to PLAY for a championship year in and year out. Hell, last year, the system GUARANTEED it! Here's how the opportunities happened over the past 7 seasons:

2012: 4 1-loss teams, Alabama selected
2011: 3 1-loss teams, Alabama selected
2010: Both teams undefeated
2009: Both teams undefeated
2008: 8 1-loss teams, Florida and Oklahoma selected
2007: 10 2-loss teams (and a 1-loss team other than Ohio State), LSU selected
2006: 4 1-loss teams, Florida selected

Regarding Tex. A&M and Johnny Manziel...incredible player, well deserving Heisman winner IMO. However, he won the award and the national attention in one game. Would anybody be giving him this much credit if he still played in the Big 12? It's the SEC love-fest that elevated the Johnny Football brand. As good as he is, he's still a Freshman that did serious damage in the almighty SEC. Are they that good, or is the SEC just not as tough a schedule as the Big 12? Silly question, but again, it points to opinion and speculation rather than fact to answer it.

ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT WE DESERVE A FAIR SYSTEM. THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS NOT...IT INCLUDES BIAS, OPINION AND SPECULATION. AS AN AVID COLLEGE FOOTBALL FAN, I'M LOSING THE LOVE.

Biggus Duckus wrote:You can't have it both ways Bud. We won the Rose because OSU it's ineligible. You know, the same reason the SEC is even in the title game this year. Georgia and Florida have been overrated all season, it's hard to believe we were a Notre Dame los away from them being 1 2 3.

I'm going to write something socking right now....Something many of you may not believe my fingures typed it...Bama does not belong in title game and I think they will lose to Notre Dame in a close one. In my opinion they are not even the best team in the SEC, I think that is A&M right now. I think the best team in the county is playing y'all tonight. I think the only reason they are there is because of who they are and Ohio is not able to play. Their scedule was a joke and I am really getting tired of the special treatment the SEC gives them.

AutzenMember wrote:

Bud Lee wrote:First of all, yes Texas A&M is that much better, they got this kid that y'all might not of heard but he broke all kind of records that two other Hiesman winners set and then won the Hiesman himself. One player like that can make a average team a great team quickly, as Cam did for AU.

Second of all what happens if they go on to win their bowl and then Bama wins the SEC's 7th straight title? Are we then proven?

Third, are you really bragging about beating those two teams because they won their little conferences? If so then they Florida lost should be forgiving since it was by a conference champion....right?

Lastly, the PAC has no room to talk , at this point at least, when it comes to bowl performances. You all have beaten Navy, barely inched by Nevada who controlled that game until the end, and beat a Big 10 champ that is only the Big 10 champ because the undeceated Big 10 member and another with a better record was ineligible.

No, not bragging at all...just comparing SOS as it turned out. Oregon took a lot of heat for their schedule, but it turns out that the SOS wasn't so bad. Florida is applauded for the strongest schedule...Bowling Green, La Lafayette, Jacksonville St. and Florida St. for OOC opponents.

My point is not that the SEC isn't good (I do feel they are the best conference overall), it's the system that leaves teams unproven based on the weak 4-game OOC schedule, leaving only 8 inter conference games (in a 14 team conference) to ascertain how good they are (Alabama didn't play SC or Fla, Georgia didn't play LSU or aTm, LSU didn't play UGa or SC...leaving a round robin effect of minimal losses and lingering top 10 rankings). This results in artificially inflated rankings that boost the teams, win or lose. Was Florida really the 3rd best team in the country? Was South Carolina a top 10 team? In an 8 game playoff, I wouldn't think either of these teams would hold up, but based on the current system, both would get in.

I never brought the PAC into the argument. The SEC makes my point better (flawed system) because they are lauded as the best conference, yet when playing against better competition in bowl games, some have been exposed. Would it be different if they were playoff games set two weeks after the regular season? Perhaps.

The SEC's top team is definitely proven based on the the string of championships. But the system has given those teams the opportunity (through the rankings) to PLAY for a championship year in and year out. Hell, last year, the system GUARANTEED it! Here's how the opportunities happened over the past 7 seasons:

2012: 4 1-loss teams, Alabama selected
2011: 3 1-loss teams, Alabama selected
2010: Both teams undefeated
2009: Both teams undefeated
2008: 8 1-loss teams, Florida and Oklahoma selected
2007: 10 2-loss teams (and a 1-loss team other than Ohio State), LSU selected
2006: 4 1-loss teams, Florida selected

Regarding Tex. A&M and Johnny Manziel...incredible player, well deserving Heisman winner IMO. However, he won the award and the national attention in one game. Would anybody be giving him this much credit if he still played in the Big 12? It's the SEC love-fest that elevated the Johnny Football brand. As good as he is, he's still a Freshman that did serious damage in the almighty SEC. Are they that good, or is the SEC just not as tough a schedule as the Big 12? Silly question, but again, it points to opinion and speculation rather than fact to answer it.

ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT WE DESERVE A FAIR SYSTEM. THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS NOT...IT INCLUDES BIAS, OPINION AND SPECULATION. AS AN AVID COLLEGE FOOTBALL FAN, I'M LOSING THE LOVE.

We can back and forth all day when it comes to the in between stuff but we are in agreement when it comes to the last thing you said, we need and deserve as fans a better system.

I have to also say, I'm REALLY hoping that the playoff system will change the SEC format , I do want either an additional conference game or for more of out schools making a better effort to play a "BCS" level school.

Bud Lee wrote:..Bama does not belong in title game and I think they will lose to Notre Dame in a close one.

I actually think the opposite. Notre Dame is much the same as Florida. Massively overranked, overrated and will get blown out in the natty. They have no business being in the National Championship. The only reason they got there is luck in everyone else dropping a game while they got a favorable homefield call vs Stanford. I'm calling it, 37-10 Bama.

It would surprise me if Bama won, but it would surprise me if they blow them out.

Bud Lee wrote:It wouldNT surprise me if Bama won, but it would surprise me if they blow them out.

Surprise all around!

UOducksTK1 wrote:

Bud Lee wrote:It wouldNT surprise me if Bama won, but it would surprise me if they blow them out.

Surprise all around!

My "b"...posting from the phone while drugged up is hard stuff

No worries bud, I realize how hard it is to contain your excitement before a Ducks game.

Haven't you heard? No posting while Duck'd up on Quack. Lol I'm going to kick myself in the balls now for posting that.

Biggus Duckus wrote:The vaunted SEC defenses in bowl season:

Team - Points allowed

Georgia - 31
Florida - 33
South Carolina - 28
Vanderbilt - 24
LSU - 25
Miss St - 34

Looks like LSU did the best job against their opponent, even in the loss. Other than Clemson, none of these teams were offensive juggernauts:

Opponent's average pts per game, national ranking in that category
Georgia - 31 (Nebraska 34.8 pts, 28th)
Florida - 33 (Louisville 31.2 pts, 50th)
South Carolina - 28 (Michigan 29.8 pts, 58th)
Vanderbilt - 24 (NC St. 28.1 pts, 71st)
LSU - 25 (Clemson 41.0 pts, 6th)
Miss St - 34 (Northwestern 31.7 pts, 42nd)