So the so-called "SEC bloodbath" has begun, with the annual internal dismantling of individual SEC schools playing the very best football in the nation against one another. Or is it? Granted, there are a lot of factors that go into playing a game, especially intangibles (ex. LSU's leading the nation in 4th down conversions since 2005) and yes, we have performed well on the national stage against other conferences overall, but with games like Ole Miss's defeat of UF does this look more like parity or was the number four team in the country being very, very overrated? Just something I've been thinking about. I am very much of the opinion that the SEC is the very best conference in the nation, both today and historically, but (not to quote Dennis Green) are we who we say we are? Are the details (ex. Ole Miss's two losses were both very close, one to a ranked SEC team) not as important as the end product: wins, and having one program win out year-in and year-out (a la USC)? It's the fans who decide these sort of things, as we are the ones with the dollars.
Hmmmm.....UGA and UF are Top 10 Teams IMO and Bama is too. I don't think it was a matter of UGA and UF being over rated and I don't think that Bama is so incredible because they embarrassed UGA, but I believe it is just a matter of 2 teams being ready to play, with a good game plan and 2 teams that just weren't quite ready or the game plans weren't good enough. The same goes with USC, they are a top 10 team but they just didn't show up and OSU did. I'm not ready to say it is parity in the Pac-10 because of that game just like I'm not ready to say Ole Miss is the same caliber as Bama, LSU, UF, UGA and claim that the SEC has ultimate parity. Typically in a conference, there is enough talent on any one team so that they can beat any opposing team in their conference. However several things have to happen. The lesser team has to have a good game plan that is portrayed and embedded into the players, the players have to believe in the plan and in their team, and the opposing team may not be ready, look past the opponent, believe that they can't lose the team. The upsets of USC, UGA, and UF are cases where the better teams weren't prepared psychologically, lack of preparation, expected their talent to get them by, etc etc. UGA was a bit over rated IMO so that wasn't nearly the upset that UF faced, but the fact they got creamed was surprising. I really don't believe the SEC has perfect parity and I don't think they are over rated. I believe UF, UGA, USC are Top 10 teams, they just got beat by teams that were prepared in all aspects of the game better than the favorites. It basically shows that the talent level in the SEC on any team has the ability to beat any other team if factors fall into place. But this can happen most conferences.
Good post. Florida and Georgia were not overrated. In the SEC, you have to play every game to win and be prepared for a showdown every weekend. If you're not ready to play, you get beat. All the teams have enough talent to step up and beat you if you're not ready to play with a good game plan. Talent and potential are the unfulfilled promises of losers. Those two games and the USC loss to the Beavers illustrate one of the most important lessons in sports. Respect your opponent! He wants to win as badly as you do.
I know its not the point but watch the aub-tenn game and then think about the statement. I've never seen two teams more deserving of a loss.
Sorry, I think the Gators are overrated. They pretty much have 2 players in Tivo and Harvin, the rest of the team hasn't showed up this year? I don't know but from what I've seen I haven't been impressed with them. I guess I'll find out in 2 weeks. I think Georgia and Bama are for real though.
I watch football with a critical eye, and I think the SEC is the best conference in the country hands down. Now we can't prove that until after bowl season. But as of right now, we still have like 5 of the top 15 teams in the country and the SEC was what, 7-2 in bowl games last year? And for being overrated, that just depends. Do you expect every team in conference to be bowl eligible and win that bowl game? Thats overrated, but those are extremely high standards. I expect the SEC to win its bowl games starting on Jan 1. Thats the Citrus, Outback, Sugar, usually the Cotton, and the BCSNCG. Thats a high standard, but the past few years, we've done pretty well.
I will put it this way. I will pit the unranked of the SEC against the unranked of the PAC-10, Big 11, Big 12, as well as the ranked of the Big East and ACC, and put my money on the SEC. Think about it. Besides MAYBE losing to USC, who does Ole Miss lose to in the PAC 10? Outside of Penn State, who does Mississippi State lose to in the big 11? Ok, Arkansas is garbage, but i put money on them having a winning record in the big east and ACC. I think in reality, just based on the O and D lines, the SEC's Bottom feeders are better than second and third place teams in all other conferences. The only thing most of these teams lack is consistency. Florida and UGA were over rated. Not so much in the national poll pecking order, but how they were in the pecking order compared to other sec teams. I honestly feel like the SEC fields 5 of the top 10 teams in the nation, based on everything minus conference record. That's why the SEC is the best conference to ever lace up the cleats. Same goes for baseball by the way.
