The SEC is Mad and They Aren't Going to Take it Anymore!

[30Duck]

When you're used to filling half the bracket, only getting four out of 12 is hard to take.

 

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey fires controversial shots at CFP, other conferences

SATURDAYBLITZ.COM

---

We knew it wouldn't be long before SEC commissioner Greg Sankey would begin his politicking to cram as many teams inside...

 

[jrw]

How long before the SEC and ESPN decide that they’re just going to have their own league, and no longer mingle with the peasants?

[noDucknewby]

Classic circular reasoning:

 

1.  All these 2-loss SEC teams deserve to be ranked because the SEC is so tough.

 

2.  This proves that the SEC is the toughest conference because they have the most ranked teams.

 

And don't get me started on how worthless the ESPN strength of schedule rankings are, now who is their biggest broadcast partner?

[MicroBurst61]

AND ESPECIALLY when All the other conferences are playing conference foes...SEC is playing "Sisters of the merciful Beat Down".

 

So half of the other conferences pickup another loss, thus dropping them on the rankings;  most SEC teams pickup an "automatic" win, move up to fill spots by dropping teams from conference losses, then loudly, blatantly point out how "many more" ranked teams they have...thus gotta be the toughest conference with the  (built in) hoghest SOS.

 

I cannot believe that this still works for the SEC,  more than a decade after the end of the BCS!!

 

Oh well.  It was it is, I quess. 

[Jon Joseph]

 

Greg Sankey, Serenading for the SEC? Who knew (except the folks in Tallahassee. )

 

 

You Go, Greg! 

 

And with the conference so deep from top to bottom it won't be upsetting when Kentucky beats Texas, Auburn beats A+M, the Cowbells beat Mizzou, and Florida swamps Ole Miss, Right?

 

I do think Georgia will survive UMass and the Vols will take down UTEP.

 

 

[30Duck]

So Saeth, Saban:

 

"I think Ohio State and Oregon, the top teams in the Big Ten are just as good as the top teams in the SEC. But the SEC is so much deeper," Saban said on "The Pat McAfee Show" Friday. "There's 8 or 9 teams that have been in the top 25 this year, and they're all playing each other and they're beating each other. You have a 2-loss team like Georgia that has played five top-25 teams and they have two losses. That's a little different than playing no top-25 teams, or not beating any top-25 teams like some teams in the Big Ten"

[Steven A]

On 11/22/2024 at 12:42 PM, 30Duck said:

So Saeth, Saban:

Hey St. Nick:

 

If most of your teams start in the top 25, then as they beat up each other, they don't fall far and then end up with top 25 W's.

 

The eyeball and helmet tests are used to start the season and absent utter failure, those teams stay in the top 25.

[30Duck]

Listening to Cowherd, I know, I know. But I need something to drown out the leaf blower.

 

 He was talking about the Indiana @ Ohio State game. and one of the things I heard him say was, "Indiana is similar to Oregon." unfortunately I didn't catch what the similarity was.

 

What I did hear though was when he said, "All the pressure is on Ohio State". He is right about that, and everybody knows how Dan has done in important games. But shouldn't there be at least some pressure on Indiana?

 

[Sandy Rocks]

All these teams need a NET which takes into consideration a variety of factors, I think 6. Then the determination is based on an objective measure. It is not fair, as many have said, to have a conference that only has to play eight games and non conference games against Division II or Division I teams that rarely have good records. I do commend the Ducks. They have always played good non conference teams, during most years anyway.

 

There do need to be automatic bids for conference winners, I thought they were doing that but I guess not. Teams should be rewarded for winning their conference. In all the whining, I did not hear anything about the difficulty of the duck's schedule.

 

[CalBear95]

I agree with Saban.  The SEC is deep this year and there is a lot of parity.  If the SEC got 4 teams in I wouldn’t blink. 5, I could get it but the argument gets a lot tougher because now you need to subtract from somewhere and that somewhere is the B1G or ND. 
 

There are 4 teams max from the B1G.  UO, OSU, PSU, and IU. 
 

The SEC can reasonably claim the following as CFP worthy teams: UGA, Alabama, Texas, TAM, Tennessee and Mississippi. 
 

UGA is a no-brainer though they aren’t perfect given their inconsistent play.  But they have a rough SOS and going 3-2 against the top 25 is pretty good 

 

Alabama…guh!  Take away their brand name and you are left with a win over UGA (good), a stretch of 3 mediocre games where they went 2-1 and could just have easily been 1-2 (not good) and a really ugly loss to Tennessee (not terrible only because it was a road game)

 

Tennessee and Mississippi are very similar in terms of their argument.  Wins against top 10 teams, losses to top 25 teams.  They are good teams and I’d rank the Fighting Kiffins a nose ahead of Tennessee. 
 

After this weekend Texas will be in the same boat as IU: weak SOS and only 1 loss but it’s a convincing one against a top 10 team.  The only difference is that Texas’ was at home.

 

TAM’s resume gets worse with each week.  Their win against LSU looks less impressive now and they’ve lost to any quality team they’ve met (USC being the most recent).  
 

If TAM beats Texas, however, all hell is going to break loose because (1) the SEC is at most going to get 5 teams but probably 4, and (2) what do you with Texas?  The answer to that question causes a whole ripple effect. 
 

If Texas is in, how to you exclude TAM even though they are clearly in the 6 spot on this list but will have clinched a spot in the CG?  And if Texas and TAM are then in, how do you argue Penn State or IU is better than either Mississippi or Tennessee given neither have wins against a top 15 opponent?

 

So, Saban isn’t wrong when he says that.
 

HOWEVER, unsaid is the lack of 9 league games.  If you did that then I think you are left with a clearer picture of who the top 4 are and you avoid a situation where TAM and Texas can get to the conference CG even though they aren’t better than 3 or 4 other teams in the league.  
 

Said another way, live by the 8 game schedule sword, die by the 8 game sword. 

[DuckFan93]

How about playing more G4 games instead of FCS, to prove that SEC is better than other leagues? 

[30Duck]

On 11/22/2024 at 3:30 PM, CalBear95 said:

 

Said another way, live by the 8 game schedule sword, die by the sword.

Even with the 8 game advantage Georgia's schedule is tougher than Indiana's. The only way Indiana should get in the Playoff is the Automatic bid. 

[Jon Joseph]

 

Friends CalBear + 30, Texas has the same number of wins vs the Committee's Top 25 as Indiana and it has one more loss than Indiana. 

 

The SEC is deeper but the SEC will have nine fewer losses than the B1G until it plays 9 conference games. This Saturday sees games vs. UMass, UTEP, and THE CITADEL! In a 14-week season, these games = a third Off Week late in the season. 

 

Mizzou is 23 simply because it's in the SEC. Mississippi State, Kentucky, Florida, and LSU aren't all that. Not every SEC game is a battle of behemoths like never witnessed before.

 

I kind of get the SEC playing 8 but the ACC? And I get SCOREBOARD. The SEC has earned its football field bona fides. 8 games have the potential to result in utter champ game chaos. Make It So! 

[Nevada Dawg]

Those of you who follow my posts know that I have been a proponent of the SEC going to a 9 game schedule. But I wanna puke when I hear Y'all arguing that the B1G teams have it tougher for playing 9 games. The B1G has a minimum of 10 (more like 12) teams that are mediocre at best. It is possible to go a month in that league and not face an opponent that even quickens the pulse. The best teams in the B1G are quite competitive nationally, but they'll suffer on the SOS metric because they play so many stiffs IN CONFERENCE! And it is lame, IMHO to berate ESPN's SOS calculations When the alternative raters pretty much concur with ESPN at the macro level.

 

So this are my feelings about the 8 vs. ( conference game schedule. I think 9 games in the B1G is actually a weaker schedule, particularly for the good teams, than an 8-game SEC schedule. How many of you would wanted to play Georgia's schedule (or those of the other top four SEC schools this year) than the one you got to play. Precious few of you I'd imagine.

 

[GeotechDuck]

I stopped reading the article once I saw that the so called Texas SOS is ahead of every team in the BIG, despite losing to the only ranked team they have played by multiple scores and only beating one team with a winning record.   

 

Classic case of garbage in / garbage out, IMO. 
 

[Charles Fischer]

On 11/22/2024 at 10:27 PM, Nevada Dawg said:

And it is lame, IMHO to berate ESPN's SOS calculations

Nevada...read the room please.  This is a B1G audience now, and we are SICK of the crap we've been given about the SEC while being disrespected when in the Pac-12 in the past. Key question....would Missouri have the same ranking if they were in the Big-12?  With their SOS?  Their schedule?  Of course not, and this is an example.

 

This is a Playoff for the 'Natty, and the objective of the Playoff is to determine a National Champion.  Be honest....do you guys REALLY think the No. 5 team in the SEC could win the National Championship?

 

Of course not.  As one writer recently stated, "if you cannot make the top four of your conference, then you do not deserve to be in the Playoff."  Amen.

 

Your placement of your aggressive opinion is puzzling considering that it is on the site of the No. 1 team in the nation that can play with anyone.  Yes, Georgia and Ohio State are tough, but we can play with anybody now. To come in and make your assertions are allowed and acceptable by our rules....but you cannot expect them to be well received.  Note you have not been insulted or banned, as this is a wonderful group of people. 

 

But what if I were stating aggressive B1G views on an SEC board?  (We call that being CANCELLED)

 

 

[DrJacksPlaidPants]

On 11/22/2024 at 2:30 PM, noDucknewby said:

Classic circular reasoning:

 

1.  All these 2-loss SEC teams deserve to be ranked because the SEC is so tough.

 

2.  This proves that the SEC is the toughest conference because they have the most ranked teams.

 

And don't get me started on how worthless the ESPN strength of schedule rankings are, now who is their biggest broadcast partner?

This is what I refer to as “a self-licking ice cream cone “.

[DrJacksPlaidPants]

I’ll end this argument right here. The bottom line up front is the SEC’s top tier has too many losses to bad teams.
 

The top 4 teams in the B1G’s record against teams NOT named Oregon, Ohio State, Penn State and Indiana. 37 wins vs. 0 losses. 

 

The top 6 teams in the SEC’s record against teams NOT named Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, Ole Miss, Texas and Texas A&M. 44 wins - 6 losses (4 of these losses are against unranked teams). 
 

Three of the SEC’s top six teams have losses to unranked teams while the B1G’s top four teams haven’t lost to anyone outside of the top 5.

[SoGaDawg]

This might not be popular, but the SEC has more good teams and it’s not close.  I’m not saying the best team in the country is in the SEC, but playing an SEC schedule is tough.  For some teams it’s very tough.  
 

How many of you folks think Penn St or Indiana would have only two losses if they played an SEC schedule?  
 

 

[Jon Joseph]

On 11/23/2024 at 10:14 AM, SoGaDawg said:

This might not be popular, but the SEC has more good teams and it’s not close.  I’m not saying the best team in the country is in the SEC, but playing an SEC schedule is tough.  For some teams it’s very tough.  
 

How many of you folks think Penn St or Indiana would have only two losses if they played an SEC schedule?  
 

 

 

I agree that the SEC is deeper than the B1G. But which schedule would PSU and Indiana play? The Mizzou/Texas schedules or the Georgia/Bama schedules? Indiana had one common opponent with Texas, both defeated Michigan. 

 

And which team would show up? Georgia at Ole Miss or Georgia at Texas? Bama vs. Tennessee, Vandy, or Georgia? Ole Miss vs. Georgia or Ole Miss vs. Kentucky? Texas vs. Oklahoma or Georgia?  

 

I do not see a consistently elite team in the SEC in 2024. This is the case for most of CFB with the possible exceptions of OBD and Ohio State. However, both Oregon and tOSU have struggled in 2024. 

 

It will be interesting to watch the games if both the B1G and the SEC put four teams into the PO. How will SEC teams perform in the North in the post-season? A question B1G fans have asked for decades. A White Out in a possibly literal whiteout in December in Happy Valley will not be easy for any team, SEC or otherwise.

 

With 5 of the PO games being played in Dixie, advantage SEC. 

 

I reiterate. To date, no team is being PO-hosed over more than the Athens Dawgs.

 

Best of luck today with UMass.

 

 

[SoGaDawg]

On 11/23/2024 at 10:44 AM, Jon Joseph said:

 

I agree that the SEC is deeper than the B1G. But which schedule would PSU and Indiana play? The Mizzou/Texas schedules or the Georgia/Bama schedules? Indiana had one common opponent with Texas, both defeated Michigan. 

 

And which team would show up? Georgia at Ole Miss or Georgia at Texas? Bama vs. Tennessee, Vandy, or Georgia? Ole Miss vs. Georgia or Ole Miss vs. Kentucky? Texas vs. Oklahoma or Georgia?  

 

I do not see a consistently elite team in the SEC in 2024. This is the case for most of CFB with the possible exceptions of OBD and Ohio State. However, both Oregon and tOSU have struggled in 2024. 

 

It will be interesting to watch the games if both the B1G and the SEC put four teams into the PO. How will SEC teams perform in the North in the post-season? A question B1G fans have asked for decades. A White Out in a possibly literal whiteout in December in Happy Valley will not be easy for any team, SEC or otherwise.

 

With 5 of the PO games being played in Dixie, advantage SEC. 

 

I reiterate. To date, no team is being PO-hosed over more than the Athens Dawgs.

 

Best of luck today with UMass.

 

 

I can’t disagree with you at all, your points are valid.  Also, I hadn’t even thought of a team from the south having to play a game hosted by a team up north in the playoff.  It’s going to be interesting.  I really hope my Dawgs don’t wind up in that position.  I can say from personal experience that it’s quite a shock for someone that grew up in the Deep South to face truly cold weather for the first time.  I lived in Canada for years and that first winter was rough in the beginning.  I did grow to love the cold weather, except for the ice storms!  Ice storms are terrible. 

[Mike West]

Here 's m y  take:  the SEC has more talent across the board than the B1G.  It's just a fact.

 

That said, it is inexcusable for the conference to argue their losses matter more.  This weekend validated the conference is just as mediocre as the rest of the nation.

 

There is absolutely no excuse for playoff caliber A&M, Alabama and Ole Miss losing yesterday.

 

Playoff caliber to me means you win the games you're supposed to win.  The SEC is not parity capable like the NFL.  It really isn't an 'any given Saturday" conference.

 

I've watched Indiana closely.  I've watched Penn State closely.  OBD and Ohio State.  Out of all the SEC teams with a beef, Georgia is the only one with a legitimate argument.   I think Georgia is the only one that could handle those four teams and win. 

 

Bama, Ole Miss, Tennessee, and A&M are not controlling games to the degree they have an argument they deserve a spot at the table. And it's not because the conference is 'that talented '.  It's simply "that group of teams" are not dominant enough to beat the teams they lost to. Texas isn't far behind.

 

Georgia IS dominant enough.  They just aren't invincible anymore.  That's the difference.  Georgia has been penalized, while the others have been propped up.  

 

I'm sorry, Auburn is a self destructive team.  Playoff caliber teams snuff mistake prone teams.  Florida plays well with QB Lagaly, but the guy is an average QB that leads his team well.  Ole Miss just farted, and said 'excuse me' and gets a pass. Twice now. Playoff Caliber teams put hyped up teams away early.

 

Alabama has such a talent advantage that it is unacceptable for a QB to have up and down performances week to week.  That's just not a playoff team.  Oklahoma had no business being in that game, much less win it. 

 

Again, Auburn, Florida and Oklahoma are not good enough to beat playoff caliber teams.  Point blank.  Neither is Vanderbilt or Kentucky.  Twelve out of twelve games all five of those teams lose to playoff caliber teams.

 

And yes, Indiana would struggle against all five.  They are talented enough to defeat all five, and I know for sure Penn State would beat all five.  Those two get the most criticism.  The "fab five" lost, but that's supposed to mean they're better than Indiana.  

 

Strength of Schedule has become overrated.  When the SEC starts playing OOC games like Bama and LSU , (and to some extent Georgia -who waited until they became dominant), I don't buy the SEC mantra.  

 

Florida went to Utah last year and promptly lost.  To a Utah team without their star QB at that.  That's what I'm talking about.  Bama went to Wisconsin this year.  LSU went to Vegas this year.  

 

The results prove themselves.  The SEC is average at best when they start traveling the country and play OOC opponents.  They beat each other up because they are so familiar with each other.

 

That is not the same thing as being more talented than the rest of the country. It's not the same thing as playing the rest of the country to prove it.  Play the rest of the country, and let the results tell the story.  From what I've seen, I don't believe the SEC would look much different than the rest of the country.  

 

The SEC markets their conference better than everyone else.  They shield their average teams from losing their reputation by staying in the South in OOC play.  Against bums from the South at that.  I'm not impressed.  And I recognize the talent difference.  Show that talent to the entire country, by playing the entire country.  

 

Then stake your claim. 

[SoGaDawg]

This season, with new format, is just so new.  We really don’t know 100% what will happen with the committee.  I do believe that on average an SEC schedule is tougher, but not all SEC schedules are created equally in SOS.  Missouri’s isn’t exactly as daunting as GA’s schedule for example.  
 

In the end, who knows what conference has the best team or teams?  I believe, as someone stated above, that if you don’t finish in the top 3 or 4 of your conference, you’ve got not real grip about not making the Playoff.  If GA had lost to TN or if they lose the SEC championship, I’ll be upset, but I will not be fussing about why they deserve a place in the Playoff.  
 

As far as SOS goes, you can only play the teams on your schedule.  With 12 teams, I feel pretty confident that the best teams will be represented in the Playoff.  Yes, I do think GA is one of the best teams in the country, when they play very well, they might be the most dominant team.  And yes, if GA plays mediocre again and doesn’t make it, I’ll be bitter for a day or so knowing that my team probably has the potential to beat or at least give a game to any team in the Playoff.  Yet ultimately, SOS be-dam, you gotta win.  And those teams that aren’t as good as GA will be exposed by the best teams in the Playoff.  
 

Yes, I think GA was probably the best team in the country last year, and many think we got hosed.  Perhaps we did, but it’s our own fault.  We lost when we couldn’t afford to and it bit us in the a$$.  Can’t complain too much, if you want to be the dominant team, you must dominate.  Leave no DOUBT.  If you do, it’s your own fault, or perhaps you’re just not as good as you thought.  
 

In the end, all of these factors like SOS and all of the other criteria that the committee will use is past much debate at this point.  12 teams will make it, if you’re not one of those teams, it’s highly likely that you certainly aren’t the best team in the nation anyway.  

Edited Sunday at 06:59 PM by SoGaDawg

[EastBayDuckDad]

Just for the sake of argument, let's go back a year and look at the teams that made the final four team CFP along with their records and conferences:

 

1. Michigan (B1G)   13-0

2. Washington (Pac-12)  13-0

3. Texas (Big-12)  12-1

4. Alabama (SEC)  12-1

 

An undefeated FSU got jilted, as did UGA with it's one loss to Alabama by 3 points in the SEC CG. Behind them, tOSU at 12-1 and OBD at 11-2 were omitted by virtue of losing their respective CGs by less than a touchdown in each. All four would have been included in this year's 12 team CFP, with UGA, tOSU and OBD capable of, if not winning out, playing exciting and competitive PO games in the old format.

 

The narrative for not expanding the CFP was always based on the belief that the eventual NC would likely never drop below the four playoff teams, and that the regular season had to mean something by not rewarding multiple loss teams (unless you are in the SEC) with a PO berth. That narrative has now been turned on it's ear

 

 

If you froze the rankings on Tuesday, what four teams would be in if it was 2023? 

 

Oregon, tOSU and Texas?  Yes

 

Miami, Penn St, ND, Tenn and UGA all vying for the last spot? Yeah, but Georgia beat Texas at home, PSU lost close at home to tOSU, Tennessee has two losses, Miami lost to an unranked GTech and the egg ND laid in it's first game can't be unseen. IMHO, Georgia wins by default, even with 2 losses and SEC bias. 

 

It's not 2023, and CGs are still to be played, so this will likely all change. My point is that a three loss SEC team not in it's CG should be left out. That's you, Alabama, Ole Miss and probably TA&M. If TA&M loses to Texas they are out. Texas will be in either way as will Georgia regardless who wins the SEC CG. Tennessee will probably squeak in, though it shouldn't.

 

Like it and fair or not, four SEC teams will probably get in regardless of W-L record, thus rewarding teams with multiple regular season Ls. The winner of the SEC CG 'deserves' it because that's the way it's set up (heaven help me, even if they have 3 losses). The loser, whether it be UGA or Texas, yes. A two loss, non-CG Texas and Tennessee....maybe, if only to keep Finebaum out of an ICU stroke protocol.

 

The rest....Nah.

 

 

[SoGaDawg]

On 11/24/2024 at 3:18 PM, EastBayDuckDad said:

Just for the sake of argument, let's go back a year and look at the teams that made the final four team CFP along with their records and conferences:

 

1. Michigan (B1G)   13-0

2. Washington (Pac-12)  13-0

3. Texas (Big-12)  12-1

4. Alabama (SEC)  12-1

 

An undefeated FSU got jilted, as did UGA with it's one loss to Alabama by 3 points in the SEC CG. Behind them, tOSU at 12-1 and OBD at 11-2 were omitted by virtue of losing their respective CGs by less than a touchdown in each. All four would have been included in this year's 12 team CFP, with UGA, tOSU and OBD capable of, if not winning out, playing exciting and competitive PO games in the old format.

 

The narrative for not expanding the CFP was always based on the belief that the eventual NC would likely never drop below the four playoff teams, and that the regular season had to mean something by not rewarding multiple loss teams (unless you are in the SEC) with a PO berth. That narrative has now been turned on it's ear

 

 

If you froze the rankings on Tuesday, what four teams would be in if it was 2023? 

 

Oregon, tOSU and Texas?  Yes

 

Miami, Penn St, ND, Tenn and UGA all vying for the last spot? Yeah, but Georgia beat Texas at home, PSU lost close at home to tOSU, Tennessee has two losses, Miami lost to an unranked GTech and the egg ND laid in it's first game can't be unseen. IMHO, Georgia wins by default, even with 2 losses and SEC bias. 

 

It's not 2023, and CGs are still to be played, so this will likely all change. My point is that a three loss SEC team not in it's CG should be left out. That's you, Alabama, Ole Miss and probably TA&M. If TA&M loses to Texas they are out. Texas will be in either way as will Georgia regardless who wins the SEC CG. Tennessee will probably squeak in, though it shouldn't.

 

Like it and fair or not, four SEC teams will probably get in regardless of W-L record, thus rewarding teams with multiple regular season Ls. The winner of the SEC CG 'deserves' it because that's the way it's set up (heaven help me, even if they have 3 losses). The loser, whether it be UGA or Texas, yes. Tennessee....maybe, if only to keep Finebaum out of an ICU stroke protocol.

 

The rest....Nah.

 

 

I agree with you.  It’s going to be interesting to see how this plays out.  As a rule, I think it should be very rare for a 3 loss team to make the Playoff aside from a 3 loss conference winner.  If GA were to lose a close game in the SEC championship, perhaps with their resume, they might warrant a spot depending on what the field looks like and assuming they beat GA Tech.  
 

In the end, wins and losses should mean something.  SOS, eye test, etc….. will be used in an attempt to cut the fat and while being a bit subjective, it’s just the way it’s going to be and we all will have to live with that unless our teams leave no doubt.  
 

So far as SEC bias?  Of course there is SEC bias.  Just as wins and losses mean something, so does reputation.  Like it or not, the SEC has all but dominated CFB more years than not on a national stage for awhile now.  I don’t mean to convey an arrogant attitude on this just bc my Dawgs are SEC, but of course there is going to be some bias regarding the SEC.  If other conferences want to make this bias disappear the fix is simple, don’t let the SEC win National Championships for a few more years and change the narrative.  The truth is that if the SEC keeps winning the NC twice every three years the bias will continue.  

Edited Sunday at 09:10 PM by SoGaDawg

[DrJacksPlaidPants]

The SEC bias was based on the Nick Saban effect. He never had one recruiting class that didn’t win a national championship from 2007 to 2020. After the 2009 season until his retirement he never had roster that didn’t have a national champion on it. That will never happen again because of the way recruiting has changed. We will soon see more of a program bias rather than a conference bias.

 

However, you will see Kirby Smart win more national championships and I think Dan Lanning is capable of doing the same. The reason I say this is because great coaches will always be the X-factor when it comes to championships and I think Kirby and Dan are the best out there.