Allow me to advance a heretical idea: I actually do think the SEC is indeed, as advertised, the overall the best conference in football...and LSU/Alabama/Georgia actually do indeed all at least belong in the playoff discussion.

We just don't think so...mostly because we've gotten used to watching Clemson.

Those teams, frankly, don't look particularly imposing by Clemson's standards. But that's just because we look like one of those schools that you've been playing for six months on Dynasty Mode on those old NCAA Football PlayStation games right now. When you compare the SEC squads to the rest of the country you see, clearly, just why a middlin' good (by SEC standards) Auburn could beat Oregon...even with true frosh Bo Nix taking his first-ever college snap at QB for Auburn. There's a gulf there in athletes.

With Clemson in a bye week and the nasty weather, I found myself stuck inside and bored out of my mind...and so I watched a lot of non-Clemson college football yesterday. I was kind of...taken aback. It's really not good out there...or at least, Clemson has accumulated so much talent the gulf between us and everybody else looks like a chasm right now.

Ohio State and Penn State, obviously, was interesting (and left with the measured impression OSU is walking into their third straight beatdown against Clemson.) But then I watched Arizona State/Oregon and then part of Utah/Arizona last night...and the thing that jumped out at me was how uneven the talent was across all four rosters.

They are...not great. (Though I like Utah. Big. Ugly. Physical. Funny-shaped.) And we are so spoiled.

The Pac-12 (and Big 12, but we've known that for awhile) are just...patchy, as is the bottom half of the B1G. But the top of the SEC - LSU/Alabama/Georgia/Auburn/A&M/Florida are indeed Top-25 caliber, and the top three of those - LSU/Alabama/Georgia - are better than that; they're legit Top-10 or even Top-5. Truth. They are that good...at least, compared to the Pac-12, Big 12, and bottom half of the B1G.

(The big problem with the ACC, by the way, isn't that ACC squads are bad. It's just that there's 13 of the 14 stuck in mostly 3-star Purgatory unable to separate from the others, and Clemson eats those solid-but-unspectacular squads up like s'mores.)

Because...then there's Clemson right now.

Did A&M really challenge us? Ever? Clemson didn't even play particularly well and still outgained A&M 389 to 289 - which was our worst offensive showing by a mile other than that UNC game where it barely looked where we got off the bus) - and A&M got the bulk of those yards in the fourth quarter, against our 2's and 3's...and their only TD with their starters still in with less than 10 seconds to go. Rock on, Jimbo.

You've gotta be careful with applying transitives to results, but Georgia did lose to South Carolina. At home. And A&M almost beat UGA yesterday, in Athens - the Aggies outgained them (get this!) 275 yards to 260, yeesh - but A&M struggled some against South Carolina, and lost a squeaker to Auburn. Auburn dropped close games to UGA, LSU (by just 3 points!) and Florida...who in turned lost to LSU by 14 and UGA by a TD...you get the idea. A muddle.

Whereas - in September, mind, where Clemson never looks all that great - we pretty much toyed with the Aggies. That game was in pretty much zero doubt throughout. And does anyone think South Carolina will give us any kind of game next week, if Clemson shows up at all?

Me either.

So...sorry. I actually do think the SEC is as good as is claimed. Mostly. What I personally think the media is collectively getting wrong, though, is that little ol' Clemson isn't just a contender...we're in reality at least 2 TD's better than any team in America (except maybe OSU) right now, and the methodical, developmental way that Clemson approaches its seasons and builds capability and depth (and avoids putting too much wear on tear on its starters) instead of posting lopsided scores tends to hide that.

Maybe even to us.

FWIW.