|
Replies: 31
| visibility 154
|
All-Pro [707]
TigerPulse: 70%
22
|
Why the SEC Dominated for Seven Years.
Jan 13, 2015, 9:26 PM
|
|
When you listen to SEC fans, they make it appear as though the period from 2006 to 2012 was the norm of college football history. In this duration, SEC teams impressively won seven consecutive national titles. While an amazing feat, several nearly simultaneous factors contributed to such dominance.
Recall that, from 1980 to 2005, only five national champions came from that conference (Georgia in 1980, Alabama in '92, Florida in '96, Tennessee in '98, and LSU in 2003). In this same time frame, The U won five national crowns, Nebraska three, FSU two, Oklahoma two, and The Real USC two. I'm not even counting the many times they participated in bowl games with national title implications.
Remember those powerful Hurricane squads, Bobby Bowden's dominating Seminoles, Tom Osborne's mighty Huskers, and Pete Carroll's untouchable Trojans? What happened to those dynasties during or shortly before the SEC Glory Era of 2006 to 2012? Miami fell off the map because of Larry Coker and scandals. Age finally caught up with Bobby Bowden and FSU consequently began a decade-long lull. The man who followed the legend of Osborne was unable to imitate him. The Real USC became mired in NCAA improprieties and Pete Carroll bolted for the NFL after the 2009 season.
In other words, the national competition was dwindling (or had already dwindled) away by the latter half of the 2000's. Other than the top SEC powers, virtually only Ohio State and Oklahoma maintained their national prominence.
Furthermore, in the mid-2000's, Alabama and Florida lucked up and attracted two excellent coaches in Nick Saban and Urban Meyer. Notice that five of the seven consecutive SEC national championships were won by these two men! While other national powers were falling apart, the Tide and Gators were hiring the hottest commodities in coaching. Note that both Alabama and Florida were wallowing in mediocrity before Saban and Meyer, respectively, came.
My point is not to undermine the traditional greatness of the SEC. Five national crowns from 1980 to 2005 is nothing to scoff at or ridicule. However, did "SEC Speed" only begin in 2006? Did unstoppable "SEC Defenses" only come about in 2006? Did the Deep South become a hotbed of recruiting talent only after 2005? I don't think so. Rather, non-SEC powers fell apart while two future coaching legends fell into the SEC's lap. The Southeastern Conference does not exist in a vacuum.
By the way, notice that no SEC school has won a national title in the past two years. What has happened during this time? Florida State has finally had a re-awakening as a program and returned to dominance. Also, Urban Meyer has had enough time to get most of his players and system together at Ohio State. In short, national competition is gradually beginning to increase again and the SEC is suffering from it.
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [2240]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: Why the SEC Dominated for Seven Years.
Jan 13, 2015, 9:57 PM
|
|
One more thing that I told a Coot a few weeks ago. I would say that if SEC-hysteria hadn't come into play, where-by all of the years mentioned "HAD" to have at least one SEC team in the Championship Game. One year, TWO. So, without a playoff, the SEC had a 50% chance - 100% chance to win it all. I told the Coot that I would bet if there had been a play-off of four teams during their stretch of championships, I doubt very seriously that they would have put that string together.
Bottom-line: The actual playoff will be the end of that kind of conference dominance. Wait and see.
Go Tigers!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
You forgot to mention fraud poll fixin and the money train***
Jan 13, 2015, 10:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [713]
TigerPulse: 38%
22
|
Re: Why the SEC Dominated for Seven Years.
Jan 13, 2015, 10:30 PM
|
|
The more you make of it the more obsessed you look.
facts - everything has ebbs and flows - SEC is taking that downward trend and the timing is probably right, everyone is tired of them. That doesn't change the fact that the conference dominated for years.
Navy and Ga tech have multiple national champs but aren't considered in the discussion these days
Oklahoma had a nice run with Switzer then dropped off to nothing until stoops but still nothing lately
Bama went throught the ringer with multiple bad coaches and was nothing for years
Miami was something now nothing but rebounding with a potentially good coach
Ohio st got beat by usc 2 years in a row and were nothing special for years
Sure the sec had some good teams at the same time and from top to bottom many called it the elite conference in football and there are facts to back that up
Rather than fight it or call espn and others names for stating the obvious, why not wait for Louisville, Clemson, FSU, Ga tech, Miami, others in the ACC to take charge and get the national focus. Face it Ohio st and mich st and much may stay pretty good but the rest of the big ten is not going to be world beaters. The ACC has a chance to make a run
I agree the dominance was simply timing in that Tenn had been very good, LSU, Bama, and Florida, all had good runs and it made the conference look tough. Other facts are look at the bowls, SEC teams never play similar ranked conference opponents, they are always matched with a higher ranked team within its particular conference. Think chick fil a bowl when a #2 ACC team played a #5-6 SEC team and it was always a great game
#1 BCS
#2 BCS
#3 cotton
# 4 Citrus
#5 Outback
#6 Chick fil a
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1127]
TigerPulse: 99%
26
|
Re: Why the SEC Dominated for Seven Years.
Jan 14, 2015, 8:48 AM
|
|
The overrated part comes from the SEC only beating the SEC in conference play where they are all ranked so teams that might be 1,4,9,15,20 all beat each other and stay ranked. 1 2 or even 5 losses (auburn) keeps you ranked in the SEC. Its not a conspiracy its fact. People assume Ole Miss must be good because they beat Bama. So they skyrocket. Miss ST is undefeated at 7-0 has to be a top ten. The SEC is good and should be because there is more talent. The problem is that the top 25 and and the NC should be the best of the best. 6 SEC teams this year 2 in the top ten (2 teams from each Power 5 in the top ten this year) is about right. Some years Bama or Auburn or LSU should compete for titles but it doesn't make the SEC better than everyone else. I think that as a conference the Pac 12 was best and OSU was the best overall. Media is of course bias but should TRY not to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16691]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
|
Speaking of obsessed...who is on their rivals board trying
Jan 14, 2015, 8:57 AM
[ in reply to Re: Why the SEC Dominated for Seven Years. ] |
|
to convince us that the SEC is just dominant?...and what exactly has USuCk ever done in football to help the SEC?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1832]
TigerPulse: 97%
31
|
The SEC had a legitimate 4 years of dominance
Jan 13, 2015, 11:18 PM
|
|
The other 3 years weresolution garbage. The years of Florida, LSU, Florida, and Bama were years when the SEC was dominant. Auburn was telling best team in 2009-2010, but the rest of the conference was garbage. The 2011 and 2012 championships were jokes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [68088]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 90176
Joined: 2001
|
Yea but Jimbo and Urban are both former SEC coaches....
Jan 14, 2015, 8:34 AM
|
|
and have turned FSU and Ohio State into $EC-like teams (tongue firmly planted in cheek and rolling eyes).
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1127]
TigerPulse: 99%
26
|
Re: Why the SEC Dominated for Seven Years.
Jan 14, 2015, 8:50 AM
|
|
Also they claim SEC when it was just Alabama, LSU, Florida, and Auburn. Georgia was also a good team but never champion and USC jr had a brief run. It quickly became just about Bama though. The SEC tried to cover its tracks by saying Ole Miss and Miss St were good but were exposed. Bama, Mizzou, and UGA were the best and all three looked average at times this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5179]
TigerPulse: 42%
38
Posts: 17167
Joined: 2005
|
The most impressive part of the SEC streak
Jan 14, 2015, 9:01 AM
|
|
Isn't that it won 7 national championships in a row. It's that 4 different teams won a national championship. No other conference has that type of depth.
No one is arguing that the SEC is superior to the true blue bl
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5179]
TigerPulse: 42%
38
Posts: 17167
Joined: 2005
|
I accidentally hit enter on my iphone
Jan 14, 2015, 9:03 AM
|
|
But no one is arguing the SEC is superior to the true blue bloods in college football. Clearly the FSU, USC and Ohio States of the world are just as good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3948]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: The most impressive part of the SEC streak
Jan 14, 2015, 9:06 AM
[ in reply to The most impressive part of the SEC streak ] |
|
Careful there $EC homer. Remember that to win the MNC the $EC had to get teams in the game. THE ESecPN hype is what led to that. They even had two $EC teams in the game when other teams were clearly a better match up. I could go on and on but I won't. Just remember that, although the SEC west was pretty strong for a couple of years, and Florida was very good with Meyer, uscjr still sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [86429]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 81202
Joined: 1999
|
Alabama and LSU would have both beaten Ok. St. Ok. St.
Jan 14, 2015, 9:08 AM
|
|
lost to Iowa State. Bama lost to the number one team, LSU. They clearly deserved to be in the game more than OSU.
Message was edited by: josephg®
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3948]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: Alabama and LSU would have both beaten Ok. St. Ok. St.
Jan 14, 2015, 9:30 AM
|
|
OK State had just had a significant death in their Athletic Department. I'm not sure that if there were a 4 team playoff that year that OSU couldn't have beaten both LSU and Bama. We shall never know I guess. There was NO reason to have a rematch of LSU and Bama.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [86429]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 81202
Joined: 1999
|
True but going forward, look for the PAC 12 and BIG to
Jan 14, 2015, 9:07 AM
[ in reply to The most impressive part of the SEC streak ] |
|
challenge the SEC. The PAC 12, imo, was the best this year.
Oregon, USC, Stanford, UCLA, and both Arizona schools have the potential to win a NC.
In the BIG, Ohio State, Michigan State, and Wisconsin have the potential to win one now, but look for Michigan to really take off now with Harbaugh, and for Penn State to be powerful again in a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5179]
TigerPulse: 42%
38
Posts: 17167
Joined: 2005
|
Sorry but you're just wrong
Jan 14, 2015, 9:13 AM
|
|
To think all of those teams are capable of winning a national championship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [86429]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 81202
Joined: 1999
|
Remember, potentially and actually doing it are a whole
Jan 14, 2015, 9:25 AM
|
|
different story. No way I see the PAC 12 winning it 7 straight years with those teams ever.
Does Arizona State have the potential to win one? Yes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5179]
TigerPulse: 42%
38
Posts: 17167
Joined: 2005
|
Why stop there Joseph?
Jan 14, 2015, 9:58 AM
|
|
Akron could win a national championship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zealot [757]
TigerPulse: 81%
22
|
Ya know what?..
Jan 14, 2015, 11:10 AM
|
|
Akron may actually have a better chance than uSC. Good point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [86429]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 81202
Joined: 1999
|
Arizona State is 50-1 to win it next year which is 21st
Jan 14, 2015, 11:13 AM
[ in reply to Why stop there Joseph? ] |
|
in the country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [80845]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 37396
Joined: 2003
|
Without the playoff, very good chance the SEC
Jan 14, 2015, 9:02 AM
|
|
would have gotten another one this year, as Ohio State and Oregon would not have been in a BCS Championship game, it would have been Bamer and the Criminoles. I think the nonSEC championship trend will continue, since they will have to get "up" for more than one game at the end of the season. I don't think they have it in them. (Since of course all their energy has already been expended getting through their NFL type regular season, beating up on all these other NFL caliber teams in the SEC. NOT.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3948]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
funny***
Jan 14, 2015, 9:06 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [98572]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 97864
Joined: 2009
|
True.
Jan 14, 2015, 11:06 AM
[ in reply to Without the playoff, very good chance the SEC ] |
|
And don't think for a minute the committee put FSU third instead of fourth thinking they would eliminate Bama and ruin the playoffs.
The committee is in ESPiN's pocket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [23802]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 20175
Joined: 2011
|
Great sensible well thought out post,
Jan 14, 2015, 9:08 AM
|
|
but the simple truth is that during the BCS/ESecPN Era, ESecPN CONVINCED the world that the SEC Champion automatically got 1 spot ,while the other 110 plus teams had to fight it out for the other one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5179]
TigerPulse: 42%
38
Posts: 17167
Joined: 2005
|
Which year did the SEC not deserve a spot?
Jan 14, 2015, 9:15 AM
|
|
I can see an argument for the lsu-Bama year but obviously the sec still deserved one spot that year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [98572]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 97864
Joined: 2009
|
There's another half of that issue.
Jan 14, 2015, 9:42 AM
|
|
No one can prove they didn't deserve a spot but I think it's pretty clear that better teams got left out of the BCSNCG so an SEC wouldn't face a good opponent.
When the hype got out of control this season most of them played good opponents and got landblasted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [23802]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 20175
Joined: 2011
|
Can't argue with an SEC Kool Aid drinker.
Jan 14, 2015, 9:45 AM
[ in reply to Which year did the SEC not deserve a spot? ] |
|
|
|
Without that Conference to hang onto, some aren't chit.Saban took his Michigan State Defense to the SEC and OWNED, then Meyers took his Utah offense, an offense that all the experts said would fail in the SEC and OWNED it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zealot [757]
TigerPulse: 81%
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8119]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: Why the SEC Dominated for Seven Years.
Jan 14, 2015, 9:19 AM
|
|
You forget rank inflation. When an overhyped SEC team beats another overhyped SEC team, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. A 2 - loss LSU team in the national title game in 2007 is proof positive. Miss St #1 this season? LOL, what a joke that was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [98572]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 97864
Joined: 2009
|
Being rated in the top ten and having one ranked #1
Jan 14, 2015, 9:37 AM
|
|
always put at least one in the BCSNCCG. Having two there killed the golden goose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 31
| visibility 154
|
|
|
50
