🏈 The myth of superiority of the SEC

[PhillyGirl]

http://www.thepostgame.com/commenta...sto-southern-secession-chuck-thompson-sec-bcs

 

[TerryP]

I'm a self admitted stats guy. I love looking at them and use them often—and use them seriously. Ask psychojoe how often I refer to some set of stats when we discuss which teams we are betting on for the weekend. Hell, it's more than often.

I'm also very aware how one can take stats and twist them to fit the argument they are making.

One of the more recent examples came from Mizzou fans who were pointing to their overall record against SEC teams and using that as a basis for how competitive they were going to be in their inaugural season.

It was very much true they had a good winning percentage against SEC teams; 17-13-1 record. However, it was also very true that when you took their wins and looked at who they were against it told a different story. Out of those 17 wins, 8 of them came against the Mississippi schools.

Now, don't get me wrong. The Mississippi schools have had some success in the SEC. Ole Miss, as example, has won six SEC championships. Of course, none of those Mizzou wins came against those teams.

Hey, let's take it a step further here. Six of Mizzou's 17 wins came against teams with winning records on the season. Five of those came against teams that had eight wins or fewer on the season.

That picture is suddenly not as illustrious as they purported it to be now, is it?

Here's a interesting way the author here twists a few facts.

That's a stunning turnaround when compared with an undisputed national title rate of 10.42 percent over the half-century prior.

In other words, he's taken titles off the table if two teams were voted national champions in the same year. The most recent example would be LSU in 2007 when USC was given a share with the AP poll.

Going back to the subject at hand with this article, I'm going to take one more example and...well, tear it apart as well.

SEC vs. PAC-12 regular season: 10-12

Out of the nine PAC teams, only three have winning records vs the SEC.

UCLA is 4-0. The combined record of those SEC teams over those four games is 23-25. The best record of the SEC teams in those four wins is 7-5 (Bama in 2001; 20-17) and 7-6 (UT in 2009; 19-15).

Hmmm...story is beginning to take a different light here, isn't it?

Oregon is 3-1. NONE of their three wins is against an SEC team with a winning record. Two of those wins against Miss. State who won a total of five games in those two years they played. One win against UT in 2010 when they went 6-7.

Different light now? Hell no, it's becoming shady.

USC, on the other hand, had three of its four wins against team with winning records. Auburn twice: a nine win and eight win season. Arkansas once; 2006 team who won 10 games and lost to Florida in the SECCG.

---

I always love these articles that begin "this conference says it's better top to bottom" because they seldom discuss using comparable teams.

Just as a side note:

The last time I had a fan throw some stat in my face trying to prove a point was a Michigan fan. His assertion began with "you guys don't have the balls to play any of us B1G teams up in the cold weather." I told him to bring that back up to me again when Michigan plays ANY SEC team in their home stadium. His look was one...well, let's just call it dumbfounded.

I explained, slowly...Michigan has never traveled to the south and played one SEC team in their home stadium in all of those all time wins you talk about.

FWIW, the SEC has traveled up there six times, won once. Vandy lost twice, Georgia Tech and Tulane lost once, and Georgia is 1-1.

---

And that concludes my diatribe for Thursday, November 16th, 2012...unless something else tweaks me interest.

 

[Crimson&WhiteGecko]

For all the points he made about the BCS being geared to SEC champions, he doesn't even acknowledge leaving out Auburn in '04. Objectivity at it's best.

Also, the issue of travel in bowls, in particular BCS championships. I've never heard a northern state team complain about playing in warmer weather late into the season. NEVER.

 

[jdpas29]

all i hear is yankee crying. waaaa!!! back up the waaaambulance!!!!

 

[PhillyGirl]

I'm from the North, and I thoroughly believe the author is a jealous whiner who misconstrues the facts. You guys should've seen the comments on the Bleacher Report article that reposted it: it was essentially a Big 12/Pac 12/Big Ten orgy of hating on the SEC. I only WISH I had grown up down south. You are looking at a Yank truly gunning to live in Alabama in the future

Ain't no football like SEC football. Haters gonna hate! :icon_elephant:

 

[TerryP]

If someone has the time and feels like looking it up, it's always interesting to note how bowl games are selected. This is just another point many choose to ignore.

Yes, they try to exclude things like the SEC winning in the BCS bowls. But they also don't want to point where one of the SEC teams ranks among other conference members when they face out of conference competition in bowl games.

The closest I can think of is at the top, but there is still a disparity. After the BCSNC game is chosen and the At-Large bids are accepted the Capital One game gets the third ranked team in the SEC the majority of the time.

The Cotton Bowl gets the next pick as long as it's from the Western conference. IF they chose a team out of the East, they have to wait until the Outback bowl makes its selection from the East. In those years you're looking at the 5th best SEC team playing in the Cotton.

Against the #2 team from the Big12.

The SEC is 8-2 over the past decade.