This is the most striking argument to me. If one or the other had come in and done well, you could call it a coincidence. But as both of them have beaten the top teams in the conference in their first two years, I think that's a pretty clear indication that the SEC isn't as head-and-shoulders above everyone else as is often portrayed.Just the fact that Mizzou and A&M were more or less also-rans in the Big XII, but are forces in the SEC should speak volumes. 3 title game appearances between the two in memory serves. But the revisionist history is just crazy.
It would be more striking if it were correct. It's 1, not 3. This stuff really is easy to look up, guys, no need to rely on a faulty memory. But I agree that Missouri stepping in and winning their division does make for a good argument, and A&M has fared well too.This is the most striking argument to me. If one or the other had come in and done well, you could call it a coincidence. But as both of them have beaten the top teams in the conference in their first two years, I think that's a pretty clear indication that the SEC isn't as head-and-shoulders above everyone else as is often portrayed.Just the fact that Mizzou and A&M were more or less also-rans in the Big XII, but are forces in the SEC should speak volumes. 3 title game appearances between the two in memory serves. But the revisionist history is just crazy.
Guessing he meant Big 12 title game appearances not SECIt would be more striking if it were correct. It's 1, not 3. This stuff really is easy to look up, guys, no need to rely on a faulty memory. But I agree that Missouri stepping in and winning their division does make for a good argument, and A&M has fared well too.This is the most striking argument to me. If one or the other had come in and done well, you could call it a coincidence. But as both of them have beaten the top teams in the conference in their first two years, I think that's a pretty clear indication that the SEC isn't as head-and-shoulders above everyone else as is often portrayed.Just the fact that Mizzou and A&M were more or less also-rans in the Big XII, but are forces in the SEC should speak volumes. 3 title game appearances between the two in memory serves. But the revisionist history is just crazy.
Should have just bolded the first sentence. Only one title game appearance but they've beaten pretty much everyone else in the conference in two years.It would be more striking if it were correct. It's 1, not 3. This stuff really is easy to look up, guys, no need to rely on a faulty memory. But I agree that Missouri stepping in and winning their division does make for a good argument, and A&M has fared well too.This is the most striking argument to me. If one or the other had come in and done well, you could call it a coincidence. But as both of them have beaten the top teams in the conference in their first two years, I think that's a pretty clear indication that the SEC isn't as head-and-shoulders above everyone else as is often portrayed.Just the fact that Mizzou and A&M were more or less also-rans in the Big XII, but are forces in the SEC should speak volumes. 3 title game appearances between the two in memory serves. But the revisionist history is just crazy.
Wrong wrong wrong. I remember sitting in my lobby in undergrad back in 02 watching football all day saturday (ah the good ol days) and couldn't believe how they were all over the SEC...how it was the best conference top to bottom, great athletes, just pro material blah blah blah blah blah....keep in mind Miami was the defending champ and they lost to Ohio State that season. It started LONG before the SEC started getting the benefit of the doubt title game bids over other schools...StPaulHusker said:Let me ask all of you this. Before the SEC won 7 straight championships, did ESPN ride them like they do now? I would say no.
Until there is a streak of other conferences winning the championships and winning the recruiting battles, etc. that will be the talk.
In fact, it started when the SEC and ESPN signed a then-historic TV rights deal.Wrong wrong wrong. I remember sitting in my lobby in undergrad back in 02 watching football all day saturday (ah the good ol days) and couldn't believe how they were all over the SEC...how it was the best conference top to bottom, great athletes, just pro material blah blah blah blah blah....keep in mind Miami was the defending champ and they lost to Ohio State that season. It started LONG before the SEC started getting the benefit of the doubt title game bids over other schools...StPaulHusker said:Let me ask all of you this. Before the SEC won 7 straight championships, did ESPN ride them like they do now? I would say no.
Until there is a streak of other conferences winning the championships and winning the recruiting battles, etc. that will be the talk.
I can hear the spin about OSU beating Mizzou already.........OU won last night, NU beat Georgia, now we need Ok State to beat Mo and FSU to beat Auburn - puts the SEC where it belongs. Wish Duke had beat A&M
I'm sure you do. Tough beans that A&M rallied. One day, I will understand the whining from other conferences. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Win. Beat the SEC on a consistent basis and the view will fade.
But until them, I'm sure your constant bitching about it will have to do.
That's the thing. Teams do beat the SEC on a consistent basis. It's just the one team at the top that wins and all of a sudden the entire conference is awesome.I'm sure you do. Tough beans that A&M rallied. One day, I will understand the whining from other conferences. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Win. Beat the SEC on a consistent basis and the view will fade.
But until them, I'm sure your constant bitching about it will have to do.
I'm sure you do. Tough beans that A&M rallied. One day, I will understand the whining from other conferences. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Win. Beat the SEC on a consistent basis and the view will fade.
But until them, I'm sure your constant bitching about it will have to do.
Witness the record since the start of the BCS era in 1998:
SEC vs. PAC-12 regular season: 10-12
SEC vs. PAC-12 bowl games: 1-0
SEC vs. Big 12 regular season: 6-10
SEC vs. Big 12 bowl games: 21-8
SEC vs. ACC regular season: 42-36
SEC vs. ACC bowl games: 16-9
SEC vs. Big 10 regular season: 7-4
SEC vs. Big 10 bowl games: 19-19
SEC vs. Big East regular season: 16-15
SEC vs. Big East bowl game: 3-8
Well, if middle of the pack Big 12 teams like Mizzou and A&M can do it, anyone can.I'm sure you do. Tough beans that A&M rallied. One day, I will understand the whining from other conferences. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Win. Beat the SEC on a consistent basis and the view will fade.
But until them, I'm sure your constant bitching about it will have to do.
Well, if middle of the pack Big 12 teams like Mizzou and A&M can do it, anyone can.I'm sure you do. Tough beans that A&M rallied. One day, I will understand the whining from other conferences. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Win. Beat the SEC on a consistent basis and the view will fade.
But until them, I'm sure your constant bitching about it will have to do.