Great, but long article, about pumping up the SEC bias

[Ric Flair]

2012 -Bama lucks back into title game after Oregon and KSU lose on same night. And Ohio State Banned from bowl.

2011 - Okie State Big 12 Champ held out in favor of Bama that didnt win its division for a BS all SEC West title rematch

2010 - Boise St blows their shot with a missed FG and Auburn escapes Oregon via Dyers infamous Dyer isnt down run.

2009 - 5 Teams finish undefeated. Texas escapes us to lose Mccoy in the first quarter and be ineffective against Bama.

2008 - Oklahoma flexes its weaknesses against Florida after the 3 way Big 12 South tie that couldve gone to Texas.

2007 - An awful year for rankings. Everbody lost and lost alot. Ohio State and LSU limp into title game that was up for grabs.

2006 - Florida starts the trend and the nightmare continues this season.

Excuses are for losers. I'm not calling you a loser. I'm suggesting that we are (or used to be at least) better than this nonsense.

Some of you sound like Missouri or K-State fans used to back in the old Big 8 days. Good teams make their own luck.

The SEC's seven national titles in a row speak for themselves.

2011 was bullsh#t and its hard to argue otherwise. 2012 Bama had a loss and wouldnt have been in if not for the Buckeyes bowl ban they shouldve taken the year before. Those are facts

Here's a breakdown of the controversy back then.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/04/bcs-rankings-alabama-or-oklahoma-state-2-spot-lsu_n_1128189.html

In 2011, both Alabama and Oklahoma State had 1 loss. LSU was undefeated. It was something of a toss-up whether Alabama or Okie State was the better team. Each of Alabama's victories was by at least 16 points. And given that Alabama ultimately dominated LSU in winning 21-0, it's hard to see how you argue retroactively that they shouldn't even have been playing in that game.

 

[Redux]

2012 -Bama lucks back into title game after Oregon and KSU lose on same night. And Ohio State Banned from bowl.

2011 - Okie State Big 12 Champ held out in favor of Bama that didnt win its division for a BS all SEC West title rematch

2010 - Boise St blows their shot with a missed FG and Auburn escapes Oregon via Dyers infamous Dyer isnt down run.

2009 - 5 Teams finish undefeated. Texas escapes us to lose Mccoy in the first quarter and be ineffective against Bama.

2008 - Oklahoma flexes its weaknesses against Florida after the 3 way Big 12 South tie that couldve gone to Texas.

2007 - An awful year for rankings. Everbody lost and lost alot. Ohio State and LSU limp into title game that was up for grabs.

2006 - Florida starts the trend and the nightmare continues this season.

Excuses are for losers. I'm not calling you a loser. I'm suggesting that we are (or used to be at least) better than this nonsense.

Some of you sound like Missouri or K-State fans used to back in the old Big 8 days. Good teams make their own luck.

The SEC's seven national titles in a row speak for themselves.

2011 was bullsh#t and its hard to argue otherwise. 2012 Bama had a loss and wouldnt have been in if not for the Buckeyes bowl ban they shouldve taken the year before. Those are facts

Here's a breakdown of the controversy back then.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/04/bcs-rankings-alabama-or-oklahoma-state-2-spot-lsu_n_1128189.html

In 2011, both Alabama and Oklahoma State had 1 loss. LSU was undefeated. It was something of a toss-up whether Alabama or Okie State was the better team. Each of Alabama's victories was by at least 16 points. And given that Alabama ultimately dominated LSU in winning 21-0, it's hard to see how you argue retroactively that they shouldn't even have been playing in that game.

Easily. LSU had defeated Alabama previously. Alanama did not win their division. Oklahoma State won their conference. Alabam was selected over Oklahoma State. This essentialy proved the BCS bias and inneficiancy to level the provebial playing field. If the champion of the supposed #2 conference got snubbed in favor of a 6-9 rematch of division foes, what is the point for anybody to try or give a sh#t? The logo on the field gets the final say. Really, the fact Bama smoked LSU in the rematch says more about the SEC NOT being as great.

 

[Landlord]

2012 -Bama lucks back into title game after Oregon and KSU lose on same night. And Ohio State Banned from bowl.

2011 - Okie State Big 12 Champ held out in favor of Bama that didnt win its division for a BS all SEC West title rematch

2010 - Boise St blows their shot with a missed FG and Auburn escapes Oregon via Dyers infamous Dyer isnt down run.

2009 - 5 Teams finish undefeated. Texas escapes us to lose Mccoy in the first quarter and be ineffective against Bama.

2008 - Oklahoma flexes its weaknesses against Florida after the 3 way Big 12 South tie that couldve gone to Texas.

2007 - An awful year for rankings. Everbody lost and lost alot. Ohio State and LSU limp into title game that was up for grabs.

2006 - Florida starts the trend and the nightmare continues this season.

Excuses are for losers. I'm not calling you a loser. I'm suggesting that we are (or used to be at least) better than this nonsense.

Some of you sound like Missouri or K-State fans used to back in the old Big 8 days. Good teams make their own luck.

The SEC's seven national titles in a row speak for themselves.

2011 was bullsh#t and its hard to argue otherwise. 2012 Bama had a loss and wouldnt have been in if not for the Buckeyes bowl ban they shouldve taken the year before. Those are facts

Here's a breakdown of the controversy back then.

http://www.huffingto..._n_1128189.html

In 2011, both Alabama and Oklahoma State had 1 loss. LSU was undefeated. It was something of a toss-up whether Alabama or Okie State was the better team. Each of Alabama's victories was by at least 16 points. And given that Alabama ultimately dominated LSU in winning 21-0, it's hard to see how you argue retroactively that they shouldn't even have been playing in that game.

Not hard for me to see. Just because they won doesn't mean they deserved to be there. That argument came down to whether you focus more on wins or losses. Alabama had a 'better' loss to LSU than Oklahoma State did to Iowa State, but Oklahoma State had far better wins than Alabama did.

 

[BIG ERN]

If people do not think that the SEC is a better conference than the Big10 give me what you are smoking, please.

 

[sd'sker]

in sports, you can always make a specious argument to discredit a championship (except maybe with 7 game series). but if you fail to recognize the self-fulfilling prophecy the sec has created through the media to insulate itself at the top, you are willfully ignorant. the sec is good, but that means they will always get the benefit of the doubt until they are dethroned. and even then i worry. as espn as an interest in keeping the south relevant because of their growing populations and rabid interest.

 

[StPaulHusker]

2012 -Bama lucks back into title game after Oregon and KSU lose on same night. And Ohio State Banned from bowl.

2011 - Okie State Big 12 Champ held out in favor of Bama that didnt win its division for a BS all SEC West title rematch

2010 - Boise St blows their shot with a missed FG and Auburn escapes Oregon via Dyers infamous Dyer isnt down run.

2009 - 5 Teams finish undefeated. Texas escapes us to lose Mccoy in the first quarter and be ineffective against Bama.

2008 - Oklahoma flexes its weaknesses against Florida after the 3 way Big 12 South tie that couldve gone to Texas.

2007 - An awful year for rankings. Everbody lost and lost alot. Ohio State and LSU limp into title game that was up for grabs.

2006 - Florida starts the trend and the nightmare continues this season.

Excuses are for losers. I'm not calling you a loser. I'm suggesting that we are (or used to be at least) better than this nonsense.

Some of you sound like Missouri or K-State fans used to back in the old Big 8 days. Good teams make their own luck.

The SEC's seven national titles in a row speak for themselves.

2011 was bullsh#t and its hard to argue otherwise. 2012 Bama had a loss and wouldnt have been in if not for the Buckeyes bowl ban they shouldve taken the year before. Those are facts

Here's a breakdown of the controversy back then.

http://www.huffingto..._n_1128189.html

In 2011, both Alabama and Oklahoma State had 1 loss. LSU was undefeated. It was something of a toss-up whether Alabama or Okie State was the better team. Each of Alabama's victories was by at least 16 points. And given that Alabama ultimately dominated LSU in winning 21-0, it's hard to see how you argue retroactively that they shouldn't even have been playing in that game.

Not hard for me to see. Just because they won doesn't mean they deserved to be there. That argument came down to whether you focus more on wins or losses. Alabama had a 'better' loss to LSU than Oklahoma State did to Iowa State, but Oklahoma State had far better wins than Alabama did.

And if we are piling on. Oklahoma States loss to Iowa State was only bad on paper. They played that game shortly after athletic department people were killed in a plane crash, did they not? Can't imagine what it must have been like to try to get up for a game after that. Of course the computer has no emotions so it didn't give a sh#t.

 

[StPaulHusker]

If people do not think that the SEC is a better conference than the Big10 give me what you are smoking, please.

If people do not think that the SEC is a better conference than the Big10 give me what you are smoking, please.

Top to bottom, it's not. The stats have been posted numerous times.

 

[Redux]

Alabama has lucked into the last two National Championships. Not saying they werent a top 5 team. But they werent the best team in 2011 in my mind. And last year is a tossup whether or not they couldve beaten OSU.

 

[Landlord]

Alabama has lucked into the last two National Championships. Not saying they werent a top 5 team. But they werent the best team in 2011 in my mind. And last year is a tossup whether or not they couldve beaten OSU.

Don't say they weren't the best team. They were obviously the best team.

Say they didn't deserve to play in the championship game or they didn't have the best resume. Both are very different statements.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

The author has an axe to grind against the entire South and a book to promote. His stats actually suggest that the SEC isn't as big of a deal as the SEC wants to think, and who can disagree with that? But the conspiracy case is flimsy and the bias itself is over-rated.

His Auburn example merely shows how an unranked team can rise above the preseason predjudice by beating everyone in its path. It's not an SEC conspiracy when Oregon blows a big game.

ESPN paid big money to broadcast SEC games driven by public demand. As many viewers want to see SEC teams get their asses kicked as want to see them win. ESPN wins either way. It's brand name football. It's business.

And brand name football is also the reason why Nebraska is rated higher at the beginning of the season than they are at the end. We don't seem to complain about our benefit of the doubt.

Still gotta prove yourself.

Nebraska couldn't beat the SEC #4 in our last two bowl games. Alabama looks pretty damn good to my eye. The Huskers would definitely have their hands full with Vanderbilt this year.

Sorry. Whining about media bias is my least favorite Husker passtime.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I also think the author undervalues dry humping your girlfriend standing up in her parents garage.

 

[Redux]

Alabama has lucked into the last two National Championships. Not saying they werent a top 5 team. But they werent the best team in 2011 in my mind. And last year is a tossup whether or not they couldve beaten OSU.

Don't say they weren't the best team. They were obviously the best team.

Say they didn't deserve to play in the championship game or they didn't have the best resume. Both are very different statements.

2011 I just dont think they were the best. Last year sure, beating undefeated ND grants them that title. But beati g LSU was a wash. Its hard to beat the same team twice in one year, Okie State couldve beaten them both I feel.

 

[Landlord]

Nebraska couldn't beat the SEC #4 in our last two bowl games.

You can't refer to South Carolina and Georgia as both being the SEC #4 when they had different season results and different standings in their conference.

 

[Count 'Bility]

If people do not think that the SEC is a better conference than the Big10 give me what you are smoking, please.

Oh Jeebus. You continue to miss the point.

It's not whether or not it's better. it's the fact that the gap is not nearly as wide as ESPN wants you to think.

Who's the only conference with a network through ESPN?

Who's the most powerful sports network (if not network period) in the world?

Huh. No wonder perceptions have been driven home. You sir have been had.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Nebraska couldn't beat the SEC #4 in our last two bowl games.

You can't refer to South Carolina and Georgia as both being the SEC #4 when they had different season results and different standings in their conference.

I can refer to them as #4 choice to represent the SEC in a bowl game, because that's what they were.

Go ahead and make your own Top 6 of SEC teams. Tell me how many you'd bet money on Nebraska beating the past two years.

It is what it is. The SEC is a little better right now. Not hugely better. They've been worse than the Big 10 and Big 12 in the past. They are better at the moment. Others will rise and fall in the future. ESPN will cover it either way.