From ESPN: http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/96456/gap-closing-on-sec-maybe-but-thats-good The no show by the SEC West has some around the country questioning the SEC's pedigree and free pass status into the CFB playoff. If and when UF gets back to playoff level I'm still glad that FSU is a game at the end of the season that can give the Gators a playoff boost if needed.
With Meyer, Dantonio and Harbaugh it does appear the Big 10's bounce should be here to stay for awhile. Like the article says though I don't think the SEC is going away any time soon though. From recruiting rankings in another topic: 1. Bama...natch 2. FSU 3. UGA 4. USC...uh oh... 5. Tenn
Harbaugh has a lot of repairing to do.....I would guess that we'll see more from Riley quicker than Harbaugh.....plus Dantonio goes in cycles, and he probably just lost the other half of the recruiting war to Mich now....look for thin times in E. Lansing.
Stoops is retooling the staff at OU and Strong is finishing strong in recruiting...Texas and OU will be back, add in KState, Baylor and TCU and we'll have our day. Not this year though. Terrible Bowl season.
That might be true actually. I disagree the SEC is on a "slippery slope"... etc. Look at the recruiting rankings I posted. The players will still be there..... and the coaching across the board is exceptional if not downright intimidating. Damn... and then there's Muschamp as DC at Auburn.... yikes. Jones, Freeze, Mullen, Bielema..... fairly new guys joining the success of guys like Saban,Richt, Miles and Spurrier and then there's A&M and Mo. the newest additions already accounting for themselves and you have McElwain who could be sitting on a gold mine at UF. This SEC ain't going anywhere.
More SEC slippage discussion: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/24935270/end-of-an-era-looks-like-cfp-does-what-bcs-couldnt-end-sec-dominance
No offense to our resident Lions fans here but good god was I glad something else took away the sports narrative in my Facebook feed. It's absolutely unreadable. Blog after blog and news article about 'how the SEC really is still number one... or is this the end of the SEC dynasty?' It's suffocating.. especially when one considers that this particular dynasty was a product of the system it played in. What gets lost in all the BS is that, as AJ mentioned, these things are cyclical. With the insane amount of money and resources dumped into the SEC programs, they're never going to be out of the conversation, even in the worst of years for them. There's just too much money and talent for them to justifiably be too far away. We entered this golden age of hyperbole in which one conference is supposed to be so much better than all the rest. What you don't notice, or want to depending on your perspective, is that the narrative for justification changed each and every year. We've done away with most of that silly nonsense and moved forward. I think the move to 8 and locking it there will be exactly where this sport needs to be. Is the SEC done? No.. we just stopped pretending that half the country doesn't exist.
I never completely get it when you say this.... and you say it often. Two teams played each other on the field each and every year at the end.... and the winner was crowned champion. Polls helped to determine the BCS CG participants along with a mathematical formula and conference bowl tie-ins were severed for the sake of coming up with a true champion. I do like this 4 team playoff better.... but I just cannot understand in the least how you can be so dismissive of BCS Championships won on the field and yet be enamored with college football traditions, history and past champions when only a few of those champions proved anything on the field in their final game.
This SEC run was never going to last forever. Two things however first I doubt any of the other leagues put together such a run. Second most years the SEC will have a team in the playoff capable of winning it all. We are certainly not down and out.
I'm painfully aware of this, and I'll probably be getting a text from Kesley laughing at me for trying again....but here it goes. I can say that the system is ********, without saying your team is illegitimate. Correct, and it was the laughable selection process that was questioned each and every year. Just because you won, or folks from your conference won, you chose to look the other way. They didn't believe the BCS was very legitimate when Auburn was left out. They somehow believed the BCS was the best thing ever when everyone else was left out for the remainder of the life of the BCS era. I would like to point out that this guy is one of those voters. The polls were also quack jobs that tweaked every year to address the bitching but were always somehow off-base. There's just no substitute for reality no matter how hard we try. I can come up with countless arguments against some subjective selection method that relies on rumor, tradition and marketing. What is so hard about saying 'We take the major 5 champions and 3 wild cards.. thus giving you die hards for the old system a way to flood it with your ********..and let them duke it out?'
So I have always said the BCS was just a better system than what we had before and I am saying I like 4 teams better. So.... BCS was better.... and 4 teams even better. "The polls were also quack jobs" Before the BCS that's damned near all we had but all of those poll decided national championships are recognized still today.
I'm pretty much with MCG on this issue. And sorry Corey but it's nonsense to say that the SEC won those Championships because of the system. Maybe some of those years there was a team that was better than the team the SEC had to beat to be champion. What has happened is that the gap has been closed. I will remind you that the streak started with Florida in 2006. ESPN, especially Herbstreet did everything in their power to get a rematch with Ohio State and Michigan but it didn't work. Thank goodness it didn't work. In the end Florida destroyed Ohio State, sorry guys no insult but true, and S. Cal destroyed Michigan. If ESPN had gotten their way it would have been Ohio State and Michigan again and neither of them were as good as Florida or S. Cal that year. The team I feel bad about this year is TCU, they belonged in the playoff. So I am with you that it needs to be expanded. But the only reason that the SEC won all those Championships was because of the BCS is complete nonsense I will concede that there are a number of teams that have risen up to the level that the SEC is not going to win that many in a row again and I am still amazed that we did win that many. But don't diminish the accomplishment as that just doesn't pass the smell test. Just my humble opinion of course.
In my response, I still give nothing but praise to the SEC team. In your responses, both of them, you do nothing but discount the rest of the nation. We could have had 4 teams back then. It seemed to be something that could not be sold to the general public at the time, which is, I'm sure the counter-point you're thinking of here. That's true, partially. Ironically, that could also be the best way the BCS era could be remembered.. It's true, partially. Back when we went to the Bowl Alliance (which was the pre-cursor to the BCS), had you told the college football world everything that would have happened during the BCS era.. there's no way America would have bought into either the Bowl Alliance or the BCS. They would have gone to the playoff, or stayed right where they were. What you have with the BCS is a cash grab that was sold to the ADs which excluded large portions of the college football world and demanded that the rest of the college football world change their ways to conform to the demands of 2 conferences. If you could possibly, which you've proven you cannot over the years, step out of your conference skin long enough to look at this from the bird's eye, you'd see that. Since you'll likely not see this in my lifetime, we can just agree to disagree. I said it at the time, and I will say it again. I believe history will not be kind to the BCS. People will wonder 'why didn't we do this sooner?!' when this is all in the rear view mirror of another decade or so. We've been playing this game for 140+ years and all of a sudden, we see one conference emerge to totally dominate the landscape for a decade with almost no tangible reason for this explosion... sure, I'm sure that was all on the up and up. I could point to at least half of those title games and come up with at least one, and sometimes 2 or 3, teams that were every bit as deserving to play in that game. If you can't see how that might possibly aid a decade of dominance, I can't help you.
The only thing wrong with the BCS is that it was restricted to 2 teams. If the BCS had the same formulas but was expanded to include 4 teams then we would probably have the same 5 or 6 teams vying for the 4 spots that we had this year. I am for an 8 team playoff too. I think 8 slots will keep the regular season relevant and if a combination of conference championships and at large slots are used then some folks will still argue that one conference is getting preference over another. :lol:
I don't disagree with that KP, but that's not what the BCS wanted to do. They took 8 teams but only 2 could play for the title. They never wanted a playoff. They'd pretend it was the same thing.. as we've seen, it's not. Ironically, these are the same people now fussing that we don't need to go to 8 teams because 'we'll just be changing the number of teams each year to fit the number of complaints.' It's all disingenuous and it's all butt hurt. The fun starts now.
Corey, for the record I am not discounting or demising other teams no way. There very well may have been a team that might have won in a four team playoff. However I know that the SEC team took on whatever opponent was put in there with them. I distinctly remember telling you Notre Dame fans that Bama was the best team the year you made the playoff with Bama. I was told by the Irish fans here that I was crazy. I was not and Bama won handily. I will also say that if there was a four team playoff last year that Bama would have likely been in the playoff. Auburn had an unbelievable year but caught lightning in a bottle twice, against Georgia and against Bama. I firmly believe Bama was better and would have likely won. Regardless I don't want to diminish any other teams and this year no SEC team in the finals. And...........kp has been telling us all year long this Bama team was not as good and as it turns out he was right. Both Auburn and Ohio State had offenses that the Bama defense could not handle. Anyway I am happy we now have more than two teams in the playoff and look forward to expanding to 6 or 8. And yes we could have 6 with two teams getting a bye the first round.
The problem with the Bull Crap System is because there were only two teams, they HAD to ABSOLUTELY get the best two teams. No way a consensus was to be found for that in most years... so they boggled it up with various computer programs, and polls. I love the SEC, but I still LOVE the playoff. I think it now makes everything unquestionably legit. This year the SEC was a little down, and didn't make the cut. We'll be back. 8)
Corey, I think you are looking for black helicopters. Before the BCS, we had bowl games with conference tie ins that totally ignored trying to get #1 and #2 into the final game. It happened every once in a while but the Big 10 champ always played the PAC 10 champ in the Rose Bowl. No matter what. The SEC Champ played in the Sugar Bowl, the SWC Champ played in the Cotton Bowl. The BCS was a 2 team playoff. Not good but better than before. Now we have a 4 team play-off. Not good but better than before. I think if we get to 8 teams we will have the scope to cover most if not all of the contenders for the national championship. Better! 8)