I hate how protected the SEC is

i think that oregon vs k-state will be a fun game to watch so im not necessarily complaining about the game but im more complaining that SEC thinks that its so good and yet florida and georgia are playing absolute nobodies. i truly believe its because they dont want to match them up against oregon or k-state in fear that they will both lose and then the SEC will lose credibility. they are assuring themselves bowl wins and claiming to be the best while not playing the best. i really wanted the match ups to be oregon and k-state against florida and georgia just to show that both of them could hang in the SEC.

What I find amazing is how much they protect them. I love how Texas AM couldnt hang in the big 12 so they went to the SEC and now they are one of the best teams in the country. But hey we will find out how good AM is when they play OU. Even though this OU team is not very good by our standards I welcome the game.

PP im shocked at thoses games indeed.yes oregon vs kansas st is awsome but like you i wish they were playing georgia and florida..lsu vs clemson is ok but please n illionois.

I guess my post before I went to the gym didn't get posted. First off, who is the they in your post? Is it the BCS, SEC, or NCAA? Anyways, I want to talk through why I don't think the SEC is at all protected.

There are 5 BCS bowl affiliations. Pac 12 and Big 10 go to Rose, SEC to Sugar, Big 12 to Fiesta, and ACC to Orange. The championship game takes the top 2 which took the SEC champ away from the Sugar. The Sugar then has first choice of all the non-affiliated BCS-eligible teams. This year all 10 spots were automatically qualified with the 6 conference winners, ND in the top spot, 3rd place eligible team (only ineligible if top 2 teams are from same conference), 4th place (only ineligible if 2 of top 3 from same conference), and non-AQ in top 16 ahead of AQ champ. This means Florida, Oregon, Louisville, and NIU were the available choices. The Sugar did what all bowls did and followed their tie-in if available. Fiesta had next choice and took the easy next choice in Oregon. The Sugar got the next choice and selected Louisville with the Orange being stuck with NIU.

The SEC is playing the #1, #21, #16, #14, #11, and #18 teams in the nation as well as Pitt, Northwestern, and NC State. Neither the ACC nor the Big East got 6 bowl eligible teams much less are facing 6 ranked teams. The Pac 12 is facing #5, unranked, #23, unranked, unranked <.500 team, and #19 with their top 6 and Navy and Nevada added onto that. The Big 12 is facing #4, #9, #13, unranked, #17, and unranked with their top 6 and Minnesota, Syracuse, and Tulsa. Considering the SEC is 6 of the top 10, you would expect the other conferences to have much rougher schedules but the SEC still has the toughest games.

UBeeg9cats wrote:I guess my post before I went to the gym didn't get posted. First off, who is the they in your post? Is it the BCS, SEC, or NCAA? Anyways, I want to talk through why I don't think the SEC is at all protected.

There are 5 BCS bowl affiliations. Pac 12 and Big 10 go to Rose, SEC to Sugar, Big 12 to Fiesta, and ACC to Orange. The championship game takes the top 2 which took the SEC champ away from the Sugar. The Sugar then has first choice of all the non-affiliated BCS-eligible teams. This year all 10 spots were automatically qualified with the 6 conference winners, ND in the top spot, 3rd place eligible team (only ineligible if top 2 teams are from same conference), 4th place (only ineligible if 2 of top 3 from same conference), and non-AQ in top 16 ahead of AQ champ. This means Florida, Oregon, Louisville, and NIU were the available choices. The Sugar did what all bowls did and followed their tie-in if available. Fiesta had next choice and took the easy next choice in Oregon. The Sugar got the next choice and selected Louisville with the Orange being stuck with NIU.

The SEC is playing the #1, #21, #16, #14, #11, and #18 teams in the nation as well as Pitt, Northwestern, and NC State. Neither the ACC nor the Big East got 6 bowl eligible teams much less are facing 6 ranked teams. The Pac 12 is facing #5, unranked, #23, unranked, unranked <.500 team, and #19 with their top 6 and Navy and Nevada added onto that. The Big 12 is facing #4, #9, #13, unranked, #17, and unranked with their top 6 and Minnesota, Syracuse, and Tulsa. Considering the SEC is 6 of the top 10, you would expect the other conferences to have much rougher schedules but the SEC still has the toughest games.

Lets look at this.
These are the opponents that the SEC are playing
Notre Dame- Really we can throw this one out to be honest its the championship game.

NC State (5 loss team) They are the 6th best ACC team
Clemson Another ACC team
Northwestern big 10
Nebraska big 10
Michigan big 10
Louisville Big East
Pitt- WOW what a powerhouse. They are 6-6 right now.
And Oklahoma (lets be honest its the only powerhouse type team outside of the NC game and they are having a down year)

So if we ranked the conferences this year.

I would put it
1. SEC
2. Big 12
3. Pac 12
4. Big 10
5. Everyone else

So if we look at this. The mighty SEC is playing
1 Big 12 team
0 Pac 12 teams
3 big 10 teams
Then a bunch of teams from shit conferences.

Meanwhile the Big 12
1 SEC team
3 Pac 12
3 Big 10
Then 2 teams from shit conferences.

Yeah I would say they are pretty protected this year. Considering last year the Big 12 won the most bowl games. I am not saying the Big 12 is a better conference but we did get 9 teams into the bowl games this year. Thats the same as the SEC and we did it without the help of a massively top heavy conference who just beats up on the bottom half to get their teams bowl eligible. Not to mention we did it with only 10 teams. I would say the big 12 has more depth this year and the SEC is only playing one Big 12 team and for that matter its Texas AM. A Former Big 12 team who left the Big 12 cause they couldnt handle it. I think the rest of the country is sick of this bullshit SEC bias.

But you are making the assumption that all teams from a given conference are equal. The SEC's Big Ten opponents are all ranked in the top 20 while the Big 12's Big Ten opponents are all 6-6 with none of them having a winning conference record. That is a chasm in quality. I would also take ND, Clemson, and Louisville over Oregon, Oregon State, and UCLA in at least 2 of 3 games. If you lined up the SEC's bowl game opponents from hardest to easiest vs the Big 12's, the SEC's wins 7+ IMO. The SEC wins the championship each year against the best team from the other conferences. I'm not even a fan of any SEC teams(in football) so why would I be biased for them?

UBeeg9cats wrote:But you are making the assumption that all teams from a given conference are equal. The SEC's Big Ten opponents are all ranked in the top 20 while the Big 12's Big Ten opponents are all 6-6 with none of them having a winning conference record. That is a chasm in quality. I would also take ND, Clemson, and Louisville over Oregon, Oregon State, and UCLA in at least 2 of 3 games. If you lined up the SEC's bowl game opponents from hardest to easiest vs the Big 12's, the SEC's wins 7+ IMO. The SEC wins the championship each year against the best team from the other conferences. I'm not even a fan of any SEC teams(in football) so why would I be biased for them?

i dont care what anybody says, oregon is definitely better than ND. i still dont think that ND is at all a top 2 team but because they are undefeated i understand. so alabama is fortunate to play their easiest NC game in a long time. next, do you know how many ranked teams louisville played? 0. and they lost twice. oregon state played 4 ranked teams and were 2-2. they arent the greatest team but are legit unlike louisville. i could say that clemson is probably the same as ucla. they are probably about even.

nebraska is terrible. they got blown out in their big game against wisconsin who only got in because ohio state and penn state werent eligible. and michigan isnt good either.

pac 12 just got snubbed more than protected.

UBeeg9cats wrote:But you are making the assumption that all teams from a given conference are equal. The SEC's Big Ten opponents are all ranked in the top 20 while the Big 12's Big Ten opponents are all 6-6 with none of them having a winning conference record. That is a chasm in quality. I would also take ND, Clemson, and Louisville over Oregon, Oregon State, and UCLA in at least 2 of 3 games. If you lined up the SEC's bowl game opponents from hardest to easiest vs the Big 12's, the SEC's wins 7+ IMO. The SEC wins the championship each year against the best team from the other conferences. I'm not even a fan of any SEC teams(in football) so why would I be biased for them?

last year in the championship game they played each other even though osu should have been in. Also yes we have to look at the conference strength. The reason we look at conference strength is simple it's easy for a decent team like a Nebraska to build a record in a shitty conference. That's why they left the big 12. So their national rank is inflated. So why is it that the sec is not matched up with the second or third best conferences?

Also Louisville and Clemson would finish maybe 7 or 8 in the big 12. But they are being thrown out there to make sure the sec looks good. I just don't like it. This happens a lot more than we think. I will say that if those sec teams lose it shows that that conference is highly overrated.

I hope you also understand the bowl tie-ins weren't decided on some whim to make the big, bad SEC look powerful. Most of the country hates the SEC so people wouldn't agree to that.

Big 12's tie ins are:
2 vs SEC 3/4
3 vs P12 2
4 vs B10 4/5
5 vs P12 3
6 vs B10 6
7 vs BE 4
8 vs B10 7

SEC's are:
2 vs B10 2
3/4 vs B12 2
3/4 vs B10 3
5 vs ACC 2
6 vs B10 4/5
7/8 vs ACC 6
7/8 vs CUSA 1
9 vs BE 5

These tie-ins are very fair IMO. The SEC does not take on any team from another conference of lower rank. The Big 10 and ACC are down right now or the SEC's schedule would be very difficult.

I thought there were playoffs in NCAA football now?

Diego408 wrote:I thought there were playoffs in NCAA football now?

not until after next season. and its not really a playoff since its only 4 teams.

4 teams is plenty.

dmar5143 wrote:4 teams is plenty.

it wouldn't have been this year. It would have left out a one loss big 12 champ and a one loss PAC 12 champ which is a joke

Soonermark890 wrote:

dmar5143 wrote:4 teams is plenty.

it wouldn't have been this year. It would have left out a one loss big 12 champ and a one loss PAC 12 champ which is a joke

actually the PAC 12 champ (stanford) had 2 losses. oregon was the best in the PAC 12 but lost to stanford in OT which made them both have 1 loss in conference so stanford got in.

powerpuncher wrote:

Soonermark890 wrote:

dmar5143 wrote:4 teams is plenty.

it wouldn't have been this year. It would have left out a one loss big 12 champ and a one loss PAC 12 champ which is a joke

actually the PAC 12 champ (stanford) had 2 losses. oregon was the best in the PAC 12 but lost to stanford in OT which made them both have 1 loss in conference so stanford got in.

thats right. So only the big 12 gets screwed. It's the second best conference and it would get screwed over two years in a row.

powerpuncher wrote:i dont care what anybody says, oregon is definitely better than ND. i still dont think that ND is at all a top 2 team but because they are undefeated i understand. so alabama is fortunate to play their easiest NC game in a long time. next, do you know how many ranked teams louisville played? 0. and they lost twice. oregon state played 4 ranked teams and were 2-2. they arent the greatest team but are legit unlike louisville. i could say that clemson is probably the same as ucla. they are probably about even.

nebraska is terrible. they got blown out in their big game against wisconsin who only got in because ohio state and penn state werent eligible. and michigan isnt good either.

pac 12 just got snubbed more than protected.

I know it is a TERRIBLE metric but ND outperformed Oregon against common opponents. I realize it is subjective on these teams but Oregon State is 1-2 against teams that ended up ranked. They also lost to a solid team outside the top 25. Louisville lost a squeaker and a game they didn't show up to. I was more taking Clemson over Oregon State. They lost to 2 quality teams but destroyed everyone else. I think Louisville could hang with UCLA but would pick the Bruins. UCLA beat a shaky at the beginning of the season Nebraska and team implosion in USC.

I was comparing Nebraska, Michigan, and Northwestern to Michigan State, Purdue, and Minnesota. If you don't side with the first 3 being tougher than the latter, then I cannot debate you anymore. I might also remind you that Nebraska is UCLA's only win over a team currently ranked.

I'm not sure how the pac 12 got snubbed. Every bowl eligible team got a bowl game and they got the max allowed into the BCS games. There is a rule that 2 is the most a conference gets regardless if they have 1, 2, and 3 in the rankings. I don't think you can justify Stanford getting in the title game over Bama and Oregon is left out because they didn't win their conference and their conference champ didn't make it. The Pac 12 should be glad they get an overrated Boise (hurts me to say that one), an up and down Texas team, a 5 loss Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl, and a nice game to prove the 2nd best conference against K-State.