Because they match top tier conference teams vs. each other. Would Vanderbilt vs. Duke tell us anything? No, but Florida vs. Ohio State or LSU vs. Illinois (1 loss Big 10 team in 2001) does. I'll give Hawker a pass, though. He's been suffering through a lot what with the golden boy for a coach and all.
i actually think matchup of the weak teams is as valuable. who wins a bowl game doesnt usually mean as much to a team as a conference game, so you never know how intense theyll be. i dont think, on a whole they are as indicative of a teams ablility as a reg season game. much better to go on non conf games if you want to compare, but the # is low.
Well, because the BCS bowls are the only ones with even match-ups, usually conference champ vs. conference champ. In EVERY OTHER bowl game, the sponsors match up, say, the 3rd best Big 10 team against the 5th best SEC team. Because they know if they went 3rd vs. 3rd, they'd have a blowout on their hands.:helmet:
Point #1: I looked at all matchups from BCS conference over the past five year (including games played in this, the 6th year)... Why? Because those are games played on the field. Games played on the field don't include things like: a) personal biases, b) subjective media rankings, c) speculation about who might beat who (now if USC was in our league they'd lose at least two games cuz we're so darn tough). I'm sure you've heard that one. Point #2: Actual BCS bowl games are more about teams than conference. There are very good teams sprinkled about in all conferences. When one of those teams win, it speaks to that team more than it does their conference affliation. The SEC has now played some 100 games over the past 5/6 years against other BCS league teams and the record is quite modest. Why doesn't that count?? And, yes, Sabanfan, I'm in a baaaaahd mood. Life has not been good in the field of dreams. But.... I'm proud of you guys... mind if I tag along for a while?
School's still out on our demise, but here's my personal topline: 1) Our "great" recruiting class... I think we were # 10 in 2005 class... has been decimated. Out that class of 22, only nine remain... flunked out, injured, transferred, whatever. The 2004 class, less highly ranked, is also about "half there". 2) With the exception of one coach, who left last year for the Arizona Cardinals, Ferentz' staff has been intact for 8 years now. Some think that should be a good thing. I think people can get comfortable and complacent without the flow of organized change. 3) There's nothing wrong on the Defense. We're actually very good on that side of the ball. The D, however, seems to always be on the field... that's not good for any D. 4) Christensen has been a big disappointment... very inaccurate, can't run when needed, and there's no doubt it's now "in his head". friggen sad to watch any QB who looks like he's dancing barefoot on glass. 5) Special teams... what was the trademark of Iowa football... has all but vanished. We'll probably play Penn State well this week... only because we seem to have their number... just like we always play Wisconsin well... but don't let that fool you, we have a lot of problems. Right now, we need a QB who can take off.... ala Brad Banks.
Hawker, If you exclude Mississippi St, Vandy, Kentucky, & Ole Miss from those stats, how does it look for the SEC then? Better yet, remove just Vandy.
Grading, I think I can pull that from my little data base... let me try. From the top of my head, I remember Georgia and LSU have the best ooc record against other BCS league teams. As I remember Auburn, Tennessee, South Carolina were not very good... South Carolina has a lot of losses to Clemson during those years, whereas Georgia has had Georgia Tech's number... things like that. Florida was something like .500, as was Arky. But yes, your bottom dwellers always have a negative effect, which is probably true of all conferences.
Okay, here you go... SEC by team record against teams from other BCS conferences (including the Weis men from ND) with short commentary: Georgia 12-1 (plus they won some of these games big) LSU 8-3 (two of the losses came in 2002, take out that one year and you're right there with the Dawgs) Kentucky 6-5 (a few wins over Indiana, a few losses to Louisville) Vandy 4-3 (it helps to play Duke) Auburn 6-6 (give USC two of those wins, but GT has also had their number) Tennessee 5-7 (it doesn't help Phil to play ND) Florida 5-7 (Zookered) Arkansas 3-5 (I threw in their win over South Florida back in 2002) Bama 3-5 (and I threw in their win over South Florida in 2003) South Carolina 3-6 (Clemson has had their number) Ole Miss 2-5 (didn't play a BCS ooc opponent in 04 or 05) Miss State 0-3 (played Oregon twice and WV once... only ooc bcs teams they've played in 6 years, hmmm) So, all in all, the SEC is 57-56 in their last 113 games against other BCS league teams. Please don't get me wrong. I think the SEC is a great league... and some years, you RULE. I just don't think the separation between leagues is near as great as some would claim.
many typically say that the SEC is generally the best league not because of the top teams but because of the bottom teams. i would expect the bottom SEC teams ooc record to be better than other conferences, unless there are significant differences in the quality of ooc opponents. come to think of it, the quality of ooc opponents has been claimed to be poor by sec detractors (and theyre probably right), so that probably wont work.
