i think most SEC fans would be surprised to learn that the Pac 10 is 12-10 versus the SEC since 2000:
UCLA 4-0 vs SEC (beat Alabama twice, beat Tennessee twice)
USC 4-0 vs SEC (beat Auburn twice, beat Arkansas twice)
Oregon 3-1 vs SEC (beat TN, beat MSU twice, lost to Aub on last sec FG)
Cal 1-1 vs SEC (beat 10-4 Tennessee, lost @ Tennessee)
Stanford 0-0 vs SEC
Oregon State 0-1 vs SEC (lost to LSU by 1 pt)
Washington 0-1 vs SEC (lost to LSU by 8 pts)
Washington St 0-1 vs SEC (lost to 11-2 Auburn team in 2006)
Arizona 0-2 vs SEC (lost to 11-2 LSU and 13-1 LSU)
Arizona State 0-3 vs SEC (lost to Georgia twice by 3 pts and 17 pts, lost to LSU by 4 pts)
sure, the SEC has produced more nfl talent than the Pac 10 (although there are years where the Pac 10 has just as many players drafted per team that the SEC has, including in this last nfl draft... also the last nfl pro bowl team had more Pac 10 players than SEC players)
and sure, the SEC has more powerhouse football programs, but that doesn't mean the Pac 10 sucks. they have people here acting like the Pac 10 is the MWC, WAC, Sun Belt, C-USA, etc
since the 2001 draft, six Pac 10 teams have had 30 to 38 players taken in the nfl draft (38 Cal, 36 Oregon, 35 Stanford, 32 Oregon State, 30 Arizona State, 30 UCLA), which is just as many as Auburn (38), South Carolina (30), and Arkansas (28) -- and all three of those teams are competitive in the SEC: Auburn went to the SEC Championship in '00, '04, and '10, and won the SEC in 2004 and 2010. Arkansas went to the SEC Championship in '02 and '06. South Carolina went to the SEC Championship in 2010
so if those three teams could be competitive in the SEC, there is no reason why the six Pac 10 teams with similar talent couldn't have been just as competitive in the SEC. of course, in addition to those six teams, the Pac 10 also has USC, which has had more players drafted since the 2001 draft than any single SEC team
Click to expand...