All-Time SEC vs. Non-Conference Opponents (By Decades) (Does not include bowl games) Decade W-L-T Pct.1930s 270-105-19 .7091940s 359-123-14 .7381950s 320-107-14 .7411960s 297-125-20 .6951970s 328-169-13 .6561980s 356-161-17 .6831990s 282- 84- 3 .7682000s 177- 65- 0 .731TOTALS 2389-939-100 .711 Best Percentage (Season): 1997, 32-4 (.889) The SEC has only had one losing non-conference season - 1979 (23-29-1, .443) see ya & raise ya hawker! :thumb:
Its not just the SEC teams that make it more difficult. The stadiums and fanbase put a lot more pressure on teams than most "outsiders" realize. Obviously, their will never be a proven answer, but to say the SEC is an inferior conference to anyonme is somewhat doubtful in my mind. The reason people defend the SEC so much is b/c it is attacked so often. When a conference has a good season, the first place they go and compare themselves to is the SEC. Why they do theat is somewhat obvious to me. :lsup:LSU!:champs:
All-Time record vs other conferences (current affiliation) SEC vs ACC = 888-747-83 (.541) SEC vs B12 = 309-301-24 (.506) SEC vs BE = 111-67-11 (.616) SEC vs P10 = 62-39-7 (.606) SEC vs B10 = 86-91-7 (.486) total = 1456-1245-132 OK Hawker, I know the Big 10 is up by 5 games on us, but I have an excuse. Michigan (42 time champ/co-champ of the Big 10) is 9-0 against Vandy (0 SEC titles). The only other matchup with more than just a couple of games, is Indianna vs Kentucky which Indy leads 17-18-1. Also, BAMA is 8-5 vs Penn ST. Other than that, all the schools take turns with records like 1-1-1 or 2-3-0 stuff like that.
Hawker, another point about the Bowl record is that the SEC is always matched up against teams from other conferences that are a higher seed within their conference. For example, I can't remember the exact match ups (and I can't seem to find them in a quick web search), but it seems like our #4, #5, and #6 guys are matched up against the #2 and #3 teams from other conferences. That is why the bowl records are so even. We are always playing above our heads.
Probably because of the fact that, top to bottom, the SEC has better teams than any other conference. But, more so, at the top. Every conference has its patsies at the bottom, such as Vandy, Kentucky and Miss State. But no other conference has anything that compares to LSU, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Bama and Tennessee. Look at the :crystal: the conference has accumulated. There have been a couple of occasions in recent years where an SEC team has run the brutal conference gauntlet, yet been viewed as undeserving of a shot at :crystal: . Witness Auburn a couple of years ago. In 2003, many thought LSU didn't deserve to be in the BCS Championship. Nevertheless, the SEC has had multiple teams win :crystal: s in recent years and that is despite the fact that, in order to get through the SEC and win the conference championship (thereby gaining the auto BCS berth), an SEC team MUST beat the best teams that the conference has to offer. There is no sidestepping any team. We either play them in our division, or play them in our conference championship game (a concept that is foreign to the Big 10 + 1).
LOL... g'morning, all... Given that there is absolutely no way to compare "opponents" for many of the decades listed above... simply because southern teams would not play racially mixed teams, makes this analysis rather useless. Eastern, Northern and Western teams have played each other for a long, long time (hence our history with west coast schools) while the South pretty much played their OOC schedule and bowl games among themselves. .... so it's kinda hard to make a measuring stick out of this info.
Tigermark, there may be truth to what you say... I have no numbers from other conferences to suggest it is not... However, speaking to just the SEC and Big Ten match-ups in bowls... where our #2 is suppose to play the SEC #2, both conferences can get "out of kilter" when they get two teams in the BCS and therefore have their #3 team going to #2's bowl. Since the BCS thingy started the Big Ten has had two BCS teams in 1998 (OSU, Wisc), 1999 (Mich, Wisc), 2002 (OSU, Iowa), 2003 (Osu, Mich) and 2005 (PSU, OSU). The SEC has had multiple teams in 1999 (Bama, Tn) and 2001 (LSU, Fl)... so, in these years, in SEC/B10 match-ups, what you suggested may not be the case.
Interesting to note that since the start of the BCS, the Big Ten has had six different conference teams win the conference and a seventh, Iowa, has tied for the crown twice. Wisconsin won it in 98 & 99, Purdue 2000, Ill 2001, OSU 2002, Mich 03 & 04 and PSU in 05. So I'd say the conference is a tad more competitive than you may want to believe. And, again, I am not suggesting the SEC is inferior to anyone. I am just responding to the "obvious gap" that the author of this thread is suggesting. There is little to suggest there is a gap... and even less to suggest it is obvious... at least since the BSC started... and I have little interest in games played in 1931.:shock:
Since the SEC went to two divisions with a championship game, * eight SEC teams have won their division championship. * six SEC teams have won the conference championship. * four SEC teams have won National Championships (+ undefeated Auburn being locked out of the BCS game) No league has better balance than the SEC. The Big-10 has come a long way, but for decades it was the Big-2, Little-8.
And for decades the SEC was Alabama!:shock: Decades?? How is that different in the two Conferences?? The Gophers ruled in the 40's, it was Iowa and the Goophies in the 50's, OSU and Michigan came on in the 60's... as did Penn State, same in the 70's, Iowa joined them in the 80's, the 90's had multiple champions from NW, PSU, Osu, Mich, Wisc and the 2000's has been a mixture much like the 90's... ... the SEC has had a similar mixture of good and bad teams. I've seen Tn, Geo, Aub, Fl, Lsu, Bama mentioned often on this thread, as if they've always been good. We know better, don't we?:nope:
