Les Miles Beating The SEC Hype Drum

[HellYeahHokie]

As if he was taking notes from SEC fans themselves:

http://www.2theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/8267042.html

I don't think there's anything wrong with a coach trumping up his league. Of course, he should. And certainly the SEC is a tough league.

However, when he starts calling out USC because they have so many easy teams compared to his teams schedule, it shows he's gone from SEC cheerleader to delusional fan. He mocks USC's games against "juggarnauts" UCLA, Stanford, Cal-Berkely, and Washington, etc. Saying they have only a couple of tough games per year. Meanwhile, LSU's schedule has "juggernauts", Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tulane, Middle Tennessee, Kentucky, and Louisiana Tech. That takes some brass ones to mock USC's light teams. Which isn't to say that LSU doesn't have a few tough opponents. Florida, Auburn, and VT should be formidable opponents, but they are all played at home.

And even calling USC out because they play in an easier conference than the SEC is pretty absurd considering what the Trojans have done to SEC opponents when they've played them recently. Somebody at Arkansas and Auburn might want to remind Les Miles how difficult the SEC has been for USC recently.

It's pretty funny. The conference debate is good fodder for message boards like this, but it's kinda sad when a coach opens his mouth and regurgitates the same old arguments that aren't based in a lot of reality.

[sc69er]

If USC is undefeated and the SEC Champ is undefeated, USC will be ranked higher than the SEC champ and will be the first choosen for the Championship game. Less Miles/gallon is starting the Tommy Blubberville advanced lobbying for a slot in the big game! As an aside the PX may be the toughest league this year!!

[Blue Hen]

Guaranteed - USC's SOS in the computer ratings will be tougher than LSU's.......as it is just about every season. Disappointing to hear Myles talk dumb like that. It is self serving for coaches to proclaim how tough their schedules and conferences are when their jobs are rarely long term secured.

[aufan59]

If I were to guess, playing 1 SEC game is equivalent to playing 2 or 3 Pac-10 games as far as physical wear and tear is involved. The PAC-10 schools can do fine outside of two hand touch where there are more TD's in a game than tackles for one game, but if the teams had to endure the physical SEC for a whole season they couldn't make it.

Unlike the 'juggernauts' of the Pac-10, the SEC bottom feeders will play a physical game even if out matched. Lets look at last year: I'd rather play a 6-6 WSU team than a 3-9 MSU team. Washington State might be more ofa a challenge, but lets face it, being pushed lightly out of bounds after a 5-10 yard gain isn't that punishing. Mississippi State will atleast force you to grind out yards in a physical game with big hits.

This is what Les is trying to say. Even if the SEC was weaker from top to bottom than the Pac-10, the SEC would still be a tougher conference to play through due to the physical nature of the conference..

[Blue Hen]

That is ridiculous

[aufan59]

There is a reason why its only SEC coaches that beat their own drum: They can say it while being completely honest. PAC-10 coaches don't come out and say that the Pac-10 is the toughest because it's simply not true. People will catch them on it and unlike everyone here, they have an actual reputation to protect.

[HellYeahHokie]

I have a hypothesis that the SEC's need to proclaim its superiority is deeply-rooted in the history of the South, which still feels the need to prove itself 150 years after losing the Civil War. I think people who are boastful are actually masking a deeper inferiority complex.

Just a theory.

[aufan59]

If the SEC wasn't the best and the PAC-10 was, the forum would have "Pete Carroll Beating the SEC Drum" and "Same Old PAC-10 arguments" on the forum.

The reason why everyone hates the SEC is because they are the best. 50% of the posters don't have this fixation on a conference that is just average because it is average. They hate it because the SEC is the best and that bothers them for some reason.

Its why people hate the Yankees, Pats and Lakers. Its why people hated Spurrier. Why they hated Miami and USC. You don't get haters unless you are at the top, which is where the SEC is.

Nobody would care if it was the PAC-10 saying the same things because everyone knows its not true. People would just laugh it off, not spend hours researching obscure facts such as number of LBs in the NFL HOF.

[CJHawkeyes]

I don't hate the SEC nor do I have a problem with the opinion that it is the strongest conference. That said, I think the SEC's alleged superiorty negligible.

[Blue Hen]

Mr. AUfan,

Please give us a list of all the physically punishing linebackers and defensive backs produced by the physical SEC that were good enough, physical enough and punishing enough to go on to an NFL Hall Of Fame career. There surely are dozens of them in the HOF since the SEC has been so physically punishing for 74 years now.....but just list a few so that we can get a good sense of your claim.
BTW, there are plenty of HOF DBs and LBs from the "two hand touch" conference, but the SEC list must be massive. Anxiously awaiting the list...thanks.

[Blue Hen]

" Mississippi State will at least force you to grind out yards in a physical game with big hits "

Yeah Boy !!!...
Looking over MSU's non conference games in recent seasons I see that BYU laid 69 points on those hard hitting MSU Bulldogs in 2 games. Tulane laid 32 and 31 in 03 & 06. West Virginia went up and down the field at will ( 42 points) last season. 'Two Hand Touch' Oregon scored 78 points in 2 games in 02 and 03......and on and on. Oh ..forgot about 2004 when the weakest team in the Atlantic 10 ( 1AA league ) went down to Starkville and whipped the hard hitting MSU bulldogs. That, of course, would be the mighty Black Bears of the University of Maine.

Maybe MSU frightens SEC teams with it's brutal hitting but it has lost 7 games to mid-majors and one game to 1AAs in the 2000s.

[Blue Hen]

I really don't hate the SEC either, CJH, but I find SEC fiction and mythology very entertaining.

[HellYeahHokie]

I don't hate the SEC. I love the SEC.

But I don't think the SEC is the best conference from year to year. And I know the SEC isn't nearly as dominant as SEC fans think it is.

The reason that people spend time (not hours researching, because it really doesn't take that long) pulling out statistics about SEC records, is because SEC fans like yourself refuse to face facts, and instead rely on hype.

Case in point, your comment about the Pac-10 being touch-football, while Mississippi State is so much better and physcially tougher. The same MSU that lost the the jauggernaut Maine Black Bears...AT HOME!!!

That right there is the perfect example of SEC hype vs SEC reality. Which you will still refuse to acknowledge because instead of statistics and records you will rely on the tried-and-true SEC fan arguement: "The SEC is best because I said so."

[Trojangles]

Yeah, Les ("We've got to do something about USC") Miles and the rest of the SEC homers are at it again, telling anyone who will listen about the SEC's overwhelming dominance of college football and how weak the Pac-10 (and every other conference) is by comparison.

Trouble is, these tub-thumpers consistently avoid discussing the results of head to head meetings between the two conferences in recent years. It's easy to see why---The Pac-10 leads with 8 wins to 6 losses, as follows:

2000
UCLA 35, Alabama 24

2001
UCLA 20, Alabama 17

2002
Oregon 36, Mississippi State 13
Southern California 24, Auburn 17

2003
LSU 59, Arizona 13
Oregon 43, Mississippi State 34
Southern California 23, Auburn 0

2004
LSU 22, Oregon State 21

2005
LSU 35, Arizona State 31
Southern California 70, Arkansas 17

2006
Auburn 40, Washington State 14
LSU 45, Arizona 3
Southern California 50, Arkansas 14
Tennessee 35, California 18

Any way you slice it, the Pac-10 has been more than competitive in head to head meetings with the SEC in recent years. But, hey, who would want to crow about that?

[Blue Hen]

What do you think, au59fan ? How can the hard hitt'n SEC boys only post a 43% success rate vs the 'two hand touch boys' this decade ?


I know..the SEC leads all time in head to head...but they somehow just decide to stop hitting in the 2000s ?

[sc69er]

equation and also take out LSU, the best team in the SEC the last 4 years or so, you wind up with PX 4 SEC 2. No other way to say it, the PX is the better conference. And will demonstrate it again this year.

[Blue Hen]

Be careful there......that sounds like something these SEC types would say. IMO, there is no 'better' conference. The overall quality of play among the 6 BCS leagues is pretty equal with the B10,P10, ACC & SEC having a bit more talent density ( at least by NFL standards ) than the B12 & BE.

[sc69er]

like the SEC honks, it was supposed to! The quality of play ebbs and flows in each conference year to year. A few years back the ACC was undoubtably the top conference and before that the BXII was top dog. With their scheduling exentricities the SEC makes it hard to identify when they are on top but this next year doesn't seem like a good one for the SEC fans. I think that the PX may be very good this year with as many as 7 bowl teams and 2 BCS participants--a lot of teams bringing back a lot of talent. The BX may be on an upswing also but they have caught the SEC scheduling disease so it will be hard to sort out.

[TommyTrojan]

I don't hate the SEC nor do I have a problem with the opinion that it is the strongest conference. That said, I think the SEC's alleged superiorty negligible.

What's so funny to me is that these SEC guys alwys seem to focus on USC and their supposed "Easy" path to a national title. It just burns them so much that this school on the left coast has become powerful again. Why not focus on Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State??? Their schedules have been every bit as "easy" as USC's.

Getting pummled on the field by a bunch of organic food eating, surfers has brought out the worst in them

[Hubbs]

They brag like 2002 was a blowout or something but it wasnt. 7 point game and Auburn lost its starting RB at halftime with bad cramps. He had 93 yards when he went down at the half.
That said WSU wasnt physical at all last season! Auburn's offensive line dominated theirs and vise versa. I never once felt threatened by WSU last season after the game started. WSU went toe to toe with USC last season all be it at WSU. The next week Auburn went to Mississippi State and had a hard time moving the ball.

You haters of the SEC need to know that if Auburn goes undefeated this season they WILL be in the NC game. Nations #2 hardest road schedule PSEG. As well as the nations #5 hardest schedule overall. But they play Tennessee Tech so automatically the other 11 games dont count...ha!

[GatorGrad]

I don't see what all the fuss here is about. Miles is an SEC Coach speaking up on behalf of his conference. Of course he's biased. What coach isn't? I personally do not think that the SEC is by far the most dominating conference in college football. But I do think it was the best this past season going 6-3 in bowls including Florida and LSU crushing Ohio St and Notre Dame in BCS Games. So if Les Miles is backing the SEC right now, the results from the most recent season certainly back him up. Of course it could be different in 2007...time will tell.

[sc69er]

Auburn goes 8-4/7-5 this year. You lose to South Fla, LSU, Ark, and either UGa or Fla. You may lose to Kst. A brand new offensive line and an average(for Auburn) defense are the culprits. Borges can't do it with no talent.

[GatorGrad]

Also, the SEC is 3-0 in BCS Championship Games:

Tennessee in 1998
LSU in 2003
Florida in 2006

And Florida and LSU won the BCS Title despite a regular season loss to another SEC team (LSU lost to Florida in 2003, and Florida lost to Auburn in 2006.) The conference is unbeaten in BCS Title Game opportunities. When the SEC has produced a "championship worthy team," they have proven themselves in the big game 100% of the time. Unfortunately, we'll never know how Auburn '04 would have done if given a shot in the big game.

Also, the SEC has three BCS Champs in nine BCS Title Games. That's the most of any conference, and I also think that the conference depth is displayed by the fact that the three titles were all won by three separate teams. Not just one. No conference has produced as many BCS Champs, or as many separate BCS Championship Schools.

Does this mean that the SEC is by far the best conference in the country? No. But I think it certainly speaks volumes about the depth of the conference in regards to the # of quality programs that are capable of competing for the MNC.

[sc69er]

Million $$$ Coachs--Saban, Meyers, Spurrior, Fulmer, Miles, Richt, Tubberville and maybe Nutt and Ogeron. Each of these Million dollar coachs fill a large stadium each saturday, hence the SEC has the most money. The SEC is the best at the College football business!

[Blue Hen]

The SEC teams have performed very impressively in those 3 BCS PSEG MNCs.....or whatever they're supposed to be.....also in most of those BCS PSEGs. However, those 3 games represent less than 2 percent of the SEC's total interaction with the other BCS leagues. Add in the other 98% of these games and you get a perfectly 'average' 80-80 inter -BCS record for the conference......even less remarkable when you consider the SEC's huge numerical home/relative home field advantage.
I know that you fully realize, GG, that 100% of something will tell you more than 2% of something......because you are an astute SEC fan, relative to most.

[GatorGrad]

Yes, I understand that it's a small sample. But I am just pointing out results in the BCS Title Games, the biggest of all bowl games. The SEC is unbeaten (3-0) in such games. When the SEC has produced a MNC contender, they have taken care of business 100% of the time in the big game on the biggest stage. They are the only conference to produce three BCS Champions (one-third of all BCS Champs,) and three separate BCS Champions. That fact cannot be ignored. It shows the depth of the conference as it's not just a one or two team conference. Had Auburn gotten their chance in 2004, and had Florida not ruined Georgia's chance in 2002 by giving them their only loss, it could be 4-0 or 5-0! As I said before, I do not think that the SEC is head and shoulders above all other conferences. Certainly, there is a lot of parity and these things go in cycles. But I do think it was the best last season given their 6-3 bowl record and BCS Bowl Game performances. If even sc69er can admit it, then you know it must be true!


:)

[Don]

Trouble is, these tub-thumpers consistently avoid discussing the results of head to head meetings between the two conferences in recent years. It's easy to see why---The Pac-10 leads with 8 wins to 6 losses, as follows:
.....
Any way you slice it, the Pac-10 has been more than competitive in head to head meetings with the SEC in recent years. But, hey, who would want to crow about that?

NO they haven't in RECENT years.

Why is 7 years your definition of "recent"?

Wouldn't the last 3 years be "recent"?
Over the span 2004-06 the SEC is 5-2 vs the PAC 10.

Over the span 2003-06 the SEC is 6-4 vs the PAC 10.
Over the span 2002-06 the SEC is 6-6 vs the PAC 10.
Over the span 2001-06 the SEC is 6-7 vs the PAC 10. ***
Over the span 2000-06 the SEC is 6-8 vs the PAC 10. *** your pick
no games in 1998 or 1997
Over the span 1997-06 the SEC is 7-8 vs the PAC 10.
Over the span 1996-06 the SEC is 8-8 vs the PAC 10.

Beyond this the SEC NEVER had a losing record vs the PAC 10.

The current SEC vs PAC 10 record is 59-36-5.

Why do you conveniently pick 2000-2006? Because it is the only span where the SEC has a losing record vs the PAC 10!!

You PAC 10 guys are amazing!

[String911]

Some things never change.

[Trojangles]

" . . . Why do you conveniently pick 2000-2006? Because it is the only span where the SEC has a losing record vs the PAC 10! . . . You PAC 10 guys are amazing!

Well, Don, I felt, with the new millennium and all, it made some sense. You know, starting with year 2000, recent history and all.

Now you want to quibble . . . Kind of amazing you're reduced to doing that, Don, what with the SEC being so overwhelmingly great . . . to be trailing a bunch of cupcakes like the Pac-10. But, even if we take your accounting for the period 1996-2006, the two conferences are dead even . . . So, where's the dominance you folks keep crowing about?

But, don't dispair . . . Most folks realize SEC fans find a way to disregard results they don't like.

[Don]

Well, Don, I felt, with the new millennium and all, it made some sense. You know, starting with year 2000, recent history and all.

Now you want to quibble . . . Kind of amazing you're reduced to doing that, Don, what with the SEC being so overwhelmingly great . . . to be trailing a bunch of cupcakes like the Pac-10. But, even if we take your accounting for the period 1996-2006, the two conferences are dead even . . . So, where's the dominance you folks keep crowing about?

But, don't dispair . . . Most folks realize SEC fans find a way to disregard results they don't like.

Why not pick the last 1 year as recent? The SEC wins!
Why not pick the last 2 years as recent? The SEC wins!
Why not pick the last 3 years as recent? The SEC wins!
Why not pick the last 4 years as recent? The SEC wins!

Where's the quibbling? The SEC is the winner.

From 2000 to 2003 the PAC 10 won 6 straight games vs the SEC. In these games the PAC 10 teams were a combined 51-24 and the SEC teams were a combined 32-41. In all 6 games the PAC 10 team had the better record. Take out those 6 games and there would be NO time from from 1 year to 100 years where the PAC 10 had a NON-LOSING record vs the SEC.

It isn't quibbling for you to pick the only time frame in the past 100 years where the PAC 10 has a winning record to prove the PAC 10 is on par with the SEC but it is quibbling for me to pick the other 94 years to show the PAC 10 isn't on par with the SEC? Give me a break!

PS. Just in case you missed it the millennium started in Jan 1,2001.

[Hubbs]

Auburn goes 8-4/7-5 this year. You lose to South Fla, LSU, Ark, and either UGa or Fla. You may lose to Kst. A brand new offensive line and an average(for Auburn) defense are the culprits. Borges can't do it with no talent.

I never said Auburn would go undefeated. I have Aubie going 9-3 myself. You have no clue whatsoever about Auburn's defense. We boast one of the SEC's best young defensive lines that goes 3 deep across the board. Which means we will be fresh come the 4th quarter. With Groves standing up at the LOLB and Tray Blackmon at the other OLB Auburn will be tough. We do lose David Irons but we have quality depth not excellent depth there. Offensive line isnt as young as you think it is. Jason Bosley has started several games at center and is a sig upgrade from Joe Cope at center. Jonathan Palmer wasnt that great at RT last season either. Leon Hart (bust) hasnt lived up to the hype since he arrived at Auburn so the RT is really the only ? I see. Tyronne Greene is a future all-sec Guard to replace Grubbs. Only weak spot (talent-wise not experience) for Auburn is WR. Hopefully Tim Hawthorne (alabama #7 overall prospect in '06 class) will step up from his red shirt and help out. All Cox needs is a good possession reciever and this offense will be good.

[Blue Hen]

Trojangles and Don

Can you guys give me the head to head P10/SEC record in the BCS era ( 1998-2006 ) and break it down by home/away match ups.

Also Don, regarding that all time head to head record, could you please offer the # of home SEC games and home P10 games ?

Thanks, guys

[Blue Hen]

Agree about those SEC teams really shining in those 3 'big stage' games but I don't see how that proves anything about 'depth of conference'. Drawing any conclusions about anything from a 1.8% sample just doesn't work. Heck, MWC and WAC teams are a perfect 1000% in BCS bowls games. Does that prove something ?....or say some something about mid-major depth ? No, it just tells you what terrific individual teams those two were. Small, select samples....useless.
Now, regarding 'depth' of conference, I took a look at all 12 SEC teams and their performance vs other BCS leagues (BCS era). Even with a huge overall home field advantage .....
GG, believe it or not, but only 4 of the 12 SEC teams can claim a winning record vs the other BCS leagues ..that's 33 % of the SEC. THERE is your true SEC 'depth of conference'

SEC teams inter-BCS success rates
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Arkansas - .300
Alabama - .375
S.Carolina - .375
Florida - .400
Auburn -.400
Miss State -.444
Mississippi -.444
Kentucky - .500
Tennessee - .600
Vanderbilt -.636
LSU - .727
Georgia - .800

SEC ( 80-80 ) .500

Now, no need to point out that such and such played tough BCS opponents and this or that team played more manageable opponents etc.....I'm fully aware of all that. It's the big, overall, SEC picture that tells you things, and this 160 game , BCS era sample features a very fair balance of relative match-ups ( you've got Vandy-Michigan type games and you've also got plenty of Tennessee-Duke type games ). The only thing that is out of balance is the SEC's enormous home/relative home advantage which makes the 'depth of conference' from this perspective kind of underwhelming.

[buckeyejim]

Most era comparisons are done decade-by-decade. For example...

1950-1959
1960-1969
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009

...and so on.

If someone wants to research W-L records of the SEC vs the Pac-10 it only seems logical to use the decade-by-decade method to see the numbers. Just my opinion.

[Blue Hen]

All Time
BCS ERA
Decades
.....they all make some sense to me

[Trojangles]

Trojangles and Don

Can you guys give me the head to head P10/SEC record in the BCS era ( 1998-2006 ) and break it down by home/away match ups.

Also Don, regarding that all time head to head record, could you please offer the # of home SEC games and home P10 games ?

Thanks, guys


Blue, I'm giving you an additional year, so there's a full 10 year period (1997-2006), which adds just one more game:

Road & Home
@ Pac-10 Sites = 7
@ SEC Sites = 8

1997
Tennesse 30, @ UCLA 24

1998
No Meetings

1999
No Meetings

2000
@ UCLA 35, Alabama 24

2001
UCLA 20, @ Alabama 17

2002
@ Oregon 36, Mississippi State 13
@ Southern California 24, Auburn 17

2003
LSU 59, @ Arizona 13
Oregon 43, @ Mississippi State 34
Southern California 23, @ Auburn 0

2004
@ LSU 22, Oregon State 21

2005
LSU 35, @ Arizona State 31
@ Southern California 70, Arkansas 17

2006
@ Auburn 40, Washington State 14
@ LSU 45, Arizona 3
Southern California 50, @ Arkansas 14
@ Tennessee 35, California 18

Footnotes:
(1) The Pac-10 won four of the seven games played at home, and four of the eight played on the road.
(2) Katrina caused the shift of the 2005 LSU-ASU game, which had originally been scheduled as an LSU home game.

[Blue Hen]

thanks tj
Looks very competitive to me. Imo the talent level and quality of play in those two leagues is quite equal. A powerful P10 team would be powerful in the SEC and vice versa.

[EvilVodka]

What's so funny to me is that these SEC guys alwys seem to focus on USC and their supposed "Easy" path to a national title. It just burns them so much that this school on the left coast has become powerful again. Why not focus on Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State???


Bingo...nothing has been quite as easy as the Big XII path...this has been a pathetic league over the last few years...this coming year should be better though

The Big 10 has taken a step back and has alot to prove as well

[EvilVodka]

I don't hate the SEC. I love the SEC.

But I don't think the SEC is the best conference from year to year. And I know the SEC isn't nearly as dominant as SEC fans think it is.

The reason that people spend time (not hours researching, because it really doesn't take that long) pulling out statistics about SEC records, is because SEC fans like yourself refuse to face facts, and instead rely on hype.

Case in point, your comment about the Pac-10 being touch-football, while Mississippi State is so much better and physcially tougher. The same MSU that lost the the jauggernaut Maine Black Bears...AT HOME!!!

That right there is the perfect example of SEC hype vs SEC reality. Which you will still refuse to acknowledge because instead of statistics and records you will rely on the tried-and-true SEC fan arguement: "The SEC is best because I said so."

Actually, the SEC is the best because of coaching...and I know the anti-SEC argument is strong on this board, but the SEC was the strongest conference last year, and will probably be again this year, because its loaded with great coaches

Its not a good time to be an anti-SEC fan

(Trivia: how many current coaches in the SEC have National Championship rings?)

[EvilVodka]

thanks tj
Looks very competitive to me. Imo the talent level and quality of play in those two leagues is quite equal. A powerful P10 team would be powerful in the SEC and vice versa.

Also depends on the schedule you get....LSU dodges Georgia and Tennessee next year (unless they play them in the SEC Championship)

The PAC 10 schedule can actually be more brutal, especially now that its 9 games and you don't get to dodge anyone

[TommyTrojan]

Actually, the SEC is the best because of coaching...and I know the anti-SEC argument is strong on this board, but the SEC was the strongest conference last year, and will probably be again this year, because its loaded with great coaches

Its not a good time to be an anti-SEC fan

(Trivia: how many current coaches in the SEC have National Championship rings?)

IMO, the SEC was the best league last year, and has been the best on many years in the last 20 yrs or so.

I just don't understand all the conference pride. Is there some award given out for the best conference? Really....who gives a isht?

[sc69er]

Schedule this year in that all of the tough games are played at Baton Rouge. I think the Less Miles knows this and is startig his media campaign to deify the SEC in order to compensate for the week schedule!

[aufan59]

Mr. AUfan,

Please give us a list of all the physically punishing linebackers and defensive backs produced by the physical SEC that were good enough, physical enough and punishing enough to go on to an NFL Hall Of Fame career. There surely are dozens of them in the HOF since the SEC has been so physically punishing for 74 years now.....but just list a few so that we can get a good sense of your claim.
BTW, there are plenty of HOF DBs and LBs from the "two hand touch" conference, but the SEC list must be massive. Anxiously awaiting the list...thanks.

Thats grabbing at straws, and to be honest, the worst statistic brought up in an argument I have ever witnessed. You keep repeating it because you can't stand the SEC being on top and you have to find some way to prove it. Very desperate that you had to go as far as the HOF for an argument.

" Mississippi State will at least force you to grind out yards in a physical game with big hits "

Yeah Boy !!!...
Looking over MSU's non conference games in recent seasons I see that BYU laid 69 points on those hard hitting MSU Bulldogs in 2 games. Tulane laid 32 and 31 in 03 & 06. West Virginia went up and down the field at will ( 42 points) last season. 'Two Hand Touch' Oregon scored 78 points in 2 games in 02 and 03......and on and on. Oh ..forgot about 2004 when the weakest team in the Atlantic 10 ( 1AA league ) went down to Starkville and whipped the hard hitting MSU bulldogs. That, of course, would be the mighty Black Bears of the University of Maine.

Maybe MSU frightens SEC teams with it's brutal hitting but it has lost 7 games to mid-majors and one game to 1AAs in the 2000s.
You can hit hard and lose. Its a style of Football, not a way to win every game.


Case in point, your comment about the Pac-10 being touch-football, while Mississippi State is so much better and physcially tougher. The same MSU that lost the the jauggernaut Maine Black Bears...AT HOME!!!

That right there is the perfect example of SEC hype vs SEC reality. Which you will still refuse to acknowledge because instead of statistics and records you will rely on the tried-and-true SEC fan arguement: "The SEC is best because I said so."
Lets take my comparison: 3-9 MSU vs 6-6 WSU. Kenny Irons averaged 9.8 per carry against WSU and 3.3 per against MSU. The scoring margin was similar, but the difference in how Auburn could run the ball was not. Auburn could man handled WSU's DL but not MSU's. This is the difference in physical play I am talking about. WSU and MSU were both cake walks, but MSU makes the schedule tougher due to being more physical.

Getting pushed out of bounds doesn't cause as much soreness as getting leveled in bounds. Just ask Arizona's QB how physical LSU's defense was.


What's so funny to me is that these SEC guys alwys seem to focus on USC and their supposed "Easy" path to a national title. It just burns them so much that this school on the left coast has become powerful again. Why not focus on Texas, Oklahoma, Ohio State??? Their schedules have been every bit as "easy" as USC's.

Getting pummled on the field by a bunch of organic food eating, surfers has brought out the worst in them
Its just annoying to see USC trample all over the PAC-10 for MNCs just like Florida State did to the ACC.

All Time
BCS ERA
Decades
.....they all make some sense to me
Which is why you spend time researching all of them, compare the numbers, and then only use the numbers from the time period that fits your argument

IMO, the SEC was the best league last year, and has been the best on many years in the last 20 yrs or so.

I just don't understand all the conference pride. Is there some award given out for the best conference? Really....who gives a isht?

Because it costs teams chances at playing in BCS National Title games. SEC was 'weak' in '04 and 'strong' in '06. It makes a difference.

If you go back and read, my point was that the TOUGHEST conference was the SEC. There are multiple factors to being the toughest conference, and its not just conference strength. The overall coaching, home field advantage, physical play and quality teams are what make it tough. As long as the SEC is as competitive as the other conferences, even if its slightly behind the others, it will be the toughest conference.

One game doesn't let teams experience what its like to go through a full SEC slate. A two hand touch team might beat a tackle team, but when two hand touch plays two hand touch, A LOT less injuries, bruises, soreness, etc. results than when two tackle teams play.

Despite the SEC's perceived old school approach to offense, they still have the highest amount of QB injuries on average. Its physical in the SEC, which is why its so tough.

[terpintime]

Last season, we were badgered with how much FASTER the SEC players were. This year, it's how much TOUGHER they are...Maybe they should let up on each other so they can muster a better OOC record against their fellow BCS foes...Or better yet, maybe they could show some real conviction and take their superior game on the road against quality competition. That would be novel...All that home cooking got this dialogue started. And to think it only resulted in a meager edge in victories against BCS opponents...The endless rationalizations posted on this board by you and your ilk certainly reflect intense passion for your conference, if not insight into the reality of padded records and rankings for its members.

[Blue Hen]

Good point. Also,that league definitely feasts much less on 1AAs than the SEC and less than the other BCS conferences.

[Blue Hen]

You are truly full of it aufan. Please give us statistical evidence that there are far more injuries in SEC ball than anywhere else (per capita).....including the Ivy League. Perceptions and imagery..........that's what drives you. If you can produce that ( and nothing from an SEC site ) I surely will apologize for doubting you.

Soooooo...apparently you couldn't find one single ex SEC LB or DB that was tough, physical , hard hitting, and good enough to make it to Canton ? Surely not.

[Hubbs]

Last season, we were badgered with how much FASTER the SEC players were. This year, it's how much TOUGHER they are...Maybe they should let up on each other so they can muster a better OOC record against their fellow BCS foes...Or better yet, maybe they could show some real conviction and take their superior game on the road against quality competition. That would be novel...All that home cooking got this dialogue started. And to think it only resulted in a meager edge in victories against BCS opponents...The endless rationalizations posted on this board by you and your ilk certainly reflect intense passion for your conference, if not insight into the reality of padded records and rankings for its members.

I usually dont get into this but that post made me laugh. Teams up around Maryland wont schedule Auburn unless its a 3 game series 2 of which being away. Does that make sense.

I swear you guys hatred of the south - Is it because we got bigger ones than you do. Its genetics thats all.

[Blue Hen]

You mean mouths ? :-)


Its a good thing for Auburn that more OOC games vs BCS opponents aren't scheduled, given that AU plays .746 ball within the relative safety of the SEC and only .429 ball when it steps out (vs BCS)

[HellYeahHokie]

WSU and MSU were both cake walks, but MSU makes the schedule tougher due to being more physical

Well, thank goodness Auburn didn't have to play Maine then. God knows what a physical matchup that would have been.

You aren't fooling anyone with this SEC hype..except maybe yourselves.

[HellYeahHokie]

I usually dont get into this but that post made me laugh. Teams up around Maryland wont schedule Auburn unless its a 3 game series 2 of which being away. Does that make sense.

I swear you guys hatred of the south - Is it because we got bigger ones than you do. Its genetics thats all.

Actually, Virginia Tech is up around Maryland and scheduled Auburn for a Home-and-Home. But Auburn backed out of the deal.

Keep throwing out unsupported facts if it helps you feel better.

[EvilVodka]

Schedule this year in that all of the tough games are played at Baton Rouge. I think the Less Miles knows this and is startig his media campaign to deify the SEC in order to compensate for the week schedule!

If Virginia Tech wasn't on the schedule, then I'd agree with you...but VT legitimizes the schedule...this is basically a playoff game early in the season

dodging Georgia and Tennessee is huge IMO...although the Alabama game is going to be especially huge this year....if LSU wants to ever get back to the National Championship game, this year sets up well for them

[terpintime]

I recall a certain Mr. Clausen who played quarterback against those TOUGH SEC defenses several years ago. After playing the Maryland Terrapins in the Peach Bowl, he remarked that he couldn't remember the last time the Vols had been beaten so badly physically...

[Hail to the Victors Valiant]

I have a hypothesis that the SEC's need to proclaim its superiority is deeply-rooted in the history of the South, which still feels the need to prove itself 150 years after losing the Civil War. I think people who are boastful are actually masking a deeper inferiority complex.

Just a theory.

I could not agree more. That theory is well tested to be almost be considered as proven. Even right after 9-11, many people from the South were hating on them Yankees to the north.

[buckeyejim]

I live in the South and I see sooooo many confederate flags it's almost laughable. It's amazing how people want to take pride for a wrong and losing cause.

[TommyTrojan]

Its just annoying to see USC trample all over the PAC-10 for MNCs just like Florida State did to the ACC.

SC has had a lot more struggles in the Pac Ten than OOC play in the last 5 seasons. Colorado, Iowa, Auburn, Oklahoma, Michigan(x2), Arkansas(x2), and ND(x4) have been pummelled out of league.

I do feel styles make leagues, and perhaps each league knows their conference's best better than another league would.

[HellYeahHokie]

Wow. How funny that you are the one agreeing with me.

[sc69er]

If Virginia Tech wasn't on the schedule, then I'd agree with you...but VT legitimizes the schedule...this is basically a playoff game early in the season

dodging Georgia and Tennessee is huge IMO...although the Alabama game is going to be especially huge this year....if LSU wants to ever get back to the National Championship game, this year sets up well for them

Good teams lose on the road in conference, its just a law of div-1a football. LSU plays MSU, Ole Miss, Kentucky, and alabama on the road--thats it! They get VaTech at Baton Rouge where they almost never lose--they have a cake walk.

[GatorGrad]

Good teams lose on the road in conference, its just a law of div-1a football. LSU plays MSU, Ole Miss, Kentucky, and alabama on the road--thats it! They get VaTech at Baton Rouge where they almost never lose--they have a cake walk.

I wouldn't call a schedule that includes VaTech, Alabama, Florida, Auburn, Arkansas, South Carolina, and an SEC Title Game against another likely solid SEC East Championship Team like Tenn, Georgia, or Florida a "cake walk." I hope you're joking.

[Blue Hen]

And Bjim, Southern US history and heritage covers about..what ? 325 years ?yet the Confederacy was for about 4 of those years.....about 1% of total Southern history. So it is comical and a little sad that some of these folks focus on 1% of their so called 'Southern Heritage' as the reason for flying that dumb flag.
Did you read HYH's theory about why Southeasterners try so very hard to hype up and over inflate SEC FB ? He thinks it might be related to an inferiority complex rooted in the Civil War. Sometimes that seems plausable to me.

[aufan59]

Its just annoying to see USC trample all over the PAC-10 for MNCs just like Florida State did to the ACC.

SC has had a lot more struggles in the Pac Ten than OOC play in the last 5 seasons. Colorado, Iowa, Auburn, Oklahoma, Michigan(x2), Arkansas(x2), and ND(x4) have been pummelled out of league.

I do feel styles make leagues, and perhaps each league knows their conference's best better than another league would.

FSU had Miami and Florida OOC every year and sometimes another tough team. Much more difficult than USC's OOC.

[HellYeahHokie]

Much more difficult than USC's OOC.

Good point. USC was playing Auburn and Arkansas.

[tigercpa]

As if he was taking notes from SEC fans themselves:

http://www.2theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/8267042.html

I don't think there's anything wrong with a coach trumping up his league. Of course, he should. And certainly the SEC is a tough league.

However, when he starts calling out USC because they have so many easy teams compared to his teams schedule, it shows he's gone from SEC cheerleader to delusional fan. He mocks USC's games against "juggarnauts" UCLA, Stanford, Cal-Berkely, and Washington, etc. Saying they have only a couple of tough games per year. Meanwhile, LSU's schedule has "juggernauts", Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tulane, Middle Tennessee, Kentucky, and Louisiana Tech. That takes some brass ones to mock USC's light teams. Which isn't to say that LSU doesn't have a few tough opponents. Florida, Auburn, and VT should be formidable opponents, but they are all played at home.

And even calling USC out because they play in an easier conference than the SEC is pretty absurd considering what the Trojans have done to SEC opponents when they've played them recently. Somebody at Arkansas and Auburn might want to remind Les Miles how difficult the SEC has been for USC recently.

It's pretty funny. The conference debate is good fodder for message boards like this, but it's kinda sad when a coach opens his mouth and regurgitates the same old arguments that aren't based in a lot of reality.

It's sad commentary...Miles is just walking the party line here (mythology as Hen says) and largely parroting what gets blasted around the internet by the SEC hordes - and some of the mainstream media as well.

He certainly is making those excuses early in the year.

The league schedule consists of just eight regular season games, which means that four teams are missed on a regular basis. So the big boys don't really have to play each other every year.

For instance, this year LSU will play Florida, Auburn and Arkansas. It will pepper the rest of its schedule with historical SEC bottom-feeders Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Kentucky and SC, while adding a non-conference schedule that includes Middle Tennesse State, Louisiana Tech and Tulane.

The SEC is certainly a tough league. There is a big case to be made that while some of the elite SEC teams may have four or five relatively tough games, the rest of the schedule is quite conducive to preparing for those games.

Conversely, the Pac-10 plays a round-robin schedule, where no team is missed. What's more, the conference tends to schedule tougher out-of-conference opponents and also plays more road games. This more than tips the schedule toughness ledger squarely in the Pac-10's corner.

This is why every year we see football guru Phil Steele rate the Pac-10 schedules as the nation's toughest.

This year's toughest schedules, according to Steele:

1. Washington
2. USC
3. Wsahington State
4. Arizona
5. UCLA
6. Stanford
7. Oregon State
8. California
9. Duke
10. Texas A&M
11. Oregon
15. Arizona State

The 8 toughest schedules and 10 of the top 15.

[GatorGrad]

The league schedule consists of just eight regular season games, which means that four teams are missed on a regular basis. So the big boys don't really have to play each other every year.

Actually, it means that THREE (not four) teams are missed out of 11 possible opponents. Also, the conference championship game means that the road for any National Title contender coming through the SEC includes one extra 9th conference game against a likely solid team. So an SEC Champion will have played as many conference games (9) as any PAC 10 team as Florida did last year. The only two schools in the SEC that Florida did NOT have to play? Ole Miss and Miss St. So you see, it can work both ways the way they rotate the schedule. And having the CCG ensures that it is not possible to win the SEC without playing the 2nd best team in the conference. You either played them in your 5 division games, or if they happened to be in the opposite division, you play them in the CCG. That's why I love the CCG format.

[tigercpa]

I just hate the CCG format, it's nothing more than a money grab.

Give me round robin any day. Make conference team limits at 10 schools, play round robin and 2 quality OOC games.

I enjoy your posts GG, a real respite from most SEC RULZ types!

[GatorGrad]

I like round robin scheduling as well and wouldn't mind it AS LONG AS there was a clear tiebreaker in place for teams finishing with identical records such as head to head followed by whatever rules are put into place. Other than the exciting race and championship game hoopla that a CCG format creates, the other thing I love about the CCG format is that it guarantees one, and only one, true conference champion. No co-champs or three teams ordering rings and hanging banners at the end of the year. It's bad enough that we have to deal with that nonsense at the National Championship level. No reason why we should have to deal with it at the CONFERENCE Championship level when there are no more than 12 teams to sort through.

[HellYeahHokie]

While he's blasting the Pac10 and the Big12, he actually praises the ACC as a good conference.

This just shows that he's basing his ideas on perception.

On paper, the ACC should be a tough league. But let's face it, for the past 3-4 years, Miami and FSU are not the teams they once were. Everyone assumed when the ACC expanded, that the combination of VT, UM, and FSU at the top of the conference, with some relatively solid middle teams, and really only 2 doormats in Duke and Wake Forest (see where that perception got?).

But the ACC just hasn't been as good as advertised. So Les Miles's comments are so obviously based on perception than results, that he has no credibility.

However, I think he's just doing early what Urban Meyer did late last year. Start beating the SEC hype drum, because it <b>will</b> affect voters. Florida proved it last year. I think this goes way beyond booster pep talk. I think it's specifically designed to keep LSU in the championship picture....which he's gonna need after VT beats them up early on. :)

[GatorGrad]

....which he's gonna need after VT beats them up early on. :)

I can't wait for Sept 8th VT @ LSU. That's going to be a treat to watch. Should be a slugfest between two solid defensive teams.