Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

historian said:

---

True. But the same could be said of the SEC, Big 10, & ACC. It's a down year for everyone.

---

This. The second tier of all conferences is meh. College football in general is meh right now below the top four or five teams, and even they are way down compared to their peers of past years. That's why we saw so much parity this season.

But Aberzombie just couldn't miss another opportunity to **** all over the Big 12. It's what he does.

---

We saw all of that "parity" with the final four CFP teams, huh?

Separately, several posters here hide behind claims of parity and other inaccurate claims in order to avoid holding the Big 12 accountable. The conference can and should do better, and ragging on other conferences won't change that reality.

---

Yes, we did.

The two teams that would have been selected by the BCS formula got manhandled in their quarterfinal games. And two of the current semifinalists wouldn't have made a four-team playoff because they lost games that would have been disqualifying in the past.

If you don't think that parity is at an all-time high in college football, you haven't been paying a damn lick of attention. But that's not the least bit surprising given that it was exactly that parity that shot every single one of your erroneous SEC opinions to **** this season.

Does that mean there aren't a few teams that are better than the rest? No. But the gap is narrower than it's ever been. And it will only continue to narrow if the current forces on the sport are allowed to act unencumbered and current trends are allowed to progress organically.

And ****ting on the Big 12 when our champion was the only non-favorite team in the playoff to have a chance to win -- they actually dominated Texas for 2 1/2 quarters -- is such a ***** move. Albeit predictable.

The Big 12's top three teams showed better than any league's but the Big Ten's this year. To continue to trash the league in the face of that fact is so on brand.

You've been wrong about everything all season. You just refuse to adjust your opinions to match the facts.

bear2be2 said:

---

And ****ting on the Big 12 when our champion was the only non-favorite team in the playoff to have a chance to win -- they actually dominated Texas for 2 1/2 quarters -- is such a ***** move. Albeit predictable.

The Big 12's top three teams showed better than any league's but the Big Ten's this year. To continue to trash the league in the face of that fact is so on brand.

You've been wrong about everything all season. You just refuse to adjust your opinions to match the facts.

---

bear2be2 said:

---

And ****ting on the Big 12 when our champion was the only non-favorite team in the playoff to have a chance to win -- they actually dominated Texas for 2 1/2 quarters -- is such a ***** move. Albeit predictable.

The Big 12's top three teams showed better than any league's but the Big Ten's this year. To continue to trash the league in the face of that fact is so on brand.

You've been wrong about everything all season. You just refuse to adjust your opinions to match the facts.

---

The post that triggered you here was about the 2nd tier of the Big 12 - TCU, Baylor, Tech, Kansas State, and Colorado - so it's not clear why the topic is being redirected to the Big 12 champion. To be clear here, the best P5 out of conference wins from that 2nd tier group (including out of conference games between conference members) were Rutgers, Arizona, and Stanford (i.e. 1 bowl eligible P5) with losses to Arkansas, Washington State, Nebraska, BYU, Utah, and LSU. If you want to argue that that's not meh, please do so as I will not stop you if that's what you believe.

Feel free to continue shift goal posts to meet whatever narrative you would like, but the posters here with stronger critical thinking skills can see what reality is here.

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

historian said:

---

True. But the same could be said of the SEC, Big 10, & ACC. It's a down year for everyone.

---

This. The second tier of all conferences is meh. College football in general is meh right now below the top four or five teams, and even they are way down compared to their peers of past years. That's why we saw so much parity this season.

But Aberzombie just couldn't miss another opportunity to **** all over the Big 12. It's what he does.

---

We saw all of that "parity" with the final four CFP teams, huh?

Separately, several posters here hide behind claims of parity and other inaccurate claims in order to avoid holding the Big 12 accountable. The conference can and should do better, and ragging on other conferences won't change that reality.

---

Yes, we did.

The two teams that would have been selected by the BCS formula got manhandled in their quarterfinal games. And two of the current semifinalists wouldn't have made a four-team playoff because they lost games that would have been disqualifying in the past.

If you don't think that parity is at an all-time high in college football, you haven't been paying a damn lick of attention. But that's not the least bit surprising given that it was exactly that parity that shot every single one of your erroneous SEC opinions to **** this season.

Does that mean there aren't a few teams that are better than the rest? No. But the gap is narrower than it's ever been. And it will only continue to narrow if the current forces on the sport are allowed to act unencumbered and current trends are allowed to progress organically.

---

Again, shifting goal posts, but please continue by all means.

2 of the final four teams were in the top 4 of the AP poll going into the season and all 4 of such teams were in the top 8 of the same poll. Calling that distribution "parity" is a bit much, as that's not outside of the normal distribution of teams.

Separately, teams that "could" have won the title but weren't given the opportunity to do so due to having too many losses or other reasons is a regular occurrence. None of that is new.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

And ****ting on the Big 12 when our champion was the only non-favorite team in the playoff to have a chance to win -- they actually dominated Texas for 2 1/2 quarters -- is such a ***** move. Albeit predictable.

The Big 12's top three teams showed better than any league's but the Big Ten's this year. To continue to trash the league in the face of that fact is so on brand.

You've been wrong about everything all season. You just refuse to adjust your opinions to match the facts.

---

The post that triggered you here was about the 2nd tier of the Big 12 - TCU, Baylor, Tech, Kansas State, and Colorado - so it's not clear why the topic is being redirected to the Big 12 champion. To be clear here, the best P5 out of conference wins from that 2nd tier group (including out of conference games between conference members) were Rutgers, Arizona, and Stanford (i.e. 1 bowl eligible P5) with losses to Arkansas, Washington State, Nebraska, BYU, Utah, and LSU. If you want to argue that that's not meh, please do so as I will not stop you if that's what you believe.

Feel free to continue shift goal posts to meet whatever narrative you would like, but the posters here with stronger critical thinking skills can see what reality is here.

---

Because it's stupid to **** on those teams, too. The Big 12's middle tier was fine. Not great, but not significantly weaker than anyone else's. You choosing to **** on our league specifically is stupid, given that fact. But completely on brand for you.

And I'm not triggered. Just tired of your bull***** You speak like an expert and condescend to everyone here while being wrong about virtually everything.

To use this year to try to justify that the SEC has always been overrated is simply erroneous, but I would have to admit that the landscape has changed and continues to change. Teams in the SEC and certain Big 10 teams are still for the foreseeable future going to have the best recruiting classes, but they're no longer going to be able to stockpile and develop that talent which is what has given them such an advantage in the past.

Any major recruit who hasn't cracked the rotation by his sophomore year is going to look to transfer. That attrition will affect the teams that recruit the best as their former 4 and 5 start recruits will be in high demand everywhere. Former SEC players are all over the college landscape now.

Who knows how this will shake out. I'm glad the players are getting more commensurate compensation for their efforts, but the lack of contracts and ridiculously free movement from team to team is making a joke of college football as we know it.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

historian said:

---

True. But the same could be said of the SEC, Big 10, & ACC. It's a down year for everyone.

---

This. The second tier of all conferences is meh. College football in general is meh right now below the top four or five teams, and even they are way down compared to their peers of past years. That's why we saw so much parity this season.

But Aberzombie just couldn't miss another opportunity to **** all over the Big 12. It's what he does.

---

We saw all of that "parity" with the final four CFP teams, huh?

Separately, several posters here hide behind claims of parity and other inaccurate claims in order to avoid holding the Big 12 accountable. The conference can and should do better, and ragging on other conferences won't change that reality.

---

Yes, we did.

The two teams that would have been selected by the BCS formula got manhandled in their quarterfinal games. And two of the current semifinalists wouldn't have made a four-team playoff because they lost games that would have been disqualifying in the past.

If you don't think that parity is at an all-time high in college football, you haven't been paying a damn lick of attention. But that's not the least bit surprising given that it was exactly that parity that shot every single one of your erroneous SEC opinions to **** this season.

Does that mean there aren't a few teams that are better than the rest? No. But the gap is narrower than it's ever been. And it will only continue to narrow if the current forces on the sport are allowed to act unencumbered and current trends are allowed to progress organically.

---

Again, shifting goal posts, but please continue by all means.

2 of the final four teams were in the top 4 of the AP poll going into the season and all 4 of such teams were in the top 8 of the same poll. Calling that distribution "parity" is a bit much, as that's not outside of the normal distribution of teams.

Separately, teams that "could" have won the title but weren't given the opportunity to do so due to having too many losses or other reasons is a regular occurrence. None of that is new.

---

Tell me the last time the SEC's champ had two regular-season losses. Or the last time the SEC had zero teams finish with less than three losses total, which will likely be the case when Ohio State is through with Texas this week.

Now do the same with the ACC, which had a three-loss champ.

The Big Ten's champion was undefeated. That's the one league that parity hasn't hit, but even that champion got throttled by the league's fourth-place team in the playoff.

If you don't think parity is greater than it's ever been in college football, you're not paying attention. It's really that simple. And the trend is taking us farther in that direction, not the opposite.

Chuckroast said:

---

To use this year to try to justify that the SEC has always been overrated is simply erroneous, but I would have to admit that the landscape has changed and continues to change. Teams in the SEC and certain Big 10 teams are still for the foreseeable future going to have the best recruiting classes, but they're no longer going to be able to stockpile and develop that talent which is what has given them such an advantage in the past.

Any major recruit who hasn't cracked the rotation by his sophomore year is going to look to transfer. That attrition will affect the teams that recruit the best as their former 4 and 5 start recruits will be in high demand everywhere. Former SEC players are all over the college landscape now.

Who knows how this will shake out. I'm glad the players are getting more commensurate compensation for their efforts, but the lack of contracts and ridiculously free movement from team to team is making a joke of college football as we know it.

---

I don't know of anyone who has done this. The SEC used to be an elite league. It hasn't been the last two years and will likely have trouble re-establishing that level of dominance again in the immediate future for the reasons you cite.

Given that fact, perceptions and expectations of that league need to be adjusted. It's not what it once was.

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

This is the biggest loser mentality I have ever heard. Wasn't motivated lol

If you're not trying to win, don't get off of the bus. What a joke of an excuse. You lost, it counts, no excuses. Be respectful to your opponent and the game and leave the excuses at home with the other losers who can't hack it

Heisman25g said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

This is the biggest loser mentality I have ever heard. Wasn't motivated lol

If you're not trying to win, don't get off of the bus. What a joke of an excuse. You lost, it counts, no excuses. Be respectful to your opponent and the game and leave the excuses at home with the other losers who can't hack it

---

Just being a realist. Not saying it doesn't count. All I'm saying is it's not a true reflection of the team during the regular season. Kirby smart has made a habit of only playing players that want to play in the non-playoff bowl games and often resorts to second team players because he understands that they have much more motivation. Do you think Georgia was really 60 points better than undefeated Florida State last year?

Again, these games count, but you can't always extrapolate meaningful information from them.

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

Other than Texas' quarterfinal win over Arizona State, which came in overtime with some help, the SEC's only notable wins out of conference were against Clemson, which no one actually thinks was that good this year.

Otherwise, nobody cares about wins over a bunch of 6-7 ACC or 5-7 Big Ten teams.

And when you can deem every game you lose meaningless -- an effective PR strategy for the SEC -- there's really no point in discussing anything.

Heisman25g said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

This is the biggest loser mentality I have ever heard. Wasn't motivated lol

If you're not trying to win, don't get off of the bus. What a joke of an excuse. You lost, it counts, no excuses. Be respectful to your opponent and the game and leave the excuses at home with the other losers who can't hack it

---

It's the SEC way. Michigan had way more players out than Alabama did and beat them with their JV team. And South Carolina was never as good a team as everyone tried to make them out to be. They were very solid, but nothing special. With the exception of the Clemson game, which they trailed late and needed a terrible pick by Klubnik to seal in the final minute, they lost every statement game on their schedule, including their bowl game against an Illinois squad they were favored to beat.

Chuckroast said:

---

Heisman25g said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

This is the biggest loser mentality I have ever heard. Wasn't motivated lol

If you're not trying to win, don't get off of the bus. What a joke of an excuse. You lost, it counts, no excuses. Be respectful to your opponent and the game and leave the excuses at home with the other losers who can't hack it

---

Just being a realist. Not saying it doesn't count. All I'm saying is it's not a true reflection of the team during the regular season. Kirby smart has made a habit of only playing players that want to play in the non-playoff bowl games and often resorts to second team players because he understands that they have much more motivation. Do you think Georgia was really 60 points better than undefeated Florida State last year?

Again, these games count, but you can't always extrapolate meaningful information from them.

---

The problem with the way the SEC is viewed and talked about is that no loss is ever a true reflection of a team -- including those in the regular season.

We just watched Alabama lose to Vanderbilit and get murdered by a bad Oklahoma team, and Ole Miss get beat by a terrible Kentucky team and a meh Florida one, and those losses literally meant nothing for SEC fans and pundits. Hell, one of their coaches is still spilling menstrual blood all over social media over being "snubbed."

SEC losses never count with the national talking heads trying to sway public college football opinion. Fortunately, the committee didn't fall for that bull**** this year.

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

Other than Texas' quarterfinal win over Arizona State, which came in overtime with some help, the SEC's only notable wins out of conference were against Clemson, which no one actually thinks was that good this year.

Otherwise, nobody cares about wins over a bunch of 6-7 ACC or 5-7 Big Ten teams.

And when you can deem every game you lose meaningless -- an effective PR strategy for the SEC -- there's really no point in discussing anything.

---

Hyperbole much?

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

Heisman25g said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

This is the biggest loser mentality I have ever heard. Wasn't motivated lol

If you're not trying to win, don't get off of the bus. What a joke of an excuse. You lost, it counts, no excuses. Be respectful to your opponent and the game and leave the excuses at home with the other losers who can't hack it

---

Just being a realist. Not saying it doesn't count. All I'm saying is it's not a true reflection of the team during the regular season. Kirby smart has made a habit of only playing players that want to play in the non-playoff bowl games and often resorts to second team players because he understands that they have much more motivation. Do you think Georgia was really 60 points better than undefeated Florida State last year?

Again, these games count, but you can't always extrapolate meaningful information from them.

---

The problem with the way the SEC is viewed and talked about is that no loss is ever a true reflection of a team -- including those in the regular season.

We just watched Alabama lose to Vanderbilit and get murdered by a bad Oklahoma team, and Ole Miss get beat by a terrible Kentucky team and a meh Florida one, and those losses literally meant nothing for SEC fans and pundits. Hell, one of their coaches is still spilling menstrual blood all over social media over being "snubbed."

SEC losses never count with the national talking heads trying to sway public college football opinion. Fortunately, the committee didn't fall for that bull**** this year.

---

I'm not defending the SEC this year. But these discussions have been going on for years. You finally have a year when your argument is true.

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

Other than Texas' quarterfinal win over Arizona State, which came in overtime with some help, the SEC's only notable wins out of conference were against Clemson, which no one actually thinks was that good this year.

Otherwise, nobody cares about wins over a bunch of 6-7 ACC or 5-7 Big Ten teams.

And when you can deem every game you lose meaningless -- an effective PR strategy for the SEC -- there's really no point in discussing anything.

---

Hyperbole much?

---

No. List all the impressive out-of-conference wins you're talking about.

We had Aberzombie trying (futilely) to hype wins over NC State and Wisconsin for most of the season.

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

Heisman25g said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

This is the biggest loser mentality I have ever heard. Wasn't motivated lol

If you're not trying to win, don't get off of the bus. What a joke of an excuse. You lost, it counts, no excuses. Be respectful to your opponent and the game and leave the excuses at home with the other losers who can't hack it

---

Just being a realist. Not saying it doesn't count. All I'm saying is it's not a true reflection of the team during the regular season. Kirby smart has made a habit of only playing players that want to play in the non-playoff bowl games and often resorts to second team players because he understands that they have much more motivation. Do you think Georgia was really 60 points better than undefeated Florida State last year?

Again, these games count, but you can't always extrapolate meaningful information from them.

---

The problem with the way the SEC is viewed and talked about is that no loss is ever a true reflection of a team -- including those in the regular season.

We just watched Alabama lose to Vanderbilit and get murdered by a bad Oklahoma team, and Ole Miss get beat by a terrible Kentucky team and a meh Florida one, and those losses literally meant nothing for SEC fans and pundits. Hell, one of their coaches is still spilling menstrual blood all over social media over being "snubbed."

SEC losses never count with the national talking heads trying to sway public college football opinion. Fortunately, the committee didn't fall for that bull**** this year.

---

I'm not defending the SEC this year. But these discussions have been going on for years. You finally have a year when your argument is true.

---

It was true last year, too. People just refused to see/believe it.

When Ole Miss and Missouri are among the best teams in the SEC, the SEC is not the SEC.

I went back and forth with several of you guys on that very point earlier this season and came out of that debate smelling like a rose -- as you will 95 times out of 100 when arguing against the side trying to hype Ole Miss, Missouri, A&M, etc. as elite programs.

The only actually elite programs in the SEC are Alabama, Georgia and LSU, and two of those aren't fielding elite teams right now. When that's the case, the league is going to be down because nobody else is capable of carrying that mantle for more than a season or two at a time (if that).

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

Other than Texas' quarterfinal win over Arizona State, which came in overtime with some help, the SEC's only notable wins out of conference were against Clemson, which no one actually thinks was that good this year.

Otherwise, nobody cares about wins over a bunch of 6-7 ACC or 5-7 Big Ten teams.

And when you can deem every game you lose meaningless -- an effective PR strategy for the SEC -- there's really no point in discussing anything.

---

Hyperbole much?

---

No. List all the impressive out-of-conference wins you're talking about.

We had Aberzombie trying (futilely) to hype wins over NC State and Wisconsin for most of the season.

---

I'm not saying every lost game is meaningless. I'm simply saying that regular season and playoff games are more meaningful than random bowl games and that you should extrapolate from those types of games more than random bowl games.

The SEC has proved this year that it is not dominant. I have no problem acknowledging that.. So far, the top teams in the big 10 appear to be the best, however, I wouldn't say they are dominant either by standards of the past.

I don't think there is a whole lot of difference between teams in the playoffs. Interestingly, one team can control for a quarter or two and then be controlled by the other team for a quarter or two. Although the teams left out of the playoffs may not really have a huge argument, those teams can absolutely be competitive with the teams that are in the playoffs. There is more parity this year than I've ever seen.

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

Heisman25g said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

This is the biggest loser mentality I have ever heard. Wasn't motivated lol

If you're not trying to win, don't get off of the bus. What a joke of an excuse. You lost, it counts, no excuses. Be respectful to your opponent and the game and leave the excuses at home with the other losers who can't hack it

---

Just being a realist. Not saying it doesn't count. All I'm saying is it's not a true reflection of the team during the regular season. Kirby smart has made a habit of only playing players that want to play in the non-playoff bowl games and often resorts to second team players because he understands that they have much more motivation. Do you think Georgia was really 60 points better than undefeated Florida State last year?

Again, these games count, but you can't always extrapolate meaningful information from them.

---

The problem with the way the SEC is viewed and talked about is that no loss is ever a true reflection of a team -- including those in the regular season.

We just watched Alabama lose to Vanderbilit and get murdered by a bad Oklahoma team, and Ole Miss get beat by a terrible Kentucky team and a meh Florida one, and those losses literally meant nothing for SEC fans and pundits. Hell, one of their coaches is still spilling menstrual blood all over social media over being "snubbed."

SEC losses never count with the national talking heads trying to sway public college football opinion. Fortunately, the committee didn't fall for that bull**** this year.

---

I'm not defending the SEC this year. But these discussions have been going on for years. You finally have a year when your argument is true.

---

It was true last year, too. People just refused to see/believe it.

When Ole Miss and Missouri are among the best teams in the SEC, the SEC is not the SEC.

I went back and forth with several of you guys on that very point earlier this season and came out of that debate smelling like a rose -- as you will 95 times out of 100 when arguing against the side trying to hype Ole Miss, Missouri, A&M, etc. as elite programs.

The only actually elite programs in the SEC are Alabama, Georgia and LSU, and two of those aren't fielding elite teams right now. When that's the case, the league is going to be down because nobody else is capable of carrying that mantle for more than a season or two at a time (if that).

---

at least 5 teams in the sec would have won the big 12, or at the minimum, come in 2nd.

Southtxbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

Heisman25g said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

This is the biggest loser mentality I have ever heard. Wasn't motivated lol

If you're not trying to win, don't get off of the bus. What a joke of an excuse. You lost, it counts, no excuses. Be respectful to your opponent and the game and leave the excuses at home with the other losers who can't hack it

---

Just being a realist. Not saying it doesn't count. All I'm saying is it's not a true reflection of the team during the regular season. Kirby smart has made a habit of only playing players that want to play in the non-playoff bowl games and often resorts to second team players because he understands that they have much more motivation. Do you think Georgia was really 60 points better than undefeated Florida State last year?

Again, these games count, but you can't always extrapolate meaningful information from them.

---

The problem with the way the SEC is viewed and talked about is that no loss is ever a true reflection of a team -- including those in the regular season.

We just watched Alabama lose to Vanderbilit and get murdered by a bad Oklahoma team, and Ole Miss get beat by a terrible Kentucky team and a meh Florida one, and those losses literally meant nothing for SEC fans and pundits. Hell, one of their coaches is still spilling menstrual blood all over social media over being "snubbed."

SEC losses never count with the national talking heads trying to sway public college football opinion. Fortunately, the committee didn't fall for that bull**** this year.

---

I'm not defending the SEC this year. But these discussions have been going on for years. You finally have a year when your argument is true.

---

It was true last year, too. People just refused to see/believe it.

When Ole Miss and Missouri are among the best teams in the SEC, the SEC is not the SEC.

I went back and forth with several of you guys on that very point earlier this season and came out of that debate smelling like a rose -- as you will 95 times out of 100 when arguing against the side trying to hype Ole Miss, Missouri, A&M, etc. as elite programs.

The only actually elite programs in the SEC are Alabama, Georgia and LSU, and two of those aren't fielding elite teams right now. When that's the case, the league is going to be down because nobody else is capable of carrying that mantle for more than a season or two at a time (if that).

---

at least 5 teams in the sec would have won the big 12, or at the minimum, come in 2nd.

---

The SEC is undefeated in hypothetical matchups.

It's those pesky real ones that keep getting them. But none of those mattered because they didn't really care about winning any of the ones they lost.

bear2be2 said:

---

Southtxbear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

Heisman25g said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Chuckroast said:

---

There are no dominant teams in college football right now. Results can vary greatly depending on home field advantage and having a few big plays or big turnovers in a given game. You don't see any teams consistently dominating both sides of the line of scrimmage like we have in the past.

That being said, we don't need to assume that all conferences are exactly even either. We all have no problem recognizing that conferences outside of the P4 are not on equal footing with P4 conferences. If one P4 conference is stronger or has more strength from top to bottom than another, it's ok to recognize that as well and take strength of schedule into account as objectively as possible. None of us ever complained when the Big 12 was considered the strongest in basketball and got more teams with more losses into the tournament than other conferences. Regular season matchups are the best way to make that determination in a given year.

I'd like to see more out of conference P4 regular season matchups, but it makes less sense now than ever. Without regular season matchups, we have to rely either on computer metrics or complete subjectivity of the CFP committee.

---

I don't think anyone has said all conferences are equal or demanded that all leagues get the same number of teams in the playoff.

What people have a problem with is a team like BYU, which had a road win over a playoff team and two losses by a combined nine points, not even being part of the at-large large discussion while three three-loss SEC teams were hyped up by many in CFB media as world-beaters.

In the end, I think the committee got it right. But the narrative all season was largely nonsense -- as proven by virtually all postseason results, which largely reinforced what those of us who were paying attention saw throughout the regular season.

---

If you're talking specifically about the SEC, they did better against P4 in their regular season non-conference schedule than any other conference. It's the regular season and meaningful postseason games where a team is fully motivated that count. I'll admit that Tennessee laid an egg in a hostile road environment against a resurgent Ohio State team. I would not use that one game as validation for the premise that BYU is equal to other at large SEC teams.

It's also true that Alabama and South Carolina narrowly lost their bowl games to very respectable teams, but those games were essentially meaningless. For those programs, a win or loss was irrelevant. They may or may not have been motivated. They mayhave played their best football or they may not have, but it didn't matter.

---

This is the biggest loser mentality I have ever heard. Wasn't motivated lol

If you're not trying to win, don't get off of the bus. What a joke of an excuse. You lost, it counts, no excuses. Be respectful to your opponent and the game and leave the excuses at home with the other losers who can't hack it

---

Just being a realist. Not saying it doesn't count. All I'm saying is it's not a true reflection of the team during the regular season. Kirby smart has made a habit of only playing players that want to play in the non-playoff bowl games and often resorts to second team players because he understands that they have much more motivation. Do you think Georgia was really 60 points better than undefeated Florida State last year?

Again, these games count, but you can't always extrapolate meaningful information from them.

---

The problem with the way the SEC is viewed and talked about is that no loss is ever a true reflection of a team -- including those in the regular season.

We just watched Alabama lose to Vanderbilit and get murdered by a bad Oklahoma team, and Ole Miss get beat by a terrible Kentucky team and a meh Florida one, and those losses literally meant nothing for SEC fans and pundits. Hell, one of their coaches is still spilling menstrual blood all over social media over being "snubbed."

SEC losses never count with the national talking heads trying to sway public college football opinion. Fortunately, the committee didn't fall for that bull**** this year.

---

I'm not defending the SEC this year. But these discussions have been going on for years. You finally have a year when your argument is true.

---

It was true last year, too. People just refused to see/believe it.

When Ole Miss and Missouri are among the best teams in the SEC, the SEC is not the SEC.

I went back and forth with several of you guys on that very point earlier this season and came out of that debate smelling like a rose -- as you will 95 times out of 100 when arguing against the side trying to hype Ole Miss, Missouri, A&M, etc. as elite programs.

The only actually elite programs in the SEC are Alabama, Georgia and LSU, and two of those aren't fielding elite teams right now. When that's the case, the league is going to be down because nobody else is capable of carrying that mantle for more than a season or two at a time (if that).

---

at least 5 teams in the sec would have won the big 12, or at the minimum, come in 2nd.

---

The SEC is undefeated in hypothetical matchups.

It's those pesky real ones that keep getting them. But none of those mattered because they didn't really care about winning all of the ones they lost.

---

You've been talking about how overrated the SEC is for years and now gloating to everyone in a year that they've come back to earth a little. They still have a winning record in 12 P4 bowl games with only 16 teams (2 less than the Big 10). Maybe not a dominant year by their past standards but still good.