Kill or Save - 2008 SEC edition

[RalphieMalph]

I think that by definition, anthing that is regarded as the best cannot be overrated. The rating of "The Best" marks it as superior to all others, and thus can't be "More best". It's already at the peak. Now to use the Patriots/Brady example, they were regarded as the best until it was proven otherwise. Up until the point where they lost the Superbowl, it would be ludicrous to say they were overrated.

A new restaurant opens in Denver that mixes dog **** into all of their menu items. People come out of curiosity, then tell their friends when they're astonished to find that the dog **** they're serving doesn't taste all that horrific. The press catches wind (so to speak) of the phenomenon, and soon the restaurant is drowning in wildly popular reviews for their dog-**** based dishes, all of which taste dreadful when compared to normal food, but are given gobs of extra credit from the media and public because it's astonishing to them that dishes made out of dog **** could even be edible.

Westword recognizes the restaurant with an award for being the best fecal-based cuisine in the state. Many disagree with the award, saying their menu offerings are wildly overrated.

You would contest the validity of these peoples' claims? :lol:

 

[RalphieMalph]

Look, I'm not saying that the SEC isn't the strongest conference in the country, I'm just asserting that the degree to which they're superior over other conferences is WILDLY exaggerated by both the media and (especially) SEC fans.

When Alabama jumped out to a 27-0 lead on Colorado, message boards across the world started raining down with all of this "Colorado shouldn't even be on the same field with an SEC team, if they played in the SEC they would have gone 1-11 this year" chatter. Then CU went on a 24-3 run, after which many SEC fans alleged "Alabama just ran out the clock after they got that lead, Colorado was only let back in because Saban chose to let them back in". Honestly, the arrogance of these hayseeds and plug-wads is ridiculous.

If the SEC was as superior to other conferences as the press and public would have you believe, they'd never have lost 2 bowl games this season. Furthermore, a Colorado team saturated with true freshmen starters would have never been able to come back against Alabama. A Florida State team with barely enough players to field a starting 22 would have never been able to almost topple Kentucky. Auburn wouldn't have needed OT to beat Clemson, Arkansas wouldn't have lost by 31 to Mizzou, Florida CERTAINLY wouldn't have lost to Meechigan, and Georgia and LSU... well, they were playing Hawaii and Ohio State, those games don't count :smile2:

In your typical conference, there are one or two elite teams, 3 to 5 very good teams, a couple average teams, and a few teams that just flat out suck. For instance in the Big XII this year, Texas and Oklahoma were elite, Kansas, Missouri, and Texas Tech were very good, Colorado, KState, Okie Lite, and TAMU were average, and Iowa State, Baylor, and Nebraska just flat out sucked.

The difference between the SEC and "your typical conference" does not come from their cache of elite teams, as they usually only have 1 or 2 just like everyone else, the difference is that the rest of their conference (with the obvious exception of Vanderbilt and in years past Kentucky) is always very good, and rarely average. An elite team from the SEC is no better than an elite team from the Big XII, and a very good team from the Big XII is just as good as one from the SEC, the only difference is that there's a lot more of those very good teams in the SEC, so their in conference schedules are more rigorous because SEC squads are never awarded a week off from a pathetic opponent (outside of non-con opponents, obviously).

So that's why I believe the SEC is the best conference in football, but it's overrated. If they were really as dominant as everyone says they are, they'd get into bowl season and promptly blow everyone out of the water, but that isn't what happens. The truth is that similar teams from outside the SEC are just as good as those in the SEC, other conferences just don't have as many that are up to snuff.

This was a long post.

 

[Duff Man]

I know people are sick of the SEC hype, but it does have some validity. The speed on the field in a random SEC game is incredible. The talent on the field in a random SEC is incredible. Are there teams unbeatable? Most certainly not.

 

[sackman]

A new restaurant opens in Denver that mixes dog **** into all of their menu items. People come out of curiosity, then tell their friends when they're astonished to find that the dog **** they're serving doesn't taste all that horrific. The press catches wind (so to speak) of the phenomenon, and soon the restaurant is drowning in wildly popular reviews for their dog-**** based dishes, all of which taste dreadful when compared to normal food, but are given gobs of extra credit from the media and public because it's astonishing to them that dishes made out of dog **** could even be edible.

Westword recognizes the restaurant with an award for being the best fecal-based cuisine in the state. Many disagree with the award, saying their menu offerings are wildly overrated.

You would contest the validity of these peoples' claims? :lol:

This is a ridiculous example, but I'll play along - To say that it is an overrated dog **** restaurant would be incorrect. It's the best dog **** restaurant out there, therefore it cannot be overrated. However, to say it's the best restaurant regardless of menu offering would probably be false, and therefore you could make the argument that it's overrated as a restaurant, but not necessarily as a restaurant that specializes in dog ****.

 

[Cornh8er]

Look, I'm not saying that the SEC isn't the strongest conference in the country, I'm just asserting that the degree to which they're superior over other conferences is WILDLY exaggerated by both the media and (especially) SEC fans.

When Alabama jumped out to a 27-0 lead on Colorado, message boards across the world started raining down with all of this "Colorado shouldn't even be on the same field with an SEC team, if they played in the SEC they would have gone 1-11 this year" chatter. Then CU went on a 24-3 run, after which many SEC fans alleged "Alabama just ran out the clock after they got that lead, Colorado was only let back in because Saban chose to let them back in". Honestly, the arrogance of these hayseeds and plug-wads is ridiculous.

If the SEC was as superior to other conferences as the press and public would have you believe, they'd never have lost 2 bowl games this season. Furthermore, a Colorado team saturated with true freshmen starters would have never been able to come back against Alabama. A Florida State team with barely enough players to field a starting 22 would have never been able to almost topple Kentucky. Auburn wouldn't have needed OT to beat Clemson, Arkansas wouldn't have lost by 31 to Mizzou, Florida CERTAINLY wouldn't have lost to Meechigan, and Georgia and LSU... well, they were playing Hawaii and Ohio State, those games don't count :smile2:

In your typical conference, there are one or two elite teams, 3 to 5 very good teams, a couple average teams, and a few teams that just flat out suck. For instance in the Big XII this year, Texas and Oklahoma were elite, Kansas, Missouri, and Texas Tech were very good, Colorado, KState, Okie Lite, and TAMU were average, and Iowa State, Baylor, and Nebraska just flat out sucked.

The difference between the SEC and "your typical conference" does not come from their cache of elite teams, as they usually only have 1 or 2 just like everyone else, the difference is that the rest of their conference (with the obvious exception of Vanderbilt and in years past Kentucky) is always very good, and rarely average. An elite team from the SEC is no better than an elite team from the Big XII, and a very good team from the Big XII is just as good as one from the SEC, the only difference is that there's a lot more of those very good teams in the SEC, so their in conference schedules are more rigorous because SEC squads are never awarded a week off from a pathetic opponent (outside of non-con opponents, obviously).

So that's why I believe the SEC is the best conference in football, but it's overrated. If they were really as dominant as everyone says they are, they'd get into bowl season and promptly blow everyone out of the water, but that isn't what happens. The truth is that similar teams from outside the SEC are just as good as those in the SEC, other conferences just don't have as many that are up to snuff.

This was a long post.

too long...can you summarize for me:smile2:

 

[Junction]

A new restaurant opens in Denver that mixes dog **** into all of their menu items. People come out of curiosity, then tell their friends when they're astonished to find that the dog **** they're serving doesn't taste all that horrific. The press catches wind (so to speak) of the phenomenon, and soon the restaurant is drowning in wildly popular reviews for their dog-**** based dishes, all of which taste dreadful when compared to normal food, but are given gobs of extra credit from the media and public because it's astonishing to them that dishes made out of dog **** could even be edible.

Westword recognizes the restaurant with an award for being the best fecal-based cuisine in the state. Many disagree with the award, saying their menu offerings are wildly overrated.

You would contest the validity of these peoples' claims? :lol:

First of all, this is an invalid example, because Applebees is not a new restaurant in Denver, and it does not receive wildly poopular reviews... :smile2:

But to play along with your example, if they have the best fecal based cuisine in the state (does LF get to be a judge in this contest??) and are awarded the prize for the best fecal based cuisine in the state, they are not overrated. If they are awarded the prize as best restaurant of any kind in the state, then they would be overrated...

 

[RalphieMalph]

Could someone define semantics for me?

 

[Junction]

Could someone define semantics for me?

I think they're some kind of little bugs that attach themselves to the inside of your urethra... :wow:

But I think it's spelled semen... :huh:

 

[RalphieMalph]

too long...can you summarize for me:smile2:

The SEC is the strongest conference in college football, but their superiority only stems from the fact that they lack a hearty quantity of consistently average/below average teams. The very good teams in the SEC are no better than the very good teams in any other conference (barring mid majors and the Big 11).

I probably should have just said that the first time around, huh?

 

[Cornh8er]

The SEC is the strongest conference in college football, but their superiority only stems from the fact that they lack a hearty quantity of consistently average/below average teams. The very good teams in the SEC are no better than the very good teams in any other conference (barring mid majors and the Big 11).

I probably should have just said that the first time around, huh?

Yes:smile2: Thanks for the summary

 

[Bama Charlie]

The SEC is the strongest conference in college football, but their superiority only stems from the fact that they lack a hearty quantity of consistently average/below average teams. The very good teams in the SEC are no better than the very good teams in any other conference (barring mid majors and the Big 11).

I probably should have just said that the first time around, huh?

The SEC is 11-4 in BCS games. They have never lost a championship game. I am missing your point.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

The SEC is the strongest conference in college football, but their superiority only stems from the fact that they lack a hearty quantity of consistently average/below average teams. The very good teams in the SEC are no better than the very good teams in any other conference (barring mid majors and the Big 11).

I probably should have just said that the first time around, huh?

Yes:smile2: Thanks for the summary