Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

SEC 0-4 against ACC last weekend. Not a peep heard from ESPN

Dark Bohner

Dark Bohner

Cooler than a Popsicle Stand.
Club Member
Was listening to XM college football radio this morning and they were talking about this last weekend, and Greg McElroy and some SEC analyst were downplaying how the SEC got thumped by the ACC this last weekend. Basically stating how it didn't really matter. If I hadn't heard about it this morning, I would not have even known.

Amazing how there wasn't even a blip about it on ESPN (okay not really amazing). Yet I remember how when the B1G was struggling this year in OOC it was front and center on ESPN. Just continues the valid argument of SEC bias at ESPN.
 
I watched the Sunday morning recap show and they discussed the ACC going 4-0 against the SEC.

Although, with VT's performance this year, I'm not beating my chest with "conference pride".
 
buffedup said:
Was listening to XM college football radio this morning and they were talking about this last weekend, and Greg McElroy and some SEC analyst were downplaying how the SEC got thumped by the ACC this last weekend. Basically stating how it didn't really matter. If I hadn't heard about it this morning, I would not have even known.

Amazing how there wasn't even a blip about it on ESPN (okay not really amazing). Yet I remember how when the B1G was struggling this year in OOC it was front and center on ESPN. Just continues the valid argument of SEC bias at ESPN.
Click to expand...

If it had gone the other way, we would have heard of it on ESPN.
 
When they lose those out of conference games, it doesn't matter. When they win them, it validates putting all of them in the top 10.
 
hokiehead said:
I watched the Sunday morning recap show and they discussed the ACC going 4-0 against the SEC.

Although, with VT's performance this year, I'm not beating my chest with "conference pride".
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry so much about ACC conference pride. My argument is more about SEC conference pride being protected by ESPN after such a debacle.
 
Honest question (that I haven't researched, but have kind of tracked mentally).

At the time of meeting:

How many times has an SEC beaten a more highly ranked team in the last three years?

How many times has a lower ranked team beaten an out-of-conference SEC team in the last three years (i.e. GT over Georgia)?

To my way of thinking, that would be the best way to determine if SEC teams are overrated.

Let's face it, most of the SEC losses meant little last weekend, based on the relative rankings.
 
Orr said:
Honest question (that I haven't researched, but have kind of tracked mentally).

At the time of meeting:

How many times has an SEC beaten a more highly ranked team in the last three years?

How many times has a lower ranked team beaten an out-of-conference SEC team in the last three years (i.e. GT over Georgia)?

To my way of thinking, that would be the best way to determine if SEC teams are overrated.

Let's face it, most of the SEC losses meant little last weekend, based on the relative rankings.
Click to expand...

I somewhat disagree. The SEC only plays 8 conference games. That gets justified by pundits saying that the conference is so good and with so much depth that the grind is on a different level. But then I see a Missouri that got blown out by the only decent team in the East (Georgia, which lost to GT) and drew aTm and Arkansas from the West while losing to Indiana in the OOC and playing no other P5 teams. I see Mississippi State talked up, but they drew Vanderbilt and Kentucky from the East while playing Southern Miss, UAB, S Alabama and TN-Martin in the OOC. This goes on and on with the SEC teams, but they get a pass.
 
it never happened. even SEC teams can't beat SEC teams. they are all 12-0 except Vanderbilt, who lost their intersquad game.
 
Buffnik said:
I somewhat disagree. The SEC only plays 8 conference games. That gets justified by pundits saying that the conference is so good and with so much depth that the grind is on a different level. But then I see a Missouri that got blown out by the only decent team in the East (Georgia, which lost to GT) and drew aTm and Arkansas from the West while losing to Indiana in the OOC and playing no other P5 teams. I see Mississippi State talked up, but they drew Vanderbilt and Kentucky from the East while playing Southern Miss, UAB, S Alabama and TN-Martin in the OOC. This goes on and on with the SEC teams, but they get a pass.
Click to expand...

I meant to say that it proved little in answering the question of whether or not the SEC teams are overrated.
 
Orr said:
I meant to say that it proved little in answering the question of whether or not the SEC teams are overrated.
Click to expand...

I'd disagree. Every conference has top level teams. The SEC loves to brag about their conference depth. Yet Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina were supposed to be favorites to compete for SEC and national titles (maybe not Florida, but that wasn't due to talent). Yet all of them lost to comparable ACC teams. Kentucky was beat by a good, but not great Louisville.

The depth argument really doesn't hold water.
 
buffedup said:
I'd disagree. Every conference has top level teams. The SEC loves to brag about their conference depth. Yet Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina were supposed to be favorites to compete for SEC and national titles (maybe not Florida, but that wasn't due to talent). Yet all of them lost to comparable ACC teams. Kentucky was beat by a good, but not great Louisville.

The depth argument really doesn't hold water.
Click to expand...

Here's how I'm framing my argument:

The SEC is a very good conference, but its teams tend to be rated higher than they should be.

That means that higher ranked ACC teams SHOULD beat lower ranked SEC teams. To me, GT over Georgia is the only game that really furthered my suspicion that the SEC is overrated, overall.

The real evidence comes when:

1. A lower rated team from another conference beats a more highly rated SEC team.

2. When a much lower rated non-SEC team loses to a much higher ranked SEC team, but appears to be competitive (evenly matched).

If you look at the bowl games over the last two seasons, SEC teams seem to struggle with (or outright lose) to teams which are ranked much lower.

By the way, when I mention these suspicions to the Florida grad in my office, defends the SEC by saying, "That's because SEC teams are disappointed in bowl games that aren't the national championship."
 
Orr said:
Here's how I'm framing my argument:

The SEC is a very good conference, but its teams tend to be rated higher than they should be.

That means that higher ranked ACC teams SHOULD beat lower ranked SEC teams. To me, GT over Georgia is the only game that really furthered my suspicion that the SEC is overrated, overall.

The real evidence comes when:

1. A lower rated team from another conference beats a more highly rated SEC team.

2. When a much lower rated non-SEC team loses to a much higher ranked SEC team, but appears to be competitive (evenly matched).

If you look at the bowl games over the last two seasons, SEC teams seem to struggle with (or outright lose) to teams which are ranked much lower.

By the way, when I mention these suspicions to the Florida grad in my office, defends the SEC by saying, "That's because SEC teams are disappointed in bowl games that aren't the national championship."
Click to expand...

:lol:

Your anecdote kind of proves my point. SEC folks think that the SEC only loses when the SEC doesn't feel like winning.
 
Orr said:
By the way, when I mention these suspicions to the Florida grad in my office, defends the SEC by saying, "That's because SEC teams are disappointed in bowl games that aren't the national championship."
Click to expand...

That's my same argument for why CU lost the 2001 Fiesta Bowl.
 
So the question is, do we want Whoregon to stomp the SEC teams in the playoff? It would be nice to shut up the SEC, but I'm not sure I'd want the FdUCKs to have a NC and, likely, a Heisman winner. It's the one last things we have over the nouveau riche bastids.
 
JPinCO said:
So the question is, do we want Whoregon to stomp the SEC teams in the playoff? It would be nice to shut up the SEC, but I'm not sure I'd want the FdUCKs to have a NC and, likely, a Heisman winner. It's the one last things we have over the nouveau riche bastids.
Click to expand...

I've resigned myself to rooting for them in that scenario, though I share your concerns.
 
buffedup said:
:lol:

Your anecdote kind of proves my point. SEC folks think that the SEC only loses when the SEC doesn't feel like winning.
Click to expand...

Oh no, I fully acknowledge the parochialism of the SEC fans. But dealing with SEC fanboys has taught me that you can't approach them with suspicions and hunches. You have to show them on paper that SEC teams never beat teams that are more highly ranked them, but do lose to teams that have lower rankings.

They may retreat to the (insert excuse: disappointed in bowl, unfamiliar with that style of football, unique characteristics of bowl games, the rules go out the window in a rivalry game etc... ad nauseum) but at least they'll do it while backed into a corner. Whether or not the burden of proof should be on you, it nonetheless is.
 
SEC bias? No... they are obviously the most talented conference [puking]. They have the best DL in the country (in terms of quantity), but outside of that, the talent of players are equivalent.

ESPN has laid it's sacrifice at the alter of the SEC in worship of the almighty dollar... can't watch their coverage anymore.
 
Mr. Babar said:
SEC bias? No... they are obviously the most talented conference [puking]. They have the best DL in the country (in terms of quantity), but outside of that, the talent of players are equivalent.

ESPN has laid it's sacrifice at the alter of the SEC in worship of the almighty dollar... can't watch their coverage anymore.
Click to expand...

ESPN's bias has gotten so bad that the only ESPN guy I saw critique the SEC for its late-season cupcake feast was friggin' Paul Finebaum. He is apparently now the voice of reason when it comes to slobbering the SEC knob.
 
Buffnik said:
ESPN's bias has gotten so bad that the only ESPN guy I saw critique the SEC for its late-season cupcake feast was friggin' Paul Finebaum. He is apparently now the voice of reason when it comes to slobbering the SEC knob.
Click to expand...

Wow. That's equivalent to Vladmir Putin being the most vocal critic of Russia's invasion into the Ukraine.
 
In Bill Simmons latest podcast, him and Chuck Klosterman talk college football. Simmons knows very little about it, Klosterman seems to be new to it, but he tries to explain what's going on to Bill.

Here's an example of some of the SEC fellating he did:

[tweet]540243413078401024[/tweet]

He also said Alabama plays more tough games in one year, than any other team plays in 3 years, because the SEC is west is so far above the rest of college football.

I had to turn it off.
 
My greatest hope is that Alabama loses to Mizzou and no SEC teams end up in the playoff. Not likely, but one can hope.
 
buffedup said:
Was listening to XM college football radio this morning and they were talking about this last weekend, and Greg McElroy and some SEC analyst were downplaying how the SEC got thumped by the ACC this last weekend. Basically stating how it didn't really matter. If I hadn't heard about it this morning, I would not have even known.

Amazing how there wasn't even a blip about it on ESPN (okay not really amazing). Yet I remember how when the B1G was struggling this year in OOC it was front and center on ESPN. Just continues the valid argument of SEC bias at ESPN.
Click to expand...

Call me an SEC apologist, but I don't think this is a huge deal-South Carolina, Florida, and Kentucky were all underdogs. The only shocker is Georgia losing at home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top