Conference Strength Part II

I've had many discussions (arguments really) with fans from all the conferences about my conference strength position.  By far, the SEC fans are most disturbed.  I hold strong to my position. 

The fans, players and coaches of the SEC claim they do not have to schedule difficult non-conference games because the conference is tough enough to warrant the rankings.  So I put this argument to a test.  For this claim to be valid, the teams that the SEC champion has to beat to win their conference must be beating their non-conference opponents (from BCS conferences).  Again, the SEC claims there are no weeks off in the SEC compared to other leagues where some teams only have to show up to win.

 

My rebuttal.  Clemson pounds SC every year.  Louisville (except 2007) pounds on KY every year, West VA has pounded Miss St the last two years, Missouri pounded Ol Miss the last two years.

Tenn

has lost twice to ND and once to

Cal

in the last four years,

Auburn

lost to S. Fla last year, Ala lost to Fla St and La Monroe last year, Vandy lost to Wake and Michigan last two years, Arkansas lost to USC (50-14) in 2006 when

Arkansas

won the SEC West with McFadden.  How many examples of non-conference losses need to be mentioned before it is credible to argue that the SEC is just like every other conference?  It is strong on the top, avg in the middle, weak on the bottom.  Since the other conferences are beating the same teams that the SEC champion has to beat to win the SEC, I think it is reasonable to suggest that the SEC is not as superior as a lot of people want it to be. 

 

The only conclusion one can make right now if the SEC’s top team has been better than Big Ten’s top team the last two seasons.  With that in mind, the head to head record for Big Ten/SEC last ten years is 50/50.  Last two seasons is 3-3 – two seasons which most experts would argue the Big Ten has been down. If the SEC is so tough and the Big Ten so weak, the record should be at least 5-1 if not 6-0.   Instead, the record is even.  If you look at the seasons when the SEC/Big Ten has won the BCS title, the Big Ten is 7-5 against the SEC.  So, in the seasons when the SEC has been crowned the champion and inevitably leads to their fan base/coaches/players claiming superiority, they have a losing record against the lowly Big Ten head to head. 

 

Thinking something is true does not make it true.  The only true measuring stick is head to head.  Over the last five seasons, the head to head results prove the SEC loses more than it wins when their teams play non-conference games against BCS conference schools. Bowl games are the exception for the last two years, but there are mismatches to consider such as  2's vs 3's, bowl location and time off between a team's last game and bowl game. 

The SEC is a great conference with a strong tradition of winning championships.  The fan base is intensely rabid.  The SE has some of the best high school talent in the country which usually ends up in the SEC.  I love attending and watching SEC games.  All of this does not mean the SEC is the best conference, not does it mean it is the deepest conference.  All that can be concluded is the SEC has had the BCS Champion four times.