# The STATE of the SEC West



## Old Dead River (Oct 12, 2014)

During the offseason I read a lot of articles about 2014 being the cycle year where the bigger programs in the West would empty their stables via players graduating and playing on sundays. These articles often foreshadowed the rise of the two Mississippi programs. I've heard some stupid people say that the west just wasn't good this year because bama and lsu weren't top notch. That just because the perennial powers aren't insurmountable the division isn't as good as it has been previously. NOT TRUE. Today State defeated a very good Auburn team which was not as adversely affected by the cycle year as Lsu and Bama were. Unlike the state victories over A&M and LSU in previous weeks, no one is going to say that Auburn was overrated or that they weren't really that good anyway. Many people thought Auburn were one of the best teams in the country and they may reemerge in that conversation.

Bama is still in the mix for now, but every game this season has shown clearly that this isn't your dad's Alabama- particularly the game tonight against an improved Arkansas team. Ole Miss and State succeeding isn't just because of the cycle year. Ole Miss has recruited very well even though they've had limited success in the past few years. State has developed two and three star highschool players to the max, one of them is a Heisman frontrunner. 

My question is, how far can these teams go?

State has endured their biggest gauntlet defeating three consecutive top ten teams. They have tough away games @ Bama and the season finale in Oxford against Ole Miss.
I'm more worried about Ole Miss than Bama, but playing in Tuscaloosa is tough. Despite talking heads boosting up the Kentucky game I think it and the rest of the schedule are non issues for state (besides the two tough games mentioned).

Ole Miss made a statement tonight going into College Station and owning A&M- further exposing a team that I thought was overrated. I am interested to see how Ole Miss will pair up with Auburn. The LSU game is also a bit of a rivalry, could there be an upset?

Arkansas will get a conference win this year, when and over whom?


----------



## Jetjockey (Oct 12, 2014)

Auburn is good, I would not call them very good.  Remember, they should have lost to Kansas St.  I thought Miss St looked great against them for a while, and then they showed they couldn't take care of the ball.  There is big holes in both of their offenses.


----------



## RipperIII (Oct 12, 2014)

I've posted numerous times over the last 3-4 years that I thought that Dan Mullen was one of the best coaches in the SEC, given the severe lack of 4-5* recruits MSU can muster relative to the rest of the conference.
MSU does have it's holes for sure, and as DAK goes so goes the offense.
Ole Miss is a very good team, but with out BAMA's help, they don't win that game.
There is some truth/merit to the "cycle" theory,...BAMA's issues, however  are coming from senior players who should know better, and Sims just hasn't handled pressure very well at all...the young guys on defense are stepping up all along the line and thank th good lord we finally stopped blitzing to give our secondary some help.
The state of mississippi should be proud thus far.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 12, 2014)

JJ, who is your top 5?


----------



## greene_dawg (Oct 12, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> JJ, who is your top 5?


----------



## maker4life (Oct 12, 2014)

They both look good, either could win it all. I don't think anyone is great this year. I really think this year will come down to who wants it most, which I think bodes well for the Mississippi schools.


----------



## MCBUCK (Oct 12, 2014)

The Egg Bowl will determine the west champ....and could easily be the 1 and. 2 teams in the country by then.... A de facto MNC.


----------



## rex upshaw (Oct 12, 2014)

The west is absolutely brutal this year.  Whoever survives, will have earned it.


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 12, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Auburn is good, I would not call them very good.  Remember, they should have lost to Kansas St.  I thought Miss St looked great against them for a while, and then they showed they couldn't take care of the ball.  There is big holes in both of their offenses.



Mullen calling that fake punt shifted the momentum. If you're referring to that as a hole that's on the coach not the players. Prescott threw two picks which will happen from time to time. Looked like both were supposed to be backshoulder throws. He teed off on a&m doing this and each time the receivers were on the outside (beaten their coverage down the field) instead of on the inside where they belonged. Prescott bounced back and led the team though.

The running game was there, Robinson and Prescott both had good yardage. The secondary played pretty well for a second week in a row. Auburn dropped some, had a bang bang penalty called against them (I remember in 2011 Auburn was given a 1st down that was almost a foot short, payback). Having said that, I was watching Booger McFarland last night and he said there was a push off on that pass interference play. We've seen people get away with a lot more but according to McFarland the push for separation was enough.

The offensive line played pretty well but did allow penetration which at time disrupted Prescott. I also felt there were some 3rd and shorts that Prescott should've converted...One play it seemed like he waited to long to run up the gut. 

The defensive front played great for the most part. The first pass from Marshall was deflected. The last pass from Marshall was deflected to seal the victory. They were also very good in the redzone, I saw one blatantly missed assignment on the first AU td. I did see some missed tackles in the game when Marshall and Artist-Payne were running. There were several plays that should've been stopped for no gain that resulted in first downs. I felt the bulldogs tackled the worst in this game than in the previous two big games.

Biggest hole I see is special teams. It's always been a problem for State under Mullen. Whether it's kicking an extra point, a medium range field goal, or merely fielding a punt cleanly. We fumbled a punt two weeks in a row. We need Jameon Lewis back asap both as a receiver and a punt returner. He was one of our biggest weapons and has been out the past two games.

for state to have four turnovers and still win the game handily is a testament to their strength. Defense forced all four of Auburn's turnovers- both picks from Marshall were deflected. Both AU fumbles were caused by hits and/or strips. Mississippi State's turnovers were blatant mistakes - stupid plays that in years past have cost them games, two picks by Prescott that were easily caught by AU defenders, the fake punt interception again thrown directly to an AU defender, and a fumbled punt - remember the same guy did it last week against A&M.

hailstate


----------



## RipperIII (Oct 12, 2014)

MCBUCK said:


> The Egg Bowl will determine the west champ....and could easily be the 1 and. 2 teams in the country by then.... A de facto MNC.



Ole Miss has a very good defense, but they are very beatable.
MSU looks to be the most balanced, but both will lose one game for sure.


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 12, 2014)

RipperIII said:


> Ole Miss has a very good defense, but they are very beatable.
> MSU looks to be the most balanced, but both will lose one game for sure.



I wanted State to win the games that they have but I am surprised it happened especially how easy they made some of it look. IMO the worst part of their schedule is over. Those two big road games will be tough, but this is a good team. If they were to run the table this would be a great year to do it. Their schedule sets up nicely. Practical bye weeks in vandy and middle tenn. Kentucky away should be no problem, we have Arkansas at home so we should be fine. Take care of business on those smaller games one at a time and dig a little deeper on the big ones. I'm by no means forecasting that they'll run the table - they definitely have their work cut out for them. But it would be really remarkable if they did. Would love to see it happen.


----------



## Georgia Hard Hunter (Oct 12, 2014)

I like the way our schedule lays out for us, the 2 top 10 games Auburn and Ms St at home. Those 2 will be wars but we know what we're getting into. 2 possible scary upsets we're at LSUx which is a hated rivalry so who knows and a possible trap game at Arkansas could be looking ahead to Ms St the next week (happened with Memphis but we won barely) also Ark isnt as bad as their record.


----------



## Throwback (Oct 12, 2014)

Jetjockey said:


> Auburn is good, I would not call them very good.  Remember, they should have lost to Kansas St.  I thought Miss St looked great against them for a while, and then they showed they couldn't take care of the ball.  There is big holes in both of their offenses.




Shoulda coulda woulda


Sounds like a chant for a PAC12 team


T


----------



## shane256 (Oct 13, 2014)

As any fan of MSU has known... you always wait for the other shoe to drop... MSU has played many 3 quarter games well only to forget that the game actually has 4 quarters. That and times in the past when MSU was ranked, they got the big head and thought that they had made it but the season was only half over.

From what I've seen, I think MSU might remember there are 4 quarters (although the LSU and aTm games brought back scary memories) and if they can forget the rankings and just play hard, they should have a clear shot through the rest of the schedule except for Ole Miss. Ole Miss has been playing some really good games (and a couple so-so games... Memphis, Alabama) and the Egg Bowl is always a slug fest.  That's the game that I'm most worried about, as long as MSU remembers there are 4 quarters in a game and they don't get the big head over what they've done so far.


----------



## elfiii (Oct 13, 2014)

The SEC West has cannibalized themselves with a vengeance this year. Who knew they would wind up being this competitive?


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 13, 2014)

elfiii said:


> The SEC West has cannibalized themselves with a vengeance this year. Who knew they would wind up being this competitive?



the west has been the better division for many years now. the players are just a bit different now. LSU could still salvage their season.


----------



## rjcruiser (Oct 13, 2014)

rex upshaw said:


> JJ, who is your top 5?



Oregon
Arizona
UCLA
USC
*ND

*just keeping it real with a team from a different conference.


----------



## elfiii (Oct 13, 2014)

Old Dead River said:


> the west has been the better division for many years now. the players are just a bit different now. LSU could still salvage their season.



It's more like the West's talent is more evenly distributed. This year has been a dog fight between them. I figured 'Bama to not quite cruise but still have the upper hand no problem. Instead it's looking more and more like the MS St-Ole Miss game will decide the winner of the West.


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 13, 2014)

elfiii said:


> Instead it's looking more and more like the MS St-Ole Miss game will decide the winner of the West.



which is why it's starting to look like it's not that evenly distributed. the real shakers and movers in the sec west are State, Ole Miss, and Auburn. Three teams just like it has been in previous years. Having said that there's talent all over the division.

Generally it's Bama, LSU, and Auburn, a few years back Petrino's Ark was the next one down, as that program imploded in came johnny football and A&M

This year Bama, A&M, and LSU clearly just don't have it like they did previously. Arkansas is almost there, just can't finish and still missing something.


----------



## Cranium (Oct 13, 2014)

elfiii said:


> The SEC West has cannibalized themselves with a vengeance this year. Who knew they would wind up being this competitive?



competitive?  

Auburn - one win over a top 25 team
AL         - zero wins against top 25
A&M     - zero wins against top 25
LSU       - zero wins against top 25
Ole Miss & Miss St - legit

Kinda like saying UGA has played a tough schedule!! lol

Beaten 1 top 25 team & got beaten by unranked team


----------



## Madsnooker (Oct 13, 2014)

Cranium said:


> competitive?
> 
> Auburn - one win over a top 25 team
> AL         - zero wins against top 25
> ...



Wow, some reality is nice at times!!!

There has been so mush hype by espin with the game day crew and the hyping of A&M early (I could go on and on) I really think its hard for many fans to see thru the trees if you will.

Not taking anything away from the 2 Mississippi teams as they have been great, and have meet every challenge in front of them. 

But when looking at all the games and getting rid of the ridiculous rankings that continue to correct themselves, its a bunch of good teams not great teams. SEC fan doesn't want to hear it, but its just simply the truth. 

Still along way to go in the season and it will be a great story if the 2 Mississippi teams remain unbeaten.


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 13, 2014)

Cranium said:


> competitive?
> 
> Auburn - one win over a top 25 team
> AL         - zero wins against top 25
> ...



Wrong!

LSU was ranked #15 when Auburn beat them. Auburn beat two ranked teams

I told yall, three great teams


----------



## Throwback (Oct 13, 2014)

Cranium said:


> competitive?
> 
> Auburn - one win over a top 25 team
> AL         - zero wins against top 25
> ...






T


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 13, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> Wow, some reality is nice at times!!!
> 
> There has been so mush hype by espin with the game day crew and the hyping of A&M early (I could go on and on) I really think its hard for many fans to see thru the trees if you will.
> 
> ...



not reality, he omitted an Auburn victory over a ranked team.


----------



## riprap (Oct 13, 2014)

If vandy and Kentucky were leading the east y'all would be laughing.


----------



## elfiii (Oct 13, 2014)

Cranium said:


> competitive?



Yes, competitive. Look at their conference W/L record.

There will be more SEC teams in the Top 10 at the end of the season than any other conference unless the West consumes themselves down the stretch.


----------



## Cranium (Oct 13, 2014)

elfiii said:


> Yes, competitive. Look at their conference W/L record.
> 
> There will be more SEC teams in the Top 10 at the end of the season than any other conference unless the West consumes themselves down the stretch.



The ONLY reason there are more top 10 ESPNSEC teams is the never-ending daily hype of a conference living in the past!!! 

The worn out strength of schedule conference argument the ESPNSEC trots out isn't viable anymore since the entire conference is down. 

But until a 2 loss SEC team wins the SEC championship game & gets left out of the 4 team playoffs to other undefeated or 1 loss teams from outside of the SEC, the ESPN biased polling will continue


----------



## elfiii (Oct 13, 2014)

Cranium said:


> The ONLY reason there are more top 10 ESPNSEC teams is the never-ending daily hype of a conference living in the past!!!
> 
> The worn out strength of schedule conference argument the ESPNSEC trots out isn't viable anymore since the entire conference is down.
> 
> But until a 2 loss SEC team wins the SEC championship game & gets left out of the 4 team playoffs to other undefeated or 1 loss teams from outside of the SEC, the ESPN biased polling will continue





Go look at the strength of schedule of the Top 10 and then cry me a river.


----------



## Cranium (Oct 13, 2014)

elfiii said:


> Go look at the strength of schedule of the Top 10 and then cry me a river.



LOL...you have a severe case of homeritis.

Miss St & Ole Miss are legit..they are the ONLY ones out of the SEC

Auburn - 1 win on top 25  1-1
A&m      - 0 wins on top 25 0-2
AL          - only 0-1
LSU - 0 
Ark  - 0 
UGA - 1-0 with loss to unranked
FL - 0 
TN - 0

TN -


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 13, 2014)

Cranium said:


> The ONLY reason there are more top 10 ESPNSEC teams is the never-ending daily hype of a conference living in the past!!!
> 
> The worn out strength of schedule conference argument the ESPNSEC trots out isn't viable anymore since the entire conference is down.
> 
> But until a 2 loss SEC team wins the SEC championship game & gets left out of the 4 team playoffs to other undefeated or 1 loss teams from outside of the SEC, the ESPN biased polling will continue



I thought State just beat three consecutive top ten teams. Oh but wait they really weren't that good afterall because State beat them right? One of them was the national championship runnerup last year.

With the exception of a couple of Saban's jilted teams that didn't make the title game (losing to Oklahoma and who Utah?) we generally know what happens when the good SEC teams play out of conference. State demolished Rich Rod's Michigan in 2010. Sterling example of a then above average/middle of the road SEC team stomping on the big ten.  We saw Notre Dame a few years ago against bama - how did that go?


----------



## elfiii (Oct 13, 2014)

Cranium said:


> LOL...you have a severe case of homeritis.
> 
> Miss St & Ole Miss are legit..they are the ONLY ones out of the SEC
> 
> ...



Source - http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

1. MS ST - Plays 5 ranked teams this year. All of them are Top 10. All of them are SEC.

2. FSU - Plays 2 ranked teams this year. Only 1 is Top 10.

3. Ole Miss - Plays 4 ranked teams. All but one is Top 10. All 4 are SEC.

4. Baylor - Plays 4 ranked teams. 1 was Top Ten.

5. Notre Dame - Plays 4 ranked teams. Only 1 is Top 10.

6. Auburn - Plays 6 ranked teams. 4 are Top 10. All are SEC.

7. Alabama - Plays 4 ranked teams. 3 are Top 10. All are SEC.

8. Michigan State - Plays 3 ranked teams. 1 is Top 10.

9. Oregon - Plays 4 ranked Teams. 1 is Top 10.

10. Georgia - Plays 4 ranked teams. 1 is Top 10. 3 of 4 are SEC.

So, based on the above one must conclude either:

1. The SEC is "fuh real" which makes MS ST and Ole Miss "fuh real".

OR - 

b. MS ST and Ole Miss aren't "fuh real" because the SEC isn't "fuh real".

So which is it, "Cranium"?


----------



## Madsnooker (Oct 14, 2014)

Old Dead River said:


> not reality, he omitted an Auburn victory over a ranked team.



His point was, where they are ranked now. LSU was never a top 10 team or even top 20. It was preseason polls that had them very high. As the polls continue to correct themselves and we see how good teams really are, then we can see how good the wins were.

Again, I think what the Mississippi teams are doing is great, but I'm tired of hearing how one of them beat 3 top ten teams. No, they didn't. At the end of the season, we will know the accurate rankings.

The bottom line is, this season is wide open and who knows were it all ends up?


----------



## Madsnooker (Oct 14, 2014)

elfiii said:


> Source - http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings
> 
> 1. MS ST - Plays 5 ranked teams this year. All of them are Top 10. All of them are SEC.
> 
> ...



Elfiii,

who are the 5 top ten teams state plays? Are you including A&M and LSU, because everyone knows they are not top 10 teams.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

Old Dead River said:


> Wrong!
> 
> LSU was ranked #15 when Auburn beat them. Auburn beat two ranked teams
> 
> I told yall, three great teams



I guess USCe is still one of the ten best teams in the nation?

LSU has been exposed.

Enjoy being #1.  Y'all deserve it, but let's not get stupid.  The LSU win wasn't over a great team.


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> His point was, where they are ranked now. LSU was never a top 10 team or even top 20. It was preseason polls that had them very high. As the polls continue to correct themselves and we see how good teams really are, then we can see how good the wins were.
> 
> Again, I think what the Mississippi teams are doing is great, but I'm tired of hearing how one of them beat 3 top ten teams. No, they didn't. At the end of the season, we will know the accurate rankings.
> 
> The bottom line is, this season is wide open and who knows were it all ends up?



Just looking at the Top 10, the Top 5 are all undefeated teams. Teams 6-10 are all 5-1. Maybe somebody wants to make an argument for rearranging them because they don't like the SEC? In doing that maybe they can explain to us why 4-1 teams in other conferences are ranked higher than 5-1 teams in other conferences? Is that SEC "homerism" too? That doesn't change the fact the SEC teams in the Top 10 would still most likely be in the Top 10. Comparing the two polls there would be no change in the Top 5. But that's probably because all the coaches in the nation are really just SEC homers.

Cranium said MS St and Ole Miss were for real. Based on who they have played so far, including ranked teams, saying they are for real is an impossibility if you claim the rest of the SEC isn't. All he can claim there is they are the best of a bad lot and they aren't really "fuh real man".

Maybe somebody can make an argument there is a more competitive conference than the SEC? I can wait.



By the way, FSU is the defending national champ and they are undefeated. They should be #1 until somebody knocks them off.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

elfiii said:


> Go look at the strength of schedule of the Top 10 and then cry me a river.



Strength of schedule is determined by rankings.  Since the argument is that these teams rankings are inflated from the beginning and just become kneejerk reactions to each week after, strength of schedule arguments don't mean much.

Remember Mizzou was ranked 23rd.  Did you honestly think they were the 23rd best team in the nation?  

aTm vaulted into the top 10 by beating a USCe team that anyone with any sense knew should have been at the bottom of the top 25 (at best).

aTm hasn't beaten anyone of note all year, but still gets looked at as a good team.

Even worse, people point to Arkansas as a good win, because they've played a couple of good teams tough.  Really, we're giving credit for losing now?

It's not just in the SEC, either.  Arizona went from unranked to top 10 with ONE win.  Perhaps we should have ranked App State in the top ten after beating Michigan years ago.

Notre Dame is ranked above several teams that they would be underdogs against on a neutral field.  Yet, FSU will still get credit for playing a top 5 team, until after the game.  If FSU wins, the talk will be that Notre Dame wasn't that good.

I prefer to just watch the teams play and determine how good they are.  SOS is nothing more than the opinions of people who don't want to be proven wrong with where they ranked teams to begin the season.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

elfiii said:


> By the way, FSU is the defending national champ and they are undefeated. They should be #1 until somebody knocks them off.



From what I've seen so far this year, the #1 spot should just be left blank.

No one has looked like the best team in the nation.

Plus, it doesn't matter who's #1.  Just who's higher than #5.


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> Strength of schedule is determined by rankings.  Since the argument is that these teams rankings are inflated from the beginning and just become kneejerk reactions to each week after, strength of schedule arguments don't mean much.



1-5 are all undefeated and the only undefeated teams. Like I said, maybe somebody can make an argument for their 5-1 team replacing one of those? Same goes for 6-10.



Rebel Yell said:


> Notre Dame is ranked above several teams that they would be underdogs against on a neutral field.  Yet, FSU will still get credit for playing a top 5 team, until after the game.  If FSU wins, the talk will be that Notre Dame wasn't that good.



Thanks for making my case for me. The same argument can be made about MS St and Ole Miss. Auburn and 'Bama weren't that good. See how that works?



Rebel Yell said:


> I prefer to just watch the teams play and determine how good they are.  SOS is nothing more than the opinions of people who don't want to be proven wrong with where they ranked teams to begin the season.



I don't disagree. The way I see it 6 teams are tied for first place. A whole slew of teams are tied for second place. Then there is everybody else. The only way to settle it is a real playoff system. Take your pick, either the conference champs with a wild card or two like the pros or the Top 20 go to the dance based on W/L record alone. Everybody else is a supporting cast of thousands. Winner takes all. Somebody would gripe about that.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

elfiii said:


> Thanks for making my case for me. The same argument can be made about MS St and Ole Miss. Auburn and 'Bama weren't that good. See how that works?



Difference is, no one is doing that.  Heck Arkansas gets pumped up as a tough game because they played a couple of good teams tough.  In the SEC everyone gets pumped up.  Even Kentucky is getting pumped up this year.  Kentucky may be a little better, but the rest of the East has fell.  That makes Kentucky look better if you ignore the fact that the East is no better than the ACC Atlantic.

Outside of Lou Holtz, everyone at ESPN will be labeling Notre Dame as a pretender.  Yet, no one is labeling Bama as a pretender.  No one is labeling Auburn as a pretender, even though that looked like the worst #2 vs. #3 matchup ever.

After the opener, no one said, "Maybe USCe just isn't that good."  Nope, they jumped straight to penciling aTm into the playoff.


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 14, 2014)

average SEC team would reak havoc in another conference. you think Baylor could compete in the sec west giving up 58 points?


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 14, 2014)

a lot of people are labeling bama a pretender.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

Old Dead River said:


> average SEC team would reak havoc in another conference. you think Baylor could compete in the sec west giving up 58 points?



That's what everyone said two years before Mizzou won the East.


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> That's what everyone said two years before Mizzou won the East.



Lemme guess. Mizzou wanted in the SEC so bad because it was "weak". By the same token, FSU remains in the ACC because it is weak.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

elfiii said:


> Lemme guess. Mizzou wanted in the SEC so bad because it was "weak". By the same token, FSU remains in the ACC because it is weak.



Spin the conversation wherever you want, but the "No one else can compete in the SEC" myth has been blown away over the past two years.

Mizzou, who has never won the Big12 won their division.

I remember hearing how those Big12 qb's wouldn't put up those numbers against SEC defenses.  Johnny Football won the Heisman against those very same defenses.

The SEC is the best conference in the land, no doubt.  But the idea that no one else can compete there is a joke.

aTm and Mizzou are just as competitive in the SEC as they were in the Big12.


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> Spin the conversation wherever you want, but the "No one else can compete in the SEC" myth has been blown away over the past two years.



I never said no one else can compete in the SEC. I said the SEC is the most competitive conference. So did you.



Rebel Yell said:


> The SEC is the best conference in the land, no doubt.



Or did you mean to say something else?


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 14, 2014)

Mizzou greatly benefited from being in the sec. and of course the east has been weak for some years now. Florida and Tenn haven't been relevant in years. UGA had a bit of an off year last year as well.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

Old Dead River said:


> Mizzou greatly benefited from being in the sec.



How?  Did their players gain 30lbs and shave a half second off their 40 time when they sewed on the SEC patch?

That was still a BIG12 roster that played in the SECCG.


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> How?  Did their players gain 30lbs and shave a half second off their 40 time when they sewed on the SEC patch?
> 
> That was still a BIG12 roster that played in the SECCG.


lot of revenue and exposure, it also boosted their prowess as a recruiter.


----------



## shane256 (Oct 14, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> who are the 5 top ten teams state plays? Are you including A&M and LSU, because everyone knows they are not top 10 teams.



Well... if you go that route, the #1 spot will like not have played many top 10 teams by the end of the year... since a loss by a team will make them drop a bit. You're left comparing a bunch of teams who didn't play each other and try to compare how they stack with each other.

I agree somewhat, though... most teams try to schedule some easy teams at the start to get their teams used to playing... a decent team, like aTm, will blow them away and continue to look good with good stats. It's really only half way into the season when we can really start to see really how good they are.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

elfiii said:


> I never said no one else can compete in the SEC. I said the SEC is the most competitive conference. So did you.



I was referring back to the original comment that I replied to......



Old Dead River said:


> average SEC team would reak havoc in another conference. you think Baylor could compete in the sec west giving up 58 points?


----------



## shane256 (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> Spin the conversation wherever you want, but the "No one else can compete in the SEC" myth has been blown away over the past two years.
> 
> Mizzou, who has never won the Big12 won their division.
> 
> ...




I think the difference is that most conferences have one, maybe two, teams that are strong. The rest are there to pump up the stats of the one/two strong teams.  The SEC tends to have at least four competitive teams every year. It's very hard for an SEC team to end the season undefeated. It's not so hard for some others. Look at Boise State for so many years... they knew how to game the system... they'd play a bunch of high schools and community colleges and then crow at the end of the year about an undefeated season and how that should make them #1. Then they played a school with a competitive football team and get dragged up and down the field.


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> How?  Did their players gain 30lbs and shave a half second off their 40 time when they sewed on the SEC patch?



Yes. It's the standard handicap issued to all new teams in the SEC to make it fair. We would do the same thing for ya'll should ya'll decide to step it up a notch.


----------



## Madsnooker (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> Spin the conversation wherever you want, but the "No one else can compete in the SEC" myth has been blown away over the past two years.
> 
> Mizzou, who has never won the Big12 won their division.
> 
> ...



Good post!!!


----------



## Madsnooker (Oct 14, 2014)

Old Dead River said:


> average SEC team would reak havoc in another conference. you think Baylor could compete in the sec west giving up 58 points?



Just when you start to be taken serious, you go JJ on us!!!

No middle of the pac sec team is going to reek havoc anywhere. I watched a team lose to Nwestern that took one of your "top 10" teams to the woodshed until their running back got hurt. 

I say Baylor would reek havoc against some of those defenses I have witnessed in the sec this year?


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

shane256 said:


> I think the difference is that most conferences have one, maybe two, teams that are strong. The rest are there to pump up the stats of the one/two strong teams.  The SEC tends to have at least four competitive teams every year.



Those teams are usually Bama, LSU, UGA, and USCe.  They don't all play each other, either.  Every elite team plays 2 or 3 games a year that they have a legit chance to lose.


----------



## Madsnooker (Oct 14, 2014)

Old Dead River said:


> lot of revenue and exposure, it also boosted their prowess as a recruiter.



You can't be serious? 

Those teams fielded the same team they would have if they were still in the Big 12. Recruiting had no bearing on the teams last year.

Quit making excuses for BOTH teams turning the garbage we have heard for years, on its head!!!!


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> Those teams are usually Bama, LSU, UGA, and USCe.



The Barners don't get no respect? What's up w/that?


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

elfiii said:


> The Barners don't get no respect? What's up w/that?



I mean consistently.  They've had the last two years, but they usually pop up every few years then fade back in to the background.


----------



## Madsnooker (Oct 14, 2014)

Old Dead River said:


> and of course the east has been weak for some years now. .



I assume this was just a slip of the tongue?


----------



## weagle (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> Those teams are usually Bama, LSU, UGA, and USCe.  They don't all play each other, either.  Every elite team plays 2 or 3 games a year that they have a legit chance to lose.



So you are not going to include Florida and Auburn and Tennesee as traditional powers?


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> I mean consistently.  They've had the last two years, but they usually pop up every few years then fade back in to the background.



The same could be said about the other teams. All of them have had a bad patch of lean years.


----------



## weagle (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> I mean consistently.  They've had the last two years, but they usually pop up every few years then fade back in to the background.



You are kidding right? You are includiing South Carolina, who has nver won the SEC, and UGA who hasn't won a NC since 1980 and leaving off Tenn, Florida and Auburn who have all won multiple SEC championships, had undefeated seasons and won one or more NC's?


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

weagle said:


> So you are not going to include Florida and Auburn and Tennesee as traditional powers?



I guess Florida could still be counted, but Tennesee?  C'Mon, man.  I'm talking recent history.


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> I guess Florida could still be counted, but Tennesee?  C'Mon, man.  I'm talking recent history.



If you are going to include the Gators then you have to include the Barners. Auburn won the SECCG in '04, '10 and '13. That's pretty "recent".


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

elfiii said:


> If you are going to include the Gators then you have to include the Barners. Auburn won the SECCG in '04, '10 and '13. That's pretty "recent".



OK, then Auburn, too.  The top teams in the SEC play about one game more than the rest of the nation.  I don't give alot more credence to a team you should beat by 30 instead of 40.


----------



## weagle (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> I guess Florida could still be counted, but Tennesee?  C'Mon, man.  I'm talking recent history.



The point is when Bama was down Tenn and Florida were up, When Florida and Tenn are down then Ole Miss, Miss St are up.

There are always 6 to 8 SEC teams who are serious contenders.  No other conference even comes close.


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

weagle said:


> The point is when Bama was down Tenn and Florida were up, When Florida and Tenn are down then Ole Miss, Miss St are up.
> 
> There are always 6 to 8 SEC teams who are serious contenders.  No other conference even comes close.



Who are the contenders right now?  How many contenders were there last year?

Do you mean for the conferecne or national contenders?


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> OK, then Auburn, too.  The top teams in the SEC play about one game more than the rest of the nation.  I don't give alot more credence to a team you should beat by 30 instead of 40.



I only give credence to the W or the L. Who you "should" beat and who you "shouldn't" is meaningless once the scoreboard clock expires. All of that is nothing more than pure speculation. The road to Hades is paved with shoulda', coulda' woulda'.


----------



## DSGB (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> Spin the conversation wherever you want, but the "No one else can compete in the SEC" myth has been blown away over the past two years.
> 
> Mizzou, who has never won the Big12 or the SEC.
> 
> ...



Fixed it for you. Don't forget Mizzou won their division in the Big12 three out of four years before joining the SEC. They played UGA and UF last year when both teams had a horrendous amount of injuries. 

How many games did A&M play in the Big12 with Manziel?


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

DSGB said:


> Fixed it for you. Don't forget Mizzou won their division in the Big12 three out of four years before joining the SEC. They played UGA and UF last year when both teams had a horrendous amount of injuries.
> 
> How many games did A&M play in the Big12 with Manziel?



So, what you're saying is that Mizzou had the same success rate in the SEC as they did in the BIG12.  That is exactly my point.

Of Manziel had been in the BIG12 aTm, evey one of you hear would be shouting from the rooftops that he couldn't have done it in the SEC.  He wouldn't be big enough to take the pounding that SEC defenses would be giving him.

Look, you have never heard me say that the SEC isn't the best conference, but htis notion of every team being good and the myth that no one else could compete in the SEC is preposterous.


----------



## DSGB (Oct 14, 2014)

Rebel Yell said:


> So, what you're saying is that Mizzou had the same success rate in the SEC as they did in the BIG12.  That is exactly my point.
> 
> Of Manziel had been in the BIG12 aTm, evey one of you hear would be shouting from the rooftops that he couldn't have done it in the SEC.  He wouldn't be big enough to take the pounding that SEC defenses would be giving him.
> 
> Look, you have never heard me say that the SEC isn't the best conference, but htis notion of every team being good and the myth that no one else could compete in the SEC is preposterous.



Not at all. 3/4 is better than 1/2 - going on 1/3. If they do end up winning the East this year, then it's a little closer.

You wouldn't hear me say that about Manziel. He was a special talent. Tebow and sCam were the same way. 

I don't think every team in the SEC is good. Like was already mentioned, there are usually 6 at any given time that are. What other conference can say that?


----------



## Throwback (Oct 14, 2014)

elfiii said:


> . The road to Hades is paved with shoulda', coulda' woulda'.



So is the road to the PAC 12



T


----------



## Rebel Yell (Oct 14, 2014)

DSGB said:


> I don't think every team in the SEC is good. Like was already mentioned, there are usually 6 at any given time that are. What other conference can say that?



Let's say there are 6.  At the most, each team will play 4 of the others.  That still leaves 9 games that should be gimme's.  No one has to play tough games every week.  SEC teams, generally, play about one more tough game than anyone else.

Just because Vandy is a little better than Wake Forest doesn't mean they are any more of a threat to beat you.  They'll just lose by less.


----------



## Cranium (Oct 14, 2014)

weagle said:


> The point is when Bama was down Tenn and Florida were up, When Florida and Tenn are down then Ole Miss, Miss St are up.
> 
> *There are always 6 to 8 SEC teams who are serious contenders.  No other conference even comes close.*



HUH?? Are you delusional?? Or are you talking about the conference championship?? 
There has only been a MAXIMUM of 2 serious contenders for the NC out of the all mighty SEC in the past several years and even the years for 2 are RARE.

But I do agree with Elfii..using past Bama logic when they were playing the "sisters of the poor colleges" while the #2 & #3 teams were playing top 15 teams..
When you're the defending champ you're still #1 until you lose


----------



## elfiii (Oct 14, 2014)

Throwback said:


> So is the road to the PAC 12
> 
> 
> 
> T



There is no road to the PAC 12. You have to take a boat. A slow one.


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 14, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> Just when you start to be taken serious, you go JJ on us!!!
> 
> No middle of the pac sec team is going to reek havoc anywhere. I watched a team lose to Nwestern that took one of your "top 10" teams to the woodshed until their running back got hurt.
> 
> I say Baylor would reek havoc against some of those defenses I have witnessed in the sec this year?



you talking about a state team from a few years ago that wasn't that good anyway? boohoo.

Baylor gave up 58 points to a non sec school and you're chestbeating about what they will do against bigger physical sec teams? get real man.


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 14, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> You can't be serious?
> 
> Those teams fielded the same team they would have if they were still in the Big 12. Recruiting had no bearing on the teams last year.
> 
> Quit making excuses for BOTH teams turning the garbage we have heard for years, on its head!!!!



how dare you distort my words, I said being in the SEC would benefit the program which it has and will. I did not say it changed the team they had on the field. they backed into the sec east game that is, beat a uga team that was much maligned with injuries after a raucous game with LSU. and they got defeated in the title game did they not?? A&M was a much better team with manziel but because they were playing in the stacked west they weren't able to get to the big game either of first two years.

being an sec school gives both of those new teams a tremendous advantage going fwd, particularly a&m - duh


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 14, 2014)

Madsnooker said:


> His point was, where they are ranked now. LSU was never a top 10 team or even top 20. It was preseason polls that had them very high. As the polls continue to correct themselves and we see how good teams really are, then we can see how good the wins were.
> 
> Again, I think what the Mississippi teams are doing is great, but I'm tired of hearing how one of them beat 3 top ten teams. No, they didn't. At the end of the season, we will know the accurate rankings.
> 
> The bottom line is, this season is wide open and who knows were it all ends up?




with the amount of 4 and 5 star talent LSU ought to be a decent team. they probably have more talent in their stables than state but it obviously hasn't been developed. from what I'm reading Miles doesn't develop quarterbacks anyway.

you wanna try to tell me Alabama doesn't have a lot of talent, as if they haven't had their pick of litter for nearly the last decade. Both Bama and LSU will be back. 

Everyone knows how the polls work. You can't have it both ways. If you beat a team when they are ranked in the top ten then you defeated a top ten team, no ifs, ands or buts.

you sound like one of these guys that might try to tell me how much better Auburn is than State just because Auburn scored more points on LSU and had more separation score wise. Did it ever occur to you that losing big games you're favored in can have a profound negative effect on a team. And even if that isn't all of the diagnosis with LSU, it was very apparent that Harris was playing MUCH worse against Auburn than he did against State.


----------



## Old Dead River (Oct 14, 2014)

as for those cupcake teams masquerading as division stalwarts. In a good conference like the SEC they generally get exposed rather quickly. South Carolina on the opening night of the season and then the over-hyperbolized A&M. Everyone was singing the praises of Kenny Hill and how Kevin Sumlin had the aggies going without missing a beat after manziel left. The litmus test occurred in Starkville and then Ole Miss repeated the experiment to validate the results. a team like A&M very likely could've hovered around in some of the weaker conferences and not gotten tested till the end of the year if at all. That's sec justice.

If you wanna rag on State and knock their win at lsu and defeat of A&M because the teams got bushwhacked and turned out to be not as good as they had been in years past, where there's the Auburn win to prove you wrong. Auburn are clearly one of the best teams in the country. I can't stand them but you have to give credit to a quality opponent.


----------

