@@rancidity That's not true. Historically, the B10 had the biggest fan base because of Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan. Also, teams like Notre Dame and USC would come and play them. It was only recently that the SEC inched out the B10 in the number of their fans. but with the realignment - I don't think it's gonna last for long.
Why does the media get so defensive about SEC bias? Not just this show. There are dozens over examples. My biggest issue is how far the media goes to defend rhe SEC.
I do think there is a bias. I think the SEC is still the best overall, but I don’t think the gap is as big as the media is trying to portray. I’m sorry but if Vandy can lose to Georgia state but beat Bama right after Bama beat Georgia, there’s fluctuations in college football but that’s all over the place
Sec voters not voting for pac 10/12 heisman is the grossest bias that happened AGAIN last year!!! It’s real, it’s toxic, it’s crumbling with the new big 10
Iowa State, BYU, Pitt, and even Miami would all get curb stomped by any single one of the ranked SEC teams. I mean Clemson is the only team I respect in the ACC and look what Georgia did to them.
2:26 you and many other analysts used this logic to say Washington was not very good last year, disrespecting them all year. Clearly that was wrong. If an sec team was playing like UW was they would have been too 2 the whole year
The championships, The sheer number of SEC players starting in the NFL ruins any argument the jealous may have and my team isn't even in the SEC. Just an objective observer.
The championships - runs into severe problems when you recognize the long history of extremely questionable selection process this sport has in determining who can even go to a championship game in the first place.
@@MattBuild4 You can try to argue that if you have nothing else to legitimately complain about, but together with the draft picks kind of confirms the playoff selection committee got it right most of the time. Me being a Miami fan shouldn't want the SEC to be what it is either, because it tarnishes the "U" golden years. But facts are facts like it or not.
@@SpontaneousOracle I would say starting NFL players is much stronger argument for you than number of draft picks in general. Draft picks imo can get biased based on viewership. If you arent in a conference with as many scouts and eyes you have a lower likelihood of getting drafted. As a result conferences that provide the most viewershp of players will likely have the most drafted players. However starting, requires some actual field evaluation of talent in a game.
@MattBuild4 I see so all the NFL scouts and NFL leadership is wrong, the selection committee is wrong, All the coaches and experts that rank the teams are wrong. But you are right? Its a miracle all these organizations can function without you in the group.😆 🤣 😂.
@@SpontaneousOracle Are the NFL scouts infalliable? No. What does getting drafted actually mean? Its a subjecitve opinion based on your level of play relative to your prospective market value and the overall demand value for a specific team. You could be the best TE or RB in the nation and not go in the first round, because the NFL doesnt value your position that much - has really nothing to do with your inherent talent. Furthermore theres still the question of how good are you really at playing the actual sport. Dont tell me you dont believe in busts?
If the SEC hadn't been illegally paying players for the last 20 years they wouldn't have won so many natty. Now that everyone can pay players and with the transfer portal...it really shows
Even the legal payments to their coaches. They keep talking about the Saban coaching tree like it was just him being great (some of it was him being great). But the reality was Alabama had a $10-15 million dollar coaching staff when others struggled to shell out $5 million. If you're an up and coming G5 or D2 coach, it was a lot more attractive to make $1-5 million as a coordinator at Alabama on your way to a head coaching job at the P5 than making half that as a head coach at a crappy P5 or G5 school on your way to a better head coaching job. Along with facilities upgrades, people severely under-estimated the impact this had on college football. I don't want to say it was absolutely the wrong thing to do, but the SEC signing the first big TV deal for over a billion dollars back in 2007 is really what gave them the leg up on other conferences going forward. It was brilliant, but if you look at college football up to 2008, and since then to today, there's an obvious dominance by very specific SEC teams who won out the most from those pay days. 2024 is a preview of how NIL is leveling the playing field.
You’re contradicting yourself so badly. You penalize Miami every week for close wins against what you think are “weaker teams”. I’m not sure you thought this one out.
The main reason for the bias is the preseason rankings. You know, ole Miss, Tennessee, Texas A&M, Missouri are not winning a dang thing. But they were in the top 10? GTFOH
Luv ya JD, but I’m not convinced. The SEC built their schedule to play fewer games at the power 5 level. Every year they have more teams dropping in the rankings, as football is played, than any other conference. I get that there is money to be made from pandering to one of the largest fan bases thought. ;)
Why do they drop on rankings? It's because they play each other lol.. the SEC is the most dominant conference, and it's not even debatable. Every other conference may have 1 or 2 teams that can even compete, the SEC has about 8 or 9.
@@Free4Now2 Why does the SEC have 8 teams that can compete, but the B12 doesnt, despite the B12 having 8 teams with the same or better record than Alabama this season? The B12 only has 2 ranked teams for comparison. But what actually is the logic or argument being used to justify these rankings?
@@MattBuild4the talent on the teams. It’s rly not that complicated. SEC has the largest volume of talent. Doesn’t mean their teams are always the best, but it’s why there’s bias. Not to mention the entire history of college football backing up that bias
@@GeronimoOoO7 So how did A&m go from a historical powerhouse that hadnt been relevant in 50 years in the SWC to a bottom feeder in the B12 to a solid average SEC team because the SEC is just a better conference? All jokes aside I somewhat agree, but for every different reasons. The SEC spends the most money on college football of any conference and guarantees the most viewership. The most viewership leads the most top end talent which the majority of times will help you most. However how this came to be - isnt strictly speaking legal...... and more importantly just having the projected talent on paper doesnt mean youd actually win. My problem is with people saying that we have the titles, without recognizing the extremely well documented truth that the post season of college football has been a complete sham for centuries. There are entire seasons where its documented that teams bought the abilility to make a game - any other sport on earth thats INSANELY ILLEGAL...... In college football its "just a part of the game"...... Uh wtf........
What was the record of teams faced in those bowl games? Cuz im sorry but #9 South Carolina playing #20 Nebraska really isnt that surprising for South Carolina to win, and tbh I dont really see how them winning that game is clear evidence that they are actually a top 10 team.
Lol bowl games are the worst way to determine conference stength! With the long breaks, weird travel, coaching changes, and opt outs! You clearly need to learn the sport 😂🤡🤦🏼♂️
It's because SEC fans live in a bubble and there's no one outside the SEC that can compete against them. The only other conference that the SEC plays out of conference is the ACC and if you take out all the ACC games from the SEC's non conference matches - the SEC is in the negative lol. SEC IS OVERRAAAATED!!! =]
Haha, I love the energy. So, who is comparable to the SEC? And in what category? Because I hope you're not just emotionally venting. And we think no one outside of the SEC can compete... who said that? Provide receipts. People like you love to use general statements that have no accountability.
@@tremoore9831 i mean to come off like that i thought u was the sec hater😭😭😭 but yeah big 10 for sure imo and i feel like acc has better top tier teams but as an avg i think big 12 might have them
SEC is definitely the best conference now. I think the bias was more of an issue in the mid to late 2000s when arguable teams like USC would have beaten the the SEC team that got in the title game
@@PappavolGeorgia lost to a trash Alabama team. Lost to a Vanderbilt team that lost to Georgia State. An Oregon loss is easily a better loss than any loss in the country clown
Well in that case the big 12 is the best cause outside of top 2 in sec big 12 has owned them in bowl games and for the most part non conference. But “they weren’t trying” right..
And only 2 of those programs are legit. UF without Urban is nothing, Auburn and LSU are the biggest jokes in the sport. If you can’t sustain success, it’s luck not skill
Yeah well heres some more facts..... Both of Florida's titles were won in seasons that they didnt finish with the best record (thats pretty sus). Auburn's title came in a season they magically jumped a back to back undefeated team (thats pretty sus). 1 of LSU's titles came in a season they beat the B12 runner up instead of a team literally ranked #1 in the nation - another of LSU's titles came in a season with 8 way tie for 1st place. (they do have 1 undisputed title tho) 4 of 6 Alabama titles include seasons where they did not beat play undefeated or teams with the same record as them for a title game.
@@johncrawford1320 history built off of paying players when other conferences would be extremely punished for the same “tactic”. The very definition of “biased”!! The deliberate decision to not vote for pac 10/12 players as heisman by ignorant SEC voters is also the definition of “biased”. Now the SEC isn’t the only conference allowed to pay players, and those ignorant fans and voters can’t comprehend how other teams and conferences can and will be better than the “SEC elite”
@@rustystokes1404 That was 2004 and fair enough. Though 6 teams went undefeated in 2004. Imo 2004 isnt undisputed for this reason either. However id argue the comparison isnt just Auburn vs USC - you gotta throw Utah in there as well who had 9 drafted players including the first overall drafted player and nfl hall of famers on their team.
But when you see Georgia mall every other conference and even the SEC, then what makes it so tough. Alabama did the same thing. Don't give me this SEC is so tough stuff. Every other SEC team sucks
Haha, if you think every other SEC team sucks. I can only imagine what you think of "every other" team in the other conferences. I'm happy that your standards are so high. I can respect that if your standard is consistent.
The SEC is not overrated and unfortunately for all the people who think otherwise history says otherwise and perception is reality when it comes to track record and getting the benefit of the doubt when spots are up for grabs. When you win titles with multiple teams in your conference over a 25 year period and by multiple I mean 6 teams with 4 of the 6 winning multiple titles it says your conference isn’t overrated. Even this year I’d say theirs 4 teams that are good enough to win it.
If the S.E.C was overrated then why has the S.E.C won thirteen of the last eighteen National Championships in College football? Why has the S.E.C won five consecutive World Series in College baseball? Why has the S.E.C won two consecutive National Championships in Women's College basketball? Why is Dawn Staley coming off of her greatest recruiting class of all time? Or does anyone know?
Division 1 FBS college football post season and championship selection is historically corrupt af. Similar problems do exist for the CWS - like how Florida jumped about 30 teams they shouldnt have to make the tourney - but at least CWS has a legit post season, so this can actually be proven to be legit. "Why has the SEC won two consecutive national championships in womens basketball? Cuz Uconn got tired of winning them every year........ Oh you got 2 - thats cute
@@WangHungLo you can call them excuses but its kinda telling when the US DOJ and US Senate sue your ass for $2 billion for fraud, corruption and anti-trust.
SEC bias always is without any true perspective on the college game on the whole. They typically point to individual game results while not noting the bottom line numbers when comparing conferences. Numbers like the number of pro players and 🏆. When you look at the individual games they point to their claims without context of the level of competition. First of these are college athletes and you typically get up and down performances. If teams arent motivated they have lackluster performances and it many times leads to upsets. Also when you have a good number of pretty good teams in a conference playing each other ; the schedule plays as a perpetual trap. Now if you are Ohio State or Michigan you simply dont have that factor in like an SEC schedule. You have two games to navigate thru and that's it. I realize its a bit different with conference expansion. But this SEC bias talk has been around a while. I do think there are teams and conferences that are underserved so to speak and too easily dismissed. But they are by in large teams out west where times zones play into it somewhat. These teams a lot of times are not getting the same amount of views because the east has finalized their day and unplugged. But lets get to the real two biggest reasons. Number one is the lack of good defense in competing conferences. The scores in these conferences reveal this issue. Just a few programs sprinkled here and there in these conferences. The one exception has been the Big 10. Fans typically and rightfully dismiss teams that cant play decent defense. And the last one is the amount of rivalries in the SEC as opposed to other conferences. Two things about it. Number one is it raises the intensity of games for the most part. More intensity brings more attention. More attention brings more money. More money brings more viewership. It is a self perpetuating cycle. Now college football is changing fast especially with conference realignment. Big 10 especially has at least somewhat of a chance to be viewed more evenly with the SEC. All other conferences will struggle for the leftovers. Its just reality. Unfortunate but some good teams will struggle in some cases to get their rightful due.
Running through this after the games happened, and the new polls released is cheating a bit, but I had a super busy weekend and I really wanted to respond to this (even if it's just a response to the ether), because I would have agreed with you in most years since about 2010, but this year...I don't think there's a good defense for the SEC or how pollsters and the general public view them. Mizzou has been my go to example all year, and the AP is proving again that the SEC has been vastly overrated. First, get this out of the way, the AP matters. People keep talking about polls don't matter, but Mizzou is a prime example of why they do. If they didn't matter, people wouldn't care about strength of schedule, they would just watch the games and be able to asses teams based on how they're playing, not if there's a number next to one or both teams while the game is being played. Mizzou in week 10 is ranked 25th in the country, and all anyone I've found online and in the media can say is "Well who else are you ranking there?" First of all, anybody, literally anybody. Second of all, do you not think the only reason people are asking that question is because of the conference logo Mizzou is associated with? Because if you think it's any other reason, look at their resume. They blew out Murray St, Buffalo, and Massachusetts. They had a tight one against a BC team that has dropped 3 straight in the ACC, and another tight one to an Auburn team that...honestly they might not be terrible, but they're not good at winning. In the two games they faced actual competition they lost by a combined 75-10. Mizzou is not a good team, much less a top 25 team, and nothing in the season other than the fact that they're in the SEC indicates that they're worthy of a top 25 ranking. That's the most egregious and obvious example, but across the board SEC teams are given more leeway, and it's normally the right choice, but we've seen evidence even within the SEC that we need to be adjusting our perspectives on teams overall, and that should extend to all conferences evenly, including the SEC. It's not that these teams in the mid level of the SEC couldn't win all their games against other conference schedules, it's that they haven't been. It's that the elite of the SEC have been as flawed and unpredictable as the top levels of other conferences have been for the past decade, and that NIL has leveled the playing field, but people are still only giving SEC schools benefit of the doubt. If Pitt had lost to UNC and Syracuse they'd be so far off the radar that we wouldn't even know that Eli Holstein came from Alabama to lead their resurgence, but tell me what on Ole Miss' schedule other than our expectations of what they should have been points to them being a better team? Ole Miss' best win is against South Carolina, they beat a trio of garbage that's not worth typing out, and a pretty bad Wake Forest team. Yes their 6 points from being undefeated, but not only did they not win those games, one of them was against Kentucky, and that loss is getting uglier by the week. Despite all of that it took an emphatic win against Syracuse for Pitt to be placed just ahead of Ole Miss in the rankings. Pitt has looked good this year, they've been winning this year, Ole Miss is more talented but they've looked inconsistent at best offensively, and yet because they were preseason high ranked, and are in the SEC (which was the basis for their preseason high rank), it took 9 full weeks, and 2 losses for Pitt to just barely sneak ahead of them. Just going down the line we see people putting SEC teams where they think they should be based on their talent level, and not on field results. Alabama shouldn't be ahead of Boise State, particularly since the Bronco's one loss was three point to what people are largely agreeing is at least a top 5 if not #1 team in Oregon, Tennessee hasn't looked really good on offense since Kent State, and there are other teams behind them that have looked at least as good if not better (Indiana, I don't care about the competition, has looked consistently dominant), people are saying Georgia is fixed because they beat the snot out of Texas, but somehow are just forgetting that for four straight games they looked beyond mortal, they looked pretty awful, and didn't play a single complete game from Kentucky to Mississippi State (and mind Auburn and MissSt are varying degrees of terrible, and Georgia just didn't look dominant against them). When we as fans, outside of the sphere of SEC fandom, say that there's an SEC bias what we...well at least what I mean, I guess I can only speak for myself, but what I mean is the same rules are not applied to the SEC when those rules are warranted. The upper tier has been weaker than expected (Texas, Alabama, Georgia), and not just against each other, the second tier has just outright lost to bad conference teams and their big OOC games, and the lower tier is just as terrible as the lower tiers in other conferences. We see that watching the games week to week, and continue to see 8-10 SEC teams ranked when it's obvious that other conferences are producing equally good football. And again, people need to stop pretending the rankings don't matter. I want to not care about them, but the perception of every single team is based on that lil number that is or isn't next to their name during a game, and so I have to care and seeing that little number next to an absolutely atrocious Mizzou team...yeah frankly it pisses me off. It's undeserved and absolute crap, and I think it's absolute crap on the part of media personalities like yourself to tell us there's no bias.
This isnt anything new...... 2010 South Carolina - besides beating Alabama what did they do? Went 9-5 beat ZERO other ranked teams, lost to 6-7 team and lost by 9 in their bowl depsite outranking their opponent by 5 spots. Thats a top 25 team? Do you realize 11+ wins teams magically didnt get ranked that season. Or how did Miss State finish as a top 15 team in the same year? They went 9-4 - beat 0 ranked teams, lost close to Auburn and Arkansas, got blown out vs Alabama and LSU. They magically jumped from #21 to #15 beating a 7-5 unranked Michgan in a bowl game? Really? Do you realize this team nearly outranked a ACC Champion? And if its cuz they lost close to good teams, why doesnt 9-4 Air Force get the same treatment losing by 3 to #6 OU (who outranked literally everyone Miss State played besides Auburn)? That was 1 of 3 Top 10 teams Air Force played in 2010 - but they go unranked and Miss State is top 15? That looks weird. Why is LSU Top 10 in that year? They finished 3rd in the SEC West. It would seem to me the only reason they outranked Arkansas (who they lost to) is cuz Arkansas actually had to play a top 10 team in their bowl game, while #11 LSU played #18 A&M. If this sport is about competition, why doesnt #21 Miss State play #18 A&M instead of barely .500 team and #11 LSU play #12 Nevada instead a team they outranked by 7 spots and 3 wins - or if you wanna actually prove youre a top 10 team - play #7 Boise State in a bowl?
somehow just some way - oh i dont know could be because since the BCS the SEC has recieved extremely favorable rankings and bowl game selection despite playing the least amount of conference and road games of any conference in the league. Yall act like theres no evidence of this. Bro 2006 LSU finsihed 4th in the SEC, but somehow was ranked 3rd in the nation? I mean how do you explain this..... that alone doesnt make any sense - then you add the fact they ddnt even beat a top 10 team that season. I can keep going - 2007 - 7 of the top 8 teams had the same record, so how are you gonna seriously claim that LSU is the undisputed best team? 2008 and 2009 you had multiple undefeated teams magically miss the championship - 2008 Alabama went from #22 to #1 in the nation beating teams that went 70-79 on the year, yet you chasticized an undefeated G5 team with 5 top 25 wins. Make it make sense! 2009 5 teams went undefeated, but yall act like the SEC is just so much better than everyone. 2010 you have auburn jump a back to back undefeated G5 team when they beat an FCS team - that G5 team beat a top 6 team on the road by 40! I mean it doesnt more obvious that insane bias existed in the league. 2011 selection directly contradicted the 2006 selection and managed to favor the SEC in BOTH seasons. What are you smoking that theres no evidence of this? You put a legit playoff in the BCS era tand the SEC gets 25% as many titles (at best) as they received. Yall used the BCS as a crux to claim that this was why the SEC was so amazing in the CFP, which led to constant 1 and 2 team selections in the CFP era. Its pretty easy to claim you have the most title games, when your teams are also selected significantly more often than other conferences. And the CFP like the BCS has ZERO consistent criteria for selection beyond bs subjectivity opinions.
@@JoshStrickland-n8x Yeah and how many of them have asterisks with them? Did you even bother to read the comment....... How many of your glorious titles arent undisputed? 1998 - Undefeated Tulane doesnt play for the ttle 2003 - The #! RANKED TEAM IN THE NATION (USC) didnt play for the title. 2004 - 6 teams went undefeated 2006 - Michigan split with Florida and Boise State went undefeated 2007 - 7 of the top 8 teams had the same record - Kansas had a better record than LSU and didnt even make the game. 2008 - 2 teams went undefeated and magically neither played for the title, plus there were 3 way ties in the PAC and B12 2009 - 5 teams went undefeated 2010 - Undefeated TCU magically doesnt play for the title 2011 - Selection directly contradicts 2006, Stanford, Oklahoma State and Boise State all have the same record as Alabama 2012 - undefeated Ohio State doesnt play for the title 2015 - Undisputed 2017 - Undefeated UCF doesnt play for the title - they make up some bs about sos, even tho B10 champion Ohio State has 100000000 tmes the SOS as the 3rd best SEC team who magically makes the game. 2019 - Undisputed 2020 - covid season, undefeated UC doesnt even make the game, conference fix games to get brand teams into the playoffs 2021 - ND and UL have the same record as Georgia, but Georgia gets it as the SEC runner up because theyre in the SEC. 2022 - Undisputed Yall act like youre clearly dominating the sport, yet have had 3 undisputed titles in the last 26 years - thats pretty false advertisement if you ask me.
Teh level of bias they get is absolutely not deserved it’s propping up done by the media. Ole miss and mizzou were top 6 teams, A&M and lsu beat no one and go way up. They rank everyone 10 spots higher than they should be like ole miss. What have they done to deserve it and has Tennessee really looked like #7 team? They would’ve lost to fl if mertz didn’t get hurt and lost to Arkansas who got beat by 16th in big 12 Oklahoma state
@@jonathanwrehe8015for your sake, if you're ever charged with anything legally... I hope they require actual proof. As opposed to speculation and wild theories. Now you're claiming the AP poll and CFP committee is biased. When you probably don't know who on the CFP committee or the AP poll.
Saw my first SEC game in ‘64. I have seen a lot of big time football…SEC is so strong. Check how many SEC schools won the Natty this century….they play big games every year in the conference.
8 of 16 current SEC teams have won a title since the BCS era. Who else can come close to saying that about anyone else? They might claim that we're living in the past. So let's settle for having won 4 of the last 5 championships.
The BCS was a joke, but pre-BCS titles are in many cases even more sus. The amount of titles Alabama claims in seasons THEY LOST THE TITLE GAME - is pretty insane.
@MattBuild4 the BCS was an upgrade. It only became questionable once they caved to outside pressure and kept changing the point system used to rank teams. So, there was no standard or continuity from year to year.
@@tremoore9831 "Only became questionable one they caved to outside pressue" So you mean after year 1? System was first changed from the original formula in 1999. The BCS started in 1998. Thats not a good sign..... Like SEC fans seem to have this belief of the BCS that it only started to change when yall were winning - thats historically not even remotely true.
Using only metrics from this year, the SEC is on average the best conference. However, the Big 10 is much better at the top, and phrases like “Ohio St would go 6-6 in the SEC” just need to stop. OSU’s historical record vs the SEC couldn’t matter less. The Big 10 is much more suited to win a title than the SEC this year because of top teams.
We live in a day and age where most people don't know how to brag or build themselves up without putting someone else down. Combine that with... nothing brings people together more than having a common enemy. Then you'll see why people feel the way they do about the SEC. We don't need to be liked by everyone. The sad fact is... who is the SEC actually comparable to? We actually only compete against ourselves (without a doubt, there are schools that compare, just not entire conferences). I'm sure that will trigger some people. Oh, well. A championship mindset would typically motivate those who strive to be on top of college football. Instead, the path of least resistance is claiming bias. The hard work and grind that got the SEC to the top are completely overlooked. The Ohio State's of college football understands this very well. They put in the work year round. That's why their goals are so high. So those people should strive to do what Oregon is doing with Dan Lanning (maybe having a different target goal besides an SEC will be more palatable for some), or continue to keep on bitching. I'm sure that strategy will work out well for them.
The bias is real because it’s true. Even the SEC mid teams were dangerous to the best out of other conferences. That’s why it’s such a big deal when a BIG or ACC or PAC team won it. It’s the deepest conference for sure and based off this season you could make a case that it’s even deeper this season I wouldn’t say overrated
Georgia State sucks and beat an SEC school, Cal is garbage and beat an SEC school, USC is down and beat the third best SEC school, Notre Dame lost to Northern Illinois and beat the 4th SEC team.
@@glennwilliams2950 I think you can have a bad game and still go in to win big. When it becomes repetitive with the same issues that’s when you can start saying stuff
We’re not saying a conference best couple teams would not be able to win against the sec. What we’re saying is, a legit 10 even 12 sec teams can beat you any given weekend..The last 100 hundred years Michigan and Ohio state beat down 10 teams with no pulse, and then finally play one meaningful game.. And their supposedly the second best conference 😂😂😂 SEC SEC SEC
Anybody that thinks the SEC isnt the toughest conference just doesnt know ball. No point in even arguing with them. Its like trying to explain reality to a "flat earth"er...just smile and pat them on the head and move on 😂😂.
Na. Mid level sec is better than top any other conference. Ohio st, Oregon, Clemson or whatever shitty team are big fish little pond. That’s why they always go undefeated in regular season. There’s one or two teams in other conferences that are good. The sec has talent spread throughout. SEC is just better.
Now that you bring it up, there is a bias in the college sport broadcasting industry concerning the SEC, in my opinion.
They make the most money. 🤷♂️
@@rancidity They have a bigger fan base because of better coverage and in turn you they get more money.
@@TruthHurtsAJP they had more fans since the game started. Before televised sports were a thing, they were just bigger
@@rancidity That's not true. Historically, the B10 had the biggest fan base because of Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan. Also, teams like Notre Dame and USC would come and play them. It was only recently that the SEC inched out the B10 in the number of their fans. but with the realignment - I don't think it's gonna last for long.
@@TruthHurtsAJP that’s only people who could afford to go to games. Once it became televised, sec schools became immediately popular.
Why does the media get so defensive about SEC bias? Not just this show. There are dozens over examples. My biggest issue is how far the media goes to defend rhe SEC.
I do think there is a bias. I think the SEC is still the best overall, but I don’t think the gap is as big as the media is trying to portray. I’m sorry but if Vandy can lose to Georgia state but beat Bama right after Bama beat Georgia, there’s fluctuations in college football but that’s all over the place
@@Keshauwnw Oregon is rightfully the #1 team in the country and they were one play away from losing to a G5 team. Upsets happen.
@@kevinbond8966 exactly. These are not pros, these are still guys trying to to figure it out. That’s why college football is awesome tho
Didn't Oregon struggle against an FCS team?
No teams receive more glazing from the media than Ohio State and Notre Dame. It's always been that way.
Dude talks about notre dame... didn't they comfortably beat TAnM whose the only undefeated team in the conference standings?
If the SEC was overrated, why have only
Cause Nick Saban.
Well when you ban 80% of the league from even attemptng to play for one, it severely aids in your favor......
Living in the past lil bro
@@mrvroom188 I would rather base predictions on history than on imagination
@@Foggydidwhat you sure? you SEC fans sure do love hypotheticals.
Sec voters not voting for pac 10/12 heisman is the grossest bias that happened AGAIN last year!!! It’s real, it’s toxic, it’s crumbling with the new big 10
Same thing with pac 12 voters not voting for SEC heisman, he was the best player in country
Slander?? If any conference gets slandered it's the Big12 and ACC. Those are conferences that get trashed by everyone a lot and im sick of it.
Iowa State, BYU, Pitt, and even Miami would all get curb stomped by any single one of the ranked SEC teams. I mean Clemson is the only team I respect in the ACC and look what Georgia did to them.
Yeah ACC a joke
@@monkeyglocksfalse
People confuse trash talk with official positions or statements. Some people can't distinguish between the two.
@@SurferRC whatever makes u feel better
2:26 you and many other analysts used this logic to say Washington was not very good last year, disrespecting them all year. Clearly that was wrong. If an sec team was playing like UW was they would have been too 2 the whole year
The championships, The sheer number of SEC players starting in the NFL ruins any argument the jealous may have and my team isn't even in the SEC. Just an objective observer.
The championships - runs into severe problems when you recognize the long history of extremely questionable selection process this sport has in determining who can even go to a championship game in the first place.
@@MattBuild4 You can try to argue that if you have nothing else to legitimately complain about, but together with the draft picks kind of confirms the playoff selection committee got it right most of the time. Me being a Miami fan shouldn't want the SEC to be what it is either, because it tarnishes the "U" golden years. But facts are facts like it or not.
@@SpontaneousOracle I would say starting NFL players is much stronger argument for you than number of draft picks in general. Draft picks imo can get biased based on viewership. If you arent in a conference with as many scouts and eyes you have a lower likelihood of getting drafted. As a result conferences that provide the most viewershp of players will likely have the most drafted players. However starting, requires some actual field evaluation of talent in a game.
@MattBuild4 I see so all the NFL scouts and NFL leadership is wrong, the selection committee is wrong, All the coaches and experts that rank the teams are wrong. But you are right? Its a miracle all these organizations can function without you in the group.😆 🤣 😂.
@@SpontaneousOracle Are the NFL scouts infalliable? No. What does getting drafted actually mean? Its a subjecitve opinion based on your level of play relative to your prospective market value and the overall demand value for a specific team. You could be the best TE or RB in the nation and not go in the first round, because the NFL doesnt value your position that much - has really nothing to do with your inherent talent.
Furthermore theres still the question of how good are you really at playing the actual sport. Dont tell me you dont believe in busts?
If the SEC hadn't been illegally paying players for the last 20 years they wouldn't have won so many natty. Now that everyone can pay players and with the transfer portal...it really shows
Probably why Nick Saban retired he knew that they wouldn't be the top dogs anymore because NIL.
Even the legal payments to their coaches. They keep talking about the Saban coaching tree like it was just him being great (some of it was him being great). But the reality was Alabama had a $10-15 million dollar coaching staff when others struggled to shell out $5 million. If you're an up and coming G5 or D2 coach, it was a lot more attractive to make $1-5 million as a coordinator at Alabama on your way to a head coaching job at the P5 than making half that as a head coach at a crappy P5 or G5 school on your way to a better head coaching job. Along with facilities upgrades, people severely under-estimated the impact this had on college football.
I don't want to say it was absolutely the wrong thing to do, but the SEC signing the first big TV deal for over a billion dollars back in 2007 is really what gave them the leg up on other conferences going forward. It was brilliant, but if you look at college football up to 2008, and since then to today, there's an obvious dominance by very specific SEC teams who won out the most from those pay days. 2024 is a preview of how NIL is leveling the playing field.
😂😂😂😂😂@@jpDragna
Like every big time program hasn’t been paying players stop acting like it’s just the SEC.
@@chrisowen3264 every big time sec program has. Not every program has however. You are sorely mistaken.
Vanderbilt lost to Georgia State...
Took ball state wire to wire
Georgia State > University of Georgia
LSU lost to USC
@@glennwilliams2950this^
They hate us because they ain’t us. Go Dawgs!
You’re contradicting yourself so badly. You penalize Miami every week for close wins against what you think are “weaker teams”. I’m not sure you thought this one out.
Cause it’s the ACC
@@anthonymanross2914 when did UF join the ACC?
Clemson is gonna run yall out of the building 😂😂 45 to Louisville is actually insane
@@RadicallyOptimistic almost as crazy as scoring 3 points in a full 4 quarter game.
Are you dumb?
The main reason for the bias is the preseason rankings. You know, ole Miss, Tennessee, Texas A&M, Missouri are not winning a dang thing. But they were in the top 10? GTFOH
Luv ya JD, but I’m not convinced. The SEC built their schedule to play fewer games at the power 5 level. Every year they have more teams dropping in the rankings, as football is played, than any other conference. I get that there is money to be made from pandering to one of the largest fan bases thought. ;)
Why do they drop on rankings? It's because they play each other lol.. the SEC is the most dominant conference, and it's not even debatable. Every other conference may have 1 or 2 teams that can even compete, the SEC has about 8 or 9.
@@Free4Now2 Why does the SEC have 8 teams that can compete, but the B12 doesnt, despite the B12 having 8 teams with the same or better record than Alabama this season? The B12 only has 2 ranked teams for comparison.
But what actually is the logic or argument being used to justify these rankings?
@@MattBuild4sec wins 75% of the championships 🤡🤡🤡
@@MattBuild4the talent on the teams. It’s rly not that complicated. SEC has the largest volume of talent. Doesn’t mean their teams are always the best, but it’s why there’s bias. Not to mention the entire history of college football backing up that bias
@@GeronimoOoO7 So how did A&m go from a historical powerhouse that hadnt been relevant in 50 years in the SWC to a bottom feeder in the B12 to a solid average SEC team because the SEC is just a better conference?
All jokes aside I somewhat agree, but for every different reasons. The SEC spends the most money on college football of any conference and guarantees the most viewership. The most viewership leads the most top end talent which the majority of times will help you most. However how this came to be - isnt strictly speaking legal...... and more importantly just having the projected talent on paper doesnt mean youd actually win.
My problem is with people saying that we have the titles, without recognizing the extremely well documented truth that the post season of college football has been a complete sham for centuries. There are entire seasons where its documented that teams bought the abilility to make a game - any other sport on earth thats INSANELY ILLEGAL...... In college football its "just a part of the game"...... Uh wtf........
Jitt came straight out the gate all defensive. You are funded by the SEC
Since 2006 bowl records
Sec 97-55
Big 12 56-52
PAC 12 49-46
Acc 63-76
Bowl games don't lie....
What was the record of teams faced in those bowl games? Cuz im sorry but #9 South Carolina playing #20 Nebraska really isnt that surprising for South Carolina to win, and tbh I dont really see how them winning that game is clear evidence that they are actually a top 10 team.
@@MattBuild4 Also how many of those bowl games are in the south?
@@glennwilliams2950location does not matter. The team with the better game plan wins every time.
Lol bowl games are the worst way to determine conference stength! With the long breaks, weird travel, coaching changes, and opt outs! You clearly need to learn the sport 😂🤡🤦🏼♂️
@@snuffedtorch3683🤦🏼♂️😂🤡
I'm from Colorado and now I live in NC. The anti SEC people are absolutely nuts.
When did NC become SEC country
@@nicholastaiariol2631 can you please actually read and understand a comment before you reply?
😂 No one asked were you lived
@@isaacvillarreal8094 nixhicaol did... He's very confused
Nooo QBs ever come from the SEC
Joe burrow, Tua, Richardson, Daniels, Levis, Prescott 😂😂
If you meant good QBs the list is really - Stafford, Burrow, Prescott - borderline hurts if you wanna claim him.
"It just means more" the sec has been dominating baseball as well
No one cares about baseball😭
@yukslime8468 Wrong! Go Vols!
“College football is the most volatile sport in the world…”
Sir, college basketball would like a word.
It's because SEC fans live in a bubble and there's no one outside the SEC that can compete against them. The only other conference that the SEC plays out of conference is the ACC and if you take out all the ACC games from the SEC's non conference matches - the SEC is in the negative lol. SEC IS OVERRAAAATED!!! =]
Haha, I love the energy. So, who is comparable to the SEC? And in what category? Because I hope you're not just emotionally venting.
And we think no one outside of the SEC can compete... who said that? Provide receipts. People like you love to use general statements that have no accountability.
hasnt sec won like 7 of last 10 national championships?😂keep coping
@KahnanFN I think it is 6/10. But with 3 different teams. The real question is... who's #2 after the SEC.
@@tremoore9831 its the big 10 obviously
@@tremoore9831 i mean to come off like that i thought u was the sec hater😭😭😭 but yeah big 10 for sure imo and i feel like acc has better top tier teams but as an avg i think big 12 might have them
SEC is definitely the best conference now. I think the bias was more of an issue in the mid to late 2000s when arguable teams like USC would have beaten the the SEC team that got in the title game
If there’s bias in any direction, it’s the Big 10
Rather you agree with it or not it’s true as long as you’re in the SEC you will be ranked… some teams over ranked
Well they've had 5 different teams win titles since 2000. 🤷♂️
LSU to USC … say it
Dawg, you're 100% right love the podcast!
Love how you all include every team on thumbnail except A&M 😂
They are never good
No. 3 in the Big Ten and their “best defense” were shredded in the Peach Bowl by No. 3 Ole Miss !
SEC fans are obsessed with historical stats 😂 what about right now, when Ohio St is a touchdown better than Georgia in SP+ and FPI?
Georgia would murder Ohio state. Y’all done folded to Oregon n you trying to fight with the sec 😂
@@PappavolGeorgia lost to a trash Alabama team. Lost to a Vanderbilt team that lost to Georgia State. An Oregon loss is easily a better loss than any loss in the country clown
The bowls & playoff games should decide that, who is or isn't overrated.
#GBO
Arkansas decided that Tennessee is overrated
@@nicholastaiariol2631And LSU dog walked Arkansas
Well in that case the big 12 is the best cause outside of top 2 in sec big 12 has owned them in bowl games and for the most part non conference. But “they weren’t trying” right..
@@nicholastaiariol2631we’ll see in Knoxville next year while Arkansas has 3 losses 🤡
The SEC has gone downhill now that every conference can pay players instead of just them
@@JoshStrickland-n8xthe SEC is garbage get over it
@@JoshStrickland-n8xmy conference wasn't paying players like yours. The McDonald's bags conference 😂
@@JoshStrickland-n8xit's funny how you people went from "no one is paying players quit complaining" to "well you guys were paying players too!"
People love to throw baseless accusations because that's the only way they can fathom as to why they were/are successful.
The bias is real and it’s gross
@@JoshStrickland-n8xof course the SEC has a ton of talent they were the slave states. Shame on "y'all"
Oh because those past years are so relevant. 2024 is the only year that matters rn. The SEC has no top tier, they are a glorified Pac-12
@@RadicallyOptimisticcome back to this when… yet again another SEC school wins the national championship. Mark my words
@@alexharden6620yeah because they will stack the deck with 25% of the sec getting in to the 12 team playoff 🤡😂😂🤦🏼♂️
@@SurferRCcry more
Vandy lost to Georgia State THIS YEAR. No one is arguing that they're last year's Vandy...
Vandy hasn't gotten better the SECs best teams have fallen off a cliff
@nicholastaiariol2631 you're wrong. Vanderbilt took advantage of the transfer portal and is without question better.
@@Joe.H.THEY LOST TO GEORGIA STATE 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@glennwilliams2950 this your fist season watchin football?
@@Joe.H.game results dont matter if they aren’t sec favorable am i right!? 😂
Since 2000 sec has 14 national championships by 5 different teams... it's no bias it's facts
And only 2 of those programs are legit. UF without Urban is nothing, Auburn and LSU are the biggest jokes in the sport. If you can’t sustain success, it’s luck not skill
Yeah well heres some more facts.....
Both of Florida's titles were won in seasons that they didnt finish with the best record (thats pretty sus).
Auburn's title came in a season they magically jumped a back to back undefeated team (thats pretty sus).
1 of LSU's titles came in a season they beat the B12 runner up instead of a team literally ranked #1 in the nation - another of LSU's titles came in a season with 8 way tie for 1st place. (they do have 1 undisputed title tho)
4 of 6 Alabama titles include seasons where they did not beat play undefeated or teams with the same record as them for a title game.
@@johncrawford1320 history built off of paying players when other conferences would be extremely punished for the same “tactic”. The very definition of “biased”!! The deliberate decision to not vote for pac 10/12 players as heisman by ignorant SEC voters is also the definition of “biased”. Now the SEC isn’t the only conference allowed to pay players, and those ignorant fans and voters can’t comprehend how other teams and conferences can and will be better than the “SEC elite”
@@MattBuild4Auburn was under defeated in 2003 or so…Got shut out of Natty with USC curb stomping OU. That AU team had at least 4 first rounders.
@@rustystokes1404 That was 2004 and fair enough. Though 6 teams went undefeated in 2004. Imo 2004 isnt undisputed for this reason either. However id argue the comparison isnt just Auburn vs USC - you gotta throw Utah in there as well who had 9 drafted players including the first overall drafted player and nfl hall of famers on their team.
If you put the eighth best SEC team in the big 12 or in the ACC, they would either win the big 12 or be in the ACC championship
severe doubt....
Wouldn’t worry about what haters think. They wouldn’t be watching u , if they didn’t like what you talk about
But when you see Georgia mall every other conference and even the SEC, then what makes it so tough. Alabama did the same thing. Don't give me this SEC is so tough stuff. Every other SEC team sucks
Haha, if you think every other SEC team sucks. I can only imagine what you think of "every other" team in the other conferences. I'm happy that your standards are so high. I can respect that if your standard is consistent.
Just wanted to point out that A&M didn't even make the Thumbnail 😂😂😂
It's sad that JD has to address is roots every year.
The SEC is not overrated and unfortunately for all the people who think otherwise history says otherwise and perception is reality when it comes to track record and getting the benefit of the doubt when spots are up for grabs. When you win titles with multiple teams in your conference over a 25 year period and by multiple I mean 6 teams with 4 of the 6 winning multiple titles it says your conference isn’t overrated. Even this year I’d say theirs 4 teams that are good enough to win it.
...Paul finebaum
If the S.E.C was overrated then why has the S.E.C won thirteen of the last eighteen National Championships in College football? Why has the S.E.C won five consecutive World Series in College baseball? Why has the S.E.C won two consecutive National Championships in Women's College basketball? Why is Dawn Staley coming off of her greatest recruiting class of all time? Or does anyone know?
Division 1 FBS college football post season and championship selection is historically corrupt af. Similar problems do exist for the CWS - like how Florida jumped about 30 teams they shouldnt have to make the tourney - but at least CWS has a legit post season, so this can actually be proven to be legit.
"Why has the SEC won two consecutive national championships in womens basketball? Cuz Uconn got tired of winning them every year........ Oh you got 2 - thats cute
@MattBuild4 when was the last time your pathetic Conference won a National Championship in women's College basketball? Or do you even know?
@MattBuild4 what other excuses do you have?
@@WangHungLo you can call them excuses but its kinda telling when the US DOJ and US Senate sue your ass for $2 billion for fraud, corruption and anti-trust.
SEC is dogwater this year, only teams that deserve to be in the conversation are Georgia, LSU, and Vanderbilt.
Clown comment
A&M instead of LSU
SEC bias always is without any true
perspective on the
college game on the
whole. They typically point to
individual game results while not noting the bottom line numbers when
comparing conferences.
Numbers like the
number of pro players and 🏆.
When you look at
the individual games
they point to their
claims without
context of the level
of competition.
First of these are
college athletes and
you typically get up
and down performances. If teams arent motivated they have
lackluster performances and it
many times leads to
upsets. Also when you have a good number of pretty good teams in a
conference playing
each other ; the
schedule plays as
a perpetual trap.
Now if you are Ohio
State or Michigan
you simply dont have that factor in
like an SEC schedule. You have
two games to
navigate thru and that's it. I realize its
a bit different with
conference expansion. But this
SEC bias talk has been around a while.
I do think there are
teams and conferences that are
underserved so to speak and too easily
dismissed. But they
are by in large teams
out west where times zones play into it somewhat.
These teams a lot of
times are not getting
the same amount of
views because the
east has finalized their day and unplugged. But lets
get to the real two
biggest reasons.
Number one is the
lack of good defense in competing conferences. The scores in these
conferences reveal
this issue. Just a few programs sprinkled here and there in these conferences. The one exception has
been the Big 10.
Fans typically and
rightfully dismiss
teams that cant play
decent defense.
And the last one is
the amount of rivalries in the SEC
as opposed to other
conferences. Two
things about it.
Number one is it
raises the intensity
of games for the
most part. More
intensity brings more attention.
More attention brings more money.
More money brings
more viewership.
It is a self perpetuating cycle.
Now college football
is changing fast
especially with
conference realignment.
Big 10 especially has at least somewhat of a
chance to be viewed
more evenly with the
SEC. All other conferences will struggle for the
leftovers. Its just reality. Unfortunate
but some good teams will struggle
in some cases to
get their rightful due.
no, it's not overrated, but it's the new pac 12. get use to 2 and 3 losses conference champions 🏆. the top teams can lose to a team at the bottom
Running through this after the games happened, and the new polls released is cheating a bit, but I had a super busy weekend and I really wanted to respond to this (even if it's just a response to the ether), because I would have agreed with you in most years since about 2010, but this year...I don't think there's a good defense for the SEC or how pollsters and the general public view them.
Mizzou has been my go to example all year, and the AP is proving again that the SEC has been vastly overrated. First, get this out of the way, the AP matters. People keep talking about polls don't matter, but Mizzou is a prime example of why they do. If they didn't matter, people wouldn't care about strength of schedule, they would just watch the games and be able to asses teams based on how they're playing, not if there's a number next to one or both teams while the game is being played.
Mizzou in week 10 is ranked 25th in the country, and all anyone I've found online and in the media can say is "Well who else are you ranking there?" First of all, anybody, literally anybody. Second of all, do you not think the only reason people are asking that question is because of the conference logo Mizzou is associated with? Because if you think it's any other reason, look at their resume. They blew out Murray St, Buffalo, and Massachusetts. They had a tight one against a BC team that has dropped 3 straight in the ACC, and another tight one to an Auburn team that...honestly they might not be terrible, but they're not good at winning. In the two games they faced actual competition they lost by a combined 75-10. Mizzou is not a good team, much less a top 25 team, and nothing in the season other than the fact that they're in the SEC indicates that they're worthy of a top 25 ranking.
That's the most egregious and obvious example, but across the board SEC teams are given more leeway, and it's normally the right choice, but we've seen evidence even within the SEC that we need to be adjusting our perspectives on teams overall, and that should extend to all conferences evenly, including the SEC. It's not that these teams in the mid level of the SEC couldn't win all their games against other conference schedules, it's that they haven't been. It's that the elite of the SEC have been as flawed and unpredictable as the top levels of other conferences have been for the past decade, and that NIL has leveled the playing field, but people are still only giving SEC schools benefit of the doubt. If Pitt had lost to UNC and Syracuse they'd be so far off the radar that we wouldn't even know that Eli Holstein came from Alabama to lead their resurgence, but tell me what on Ole Miss' schedule other than our expectations of what they should have been points to them being a better team? Ole Miss' best win is against South Carolina, they beat a trio of garbage that's not worth typing out, and a pretty bad Wake Forest team. Yes their 6 points from being undefeated, but not only did they not win those games, one of them was against Kentucky, and that loss is getting uglier by the week. Despite all of that it took an emphatic win against Syracuse for Pitt to be placed just ahead of Ole Miss in the rankings. Pitt has looked good this year, they've been winning this year, Ole Miss is more talented but they've looked inconsistent at best offensively, and yet because they were preseason high ranked, and are in the SEC (which was the basis for their preseason high rank), it took 9 full weeks, and 2 losses for Pitt to just barely sneak ahead of them.
Just going down the line we see people putting SEC teams where they think they should be based on their talent level, and not on field results. Alabama shouldn't be ahead of Boise State, particularly since the Bronco's one loss was three point to what people are largely agreeing is at least a top 5 if not #1 team in Oregon, Tennessee hasn't looked really good on offense since Kent State, and there are other teams behind them that have looked at least as good if not better (Indiana, I don't care about the competition, has looked consistently dominant), people are saying Georgia is fixed because they beat the snot out of Texas, but somehow are just forgetting that for four straight games they looked beyond mortal, they looked pretty awful, and didn't play a single complete game from Kentucky to Mississippi State (and mind Auburn and MissSt are varying degrees of terrible, and Georgia just didn't look dominant against them).
When we as fans, outside of the sphere of SEC fandom, say that there's an SEC bias what we...well at least what I mean, I guess I can only speak for myself, but what I mean is the same rules are not applied to the SEC when those rules are warranted. The upper tier has been weaker than expected (Texas, Alabama, Georgia), and not just against each other, the second tier has just outright lost to bad conference teams and their big OOC games, and the lower tier is just as terrible as the lower tiers in other conferences. We see that watching the games week to week, and continue to see 8-10 SEC teams ranked when it's obvious that other conferences are producing equally good football. And again, people need to stop pretending the rankings don't matter. I want to not care about them, but the perception of every single team is based on that lil number that is or isn't next to their name during a game, and so I have to care and seeing that little number next to an absolutely atrocious Mizzou team...yeah frankly it pisses me off. It's undeserved and absolute crap, and I think it's absolute crap on the part of media personalities like yourself to tell us there's no bias.
This isnt anything new...... 2010 South Carolina - besides beating Alabama what did they do? Went 9-5 beat ZERO other ranked teams, lost to 6-7 team and lost by 9 in their bowl depsite outranking their opponent by 5 spots. Thats a top 25 team? Do you realize 11+ wins teams magically didnt get ranked that season.
Or how did Miss State finish as a top 15 team in the same year? They went 9-4 - beat 0 ranked teams, lost close to Auburn and Arkansas, got blown out vs Alabama and LSU. They magically jumped from #21 to #15 beating a 7-5 unranked Michgan in a bowl game? Really? Do you realize this team nearly outranked a ACC Champion? And if its cuz they lost close to good teams, why doesnt 9-4 Air Force get the same treatment losing by 3 to #6 OU (who outranked literally everyone Miss State played besides Auburn)? That was 1 of 3 Top 10 teams Air Force played in 2010 - but they go unranked and Miss State is top 15? That looks weird.
Why is LSU Top 10 in that year? They finished 3rd in the SEC West. It would seem to me the only reason they outranked Arkansas (who they lost to) is cuz Arkansas actually had to play a top 10 team in their bowl game, while #11 LSU played #18 A&M. If this sport is about competition, why doesnt #21 Miss State play #18 A&M instead of barely .500 team and #11 LSU play #12 Nevada instead a team they outranked by 7 spots and 3 wins - or if you wanna actually prove youre a top 10 team - play #7 Boise State in a bowl?
That Team Out West 🦆 Go Ducks!
I think there is some Florida would not be a top 25 team if they were in the big 12
Sec is very overrated PERIOD! The 2 best teams in America are in the big 10
Play 2 top teams in the sec and then let's talk, how many championship titles have any other conference won since 2000?
Yeah crickets
@@rickypope7849 uh zero cuz entre conferences dont play for championships
What happened last time ga played osu and Oregon?
@@balleraap007 Cool bro, and what happened the last time ga played Boise State?
somehow just some way - oh i dont know could be because since the BCS the SEC has recieved extremely favorable rankings and bowl game selection despite playing the least amount of conference and road games of any conference in the league.
Yall act like theres no evidence of this. Bro 2006 LSU finsihed 4th in the SEC, but somehow was ranked 3rd in the nation? I mean how do you explain this..... that alone doesnt make any sense - then you add the fact they ddnt even beat a top 10 team that season. I can keep going - 2007 - 7 of the top 8 teams had the same record, so how are you gonna seriously claim that LSU is the undisputed best team? 2008 and 2009 you had multiple undefeated teams magically miss the championship - 2008 Alabama went from #22 to #1 in the nation beating teams that went 70-79 on the year, yet you chasticized an undefeated G5 team with 5 top 25 wins. Make it make sense! 2009 5 teams went undefeated, but yall act like the SEC is just so much better than everyone. 2010 you have auburn jump a back to back undefeated G5 team when they beat an FCS team - that G5 team beat a top 6 team on the road by 40! I mean it doesnt more obvious that insane bias existed in the league. 2011 selection directly contradicted the 2006 selection and managed to favor the SEC in BOTH seasons. What are you smoking that theres no evidence of this?
You put a legit playoff in the BCS era tand the SEC gets 25% as many titles (at best) as they received. Yall used the BCS as a crux to claim that this was why the SEC was so amazing in the CFP, which led to constant 1 and 2 team selections in the CFP era. Its pretty easy to claim you have the most title games, when your teams are also selected significantly more often than other conferences. And the CFP like the BCS has ZERO consistent criteria for selection beyond bs subjectivity opinions.
@@JoshStrickland-n8xexactly, people are just mad sec is better😂
@@JoshStrickland-n8xwhat does that past have to do with the present
@@MarvelandStarWarsProductionshow many undefeated teams do you have? The SEC is a poor man's big 12
The sec played other conferences in all their bowl games/ nattys and whooped dat a$$ stop crying
@@JoshStrickland-n8x Yeah and how many of them have asterisks with them? Did you even bother to read the comment....... How many of your glorious titles arent undisputed?
1998 - Undefeated Tulane doesnt play for the ttle
2003 - The #! RANKED TEAM IN THE NATION (USC) didnt play for the title.
2004 - 6 teams went undefeated
2006 - Michigan split with Florida and Boise State went undefeated
2007 - 7 of the top 8 teams had the same record - Kansas had a better record than LSU and didnt even make the game.
2008 - 2 teams went undefeated and magically neither played for the title, plus there were 3 way ties in the PAC and B12
2009 - 5 teams went undefeated
2010 - Undefeated TCU magically doesnt play for the title
2011 - Selection directly contradicts 2006, Stanford, Oklahoma State and Boise State all have the same record as Alabama
2012 - undefeated Ohio State doesnt play for the title
2015 - Undisputed
2017 - Undefeated UCF doesnt play for the title - they make up some bs about sos, even tho B10 champion Ohio State has 100000000 tmes the SOS as the 3rd best SEC team who magically makes the game.
2019 - Undisputed
2020 - covid season, undefeated UC doesnt even make the game, conference fix games to get brand teams into the playoffs
2021 - ND and UL have the same record as Georgia, but Georgia gets it as the SEC runner up because theyre in the SEC.
2022 - Undisputed
Yall act like youre clearly dominating the sport, yet have had 3 undisputed titles in the last 26 years - thats pretty false advertisement if you ask me.
The sec ruined this sport
The bias is real and it’s deserved. The SEC is the best conference. Argue with a wall.
Teh level of bias they get is absolutely not deserved it’s propping up done by the media. Ole miss and mizzou were top 6 teams, A&M and lsu beat no one and go way up. They rank everyone 10 spots higher than they should be like ole miss. What have they done to deserve it and has Tennessee really looked like #7 team? They would’ve lost to fl if mertz didn’t get hurt and lost to Arkansas who got beat by 16th in big 12 Oklahoma state
@@jonathanwrehe8015for your sake, if you're ever charged with anything legally... I hope they require actual proof. As opposed to speculation and wild theories. Now you're claiming the AP poll and CFP committee is biased. When you probably don't know who on the CFP committee or the AP poll.
@@jonathanwrehe8015 you’re a casual and it shows
Saw my first SEC game in ‘64. I have seen a lot of big time football…SEC is so strong. Check how many SEC schools won the Natty this century….they play big games every year in the conference.
8 of 16 current SEC teams have won a title since the BCS era. Who else can come close to saying that about anyone else?
They might claim that we're living in the past. So let's settle for having won 4 of the last 5 championships.
The BCS was a joke, but pre-BCS titles are in many cases even more sus. The amount of titles Alabama claims in seasons THEY LOST THE TITLE GAME - is pretty insane.
@MattBuild4 the BCS was an upgrade. It only became questionable once they caved to outside pressure and kept changing the point system used to rank teams. So, there was no standard or continuity from year to year.
@@tremoore9831 "Only became questionable one they caved to outside pressue"
So you mean after year 1? System was first changed from the original formula in 1999. The BCS started in 1998. Thats not a good sign.....
Like SEC fans seem to have this belief of the BCS that it only started to change when yall were winning - thats historically not even remotely true.
9 game p5 schedule babies/thread.
Yes the SEC is overrated. Go Canes
CFB SEC bias example: SEC will still get 4-5 teams (with losing records) into the CFP.
Exactly they will stack the deck and then be like see! They won! 😂😂🤦🏼♂️
Looking at the teams on the Thumbnail only UGA is good. The other 14 teams on the thumbnail are TRASH.
Using only metrics from this year, the SEC is on average the best conference. However, the Big 10 is much better at the top, and phrases like “Ohio St would go 6-6 in the SEC” just need to stop. OSU’s historical record vs the SEC couldn’t matter less. The Big 10 is much more suited to win a title than the SEC this year because of top teams.
What metrics would these be exactly?
We live in a day and age where most people don't know how to brag or build themselves up without putting someone else down. Combine that with... nothing brings people together more than having a common enemy. Then you'll see why people feel the way they do about the SEC.
We don't need to be liked by everyone. The sad fact is... who is the SEC actually comparable to? We actually only compete against ourselves (without a doubt, there are schools that compare, just not entire conferences). I'm sure that will trigger some people. Oh, well.
A championship mindset would typically motivate those who strive to be on top of college football. Instead, the path of least resistance is claiming bias. The hard work and grind that got the SEC to the top are completely overlooked. The Ohio State's of college football understands this very well. They put in the work year round. That's why their goals are so high. So those people should strive to do what Oregon is doing with Dan Lanning (maybe having a different target goal besides an SEC will be more palatable for some), or continue to keep on bitching. I'm sure that strategy will work out well for them.
The 'chaos' is why we love college football.
How many national championships across how many sec schools since 2006?
Sec is in a league of its own it’s above college football and below the NFL
Its not
The bias is real because it’s true. Even the SEC mid teams were dangerous to the best out of other conferences. That’s why it’s such a big deal when a BIG or ACC or PAC team won it. It’s the deepest conference for sure and based off this season you could make a case that it’s even deeper this season I wouldn’t say overrated
Georgia State sucks and beat an SEC school, Cal is garbage and beat an SEC school, USC is down and beat the third best SEC school, Notre Dame lost to Northern Illinois and beat the 4th SEC team.
@@glennwilliams2950 I think you can have a bad game and still go in to win big. When it becomes repetitive with the same issues that’s when you can start saying stuff
The sec has always beat up on the sec national media is crap
We’re not saying a conference best couple teams would not be able to win against the sec. What we’re saying is, a legit 10 even 12 sec teams can beat you any given weekend..The last 100 hundred years Michigan and Ohio state beat down 10 teams with no pulse, and then finally play one meaningful game.. And their supposedly the second best conference 😂😂😂 SEC SEC SEC
Any p4 team can beat any p4 team anyday…
@@SurferRC Yea… good job buddy 👍
Anybody that thinks the SEC isnt the toughest conference just doesnt know ball. No point in even arguing with them. Its like trying to explain reality to a "flat earth"er...just smile and pat them on the head and move on 😂😂.
Na. Mid level sec is better than top any other conference. Ohio st, Oregon, Clemson or whatever shitty team are big fish little pond. That’s why they always go undefeated in regular season. There’s one or two teams in other conferences that are good. The sec has talent spread throughout. SEC is just better.
🤡🤡