LJ;1533417 wrote:The SEC was considered a nothing conference in 2006. It went
1. Pac10
2. Big10
3. BIG12
4. ACC
5.SEC

What happened? Why'd it change?

but seriously, SEC below the ACC?

Mohican00;1533418 wrote:What happened? Why'd it change?

but seriously, SEC below the ACC?

The ACC with Miami and VT included had teams that had been to 5 of the previous 8 NC games. The SEC had been to 2 NC games. Tenn was down and Saban was in the NFL. USC was dominating the college landscape and Mack Brown had just won a title. Things were very different.

What changed in the SEC? Coaching and recruiting.

USC was dominating the college landscape and Mack Brown had just won a title. Things were very different.

they were

[video=youtube;ZH6eO6mj60Y][/video]

The fact that LSU is even ranked right now shows the SEC bias. Especially when you consider that the same talking heads who would tell you they should be ranked, and that they're a quality win, say that Ohio State has no quality wins, including Wisconsin. Who everyone knows should have 1 loss, because they got screwed harder than Saban's wife probably did the other night against Arizona State.

LJ;1533430 wrote:The ACC with Miami and VT included had teams that had been to 5 of the previous 8 NC games. The SEC had been to 2 NC games. Tenn was down and Saban was in the NFL. USC was dominating the college landscape and Mack Brown had just won a title. Things were very different.

What changed in the SEC? Coaching and recruiting.

And a multi billion dollar contract with ESPN helped.

Well when the 7 straight national titles happened, that helped, but I think Saban and Meyer both upped the level of the conference to such a high point and then everyone else rose to match it, and it became a super conference. Now we're at a point where it has consistently 6-7 teams ranked and it's absolutely killing teams. The conference since '98 though is 73-50 in Bowls, the only major conference with a winning record, and 17-8 in BCS Bowls which is 4 wins better than the Pac-12. That's why it receives this bias, it dominates in all honesty consistently in the post-season, B1G on the other hand is 47-59 in Bowls since then

Classyposter58;1533668 wrote:Well when the 7 straight national titles happened, that helped, but I think Saban and Meyer both upped the level of the conference to such a high point and then everyone else rose to match it, and it became a super conference. Now we're at a point where it has consistently 6-7 teams ranked and it's absolutely killing teams. The conference since '98 though is 73-50 in Bowls, the only major conference with a winning record, and 17-8 in BCS Bowls which is 4 wins better than the Pac-12. That's why it receives this bias, it dominates in all honesty consistently in the post-season, B1G on the other hand is 47-59 in Bowls since then

Some of that poor bowl record is because the B1G goes to Bowl games that they haven't earned because they put butts in the seats. A lot of times they are playing in a tier higher Bowl game than their record says they should.

0311sdp;1533884 wrote:Some of that poor bowl record is because the B1G goes to Bowl games that they haven't earned because they put butts in the seats. A lot of times they are playing in a tier higher Bowl game than their record says they should.

0311sdp;1533884 wrote:Some of that poor bowl record is because the B1G goes to Bowl games that they haven't earned because they put butts in the seats. A lot of times they are playing in a tier higher Bowl game than their record says they should.

Or last year happened where:

1. The best B1G team was ineligible.
2. The second-best team in the best team's division also was ineligible.
3. The third-best team in that same division upset the other division's champion to make the BCS.

About every single B1G team in a bowl last year was basically "overseeded" because of that (in Wisconsin's case, hilariously so, due to the number of things that had to happen for them to be in any bowl of note, much less a BCS one).

As to your point, huh? I thought most bowls were locked into conferences where if you're a B1G team and you qualified for a bowl, you'll be going to one of those. Or am I just still half-asleep and not thinking of something?

0311sdp;1533884 wrote:Some of that poor bowl record is because the B1G goes to Bowl games that they haven't earned because they put butts in the seats. A lot of times they are playing in a tier higher Bowl game than their record says they should.

Go on...

Examples?

0311sdp;1533884 wrote:Some of that poor bowl record is because the B1G goes to Bowl games that they haven't earned because they put butts in the seats. A lot of times they are playing in a tier higher Bowl game than their record says they should.

Yeah I'd love for you to give examples of this. The bowl games have tie ins as to where teams finish in conference. So unless the Big 10 had 2 teams go to a BCS bowl game it really wouldn't effect things. Or like Heteric said last year with a few teams not being eligible for a bowl games it had an effect.

Automatik;1534242 wrote:Go on...

Examples?

Illinois in '07? OSU vs. Florida '11?

Iliketurtles;1534372 wrote:Yeah I'd love for you to give examples of this. The bowl games have tie ins as to where teams finish in conference. So unless the Big 10 had 2 teams go to a BCS bowl game it really wouldn't effect things. Or like Heteric said last year with a few teams not being eligible for a bowl games it had an effect.

Doesn't the B10 have the most BCS bowl appearances of any conference? They almost always send 2 teams.

sleeper;1534374 wrote:Doesn't the B10 have the most BCS bowl appearances of any conference? They almost always send 2 teams.

I looked it up because I didn't know and yes they do. They have sent 26 teams to BCS bowls and the SEC has sent 25. The 3rd best(Pac-12 and Big 12) conferences are at 20.

Iliketurtles;1534372 wrote:Yeah I'd love for you to give examples of this. The bowl games have tie ins as to where teams finish in conference. So unless the Big 10 had 2 teams go to a BCS bowl game it really wouldn't effect things. Or like Heteric said last year with a few teams not being eligible for a bowl games it had an effect.

2006- 2 BCS teams
2007- 2 BCS teams
2008- 2 BCS teams
2009- 2 BCS teams
2010- 2 BCS teams
2011- 2 BCS teams
2012- 2 BCS teams
2013- 1 BCS team and 2 7+ win ineligible teams.

Iliketurtles;1534376 wrote:I looked it up because I didn't know and yes they do. They have sent 26 teams to BCS bowls and the SEC has sent 25. The 3rd best(Pac-12 and Big 12) conferences are at 20.

Exactly. And the B1G has never played a non-BCS school in a BCS game like the SEC gets almost every time.

sleeper;1534381 wrote:Exactly. And the B1G has never played a non-BCS school in a BCS game like the SEC gets almost every time.

2011 Rose Bowl.

wildcats20;1534383 wrote:2011 Rose Bowl.

TCU is in the B12. Nice try though.

Years SEC only had 1 team in BCS bowl- 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006

Years Big 10 only had 1 team in BCS bowl- 2001, 2002, 2005, 2013

So the SEC has had the same disadvantage in bowl games as the Big 10. As 10 out of 15 years the SEC has sent 2 teams and 11 out of 15 years the Big 10 has sent 2 teams.

sleeper;1534384 wrote:TCU is in the B12. Nice try though.

Lol they were in the MWC when they played in the 2011 Rose Bowl.

sleeper;1534384 wrote:TCU is in the B12. Nice try though.

Currently, yes.

The SEC has played a non-BCS school 4 times in a BCS bowl. 2 of which have been Notre Dame.

Not even close to "almost every time"

wildcats20;1534392 wrote:The SEC has played a non-BCS school 4 times in a BCS bowl. 2 of which have been Notre Dame.

Not even close to "almost every time"

It's not even just BCS bowl games, the SEC has more bowl tie-ins with non-BCS schools and the Big East than the B10. It's usually 3 or 4 easy wins by default every year to inflate their bowl record. I believe the B10 is .500 in the BCS era against SEC teams. SEC is overrated.

sleeper;1534410 wrote:It's not even just BCS bowl games, the SEC has more bowl tie-ins with non-BCS schools and the Big East than the B10. It's usually 3 or 4 easy wins by default every year to inflate their bowl record. I believe the B10 is .500 in the BCS era against SEC teams. SEC is overrated.

Big 10 has 8 Bowl affiliations and 1 vs non BCS teams (vs MAC in Little Caesars Bowl)
SEC has 10 Bowl affiliations and 1 vs non BCS teams (vs C-USA in Liberty Bowl).

Currently the Big 10 has

OSU
Wisconsin
Michigan St.
Nebraska
Minnesota
Iowa
Michigan

Indiana at 4-5 needs 2 wins(at Wiscy, @OSU, vs Purdue) to make the Big 10 fill all of their spots. Penn State is ineligible.

SEC has
Missouri
South Carolina
Georgia
Alabama
Auburn
Texas A&M
Ole Miss
LSU

Vandy needs 1 win (vs Kentucky, @ Tennessee, vs Wake Forest) to qualify
Florida needs 2 wins(at South Carolina, vs Georgia Southern, vs Florida State) to qualify
Tennesee needs 2 wins(vs Vandy, @ Kentucky) to qualify
Miss.St needs 2 wins(vs Alabama, @ Arkansas, vs Ole Miss) to qualify

sportswizuhrd;1534447 wrote:Big 10 has 8 Bowl affiliations and 1 vs non BCS teams (vs MAC in Little Caesars Bowl)
SEC has 10 Bowl affiliations and 1 vs non BCS teams (vs C-USA in Liberty Bowl).

Currently the Big 10 has

OSU
Wisconsin
Michigan St.
Nebraska
Minnesota
Iowa
Michigan

Indiana at 4-5 needs 2 wins(at Wiscy, @OSU, vs Purdue) to make the Big 10 fill all of their spots. Penn State is ineligible.

SEC has
Missouri
South Carolina
Georgia
Alabama
Auburn
Texas A&M
Ole Miss
LSU

Vandy needs 1 win (vs Kentucky, @ Tennessee, vs Wake Forest) to qualify
Florida needs 2 wins(at South Carolina, vs Georgia Southern, vs Florida State) to qualify
Tennesee needs 2 wins(vs Vandy, @ Kentucky) to qualify
Miss.St needs 2 wins(vs Alabama, @ Arkansas, vs Ole Miss) to qualify

SEC has 14 teams..Big10 has 11 eligible.