Friday, May 10, 2013

SEC Dominance?.... Or Propaganda?

(Disclaimer: Due to confusion amongst readers, this isn't a comparison of the SEC to other conferences but rather to their own godlike reputation upheld by the media.) Oklahoma coach Bob Stoops, had an interesting quote this week. Stoops basically said (paraphrasing of course) that the SEC is the beneficiary of media propaganda. I couldn't wait for a knowledgeable opinion to finally say what I've long held to be true. Before you think that I hold a bias against the SEC, I've always stated that I think the SEC is the best conference, but also the most overrated. I know what you are thinking, that how can a conference that just won its 7th straight BCS National Championship be overrated. Trust me, I will touch on this subject in detail. Before you read the rest, keep in mind that I am coming from the viewpoint that I still believe it is the best conference, but even the best at anything isn't above propaganda.

I won't waste any time and jump right into the main argument against possible propaganda, the 7 straight BCS titles. That is a very impressive streak, and one that I doubt any other conference will come close to ever. The most impressive thing about it is the fact that Florida, LSU, Alabama, and Auburn have all won the title in this span (Tennessee won the first ever BCS title and LSU also won in 2003). I think that it speaks volumes of the depth of the conference. With all that said, I think people forget what is the hardest thing about actually winning a BCS title, and it's access to the game. The SEC has been able to rack up titles for one, because they've actually been allowed to play in the game. This isn't NCAA basketball, the NFL and NBA playoffs, or even 1AA football where teams have to go through some sort of bracket system to prove they are the best. The biggest obstacle to winning a BCS title game is whether you are actually picked to go to the game.

In 2000, 1-loss Florida State was picked to go to the title game over 1-loss and #2 ranked Miami who beat them but also lost to 1-loss Washington. Miami and Washington couldn't win the championship because they didn't have a chance to even play in the game. #1 ranked USC was denied a spot in the game in 2003, as well as 2011 Big-10 Champion Oklahoma State, and Oregon and Boise State what seems like every year. There are numerous others as well. Outside of undefeated Auburn being denied a spot in 2005, SEC teams have generally been given great access to the title game. This includes 2-loss LSU in 2007, and 2011 Alabama who finished 2nd in its Division (not conference). For people saying that they still had to win the game, I agree but in order to win a game you have to be in it. Let's pretend for a minute that college basketball used the same system. Carolina or Duke would have had an opportunity to automatically appear in the title game about 7 times in the past 10 years (some years ranked #3 with a much stronger resume). How many of those could they have won probably 5 at least, but as it stands they have only combined for 3 titles in that amount of time because they didn't have guaranteed access to the championship game.

I think the biggest reason for the propaganda for the SEC is pre-season rankings. It artificially puts all the top SEC teams at the top without them playing a game. If they win against another top team, we anoint them as favorites for beating a top-10 ranked team (usually undeserving at that point), and if they lose the media writes that at least they lost to a top ranked team (also usually undeserving at that point). That leads to a system where SEC teams can win and climb back up the charts swiftly or lose and suffer a minimal drop at best. Whenever it's possible look at how far Bama or LSU drops after a loss, and climbs after a win compared to other good teams in different conferences. You'll notice a huge disparity. All this does is reinforce the propaganda we were given at the beginning of the season based on preseason rankings and recruiting rankings (another equally bias system, but that blog post is for another day).

Also, the media tells us that the SEC teams are better and more deserving of their rankings because they beat up on each other week in and week out. More propaganda as well, SEC teams only play 8 conference games, and 4 scrimmages (ok not really scrimmages), while Big 10 and Pac-10 teams play 9 conference games (some play Notre Dame too), and the ACC plays 8 conference games with 5 teams playing Notre Dame. Take a closer look at each team schedule to see whether they really beat up on one another every week. Bama played LSU, and Texas A&M who are both divisional foes and that was it. Georgia played South Carolina and Florida, also divisional foes, and that was it.  Both teams split the games. Florida who probably had the hardest schedule actually played LSU, A&M, South Carolina, and Georgia and went 3-1 (along with beating FSU). A&M played LSU, Bama, and Florida and went 1-2 in those games, and South Carolina played LSU, Florida, and Georgia and went 1-2 as well. LSU played South Carolina, Bama, A&M, and Florida, and went 2-2. Outside of Florida any SEC team that played 2 or more games versus other top teams didn't have a winning record. In reality, those teams beat up on Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Auburn, Arkansas, and Ole Miss, and pretenders Miss State and Vanderbilt (no top conference wins between them). But because of media propaganda and bias we rarely ever get the true story.

With all that said, I still believe Alabama had the best team in the nation but that does not mean that the SEC as a whole hasn't benefited from bias that college football has used to increase its own revenue. So SEC teams make sure to thank the media and your great respective fan bases (die hard fans willing to pay money, travel well, big boosters, etc.) for your reign over College Football.

14 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. If you have nothing to add to the topic save your comment. Tell me where my information was wrong, oh you can't. Where was my rationale off? You can't again huh. You hide behind outlandish comments with no analysis behind it. The worst kind of sports fan.

      Delete
    2. Your argument about the top 6 SEC teams last year NOT beating up on each other is circuitous as best. The fact is that Florida is the only team among the 6 to lose a game (Louisville) to anyone other than one of the other 5 best SEC teams. And how can you bash those 6 teams for going undefeated against the rest of the league in one breath, and then bash Vandy for not beating one of those teams? You can't have it both ways.

      Your point about reputation giving SEC teams an advantage in getting to the game is well taken. But champions in all sports get the benefit of the doubt. Until someone dethrones the mighty SEC, we will maintain that benefit.

      Delete
    3. I'm challenging you to step outside of the box here and change the linear nature of thinking that is so widespread in sports coverage right now. My argument isn't that the top 6 teams aren't great teams but rather contrary to what the national media wants us to believe, the best SEC teams aren't beating other great teams week in and week out. The results actually show that when forced to play other great teams they are barely beating them at all as evidence by only one team having a winning record vs other Top-6 SEC teams.

      Also I disagree with your statement that my rationale is circular. I'm not saying that the Top-6 teams are great because they beat Vandy and Vandy is not great because they haven't beat them. That is circular. I could write a whole blog on how Vandy and Miss State were pretenders in comparison to hype and rankings at one point despite neither actually contending for the conference championship but that's a whole different argument. I simply pointed out Vandy and Miss State as examples because the perception of them at some point was actually far off from reality.

      Thanks for reading.

      Delete
  2. I disagree with something you said. One, to call VU a pretender is a bit of an oversight. The culture there is changing and Franklin is building a good program. It would probably be a little more accurate to call them an 'up-and-coming' team that could cause a lot of problems for teams. Other than that great post!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're right, I would consider Vandy an up and coming team. I used the term pretender to place emphasis on the fact that they're not there yet. Thanks for reading.

      Delete
  3. With all due respect, but if you don't think the SEC isn't all it's cracked up to be, then why does the NFL draft most of it's players?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem is, it's everything and more that it's cracked up to be.

      Delete
    2. If you actually read the post instead of skimming for parts you didn't like, you would've have seen that on multiple occasions I said that the SEC is the unquestionable best conference. So the NFL drafting most of its players wouldn't be against my rationale or viewpoint at all. Thanks for reading.

      Delete
  4. 1. How to you equate the over rating % of the BEST?
    2. A playoff does NOT guarantee the BEST team will win.
    3. BASKETBALL should not be used as a factual comparison to FOOTBALL.
    4. Whenever possible, look how far any top ranked team (ie. Oregon, USC, OKLAHOMA, Ohio St, Notre Dame etc, etc) drops after a loss.
    5. How do explain the majority of big games, and every BCS title game, against non-conference foes, that the SEC keeps walking into the winning locker room at the end of the game?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. I consider overrating the best, is when the perception and story lines along with views held by the national media and casual fans are in complete disagreement with what is actually happening week to week on the field of play. Reread the first line of the post.

      2. You're right, and that is an argument that I hate for the SEC. I don't think the "best team" is supposed to win or even go to the championship game but rather the most deserving. With a playoff system you can always question whether the best team has really won but never whether the team that won was the most deserving.

      3.I'm not comparing the sports at all just the systems being used. As the other major revenue college sport, I think comparing them in some ways can be valid. I compared them to point out how the media darlings of College basketball would have had an advantage IF there was a system similar to football in place, and how that would have been way different from what we actually have.

      4. They drop a lot further than SEC teams. Most of those teams after 1 early loss is out of the national championship picture the whole season barring a major stroke of luck. I guess you only skimmed the part about how preseason rankings are misused to help a perception that was constructed in the first place.

      5. This shows you are clearly the biased one. Notre Dame was undefeated while playing a harder strength of schedule than Alabama. They squeaked out a bunch of close games, and no one thought they were better (evident by Vegas odds), but they were deserving. They earned the right to play for a championship. What team do you propose should have went over them? Remember that they were the only eligible undefeated team in the nation, and played a solid schedule. Appearing in the National Championship game is earned from regular season body of work, or at least it should be. The results of the game, or the fact that they wasn't better than Bama( & others) doesn't change the fact of them being deserving.

      Plus I'm far from a SEC hater. I grew up a UF fan and my favorite player growing up was Jacquez Green. My brother spent 5 years as a RB at UT. So I'm actually well versed in SEC football. This is just my analysis of what I think is a broken system (due to propaganda) while also acknowledging that no system is perfect. Thank you for reading.

      Delete
  5. You should really concentrate you propaganda theories on how an undefeated Notre Dame team was thought of as the no. 1 team in the nation, and a worthy opponent for the Crimson Tide. Or just take of the tin foil hat, and quit the constant crying.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete