What is Digg?38 Comments
- karmakanic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8One of the problems that the Pac-10 has had for years is that the teams are often evenly-matched, so they beat each other down during conference play and crowd each other off into minor bowl games as a result. USC's dominance over the past few years have been an anomaly. Just look at the diversity in this list of conference champions prior to 2002. See any patterns? Me either. I think that's a Good Thing.
1992 (both 6-2-0)
Stanford
Washington
1993 (all 6-2-0)
Arizona
Southern California
UCLA
1994
Oregon (7-1-0)
1995 (6-1-1)
Southern California
Washington
1996
Arizona St. (8-0-0)
1997 (7-1-0)
UCLA
Washington St.
1998
UCLA (8-0-0)
1999
Stanford (7-1-0)
2000 (7-1-0)
Oregon
Oregon St.
Washington
2001 (7-1-0)
Oregon
2002 (7-1-0)
Southern California
Washington St.
The only team in the Pac-10 NOT on the list is Cal... ...which makes sense, because Cal sucks. (lol)
Great, the SEC has a few perenial top-tier teams, but I see that it's been a while for Mississippi (1963), Mississippi State (1941), or Vanderbilt (NEVER). It must be nice to have those automatic wins you can use to pad your record with each season.
(Cal's last championship? 1975.) - NuchDog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The other confrences are there, or at least the SEC.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0608/gallery.cfb.sec.players/content.1.html - wilf_brim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4They picked the Pac10, perhaps the SEC, et al will be later. And I don't think one can say that the Pac10 isn't a "real conference".
- sirdeej, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Looks out for Cal's Forsett next year...it will be just like Marshawn after JJ Arrington graduated.
- karmakanic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Excellent analysis. Pac-10 kicks butt. Again.
(And Alexis Serna made every single extra point the rest of the season [FG: 16 of 19], ultimately winning the Lou Groza Award as the best kicker in the nation this past year.) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Click here to see the ugliest uniforms in college football.
http://www.mightyoregon.org/05-11/new-look-ducks.html - uacheesehead, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4USC, ASU, UCLA, Oregon... all solid teams. Even my team, Arizona, is on the way up, at least.
- ratbear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Not a singly Husky in the list. Pathetic. My, have we fallen from grace. With that said though, the Pac-10 still owns all other conferences in terms of national championships, by a large margin.
- footprintx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Some of the trouble regarding the lack of respect the Pac-10 is consistently shown comes from the time difference. I don't know about you folks, but at 11 pm, I'm ready to hit the hay. I'm not staying up until 3 am to watch teams out-of-conference play. Call it what you will, but most of us have to work in the morning.
Well the same goes for sportswriters. Let's say you're a sportswriter. You're writing your article on your top 10 picks. But every time you watch games, you're watching the SEC, and parts of the Big-10. Chances are you're going to leave out all the teams from the Pac-10 except the most obvious, just because you never see them play. All of a sudden a good chunk of sports media has a slant towards east-coast teams.
It's just a function of sportswriters having wives and jobs too. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm a duck, it's my town, but as much as I hate to say it, they're not going anywhere. Not enough to work with. They have those new fancy nike uniforms (which are ugly as hell) and they're going to embarass themselves.
- Grimnebulin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Why can't the geniuses at UCLA come up with their own fight song rather than stealing Cal's?
- CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2*random GO TEAM post*
- allnightbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@orenthal:
All right, I'm more inclined to agree with this post of yours.
What I mean by the split conference is that many people will say, well, the SEC has to play Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, LSU, and Arkansas. Those are seven teams that have had success at one point or another in the last two decades, and certainly, can be formidable in any given year. But they aren't always good--see Tennessee and Arkansas last year and Alabama and Florida were average teams for most of this decade. Moreover, no one ever plays all seven teams.
The SEC also has some very weak teams: Kentucky, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State. South Carolina is an average team right now, and the others are pretty weak. Occasionally, Kentuck will field an average team, and Ole Miss and Mississippi State might be somewhat respectable, but those times are few and far between.
The image of the Pac-10 as a weak team comes from 1) East Coast Bias, which is understandable because you don't see them as often and 2) the conference is very balanced. From 1992-2002, every team except Cal won or shared the conference crown. From 1991-2001, every team except USC was top 10 at the end of the season, and USC certainly has been a perennial top 4 team ever since (and they were #11 in 1996, I believe). Besides Washington and UCLA, none of the teams have quite the history that the SEC teams might, but every team is a threat to compete in the conference.
I think you can rationally argue that the SEC is better than the Pac-10. I also think I can rationally argue that the Pac-10 is on par with the SEC, or even better. I do not think you can rationally say that the Pac-10 is far beneath the SEC, nor can I argue that the SEC is much weaker than the Pac-10.
Final comment: yes, three teams in the top 25 in 2000, but they were #3, #4, and #7. - thecolor11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Surprised to see that Joe Newton isn't on this list.
- allnightbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@orenthal:
The SEC has some talented players, no doubt. They are unquestionably the most passionate fanbase in the country, and for this reason, much of the media associates the programs as being stronger than the rest of the country.
In fact, they are not the best conference in the country. Some years they are, but it seems to be somewhat cyclical. The Pac-10 was the strongest in 2000, the Big Ten in 1999, the Big XII (overall) in 2001, etc. The SEC has been the strongest conference quite a few times too.
You cite preseason ratings as evidence that the SEC is strongest and that the Pac-10 is "*****". This is circular reasoning, because the East Coast Bias gets perpetuated in the preseason ratings. Any objective computer rating at the end of the year will 1) show the teams to be roughly even, varying from year to year, 2) show the SEC to be overrated in the preseason poll, because the SEC teams are perennially rated high, and 3) show the SEC teams to play uniformly the weakest schedules. I believe last year, according to Sagarin, nine of the 10 Pac-10 teams had stronger schedules than the SEC team with the strongest schedule, and the #10 Pac-10 team was ahead of the the #2 SEC team.
So yes, the SEC has a passionate fanbase and many of their teams have a long history. With this, comes excessive preseason hype and an ability to recruit top athletes. However, the SEC is weakened because of the lack of sophisticated offensive schemes. Witness the way Steve Spurrier, the only offensive innovator, so dominated the conference in the 90s. The top two teams now? Auburn and Georgia. The latter shot to the top of the conference after installing an offense from the Pac-10 retread Al Borges, seeing a marked improvement in offensive production despite having the same personnel as the year prior (the 23-0 shutout to USC). Georgia became good when they took Mark Richt from Florida State (and conversely, Florida State's offense has been abysmal ever since).
I fully expect Florida to join these two programs, perhaps even dominating the conference, because Urban Meyer is a competent offensive coach whose innovation will be too much for the SEC. LSU is living right now off a string of top-3 recruiting classes, but Les Miles is not going to keep the momentum going.
In conclusion, is the SEC better than the Pac-10, or other conferences that actually schedule teams that offer athletic scholarships? Maybe, in certain years. Are the other conferences "*****", as you say? Certainly not, even in their down years. Is the SEC justified in scheduling cupcakes? That's their prerogative, but it is terrible for the sport as a whole and circumvents the system in place. The only reason they can get away with this is because their fanbase will watch any game, even a glorified scrimmage.
One final note. The conference championship is just a moneymaker. Sure, it adds an extra tough game to a team's schedule at the end of the year, but because of the way the divisions are split in the Big XII, SEC, and ACC, the top teams avoid each other. Each Big Ten (+1) school plays 8 of the 10 opponents each year, each Pac-10 school plays 8 of the 9 opponents each year, and beginning next year, will play all 9. This round-robin seems a more logical way of determining a champion, and in fact, ensures that every team plays one another. With the BCS system, the conference championship game will allow a team to jump another in the rankings (see LSU 2003, which moved up because it beat Georgia). At the same time, the conference championship has not yet prevented a team from playing the national championship game, even in a loss (see Nebraska 2001, Oklahoma 2003). - EpicCrusadr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4GO BEARS!!!! Oski rules!!!!
- orenthal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ allnightbaby
how does the SEC championship game allow the top teams to avoid each other? for those not familiar with the format, the SEC is divided into east and west divisions. all teams in the east play each other. all teams in the west play each other. in addition, each team plays three teams from the other division. for example, auburn (west division) plays all teams in the west and georgia, south carolina and florida from the east division.
the conference championship game pitts the champions of each division against each other. so not only does the conference championship game not allow teams to "avoid" the good teams in the other division, it often requires that the conference champion will have had to beat a team twice to win the title. even in years where the 3 non-divisional opponents are weak a team still has to face the best team in the other division to win the conference.
as for urban meyer's offensive scheme being too much for SEC defenses, i disagree. check out last year's florida-alabama game as evidence. after have his offense destroyed by the alabama defense meyer literally cried in the post game interviews.
its obvious there are good teams in each conference. it is just my belief that from top to bottom the SEC is the strongest conference almost every year. - allnightbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Add also: in 1999, the Big Ten schools were #4, #5, #7, #11, #18, #24, #25. The SEC schools were #8, #9, #12, #16, #17, #22. The SEC certainly was strong, but the Big Ten was ridiculous. This was also the Pac-10's weakest year.
In 2001, the Big XII had #5, #6, #8, and #9. I guess it wasn't very deep this year, and my perception was before Colorado and Nebraska got owned in their bowl games. I also see the SEC was fairly good this year too.
One last comment: I like to use the polls to determine the top few teams each year, because the "experts" pay more attention to the top teams. I like to use computers to determine the rest of the pecking order, because it is more objective, and for someone who believes the East Coast Bias is quite strong, I feel this is important. - orenthal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1you definitely make some good points.
i am not a big believer in the east coast bias. i think at some point that may have been the case, but not anymore. now that it is openly discussed i think some people actually favor the west coast teams a little more to compensate.
i do have to admit one thing. i had to watch the trojans put a good whoopin on my tigers a few years ago. at least i can say that i saw matt lienart's first college start though. - allnightbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Add USC 24, Auburn 17 in 2002.
And I think two Oregon over Mississippi States.
There are a few more games that escape my mind right now. - allnightbaby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The SEC is overhyped. They're 3-7 against the Pac-10 in the last 10 games, and that's with Alexis Serna shanking three extra points in 2004 and with Arizona State unable to get a punt off in 2005, against the SEC's best team (LSU).
The SEC hype is generated on the basis of four out of conference (OOC) games a year, almost all at home, almost all against Division I-AA or Division II patsies, with perhaps an occasional mid-major. For instance, did you know that Georgia hasn't traveled out of the Mason-Dixon line for a regular season football game in over 30 years? Other than a local rivalry, often mandated by the state government, the SEC plays no one out of conference. The exceptions are Tennessee and Arkansas.
Consider this:
ALABAMA: Hawaii (home), Louisiana-Monroe (home), Duke (home), Florida International (home)
AUBURN: Washington State (home), Buffalo (home), Tulane (home), Arkansas State (home)
FLORIDA: Southern Miss (home), Central Florida (home), Western Carolina (home), Florida State (away)
GEORGIA: Western Kentucky (home), UAB (home), Colorado (home), Georgia Tech (home)
LSU: UL-Lafayette (home), Arizona (home), Tulane (home), Fresno State (home)
TENNESSEE: California (home), Air Force (home), Marshall (home), Memphis (home)
Let's break it down.
- Alabama plays a mid-major in Hawaii, and it is their best OOC game. (Granted, they lost this game three years ago.) They play arguably the worst BCS conference team in Duke and two teams that aren't even D1-A. Of course, all at home.
- Auburn plays a somewhat respectable Washington State, which is expected to be in the bottom half of the Pac-10. They play a mid-major in Tulane (not too bad), a team that is on the bottom 5 of any ranking of the 117 Division 1-A teams, and a Division 1-AA team. All at home.
- Florida plays a decent mid-major (Southern Miss) and two non Division 1-AA teams in Central Florida and Western Carolina. These three are at home. There is that in-state rivalry against Florida State (at Doak Campbell), which I understand is mandated by the state legislature.
- Georgia plays a Division 1-AA Western Kentucky, a mediocre mid-major (UAB), a decent BCS team (Colorado). They also have a decent BCS team in Georgia Tech, who is their in-state rival. All four games are at home, although I understand that the Tech game alternates each year.
- LSU plays Louisiana-Lafeyette (D1-AA) and Tulane. They play a bad BCS team (Arizona) and a very good mid-major (Fresno State). Props on the Fresno State. All four games are at home, of course.
- Tennessee plays a very good Cal team and three above-average mid-majors in Air Force, Marshall, and in-state Memphis. All four at home though.
I didn't look up what the weaker SEC teams like Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Ole Miss, MSU, South Carolina, and Arkansas play. (I have already given the Razorbacks props for playing the USC Trojans.)
Contrast this with what this years USC Trojans play: at Arkansas, Nebraska, and Notre Dame. All three teams have been ranked in the top 25 in most magazines, with Notre Dame #1 in several. Or their brutal 2002 slate: Auburn (finished 9-3), Colorado (finished 9-4, I think, coming off their Fiesta Bowl season), Kansas State (10-2), Notre Dame (9-3).
Many teams do schedule weak OOC games, but I'd like to give props to most of the Pac-10, Miami, Florida State, Fresno State, Tennessee, Arkansas, Notre Dame, Michigan, Colorado, and Oklahoma for lining up a tough slate in most years. - orenthal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1there is no way you can honestly argue that the PAC-10 is a better conference from top to bottom than the SEC.
a quick look at the AP and USA today polls is pretty strong evidence that the media and coaches side with me on this. 5 SEC teams in AP top 25 (3 in top 10), and 6 SEC teams in the USA Today top 25 (3 in top 10).
there is no doubt USC is a powerhouse, CAL is strong, but beyond that the conference is full of a bunch of "also-rans".
- allnightbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@orenthal.
About the East Coast Bias. This may be a bad analogy, but I think it's kind of like racism. It's not deliberately and institutionally present anymore, and people try to avoid it, sometimes trying to compensate for it. But there are still residual effects from the past such that there is de facto East Coast Bias.
The time zones will never change. The SEC schools have much bigger fanbases, and as such, will have more television exposure, more media coverage, and more leverage with recruits. Aside from USC, and maybe UCLA, Washington, and Cal, the SEC schools have more football history than any Pac-10 school, and that is unlikely to change.
People see an 7-5 Arkansas team in an average year that went 4-4 in the SEC, and maybe 3-1 out of conference, splitting two games against legit competition and winning two against overmatched opponents, and they might be a fringe top 25 team. People see a 6-6 Washington State team that might go 4-4 in the Pac-10, going 1-2 against quality OOC opponents and beating a fourth overmatched opponent, and that team might be ranked 40th-50th.
I think as a USC fan, I can't really complain about East Coast Bias affecting USC, because there is a lot of respect for USC, and we do have the benefits of a strong tradition and recruiting network. But at the same time, I think the rest of the Pac-10 gets shafted quite often.
Looking at the AP polls you cite, perhaps the SEC is stronger (or at least more top-heavy) on an average year. It could also be the lingering effects of East Coast Bias, or artificial inflation from an easy OOC schedule, or other factors. It could also be that the SEC just kicked ass that year. - terrax, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Notre Dame is NOT in a conference. They are an independent.
The PAC-10 is not a very good conference from top to bottom. The SEC, ACC, Big 10, and even the Big 12 have better teams. - longda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0GO BEAVS!
- bruin8uclap, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3No UCLA. Go figure. GFU S.I. Why don't you and those steroid junkies at USC get a hotel room already.
UCLA FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT! - uacheesehead, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1http://digg.com/football/SEC_s_Top_10_Players_SI_Photos
- MrButthead, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1All this crap about SEC better than the PAC-10..blah blah blah. So what have the last 10 years head to head said about the conferences? As you can see, it's quite even.
1996
Tennessee 35, UCLA 20
1997
Tennessee 30, UCLA 24
2000
UCLA 34, Alabama 24
2001
UCLA 20, Alabama 17
2003
LSU 59, Arizona 13
2004
USC 23, Auburn 0
LSU 22, Oregon State 21 (OT)
2005
USC 70, Arkansas 17
LSU 35, Arizona State 31 - karmakanic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@orenthal
Yes, I am arguing precisely that. I don't really care about any one particular year - any team can pop up every now and then. I'm talking about entire decades of conference-wide competitiveness. Over the past 50 years, 40 years, 30 years, 20 years, and even 10 years, the Pac-10 kicks the SEC's ass. The only conferences that rival them for consistency are the Big-12 and the Notre Dame Conference (props to scoot87, above), followed closely by the Big-10. The SEC? A buncha semi-pro wannabe players. Chew on that, Ricky Bobby. - orenthal, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@ allnightbaby
the reason most SEC teams play weaker out of conference schedules is because each team's in conference schedule puts them among the toughest schedules in the nation year in and year out.
you pointed out all the non-conference opponents, so now lets look at some of the in-conference schedules:
alabama: at arkansas, at florida, at tennessee, at lsu, and auburn at home. those are 5 top 25 opponents, including 3 in the top 10, and 4 of those games are on the road.
auburn: lsu, arkansas, florida, georgia, alabama. again, 5 top 25 teams with two being in the top 10.
i could go on, but i think you get the idea. sure, USC plays 3 good non-conference opponents this year, but its becuase if they didnt their strength of schedule would be ***** due to their conference opponents. SEC teams may play some weaker non-conference teams but it is becuase the SEC conference is the toughest in the nation AND because the SEC has a championship game WHICH THE PAC 10 DOES NOT!!! - orenthal, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@ allnightbaby
i forgot one thing. you mentioned that the PAC 10 was the strongest in 2000. correct me if i am wrong but in the final AP poll of 2000 there were 3 PAC 10 teams in the top 25. in the same poll there were 6 SEC teams in the top 25. from top to bottom, SEC is the strongest.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/polls/2000/ap/
in the 1999 final AP poll there were 7 SEC teams in the top 25. 7 out of 12!!! in the same year i count only 6 teams from the Big X in the top 25.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/polls/1999/ap/
in 2001 there were 5 SEC teams to finish in the top 25. in the same year there were only 4 Big XII teams to finish in the top 25.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/polls/2001/ap/
yet, in all these years you pointed out that the SEC was not the strongest conference in the nation. the numbers do not back up your argument. - allnightbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@bruin8uclap
There are no UCLA pictures because SI (and most of the nation) do not believe UCLA has any top 10 players in the Pac-10.
Who would be your top player? Ben Olson, your starting QB, and hot-shot recruit in 2001?
Ladies and gentlemen, presenting the face of the UCLA program, Ben Olson: http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c57/keenane/USC%20Football/BenOlson06.jpg - MrButthead, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Lets step out of football for a second. We'll see that the Pac-10 owns the SEC when it comes to overall NCAA team championships at 251 vs. 91. And more importantly, the quality of education you'll receive at a Pac-10 school puts the SEC to shame. Cal, UCLA, Stanford, UW, USC....'nuff said.
- Streyeder, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1It's all west coast bias. :P
- allnightbaby, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0digg down
- scoot87, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5"One team doesn't make a conference."
Yes it does, Notre Dame makes its own a conference. - bongo, on 10/12/2007, -8/+4*ahem* USC FOOTBALL RULES!!
Thank you. - skubiszm, on 10/12/2007, -16/+6Too bad they didn't choose to rank the top players in a real conference like the Big Ten or SEC. And don't start talking about USC and their MNC's. One team doesn't make a conference.
Either way, feel free to digg me down.
Marked as lame.
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 