The SEC has dominated the BCS era of college football with multiple champions of superior ability. The first BCS title was won by the SEC (Tennessee), and the most recent BCS title was won by the SEC (Louisiana State).
Of the 10 BCS winners, four are from the SEC. The only multi-year winner in history is from the SEC. No SEC team has ever LOST a BCS title game.
So those are the facts—read 'em and weep if you're not an SEC fan. The proof is in the numbers, not the opinion.
We establish the pecking order of BCS Conferences like this.
No. 1: SEC — Four wins (Tennessee '98, LSU '03, Florida '06, LSU '07), zero losses
No. 2: Big 12 — Two wins (Oklahoma '00, Texas '05), three losses (Nebraska '01, Oklahoma '03 and '04)
No other Conference has multiple BCS winners. We must drop down into the number of losses to rate these other leagues.
No. 3: Pac-10 — One win (USC '04), one loss (USC '05)
No. 4: Three-way tie
ACC: One win (FSU '99), two losses (FSU '98 and '00)
Big East: One win (Miami '01), two losses (Virginia Tech '99 and Miami '02)
Big 10: One win (Ohio State '02), two losses (Ohio State '06 and '07)
Just another example of the superiority of the Southeastern Conference in the BCS era. Multiple champions, no losses.
While we're busy giving out awards, we should note that Ohio State, Florida State, and Oklahoma are the only multi-year losers of the BCS title game. The Pac-10, Big 10, and ACC are the most unbalanced leagues, as they have sent only the same school to the BCS title games.
This speaks to the level of competition, or lack thereof, in those leagues, rather than domination. The combined record of those three schools in the game is sub-.500 at 3-5.
It's good that we got this out into the open, so we could set the record straight as to who is the best, and who is the also ran.
comments (10) write a comment »
write a new comment
3 months ago
Totally agree with you that the SEC is the strongest conference in the BCS era, but your report sounds a little arrogant.
I think that for most of the people who hate the SEC, it's not because we are the best, but because that fact seems to have gone to our heads. Not trying to flame...as I said, I agree with every single statement you made and I like how you supported your points with stats.
Just remember that people vote to determine who plays for the NC (at least voting is part of the formula) and if people hate the SEC that *could* reduce our chances of getting a team in. Just something to think about...
3 months ago
Liger I see your point, sounds a little arrogant. The fact is the big dog tends to strut a little. This is a product of college football. Go to a big rival SEC game and you see the same good harted and sometimes not so good harted arrogance from the fans. This is one of the best and worst things about college football. I look forward to doing some good harted smack talking at the cocktail party this year, just good old fashion fun. I say as long as the SEC has this kind of track record, let the big dog strut just a little, it wont last forever.
3 months ago
Arrogant and powerful, that is the SEC.
Arrogant and overrated, that is the PAC10.
Arrogant and biased, that is the Big 10.
from 3 months ago
I love the comment almost as much as I love the article!
3 months ago
LOL.
So, despite reaching more national title games than the Pac-10, you rate the Big Ten below them because they've lost more times? So according to your retarded Southern inbred logic, tis better to not be good enough to reach the title game than to reach it and lose? If you weren't from the South, I'd question whether or not you actually believe this logic - but I've learned to never underestimate the stupidity of the South.
That being said, the SEC obviously stands out as the best conference going right now, in spite of this stupidly-written scoring system. The rest of us will just have to grit our teeth and deal with the smack-talk until the SEC inevitably reverts to being a shitty conference once again.
There's really no point in "grading" the Big East based on the performance of schools that are no longer a part of the conference. By my scoring system, the Big East is 0 for 0 in the big game....so I guess by your Cro-Magnon logic, that would make the Big East the #2 conference in the BCS era, wouldn't it? After all, they've got the same number of losses as the SEC. The SEC wins the tiebreaker based on having more BCS championship wins, though.
3 months ago
Jeff, I think the reason he rates the PAC-10 above the Big-10, is because of the smack down administered by them whenever the Big-10 plays against them. In case you didn't know it, all those in-breds you keep mentioning in your ignorant tirade, about the South, are really Northern transplants.
Why is it that everytime someone from the North wants to make a point about something positive in the Big-10 it includes negative offbase demographics of the South. Look around you Pal, There are plenty of toothless, cigerette toting, trailer owners in the North as there are anywhere. Only Southerners aren't stupid enough to sell there homes, collect there family and move up there.
As for the SEC and football, which is the real discussion, we have and always will be KING. Look at the all-time bowl winning percentages amongst the major conferences, and get back to me. I doubt that you will because you lack the intelligence for such a conversation.
from 3 months ago
BigOrange,
For the record, I think "all-time best conference" arguments are pointless and irrelevant. But just for curiosity...why do you retards get such a hard-on for bowl games? 90% of bowl games are nothing but glorified exhibitions anyway. Why do you think they're so much more important than regular season matchups? Could it be because you're cherrypicking arbitrary stats to bolster your argument?
Bowl records mean close to nothing, dude.
I could point out to you that the Big Ten has an all-time winning record against the SEC (95-89-7) but what would that prove? The same thing - nothing.
I could point out to you that the Big Ten has an all-time winning record against the Pac-10 (268-253-13) but what would that prove? The same thing - nothing.
It's all irrelevant and pointless to discuss, because nobody's convincing anybody of anything.
(Source: http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/bigten/vs_conf.php)
3 months ago
Hey Jeff, thanks for the good words and we appreciate your fine descriptions of what the truth of the Bowl situation is. Say are you from Akron? I knew a fellow once from Akron. Maybe you know him, his name is Bob. He loved to go to Lizard farms when he came down for vacation, he loved to watch the alligator wrestling exibits. You might have seen him, he always wore dark socks with his bermuda shorts and shoes. If you see him tell him we said hello.
from 3 months ago
*Yawn*
2 months ago
The SEC will always be stout, you really can't understand unless you live in the south. They have the best athletes, coaches, stadiums, and most importantly, the best fans. The lack of pro teams I think explain some of this.
write a new comment