I have recently been asked by Bleacher Report's own Tim Pollock to answer some questions regarding the dominance of Pac-10 football.
Are national titles subjective?
Yes, they are. Under the current system with the BCS, the national championship game is always going to have a problem. What made Ohio State better than USC or Georgia last year? What made Oklahoma better than Utah or Auburn in 2004?
Without a playoff, there are too many different things to consider when asking the question, "Who is the best?"
We try to make the national champion and the national championship an objective thing, and we do the best we can with the BCS system that we have in place—but the bottom line is that it does not work in some years.
As I've stated many times before, let the teams decide the national champion, not a computer program.
How would Cal do if they played in the SEC East?
If California was placed into the SEC East this year, we all know how California would do out of conference. They'd probably play Sacramento State, Weber State, Eastern Washington, and MIT to start the season off. 4-0 automatically, in the top 25, with everyone yelling about how many top 25 teams the great SEC has.
Today's Must Reads
California would beat Vanderbilt and Kentucky pretty handily. I base this off the fact that both Vanderbilt and Kentucky are usually bottom-dwellers in the SEC East, and the fact that both teams lost to Tennessee last year, who California beat pretty badly.
South Carolina and Tennessee are teams that have pretty similar talent from my perspective. I really believe that South Carolina overachieved in the first half of the year and then was brought back to reality in the second half of the season. Both of these games would be won by California, maybe by three points or a touchdown.
Florida would be an interesting match-up, and I think the outcome of this game would be based largely on when it was played in the season and where it was played. This game is essentially a toss-up.
Georgia would beat up on California.
You never know what you're going to get out of the SEC West (which is why it's dumb to have 12 teams), so I'm going to say 2-1 on that side of the conference.
Overall, California would finish with a 9-3 or 10-2 record if they played in the SEC East.
How would Arizona State do if they played in the SEC West? How about Oregon (cue the Dennis Dixon injury comment, as if other teams don't have injuries)?
Only time will tell on this one. I think Arizona State would do very well in the SEC West. Georgia is going to have a hard time with the Sun Devils, much more than people expect. LSU came into Sun Devil Stadium and walked out with a 35-31 victory in an extremely close game.
I'm confused about the second part of the question—are you asking how Oregon would have done last year or how they would do this year? Because last year, they would have been undefeated national champions in any conference in America if Dixon was healthy.
Would USC go undefeated every year if they played in the SEC?
No, but they would come pretty damn close. USC just wailed on Arkansas in 2005 and 2006 when Arkansas was a pretty strong team. I believe they would be a one- or two-loss team at worst in that conference.
Of course, if USC played in the SEC, we would miss out on those exciting non-conference games like Ohio State and Notre Dame.
comments (13) write a comment »
write a new comment
2 months ago
Go BEARS!
2 months ago
Maybe you did not catch the game between Ky and LSU (National Champs).....Sorry Bears but you would be a cellar dwellar in the SEC....Join up and see how you do week in and week out....you better stay out there where you can win a few games
2 months ago
For the record, I never asked for this "article," and I certainly don't want my name attached to it.
That said:
So the same Cal team that went 7-6 last year, with 4 of those losses to unranked teams, would go 9-3 or 10-2 in the SEC? Yes, that makes sense.
You never actually answered the second question.
And yes, Americans sure would miss seeing Ohio State and Notre Dame get pummeled. I don't understand. If LSU dominated ND two years ago, then OSU last year, doesn't that work against your "Pac-10 has a tough out of conference rivalry" theory? Also, Notre Dame is terrible.
When FL plays FSU and Miami, are those not good out of conference rivalry games?
When South Carolina plays Clemson, is that not a good out of conference rivalry?
Georgia-Georgia Tech?
from 2 months ago
Kentucky vs. Louisville every year is also a good rivalry. Granted UL is down right now though.
from 2 months ago
Thanks, Jordan. I forgot that one.
2 months ago
Wow... just wow...
2 months ago
Only one question, why do you feel the need to compare the PAC 10 to the SEC and not any of the other four major conferences?
When you *honestly* answer that question, you'll understand why most coaches, fans, and those in the media time and time again consider the SEC the toughest conference top to bottom. That doesn't mean that no team in the SEC will ever lose to a team from another conference. It just means that most of time SEC teams have to be better to attain the same record. Most years (last year being one of them) the bowls illustrate that point. The SEC had 9 teams in bowls and SEVEN of them won, including the National Championship game and the Sugar Bowl.
It's funny, Hawaii had beaten a PAC 10 team (Washington) the game before they met UGA in the Sugar Bowl....Not only did UGA beat Hawaii, they completely dismantled them...just like Ohio State in 2006...they were golden until they played a battle-hardened SEC team. One of the Florida players said after the NC game in 2006 that OSU was about the 4th or 5th best team they played all year.
Heck, even the NFL agrees. More players in the NFL are from the SEC than any other conference...and you know what, the ACC is next...the PAC 10 is farther down the list
I really can't understand the point of these articles. Are you attempting to generate reads by trying to be controversial. If you think the PAC 10 is better than the SEC...OK, in this great country of ours you are entitled to that opinion. But it seems like you've placed a lot of energy trying to convince other people of something that I doubt you really believe yourself.
from 2 months ago
Because those are the two best conferences...
2 months ago
Cal would average 8-4 at best in the SEC.
I would say USC would have the same average as a GA-FLA or LSU, USC doesn't play as hard a schedule as a SEC team so their wins would drop on that fact alone.
The Cal - Tenn result from last year doesn't indicate that Cal was that much better than Tenn, don't get me wrong Cal mashed Tenn real good, but Tenn mashed Ga pretty good also, I think most would say Ga was the better team just not on that day.
If Cal had played an SEC schedule last year they would have been a good team that some SEC team beat badly on a given day. Tenn won at Ga and Ga won at Fla.
We might get to see a USC vs SEC Champ MNCG, What would the PAC-10 have to say if they loose that match up, I can safely say they won't be playing the Arkansas of the SEC world on that day.
2 months ago
why would you use LSU vs arizona st??
that game was in 2005. it was right after katrina.
some players had their entire families and then some piled into their apartments for that week. practices were cancelled or scaled down. players had little to no sleep.
it wasn't a typical week. the game was supposed to be in BR, it was in tempe.
b/c of the lack of practices and conditioning LSU played a soft zone for the first two games that season (tenn loss in OT was the 2nd) and LSU gave up an average of 30 pts in those two games.
since then, pelini has changed the scheme and lsu has averaged giving up in the mid teens per game.
this article is just as "subjective" as you say the NC is.
from about 1 month ago
"this article is just as "subjective" as you say the NC is."
Actually, National Championships, in College Football, are subjective :)
In fact, I STILL believe that the Kansas Jayhawks SHOULD have WON the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP, during the 2007 College Football season :)
2 months ago
Dude... Washington was the last place team in the Pac-10 and Hawaii barely beat them at home. Hawaii played a nothing schedule. The fact that Georgia beat up on them was predictable and doesn't say anything about the Pac-10.
2 months ago
Seriously, the hilarity continues to grow...
"Are national titles subjective?
Yes, they are. Under the current system with the BCS, the national championship game is always going to have a problem."
If its a system that every conference agrees to, its not subjective, its the way things have been elected to be done. Who cares if the NCG will always have a problem, with this system which has been agreed upon, like it or not, thats they way things go. Its not subjective, it the law of college football right now.
"They'd probably play Sacramento State, Weber State, Eastern Washington, and MIT to start the season off. 4-0 automatically, in the top 25, with everyone yelling about how many top 25 teams the great SEC has"
You say that like the SEC only starts out strong, yet I proved in the comments on another one of your "articles" that UGA plays 6 teams in the top 25 pre season poll, and only one is OOC, so thats 6 SEC teams ranked preseason. Also, in the final 2007 polls, the SEC has 5 teams in the top 15 and the #1 and 2 teams in the land. But wait, arent the polls subjective, so your argument about Cal being a top 25 team is then subjective. Sorry, but your not winning anyone over with that one.
"South Carolina and Tennessee are teams that have pretty similar talent from my perspective."
That line just proves your slant and delusion. You think the SEC East champ has even talent with the #9 team in conference??? Seriously??? I think everyone now understands why you think they way you do in these articles.
"You never know what you're going to get out of the SEC West (which is why it's dumb to have 12 teams)"
...and why the ACC and Big 12 have since gone the way of a two-divisional conference. Its also why the SEC is at the forefront of getting things done in college football. The SEC are obviously leaders, seems like someone needs to realize their role before they get too far behind.
write a new comment