Albama Arkansas Auburn Florida Georgia Kentucky LSU Mississippi State Missouri Ole-Miss USC Tennessee Texas A&M Vanderbilt
Latest News

“SEC Bias” Talk Needs To Stop

If you’ve listened to talk radio this week or turned on ESPN or perused the work of some national columnist — like ESPN.com’s Rick Reilly — you’ve no doubt heard/seen/read someone weeping about the expected rematch in the BCS Championship Game: LSU versus Alabama II.  If they aren’t showing their lack of football smarts by calling the first defensive masterpiece by those two squads “dull,” then they’re claiming the rematch is all just part of a pro-SEC conspiracy.  (Ironically, is there any group in the country more sure that the world is out to get them than us good ol’ Southerners?)

 

“This SEC bias has to stop. The world of college football doesn’t end at the Louisiana border.”

 

That’s how Reilly puts it in the column above.

Let’s go along with part of that argument for now.  Let’s say Bama’s getting a second shot at Les Miles’ crew only because they play in the perceived mini-NFL known as the SEC.  But I want to focus on the “has to stop” part of the argument.

“Has to stop?”  When did it start?

Maybe people would say it started when voters jumped Florida over Michigan in order to nix a Maize and Blue rematch with Ohio State in January, 2007.  Perhaps the the thought is that the Gators didn’t deserve a shot at the belt.  Unfortunately for those who feel that way, UF bombed unbeaten Ohio State, 41-14.  No bias in that one.  Just a cleated foot straight to the rump of the #1 team in America.

So maybe folks feel a pro-SEC bias allowed LSU — two-loss LSU — to meet the mighty Buckeyes in the title game the next season.  Of course, two-loss LSU thumped top-ranked Ohio State, 38-24.  And the game wasn’t as close as the score.  If bias had anything to do with that matchup, it sure didn’t show up on the scoreboard.

In fact, this bias we keep hearing about — if one really does exist this year — was quite clearly earned.  On the field.  Against the country’s best teams.  In the sport’s biggest games.

 

2006 season — Florida 41, Ohio State 14

2007 season — LSU 38, Ohio State 24

2008 season — Florida 24, Oklahoma 14 (That’s the Sooner squad that averaged 54 points per game coming in, by the way.)

2009 season — Alabama 37, Texas 21

2010 season — Auburn 22, Oregon 19 (And that’s the Duck team that averaged 49 points entering the title bout.)

 

The world of college football does not end at the Louisiana border.  But really good, defense-first football does.

If Bama’s getting a second-chance because it plays in the SEC — and not just because it’s one loss in overtime to the #1 team in the country is better than any other one-loss team’s defeat — then that should be A-OK with everyone.  The past five years have shown us that no matter how the SEC gets to the BCS Championship Game, its teams validate the voters and the computers and in the end.

Fans can drop the “S-E-C, S-E-C” chant for now and instead belt out an older boast: “Score-board, Score-board.”

The SEC bias has to stop?  It’ll stop when someone from outside the SEC beats the SEC in a late-season, meaningful showdown.  Here’s guessing that’s why so many national talking heads are upset about an LSU-Alabama rematch.  No one else will get their shot to put the big, bad SEC in its place.

There’s a desperate desire for someone — anyone: Oklahoma State, Stanford, Virginia Tech, Boise State, Houston — to dethrone the league of champions.  Even when it’s obvious that the two best teams in the country are the two that will play in that much-debated rematch.

Come to think about it, how ’bout we stop the anti-SEC bias?

 


53 comments
itsok2be
itsok2be

And sec couldn't beat USC "on the field," so they had their flunkies at the NCAA try to dismantle them.

TarHeels77
TarHeels77

If the SEC is so good, then why did Georgia (SEC East champs) lose to Boise St? Why did Florida lose to Florida State? Why did Auburn lose to Clemson?

Dave
Dave

Except he never said it, and the person who originally tweeted it made it up, because that's what he does.

jim
jim

"Anyone who doesnt win their conference has no business playing in the national championship game." ~ Nick Saban 2003

funny how that isnt an issue now is it?

jim
jim

alabamas great body of work.LMAO two teams with a real pulse three teams with winning records.yet you sec homers think they are one of the best teams in the country.what a joke.funny eSECpn never mentions this.

The only team Bama beat with a pulse was Arkansas(10-2), unless you want to count plodding Penn State (9-3) also. After that, Auburn would be the next best team they beat - the ONLY other team with even a winning record (7-5).

But they are somehow deserving of the National Championship game. They beat THREE teams with winning records.

This system is BROKEN.

Date Opponent Site
Sept. 3 Kent State (5-7) Bryant-Denny Stadium
Sept. 10 at Penn State (9-3) State College, Pa.
Sept. 17 North Texas (4-7) Bryant-Denny Stadium
Sept. 24 *Arkansas (10-2) Bryant-Denny Stadium
Oct. 1 *at Florida (6-6) Gainesville, Fla.
Oct. 8 *Vanderbilt (6-6) Bryant-Denny Stadium
Oct. 15 *at Mississippi (2-10) Oxford, Miss.
Oct. 22 *Tennessee (5-7) Bryant-Denny Stadium
Oct. 29 Open Date
Nov. 5 *LSU (12-0) Bryant-Denny Stadium
Nov. 12 *at Mississippi State (6-6) Starkville, Miss.
Nov. 19 Georgia Southern (9-2) Bryant-Denny Stadium
Nov. 26 *at Auburn (7-5) Auburn, Ala.

bamahead
bamahead

I saw another ESPN-U talking head moron the other day proclaim the first LSU-Bama matchup 'boring' the other day. He lamented that because the title game wouldn't be Okey State and Oregon throwing up touchdown after defenseless touchdown on each other, that it would diminsh the college game. I crap you not. Where do they find these vapid idiots?

jim
jim

i remember in 06 the SEC whined when there was talk of OSU playing michigan.SEC two schools from same conference shouldnt play for national title.funny how its all fine and dandy now lol..screw the SEC bias college football is becoming a joke.

Rob
Rob

I think we'd all be better off if there were only one SEC team in the national championship game. By the current rules, LSU and Alabama will both deserve to play for the title, if they finish 1-2 in the BCS, but the current rules need to be changed to prevent 2 teams from a single conference playing for everything.

LSU and Alabama may very well be the two best teams in the nation, but that shouldn't be the ONLY deciding factor. When they've already faced each other once, would it not be prudent to give someone else a shot? This is also one of my arguments against a playoff, btw. Subjectivity plays a large part of college football rankings and the only way to get around that is to play the game on the field, which LSU and Alabama have already done. Why not give someone else a chance to do the same?

jafo220
jafo220

I think what your looking for here is consistency. I think Bama is a more consistantly winning team and is much more balanced offense to defense than a one legged pony called OSU. Even in games they won, they had trouble getting there. Bama is right where it should be, in a potential BCS Championship with LSU. These are the two best most consistent and balanced teams in CFB. An I live in the true heart of Big12 country. OSU lost the right for a championship shot when they coughed up the hairball at Iowa State.

fsujd
fsujd

Why is it totally obvious Alabama is the second best team? Is that like in 92 when it was obvious Miami was going to beat Bama? Oops! IF OSU beats OU consider th following:

Wins over current BCS Top 25 teams: Oklahoma State: 5, Alabama: 2.

Wins over current BCS Top 50 teams: Oklahoma State: 7, Alabama: 5.

Wins over FBS teams with winning records: Oklahoma State: 6, Alabama: 3.

Conference titles: Oklahoma State: 1, Alabama: 0.

Alabama had its shot on its home field and lost. If OK State beats OU they deserve their shot. If LSU loses to UGA and its still LSU-Bam in title game all I can say is thankfully their is still the AP poll to crown a champion. What nonsense that the NC would be between two teams that didn't even win their conference. So when you consider talk like that then yes the SEC bias does need to stop.

Someone who thinks
Someone who thinks

I like how the author said, "really good, defense-first football" because "really good" and "defense-first" are not synonymous? Case and point--look at the best teams in the NFL (where the level of competition is HIGHER than that of the SEC) are offense-first teams.

Oh and in last year's national championship game, when Auburn beat Oregon and you like to remind us that the Ducks averaged 49 ppg prior to that game, may I remind you that Auburn averaged nearly 43 ppg prior to the game against Oregon and the defense that you implicitly dismiss b/c it is from the then-Pac10. Oregon's defense held Auburn to the second lowest point output of the season (less than Auburn did in the SEC championship, less than LSU, less than Alabama).

So is your comment that the SEC is the only place good college football is played true? Not at all! Is it true that the SEC is even a defense-first conference fair either? Nope. Auburn won because of their offense more so than their defense, same thing with Urban Meyer's Florida's teams.

Don't get me wrong, good defense (and football) is played in the SEC. But your argument is weak, at best. Nice try though.

Fayettechill14
Fayettechill14

Rick Reilly is an odd guy. He's upset that all of his preseason predictions failed. He picked the Bengals to go 0-16 and Arkansas to win the national championship. I'm a Hog fan and that was ridiculous (he made this claim AFTER Knile Davis was lost for the season), especially when he threw in his claim that Grub's Bar in Fayetteville is the best college bar in the country. It's not even the best bar on Dickson Street....

I don't know how he has a job.

Dave
Dave

Whenever we've had a "2 teams for one spot" controversy in the past, the arrow usually stops spinning on the B12 team. That conference always gets the benefit of the doubt, usually with disastrous results. They've actually had as many BCS title appearances than the SEC (6 to 6) - they've just gone 2-4 in those games, and some of those losses were ugly.

Reilly must have had one heck of an editor at Sports Illustrated. Because apparently no one at ESPN's willing to slide his column back over the desk and say, "Rick, this stinks." He's no longer a writer, just a weird brand.

skillet
skillet

I think a lot of SEC fans misunderstand how the rest of the country feels about the SEC. There isn't an SEC bias as much as begrudging respect for a conference that keeps winning. (I do think there is a backlash against a certain element of SEC fans that come across as condesending to the rest of the country, but that's a different topic.)

But ina way that has helped the BCS title game. It's become an annual 'who's going to beat the SEC team'. I know a lot of fans who suddently became Oregon, OU, Texas fans hoping that someone would knock off the king.

To that extent the network suits have to be cringing. I'd be shocked if ratings didn't plummet this year. Fans outside the SEC aren't going to be interested. For two great teams, they lack the 'star power' (other than Richardson) that brings in casual fans. (Think Tebow, Bush, Vince Young, etc.) And the first game was an ugly defensive battle...appreciated by hardcore fans - but not something that a lot of people can't wait to see again.

GeoffDawg
GeoffDawg

Something else to point out - in 2007, any applicable bias that benefitted LSU primarily came at the expense of another SEC school, Georgia. It wasn't a South vs. the rest of the world argument.

KnightTimeAL
KnightTimeAL

Bet Auburn wishes the "SEC bias" started in 2004

GeoffDawg
GeoffDawg

Yeah, saw that piece of scatological opinion writing on ESPN yesterday. Long on whining, short on reasoning.

Bulldog
Bulldog

Thank you John..was hoping you would address Mr Reilly and his anti- SEC bias. His anti-sec attitude is as bad as those pro-sec emails he loves to quote.

Old Timer
Old Timer

I liked Mr. Reilly better when he was on Hollywood Squares. A funny guy, usually showcased in the middle square. (Young people: Google Hollywood Squares for insight into this nostalgic wit.)

40Cap
40Cap

SEC backlash is a bigger reality than SEC bias, as evidence by Reilly's comments. That guy's a hack anyway, he's trying anything to stay relevant, ever seen him doing SportsCenter? It's completely unwatchable.

Andthensome
Andthensome

I live in B1G country (Ohio). When my buddies and I get together for a few 'wings and beer' obviously we discuss sports. We all agree that the SEC is the toughest conference and the championship game should be between LSU and Alabama. Most of the 'hate' is coming from the media not the fans. Fans that know football, no matter where you're from should understand that the SEC dominates right now. If you don't like it, hire a better coach and change your system.

MoKelly
MoKelly

Well said and true .. the scores say it all. I watched ESPN last night and it was a joke. I really couldn't believe the commentators were moaning and groaning that a LSU/Alabama rematch would be just as "boring" as the first game.

Stephen Noyes
Stephen Noyes

Actually he was quoted in 2003 was "I don't think anyone will know who the legitimate national champion is unless all three teams in consideration get the opportunity to play one another," LSU coach Nick Saban said.

Sounds like Nick is for a playoff, which is a sane idea......

Dave
Dave

Except he never said it, and the person who originally tweeted it made it up, because that's what he does.

TarHeels77
TarHeels77

Gret points!! This SEC bias is ridiculous. The following SEC teams were NOT good at all: Tennessee, Florida, Auburn, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State and Ole Miss! Now, if Alabama had beaten Georgia and South Carolina instead of Tennessee and Florida, they would have a strong argument, but they didn't!

BamaMan1113
BamaMan1113

Look at what the teams were ranked at the time that Alabama played them though. Such as Florida who was 5 and 0 before Alabama took out not just there starting Quarterback but the second string quarterback as well pretty much guaranteeing the rest of their season would be a bust. Vanderbilt was 3 and 1 coming into that game against Bama until once again Bama took out their starting quarterback, they are now 6 and 6 but who knows how there season would have played out before that happened. Point is the main reason that a bunch of these teams had a winning record UNTIL they played Alabama which was one of the main reasons they finished the season the way they did.

Here is a good point for you. Look at the rank of the defenses Alabama has played this year vs the defenses that Ok State have played
Bama Ok State
Kent State- 20 Louisiana Laf- 72
Penn State- 11 Arizona- 111
North Texas- 105 Tulsa- 90
Arkansas- 51 Texas A&M- 66
Florida- 10 Kansas- 120
Vanderbilt 19 Texas- 9
Ole Miss- 89 Missouri- 62
Tennessee- 28 Baylor- 114
LSU 2 ( only loss) Kansas State- 76
Miss State- 42 Texas Tech- 115
Georgia Southern- 30 Iowa State- 102 ( only loss, speaks volumes)
Auburn- 78 Oklahoma- 52

See what I did there? Ok State has played 5 teams that ranked 102 or worse in total defense while Bama has played 1. Plus Bama has played 5 teams in the top 20 while Ok State has only played 1. The biggest thing you can look at is Ok State defense is ranked 107, what is Alabama ranked? You guessed it, #1 in the nation.

skillet
skillet

You kinda miss the point that the first letter of ESPN stands for 'Entertainment.'

In a week where championship games mean very little, they need to keep people excited/talking about the championship game. Is there an easier angle than playing up the why Bama-LSU shouldn't play anymore. It gets fans of other conferences excited and predictably draws SEC fan offsides.

Though he does have a point in one regard. From a pure entertainment perspective, the networks aren't too thrilled about a Bama-LSU rematch. The first game was only exciting if you had a dog in the fight. They covered every angle for the Nov 5 game already. It's a regional match-up with limited 'star power' (how many casual fans can name 3 players on both squads). I'm sure the sports media contingent would MUCH rather have a different matchup. Easier and more interesting to cover.

BDV
BDV

If the Big 10 had won the past 5 titles on the field before '06, I doubt you would've heard much complaint. But at this point, what else does the SEC need to prove? Pit Alabama against Okie lite, Stanford, Houston, or VPI on a neutral field, and they'd be favored by at least 17.

Stephen Noyes
Stephen Noyes

How insane is it we have a system where we pick our championship game, not by the play on the field, but a "beauty contest". This year our beauty contest pits two teams, a league champion and the other, a team that didn't win it's own conference. I know we have that in the NFL for the Super Bowl, but the teams advanced through MERIT, by winning on the field.

Now don't get me wrong. I feel Alabama and LSU very well could be the best two teams, but neither earned it on the field.

Their case is made in the media! I don't quite hear all this "ANTI-SEC" bias belting out on the air waves. I hear nothing but love for the SEC as the best!!! Stop getting your panties in a wad, SEC fans because a few voices play 'devil's' advocate..

Death to the BCS was the best book out on the subject. Read it and you will want the end of this insane system we have.

Dave
Dave

Two best teams. If we get into the "most deserving, which has nothing to do with which team is better," then we've got figure skating, with regional sports writers acting like the Russian and Ukrainian judges.

You're basically saying that LSU could rematch anyone in the country, except a team in their own conference. You're also basically saying that losing to the $1 team in the country disqualifies you, but losing to anyone else doesn't. Makes no sense, and in putting another team into the game just because they haven't played LSU yet, you're punishing success.

People need to think these things through. Fine, you hate the SEC. We get it. But that doesn't make logic run backwards.

not a dumb hick
not a dumb hick

the packers and the patriots are one legged ponies and they dont seem to much worse for it...

Donald Maginnis
Donald Maginnis

OSU had their shot when they played ISU and lost to the 27 point underdog. Just because you play someone earlier in the year does not mean that you don't get a chance to play them again. NY Giants got to play the Patriots in the Super Bowl after losing earlier. Nobody said "they got their shot...let someone else play them"

Heck... North Carolina and Duke can end up playing 3 times in basketball and then meet up in the championship game. If one loses all three nobody says, "games off, Duke already won the first three... North Carolina had their shot"

Sorry but OSU embarrased themselves losing to ISU. They had their shot.

Dave
Dave

OSU lost to Iowa State, who will be 6-6 after tomorrow.
OSU nearly lost to AM, who is 6-6.
OSU nearly lost to K-State.
OSU has a defense that would be the worst to ever play for a national championship by 50 spots. It's one of the 10 worst in CFB in yards. It's bottom half in points.

Alabama's offense is 31/16 in yards points. It's defense is first. It's played one close game all year. It's destroyed every other team it has played.

OSU had its shot against a horrible Iowa State team and lost. It hasn't even played Oklahoma yet. It's offense statistically is nowhere near the OU-Bradford crew that ran into a brick wall against Florida, and Florida's defense that year, while excellent, was a notch below LSU's and Alabama's this year. Football Outsiders has Alabama and LSU lapping the field in their efficiency ratings. Even the people who do not want a rematch admit that Alabama's the 2nd best team in the country. They just don't want a rematch.

I personally prefer to see OSU get stomped by LSU and Alabama whip someone in the Sugar Bowl. It removes all doubt among the "I have no idea how the game is played, but teams that score 66 against Texas Tech must be awesome" crowd and makes them look foolish and silly. The fact that it plays out that every year only makes it even more hysterical, sort of like watching a dog chase its tail over and over again.

It will be the same thing next year. And some day, when the SEC finally loses that game to make it 10-1 or whatever in championship games, I am sure you'll hop on a message board and pretend that one game proves the other 7, 8, or 10 didn't count.

Because THAT's bias.

Dave
Dave

No one's arguing that only SEC teams play defense. But while you occasionally see a dominant D in the P-12, it's a given in the SEC that 3 or 4 teams will have NFL-quality D lines and corners which will take away your 1 and 2 reads in the passing game. Oregon consistently bites the dust when they face a team with a future pro in the D line, much less 2 or 3. In fact, Oregon's 0-5 in their last 5 out of conference games against Top 20 teams. 0-5. What happened in every one of them? Could not move the ball.

Oregon was good enough to win it all last year, just like USC, Texas, and Oklahoma have been good enough to win it all in years past. But they didn't, and they didn't because Auburn's D did what SEC defenses typically do against 40-point-per-game offenses - hold them to well below their season average.

The trend's real, and it played out in the championship game last year. It's not a weak argument - it's reality. If you want to take one game, spin it, and call that the trend, more power to you. But it's just the inner fan in you talking. I'm an ACC guy, by the way.

Grimaud
Grimaud

This is why I half expect lil' Okie to somehow sneak in the championship if they beat OU. I've already seen a couple of articles in the media that say OSU might be more deserving than Alabama if they win this weekend. I don't necessarily agree with that, but alot of folks outside of SEC country do not want this rematch and are looking for a way to avoid it.

johnmrsec
johnmrsec

GeoffDawg...

Correct, it was Georgia that got jumped. But in the piece we're trying to find any nugget of where this bias talk might have started. I'm sure there were some would have preferred another team from another conference -- not a non-league champion Georgia OR a two-loss LSU -- get a shot at Ohio State.

Our end point is the same, however... there was no bias in the first place.

Thanks for reading,
John

Andthensome
Andthensome

You're right. If you remember tOSU backed into that game with LSU. West Virginia lost and then Missouri lost which moved tOSU into the game. We all knew that we probably shouldn't be there, but you're not going to say no to the invite.

johnmrsec
johnmrsec

KnightTimeAL...

Excellent point.

Thanks for reading,
John

TarHeels77
TarHeels77

HELLO, Florida was only ranked BECAUSE of SEC bias!! You are making our argument FOR us! Florida State had no problem beating the crap out of Florida. It takes a while to knock a team out of the top 25 when the SEC lovers overrate them in the beginning of the year as they did with both Auburn and Florida!

6-in-a-row
6-in-a-row

You couldn't be more wrong. Do you realize that first game was one of the highest ranked games on CBS in over 20 years? Despite what everybody says I would be willing to bet anything that all these people spouting off at the mouth that the first game was boring, and that there shouldn't be a rematch will still watch the LSU/Bama rematch on Jan 9th. I also believe this will be one of the most watched National Championships of all time. If not, who cares? I have a dog in this fight so I will be VERY excited to watch this game just like I was on Nov 5th!!! All these fans from other conferences teams had their shot to stop an all SEC national title game and they couldn't handle the pressure and lost to unranked teams or they lost to more than one team. PERIOD!!!

jim
jim

by your logic we should reward teams.for what their conference ha done in the past.if thats the case why even have a season

jim
jim

i couldnt care less if an SEC TEAM won 10 of the last 10 championships.a team who doesnt win their division let alone their conference has no right playing for the national title.also if UGA wins today it will stil be LSU vs bama that is a freaking joke.college football is going into the dumps.we need a play off.

C'mon dave!
C'mon dave!

according to Peter King's midseason all-pro NFL team, the SEC has ONE defensive all-pro (a CB) to the Pac-12's THREE! So saying that the PAC-12 doesnt have good defensive players is a total misnomer. Last year's ESPN NFL All-pro team had THREE SEC players on the defense to FOUR Pac-12 players on theirs, including the defensive POY. On NFL.com's top 100 players of 2011 list, there were 3 PAC-12 alumni higher than ANY SEC player. And that Haloti Ngata guy? the best defensive lineman in the NFL, he PLAYED ON Oregon, so I think they know a thing or two about defensive lineman. But nice try....

And also the argument that the SEC is the best conference in NCAA Football uses the EXACT SAME LOGIC as the 2010 MWC is better than the Big-10 because the MWC conference winner beat the Big-10 winner in last year's Rose Bowl. I dare you to look me in the eye and tell me that. Just because TCU beat Wisconsin does not validate the conference. Same thing with the SEC--their string of national championships is impressive. I wholly believe that. But I don't think Auburn winning the national championship validates the SEC as a whole.

Oh and the argument that an SEC team has an NFL-quality D-line is asinine and offensive. For a point of reference, according to nfldraftblitz.com's rankings, the only school in the SEC that has 2 or more players COMBINED on the lists of the top 45 DE prospects in the class of 2011 and the top 50 DT prospects in the class of 2011 was OLE MISS!!! Only 45 DL were drafted last year in arguably the best DL draft EVER so saying that the SEC has NFL-caliber defensive lines is simply not true. This is exactly what is wrong with the SEC, people believe total crap like this. In the 2011 draft, there were NINE PAC-12 DL drafted and only EIGHT in the SEC. so clearly, the PAC-12 doesnt produce NFL DL like the SEC does....

skillet
skillet

While it' a trend, I think the perception of how those games were won have been skewed over time. The mythology is those teams were all overwhelmed the speed and physicality of the SEC. That was certainly true in the two OSU games.

The Florida-OU game was a different animal. OU controlled the first half and had it not been for some head scratching playcalling by Bob Stoops resulting in two wasted red zone trips, they could have easily been up 10 at halftime.

It's hard to draw anything from the Bama-UT game. That game was over as soon as UT lost their Heisman finalist QB in the opening minutes. Last year's game came down to a last minute drive/FG.

The streak is impressive. Impressive because it's been different teams winning with different styles. But it is NOT because those teams were physically overwhelmed.

BDV
BDV

To an extent, yes I am. The SEC has proven to the be toughest league by far for five straight years. So if there's an SEC team in the NC picture, and they have the same record as teams from other leagues, then yes, they're going to get the benefit of the doubt. Don't like it? Then don't lose to middling squads like Iowa State, Texas Tech, Clemson, or TCU. Better yet, beat an SEC team in a game that actually matters. It's that simple.

BDV
BDV

By the way, we'd probably HAVE a playoff by now if your precious Leaders and Legends hadn't stonewalled the idea for all these years. Funny that only NOW do you guys think the system needs an overhaul. I'm all for a playoff. Always have been. But the cream will always rise to the top no matter what system is in place. If you think a playoff will suddenly put an end to SEC dominance, think again.

Dave
Dave

Not if you actually watched the play. It was a stretch option, not a pass play, so the term sack doesn't even begin to apply. And why weren't the SEC offenses taken out of their comfort zone? Answer: They weren't.

Look, people can justify or blame economic fortunes on presidents who have been out of office for 12 years. I've said three times now that the games follow a similar formula. You basically agree. Have a nice day.

skillet
skillet

In any good championship game both teams should be forced to move away from the 'comfortable'. I mean if they are top teams with a month to prepare, things shouldn't be as easy as a September OOC tune-up or beating up a conference weakling. That happens or should happen in any matchup of good teams.

The McCoy injury was a QB getting injured on a regular sack. It's just part of the game. Trying to make it more than that because of the SEC player or scheme involved is a REAL stretch.

Dave
Dave

Depends on what you mean by physically overwhelmed. If by that you mean failing to find open spaces which had been there the entire year, and not knowing what do in their absence, then you're wrong. In all of those games, the SEC team identified tendencies on offense and took them away, emphatically. It's no different than making a great shooter take shots from spots he doesn't like. He's still on the court gunning, but his percentages are going to drop a lot. He isn't "overwhelmed," but he is shut down.

Yes, perceptions do skew over time. But you can look at the McCoy injury two ways. Maybe it was a freak occurrence. And maybe it was a right tackle executing a roll-block (drop and roll into the legs) on a freak defensive end who is significantly heavier and faster than the QB and who easily jumps over roll blocks. The play call almost guaranteed McCoy was going to get crushed from behind, which is why you never see that play/blocking scheme run in the SEC.

Trackbacks

  1. GOSTOSAS says:

    GOSTOSAS…

    [...]Homepage | MrSEC[...]…

  2. URL says:

    … [Trackback]

    [...] Read More: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  3. … [Trackback]

    [...] Find More Informations here: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  4. … [Trackback]

    [...] There you will find 42737 more Infos: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  5. … [Trackback]

    [...] Informations on that Topic: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  6. watch says:

    … [Trackback]

    [...] Read More Infos here: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  7. Blog You Should Be Visiting…

    [...]Here is a Great Blog You Might Find Interesting that we Encourage You[...]…

  8. … [Trackback]

    [...] Read More: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  9. … [Trackback]

    [...] There you will find 49314 more Infos: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  10. … [Trackback]

    [...] There you will find 63293 more Infos: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  11. … [Trackback]

    [...] Informations on that Topic: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  12. … [Trackback]

    [...] Read More Infos here: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  13. … [Trackback]

    [...] Read More: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  14. … [Trackback]

    [...] Read More here: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  15. … [Trackback]

    [...] Informations on that Topic: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]

  16. … [Trackback]

    [...] There you will find 85146 more Infos: mrsec.com/2011/12/sec-bias-talk-needs-to-stop/ [...]



Follow Us On:
Mobile MrSEC