Entering my third decade since childhood of dawg football and have lost count of the number of gut-churning losses like that at AU. I was pleased to see adjustments made during the LSU loss--defense played better and special teams played much better. Still, even in the jws years, when if I remember correctly we won 5 straight v auburn and 4 out 5 v bama, we were only able to grab one west title--and played a whale of an sec champ game only to come out with yet another heartbreaking loss. I think Dan is the man but the pecking order in the sec has remained pretty much consistent--lsu, bama, au, uf, tn, ga... Sure sc seems to be upsetting the mix, but time is likely to see their fall as tn, uf, and ga come back online. I'm no expert--I'm satisfied to leave that up to some of your number--but I'm beginning to turn into a paranoid conspiracy theorist. Maybe the pecking order mafia is not yet ready to see an mstate rise up and overthrow the established media-darling programs in the sec.
Is the pecking order set in stone?
- Thread starter abcdefg
- Start date
The reason the pecking order exists is because of recruiting advantages that mostly are outside of your control.
Obviously all programs have ups and downs but only the top programs have a real shot to produce Top 10 talent regularly enough to be national title caliber teams. The other programs can compile very good teams but usually those teams have more holes than the others.
Depending on the ebb and flow of the league the balance of power shifts from East to West and when that balance is in the East our programs have a chance to take advantage if we are in our up swing.
That's really the only shot we have at an SEC title is for one of us to have one of our Top 15-20 caliber teams when the West is in a down swing and then we would have to pull a 1 game upset over a national title level team from the East.
Obviously all programs have ups and downs but only the top programs have a real shot to produce Top 10 talent regularly enough to be national title caliber teams. The other programs can compile very good teams but usually those teams have more holes than the others.
Depending on the ebb and flow of the league the balance of power shifts from East to West and when that balance is in the East our programs have a chance to take advantage if we are in our up swing.
That's really the only shot we have at an SEC title is for one of us to have one of our Top 15-20 caliber teams when the West is in a down swing and then we would have to pull a 1 game upset over a national title level team from the East.
I was actually thinking about this today but in 2008 we had a DL that was as deep and talented as what LSU had out there last night.
It was about as good and deep of a DL as I have seen us have. The difference is LSU has that pretty much every year, and they have a secondary and LBs and WRs and good tailbacks and OL.
As good as you can get, there are other teams in the league that have that and then some every year because their talent base and resources are so much better. It's frustrating but I have found comfort in embracing our limitations as a fan and hoping we can just maximize what we have and hope for some breaks in the ebb and flow of other programs to allow us the occasional great season.
It was about as good and deep of a DL as I have seen us have. The difference is LSU has that pretty much every year, and they have a secondary and LBs and WRs and good tailbacks and OL.
As good as you can get, there are other teams in the league that have that and then some every year because their talent base and resources are so much better. It's frustrating but I have found comfort in embracing our limitations as a fan and hoping we can just maximize what we have and hope for some breaks in the ebb and flow of other programs to allow us the occasional great season.
the more you get to cheat and the more help you get from the refs. As much disdain as I have for olemiss, I would actually be in favor of us combining. Otherwise, the sec falls like this:<div>1a.alabama</div><div>1b.lsu</div><div>1c.auburn</div><div>1d.georgia</div><div>1e.florida</div><div>1f.tenn.</div><div>2.arkansas</div><div>2.5. south carolina (without spurrier)</div><div>3a.mississippi</div><div>3b.miss. st.</div><div>4. kentucky</div><div>5. vandy</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div>
</div><div>
</div><div>
</div>
The way I see it, Bama and UF are 1A and 1B. Georgia and LSU are 3A and 3B. UT and AU are 5A and 5B. Then Arkansas is 7. I put South Carolina with the 2 of us. Their history isn't very good. Obviously UK and Vandy are 11 and 12.
There is a decent size gap between the top 6 and bottom 6 too I think and I actually think 6 is closer to 1 than 7 is to 6.
I do agree that if we could combine we could compete. I would put our combination alongside UGA and LSU if we could combine. Aside from that we have to hope some massive population boom occurs in Mississippi or we are relegated to waiting for the few great years here and there when everything falls into place.
There is a decent size gap between the top 6 and bottom 6 too I think and I actually think 6 is closer to 1 than 7 is to 6.
I do agree that if we could combine we could compete. I would put our combination alongside UGA and LSU if we could combine. Aside from that we have to hope some massive population boom occurs in Mississippi or we are relegated to waiting for the few great years here and there when everything falls into place.
With the amount of money in college football now and the amount of money that the big boys have at their disposal within just the SEC, we cannot ever compete on a yearly basis. State and Ole Miss will show flashes but it will never stick because of the talent gap like you were talking about Bruiser.
frustrating realization to come to, but nonetheless the reality. too bad the schools are separate. i have pondered the move to drain funding of football and take a stab at basketball dominance since a couple of recruits can have a massive impact...with the right coach that is
situation in the conference. They don't have another instate school to compete with like everyone else (other than tenn.) and louisiana for some reason puts out alot of fast, quick, mean, 17ers. They can also go right next door to texas. I would hate to see them with Saban long term. The only thing bama has on them is a long history. And S.C. could be in a pretty good spot from here on out if clemson continues a steady decline. If we had one big university in miss., lsu, bama, and auburn would be negated to a certain degree as far as dipping into our recruits and we could start pulling players here and there from alabama and louisiana as well as expand our recruiting territory. And not to mention, our resources would be pooled which would certainly help matters.
With the population, money, alumni, facilities and tradition they have the SEC Big 6 will always have a lot of talent. They many not all 6 have a lot of talent every year, but at least 3 or 4 of them will. Schools like MSU, UM, USC, Ark have enough resources to get talent that's almost as good, but not nearly as consistently. </p>