I don't buy the SEC is down argument completely...

[The Usual Suspect]

What I see is parity in the league, with less traditionally top level programs (Vandy, MSU, KY, etc) not being a gimme game for others any longer. Second, lower tiered football programs have to be more patient about firing coaches, when they don't win every year. Therefore, they (Mullen) have been given time to develop their system, learn how to recruit to a particular school, etc.

 

[tatedog]

Fill in the blank: _____________ is a better conference than the SEC right now. College football in general might be down some but I don't think the SEC is being passed by.

 

[o_dawgnabit]

Coaching in the Big 10 is for sure better. But I still think SEC has the best talent

 

[patdog]

It's down. The parity you're seeing isn't because the bottom of the conference has gotten better, it's because, other than Bama, us and maybe UGA and/or Auburn, there just aren't any other good teams out there.

 

[1msudawg]

A perennial bottom dweller just beat #18 KSrate.

Granted ole miss also lost to cal, but they are redefining bottom dweller.

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

Definitely the coaching is better in the Big Ten. If Mullen were to leave, I'm not sure if there were another SEC coach outside of Saban I would want. Maybe Kirby Smart, but it's still early in his head coaching career to be certain.

A bigger playoff system would stabilize the coaching carousel. If you have 8 or even 16 teams, you can get in with a 10-2 or even a 9-3 team and put making the playoffs on your resume.

 

[johnson86-1]

A perennial bottom dweller just beat #18 KSrate.

Granted ole miss also lost to cal, but they are redefining bottom dweller.

Vandy is up. But UT and Florida are down. Mizzou is awful. UGA may be good or may be right there with UT and Florida. USCe is probably where they should be, but down from where Spurrier had them.

In the West, Bama is Bama, Auburn has a good D but may have an achilles heel O. LSU is talented but one dimensional. Arkansas is down, UM is probably going to be atrocious, A&M is a basket case.

The SEC is not bad, but we probably only have one team that is a legitimate national champ contender. That's down for us.

And which other power conference(s) would you expect our second best team to win hands down? I don't think the Big 10 or ACC or Big 12. Maybe Pac 12? (not sure what they have this year). In past years, we usually had 3 if not 4 teams that would be legitimate contenders to win three out of the other four conferences, and would probably be a shoe-in to win either the ACC or Big 12.

The SEC just looks like a solid Power 5 conference this year. We even have a handful of really bad teams in conference, which usually has been the one thing that separated us from other conferences in the past, was that we at most had one or two bad teams and every other team was a threat every week. We just don't have that right now. Not sure if it's cyclical or if it's the Saban effect of chasing out a lot of solid coaches.

 

[BulldogBlitz]

Fill in the blank: _____________ is a better conference than the SEC right now.

EXACTLY! No matter which conference you name, they are all better than the SEC

 

[patdog]

True. But, A&M, Ark, UMiss and Mizzou are worse than the bottom of the SEC for most of the past decade. Who could you even remotely see getting into the playoff? Bama and us is all I've got. Most of the last decade, you'd list half the conference in Sept as having a legitimate shot.

 

[AssEndDawg]

It's down. The parity you're seeing isn't because the bottom of the conference has gotten better, it's because, other than Bama, us and maybe UGA and/or Auburn, there just aren't any other good teams out there.

It's a little down but I think the money parity is the biggest difference. In the past LSU or Georgia could take any coach they wanted because they could out pay everyone. That just isn't the case anymore and it is allowing a Mississippi State to keep a good coach long enough to build a program. The SEC also used to be able to poach any coach they wanted for the same reasons. TV money is changing things.

 

[patdog]

The SEC also used to be able to poach any coach they wanted for the same reasons.

Good coaches are avoiding the SEC like the plague because they don't want to have to beat Nick Saban to win a title and get into the playoffs.

 

[KurtRambis4]

It's definitely down from

a head coaches perspective.

Luke, O, Bielema in the west. It's time for Dan to strike while the iron is hot.

 

[Willow Grove Dawg]

Fill in the blank: _____________ is a better conference than the SEC right now.

The answer is not the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, or Pac-12. I would take the #4 - #8 team from the SEC at year-end in every game straight-up against the #4 - #8 team in any of those leagues in every damned game.

 

[johnson86-1]

Good coaches are avoiding the SEC like the plague because they don't want to have to beat Nick Saban to win a title and get into the playoffs.

That makes sense, but I wonder how true it is.

In the West, you've had LSU make one head scratching hire. Saban probably played a role in that, as coaches probably saw how quickly Miles seat got hot winning 9-10 games a year.

But Arkansas made what looked like a home run hire (not going to get much better than a winner from another power 5 conference).

Auburn hiring Chizik looked terrible, but I'm not sure how much of that was caused by the treatment of Tubberville and expectations with respect to Bama and how much of that was caused by requirement that a coach be willing to accept meddling boosters and get on board with cheating. I think Malzahn was probably their number 1 choice when Chizik was fired.

Ole Miss hired Nutt, which was a best case scenario for them, and then Freeze, which was terrible, but I think that was a situation like Auburn's, so I'm not sure how much Saban had to do with it.

A&M hired Sumlin, which was the hot name at the time.

We hired Mullen, who was a coordinator of a national championship team (granted that was before it was obvious what a machine Saban was to create, as he wasn't that dominant at LSU).

UT plays Bama every year and has had some atrocious hires, but I'm not sure Saban impacted them as much as their own unrealistic expectations.

If anything, Saban has created faster turnover because schools have unrealistic expectations of everybody doing what Saban does. Major college football, especially the SEC, was already moving more and more towards a what have you done for me lately attitude as far as coaches, but he probably helped make it even more extreme.

 

[57stratdawg]

I agree. Start looking at the group after Bama and I see several flawed teams:

Auburn
MSU
LSU
UGA
UF
Tenn

An argument could be made for MSU to be #2 in the SEC. The next two weeks will be very telling for us.

 

[EAVdog]

Down from the stretch of winning 8 Natty's in a row sure. But down below other conferences, nah don't buy that for a second. At best the ACC may be on par with the SEC this year with Clemson and FSU.

This is what folks say when the non-name brands are winning.

 

[The Usual Suspect]

This is what folks say when the non-name brands are winning.

Exactly, if MSU lost to LSU as usual, Booger and most of the other talking heads would still be pointing to a day of reckoning game with AL and LSU in the future.

 

[patdog]

Booger and others may have been saying that, but the SEC would still be down even if LSU had won Saturday.