PascalsWager said:
The Debt said:
Based on health, coaching, personel, I feel like we are clearly ahead of some (ole miss, arkansas) but behind others (bama, aub).
How would you rank the secw in future perspective?
Let's go through everyone.
Mississippi State is a Prarie View A&M university with a Conference USA athletic department. We shouldn't lose to them in anything ever. EVER. Losing to them did more for ending Sumlin than anything else in my opinion. CUSA teams like State don't hit on two consecutive coaches. I don't care what Moorehead did before he got here. Its time for them to go back to 4 win territory where they belong. The SEC enforcing their mandated power 5 non conference game would help them get back to those 8 and 9 loss years. How did they get around it this year?
Ole Miss is mired in NCAA violations and only got to national prominence because of cheating in the first place. We gotta beat them ever year as well. Maybe they have some upside in the far future but for now, we own them. Their stock could not be lower.
Arkansas could be scary with the right coach. But for now, out reputation is CLEARLY above them. They gotta win one on the field sooner or later though. Maybe it'll be when we go back to Fayetteville eventually.
Auburn's success puzzles me. How are they good in a medium sized, low wealth state? How can Alabama support two big time programs concurrently? Ok they spend money. The sips and us have more money combined then they do. Yet I can't remember a time when we played them in game where we were both in the top 10. Auburn is the team that's going to suffer because of our success if anyone is. They are already a very boom or bust program. And right on cue they had their "up" year. Next season is 7-6 time for them.
LSU is always going to be good. Medium sized state with one show in town and most per capita NFL players. LSU and Ohio State are the two easiest jobs in the country in my opinion for those reasons. At some point we have to beat them on the field. Right now we're below them and they have all the built in advantages.
The idea that Bama is always this juggernaut world beating program is simply not true. When I started following college football in the early 2000s, they were below where we are TODAY. They were a 6 or 7 win program with an occasional 10-2 out of nowhere. Saban changed the game for them. But after legends like this leave, there is always going to be a vacuum and even a possible downfall back to those 7 win years. Would not be surprised at all if that happens. When will Saban retire is the question here. Until he does, other than winning consecutive national titles there's nothing we can do to overtake the prestige of that program.
Before Spurrier South Carolina was a joke. And now they're probably back to being a joke. I don't believe in Muschamp. And I don't believe the state of south Carolina can sustain two top level programs. Thank the SEC for this annual free win.
Florida and Georgia are ahead of us, but who cares we don't play them pretty much ever. Missouri has potential but obviously lower than us now. Tennessee has potential too with a coach. No reason to discuss Vandy or Kentucky.
It's almost like some of you have never travelled or lived in the Southeast or did not pay attention.
"Auburn's success puzzles me. How are they good in a medium sized, low wealth state? How can Alabama support two big time programs concurrently?"
Because they have a ton of talent in the state and only two major programs. Kids grow up either wanting to go to Alabama or Auburn. Winning begets wining and then Alabama can cherry pick talent from other states. They don't lose 5 or high 4 stars to OOS competition like Texas programs do. They also enough money (Auburn has big time banking money BMAs) and especially many many athletes in the state divided by a small number of major programs. Money alone will not win championships. A lot has to do with how easy it is to recruit in the talent pool around you.
"Mississippi State is a Prarie View A&M university with a Conference USA athletic department. We shouldn't lose to them in anything ever. EVER"
I used to kind of agree with this, but the state of Mississippi puts out a lot of talent and they have an awesome in state JUCO system which Miss State taps. I follow recruiting and rankings can be subjective. I don't care what their recruiting ranking has been the last four years, they have talent. They had a more talented team using the eyeball test than us this year. Their OL and DL were better than us this year (not to mention RB and QB). I think we should beat Miss St more often than not, but they will always have some decent talent. They have a 5 star DE and other very good players.
I agree with Ole Miss. They have some negative recruiting advantages (some positive too), but the main reason they have had success the last few years is due to rampant cheating.
Arkansas has less in state talent than Mississippi. In my opinion, the only way Arkansas could win the West again is if they had a Petrino or a very innovative or unique offense. Bielma tried the grind it out approach and look how far that got them.
Florida will be back. There is just too much talent in that state to believe otherwise.
South Carolina can be a decent program. The population has grown significantly and yet they still have only two schools. I agree Muschamp is very mediocre. Clemson not only gets players from the State of South Carolina, they also get a lot from Georgia. So does Auburn and so does FSU
Georgia in my opinion is the most underachieving program of all time. They have over 10 million in a state with many many athletes and only two major programs and Georgia Tech is not really a recruiting threat. You see tons of G decals and flags everywhere you turn and many kids wear Georgia gear since they were born (unlike in the State of Texas where the hot program at the time gets the players). The State of Alabama has a similar indoctrination.
I believe in expectation management. My list until proven otherwise:
Alabama
LSU
Auburn/A&M
Miss St/Arkansas
Ole Miss
