Top Conference: The SEC?

I recall my rugby days at Southern Oregon University (formerly known as Southern Oregon State College, when I attended), when I felt that our little club of about 20 men could take on or compete with anybody. The games we played at home were dominated by us with our massive Samoans in the scrum and our head-strong white guys flanking out as the backs who could run north/south pretty well. My first game, our coaches words echoing in my head "follow the ball", helped me communicate to a co-captain who was ahead of everyone but the three defenders who he was dragging with him to toss the ball to the outside, so when he turned to back his way into the defenders, I was right there for relief and snagging the perfect toss, I ran the remaining 15 yards or so to score my first "try". Yes, I "Zulued" that day. What an awesome feeling! One game, I actually scored twice, the first was on a 70 yard bolt down the sideline - and I was the rookie. We traveled to Eugene, Oregon to play their 'A' squad, for they had three separate squads at the University of Oregon. The 'B' and 'C' squads were equivalent to JV and freshman squads, I suppose. We barely lost to the Ducks by 3 points. We were just a little club, they were a huge program with 3 squads! We nearly took them with a limited traveling team that had to fork over money from their own pockets for the trip. We had the best team around. We beat Bend and OIT, Reed College and many others. As rugby goes, there is always the celebrations afterward that last late into the night that includes both teams. The sportsmanship between the two teams was like it is when I see two men bow at and hug each other after a brutal MMA match. There is respect and love of the sport that binds the two teams or individuals together. I love rugby! The Southern Oregon Fighting Cocks were the toughest team to beat with the reputation to prove it.

My feelings about my old rugby team in the early '90's reminds me of a recent article written in the October 19, 2009, issue of Sports Illustrated, by John Ed Bradley, speaking of his team that he played for in the late '70's and the conference that it participates in now. Mr. Bradley celebrates the recent accomplishments of his alma mater, LSU, and looks back at his playing days with tender fondness. He is definitely proud to be a Bengal Tiger who currently resides in Louisiana to this day. He's still tucked into the heart of the SEC, who Mr. Bradley boldly claims to be the best conference top to bottom with depth all over. That's great and gives me some warm fuzzies and all; however, I don't see any respect of other teams portrayed in this article that would show any sportsmanship and admit to the love of the game; even as the SI cover suggests, "SEC Football: Nobody Does It Better, The Nation's Toughest Conference". So, when my buddy, Shannon, handed me this Tim Tebow clad SI, he knew from his Florida State devotion that this would cause a rise in my Pac-10-minded ideals. He was absolutely correct in his assumptions and caused me to write this blog the very next day.

I think the mentality of the SEC and its players and its fans is all summed up by the words of Roy Kramer, who was the SEC commissioner for 12 years before retiring in 2002, when he was quoted in this article, "... SEC schools have had an 'us against the nation' attitude since 1926". This shows a huge flaw in the SEC who claims to love football more than anything else in life, growing up knowing the head coaches of the universities better than the political leaders of their particular states. They seem to be saying that it is the SEC way or no way at all. The fans and media have a tendency to slip into that skid and can't find their way out of the irrational thinking of pure dominance of the "best" conference in the nation. I think that true fans of the game would show respect toward other programs that may settle in different parts of the country, including teams on the west side of the Mississippi River. Yes, there is life existing and going on in these parts of the woods. To show true sportsmanship you must be able to see the big picture and not have your face in the magnifying lens all year long.

I would agree that there are a lot of athletes that come out of the state of Florida, when Mississippi head coach speaks of the 335 average amount of young men signing on to Division I schools. I also think there are a lot of talented young men coming from the state of Texas, as well. I have heard from one of the coaches at UTEP when he went on the recruiting trail that there was so much talent in particular areas of Texas that it was difficult to focus in on just individual players. He told me that the speed on the East side of the state; however, really had top notch speed in comparison to the West side of the state. With all the talent in Texas, it would seem easy to get a decent team built up, but for teams like UTEP, it is actually very difficult with so many other bigger schools vying for the same kids. Texas is the hot bed of talent snatchers that gets more early commitments than any other program out there. Then you have other schools like Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Houston, Rice, and then UTEP. This doesn't include the talons that swoop in from Oklahoma and Louisiana State. Another state that has a decent talent pool is California. There are only 4 major colleges in the state to choose from with all that talent, so many of them are swept away to distant schools.

A couple years ago, I calculated the amount of all the 3, 4, and 5-star athletes, according to Scouts.com, and put them with their perspective conferences. It showed that the SEC, as a whole, dominates the recruiting of prep super stars every year. The next best conference was around half of the amount of highly touted talent that fed into the SEC. That is incredible! The SEC does an amazing job at recruiting, as a conference whole. With that said, I would like to see the SEC schools prove their talent level with other teams than just their own. How selfish to play 4 games that you know don't have a chance at scoring against your first team defense, let alone winning the game (with few exceptions a year)! I would love to see Houston Nutt do exactly what he was quoted in this article by saying, "I watch the other conferences all the time and I think, Boy, I'd like to play them." Perfect! Schedule a game with Oklahoma or Texas or Texas Tech. Travel up north, for once, and play in the cold against Penn State or Michigan or Ohio State. Visit the Pacific Ocean side of the country, for once, and play Oregon or Oregon State or USC or California or even a Boise State or Utah. I challenge you, Coach Nutt, to make it happen. Show off your coaching skills and trickery skills and huge talent-laden team that draws from the "best" conference in the nation. Prove it to America! Put your money where your mouth is! I guarantee, that if you feel a little frightened of flying such a distance, that ANY Pac-10 team would be delighted to travel to Oxford to play the Rebels there first - even the basement-ridden Washington State - that should be an easy win for you. Wait! Don't let me limit my challenge to Coach Nutt, but to the rest of the coaches in the SEC. I tip my hat to Georgia for taking on a Pac-10 foe. I tip my hat to Tennessee, too. Even though those two games were at home for the SEC, the Pac-10 did come off with one win, and nearly a second. I even tip my hat, slightly, to LSU for actually making the trip to the Pacific Northwest to play the Pac-10 team with the longest losing streak of 14 games. I'm sure that when the game was actually scheduled, Washington was still winning 3-5 games a season, so good job LSU (slight sarcasm there). Les Miles seems to avoid the better teams of the other conferences for some reason. I'm confused how that consistently happens. Weird! With all the talent that LSU and Florida and Alabama and Auburn and Tennessee and Georgia bring in each year, there should be no fear whatsoever playing elite teams of other conferences. Those teams should be so bold to the nation and deliberately play tough games each and every week. Why not? They have the talent. They have the depth. They have the money. They have the stadium capacity. They have everything. Do it! Or are there underlying issues to suggest that maybe the "best" conference is just hype to justify the over-rated rankings each week. Which is it? Don't just make claims without actually backing it up on the field. When the naive tight end for LSU, Richard Dickson, says, "Your USCs, your Ohio States, sure, they're all great teams, but as far as a league, I don't think you can compete with the guys we have to go against each week." Really? Does he know anything about USC? What is said from LSU Belles? "The Pac-10? Isn't that a convenience store out on Highland Road?" When was the last time you, Mr. Dickson, have played "your USCs? Or an actual legitimate team from another conference since your win over Ohio State? Hmm. You may be thinking hard for a long time, buddy. It just doesn't happen. Play USC someday! I know Pete Carroll would love it! USC doesn't back down from heavy competition. Look at their opponents over the last 10 years. Notre Dame every year is a far cry from the annual Tulane hiccup you have each year. LSU doesn't even play the whole conference every year like USC does. Sure, USC gets its conference "bye" week by playing WSU, but LSU gets theirs with Vanderbilt who went to their first bowl game last year since 1982. At least WSU had 3 consecutive 10 win seasons within the last decade or so. When has Vandy ever done that? Or Kentucky? Or Mississippi State? Or Ole Miss? Don't just talk about it! I want to see it on the field! You can make all the claims in the world you want, but until I see you SEC coaches going after the big teams of other conferences and dominating them, I'm not going to be a believer - especially when the Pac-10 has a winning record over the SEC since the year 2000. These games are NOT against the easy shoe-ins for a win against opponents like Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Mississippi State, etc. The most recent wins are against Arkansas, Tennessee, and Auburn. I understand that maybe a hand full of people will actually read this, but I stand by my challenge to all the SEC coaches to step up and show off all their talent pool of young, strong, fast football players. Oregon would be a great team to go up against now with their very average 3-star athletes that have no speed like that of any SEC school, who took it to USC recently (sorry, some more sarcasm - I can't help it).

There is one thing I'm trying to figure out this season. There is this game in Knoxville that was played earlier in the season against UCLA. Well, UCLA started off with a easy opponent in San Diego State and then traveled to Knoxville to beat Tennessee two years straight and then played Kansas State (who is now atop the Big XII North). Since those three (actually two) impressive wins, UCLA has yet to win a Pac-10 game and hasn't even played USC yet. What's that say about the Pac-10? Well, let's look at the other side. Tennessee started off with a scrimmage against Western Kentucky and then lost to UCLA by 4, then a week later, lost by 10 to the #1 team in the nation, Florida. Beat an Ohio team, then lost to Auburn (shouldn't have) by 4. Then the Vols beat up Georgia by a whole bunch and lost by 2 to the #2 team in the nation, Alabama (only because the last minute field goal attempt was blocked by Alabama). Their Halloween showdown proved a dominant performance over the #22 ranked South Carolina. What's that say about the SEC? Let me think aloud for a moment when I say that UCLA was starting a freshman QB for his second game as a starter in Knoxville, who seats over 100,000 people and came off a win over an SEC school that started a veteran senior QB... hmmm... now I'm thinking to myself - maybe you might put the same 2+2 together. The answer I get is maybe John Ed Bradley of the LSU squad of several years ago may be off a bit in his assumption that the SEC is the "nation's toughest conference" by seeing how the season is getting played out. So, the question remains, which conference has more quality teams from top to bottom? Of the six major conferences, there are points to make with each conference; however, the major media will always say that the SEC is the best, but I think the facts and head-to-head statistics should have a lot more to say about it - especially when the SEC has a winning record against all the major conferences since 2000 except for the Pac-10. I feel that this is the most impressive fact that people like, Mr. Bradley will not fess up to and show good sportsmanship to recongnize all the facts before stating how inferior all other conferences are.

So, I enjoyed the article in Sports Illustrated by Mr. Bradley, but I don't think he loves the game outside of Louisiana. True fans follow more than one team or one conference because they respect the other programs and they just love the game. This is what I want to hear from someone devoted to the Southeast.

Harris Poll Bias

When I was a young lad in high school, there were few words that really stood out as I studied English to increase my vocabulary; however, one of those words sticks with me still to this day - "superfluous", meaning: extra, not needed or necessary. There are some things in life that can be described by this word - yes, even in college football, which I would have thought to be impossible until I ponder on the following thoughts on the subject of polls. I thought the whole idea of a poll, starting after the college football season has began to pan out with most non-conference play in the past and some conference games under way, were to reduce any pre-season hype/expectations and other poll influences that are not involved in the BCS. Looking at this week's Harris Poll has achieved nothing more than an additional look of the AP and Coaches' polls. There are so few differences between the Harris Poll and the AP, Coaches', and even the Legends' polls that it makes me wonder if the AP and Coaches' polls are so influential and dictate the state and direction of college football rankings, that the voters for the Harris and Legends polls are too scared to vote completely different from the grand-daddies of polls.

Now, I love the idea of the Legends Poll and think that they would have a better grasp of who should be ranked or not; however, they have no say in the ultimate outcome of the development of all the BCS bowl games like the Harris Poll does. The Harris Poll has all this power over the schools' football programs and I feel like they are not taking it seriously enough to show the proper respect that some schools deserve and freely giving respect to certain squads that don't necessarily deserve the respect that they are getting right now. In the BCS, it is all about the "right now" in performance of all the teams across the nation. What's your record right now? Did you win right now, or did you lose? How tough is your schedule right now? How tight did you play your most difficult games so far, or did you struggle against the weakest opponents? The Harris Poll was set up, in my kindergarten understanding of the poll, to help even out who has demonstrated quality football and to reward the teams that have done so and point out those teams who may seem over-rated in the other polls that have not demonstrated a justifiable higher ranking.

There are a couple "red flags" that make me question the integrity and validity of the Harris Poll, and we are a mere five weeks into the season. The first one I see is a 2-2 team at #20. Does it really matter what team it is? I don't think so. If you are a .500 team, do you really feel like you should be ranked in the top 25? This is so absurd! There are teams that are in the six major conferences that are 5-0 and 4-0 that are ranked lower that the 2-2 team. Is this for real? Does this really demonstrate an un-biased look at the top teams in the nation? Anyone who knows what a statistic is when they see it, knows that a 2-2 team has NOT demonstrated themselves better than a 5-0 team. Obviously, the voters in the Harris Poll have yet to see a statistic, which is very frightening for those teams that had to go 5-0 to get a glimpse into the top 25's elite status because it is apparent that it's not what you've done on the field, but who you are and what you've done in the past and what is expected from you by your alumni. Now, if this particular 2-2 team went on to win the rest of their games to finish 11-2, then I can see a top 20 showcase, but this early on, I have to suspect some foul play going on. Either that, or the voters for this very powerful Harris Poll are just not paying attention to college football and the games that were played the week prior because it just doesn't make sense.

Another "red flag" of inadequacy of voters who supposedly are not biased, is the fact that Florida is #1 with the schedule they have played so far. Really?!? Two conference games, yes, but against unranked teams (one had just lost to a Pac-10 team the week before (gasp!)). The other two wins were against Troy (no, not the USC Trojans - just Troy Trojans) and the well-known (sarcasm) Charleston Southern! Is that so impressive to put a team at #1? I'm confused. Why wouldn't an Alabama team be #1 instead? They have actually played teams that are significant this year, and won those games. Even the undefeated Iowa squad has played a more difficult schedule than the Gators, but they find themselves at #11. Is it really so hard to look at things at an unbiased view to get it correct "right now"? Of course the rankings will change as the teams' records change with some ranked teams losing and some teams improving throughout the year. I can't stress the "right now" enough. My Harris Poll would look completely weird compared to the AP and Coaches' polls, especially knowing that I had all that power over the outcome of the fate of so many teams in the nation. I would take it totally serious and think things through and take everything into account before I followed the previous week's AP Poll standings. Until the Harris Poll voters get it right to correct the BCS just a little bit of the flawd system, then the Harris Poll will be nothing but superfluous!

NCAA Football: ESPN Writer Is Right On

NCAA Football: ESPN Writer Is Right On and http://myespn.go.com/blogs/pac10/0-10-113/Pac-10-----Maybe-it-s-No--1-.html

Where's The Southern Love?

I have to admit, I'm a little shocked with the latest polls of week 4 of this 2009 college football season. There was a little bit of some shaking up in the top 10 from the week before, and I was expecting some teams to enter into the top 25 this week that never ended up happening. We had the #4 team in the nation, Ole Miss, losing to a 3-1 South Carolina, whose only loss was to Georgia. Now, Georgia, who has the same record as the Gamecocks, are ranked in the top 20 playing a difficult non-conference schedule (especially for an SEC team). They traveled to Oklahoma State and gave up their only loss, and they played a tight one at home against Arizona State; nevertheless, they still have Georgia Tech to play for a non-conference game. Similarly, South Carolina has chosen to play another BCS school besides their annual match-up against Clemson, by starting the season against North Carolina State. Of their four games, half of them were ranked. They lost to Georgia, but beat Mississippi. I figured, unless your record is below .500, you should be put in the top 25 after beating the #4 team in the nation. This brings up some questions about the voters. Did they realize that Ole Miss was extremely over-rated, or do they still really like Ole Miss that much better than South Carolina (even though the Rebels have played such a horrible schedule so far)? The Rebels are still ranked in the top 20, yet South Carolina is not yet ranked and not considered a better team than that one they just beat a week ago on a Thursday night with the same amount of losses. Am I the only person scracthing their head after these facts have pooled around for a while?

On another note, a 4-0 Auburn team isn't ranked either. What if Auburn goes 13-0 this season, along with Texas and a 12-0 Michigan team? Will Auburn re-live their last undefeated season and not get a chance to play in the national title game because they were so far back in the rankings that they couldn't catch up to the other undefeated teams? Of course, right now, it doesn't seem possible; however, it IS college football.

Another Southern team that isn't getting any love right now, who I feel deserves a little, is the South Florida Bulls. They came into Florida State after their huge win over then ranked #7 BYU, and stunned the Seminoles 17-7 without their starting quarterback who has been the starter for what seems like 6 years now. With Matt Grothe on the bench, the back-up, B.J. Daniels comes in and makes Bulls' fans forget about the injury to Grothe. That shows great depth and coaching! I don't know how voters can overlook that. I'm just blown away.

It seems that Oregon has gotten the better end of the deal than South Carolina. Two very similar situations with each having one loss to a ranked team coming into week 4 as an unranked team, then beating a top 10 team; however, that's where the similarities end. Oregon is now in the top 20 and the Gamecocks are not ranked at all. This just seems really backwards to me. I'm not sure if it's because Oregon beat the crap out of Cal and South Carolina squeaked one out or what, but it sure seems that by history's sake, the rankings of the two teams would have been flipped. Trust me, I love how it looks now, but I have my suspicions about the voters. Are they really paying attention to the whole nation? So, the love that I'm familiar with that hovers over the Southeastern part of the nation is eluded for a week and it has me freaking out a bit. How is the Pac-10 suppose to "earn" its way into the rankings if the South isn't getting that love? Well, I don't have to look far - I just think about a good friend's alma mater, UCLA, who is 3-0 and traveled a long ways to play an SEC team to beat them. They have yet to be ranked. Oh well, not all can be perfect in a week with West Coast love.