Good research and a lot of work. But by chance were you a debater in school? That is, by changing the terms, one wins. By removing all the other winners you reduce the SEC to two teams, when the more reasonable argument is that several teams in the SEC can and have won, and have for several years. Two teams in the ACC since 1990 have and could win, Miami and FSU. Save for one fling by GT 25 years ago and Virginia that I can barely recall, nobody else save VT has even been in the hunt. Surely you would not argue that the SEC's now reduced-to-two and the ACC's historical two are comparable. And look what happened to the ACC when FSU and Miami swooned. (Maybe we should throw in Notre Dame, that mugwump of a pretender that was in the playoffs two years ago, but since ND isn't willing to give up its money and its considerable national sway to actually be in the ACC, then to heck with 'em. Never liked them anyway.)
Where we wholeheartedly agree is that the whole thing is a mess, and I don't think it can be unmessed because like all political races influence and money are at play, and that if "we keep doing it" the media will notice. That was exactly Herbstreit's point. I suspect with no evidence at all to support it that most of us judge people in Herbstreit's place by what we fear we would do in the same situation. Pontificators need a stage and right now that is owned by the SEC. While last year was delightful a whole new season is careening toward us, so let's talk in four months and see were we are. I hope for the best, beginning first with GT and then to worry about the rest of the league.
I agree it has been a mess, however, I think looking forward, the playoff will be a much better equalizer than what we have had against the "dominant" SEC. I think we are headed in the right direction to un-mess it. Just look at last year, without a play-off, I think the SEC would have inked another title because the perception train would have
probably pitted Alabama against FSU. (IMHO, FSU would have gotten in as an undefeated defending national champ in the old system and subsequently lost to bammer. Regardless, I think we would have seen the same result if it had been the Ducks vs Pachyderms)
The cards have been stacked
heavily in the SEC's favor during the BCS era. I'll just present the absurdity of the 2011 season rematch between LSU and Bamma as axiom for that situation....nuff said. I'm not saying the SEC as a whole, overall, hasn't been the best over the last 25 years. They were and almost any logical comparison you care to reference, points to that conclusion. However, the chasm between the best and the rest is not
nearly as wide as the pundits proclaim. And that chasm, however wide in perception AND reality, is going to shrink in the landscape of a P5 system and 4 team play-off. I
was in the camp of an 8 team play-off, but I'm starting to lean towards the 4 team model as the best mechanism to knock the SEC off their perch. I think last year showed the committees' high value on being a conference champ. Because of this, I think it will be very very difficult for the SEC to get two participants in the round of four. Not saying it can't happen, just that odds will be against it. And when they have to actually play the best of the rest, on a neutral field, it's probable the SEC will not be winning national championships at a 56% clip like they were in the BCS era. When that happens, and as time passes, perceptions will change, and the worm will turn. There is light at the end of the tunnel.
