Well, when the SEC wins another one this year I guess I’ll be wrong about how strong they are - and they have 3 teams with a shot (Bama, UGA, and Texas A&M). The ACC has 1. So 11 out of the last 20 by 4 teams and 2 in a row by 2 different teams isn’t strong. I’d hate to see what you do think is strong.
And the SEC is not considered the best because ESPN puts them on TV and the pollsters rank them highly. They are strongper because they get the majority of best high school players and they attract the best coaches because they are willing to pay to be the best. We pay our coach a little over 3 million per year. Auburn just paid a high level coach 5.25 million per year. The SEC is simply willing to pay to be the best at football. Other conferences spend their money elsewhere and then fans wonder why it is how it is when it comes to football.
Listen, this is a football board not an ethics or morality board. If it were a board about strength of engineering programs and someone said GT was only strong in those fields because the pollsters (US News rankings and all other rankings) said they were and those polls tricked the public into believing it I’d point to the money GT puts into the engineering programs and I would definitely point out the scholastic ratings of the students that make up those programs (GPA, SAT, ACT). GT attracts 4 and 5 star students into their high level engineering programs because that is where the school puts their money and efforts. The SEC attracts 4 and 5 star athletes because that’s where they put their resources. Trying to say the SEC strength in football is a myth is just not being honest. That’s like UGA fans trying to tell us their enginneering programs are just as good as ours.
Your logic is flawed. It's been shown to you numerous times why your logic is flawed, so I won't recite it again here.
Whether the SEC is the best or not the best is a matter of conjecture, discussion, and opinion. Spouting that they win the NC more than anyone else doesn't mean they're the best, it means that at least 1 team in that conference was good enough to beat two other highly ranked teams after the regular season was finished. How are these highly ranked teams deemed to be highly ranked? They're voted there. Who are they voted by? Well, that's not really clear. We know the sportswriters probably cast their own vote, but all the other voters are questionable. Ah, but there's the computer rankings, that's unbiased, right? Well, no. Not really. Computer rankings are based on how these teams did against other teams that are deemed to be good, average, or bad teams. How are they ranked to support these computer rankings? Well, by what they did last year, who their opponents are, where they're ranked, etc. It's a vicious cycle that props up those who have brand recognition (i.e. SEC! SEC! SEC!) and other well-heeled teams.
So, no, the SEC isn't the best because they win the most championships. The SEC is "the best" because they say they are and ESPN supports that because it furthers their agenda (i.e. to make more money and control College Football so they can make more money). If they keep saying it long enough people like you will start to believe it. Then it will become a reality. Fake it till you make it.
When the SEC steps outside their little fiefdom, and play someone of "their caliber" outside their conference, more likely than not, they get shellacked. There's a reason uga hadn't played a game west of the Mississippi in like 50 years before they played Colorado; they didn't want the high-profile loss. Well, they got their asses handed to them. The SEC is getting better about playing the big boys, but 2/3 of their conference is horse-****, just like everyone else. LSU and Alabama haven't been afraid to step out, but everyone else is looking for the good-looking mid-level P5 win to put on their schedule. And yes, the strength of the SEC varies year to year, with some years being stronger and some years being weaker. But, that's something all conferences experience.
I wasn't intending to write this much when I sat down to respond, so my thoughts may not flow as eloquently as usual, but I know you'll understand the gist of what I'm saying.
