 |
| photo from EPN.com |
"The SEC is the most dominant conference in all of college football."
You have heard it. Everyone has heard it. You might even agree with it, or you might vehemently argue it is top heavy. There are wide ranging views on the SEC's supposed "dominance" over college football.
Being from SEC country, I have always assumed they were the best, because that is what I was told, and also because once Tennessee became an average team, they were abused and embarrassed by the rest of the conference (and obviously that's due to the SEC's strength and not to the low quality of football the Vols put out after '07, right....right?). However, recently I read an excerpt from a book that says the SEC Dominance is a myth based on the media hype and college football wanting to scratch the SEC's back (after all, the BCS creator was a former SEC commissioner).
So....I looked into it.
(Sidebar: The internet is full of lies. It also has some great truths. But you can't assume the person writing is telling the truth, so please, double check things. Don't take everything as fact. Do your own due diligence! Eliminate naivety and become an informed member of society, they are becoming fewer and fewer.)
The argument was that the SEC is simply average when taken top to bottom. Also, it argued regular season matchups mean more than bowl games, because apparently the author believes that the SEC gets favoritism shown in bowl matchups, which aren't always as neutral as they are perceived to be. It also started from 1998. A great year, I might add (Go Vols). The beginning of the BCS.
So here are the breakdowns of SEC records against the automatic qualifier conferences (PAC-12, Big Ten, Big-12, ACC, Big East).
(These records are for regular season matchups)
SEC vs: (since 1998)
PAC-12: (12-12)
ACC: (50-39)
Big-12: (8-12)
Big Ten: (9-5)
Big East: (16-17)
Well, that certainly isn't overwhelmingly impressive. Overall the SEC is (95-85), winning 52.8% of the games. They have only dominated the Big Ten during the regular season. They have beaten the ACC, but not impressively. And the others are about average, and they actually only have a 40% winning percentage against the Big-12.
However, the SEC hasn't been completely dominant since 1998. While they did win the inaugural BCS Championship (again Go Vols!), they only won two of the first eight National Championships. In fact, no conference won more than two during that span. The SEC and Big-12 won two, and the ACC, Big East, Pac-12 and Big Ten each tallied one win. Each of the AQ conferences won a championship, and no one repeated (although FSU was in the first 3, Miami the next two, Oklahoma the two after that, and USC in the final two starting with OU's last appearance).
I would argue that the first eight years of the BCS were not dominated by the SEC. They certainly had talented teams, but so did a lot of other conferences. Rather, I believe that "SEC Dominance", as we know it, should begin in 2006. It is from this point that the SEC has won seven straight National Championships (including one game featuring two SEC teams). The second half of the BCS is where the SEC turned up their game.
So, knowing that the SEC has run the table since 2006, what does that do to its record against the other five AQ conferences?
SEC vs: (since 2006)
PAC-12: (9-5)
ACC: (31-17)
Big-12: (6-6)
Big Ten: (3-3)
Big East: (10-10)
Immediately you see how dominant they have been over the ACC. And the PAC-12 as well. But the other three maintain even records.
A closer inspection of the Big-12 shows that while (6-6) is literally average, compared to the overall record of (8-12) it is a vast improvement over the 1998-2005 record of (2-6). Similarly, if you dissect the Big Ten record, while they certainly weren't as good as the (6-2) from '98-'05, two of the three losses are attributed to a 2-10 and 4-8 Vanderbilt team. But, still, top to bottom counts. And the Big East always seems to revel in playing the SEC. They get very hyped and often are better* than our preconceived notions give them credit.
While it is hard to swallow for some people, I think it is hard not to concede the SEC's dominance over the last seven years. (59-41) is a 59% win percentage, and if you are flirting with 60 as a whole conference you aren't struggling. Especially when you consider the winning percentage against AQ conferences from 1998-2005 was only 45% (36-44).
(*more on the Big East sleeper in a later post)
Some research notes I took:
The SEC and Pac-12 need to play more. Especially in bowl games. They have played only one bowl game since 1998 (Auburn v. Oregon in the 2010 NC). In fact, before that game, the last time the conferences met in a bowl game was in 1989.
The Mississippi schools have been pretty terrible. Of all the SEC schools, it is the Mississippi group that really kills the record. (1-14) against AQ conferences since 1998, including a paltry (0-9) in the dominance era. And while they must stay in the official SEC records, if you happened to do an unofficial SEC sans Mississippi record since 2006 it would be (59-32) a winning percentage of 64.8%.
Tennessee owns the Big East. With the record being so close to .500, it is interesting to note that UT has compiled a 5-1 record against the Big East. Only LSU (2-1) and South Carolina (1-0) have a winning record against the conference since 1998.
LSU owns the PAC-12. They have gone (7-0) against them since 1998. Meanwhile Tennessee, the only other team to play the conference more than twice, is (1-4).
Only three schools have played Big Ten teams during the regular season. Kentucky went (6-2) against Indiana from '98-'05. And since 2006, Vanderbilt was (0-3) a loss to Michigan and Northwestern twice and Alabama is (3-0) beating Michigan and Penn State twice.
