If we were talking Oklahoma and Texas, sure. It isn't like A&M and Mizzou were power houses in the Big 12. Two solid but not spectacular programs came in and competed at a high level in year 1 and 2. You can rationalize that out however makes it work in your mind, but if you drink the SEC juice there is no way an outsider should have come in and done what those to schools have done this early...

Everyone bashing the SEC is hanging their hat on the same thing, that Missouri and Texas A&M came in and were able to compete at the highest levels.

 

 

Texas A&M first: They had arguably the best and most dominant player in their schools history last season (also the top player in college football) and lost two Conf Games to Florida and LSU. This season 8-4 with a 4-4 conf. record...competitive but not at a high level with 4 losses. Before anyone brings up that they beat National Champion Alabama last season, remember that UK beat LSU during their National Champion seasons a few years ago. Anything can happen. Anyone putting money on A&M after Johnny Football leaves?

 

Missouri second: 2 and 6 conference record last season...this season great year kinda like the year Northwestern popped up in the Big 0 a few years ago...but they avoided Auburn, Alabama and LSU best win is over an 8-4 Georgia team that has fallen flat sever times this season. That said I think they have a shot at beating Auburn and winning the SEC, but then again even Duke, Purdue and Northwestern pop up to the top of a conference every 10-15 years.

 

And your logic here is that the SEC is just like the other conferences. Can't have it both ways. The SEC is either far superior or it isn't...

I think it is superior, how far may change from season to season...do you not think this is the best league? What league do you think is equal to or greater than the SEC?

 

SEC has almost half of the league in the top 30, any other league close to that?

And your logic here is that the SEC is just like the other conferences. Can't have it both ways. The SEC is either far superior or it isn't...

I said it was superior, the distance between SEC and others changes from season to season...

If we were talking Oklahoma and Texas, sure. It isn't like A&M and Mizzou were power houses in the Big 12. Two solid but not spectacular programs came in and competed at a high level in year 1 and 2. You can rationalize that out however makes it work in your mind, but if you drink the SEC juice there is no way an outsider should have come in and done what those to schools have done this early...

You can drink all the SEC Haterade that you want to and spin it however you want to also. There are several schools that are historically strong in football that could come to the SEC and be in the middle of the pack year in and year out and could trend up and down in the standings from year to year. Va Tech could come in and go 2-6 to 7-1 year in and year out doesn't lessen the SEC that some seasons they could make it to the top.

 

Guess what, SEC Champ might get blown out in the BCS title game by FSU or OSU does that mean the ACC or Big 10 conferences are better conferences?

You can drink all the SEC Haterade that you want to and spin it however you want to also. There are several schools that are historically strong in football that could come to the SEC and be in the middle of the pack year in and year out and could trend up and down in the standings from year to year. Va Tech could come in and go 2-6 to 7-1 year in and year out doesn't lessen the SEC that some seasons they could make it to the top.

 

Guess what, SEC Champ might get blown out in the BCS title game by FSU or OSU does that mean the ACC or Big 10 conferences are better conferences?

No it means the same thing we have seen the last 7 years in that the SEC has had the best team. Doesn't say anything about the rest of the conference like the UK fans cling to to legitimize their history of bottom dwelling in the league...

I don't think any UK fans think being in the SEC makes them better, just gives them a chance to play better teams

I don't think any UK fans think being in the SEC makes them better, just gives them a chance to play better teams

 

They defend the SEC to the death so they don't look AS bad for being terrible for decades... :banana:

If we were talking Oklahoma and Texas, sure. It isn't like A&M and Mizzou were power houses in the Big 12. Two solid but not spectacular programs came in and competed at a high level in year 1 and 2. You can rationalize that out however makes it work in your mind, but if you drink the SEC juice there is no way an outsider should have come in and done what those to schools have done this early...

 

I really think you are severely underestimating Texas A&M. They're in Texas, can pull kids from Houston, and knew they were leaving for the SEC around 3 years ago. Hey kid, wanna come play in the SEC with us or in the Big XII with the rest of the Texas schools? Not really a lot of competition for recruits outside of an Alabama or LSU.

No it means the same thing we have seen the last 7 years in that the SEC has had the best team. Doesn't say anything about the rest of the conference like the UK fans cling to to legitimize their history of bottom dwelling in the league...

 

Right... because UK would be such a bottom dweller playing Cincinnati or Louisville's schedule over the years.

How did it work out the last time Cincinnati played one of the better SEC teams in a BCS bowl?

 

Now imagine that beatdown coming weekly, injuries mounting up, and recruiting momentum halted. OSU is the premiere program in Ohio and they've been smoked the past two times they went to the Championship game.

 

What do Butch Jones and Tommy Tuberville have in common? One bolted UC for the SEC at his first opportunity and the other couldn't hack it in the SEC and landed at UC.

 

Hearing about how the SEC sucks or any Big East team would come in guns blazing is laughable.

I really think you are severely underestimating Texas A&M. They're in Texas, can pull kids from Houston, and knew they were leaving for the SEC around 3 years ago. Hey kid, wanna come play in the SEC with us or in the Big XII with the rest of the Texas schools? Not really a lot of competition for recruits outside of an Alabama or LSU.

 

Right... because UK would be such a bottom dweller playing Cincinnati or Louisville's schedule over the years.

 

So which one is it? A&M is successful because they could recruit to the SEC, but UK would be better without that advantage? The continuous double standards are rich...

So which one is it? A&M is successful because they could recruit to the SEC, but UK would be better without that advantage? The continuous double standards are rich...

 

Consensus double standards?

 

Texas is football crazy and churns out tons of D1 talent. They are in Houston's backyard, which is the third largest city in the nation. It's easy to see why Texas A&M parlayed the change of conference when they got mad at Texas over the Longhorn Network, came to the SEC at a time when their profile was unmatched, made a good hire in Sumlin, and capitalized on some recruiting momentum.

 

Kentucky has none of those advantages. They are a basketball school in a small state, and haven't had much success in football over the last 40 years.

 

UK would be better playing a soft schedule because they don't have a talent pool like Houston just sitting in their backyard, nor the tradition of a school like A&M whose boosters are nuts for football.

My whole point is, for Texas A&M and Missouri, going to the SEC made sense. Like Kentucky, they aren't completely boxed in by other schools when it comes to recruiting. Unlike Kentucky, Missouri has two cities that would easily be the largest in Kentucky in St. Louis and Kansas City. I don't even want to waste time talking about the advantages of being the only SEC school in Texas. For those schools, it makes much more sense and they have the capacity to be good more often than not because of their resources. For a school like Kentucky that doesn't have those, we'd be much better off if our goal was to get to a bowl game every year if we played Cincinnati or Louisville's schedule. There's no arguing that.

And your logic here is that the SEC is just like the other conferences. Can't have it both ways. The SEC is either far superior or it isn't...

 

It is. Next.