Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only issue I have with the SEC West, and this is perhaps not their fault, was the fact that we had to deal with an Alabama-LSU title game a couple of years back. What a joke that was.
The only issue I have with the SEC West, and this is perhaps not their fault, was the fact that we had to deal with an Alabama-LSU title game a couple of years back. What a joke that was.
That's one of the main reasons why we have a playoff now, so thanks SEC.
But after Bama gets DESTROYED by the Buckeyes... the whole SEC West is garbage.
How did OSU "destroy" Alabama? They won by a touchdown. And they trailed Alabama 21-6 at one point in the game.
If I recall correctly, OSU has been blown out by SEC teams in a number of Bowl games. You can't go sticking your chest out after winning one game.
I think the balance of power remains with the SEC because of their recruiting advantages. That doesn't mean SEC schools will win ALL of the championships. I do think, however, that they'll win most of the championships in the new playoff system once the major programs reload.
I didn't think Alabama's defense was really good compared to years past. And they seem to be a team that's built around a strong defense plus running attack. SEC teams never seem to have explosive offensives even though they have the athletes for it. And their QBs are often marginally talented at best. That's the biggest vulnerability most SEC teams have, in my view.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,989,150 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
I think the balance of power remains with the SEC because of their recruiting advantages. That doesn't mean SEC schools will win ALL of the championships. I do think, however, that they'll win most of the championships in the new playoff system once the major programs reload.
I agree. SEC will be fine. The talent is largely there due to demographic shifts and playing year round. You add the despicable practice of oversigning where you get 5 classes worth of talent every 4 years and push out the rest and you'll be guaranteed to be competitive, at worst.
I agree. SEC will be fine. The talent is largely there due to demographic shifts and playing year round.
I don't think demographic shifts have much to do with it. The Big Ten and Pac 8 (or whatever it is now) fielded dominant teams in the 70s because they were faster to integrate. Just look at the players coming from the South.
Calvin Johnson (Newnan, GA)
Demaryius Thomas (Montrose, GA)
Adrian Peterson (Palestine, TX)
Patrick Willis (Bruceton, TN)
Antonio Brown (Miami, FL)
T.Y. Hilton (Miami, FL)
A.J. Green (Summerville, SC)
Julio Jones (Foley, AL)
Dez Bryant (Galveston, TX)
Jadeveon Clowney (Rock Hill, SC)
Patrick Peterson (Fort Lauderale, FL)
Frank Gore (Miami, FL)
Tim Jennings (Orangeburg, SC)
Aqib Talib (Richardson, TX)
Keenan Lewis (New Orleans, LA)
Jamaal Charles (Port Arthur, TX)
Alshon Jeffery (St. Matthews, SC)
Matt Forte (Lake Charles, LA)
Eddie Lacy (Gretna, LA)
C.J. Spiller (Lake Butler, FL)
Brian Orakpo (Houston, TX)
DeMarcus Ware (Auburn, AL)
Reggie Wayne (Jefferson Parish, LA)
Nick Fairley (Mobile, AL)
Jeremy Hill (Baton Rouge, LA)
Santana Moss (Miami, FL)
Ed Reed (Destrehan, LA)
Willis McGahee (Miami, FL)
Ray Lewis (Bartow, FL)
Sean Taylor (Miami, FL)
That's not even close to being the full list. In 1969, all of these players would have been banned from most (if not all schools) in the South. I don't think it's so much demographic shifts that have hurt the Big 10 so much as it is southern schools now play players they would have shunned just 40 years ago.
In 1969, all of these players would have been banned from most (if not all schools) in the South. I don't think it's so much demographic shifts that have hurt the Big 10 so much as it is southern schools now play players they would have shunned just 40 years ago.
Bear Bryant had much to do with the beginnings of integration in Southern football, after the USC Trojans went into Birmingham September 12, 1970, with Sam Bam Cunningham, and beat Alabama 42-21! Or so the story goes...
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,989,150 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
I don't think demographic shifts have much to do with it. The Big Ten and Pac 8 (or whatever it is now) fielded dominant teams in the 70s because they were faster to integrate. Just look at the players coming from the South.
I'm sure that's a good chunk of the equation, but the population of the South has grown and gotten younger while the North's has dwindled (relatively) and gotten older. They're both factors. Parts of Michigan, Oh, Western PA etc are shells of what they used to be.
I'm sure that's a good chunk of the equation, but the population of the South has grown and gotten younger while the North's has dwindled (relatively) and gotten older. They're both factors. Parts of Michigan, Oh, Western PA etc are shells of what they used to be.
Nothing like having 5 classes in 4 years though.
I don't think that's just a chunk of it. That's most of it. If things had remained as they were, Alabama would not have gotten all of that talent, and all of the players I listed would have had to go to schools outside of the South. That's COMPLETELY changed the balance of power in college football.
Quote:
They came to Michigan State's lush campus in the early 1960s from places like Beaumont, Texas; Fayetteville, N.C.; Anderson, S.C.; and Roanoke, Va. Michigan State provided an opportunity -- to play college football at the highest level -- not afforded to them in their home states because of their skin color.
"All the Southern players, we were outcasts from our own states," said former Michigan State wide receiver Gene Washington, a native of La Porte, Texas. "All of the states where we were from, they would not take black athletes. We bonded at Michigan State because we all had similar stories. We could make a contribution. That was very important to us. We didn't talk about that all the time, but we knew we had something to prove, and this is our opportunity.
"We wanted to be the best in the country."
And they were. Led by coach Duffy Daugherty, Michigan State won national championships in 1965 (UPI) and 1966 (National Football Foundation) with some of the most racially and geographically integrated teams in all of college football. The 1965 roster included 18 black players, nine from Southern states (Texas, South Carolina, Louisiana, Virginia and North Carolina). The 1966 roster featured 17 black players, 10 from the South.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,989,150 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
I don't think that's just a chunk of it. That's most of it. If things had remained as they were, Alabama would not have gotten all of that talent, and all of the players I listed would have had to go to schools outside of the South. That's COMPLETELY changed the balance of power in college football.
Sure, in the 60s, but how was that really an issue in the 1980s? Except for legacy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They won by a touchdown. And they trailed Alabama 21-6 at one point in the game.
