|
Tuesday Question - The Pac 10 vs. the SEC
|
|
|
|
|
|
CollegeFootballNews.com
Posted Nov 24, 2009
|
|
Is the Pac 10 better than the SEC? The CFNers try to answer the debate in the latest Tuesday Question.
|
Tuesday Question ... Nov. 24
Is the Pac 10 better than the SEC?
Pete
Fiutak
Q: This year, is the Pac 10 better than the SEC?
A: It’s seems crazy to think, but at least it’s a discussion.
The more I keep watching Alabama and Florida, the less I’m sold that they’re the be-all-end-all in the college football world. Would I take either one of them over Oregon in Autzen Stadium? I don’t know. On a neutral site though, yeah, I’d take the top two SEC teams, but I’m not a believer in anyone else in the SEC this season.
Washington State is next level bad, and fine, Alabama and Florida are better than anyone up top in the Pac 10, but the mid-level of the Pac 10 might be better than the mid-level of the SEC. The question is Oregon State, Stanford, Cal, USC, Arizona, Washington and UCLA vs. LSU, Ole Miss, Arkansas, Auburn, Georgia, Kentucky, and Tennessee. If that’s not even, it might tip slightly towards the SEC. Throw the Tide and Gators into the mix, and the SEC is still the best conference in the country, even if it’s a down year for the conference.
I’ve spent the year dogging LSU and its mediocre lines, lack of running game, and overrated defense. Georgia is awful, South Carolina is no big deal, and Auburn, Arkansas, and Tennessee are hit or miss with their efforts. There is the UCLA win at Tennessee, back when both teams were miserable, but it’s still a win to chalk up for the Pac 10.
Forgetting about being better, the Pac 10 is at least more interesting than any other conference in the country. There’s a whole bunch of fun with everyone in the conference other than Washington State, while the SEC is playing ugly game after ugly game. I’m extremely curious to see what happens this bowl season, and while that’s not the best indicator of conference strength, it’ll at least be interesting. If the Pac 10 wants to be considered the top conference, it has to come up with another bowl season like last year. It just might.
Richard
Cirminiello
Q: This year, is the Pac 10 better than the SEC?
A: Nah.
Listen, I’m on board that the SEC is way down this year, but let’s not get too carried away. And has everyone dismissed the fact that USC, the Pac-10’s perennial cover boy, is having its worst season in almost a decade? If the Trojans were the Trojans in 2009, this debate would have more merit. With a watered-down Troy, however, it’s a tougher sell.
I’ll admit that the mid-sections of these two leagues are basically equal. Ole Miss, LSU, Auburn, and Arkansas vs. Stanford, Arizona, USC, and Cal is a toss-up. The SEC, though, is better at the top and stronger at the bottom. Below the Mendoza line, the Pac-10 offers UCLA, Washington, Arizona State, and Wazzu, which is awful. The SEC? Tennessee, South Carolina, Kentucky, Georgia, Mississippi State, and Vandy, which is a far stronger collection of schools, even in off-years.
In early December, both leagues will stage match ups to decide a conference championship and automatic BCS bowl berth. In the Pac-10, No. 16 Oregon State travels to No. 8 Oregon. In the SEC, No. 1 Florida meets No. 2 Alabama in Atlanta. Case closed.
Matt Zemek
Q: This year, is the Pac 10 better than the SEC?
A: In this dissatisfying season of college football, it's not really a case of which conference is better, but which conference is worse. That would be the SEC.
LSU has been victimized by tons of injuries, but so has USC (the Trojans, not the Gamecocks). Those two teams cancel each other out.
What are you left with, then?
The SEC has two elite teams, Florida and Alabama, who would beat all comers in the Pac-10 with the possible exception of Oregon. The SEC does have the two best teams in a comparison with either conference, though by a small-to-modest margin.
But what's left for the SEC after that? Auburn? An okay team with a nice win over West Virginia, but little more. (A win over Alabama would change the discussion, but let's see.)
Ole Miss? Exposed against decent teams, to say the least. Poorly coached, too.
Arkansas? Fattening up on so-so teams late, but likely only 7-5 unless the Hogs can win at LSU next weekend.
And then?
South Carolina? Typical second-half fade. Georgia? Insert UGA VII joke here. Mississippi State? Plucky but under .500. Tennessee? Hard-working and resilient, but the first half of the year was a train wreck. Kentucky? Even more plucky than Mississippi State, but hardly a world-beater. And then a moment of silence for the no-longer-seven-and-six Vanderbilt Commodores.
Florida and Bama are outstanding. But the Pac-10 would look good on neutral fields against pretty much everyone else. Every SEC East team would be a clear underdog to Oregon State, Stanford and Arizona. Tennessee-Cal would be an even matchup... with Jahvid Best not in the Golden Bears' lineup.
LSU would be favored against Arizona and Cal, but not the Beavers, Cardinal or Ducks. 3-2, Pac-10.
Ditto Ole Miss. 3-2, Pac-10.
Auburn-Cal would be a PICK (give or take 2 points), but the Tigers would be an underdog against the Beavers, Cardinal, Ducks and Wildcats. 4-1, Pac-10.
Ditto Arkansas. 4-1, Pac-10.
Yes, you'd see Arkansas and Ole Miss whip up on UCLA and Arizona State, but Mississippi State, Kentucky and Georgia would struggle against the Bruins and Sun Devils. (Georgia beat ASU by only three at home.)
Yes, LSU already beat Washington on the road, but I wouldn't trust South Carolina today if the Gamecocks played in Seattle.
If all things are equal, you do take the conference with the better top-level teams. But all things aren't equal. The Pac-10 has six solid top-25-worthy clubs (Oregon, Oregon State, Arizona, Stanford, Cal, USC) while the SEC owns four (Florida, Bama, LSU, Ole Miss). The SEC's doormat - Vanderbilt - is better than the Pac-10's worst team - Washington State - but that isn't a game changer by any stretch.
The Pac-10 isn't better than the SEC - don't look at it that way; the Pac-10 simply isn't as bad.
Michael Bradley
Q: This year, is the Pac 10 better than the SEC?
A:
If you were a betting man, you could cash far more often than you would trash if you bet on the SEC to be the nation’s best conference every season. On the rare occasions the league didn’t come out ahead of everyone else, as you could argue happened last year (although Florida’s national title was a compelling statement), it still finished second. This season, there is a groundswell of support for the Pac-10 as the nation’s best aggregation, and that’s simply foolish. Although Oregon has looked good, and the rise of Stanford and Arizona have been duly noted, the league can’t come close to the SEC for overall depth, talent at the top and just plain numbers of standout players.
There is no team in the Pac-10 that equals either Florida or Alabama, the two big dogs of the SEC. The Ducks have shown some spark in rebounding from the opening-game loss to Boise State, but Oregon doesn’t play defense. And this year, when the best teams in the country are also the best at stopping people, that’s a problem. Oregon State squares off against its in-state rival for a Rose Bowl berth Saturday, but the Beavers don’t play stifling defense, either. California and Stanford are good, but neither is physical enough to survive in the SEC. And let’s not even get started about USC, which could be the nation’s most disappointing team. The Pac-10 is enjoying a renaissance as the Trojans sag this season, but let’s not mistake a rise in status with a strong bid for the title. The SEC has two national title contenders – perhaps the nation’s best two teams – and because of Florida and Alabama’s dominance, the rest of the conference appears to be down by comparison. The SEC is a top-heavy conference, and its second tier (LSU, Mississippi, Arkansas) is better than the second group in the Pac-10 (Stanford, Cal, Arizona, USC) because of better defense and more physical play. Looks like the SEC bet has paid off again.
|
|
|