SEC not playing for the title
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
It feels weird, but I'm looking forward to Michigan-Washington. Should be a great game.
I live in SWFL and you learn to dislike Michiganders immensely. Just like the relationship between Hilton Head inhabitants and Ohioans.
Not a big deal and I'm pretty sure next year will have a SEC team, who knows maybe 2?
Michigan and Washington should be a great game,
Michigan and Washington should be a great game,
It is a pretty big deal for the SEC to not play in the title game. Going back to the BCS, the SEC has played in the title game 16 of the last 17 years, the first year of the CFP being the lone exception, going 13-3 in those games. There are 17 year old kids who don't really know anything other than the SEC playing for the title.
I haven't dug into it, but that's probably an unmatched level of dominance by a conference in college football.
Winning 13 of the last 17 titles, it's a pretty big deal these days for the SEC to not win title, much less not even play for it.
I could not tell you the year when it last happened, but the end of the day it was a impressive streak, but my team didn't contribute, so my feelings do not change this year not having a SEC team, it is not a big deal to me. I look forward to the game.
I could not tell you the year when it last happened, but the end of the day it was a impressive streak, but my team didn't contribute, so my feelings do not change this year not having a SEC team is not a big deal to me.
I am not a rah-rah SEC guy b/c I think it has any implication for Gamecock football. As a southerner, it is fun to see, though. And, particularly, as they concocted the CFP to try to stop the SEC from winning so much. I guess it's been somewhat successful, since the SEC will only win 60% of the first CFP titles.
The best stat emerges when you consider those years the SEC had both teams in the championship games. I guess the SEC averages >1 team in the final game over the last 17 or so years!
Yes, but it's usually the same few teams. That's why I have never understood the SEC SEC SEC rant. It's always been 1 or 2 teams carrying the SEC. Good marketing I guess and everyone has bought into it.
Well, sure. It's been basically 5 teams, but I don't know how else to talk ab out it other than SEC.
It should read first time Bama, LSU or Uga not playing for title since 2014 - 2015 season . Mostly Bama and Uga
In the last 24 years 5 different teams have won at least 1 NC. I think that's pretty balanced for a conference. B12 has had 2, P12 had 1, B10 had 1, ACC had 2.
Last edited:
Exactly! I don't give a hoot about Alabama or Georgia winning another championship. They stockpile talent and it gets tiresome having to hear about them year after year.
I assume you are counting Tenn. In this but when they come on here mouthing we all remind them they haven't been relevant in 20 years
No. I guess you could go 25 years and say it’s 6. But I was going back to 2000: UF, Bama, UGA, LSU, AU.
The SEC won 3 NY6 bowl games this season. People will say it was just Georgia and Alabama. What other conference can say that?
I'm not an SEC fan, the rest of the teams in the conference doing great doesn't help us at all. In fact, it makes it harder to recruit against teams that are dominant when they win big. Clemson has had the right idea for a decade or so. Be the dominant program in a weak as water conference.
UGA probably would have won the title fairly easily had the managed to win the SECCG which hinged on some...questionable...calls.
Bobo lost that game for UGA. He abandoned the pass for 2+ quarters and ran the ball between the tackles for no gain over and over. Saban had to feel like a kid at Christmas when he saw the plays UGA was running.
UGA will never win another championship of any kind with Bobo as OC. He will find a way to lose an important game.