Bear Down Wildcats

So glad the BCS Era is over. Probably would have been 'Bama vs. FSU this year as they were #1 and #2 in both polls.

Where's that poster from TOS who was the big Georgia and SEC honk? Had the UGA Bulldog in his avatar.

http://fivetalentsintoten.com/2014/10/0 ... nd-a-scam/

Next year in the run-up to the season we'll hear once again how the SEC is the greatest conference in the land and totally unstoppable. The ESPN hype machine is already ratcheting up to full throttle, don't you worry about that...

The SEC west gave up an average of 34.5 points per bowl game. They were outscored 242-207.

Here's SEC Exposed home site. They had a great twitter timeline last night after the Alabama loss.

Rivals 250 Members by Conference:

2015 Rivals250 Commits by Conference

SEC 76
ACC 37
Pac12 32
B1G 29
Big12 19

https://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecrui ... -3404/2015

the real dill wrote:Rivals 250 Members by Conference:

2015 Rivals250 Commits by Conference

SEC 76
ACC 37
Pac12 32
B1G 29
Big12 19

https://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecrui ... -3404/2015

Dill, what conclusion do you draw from those numbers?

azthrillhouse wrote:

the real dill wrote:Rivals 250 Members by Conference:

2015 Rivals250 Commits by Conference

SEC 76
ACC 37
Pac12 32
B1G 29
Big12 19

https://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecrui ... -3404/2015

Dill, what conclusion do you draw from those numbers?

The Big 12 has turned into a big bag of dicks. Also, Rivals clearly has a southeast bias to their rankings. Not a huge one, but I think a SEC offer jumps you up a couple tenths of a point on their grading system.

I was hoping you would say that. Hard to quantify the bias but I think it would be a big mistake to look at those numbers and conclude that the SEC was drawing double the high-level talent of any other conference.

Having said that, and acknowledging that these numbers are skewed....yeah, sheesh, whats up w the big12?

azthrillhouse wrote:I was hoping you would say that. Hard to quantify the bias but I think it would be a big mistake to look at those numbers and conclude that the SEC was drawing double the high-level talent of any other conference.

Having said that, and acknowledging that these numbers are skewed....yeah, sheesh, whats up w the big12?

How about players drafted to the NFL by conference? I can't stand the SEC as much as the next guy, but the SEC clearly has more talent top to bottom than other conferences.

Scummy Dick Douglas wrote:

azthrillhouse wrote:I was hoping you would say that. Hard to quantify the bias but I think it would be a big mistake to look at those numbers and conclude that the SEC was drawing double the high-level talent of any other conference.

Having said that, and acknowledging that these numbers are skewed....yeah, sheesh, whats up w the big12?

How about players drafted to the NFL by conference? I can't stand the SEC as much as the next guy, but the SEC clearly has more talent top to bottom than other conferences.

I could be wrong, but I don't think the SEC is having more players drafted than the next two conferences combined. Is the SEC dominating the talent pool right now? Yes. Is it to the proportions the Rivals numbers suggest? I don't think so.

As a quick example, this is the 2014 draft by major conference:

SEC 49
ACC 42
Pac-12 34
Big Ten 30
Big 12 17

the real dill wrote:

Scummy Dick Douglas wrote:

azthrillhouse wrote:I was hoping you would say that. Hard to quantify the bias but I think it would be a big mistake to look at those numbers and conclude that the SEC was drawing double the high-level talent of any other conference.

Having said that, and acknowledging that these numbers are skewed....yeah, sheesh, whats up w the big12?

How about players drafted to the NFL by conference? I can't stand the SEC as much as the next guy, but the SEC clearly has more talent top to bottom than other conferences.

I could be wrong, but I don't think the SEC is having more players drafted than the next two conferences combined. Is the SEC dominating the talent pool right now? Yes. Is it to the proportions the Rivals numbers suggest? I don't think so.

As a quick example, this is the 2014 draft by major conference:

SEC 49
ACC 42
Pac-12 34
Big Ten 30
Big 12 17

That looks more representative Agreed, only a fool would dispute that the SEC is #1 in talent, but the draft numbers look like a much more accurate representation of how they stack up than the Rivals numbers. p.s. still pretty interesting how one or two schools can skew numbers....I have to think ACC is disproportionately high due to FSU's recent ascendance and Big12 is so low because their traditional bellcows (UT and OU) have underperformed recently (to say the least in UT's case).

the real dill wrote:

Scummy Dick Douglas wrote:

azthrillhouse wrote:I was hoping you would say that. Hard to quantify the bias but I think it would be a big mistake to look at those numbers and conclude that the SEC was drawing double the high-level talent of any other conference.

Having said that, and acknowledging that these numbers are skewed....yeah, sheesh, whats up w the big12?

How about players drafted to the NFL by conference? I can't stand the SEC as much as the next guy, but the SEC clearly has more talent top to bottom than other conferences.

I could be wrong, but I don't think the SEC is having more players drafted than the next two conferences combined. Is the SEC dominating the talent pool right now? Yes. Is it to the proportions the Rivals numbers suggest? I don't think so.

As a quick example, this is the 2014 draft by major conference:

SEC 49
ACC 42
Pac-12 34
Big Ten 30
Big 12 17

2013 draft by major conference:

SEC 63
ACC 30
PAC 28
B12 22
BEast 21
B10 20

Scummy Dick Douglas wrote:

the real dill wrote:

Scummy Dick Douglas wrote:

azthrillhouse wrote:I was hoping you would say that. Hard to quantify the bias but I think it would be a big mistake to look at those numbers and conclude that the SEC was drawing double the high-level talent of any other conference.

Having said that, and acknowledging that these numbers are skewed....yeah, sheesh, whats up w the big12?

How about players drafted to the NFL by conference? I can't stand the SEC as much as the next guy, but the SEC clearly has more talent top to bottom than other conferences.

I could be wrong, but I don't think the SEC is having more players drafted than the next two conferences combined. Is the SEC dominating the talent pool right now? Yes. Is it to the proportions the Rivals numbers suggest? I don't think so.

As a quick example, this is the 2014 draft by major conference:

SEC 49
ACC 42
Pac-12 34
Big Ten 30
Big 12 17

2013 draft by major conference:

SEC 63
ACC 30
PAC 28
B12 22
BEast 21
B10 20

2012:

SEC 42
Big X 41
ACC 31
Pac 12 28
Big XII 25

It's floating around....

Didn't think he could write a worse song than that Applebee's commercial bullshit. Bravo Walker!

Release of Tennessee’s 18 infractions has similarities to ASU’s ongoing investigation when it comes to improprieties during the Covid dead period. My knee-jerk reaction is to believe that these infractions were activities imported from Pruitt’s days toiling under Saban, who keeps a tighter lid on his program.

My reaction to Oklahoma and Texas joining the SEC is about the same as UCLA/USC bolting for the Big Ten. Fine, go make it harder on yourself if you felt you'd outgrown the Pac/B12. Oklahoma's schedule is brutal starting in 2024.

Vs Texas
Vs Alabama
Vs Tennessee
Vs South Carolina
@ Auburn
@ LSU
@ Ole Miss
@ Missouri

And credit to the one Sooner fan who realizes what's happening:

$60M yearly from the SEC once they receive full shares will make up for a lot of those losses.

You got to take the long view. More money, better coaches and better faculties, etc, etc, etc

I wish we had Oklahoma’s problem…

Of course if you happen to not re e he share and get into the CFP and keep that money to the championship game, you likely make as much as the SEC or B1G payout. That is the only thing positive to staying in our $hit show conference

Merkin wrote: ↑Fri Jun 16, 2023 9:55 am $60M yearly from the SEC once they receive full shares will make up for a lot of those losses.

But who is getting the $60M?!?!? A bank account in Norman run by the Athletic Department as though that's the only thing that matters? College Football becoming ONLY about money/TV deals is at a cost to what else college football has been about in the past, particularly the fan experience, protected rivalries, and alumni pride. Those three decline as CFB focuses only on money.

84Cat wrote: ↑Fri Jun 16, 2023 10:04 am You got to take the long view. More money, better coaches and better faculties, etc, etc, etc

Disagree. There's a structural limit to paying more for better coaching or the arms race of better facilities. If ALL 16 SEC Teams pay their head coach $15M/yr thanks to the new TV deal it doesn't progressively yield more Sabans or Kirby Smarts. Texas and Texas A&M are learning the hard way with paying Sark and Fisher like Kings. (Same goes for facilities.) What instead happens is average coaches like Mel Tucker getting paid like a National Championship coach. And there's also a structural limit to money proportionally resulting in increasing wins due to the competition factor.

If Oklahoma wasn't a softball school before they sure as hell will be now.

CatsbyAZ wrote: ↑Fri Jun 16, 2023 1:51 pm

84Cat wrote: ↑Fri Jun 16, 2023 10:04 am You got to take the long view. More money, better coaches and better faculties, etc, etc, etc

Disagree. There's a structural limit to paying more for better coaching or the arms race of better facilities. If ALL 16 SEC Teams pay their head coach $15M/yr thanks to the new TV deal it doesn't progressively yield more Sabans or Kirby Smarts. Texas and Texas A&M are learning the hard way with paying Sark and Fisher like Kings. (Same goes for facilities.) What instead happens is average coaches like Mel Tucker getting paid like a National Championship coach. And there's also a structural limit to money proportionally resulting in increasing wins due to the competition factor.

However, I DO agree that pouring money into Recruiting has a better ROI chance than pouring money into facilities and coaching. Maryland coach Mike Locksley says as much, telling the Atlantic:

“I feel like I’ve got my legs cut from underneath me. Because my strength in recruiting isn’t some slick salesman job, it’s built on the longevity of relationships. And now the way the college landscape is with the NIL, the transfer portal — everything is pretty much transactional, and relationships have kind of gone out of the window.”

From Outkick: “It’s not to say that money is everything in recruiting these days. Prospects are still keeping coaching staff, playing time, and culture in mind, but things like resources and facilities are less important than they were just three years ago. Maryland is the perfect example. Locksley’s team moved into a brand-new, $149 million football-only facility, just last year. The Jones-Hill House is beautiful.”

“Unfortunately, it doesn’t really matter. The role that it plays in recruiting is minimal in contrast to NIL. Locksley will be the first to say so and he did not hold back: “Unfortunately, we moved in at a time when facilities have been de-emphasized in a recruit’s mind. Because they’d get dressed in the trash can for $25,000.”

“Name, Image and Likeness changed the entire operating system of, and behind collegiate football. The amount of money pumped into an NIL collective and success in recruiting have a direct correlation. Everything else, like facilities, take a back seat. Locksley and Maryland can’t keep up.”