Pauly is tired about all the excuses teams like Alabama have for not winning the title.
The last 9 years the SEC has won 7 titles, while from 1966 to the start of the BCS they won just 4. What changed?
Pauly feels that it is billion dollar TV contracts. The BCS seemed biased for the SEC, because ESPN was trying to protect their investment. Every year they start with half their teams in the top 15 it seems.
Andy feels that the SEC understands how to play the game, especially when it comes to scheduling. They realized that scheduling the weak non-conference teams near the end of the year was going to be big for these teams. They were getting another by late in the year when the other teams were knocking each other off.
Steve states that the SEC is underrated. Last year a mid-tier SEC team (Tennessee) was laying just 3 points at home to a MWC team (Utah State)
Every team but South Carolina in the SEC had a win ATS vs a non-conference team. The SEC was 21-12 ats vs non-conf. Missouri at Toledo was another game. The Missouri was favored by 3.5 at Toledo and crushed the Rockets.
Steve feels they are overrated in January, but underrated during the regular season.
Is the Pac-12 south better or the SEC West? Andy would rather watch the PAC-12 South, but the SEC West is better overall as far as talent goes, but the Pac-12 is closing in on the SEC.
There is a bias towards for the SEC though. Back in 2011 Oregon lost on a neutral field and dropped 10 spots, while Alabama lost at home and didn't scored a TD, yet dropped just one spot.
One thing the SEC is great at is media manipulation.
Join in the conversation.