While I agree this is patently stupid, it does not make the PAC 12 better than the SEC. This isn't a pissing contest. There are facts. Besides the championship games (which you could debate are based somewhat on opinion), the SEC produces more NFL players. Georgia has 9 guys on the team projected to be in the NFL next year.
No one in any division plays more than one or two really hard games. Playing Vandy is easy every year. Playing Auburn this year was easy. But that's not always the case. Last year, UGA got LSU and 'Bama. Add in Florida and South Carolina, and that was one bitch of a schedule.It is the preseason polls and if you only have to play one or two really hard games a year your never going to move far in loss.
And it's the same reason west coast teams don't play on the east coast.I don't subscribe to that line of thinking. Alabama hasn't played on the west coast since UCLA beat them 35-24 in 2000. There is reason they don't.
But on this we agree.Playoffs cannot get here fast enough for me.
When I lived in AZ, I tried to explain to my friends--many of whom had never lived in the southeast or even east of the Mississippi--why SEC football was so much better that PAC 12 football. I think a lot of it comes down to geography. The SEC teams are all just so much closer to each other.
But I realize that it really just comes down to where you're from. I'm sure it's frustrating to hear how superior the SEC is. I'm sure a playoff will even this out. Until then, a PAC 12 team is going to have to beat an SEC team in a championship game, and unless 'Bama loses to Auburn, UGA loses to Tech or Notre Dame loses to USC, that ain't going to happen.
Bookmarks