Wolverine247 Board

So your argument is one player can take a middling team from any conference, and surpass South Carolina in a single season?

Again, if that is the definition of elite, fine. Bama has a machine, where they have had many players as great as Manziel. Hell, I think Clowney is as great a player as Manziell. The difference is, the elite teams can overcome those things to keep winning still. That is the difference between the Bama/LSU types and everyone else in the SEC, until prove otherwise.

Edit: one side point: every SEC board I frequented before the season talked about how A&M would be out of their league. Not the case, was it? If this 'one player can make us elite' is true, than the SEC's best is never more than one player away from being an also-ran.

...and I answered that question. Johnny Football. He's a Cam Newton type of player. A&M beat Bama who many of you claim to be the undisputed king right now. That means that A&M is a very good football team right now. That's how they competed in the SEC in year 1.

TAMU had a great year, but they are not elite either. Not even with Johnny Football. Like others have said. Bama has done it with many different players and have been doing it for awhile. There is Bama and then everyone else in the SEC IMO.

I have always said the SEC is the best conference right now. Who can debate that? I don't think the argument is even close, frankly.

My point is simple: you have maybe 3 elite teams in the SEC (Alabama, LSU and Florida) who have been consistently good. Then you have half the conference (including but not excluded to SC, Georgia, Auburn and now A&M) that are generally solid, but not elite unless they get a superstar (Manziel, Newton). The problem is, that middle group cannot elevate to the top group unless something extraordinary, like a special player, comes along.

So if your argument is simply the SEC is the best conference, I totally agree. As for elite teams...that is another discussion. I think the SEC has three elite teams, and the rest are very good teams trying to elevate their game to compete.

Very True. Cock Kool Aid said LSU, SC, nor TAMU would lose to Mich, OSU, or Wisky. Gettin' outta hand.

Exactly. They finished regular season 10-2. Same as SC and several other SEC teams, but A&M "ran through the conference" makes sense

Haven't read the thread so I don't know what other people have said, but these are interesting questions.

1. I don't agree that it was a "run of the mill" or "dime a dozen" type hit, but I also don't think it was as great of a hit as everyone is making it out to be. It was 6'6 260 vs. 5'6 180. On top of that, the 5'6 180 guy didn't have a chance to make a move, protect himself, etc. With those factors, the hit played out exactly how it should. It was a big play, and it always looks big when a dude's helmet flies off, but I can't say it was a ridiculous hit. For a ridiculous hit, check Daydrion Taylor vs. PSU's Tight End from 1997. Both guys are big guys, both guys saw each other coming, and both guys lowered their shoulders into a hit. That's a big time hit.

2. No. I'm a realist. I knew this year that we wouldn't be going undefeated. Alabama was a different animal, and our next 3 toughest games were on the road and I didn't think we were good enough to win them all. I think there's a difference in expecting to win and not being surprised that you do win. This year, I would have been surprised if we beat Bama. I wasn't expecting to go 4-0 in our next 4 toughest games, but at the same time I wouldn't have been surprised if we did. Same goes for me for most years with tougher games.

3. I don't think everyone else is average, but I don't think they're as good as people believe they are. For as bad as the B1G was (or supposedly was), you'd think that B1G teams would be getting mowed down by the SEC. Georgia and Nebraska were tied going into the 4th, South Carolina needed a TD with 11 seconds left to win, and miss. state lost to Northwestern. It's a good conference, and I'd even still say it's the best conference. But outside of Alabama, it's not infinitely better than the rest of college football as the SEC would like to believe.

4. I don't think the sports viewing nation really cares about any particular team. There are some teams that everyone hates, like ND. Florida and Auburn have won a championship recently, and I'd venture to say not many people outside of their fan bases care about them, just like I don't think many people outside of Michigan's fanbase care about Michigan.

5. Not really. Sometimes you know the opinion is one that an entire fanbase holds.

6. I didn't go to Michigan, but I would guess that I've been to more games, know way more about the history of the program, and care about the success of the program more than many people who went there. I grew up like Michigan, and just because I didn't think it was the right fit for college for me doesn't mean that I have no justification for liking them. My college didn't have a football team, so that allegiance has never been split, but if Michigan were to play Xavier in basketball, I'd go for Xavier 10/10 times. I think that I can talk trash about msu football if I want to because I don't like msu football. My dislike for them started long before I decided where I wanted to go to college (actually long before I decided where to go to high school lol)

7. No clue.

Touche

I actually agree with this. But you would agree the SEC wasn't really giving you guys a lot of respect before the season either.

Well CKA you didn't ask but here's my take on the SEC. They are the strongest conference. Ranked as follows:
1. Alabama...in a class by themselves.
2. Tied....Georgia, Florida, LSU and probably TAM.
6. South Carolina.
Next to last...tied...all the rest except:
Last...Kentucky, Auburn and Tennessee. Don't care about AUs and UTs past...they have no future.