(01-16-2020 11:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-16-2020 09:34 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-16-2020 09:24 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(01-15-2020 11:55 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 07:15 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  Is 2019 a high water mark for college football?

I would argue:
-LSU 2019 offense is the best offense ever
-Alabama 2019 offense is the best offense under Saban
-Clemson 2019 defense is one of the most innovate defenses ever
-Ohio State fielded an exceptionally strong team that would probably have won it all in a weaker year
-The SEC had one of it's strongest performances ever

I just don't think we've seen the quality and competitiveness of college football this high

The bottom of the SEC was the worst I remember. Certainly since the 90s. There were 5 really strong teams, a couple mediocre and a bunch of garbage.

Agree with this:

The bottom of the SEC was the worst I remember. Certainly since the 90s. There were 5 really strong teams, a couple mediocre and a bunch of garbage.

And my VU Commodores were NOT one of the five strong teams Bullet references, just in case anybody can't recall the SEC season.

Kentucky didn't have a quarterback, using a wide receiver. They didn't have a spectacular running back like Bennie Snell. They could NOT pass the ball. They didn't run the triple option. And they were still 8th best in the conference. Tennessee was 6th or 7th and got pounded by Georgia State (7-6 Sun Belt) at home.

In a normal year, the top 5 would have lost to more than one of the bottom 9 (USCe over UGA only one), but this year there was a huge gap and it wasn't that all of the top 5 were spectacular. Despite a really good bowl season, the SEC's ooc record was their 2nd worst going back to 2005, before the run of titles.

For all this talk about how weak the bottom of the SEC was, the MC has them as easily the #1 conference overall. Just as a conference isn't just its best teams, it's not just its worst teams either.

Remember, the Kentucky team you just dumped on lost 5 games, but all were in the SEC. Outside the SEC, they beat two bad G5 teams, but they also dumped Louisville and Virginia Tech, and those weren't bad teams - both would be 8-4 without their losses to Kentucky. And yes, while Tennessee had bad losses to Georgia Southern and BYU, those both happened more than four months ago. They clearly got better, beating Indiana in a bowl game, and Indiana was clearly better than GS or BYU.

For a conference to have a team like Kentucky that went 8-5 and won a bowl game to be their *8th* best team is IMO a sign of a very strong conference. How many other conferences can go 8 deep with that kind of team?

Just looking at the Big 12, the second best conference in the computers, their #8 team is a 5-7 TCU team. For the B1G it is 7-6 Michigan State. Both are well behind UK in the final MC.

Overall, the SEC had a dominant year.

Alabama had a really good team. They were #8, worst they have done in years. The SEC was the strongest conference and also were, with the possible exception of 2016 (when the middle was weak, not the bottom), the worst they have been in 15 years.

SEC out of conference win % vs. FBS:
2019 68.6%
2018 77.4%
2017 70.6%
2016 64.8%
2015 79.6%
2014 77.3%
2013 78.9%
2012 78.0%
2011 81.4%
2010 75.6%
2009 78.2%
2008 72.3%
2007 81.4%
2006 79.6%
2005 65.8%

(01-16-2020 12:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-16-2020 11:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-16-2020 09:34 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-16-2020 09:24 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(01-15-2020 11:55 AM)bullet Wrote:  The bottom of the SEC was the worst I remember. Certainly since the 90s. There were 5 really strong teams, a couple mediocre and a bunch of garbage.

Agree with this:

The bottom of the SEC was the worst I remember. Certainly since the 90s. There were 5 really strong teams, a couple mediocre and a bunch of garbage.

And my VU Commodores were NOT one of the five strong teams Bullet references, just in case anybody can't recall the SEC season.

Kentucky didn't have a quarterback, using a wide receiver. They didn't have a spectacular running back like Bennie Snell. They could NOT pass the ball. They didn't run the triple option. And they were still 8th best in the conference. Tennessee was 6th or 7th and got pounded by Georgia State (7-6 Sun Belt) at home.

In a normal year, the top 5 would have lost to more than one of the bottom 9 (USCe over UGA only one), but this year there was a huge gap and it wasn't that all of the top 5 were spectacular. Despite a really good bowl season, the SEC's ooc record was their 2nd worst going back to 2005, before the run of titles.

For all this talk about how weak the bottom of the SEC was, the MC has them as easily the #1 conference overall. Just as a conference isn't just its best teams, it's not just its worst teams either.

Remember, the Kentucky team you just dumped on lost 5 games, but all were in the SEC. Outside the SEC, they beat two bad G5 teams, but they also dumped Louisville and Virginia Tech, and those weren't bad teams - both would be 8-4 without their losses to Kentucky. And yes, while Tennessee had bad losses to Georgia Southern and BYU, those both happened more than four months ago. They clearly got better, beating Indiana in a bowl game, and Indiana was clearly better than GS or BYU.

For a conference to have a team like Kentucky that went 8-5 and won a bowl game to be their *8th* best team is IMO a sign of a very strong conference. How many other conferences can go 8 deep with that kind of team?

Just looking at the Big 12, the second best conference in the computers, their #8 team is a 5-7 TCU team. For the B1G it is 7-6 Michigan State. Both are well behind UK in the final MC.

Overall, the SEC had a dominant year.

Alabama had a really good team. They were #8, worst they have done in years. The SEC was the strongest conference and also were, with the possible exception of 2016 (when the middle was weak, not the bottom), the worst they have been in 15 years.

SEC out of conference win % vs. FBS:
2019 68.6%
2018 77.4%
2017 70.6%
2016 64.8%
2015 79.6%
2014 77.3%
2013 78.9%
2012 78.0%
2011 81.4%
2010 75.6%
2009 78.2%
2008 72.3%
2007 81.4%
2006 79.6%
2005 65.8%

Of course you know OOC win % is going to hinge heavily on who you play. If the B1G plays Alabama, Clemson, and Oregon OOC, they will likely have a lower win % than if they play Eastern Michigan, Western Michigan, and Buffalo. So by themselves, these numbers are not IMO very informative about SEC strength.

For example, the 2016 season with the 65% win rate, the SEC was the #1 rated conference. In 2017, with a better OOC win % than both 2016 and 2019, they were the #3 rated conference.

(01-16-2020 11:00 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-16-2020 09:40 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(01-15-2020 11:13 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(01-15-2020 06:42 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(01-15-2020 12:30 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I see nothing that makes 2019 some special best-ever year. Those points are largely surface level.

Years like 2007 stand out as abnormally unique seasons that withstand the test of time.

What was great about 2007? It's a pretty forgettable year. No one wanted to be champ, so a 2-loss LSU team beat Ohio State.

Hmmm....2007 LSU vs. 2019 LSU

I think he's saying it wasn't great, just an anomaly. This was just another year, debateably anyways. LSU's season will stand the test of time however, even if it is duplicated from time to time. Many others will go 15-0 but will they have a resume close to that?

For sure it is anomaly, but MY point was that it created a high water mark for the sport, mostly with the top teams.

If Clemson had won it all, we'd be talking about a 30-game winning streak, a dynasty, 3 championships in 4 years

If Alabama had won, we'd be talking about the best Alabama offense ever (which it was), and probably the greatest dynasty ever -- 6 championships in 10 years

Plus, throw in Ohio State, which had a championship caliber team

2001 Miami had no competition...the rest of the field sucked

2005 is memorable because of the quality of the top teams, but you still had just 2 top teams

The field this year of truly elite teams was deeper and record-breaking

No. It was just that the middle was weak, making those top teams look better than they were. Other than the top 3, all the teams were pretty flawed.

Georgia was #4. They were not nearly as good as a number of recent Georgia teams and only one of those even made the playoffs. Jake Fromm wasn't as good as he was the last two years. He regressed (I don't know anyone who thinks it was a good idea he left early). And before you argue about UGA being #4, remember they beat Florida, Auburn, Notre Dame and Baylor (4 of the top 14) and only the Notre Dame game was one where I had concern about the final result. The games weren't blowouts, but UGA was firmly in control.

Just to put things in perspective...Tua's first game was a victory over Georgia 2017

The Alabama Tua offensive machine of 2019 would have torn up Georgia 2017

I don't think people are understanding the high level of quality we had this season, or really the evolution of offenses

By the end of the season, wasn't Georgia missing its top 3 Receivers? They were limited on what they could do on offense.

So disappointed Heupal did not allow Gabriel to run earlier in the year. I understand why but it made a difference.