So I enjoy rooting against the SEC as much as the next guy, though I also really enjoy watching a lot of their teams play, their home game environments, etc.  And there's definitely some circular logic going on with how voters and SEC fans view their teams, but I'm not going to sit here and also say that I don't think that conference is DEEPER than the B1G.  They have MAYBE one team this year that's as good as our top 3.  But their depth goes further down than ours.

@gros-louis True but that has never been the SEC's argument. For the 20 year dominant period the SEC enjoyed (mostly the Saban years) that is now in the rearview mirror, the SEC touted titles because they always had 1 or 2 dominant teams and the rest of the conference latched on to the top. 

Now that the SEC isn't winning titles anymore, this is their weak attempt to still try and claim superiority. 

Posted by: @gros-louis

↑

So I enjoy rooting against the SEC as much as the next guy, though I also really enjoy watching a lot of their teams play, their home game environments, etc.  And there's definitely some circular logic going on with how voters and SEC fans view their teams, but I'm not going to sit here and also say that I don't think that conference is DEEPER than the B1G.  They have MAYBE one team this year that's as good as our top 3.  But their depth goes further down than ours.

 

i actually don't think it's deeper. i think people think it's deeper because that's the narrative that's perpetually pushed and teams that have no business being ranked get ranked by brand alone.

lsu, vandy, missouri and tennessee are overrated based on who they've played. they have one win against a team with a winning record *combined* and the best win of the bunch is mississippi state in overtime by tennessee.

how do we actually know those teams are better than washington, maryland, iowa, illinois or any of the other middling b1g teams?

we don't...they're just ranked for no reason by people who don't watch the games. 

edit: i haven't listened to this btw...still working. i think the teams i mentioned from the sec are fine...i just don't see a ton of difference between the results lsu has and what washington or nebraska has done.

Posted by: @iureactionary

↑

Posted by: @gros-louis

↑

So I enjoy rooting against the SEC as much as the next guy, though I also really enjoy watching a lot of their teams play, their home game environments, etc.  And there's definitely some circular logic going on with how voters and SEC fans view their teams, but I'm not going to sit here and also say that I don't think that conference is DEEPER than the B1G.  They have MAYBE one team this year that's as good as our top 3.  But their depth goes further down than ours.

 

i actually don't think it's deeper. i think people think it's deeper because that's the narrative that's perpetually pushed and teams that have no business being ranked get ranked by brand alone.

lsu, vandy, missouri and tennessee are overrated based on who they've played. they have one win against a team with a winning record *combined* and the best win of the bunch is mississippi state in overtime by tennessee.

how do we actually know those teams are better than washington, maryland, iowa, illinois or any of the other middling b1g teams?

we don't...they're just ranked for no reason by people who don't watch the games. 

edit: i haven't listened to this btw...still working. i think the teams i mentioned from the sec are fine...i just don't see a ton of difference between the results lsu has and what washington or nebraska has done.

 

I think that's a fair critique.  But having watched Tennessee and Georgia play, Tennessee strikes me as pretty good. Better than NEbraska or Washington.  Washington's best win is Maryland...that win is going to get worse as every week passes, but if they beat Michigan this weekend...well, how good is Michigan?  Nebraska also has that Maryland win and then a win over a decent UC team.

Where I think those middling SEC teams are cashing in is on wins over what appears to have been a very overrated South Cackalacky team (saw that coming from a mile away).

I think I've seen enough of Bama playing to say they're good...and watching how Vandy and Mizzou played them told me those teams are both pretty good.

LSU?  I'd say they're great on D, horrible on O.  Still benefitting from the Clemson win.  But still they LOOK better to me than Washington or NEbraska.  I almost think of it as 'who would I rather play against?'. I'd choose to play Nebraska and Washington over LSU and Tennessee 10/10.  Probably more even when you change the conversation to Vandy and Mizzou, but again, I thought both were impressive against Alabama.

@iureactionary The "SEC depth" has almost always been a myth, more so in recent years

The SEC loves to schedule out of conference games with cupcakes like Wake Forest and Wisconsin (to be fair to Alabama, they didnt know Wisconsin would stink) and then pound their chest about "OOC Wins"

I dont know how anyone can watch the games this year and think the SEC is elite. As a conference, their offenses are horrible. 

If people lined up the SEC and matched them to a similar tier team in the B1G, I struggle to see this "SEC Depth" 

IMO this would be the top 10 power rankings

Ohio State > Alabama
Indiana > Texas A&M
Oregon > Georgia
USC > Ole Miss
Nebraska > LSU
Washington = Tennessee 
Iowa = Missouri
Illinois > Oklahoma
Michigan < Texas
UCLA = Vanderbilt

Further down the conference, yeah Miss St is probably a bit better than Rutgers, but I think it would be a close game on a neutral field. So many of these SEC teams are getting to be ranked for no reason.

@hoosierdaddy i think you're spot on...

i think the conferences are remarkably similar in depth but the rankings don't reflect that and so the public sentiment is different. what'ts interesting is the sp+ or fpi, which doesn't rely on people who don't watch the games or have a narrative, also have the conference middle similarly ranked.

my thesis isn't that the sec is inferior to the b1g, it's that the b1g is similar to the sec and isn't treated like that. there are a bunch of teams perceived to bad in the middle of the b1g that actually aren't any different than the middle of the sec.

@iureactionary I think it is a little deeper only because their bottom isn't as bad as ours (Wisconsin, Purdue, Michigan State)  

A&M, Alabama, Georgia = Ohio State, IU and Oregon.

LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, Vandy, Missouri, Ole Miss and Tennessee =

Iowa, Illinois, USC, Nebraska, Washington, Michigan and Penn State. 

South Carolina, Florida and Arkansas = Maryland, Minnesota and Rutgers.

Their bottom is better, I think, than Wisconsin, Purdue and Michigan State.

I have no idea where to put UCLA and Northwestern.  I think a couple of more weeks need to play out for both of them.  But I agree 100% with you on the SEC being marginally better but being treated like it somehow isn't even a contest.

Will be nice when they play that ninth conference game beginning next season. 

The sec will absorb eight more losses each and every season. That will have to reflect in the “rankings”. 

Will be interesting to see how that unfolds, year after year. 

You mean half their conference gets one more 'good loss'?  They'll own the standings! 😉

Yeah, will be nice to have fewer two (or three, being ESPN and the SEC) loss teams crying to make the CFP.

@seyton They are better on the bottom, but that doesnt really mean much. We are much better on the top which impacts W/L across the conference more.

I.e. I would much rather play 2 teams like Kentucky and LSU than 2 teams like Indiana and Wisconsin. When you have a bunch of elite teams at the top, it squashes the middle - upper middle who are fighting for bowl eligibility / better bowl because they have no chance in at least a couple games on their schedule

Posted by: @gros-louis

↑

So I enjoy rooting against the SEC as much as the next guy, though I also really enjoy watching a lot of their teams play, their home game environments, etc.  And there's definitely some circular logic going on with how voters and SEC fans view their teams, but I'm not going to sit here and also say that I don't think that conference is DEEPER than the B1G.  They have MAYBE one team this year that's as good as our top 3.  But their depth goes further down than ours.

 

So far this year:

Big Ten vs SEC in 2025

Posted by: @bradstevens

↑

Posted by: @gros-louis

↑

So I enjoy rooting against the SEC as much as the next guy, though I also really enjoy watching a lot of their teams play, their home game environments, etc.  And there's definitely some circular logic going on with how voters and SEC fans view their teams, but I'm not going to sit here and also say that I don't think that conference is DEEPER than the B1G.  They have MAYBE one team this year that's as good as our top 3.  But their depth goes further down than ours.

 

I know it's a different year and all, but didn't the B1G go 5-1 against the SEC in bowl games last year?

So far this year:

Big Ten vs SEC in 2025

Date	Big Ten	1	-	2	SEC
2025-09-13	Wisconsin	14	-	38	Alabama		away
2025-09-06	Michigan	13	-	24	Oklahoma		away
2025-08-30	Ohio State	14	-	7	Texas		home
	Big Ten	1	-	2	SEC

My Week 8 SEC team evaluations:

• Bama - pretty good
• Georgia - pretty good
• A&M - pretty good
• Tenn - not bad
• Ole Miss - not bad
• Vandy - pretty good
• Mizzou - not bad
• Oklahoma - not bad
• Texas - buns
• Arkansas - ASS
• Auburn - ASS
• Florida - ASS
• UK - ASS
• LSU - buns
• Sip St - ASS
• S. Cackalacky - ASS

Texas still being in the top-25 is nuts.

Posted by: @tammany

↑

Texas still being in the top-25 is nuts.