MAISEL: SEC SUX. US: UM, YEAH.

by Orson on Jan 23, 2006 11:21 AM EST

Ivan Maisel's always gotten a pass from us because he took a Stanford education and a law degree, thought for three seconds or so, and became a college football writer instead. The Three-Point Stance must be the easiest write in all of the college world, though, since it's basically three two to three sentence paragraphs Maisel has to crank out two or three times a week containing his quick hit thoughts on the game.

What separates Maisel is being "good," as in "not Peter Kerasotis-esque." Actually, one teeny spoonful of Maisel contains the nutrition of eight Mike Bianchi columns, and that's before editing. Going back and reading Maisel's archives, it's plain to see that Ivan's a guy with a panopticon eye for the game, an archivist's sense of history, and a fondness for the underappreciated and quirky characters of the college gridiron. (Who else was bullish on Tulsa senior wideout Garrett Mills during the season? Not us, for damn sure.) Maisel has also done something that made him as close to a working mainstream blogger as we can imagine: he wrote that one of his pieces just flat "sucked," and that he wished he hadn't written it. Get the man on WordPress now!

It's the offseason--here's a picture of Ivan Maisel.

Maisel, too, is an admitted homeboy for the Southeastern Conference, which makes last Friday's edition of the 3-Point Stance all the more refreshing since he leads off by recapping the SEC's dismal 7-9 record against BCS conferences (and the Elves of Notre Dame, forever sailing off to their own kingdom across the waters.) The Big 12, which we were daft enough to call a "soft" conference in an early bit of online retardation, went 8-5; the ACC went large at 13-9 against BCS opponents, while the Big Ten (ever the Even Steven of conferences) went 10-10 overall.

He doesn't mention the Pac-10 at all--we've got no clue what the numbers are, either, so if a wise fan out there has the Pac-10's record and can substantiate it, please leave the link below--but wethinks it's got to be pretty average to not even mention. It's likely superior to the SEC's, though, which as a post-mortem stat only serves to remind that the SEC, whose fans (us included) are among the most vocal about conference superiority, have little to stand on in the way of actually validating our pride.

Look at the bowls for further proof of a continuing conference malaise:

--South Carolina gets a quick leg up on Missouri before Brad Smith catches fire like Rony Seikaly in the old NBA Jamz game and leads the Tigers back to a humiliating defeat of the Gamecocks. Yes, they made it to a bowl game, and that's pretty amazing given the SWAT Team cleanout of the athletic dorms over the Carolina offseason. But collapsing to a team coached by Gary Pinkel does not impressed make.

--Auburn fails to show up against Wisconsin in the Citrus Bowl, and the defense Brodie Croyle weeps about in his dreams fails to so much as dent John Stocco in their bowl game.

--Georgia walks into a buzzsaw in the Sugar Bowl, deflating a hometown crowd in Atlanta by blowing circuits whenever West Virginia ran a complex, baffling play called...the qb choice. We wanted Georgia DC Willie Martinez in a cash game of Connect Four after watching the Georgia D flailing after Steve Slaton and Pat White all night.

Somewhere, a Georgia fan just dropped their pig in a blanket.

These losses sting for the conference as a whole--especially when your conference champion goes in against the Big East champ and nearly gets their defense run out of the yard. LSU made a nice recoup for the SEC by killing a wounded Miami team in the Peach Bowl, and earns extra points for teaching their players the Shaolin-style use of a helmet as a weapon in the post-game tunnel brawl with the Hurricanes. Florida won, too, but even the Outback win reeks a bit following a late game defensive meltdown and a bad call to save Gators from a perfectly executed Iowa onside kick. And the 13-10 "look ma, no offense!" Cotton Bowl win for Alabama was nice, but didn't exactly break any existing stereotypes one might have had about the conference as a whole.

So Maisel's right: coupled with the bowls and the record, the long-debated downturn in the SEC's fortunes is there for all to see. Is there any sign of getting better top to bottom, though? Perhaps. We've broken them down into Bulls and Bears much like our screaming hero Jim Cramer would, looking at existing trends in '05 to pick the best and worst indicators for the overall health of the SEC in 2006.

Bulls:

--A nearly bottomless well of concern. The SEC again made the most money and had the highest attendance of any conference, which means that brick-throwing lunacy will likely win out over programmatic inertia. Kentucky may be safely exempted from this statement, of course.

--Improved out-of-conference scheduling. There's still patsies-a-plenty in the rosters (Western Carolina in the next-to-last game for Florida this year? We can't wait!) But the national trend towards intersectional scheduling has even bled southward this year, and will likely continue. Tennessee opens with Cal, while Vanderbilt, not to be outdone, has the chance to give Brian an aneurysm at Michigan. Arkansas gets their yearly fill of Vitamin Wrath when USC comes to town, Auburn will face Washington State, and LSU will fill out the Pac-10 exchange program by facing the nearly rebuilt Arizona Wildcats. Even lowly Miss. State will face a substantial intersectional foe in West Virginia, while Georgia will get the chance to hand Yoda Hawkins his first loss of the year again when the Bulldogs face Colorado.

Yearly tick list for Hawkins: prostate exam, check. Change air filter, check. Lose in Athens, check.

--Stability. New coaches settling in will continue to grow more comfortable. Miles can't really perform much better, but Orgeron and Meyer certainly can and will, especially with the recruiting sorcery going on in G-ville and the recent exodus of the Miami brain trust to Oxford. Even with his lackadaisical approach to recruiting, Spurrier's Cocks should improve, as well.

These four coaches will also place a premium on scoring points. Like it or not, powerful offenses could create a desperately needed buzz in a conference that has been low on sizzle lately.

Bears:

--The old guard: Nutt, Fulmer, Brooks, and--gasp!--Croom. Not the most charismatic bunch, even with Nutt's obvious insanity in hiring a high school coach in order to grab a highly touted recruit. It's an indicator of the turnover in-conference when a third or fourth-year coach is considered senior-ish, but that's what Croom and Brooks are in the SEC at this point, and the senior-ish class of coaches may not bring much to the party this year if existing trends don't change. Tennessee's dismal year may have been an aberration, but Arkansas' s certainly wasn't, and despite his team's improved play last year, Nutt's...um...testicles are on the chopping block in Fayetteville. Croom is well-liked, but Miss. State's done little in the way of climbing upward from the Jackie Sherrill sized hole it still calls home. Oh, and Rich Brooks. Yeah...Rich Brooks.

--The cake in the 12th game. While scheduling improved, the teams of the SEC suffer from the same addiction many of its residents do: a damaging fondness for high-fructose corn syrup in the form of the Western Carolinas, Temples, Tulanes, and UCF's of the world. The obesity of the schedules could get worse, too, as some teams still have to fill the open slot on their schedules. Again, it's improving from what it was--fewer D-2 schools on the schedule, for sure--but a team with serious national ambitions could feel the sting of having a weak opponent on the schedule when the yearly BCS fiasco begins to heat up.

The SEC's schedules can still tend to the "on disability obese" side.

--So, Everyone still Cheats? We're praying for a quiescent offseason locally since the SEC's perennial bugabear--corruption--poses the greatest threat to the health of the conference in the form of NCAA sanctions and bad publicity. It's hard to imagine anything besides a full NCAA inquisition eclipsing Arrestafest '05 and Albert Means brouhahas of recent years...but it's early yet. Just when you think there's a new low, someone builds a new basement of low expectations for you as a football fan to inhabit. Whether that person will be wearing Chee-to orange this year remains to be seen...

Tweet Comment 25 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I’ll agree. It was a down year in the SEC this year. We only had 6 teams get bowl eligible. You know it’s a down year when Vandy goes 5-6 with 3 conference wins. Too bad about that loss to MTSU or they could’ve had 6 wins. I guess it’s a good thing they replaced those pesky Blue Raiders on the schedule with a more winnable game (for Vandy) against Michigan. Is there any other team in the SEC that could pull off losing to MTSU 4 years in a row?

All that said, WE ARE STILL THE BEST CONFERENCE IN THE LAND!!! (puffed chest and all)

by rebel84 on Jan 23, 2006 12:51 PM EST reply actions

FYI, the Pac 10 went 7-7 against BCS teams (including ND) this season.

The wins were over Arkansas (USC), ND (USC), Oklahoma (UCLA), NW (UCLA and ‘Zona St.), Rutgers (’Zona St.), Illinois (Cal).

The losses were to Texas (USC), Oklahoma (Oregon), LSU (’Zona St.), Louisville (Oregon St.), Purdue (Arizona) and ND (Stanford and UW).

For the record, the Pac 10 was favored in 9 of these games (the LSU-ASU game had an even pointspread), so they should have gone 9-4-1 instead of 7-7. By the same token, the SEC should have gone 7-8-1 in their games (slightly outperforming their 7-9). Whether this indicates the weaknesses of the teams or disparities in the matchups is open to debate, of course.

Surely everyone must be asking how, with all the offseason bluster, the Pac 10 managed to play less games against BCS opponents than the SEC (for what it’s worth, so did the Big 12).

by Solon on Jan 23, 2006 1:13 PM EST reply actions

Without taking the slap we’re forcibly holding behind our backs (so…difficult…must…hold…), it’s more expensive and more of a chore for a BCS team NOT in the Pac-10 to travel out West. If you can get the same poll value by traveling just down the road, you’ll do it, which most teams do.

by Orson Swindle on Jan 23, 2006 1:18 PM EST reply actions

I was thinking about that myself. The nearest BCS conference to the Pac-10 (location-wise) is the Big 12. Other than that, it’s the MWC and WAC that offer the best travel options for the Pac-10. The SEC, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, and Big East (cough cough…not really a BCS conference anymore) have many possible regional out of conference match ups with other BCS schools.

Seriously though, when is the Big East going to lose its automatic BCS berth? Yes, it’s more deserving than CUSA, the MAC, WAC, or MWC, but it’s essentially just a mid-major football conference with a BCS flag. Sometimes they deserve a bid (WVU this past year), but sometimes they don’t (Pitt in ’04).

by rebel84 on Jan 23, 2006 3:18 PM EST reply actions

Say what you will about the SEC being down this year on the field…but I would still rather tailgate for three days, sneak bourbon into a game via a ziplock bag taped to my leg, and throw half full cups of bourbon and coke everytime there’s a TD at any SEC venue (save Vandy or Kentucky) than go to, for example, an Iowa at Michigan bore-fest at 11 in the morning at the Big House…or the equivalent in any of the other conferences. That’s why the SEC is the best conference.

by Ritty on Jan 23, 2006 3:25 PM EST reply actions

Seriously though, when is the Big East going to lose its automatic BCS berth?

We could always ask Georgia…. In all seriousness though- the big BCS game that was handled competently by officials (The Orange Bowl) was called by Big East officials. With all of the disasters in officiating in this years’ bowls, I would be more than happy to have the Big East officials back.

by Lion4Life on Jan 23, 2006 3:32 PM EST reply actions

The Big East goes nowhere for a while due to lack of competition for the slot.

by Orson Swindle on Jan 23, 2006 3:35 PM EST reply actions

And in Athens, the preferred liquid to be tossed from a cup is piss, not jack and coke :-)

by tigercpa on Jan 23, 2006 3:47 PM EST reply actions

Hey, why waste a perfectly good Jack and Coke?

by T. Kyle King on Jan 23, 2006 4:07 PM EST reply actions

Twas a down year. Florida dominated their non-SEC opponents.

And say what you will about the Iowa game – UF mopped the floor with them. The defensive meltdown occured when Vernell Brown was taken out and bc Meyer let Jackson (who historically sucks at returns) fuck something up, thus making the score look better.

by Kevin on Jan 23, 2006 4:54 PM EST reply actions

And while I respect the hell out of his stanford degree, ivan maisel sux dick.

by Kevin on Jan 23, 2006 4:54 PM EST reply actions

and i meant both jacksons – chad and kyle

by Kevin on Jan 23, 2006 4:59 PM EST reply actions

hurray, the big east gets left out big-time conference talk again.

The Big East will not be losing it BCS birth anytime soon, especially now that there are going to be more BCS teams. Dropping the Big East from the BCS would be like the BCS cutting off its on legs. Having the big east gives the BCS a powerful majority in college football. That would disperse if the big east or another conference left.

by Zach on Jan 23, 2006 6:40 PM EST reply actions

Ole Miss is a BCS school? I’d love for us to play you Rebels anywhere, anytime.

by dragonash on Jan 23, 2006 9:37 PM EST reply actions

The bowls need to be restructured so that the Pac-10 and SEC only play each other. Then we’d only have to hear fans of one conference claim to be the best/whine that no one gives them the respect they deserve. Personally, my money’s on the SEC—judging by recent events, the SEC champ would get beat by the Pac-10 champ, but since no one else in the Pac-10 decides to show up for their bowl games (I’m talking about YOU Oregon, for following the CAL model…BCS my ass) I’m guessing that the Pac-10 #2, #3, and #4 would get pwn3d by their SEC counterparts.

Since none of the other conferences whine NEARLY as much as these two, the Big 11, Big 12, Big East, etc. could just play against each other. Sure, we’d have to either hear the SEC crow about how good they are or the Pac 10 whine about how they don’t get respect, but at least we wouldn’t have to hear the corresponding counterarguments (SEC—every team finishes with at least 2 losses, couldn’t score with roofies, and most non-conference opponents would lose to De Lasalle High School; Pac-10 is really USC and everyone else, no one plays defense, non-conference opponents usually consist of lesser WAC teams…)

Sadly, this 12th game will mean more cupcakes for most teams, rather than the games like OSU-Texas or the proposed Michigan/Georgia (good luck Mr. King!) contests that college football fans want to see.

by Nate on Jan 23, 2006 9:55 PM EST reply actions

More bad lies.

Alabama had around 425 yards of total offense, without their best receiver-no dpeth at that position becuse of Prothro’s injury.

Alabama just didn’t score and Steelered it for most of the day. 40+ minutes in time of possesion.

by The Spirit of Bill Oliver on Jan 24, 2006 1:15 AM EST reply actions

Wow, Nate’s nuts.

by The Spirit of Bill Oliver on Jan 24, 2006 1:17 AM EST reply actions

Please stop, flashing your self on this board, vanity 3 paragraphers are the equivilant of indecent exposure.

It’s rather disgusting, especially when you got this being written….

“SECevery team finishes with at least 2 losses, couldnt score with roofies, and most non-conference opponents would lose to De Lasalle High School;”

USC, Notre Dame, Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech etc.

Losing to De Lasalle, YOUR ARE A SUCK ASS LIAR.

In addition, “couldn’t score with roofies”.

So you idea of football is putting up 50 points a game?

WACer.

by The Spirit of Bill Oliver on Jan 24, 2006 1:22 AM EST reply actions

“Surely everyone must be asking how, with all the offseason bluster, the Pac 10 managed to play less games against BCS opponents than the SEC (for what its worth, so did the Big 12).”

Two fewer teams in the conference, perhaps? I think 14 OOC games with 10 teams in the conference is probably roughly equal, though, to 16 OOC games with 12 teams in conference – most of the ‘crowing’ comes from the USC camp (really, we’re not all quite that bad), who basically point to their yearly tussle with Notre Dame and the additional 1 BCS OOC opponent they always have and go " WE UM GOOD."

Most of the ‘upper-echelon’ teams in the Pac-10 seem to be making a good effort to improve their scheduling (as are many other conference’s top teams). The whupping boys of every BCS conference usually get an invite or two somewhere because it’s like playing those DI-AA teams but with the ‘BCS’ moniker in front of it (“We played 4 BCS conference teams during the out-of-conference season!” - “Yeah, umm… But didn’t they go a combined 6-39 or something?”

by Underbruin on Jan 24, 2006 5:19 AM EST reply actions

“YOU ARE A SUCK ASS LIAR.”

This may be the most absurd thing I have ever read. And whose freakin’ moniker is a dead eco-folk singer? I know you terrorize Heismanpundit, but admonishing Nate for merely stating the retread arguments (note: not arguing them himself) is a clear indication of mental retardation.

by I'm a Realist on Jan 24, 2006 7:44 AM EST reply actions

Realist—

He’s clearly mental, which is why I won’t even bother. Apparently he’s not content to only harass HP, but has to appear here and BGS also. Sad. Rational people, like yourself, see that I was clearly arguing neither side, but pointing out the silliness of each side’s arguments.

by Nate on Jan 24, 2006 7:57 AM EST reply actions

Nate, even irrational people like me saw that.

by RowdyRoddyPiper on Jan 24, 2006 9:48 AM EST reply actions

Honestly, what the hell was Vandy’s athletic department thinking when they scheduled Michigan? Oh, wait, that’s right. We don’t have an athletic department.

Sigh. 2-9, we’re back in your oh-so-warm embrace.

rebel84 – MWC “less deserving” than the Big East? Sure, the MWC had a bad year this year, but they boast at least four consistently solid programs (Utah, CSU, TCU, and former national champ BYU) and a couple of up-and-comers (New Mexico, Wyoming). What does the Big East have? Rutgers? South Florida?

And Ritty, I’ve been drenched in beer leaving Vandy games. Though that was admittedly rare.

by Jeff on Jan 24, 2006 3:58 PM EST reply actions