SEC Ds are looking overrated

[TheRaid]

Originally Posted by Matthanuf06

That doesn't mean all, or even most, of the defenses are good. It could easily mean the offenses are poor

Then make your case. So far you have just made comments that go against years of evidence to the contrary.

[lean_gator]

Originally Posted by LimeyGator

Ours won't.


That is all.

Yep. But lets concentrate on all the other teams like we like to do around here.....

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Originally Posted by TheRaid

Then make your case. So far you have just made comments that go against years of evidence to the contrary.

The problem is the past is not really a valuable variable here.

[gator7_5]

Anyone who thinks the sec doesn't have BY FAR the best defenses in the country needs to go peruse the rivals and ESPN recruiting rankings from the last decade. It's where the talent is. Period. One bad day doesn't change that. Lol.

[TheRaid]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

The problem is the past is not really a valuable variable here.

The sentiment was made that the offenses in the SEC over the years have created a false sense of defense. the facts prove otherwise and it is the same this year as other years. And, like someone said, today doesn't change it.

[gator7_5]

Clowney says this thread sucks! Lol.

[gatordavisl]

Clowney just said "overrate this."

[tommyuf21]

Bowl games are not always good indicators.

Some teams play with a chip on their shoulders and others are on vacation.

Does anyone think that Utah was a better team than Bama in 2008?

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Originally Posted by TheRaid

The sentiment was made that the offenses in the SEC over the years have created a false sense of defense. the facts prove otherwise and it is the same this year as other years. And, like someone said, today doesn't change it.

I read it as the SEC offenses this year have artificially elevated our defenses.

[born2beagator]

Originally Posted by gator7_5

Clowney says this thread sucks! Lol.

Hahahha. beat me to it

[Matthanuf06]

Originally Posted by TheRaid

The sentiment was made that the offenses in the SEC over the years have created a false sense of defense. the facts prove otherwise and it is the same this year as other years. And, like someone said, today doesn't change it.

We are talking about this year. And I still said we had the best defenses, but rather overrated. Overrated does not mean bad.

[Matthanuf06]

Originally Posted by tommyuf21

Bowl games are not always good indicators.

Some teams play with a chip on their shoulders and others are on vacation.

Does anyone think that Utah was a better team than Bama in 2008?

Utah was pretty damn good that year.

And if the bowl games aren't good indicators then what is? Nearly half of a conferences real OOC games for a season are bowl games.

[maleko83]

You're going to say SEC defenses are overrated based upon performances in bowls? Wow, cool story bro....

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Originally Posted by maleko83

You're going to say SEC defenses are overrated based upon performances in bowls? Wow, cool story bro....

Well this was certainly a nuanced and informative rebuttal.

[maleko83]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

Well this was certainly a nuanced and informative rebuttal.

That's what I was going for, but I'll elaborate.

Outside of the national championship game, bowl games mean nothing. There's very little (if any) incentive for the teams to win. Their prize is attending, and all the other gifts that come with playing in the game. To extrapolate the strength of SEC defenses based upon a 4-6 game sample set on NYE and NYD bowl games, as opposed to an entire season, is nonsensical.

[gatordavisl]

Originally Posted by Matthanuf06

Utah was pretty damn good that year.

And if the bowl games aren't good indicators then what is? Nearly half of a conferences real OOC games for a season are bowl games.

Bama was pretty damn good that year too. Do you think Utah was that much better? A better indicator is games that matter. The break between the season and the bowls creates a huge amount of variability which is difficult to evaluate.

[bearshark]

gAMECOCK d IS ATROCIOUS

[Matthanuf06]

Originally Posted by gatordavisl

Bama was pretty damn good that year too. Do you think Utah was that much better? A better indicator is games that matter. The break between the season and the bowls creates a huge amount of variability which is difficult to evaluate.

Id take Bama over a large sample size, but Utah was good itself.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Originally Posted by maleko83

That's what I was going for, but I'll elaborate.

Outside of the national championship game, bowl games mean nothing.

They don't mean anything, but they're still indicative of something. This is like saying our game against FSU didn't mean anything. That's true. It had no SEC-CG implications nor did it really impact our bowl game. But it showed something.

To extrapolate the strength of SEC defenses based upon a 4-6 game sample set on NYE and NYD bowl games, as opposed to an entire season, is nonsensical.

No it isn't; indeed, it's all we have to work from.

[Matthanuf06]

Originally Posted by maleko83

That's what I was going for, but I'll elaborate.

Outside of the national championship game, bowl games mean nothing. There's very little (if any) incentive for the teams to win. Their prize is attending, and all the other gifts that come with playing in the game. To extrapolate the strength of SEC defenses based upon a 4-6 game sample set on NYE and NYD bowl games, as opposed to an entire season, is nonsensical.

Well technically most games mean nothing then given they have zero national title implications. UF/FSU had zero meaning in that regard.

And to ignore around half of the OOC sample size is nonsensical.