Gator Country

Dreamliner · 01-02-2013, 10:44 AM

I think the bowl performances just serve to underscore how much SEC offenses suck. Ex: after surrendering 70 points to Wisconsin, Nebraska has no problem holding Georgia to under 50.

Go2gtr · 01-02-2013, 10:54 AM

The Gator defense has been helping to build that perception nationally.

Holding the vaunted OSU killer offence and Heisman QB to 82 yards of total offense in the MNC game still reverberates.

Holding the most prolific offense in D1 history to 14 total points in a MNC game was another complete whitewashing and domination of the best offence the nation had to offer.

I think we were the leading factor in creating this perception nationally.

I also believe Gary Danielson contributed to this change in thinking in the media.

He admitted, on air, that he was always a Big 10 guy (Purdue and Detroit Lions QB) and never gave any thought to the SEC teams. He was totally in the tank for the Big 10 on tradition and history alone. But since doing the SEC games for CBS his eyes were opened. SEC defenses were more like NFL than college. He said no conference played defense like the SEC.

Then the SEC went out and backed up those statements in dominating MNC game performance.

The perception still holds today (and wasn't hurt by Clowney's historic hit on a hapless and overwhelmed Michigan RB).

NoahBeanBizzel · 01-02-2013, 10:56 AM

I'm surprised at what teams from other conferences are doing offensively against some of the SEC defenses. I always felt that Georgia's defense-especially against the run-was overrated, but LSU and South Carolina got lit up, and THAT did surprise me.

I think 'Bama's defense is a bit overrated too. I wouldn't be surprised to see Notre Dame have success against the Tide. I would think we'll shut Louisville down, but won't be shocked if Bridgewater gives us a few problems.

orangeblueorangeblue · 01-02-2013, 10:57 AM

I don't discount the perception, nor do I think it's in any way wrong over the last few years. But that doesn't mean that the conference got the benefit of the doubt this year with regard to defense.

I'm willing to entertain the possibility that the SEC defenses weren't as stout as they were the last few years but still looked as tough due to generally weaker offenses across the league.

NoahBeanBizzel · 01-02-2013, 11:06 AM

True. There were only a few teams, offensively, that brought a consistent attack almost every week. Outside of Alabama and Georgia, poor QB play and generally inconsistent play made for a painful year for SEC fans who enjoy watching points get put on the board.

**OaktownGator** · 01-02-2013, 11:17 AM

Clemson just played at a very high level on offense... especially Boyd. They'd have put up over 50 on most teams the way they played LSU.

UGA wasn't at all ready to play, which seems like a common theme for them in bowl games.

The one that surprised me was Michigan against USCe. Gamecocks couldn't cover Gallon. But the officials clearly had some bias against USCe in that game. Clowney was held constantly without calls. If the holding gets called, that whole game changes.

nawlinsgator · 01-02-2013, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

It also doesn't mean it's inherently the case just because it was for 7 or 8 years. We won't know for sure this year because Bama isn't exactly facing an offensive powerhouse.

When they did face a good offense this year, they lost.
And you are right. Generalizations like, "Defense wins championships" and "the SEC has the best Defenses" aren't immutable laws of physics. They observations that are generally true based on the data at hand.

Go2gtr · 01-02-2013, 11:18 AM

It was a down year for offense in the SEC.

Arkansas wet the bed, unfortunately. Tenn just disappointed terribly. Auburn melted down completely. Florida never took off its training wheels, SCAR disappointed, LSU was inept, the Tide spit the bit, Vandy over achieved but has no horsepower, Cats took many steps backward, State had promise but could not deliver, Ole Miss was the same as usual, Missouri in the Ole Miss category.

Georgia and A&M were the offensive class of the conference (both struggled against FLA). The league needs to repair its offense in general so that diminishes to some degree the status of SEC defenses.

One thing hasn't changed, if you play in this conference and your offense is flawed it will be exposed.

FearNoSpear · 01-02-2013, 11:24 AM

To me it seems as though sec teams are sleep walking and are barely interested while the teams they play treat it like the Super Bowl. Excited at a chance to beat an sec team

orangeblueorangeblue · 01-02-2013, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FearNoSpear

To me it seems as though sec teams are sleep walking and are barely interested while the teams they play treat it like the Super Bowl. Excited at a chance to beat an sec team

I think this is sort of a cop out. Like losing a fight and then saying "Whatever, I didn't really care" after wards.

FearNoSpear · 01-02-2013, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

I think this is sort of a cop out. Like losing a fight and then saying "Whatever, I didn't really care" after wards.

Well being that USC and UGA won its not like losing at all. In my opinion I think SEC teams have gone in over confident and with nothing on the line didn't start games with the same intensity as teams that felt like they were playing for respect if they beat the mighty SEC

Go2gtr · 01-02-2013, 11:54 AM

Another explanation is that SEC teams finish the regular season beat to a pulp while the rest of them are fresh as daisies.

orangeblueorangeblue · 01-02-2013, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FearNoSpear

Well being that USC and UGA won its not like losing at all. In my opinion I think SEC teams have gone in over confident and with nothing on the line didn't start games with the same intensity as teams that felt like they were playing for respect if they beat the mighty SEC

Right, but if they blow them out it's like "oh yeah, the SEC is the best." If they lose or it's close, suddenly it's "oh, they didn't care, came in flat." There's really no way to lose in that realm of justification.

I don't see it. I think in general, bowl games are treated equally, and we can't go making assumptions about collective feelings toward the game to validate our preconceived opinions on conference strength.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Go2gtr

Another explanation is that SEC teams finish the regular season beat to a pulp while the rest of them are fresh as daisies.

This one also defies logic (and a previous explanation in this thread).

SJB612 · 01-02-2013, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OaktownGator

Clemson just played at a very high level on offense... especially Boyd. They'd have put up over 50 on most teams the way they played LSU.

UGA wasn't at all ready to play, which seems like a common theme for them in bowl games.

The one that surprised me was Michigan against USCe. Gamecocks couldn't cover Gallon. But the officials clearly had some bias against USCe in that game. Clowney was held constantly without calls. If the holding gets called, that whole game changes.

I recall the same thing happening when we played Michigan in Timmy's soph year. They held Derrick Harvey all game long and no calls. It was a crime.

LSU is the team I thought might not come to play. They were probably very disappointed being a top 10 team relegated to the Peach Bowl. They also have a lot of players that might be saving themselves for the NFL, since Peach Bowl champs sin't much to play for the year after playing for the MNC. Anyway, they would have won if Miles wouldn't have thrown the ball with 2 minutes left.

FearNoSpear · 01-02-2013, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

Right, but if they blow them out it's like "oh yeah, the SEC is the best." If they lose or it's close, suddenly it's "oh, they didn't care, came in flat." There's really no way to lose in that realm of justification.

I don't see it. I think in general, bowl games are treated equally, and we can't go making assumptions about collective feelings toward the game to validate our preconceived opinions on conference strength.

I respect what you're saying. Im not even saying there is no way you are right. Im just speculating on how it appeared to me.
I'll use Clowneys play for example. He was quiet most of the day and the second USC got jobbed he turned it up a notch and got the ball back. The intensity wasn't there until that point.

Neptune · 01-02-2013, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FearNoSpear

I respect what you're saying. Im not even saying there is no way you are right. Im just speculating on how it appeared to me.
I'll use Clowneys play for example. He was quiet most of the day and the second USC got jobbed he turned it up a notch and got the ball back. The intensity wasn't there until that point.

According to Lewan, the OT that was ultimately responsible for Clowney on that play (the whole game, really), he got spooked by Clowney's alignment (stunt) and called for help from the TE. The TE didn't hear the call and completely missed Clowney.
They were supposed to double team him, but ended up wiffing.

Not saying it wasn't a great move (AND HIT) from Clowney, but Lewan did a good job on him most of the day - when he and the guard weren't holding. Lewan's an excellent OT.

**OaktownGator** · 01-02-2013, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neptune

According to Lewan, the OT that was ultimately responsible for Clowney on that play (the whole game, really), he got spooked by Clowney's alignment (stunt) and called for help from the TE. The TE didn't hear the call and completely missed Clowney.
They were supposed to double team him, but ended up wiffing.

Not saying it wasn't a great move (AND HIT) from Clowney, but Lewan did a good job on him most of the day - when he and the guard weren't holding. Lewan's an excellent OT.

Lewan has very strong hands, and used them very actively all day. Can't blame him, but the officiating sucked.

gatorinmi · 01-02-2013, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Go2gtr

It was a down year for offense in the SEC.

Arkansas wet the bed, unfortunately. Tenn just disappointed terribly. Auburn melted down completely. Florida never took off its training wheels, SCAR disappointed, LSU was inept, the Tide spit the bit, Vandy over achieved but has no horsepower, Cats took many steps backward, State had promise but could not deliver, Ole Miss was the same as usual, Missouri in the Ole Miss category.

Georgia and A&M were the offensive class of the conference (both struggled against FLA). The league needs to repair its offense in general so that diminishes to some degree the status of SEC defenses.

One thing hasn't changed, if you play in this conference and your offense is flawed it will be exposed.

UT put up a lot of points on those defenses that we've been talking about in this thread, even in losses. 44 on UGA, 35 on USC and 31 on MSU. So it's not like those 3 were that great defensively this season.

Tebowism0823 · 01-02-2013, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

I simply picked the two most recent and in fact the ones that are the topic of this thread.

How does that prove they don't care instead of proving they might not be as good as people thought? You can't use your conclusion as evidence.

But you're watching it in a vacuum. If you watch high school teams play each other and one is amazing you might conclude that it's an amazing football team. But then they play another team from another state and lose 70-0. Can you say they weren't "up for the game," or is it entirely possible that we see things relatively.

I'm not saying that. We cannot know how teams show up, and we certainly can't use the game's outcome as a teetering point on which to bend to fit our pre-designed narratives.

My comment was in regards as to whether teams show up or not; not if they win. I believe you brought usce and UGA into it. UGA should have waxed Nebraska. It's easy to come to a conclusion when you have been watching football the entire year. The Alabama game in 08 was a prime example when Utah beat them. No way was Utah better.

Tebowism0823 · 01-02-2013, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

The point isn't that the teams aren't good - or even that the defenses aren't good - it's that they could be artificially inflated by playing relatively weak SEC offenses.

And I think there's evidence to that both during and after the season. Every SEC team but Miss St. gave up 20% or more yards in their bowl than they averaged against SEC opponents.

The fact can also be made that their opponents had more opportunity to study for this game.