NCAA Playoff Committee Rankings 2014 (Unranked)

[Guest]

How about let's put ND in the SEC West the last four or five years and see where they end up. How about let's be honest and take our "bias" out and ask ourselves this... if ND was in the SEC West division this year, where would they be? What's their record. And to be fair, pick the two worst East division opponents to round out your SEC schedule. Put WV on a neutral site and take the other two Bama games to fill out your entire schedule.

What's ND's record at the end of the year?

Bitch all you want ACamp but here's the facts. ND doesn't have a win against a top 25 team. Sorry... but your team lost to Fla State. BS call? Maybe... maybe not. But the call was made. The rest of the Irish opponents thus far have 3-5 losses. Just who in the hell has the Irish beat to even be considered to be at the #10 spot at this point?

All this BS SEC bias bullshit is simply that. BS.

Beat them on the field of play or drown in your "conspiracy" theories. It appears that the selection committee - who is comprised of people who are from EVERY conference - watch football games. It's really not that effing hard to see who is the better teams. Yes, there are those that will fall in that category of toss ups... but to repeatedly post that the SEC is overrated is BS. You know it, I know it, the committee knows it, and everyone else on this board knows it. It just seems you can't accept it due to your "bias."

So... to end my rant... what would the Irish's record be at the end of the year if they played in the SEC West. Use Bama's schedule to make your prediction if it makes it easier for you. Be honest in your answer... don't be a homer. This should be fun.

It would be pretty good considering out of conference schedules in the SEC are a joke and nobody knows how good they are. That is why most of us want a real playoff so we can settle it on the field, which is exactly what never happens in college football. That's why all polling and committee systems to date have been flawed pieces of shit. The only way to settle it on the field is to get rid of these rankings and SETTLE IT ON THE FIELD in a multi team playoff format .

 

[IrishLion]

The SEC hasn't played anyone of note outside of their own conference yet this year, so we don't know how they ACTUALLY compare to the best teams from other conferences.

They're getting the benefit of the doubt for beating each other up already, when we really don't know how good any of them are because they haven't seen any worthy non-SEC squads in OOC play. (Maybe Clemson-Georgia and WVU-Bama)

Ole Miss and LSU have garbage offenses, Mississippi State is basically a one-trick pony with a suspect defense, Auburn is very good but got thrashed by the Mississippi State offense. Bama and Georgia are the best of the SEC, IMO, and a lot of that has to do with the fact that they played decent (meh) teams OOC.

 

[T Town Tommy]

It would be pretty good considering out of conference schedules in the SEC are a joke and nobody knows how good they are. That is why most of us want a real playoff so we can settle it on the field, which is exactly what never happens in college football. That's why all polling and committee systems to date have been flawed pieces of shit. The only way to settle it on the field is to get rid of these rankings and SETTLE IT ON THE FIELD in a multi team playoff format .

I would love an eight team playoff. But the SEC bias BS needs to stop. The conference has proven time and again that they are without a doubt the best conference and the deepest conference every year. They prove that on the field.

 

[IrishLion]

I would love an eight team playoff. But the SEC bias BS needs to stop. The conference has proven time and again that they are without a doubt the best conference and the deepest conference every year. They prove that on the field.

Except for last year.

 

[Cali_domer]

Finish out the season. LSU on the road, Miss St and Auburn at home. Then throw in GA for the SEC CG.

LSU We can win on the road, Miss St Please, overrated and Auburn Toss up at home. Then throw in GA for the SEC CG UGA lost to South Carolina man.

SEC is a great conference but come on . We would compete in all those games and not get blown out. I 'm no where near a homer either I am a pessimist(Big one) usually.

 

[ACamp1900]

I would love an eight team playoff. But the SEC bias BS needs to stop. The conference has proven time and again that they are without a doubt the best conference and the deepest conference every year. They prove that on the field.

While having losing records to the big east, PAC 12 and big 12 during their "era of dominance" ...


Sure boss

SEC bias is real, I saw it in my cornfield last night... (Photos coming)

 

[T Town Tommy]

The SEC hasn't played anyone of note outside of their own conference yet this year, so we don't know how they ACTUALLY compare to the best teams from other conferences.

They're getting the benefit of the doubt for beating each other up already, when we really don't know how good any of them are because they haven't seen any worthy non-SEC squads in OOC play. (Maybe Clemson-Georgia and WVU-Bama)

Ole Miss and LSU have garbage offenses, Mississippi State is basically a one-trick pony with a suspect defense, Auburn is very good but got thrashed by the Mississippi State offense. Bama and Georgia are the best of the SEC, IMO, and a lot of that has to do with the fact that they played decent (meh) teams OOC.

But on this board all I am hearing from posters is SEC bias BS. Every year it's the same thing... and every year it's the same results. To bash the teams in the SEC and not take a honest look at ND and who they have played this year is really not fair either. I think most on here know that the SEC West is ridiculous and having to play each other is difficult at best. All I hear is how everyone is for the SEC but against ND. I don't buy that. I just think most people - SEC fans or not - realize where the best teams are. They may not like it but they know.

 

[Grahambo]

Finish out the season. LSU on the road, Miss St and Auburn at home. Then throw in GA for the SEC CG.

LSU sucks, Miss State is overrated, and Auburn would be 50/50 since we did beat (yeah, fuck that penalty) FSU and FSU beat Auburn in the Natty, I'll take my chances.

Call me biased towards Notre Dame all you want but since most 'experts' want to bullshit their way through a shotty excuse in dogging ND, I should balance it out.

And ND does have a Top 25 win on their schedule, Stanford was #14.

'Bama, to me, is still the team to beat in the SEC.

 

[T Town Tommy]

While having losing records to the big east, PAC 12 and big 12 during their "era of dominance" ...


Sure boss

SEC bias is real, I saw it in my cornfield last night... (Photos coming)

Again ACamp... the era of SEC dominance started around 2004 or so. What's the records from then.

And you know... and I know... where ND would fall in the SEC most years. Bash all you want. Make your snide comments all you want. While you are doing that... don't let the honesty of your answers eat at you. It's only football. And it's played very hard where our cornfields are.

 

[IrishLion]

Best case scenario:

Two SEC teams in the playoff, both lose in their semi-final games.

I think this is the year we see that the SEC isn't as far ahead as people seem to think. If Ole Miss and Mississippi State are the top of the conference, I'm not impressed.

 

[ACamp1900]

NDs record would improve almost every year over the past twenty years if they played those schedules with a few year exception when the sec WAS that much better,... no question in my mind at all...

But just to help, because you look lost....

SECTalk.com - SEC Football, Basketball, Baseball and Recruiting News and Discussion

 

[Cali_domer]

Again ACamp... the era of SEC dominance started around 2004 or so. What's the records from then.

And you know... and I know... where ND would fall in the SEC most years. Bash all you want. Make your snide comments all you want. While you are doing that... don't let the honesty of your answers eat at you. It's only football. And it's played very hard where our cornfields are.

In Weis and Willingham era? Dead last... In Holtz and Kelly era? I like our chances. If Missou can win I think we would be fine as soon as we started oversigning.

 

[Guest]

Best case scenario:

Two SEC teams in the playoff, both lose in their semi-final games.

I think this is the year we see that the SEC isn't as far ahead as people seem to think. If Ole Miss and Mississippi State are the top of the conference, I'm not impressed.

It's a down year for the SEC. We could compete with any of their top teams and do fine. There are no dominant SEC teams this year. I am not afraid of either Mississippi team.

 

[T Town Tommy]

NDs record would improve just about every year over the past twenty years if they played those schedules no question in my mind at all...

But just to help, because you look lost....

SECTalk.com - SEC Football, Basketball, Baseball and Recruiting News and Discussion

I give the Irish the benefit of the doubt and actually cheer for them when they play. But to come here every day and read all the conspiracy theories on why the SEC is given preferential treatment and ND is not does get old. Watch football games. Don't get caught up in conference labels. Watch the trenches. Who wins those battles? Who loses them? It becomes obvious very quickly which teams rise and which teams come up short.

For the record, this year I thought the Pac 12 had a chance to close the gap to the SEC. But I was wrong. They have been very unimpressive and teams like Oregon and ASU would struggle against physical teams. Their high flying offenses would be standing on the sidelines watching because their defenses would be getting owned. The ACC sucks... even FSU. The B1G is a jokeoutside of maybe Mich St. The Big 12 - no defense, light in the trenches. ND? Looks decent but has not been impressive in any of their wins. Their loss to FSU helped them but there is a reason FSU isn't getting much respect this year. They aren't very good.

 

[Cali_domer]

I give the Irish the benefit of the doubt and actually cheer for them when they play. But to come here every day and read all the conspiracy theories on why the SEC is given preferential treatment and ND is not does get old. Watch football games. Don't get caught up in conference labels. Watch the trenches. Who wins those battles? Who loses them? It becomes obvious very quickly which teams rise and which teams come up short.

For the record, this year I thought the Pac 12 had a chance to close the gap to the SEC. But I was wrong. They have been very unimpressive and teams like Oregon and ASU would struggle against physical teams. Their high flying offenses would be standing on the sidelines watching because their defenses would be getting owned. The ACC sucks... even FSU. The B1G is a jokeoutside of maybe Mich St. The Big 12 - no defense, light in the trenches. ND? Looks decent but has not been impressive in any of their wins. Their loss to FSU helped them but there is a reason FSU isn't getting much respect this year. They aren't very good.

Most be getting some respect they're ranked second.

 

[IrishinSyria]

In Weis and Willingham era? Dead last... In Holtz and Kelly era? I like our chances. If Missou can win I think we would be fine as soon as we started oversigning.

Weis was 1 and 1 against the SEC during his tenure. Not a huge sample size, but he would have done just fine. Ty was 1-0, and he beat one of the SEC's best in his worst year.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Most be getting some respect they're ranked second.

Let's see where they fall to if they lose a game. I would say out of the top 10 based on the dismal ACC and their own on the field performance.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Weis was 1 and 1 against the SEC during his tenure. Not a huge sample size, but he would have done just fine. Ty was 1-0, and he beat one of the SEC's best in his worst year.

Let that sink in. Weis and Ty. In the SEC.

 

[stlnd01]

This is silly.
The SEC is the best conference in the country over the last decade or so. It's not "bias" to acknowledge this. They won six national championships in a row. They routinely win their bigger out-of-conference games. They also do pretty well in bowl games.
Are they all awesome? No. (see Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Miss. State until this year).
Can this create an annoying echo chamber that puffs up not-so-good teams? Sure. (see Texas A&M, 2014)
Does it get tiresome? Of course.
But it would actually be surprising if they weren't the best, between their recruiting grounds, what they're willing to spend on coaches and facilities, and the - shall we say - flexible approach to academics and ethics that some SEC programs take (though there are certainly rivals in that regard, ahem, FSU).
Sure, there are other good teams out there. Some of them might be better some years. But overall, the SEC's the best conference there is and it's really not close. Who else would you even suggest?

 

[Woneone]

The problem is an entire conference of teams get credit for how great a few teams in the conference are each year (and it rotates).

Earlier in the thread, someone mentioned that the SEC "domination" started around 2007. So, I decided to take a look. There were 12 teams at that time in the SEC. I removed the top 4. Why? Because they are usually really good teams (I should have only removed 3, and maybe I'll update this tomorrow to reflect it), no one should dispute that, but the rest of the conference? Now, I did this really quick, and it's 12:30am, so please feel free to correct my mistakes. Also, because it's so late, I stopped after 3 years.

For each team, I listed games against other power conference foes (with an 'L' or 'W' in front of each). Some I put the word "Bowl" after, as when I started doing this, I was all crazy and had something else in mind, but I'm tired...

Also listed for each team are the "cupcakes" they played that year. After each year, there is a win-loss total vs the power conferences, total win-loss, and number of cupcake wins.

2007 - Top 4 Georgia / Tennessee/ LSU / Auburn
Florida (9-4) - W FSU, L Michigan Bowl (Western Kentucky, Troy, FAU)
Kentucky (8-5) - W Louisville, W FSU Bowl (EKU, Kent State, FAU)
South Carolina (6-6) - W North Carolina, L Clemson (L lafayette, SC State)
Vandy (5-7) - L Wake Forest (Richmond, Eastern Mich, Miami OH)
Bama (7-6) - L Florida State, W Colorado Bowl
Arkansas (8-5) - L Missouri Bowl (Troy, North Texas, Tennessee - Chattanooga, Florida International)
Ole Miss (3-9) - L Missouri, (Memphis, Louisiana Tech, Northwestern State)
MSU (8-5) - L West Virginia, W Central Florida Bowl (Tulane, Gardner-Webb, Alabama Birmingham)

W: 53 L: 47
Against Power Conf: 6-7 (I gave them Central Florida)
Cupcake Wins: 21
-----------------------------------------------------

2008 - Top 4 Florida / Bama / Ole Miss / Georgia
Vandy (7-6) - L Wake Forest, L Duke, W Boston College Bowl, (Miami OH, Rice)
South Carolina (7-6) - W NC State, L Clemson, L Iowa Bowl (Wofford, Alabama Birmingham)
Tennessee (5-7) - L UCLA, L Wyoming (Alabama Birmingham, Northern Illinois)
Kentucky (7-6) - W Louisville, W East Carolina Bowl (Norfolk State, Middle Tennessee, Western Kentuck)
LSU (8-5) - W Georgia Tech Bowl (App State, North Texas, Tulane, Troy)
Arkansas (5-7) - L Texas (Western illinois, Louisiana-Monroe, Tulsa)
Auburn (5-7) - L West Virgina (Louisiana Monroe, Southern Mississippi, Tennesse martin)
MSU (4-8) - L Georgia Tech (Louisiana Tech, Southeastern Louisiana, Middle Tennessee State)

W: 48 L: 52
Against Power Conf: 5-9
Cupcake Wins: 23
---------------------------------------------------------


2009 - Top 4 Bama / Florida / Ole Miss / LSU
Georgia (8-5) - L Ok. State, W ASU, W G Tech, W A&M Bowl (Tennessee Tech)
South Carolina (7-6) - W NCState, W Clemson, L UConn Bowl (FAU, South Carolina State)
Tenn (7-6)- L UCLA, L VT (W. Kentucky, Ohio, Memphis)
Kent (7-6) - W Louisville, L Clemson (Miami OH, LMU, Eastern Kentucky)
Vandy (2-10) - L Army, L Georgia Tech (Western Carolina, Rice)
Ark (8-5) - W TA&M, W East Carolina Bowl (Missouri State, Eastern Michigan, Troy)
Aub (8-5) - W WVU, W NW Bowl (Furman, Ball State, Louisiana Tech)
MSU (5-7) - L Georiga Tech, L Houston (Jackson State, Middle Tenn. State)

W: 52 L:50
Against Power Conf: 9-8
Cupcake Wins: 19
----------------------------------------

Again, I may have royally screwed some of this up, so feel free to correct my mistakes. I'm tired, but I wanted to at least get through 3 years.

I guess my overall point is, the conference gets so much credit for the teams at the top, and rightfully so, but let's not pretend the conference from top to bottom is always some juggernaut.

 

[irishog77]

How does having the best team equate to having the best conference? That's like claiming the Mountain West was a great conference because Boise St went 12-0 one year, then beat OU in the Fiesta Bowl. Or claiming it about Utah and their conference, then witnessing them beat alabama in the Sugar Bowl.

Dominating the trenches is the mark of a good team? Ok. ND dominated both trenches, on the road, against fsu. fsu dominated the trenches in their 2 games against teams from the sec last year.

And finally, refusing to bow down at the altar of sec dominion over all doesn't mean anything said regarding the conference isn't true, nor does it mean that there isn't an appreciation and acknowledgement that the sec has done very well for the past ~10 years.

 

[T Town Tommy]

The problem is an entire conference of teams get credit for how great a few teams in the conference are each year (and it rotates).

Again, I may have royally screwed some of this up, so feel free to correct my mistakes. I'm tired, but I wanted to at least get through 3 years.

I guess my overall point is, the conference gets so much credit for the teams at the top, and rightfully so, but let's not pretend the conference from top to bottom is always some juggernaut.

Every conference is going to have the celler dwellers. Someone has to lose in the conference when they play conference games. Simple mathmatics. There are several ways to identify whether a conference has depth year over year. The SEC won seven straight BCS championships. Of those seven straight, four different teams won them. Four different teams from the same conference. Four. That's elite depth. The second way to measure depth is how did the middling teams in the conference perform? Again, the teams that typically fall in this category in the SEC faired extremely well against other conferences in bowl games. The lower tier teams in the SEC? Vandy, UK, Arkansas. All three were represented well in bowl games within that ten year stretch. All three were ranked in the top 25 on occasion. All three had big wins over teams within the SEC that fall under the more elite category. That's depth.

Now, probably the second best conference is the Pac 12. Over that same stretch I believe there are only two teams that have winning records in conference - Oregon and Stanford. Every other team in the Pac 12 has had some seasons with overall losing records. UCLA, USC, Washington, Arizona, Arizona State. Good some years... horrible a lot of other years. So... the Pac 12 depth during the era of SEC dominance is very weak and outside of Oregon and Stanford pretty much a joke.

The ACC. FSU has ruled the ACC since joining. Clemson, Va Tech, Miami, have had some good years sprinkled in with terrible years. The rest of the conference is horrendous.

The B1G. Nothing really needs to be said about them since that conference has been a joke for the better part of the last decade.

The Big 12. Some decent teams but overall no team is elite - OU being the closest since the Texas falloff.

Bowl records and head to head against other conferences are typically the only way to measure conference strength. And with that, the last ten years the SEC has dominated both. And not simply the elite SEC teams. The middling teams have faired very well, as have the three teams mentioned that typcially fall at or near the bottom.

 

[T Town Tommy]

How does having the best team equate to having the best conference? That's like claiming the Mountain West was a great conference because Boise St went 12-0 one year, then beat OU in the Fiesta Bowl. Or claiming it about Utah and their conference, then witnessing them beat alabama in the Sugar Bowl.

Dominating the trenches is the mark of a good team? Ok. ND dominated both trenches, on the road, against fsu. fsu dominated the trenches in their 2 games against teams from the sec last year.

And finally, refusing to bow down at the altar of sec dominion over all doesn't mean anything said regarding the conference isn't true, nor does it mean that there isn't an appreciation and acknowledgement that the sec has done very well for the past ~10 years.

Again, the only reason right now that FSU is where they are is the fact that they are undefeated and the defending champs. They should get the benefit of the doubt... to which most of the so called CFB "experts" have voiced their FSU doubt repeatedly. If they lose a game, I would not be shocked to see them fall out of the top 10.

FSU did not dominate Auburn in the trenches last year. Auburn's defensive line tore FSU up. And to that fact, Auburn was by far the best team FSU has faced last year or this year. And outside claw boy pulling off a last minute drive, they would have lost to Auburn... a team not even ranked to start the season last year.

The last ten years speak for themselves. You can easily do your own research and find out which conference has dominated the college football scene. Bowl games, head to head against other conferences, number of draft picks, and on and on. Don't expect people to bow down. But to state it didn't exist when in fact it has is either short sightedness or simple envy. That's not even debateable. You may not like it... but you can't deny it.

edit: You not meaning you personally but rather people in general.

 

[irishtrain]

This is silly.
The SEC is the best conference in the country over the last decade or so. It's not "bias" to acknowledge this. They won six national championships in a row. They routinely win their bigger out-of-conference games. They also do pretty well in bowl games.
Are they all awesome? No. (see Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Miss. State until this year).
Can this create an annoying echo chamber that puffs up not-so-good teams? Sure. (see Texas A&M, 2014)
Does it get tiresome? Of course.
But it would actually be surprising if they weren't the best, between their recruiting grounds, what they're willing to spend on coaches and facilities, and the - shall we say - flexible approach to academics and ethics that some SEC programs take (though there are certainly rivals in that regard, ahem, FSU).
Sure, there are other good teams out there. Some of them might be better some years. But overall, the SEC's the best conference there is and it's really not close. Who else would you even suggest?

Preaching to the choir. Nobody disputes the product on the field. The reason why the playoff has been developed is because the rest of the country is trying to combat the very ethics (or lack of) that enables these teams to prosper. Every time I bring this subject up to my 'sons of the south friends' they all just shake their heads and say of course we know that. Fans of these schools are not bothered in the least about how they go about their winning. They got the special sauce baby and like all their coaches say 'were looking for men of character and leaders in our locker rooms. Pathetic man just pathetic.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Preaching to the choir. Nobody disputes the product on the field. The reason why the playoff has been developed is because the rest of the country is trying to combat the very ethics (or lack of) that enables these teams to prosper. Every time I bring this subject up to my 'sons of the south friends' they all just shake their heads and say of course we know that. Fans of these schools are not bothered in the least about how they go about their winning. They got the special sauce baby and like all their coaches say 'were looking for men of character and leaders in our locker rooms. Pathetic man just pathetic.

The playoff format was initially developed by the Mike Slive. Only the ACC agreed with Slive at the time he proposed it. Every other conference, and ND, did not agree with it. As far as ethics, I believe every school as issues with that. Some more than others. But no school is immune. Not Alabama. Not even Notre Dame.

 

[MNIrishman]

The North will rise again!

(Anyone recognize the new avatar?)

 

[Guest]

Every conference is going to have the celler dwellers. Someone has to lose in the conference when they play conference games. Simple mathmatics. There are several ways to identify whether a conference has depth year over year. The SEC won seven straight BCS championships. Of those seven straight, four different teams won them. Four different teams from the same conference. Four. That's elite depth. The second way to measure depth is how did the middling teams in the conference perform? Again, the teams that typically fall in this category in the SEC faired extremely well against other conferences in bowl games. The lower tier teams in the SEC? Vandy, UK, Arkansas. All three were represented well in bowl games within that ten year stretch. All three were ranked in the top 25 on occasion. All three had big wins over teams within the SEC that fall under the more elite category. That's depth.

Now, probably the second best conference is the Pac 12. Over that same stretch I believe there are only two teams that have winning records in conference - Oregon and Stanford. Every other team in the Pac 12 has had some seasons with overall losing records. UCLA, USC, Washington, Arizona, Arizona State. Good some years... horrible a lot of other years. So... the Pac 12 depth during the era of SEC dominance is very weak and outside of Oregon and Stanford pretty much a joke.

The ACC. FSU has ruled the ACC since joining. Clemson, Va Tech, Miami, have had some good years sprinkled in with terrible years. The rest of the conference is horrendous.

The B1G. Nothing really needs to be said about them since that conference has been a joke for the better part of the last decade.

The Big 12. Some decent teams but overall no team is elite - OU being the closest since the Texas falloff.

Bowl records and head to head against other conferences are typically the only way to measure conference strength. And with that, the last ten years the SEC has dominated both. And not simply the elite SEC teams. The middling teams have faired very well, as have the three teams mentioned that typcially fall at or near the bottom.

You danced around his analysis of the SEC mediocre record outside their conference (outside the top 3-4 teams). What this means is that while the SEC has good teams every year, most of the teams are average at best ON THE FIELD OF PLAY and the inflated rankings from them playing each other (and the cupcake OOC schedule they play ever year) leads to over-ranking the conference every year. This has been discussed on many CFB boards outside of this one and nobody from the SEC has had an effective counter argument. They just dance like you do.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Don't know if anyone has heard this but it's Jeff Long making excuses on the Dan Patirck's show

Video: Jeff Long Makes It Clear That Notre Dame’s “Body Of Work” Has Not Impressed Committee | College Spun – Social. Local. Consumable. College Sports.

We haven't beaten anybody really, and I get that. But we did lose, on a questionable flag, to the #2 team at their house. If that didn't happen I would understand the arguments against us. But with that loss, and how it happened, paired with who is above us that clearly have a lower body of work, it's bullshit.

 

[Irish Insanity]

All this BS SEC bias bullshit is simply that. BS.

I'll start by saying I think you guys deserved a better ranking, just based on the eye test. The SEC is the toughest conference. Everyone bitching about the SEC bias all the time is overplayed. BUT, if you think there is no SEC bias, you're s crazy. In the south football isn't a sport, it's a lifestyle. These networks know what sells. That's why they are successful. And not pushing what sells and what they see as a better, more marketable, product would be absurd. But you're statement is what's bullshit. There is SEC bias, anyone who doesn't see it is ignoring the obvious.

 

[Guest]

I'll start by saying I think you guys deserved a better ranking, just based on the eye test. The SEC is the toughest conference. Everyone bitching about the SEC bias all the time is overplayed. BUT, if you think there is no SEC bias, you're s crazy. In the south football isn't a sport, it's a lifestyle. These networks know what sells. That's why they are successful. And not pushing what sells and what they see as a better, more marketable, product would be absurd. But you're statement is what's bullshit. There is SEC bias, anyone who doesn't see it is ignoring the obvious.

The SEC tends to have a couple of very good teams every year which seems to rotate around a bit, with Alabama perennially in that mix. The rest of the conference is average at best against other conferences. This was documented in this thread and in several articles that have been written on the supposed greatness of the SEC top to bottom. Statistically, the SEC is average beyond their top couple of teams, and so the overhype for the SEC and the way the conference dominates the opening polls has no basis in statistical reality.