The advantages to playing football in the SEC should be obvious (and, if not, one of the league’s many supporters will fill you in on the particulars).
Football comes first at every SEC school outside of Lexington, Ky. Its teams play in the biggest stadiums with have the biggest budgets. The Program always has outsized importance in the regional culture. All of the league's teams have boatloads of top recruits in their backyards (sorry again, Kentucky).
But the biggest advantage to playing in the SEC is getting the benefit of the doubt. It’s always a given that the SEC is the best league. When the league is having a lackluster year it’s only conceded that it’s a “down year” for the SEC but it’s still the best, or that there is no real dominant team anywhere, or that the SEC still has the best team, and so on.
That’s what’s happening now. Auburn, Arkansas, Missouri and Tennessee all began the season in the Top 25. They’ve all been exposed as bad (Auburn and Arkansas) or mediocre (Missouri and Tennessee) but this doesn’t hurt the reputation of the league. Those teams mostly have been replaced in the rankings by SEC teams who beat them: Texas A&M, Mississippi State and Florida.
Mississippi State moved into the rankings by beating Auburn. Florida did so with a (lucky) victory over Tennessee. At least Texas A&M has a quality non-conference victory against Arizona St---oh, wait. Never mind.
Tennessee and Missouri were supposed to at least challenge Georgia in the East. The Vols have two losses and no quality victories. Missouri stayed in the rankings after beating two cupcakes and escaping with a home W against UConn; losing at Kentucky finally forced voters to admit the Tigers aren't very good.
That kind of circular reasoning that has always irked detractors of the SEC-is-best narrative. There's also the hubris: For reasons that can only be attributed to undeserved hype, Auburn (8-5 in 2014 and losing lots of talent) was picked to win the West and its (inexperienced) quarterback was touted as a Heisman candidate. Jeremy Johnson was benched after three games (has that ever happened to a Heisman candidate?) and Auburn has lost twice.
(The Tigers still got votes in this week's coaches' poll. If interns are filling out those ballots, get smarter interns.)
Auburn's flop hasn't slowed the SEC narrative. The polls matter less than they once did , but they still matter. The College Football Playoff selection committee's members are influenced by perception, and the perception that the SEC is best does not seem to have been affected by the league last year not putting a team in the national championship game for the first time since 2006.
Not coincidentally, that also was the first time the SEC didn't get an unofficial auto bid into the title game. The SEC earned its rep during the BCS era and, sure enough, the BCS formula would have put Florida State and Alabama in last season's national championship game. The Buckeyes were able to recover from their loss to Virginia Tech and win the national championship. They wouldn't have gotten that chance under the old formula because the Big Ten, like every other league, doesn't get the same benefit of the doubt from the public as the SEC (though maybe Michigan suddenly getting respect is a sign of some change).
If the SEC can’t get a team in the title game again this season, maybe that will change the narrative somewhat. I doubt it, though. The league is considered best even when there's evidence that it isn't. Hey, it's good to be SEC.
About the Author
