Back-to-back smack

Food for thought from John Pennington:

Nick Saban is now a legend and Alabama is back to being its dynastic self.  Both are piling up BCS crystal footballs like they’re auditioning for “Hoarders.”  Yet there’s one thing Saban hasn’t done.  There’s one thing Alabama hasn’t done.

That’s win back-to-back Southeastern Conference titles.

Think about it.  Saban has won a BCS crown in four of his last eight seasons as a college coach.  He and Alabama have now won back-to-back national titles.  But they haven’t repeated as SEC champs during that run.  No one has since Tennessee won the league in consecutive years in 1997 and 1998.

Again, think about that.  It’s literally easier to win the BCS championship than it is the SEC championship.

Does that mean Fulmer was a better coach than Saban?

This should make for some great cocktail party talk the next time Slive and Delany get together.


Filed under SEC Football

10 responses to “Back-to-back smack

  1. JT

    the Ol’ Ball coach, “It is easier to win the National Championship than it is to win the SEC, just ask Nick Saban.”

  2. Russ

    Hilarious! Suck it, Big Televen nerds!

  3. Will Trane

    What the “stats” say it the SEC is the best college football in the nation. Highly competitive week in and week out. That is why their stadiums are big and full. That is why there is so much eye candy in the stadiums.
    Plus, Senator, kindly put out the stats that LSU, A&M, and The DAWGS put up against Bama’s defensive. Compare those squads and games against Notre Dame.
    Notre Dame, Holtz, Musburger, Herbstreet, and company are a farce and are so damn biased. It is not about dynasty or dominace. It is about the universities, their athletes, and their coaches. It is about respect and proper recoginition of what they did. Listen closely to those young men and their coaching staffs. It is all about the level of their play and having fun. I do not think they care about the awards and etc, I think they play, coach, and motivated about their level and performance. SEC titles are more important to me, and I said that before, than national titles. Their is so much shennigans in the national titles and polls that they have become meaningless. Bama got the big crystal, but what they got was after Notre Dame’s ass and beat it to a pulp.
    We all heard how Bama had to back into the BCS re Oregon and K State.
    Frankly, I’m sick and damn tired of them.

    • Mayor of Dawgtown

      As bad as the BCS is, under the old system ND would have been crowned MNC by the media after plaing ang beating a middling team in a bowl. Hopefully, the new system will take some of the BS out of it. If ND had played a first round game against team # 3 or #4 instead of Bama they would have gotten knocked out that way, too.

      • That is so frighteningly true. They probably would have played Nebraska in the Fiesta Bowl and been crowned national champs.

        • Dawg19

          By “old system” I’m assuming you mean pre-BCS. If so, wouldn’t there have been a good chance that Notre Dame would have played Alabama in the Sugar Bowl?

          • Mayor of Dawgtown

            Under the old system the #1 team almost never played the #2 team in a bowl even when it was theoretically possible. That’s why the BCS came into being in the first place.

            • Dawg19

              Yeah, but it did happen. The 1988 Orange Bowl between #1 Oklahoma and #2 Miami comes to mind. Under the old system, Notre Dame wasn’t tied to any bowl but did wind up in the Sugar Bowl a few times. And we know why Alabama would have been there. So I figure that had as good or better chance of happening as any other matchup.

      • Keese

        Good point. More reason I’m looking forward to 4 team (or 8) team playoff

  4. Cojones

    Yes, The SEC is harder to win than the NC. Enough data exists to constitute proof.