SEC’s top players

This al.com slideshow of the SEC’s top players at each position – a total of 28 – is more informative than definitive in terms of noting where the top talent in the conference, given that it comes from an Alabama source.

Because it’s not Alabama that comes out on top, numbers wise.  Surprise!

  • Georgia 6
  • Alabama 5
  • Ole Miss 4
  • LSU 3
  • Florida 2
  • Mississippi State 2
  • Texas A & M 2
  • Auburn 1
  • Kentucky 1
  • South Carolina 1
  • Tennessee 1

I’m more surprised that Missouri doesn’t have a single entry than Georgia topping the list, to be honest.

What do y’all think?

19 Comments

Filed under SEC Football

19 responses to “SEC’s top players

  1. It’s the set-up for when we lose one game, Scarbinsky and the rest of Alabama media do Little Nicky’s bidding by writing of Mark Richt’s job security.

    Like

  2. Checked out the slideshow. Didn’t know that many top players were blueberries.

    Like

  3. If we had those 2 0ffensive lineman from Buford and lake city we’d really be looking nice.

    Like

  4. PansyTheDawg

    One thing I’ve found interesting is Auburn’s place in these lists compared to Auburn’s place in many preseason prediction lists. So many see Auburn in this coming CFB playoff, but at the same time, they also see Auburn as having middling talent as far as the SEC is concerned.

    Like

  5. Mike Cooley

    Yeah I know it. Do people think Gus is that brilliant? That’s funny to me. I don’t get all the Auburn love either. The way people seem to think that we can all just book the, and Tennessee being good makes no sense. Sgt. carter has a lot of people convinced but I’m not sure why. Recruiting means very little if you can’t do anything with those players. junior recruited well there. So what?

    Like

  6. South FL Dawg

    We need Malcolm Mitchell to get named to the post season list. If he does, this will be a fun year.

    Like

    • Cojones

      And our two great TEs are never mentioned. They should most definitely be there at the end of the year. Barring injury, Rome and Blazevich should have a great year in Schotty’s “new emphasis” system.

      Like

  7. doofusdawg

    Three or our guys are at two positions… still don’t know what Pruitt is going to do with them… in base much less nickel.

    Like

    • Uglydawg

      What’s so great about that is that as the year wears on and the defense gets bruised, battered and tired, Georgia should still be very strong and well rested at it’s defense’s core. Depth..it’s a good thing, esp at such a physicslly violent position. Wish wed had more at O line and especially at deep threat reciever positions.
      And while Georgia may have the most “top” players, it’s the second and third teamers being good enough to step in with little fall-off that sustains power.
      I wonder how the “second” and “third” best plays out…that would be even more telling, wouldn’t it?..esp. when all are put together in one graph.

      Like

      • Bazooka Joe

        Agree – that has always been south Carolinas problem. Their starters were usually good enough, but a very big drop off after that. And late in the season when the subs are used more and more, they would fade from the picture.

        Like

  8. Uglydawg

    What if you took the best three at each position…and assigned 3 points for first player, two for second and one for third…which team would compile the most points?..and then factor in 14 points for easiest schedule, 13 for next, etc. down to 1 for most difficult (and don’t miss the important factor of when and where games fall on the schedule..that can be huge)…..then factor in coaching…14 points and downward. The team with the most total points should be the favorite to win the SEC and be in the final 4.
    I would take a stab at it but I’m lazy . I almost feel as if I’ve had refreshments (somehow “refresh” could have a couple of letters out of order) on the front porch with Cojones this afternoon. Besides, I would be at a loss as to which players are the best, second, etc. Certainly it’s not an exact science..mostly opinion based..The schedule difficulty may very well be based on real data and science, however. coaching would be mostly based on opinion, hype and hogwash…but should take assistant coaches into account also.

    Like

  9. Scorpio Jones, III

    That Mizzou is ignored is more a comment on the source than the Tigers.

    Like

  10. Macallanlover

    The bigger issue (beyond subjective projections about future events) is the individual pieces do not correlate to the sum. You can see many All Star teams that just don’t fit together well. This is the type of team sport where have one dominant player (say in basketball) cannot guarantee success. The chemistry and way the players mix is the great unknown and can be as significant as the number of recruiting stars or returning starters.

    Like

  11. T L HOFF

    Its BS, what you do with the players you have is what counts, and Georgia is not at the top of that list

    Like