SEC East preseason media vote

Georgia, as you would expect, is the overwhelming favorite to win the division.

I can’t wait to hear from the guy who voted for UT.

***************************************************************************

UPDATE:  You’ll be shocked, shocked to learn that ‘Bama is picked to win the conference.

Somebody will have to explain to me how Mizzou didn’t get a vote to win the division, but did to win the SEC.

41 Comments

Filed under Media Punditry/Foibles, SEC Football

41 responses to “SEC East preseason media vote

  1. Greg

    Eastern Champ had to forfeit all wins, MIZZOU is runner-up. Drew Lock and his fast pace offense beats the shat out of Bama.

    Like

  2. Otto

    Hanging chads?

    Like

  3. gastr1

    The real question is how Tennessee was blanked on that SEC Champion thing after clearly taking the SEC East.

    Like

  4. ChiliDawg

    Everyone is sleeping on South Carolina, I tell ya!

    Like

  5. Argondawg

    Not a single first team SEC player? Huh?

    Like

  6. Derek

    Bama’s run comes to an end on 12/1/18.

    Like

    • Greg

      It came to an end last year. If YO ass can’t win your division or conference, U got NO bidness in the playoffs IYAM. Otherwise, no need for conference championship games.

      Like

      • ChiliDawg

        I’m sure 2007 Greg would have felt the same way.

        Like

        • Greg

          Sure, why wouldn’t I??

          Like

          • ChiliDawg

            If you would have argued in 2007 that if you didn’t win your division you didn’t deserve to play for the championship, you would likely be the only Georgia fan on the planet who felt that way.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Derek

              Put me in the camp that “deserves” got nothing to do with it.

              What are the best teams? If your “deserve” selection isn’t equal or better than the one we know is really good, take the really good team.

              UGA was the best team in the country at the end of 2007.

              Liked by 1 person

            • Greg

              Love to see the dawgs in there every year, but that is not happening. Just like to see a fair system, or as fair as you can get. You are making my argument for me, but not surprised….you probably never been accused of being too smart. Think about it…

              Like

              • ChiliDawg

                I’m not sure who you’re addressing or what the fuck you’re talking about, honestly.Do you?

                Like

                • Greg

                  LOL!!!..just a little nudge for you is all it takes, probably an innate thing…..but at least try to work on it or pretend.

                  So, here you go:

                  1) The argument against Georgia in ’07 was that we did not win our conference or division…..hold Bama to the same standards and not let them in either.

                  2) If the ultimate goal is to win the MNC, why have conference championship games?? Apparently it did not mean much in ’18, but it did in ’07.

                  3) We played one more game than Bama last year, not equal imo.

                  4) If we are going by the “eye test” or “deserving”. Georgia should have been in ’07. But they were not & I don’t disagree as to why. Just be consistent in your selection of teams, throw the system out or make it a free for all.

                  5) We already proved we were the best in the SEC, why give Bama a chance in the national scene. It’s a “national” playoff, Bama could not make it past their division, much less the conference. Otherwise, division & conference champs mean nothing….

                  Of course I wanted Georgia in the playoffs in ’07. But under the current format, if you can’t win your division/conference….you shouldn’t be in imo…..conference champs only.

                  Like

                • ChiliDawg

                  They were two completely different systems in 2007 and 2017, you idiot. You’re comparing an apple and an orange and bitching that they don’t taste the same.

                  Like

                • 1) The argument against Georgia in ’07 was that we did not win our conference or division…

                  The argument against Georgia was that it wasn’t one of the top two teams in the BCS standings.

                  Like

                • Greg

                  You may be right, but if Georgia won their conference…it seems to me they would have been ranked # 2 and in it. My whole point is, if you can’t win your conference…you should not be in it. With 2 teams or even 4 for the right to play in the MNCG.

                  I do not believe we should see two from the same conference. They (Bama) should have been eliminated when they couldn’t win their conference.

                  It’s national, make it national and put the best 4 conference champs in it. If it ever gets to a higher number than 4, it may be different for me.

                  Like

                • LOL… I “may” be right, eh?

                  Like

                • Cojones

                  Yall are gonna like 8 teams. That would take care of all the “arguments”. 🙂

                  Like

                • Greg

                  The points stands, if Georgia would have won their conference in ’07, they more than likely would have been ranked #2 in those polls you linked….and in the MNCG. Georgia didn’t. Bama did not this past year either, they should have sat their asses at home.

                  Like

                • Uglydawg

                  Greg..addressing #5.
                  It’s a four team playoff. The committee has to select the 4 best teams. It’s possible and is often reality (as in last year) that a conference would have two of the best four. It’s not about who won what..it’s about who is the best. Alabama and Georgia were the best .
                  You’re inadvertently siding with UCF’s claim here, no?

                  Like

                • Greg

                  Yes, I knew about #5.

                  Like

                • Bob

                  Got to agree with Greg here. Dawgs didn’t deserve it in 07, just like Bama didn’t in 11 or 17 or Ohio State in 16. Win your freaking Division or shut up. Especially true for a team that has played a total of 4 non conference road games this whole century.

                  My only issue in 07 was that the pompous media idiots who deemed Georgia shouldn’t play for the title were the same jerks who were on their hands and knees pleading for an Ohio State-Michigan rematch in 06.

                  Like

                • Jim

                  The argument against UGA in 2007 was that we lost to two bad teams we had no business losing to. Iirc one of them was a blow out. We controlled our own destiny. It was classic Richt sh*t the bed games. I would say it was the canary in the coal mine, but that was the Sugar Bowl against West Va after the 2005 season

                  Like

                • Tony Barnfart

                  ^^This. The comparisons are ludicrous if you take your Dawg glasses off. I was at the UT game… they skull fucked us about as bad as the 2008 blackout. It was the worst experience i’ve ever had. Our 2007 team would be like this year’s Ohio State but remove them actually winning the league.

                  Like

                • Greg

                  There were all kind of arguments back then…and yes, that was one of them. So was the dawgs not winning their division/conference. I am pretty sure that close losses would not have mattered either. Wins take care of most everything….win your conference and most doubt is removed, BCS rankings also get higher.

                  Not doing any of that was good enough to keep us out in ’07…and it should have been good enough to keep Bama out last year. No matter the 2 versus 4 team argument. Otherwise, conference championship games don’t mean shat. It’s a national championship, when you win the conference…teams like Bama should have been eliminated. I want to see the best 4 conference champs going at it. No need to bring a Bama back into it, the.ve been eliminated already. Again, if it gets to be more than 4 teams, I may change my opinion…..JMO.

                  Thinks there is a media bias when it comes to Bama, God forbid that the bias would spread to the refs in a championship game.. :>).

                  Like

  7. Xon

    To be clear, all it takes to vote is to be someone that was issued a credential and came to the event, right? Maybe some Uruguayan soccer blogger came as a joke and didn’t know his votes didn’t make any sense.

    Like

  8. W Cobb Dawg

    I’ll go out on a limb and guess the vote for utk wasn’t Aaron Murray.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Godawg

    The good news is that the media picks it wrong almost every year…

    Like

    • Cojones

      Who was voting during the week when, on the TV screen during Media Days, they had Georgia as the favorite to win the SEC(46%), ‘Bama second(42%) and Auburn third(12%)? Was that FPI ranking?

      Like

  10. Russ

    Love it. More motivation for the players.

    Like

  11. Uglydawg

    Kentucky’s 1 makes more sense to me than Tennessee’s 1.
    Both of those votes illustrate the futility in having human polls on CFB .
    There will always be dumb ass homers.
    And the fact that someone picked Mizzo to win the SEC without winning the SECE first just reiterates the point.

    Like

  12. PTC DAWG

    Looks like about 25% of the writers picked UGA to win the SEC…we’re moving on up. Kirby is on it.

    Like

  13. UGA '97

    “….Georgia comes in a distant 2nd…”

    All the same voters just somehow suddenly forgot how they gushed over the last 9 months about us catching up to Bama. Just couldn’t put their money where their ballot mouth is. Reminder: Tua has not been through the grind of entire SEC season yet. Just sayin’

    Like

  14. Cousin Eddie

    Somebody will have to explain to me how Mizzou didn’t get a vote to win the division, but did to win the SEC. — Electoral College thing, they don’t necessarily vote the same as the popular vote or something like that, really doesn’t make sense to “normal” people.

    Like