Best conference in 2008?

[TexanSam]

Which do you think is the best conference in 2008? Not over time, but this year. It could be a little early to truly say which one is best, but from a preseason perspective what do you guys think?

IMO, it's between the SEC and Big 12.

The SEC has 4 teams in the Top 11, but the Big 12 has 5 teams in the Top 15.

 

[YoungTexanFan]

It depends on if you want offense or defense. The Big 12 will give you firepower, while the SEC will typically give you defense. The Big 12 does have some very good defensive schools like OU and KU, but the SEC also has some good offenses that can keep up with just about anyone.

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

Tough to say. I look at it like this:

If I was a coach of my own team do I think I would be able to win more games playing in the Big XII or the SEC. Answer: BIG XII

If I was out of conference and had to get randomly paired with a non-conference game against either the Big XII or SEC, which one would I rather play? Answer: Big XII

Therefore, I think the SEC is still the better conference. But that's not saying the Big XII is weak by anymeans... I think they are closer now in competition level than in years past.

 

[TexansLucky13]

SEC > Big 12 > Everyone else

 

[nunusguy]

I dunno that much about college football, so here's my question: is it really the consensus now that its SEC & Big 12 one & two, respectively, and everyone else follows them ? I guess I was under the impression that the Big 12 was not thought to be superior to the PAC10 or Big 10 or ACC ?

 

[awtysst]

I dunno that much about college football, so here's my question: is it really the consensus now that its SEC & Big 12 one & two, respectively, and everyone else follows them ? I guess I was under the impression that the Big 12 was not thought to be superior to the PAC10 or Big 10 or ACC ?

I would say the consenus is that The SEC is the best football conference in the nation. Then it gets murky. Some people point to the Pac 10, but aside from USC the Pac 10 has been iffy the last decade. Some say the Big 10, but outside of Ohio State and Michigan, the rest is pretty average. The Big East is a group of relatively average teams. Therefore I say the Big XII. Oklahoma, Texas, Missou, Kansas, Texas Tech, and A&M are all solid teams. Many times there are 2 Big XII teams in the BCS games, so that says a lot in my mind.

 

[YoungTexanFan]

I dunno that much about college football, so here's my question: is it really the consensus now that its SEC & Big 12 one & two, respectively, and everyone else follows them ? I guess I was under the impression that the Big 12 was not thought to be superior to the PAC10 or Big 10 or ACC ?

The SEC is the most respected conference and is usually the best. I love SEC atmosphere. Huge stadiums with HUGE following and traditions. What I don't like about SEC teams is that they sell virtually all of their seats to alumni and the students have a hard time getting into games at their school. Prime example: LSU.

The Big 10 has Ohio St. and Michigan, but recently they haven't both been good at the same time. They have had a year or two like that, but in general, no. Also, there is little parity within the conference. Occasionally a team like Wisconsin can get into the top 25, but the conference as a whole is usually lack-luster and the Big 10 style of football is also very boring to follow for most fans. (They don't have the top defenses of the SEC or the elite offenses like the Big 12/Pac 100

The Pac 10 essentially starts and ends with USC. They are an elite team, but the conference lacks a second power. Every year a team will establish itself as the #2 team, but there is hardly ever a Pac 10 team in a BCS that isn't USC.

The Big East...They are in no way a top conference. The weakest out of the "Big 6". Upstart South Florida (who KU has away this year ) is a good looking team, but how many Connecticut's from last year can there be? West Virginia is the class of the conference.

The Big 12 has two traditional power schools in Oklahoma and Texas. They are both BCS caliber teams in any given year. Teams like Texas Tech, Missouri, Kansas, and Texas A&M provide teams that can play with almost every team from other conferences. The Big 12 is stacked at the top but also provides very solid middle group. Kansas and Missouri are being considered "middle group" because it is mostly a recent success for both teams, but they both look poised to stay in the top 25.

I'm actually a very big fan of the ACC. I LOVE Miami and except for when they play KU, I LOVE the VT defense. However, the ACC has some lower tier schools that drag the conference down as a whole, but schools like Virginia help keep a nice balance in the middle and will occasionally challenge top teams in the conference.

 

[Dan B.]

Considering the question is the best in 2008, I would have to say that the Big East is getting kind of shafted here. The conference has been improving by leaps and bounds, with Rutgers, USF, and even UConn basically starting programs from scratch, but investing millions in quality coaches and brand new stadia, helping them to make huge strides. Then there is Cincinnatti which is definitely on the rise as well, and Syracuse which hasn't been as good of late but is still a decent football school. Louisville and the aforementioned WVU are consistently top 25 schools also. They are fortunate in that most of their schools are in major cities or media markets, which helps a lot with recruiting. Especially after VT and Miami left the Big East was supposed to crater, but IMHO it has held up quite well and may even be better than the ACC or PAC 10 now -- but I think the PAC 10 is incredibly overrated. This is not to say that the Big East is anywhere close to the elite conferences, especially the SEC, which is basically a pro league. No conference comes anywhere close to the SEC from top to bottom. There are basically 10 elite programs in the SEC, with only Kentucky and Vandy failing to be a threat for a 10 win BCS season in a given year. The Big 12 is probably second in my view, because the Big 10 seems to fail in bowl games every year. I think this is because Big 10 teams tend to be built for their hometowns, which are cold weather cities where a team has to run, run, and run some more, then have a solid defense to compete. In bowl games played in Florida or sunnier climes, tricky offenses tend to pick them apart.


Basically I would rank them like this:

SEC
--
--
Big 12
Big 10
--
--
Pac 10/ACC/Big East
--
--
--
WAC/Mountain West/CUSA

A bit of info on the Big East in recent years:

In 2006, West Virginia, Louisville, and Rutgers all entered November undefeated. However, they did not stay that way, as in a trio of exciting games over the next month, Louisville defeated West Virginia 44-34, Rutgers defeated Louisville 28-25, and West Virginia defeated Rutgers 41-39 in three overtimes. Rutgers’ resurgence after a century of mostly futile play was a national story, but Louisville won the conference title in the end. In bowl action, the Big East went 5-0, including an Orange Bowl victory for Louisville over Wake Forest and a win by West Virginia over Georgia Tech in the Gator Bowl.

In 2007, USF, rose to #2 in the BCS rankings. They lost their next three games, however, to drop out of the rankings. They eventually finished the season #21 in the final BCS polls. The Connecticut Huskies, getting as high as #13, and West Virginia remained in the top 25. Cincinnati also rose as high as #15 in the rankings eventually finishing the season with 10 wins and a #17 ranking. Connecticut lost subsequent games and dropped substantially in the rankings. On the final day of the season, Pittsburgh upset #2 WVU 13-9 in the 100th edition of the Backyard Brawl to give the Huskies a share of the conference championship, while WVU was stopped on the doorstep of the BCS National Championship Game. In bowl games, WVU upset the Big 12 Champion Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl, despite having lost their highly touted coach, Rich Rodriguez to Michigan less than a month before the game.