I have said it before - my opinion is that the SEC downturn is a result of the coaching churn. Replacing coaches is not a science. There is a ton of guess work involved. So, add in the fact that you have Nick Saban in the SEC and you see coaches who would otherwise have won national championships discarded.
I'd rephrase your last statement to, "you see coaches WHO HAVE WON national championships discarded" - like Chizik and Miles, in particular...and Malzahn came within 12 seconds and probably peaked too soon.
Imagine the SEC without Saban. You have a lot more head coaches with long tenures still in place, and a few more programs with recent national championships on their resumes to help in recruiting.
This is where we get more similarities between now and Coach Bryant's day. I'm certainly not trying to knock his opposition but go back and tell me who exactly was long-term competitive with Alabama in the 1970s? From 1971-1979, the only SEC title Alabama did not win was the rebuilding year of 1976.
Who was our competition?
1971 - Auburn and UGA had one SEC loss each but....we played seven to their six and beat Auburn
1972 - Auburn and Tennessee were basically it...and our win over the Vols that year is an all-time classic (if you don't know - we trailed 10-3 with 2:38 left and got the ball at their 48 then scored in three plays. Tied at ten. On the next possession, Condredge Holloway fumbled at his own 17 and we recovered....and punched it in with about a minute left.....14 points in less than 2 minutes)
1973 - LSU and Alabama were the only two teams with a winning record in conference. And this is why a lot of folks put us in the Nebraska category of 'regional power' - we only played two decent teams other than the Irish - Tennessee and LSU and won. But the SEC as a whole was not very good at all.
1974 - no real competition as both Auburn and UGA finished two games behind; to be fair, we DID have to beat Auburn H2H to win it but that was it.
1975 - here's insane for you.....Ole Miss went 6-5 but if they had beaten us head to head, they would have won the SEC with a 7-4 record while we sat home and howled at 9-2; this was a strong year for the conference, with UF and UGA in the running as well
1977 - Kentucky was on probation and because we played seven SEC games to their six, we won it alone.
1978 - UGA had a tie that cost them a tie for the SEC;
And you have to remember that Florida had not yet come of age back then. Ole Miss suffered the backlash fallout from their refusal to recruit black athletes, Shug Jordan retired at Auburn, and Tennessee fired Bill Battle to rebuild. Neither UK nor Vandy was ever a power...including Alabama that's SEVEN teams in the SEC accounted for. The only real competition came from Auburn when Jordan was there, LSU, and Georgia.
Hmmm.....LSU, Georgia, and Alabama were the only three teams to have the same coach in 1979 they had in 1971 (and LSU fired Cholly Mac anyway at the end of that year). And besides, Vince Dooley owes his entire career to the fallout from the alleged game fix scandal in 1962. When Alabama and Georgia wound up only playing each other once in awhile, Dooley got to stay long enough to make the Hall of Fame. From 1966-1983, we only played UGA four times in those eighteen seasons, going 3-1, and Dooley's record in the SEC prior to his 1980 theft of Herschel Walker was 118-56-6 (.672).
In fact, consider this comparison:
Vince Dooley (1964-1979) - won or shared 3 SEC titles, three seasons of .500 or below, .672
Mark Richt (2001-2015) - won 2 SEC titles, 6 division titles, one season of .500 or below, .740
Keep in mind that Richt won his during a time when one team in his own division and THREE in the other won national championships. (That - to me - offsets the comeback of "but Richt got to add cupcakes to the schedule" argument).
Just take the names off of those two and which one would you think would be the Hall of Famer and which one would have been fired? Even with his dominant teams of 1980-83, Dooley's winning pct was .694, not even close to consideration.
My point is not to pick on Dooley (seriously) as much as it is to note (in agreement with you) how much things have changed and that the SEC of the 1970s was NOT the SEC of 2006-2012. Keep in mind that Jim Donnan, who was fired to hire Richt, had a better winning pct than Dooley pre-Herschel.
But who do you blame? The school ADs for wanting to beat Saban? Heck, why wouldn't they want to beat Saban?
Maybe the fans for unrealistic expectations. I think what happened is that when we were on probation teams lined up to kick us hard for our beating them in the past. Miss State beat us 4 out of 5, Tennessee owned us for a solid decade, LSU took their shots at us, and we even managed to lose to Kentucky for the first time since 1922. Probation wasn't enough for Arky, who needed officiating help to beat us three different times despite their advantages.
And then Coach Saban flew in on the jet - and it started with "he's overrated" and "he's leaving soon" and progressed to "he's buying players" which turned into "he's going to Texas" and has now gone to the insane notion that "Bama owns the refs."
Mississippi State - I say this as a former resident of the Bulldog fan area - I don't think they REALLY care. Honestly. I think they WANT to beat Saban but they would be happy with Mullen going to a BIG bowl game (Gator or above) about every three years, beat Ole Miss 3 out of 4 years at a minimum, and win 8-10 games - beat who you're supposed to like the cupcakes, Vandy and UK, and pull off the once a year upset. THEY will always be happy with that which is why I don't see them canning Mullen as long as he can do that.
Vandy and UK don't really care, either, and I don't think S Carolina does, either.
But the rest of them for sure want us hanging on their wall as a trophy. If one team would take a long-term solution to the problem, they'd hire a fresh young coach to build the program for five years from now when Saban is 70. The end IS coming, folks, as far as his tenure here - it's only a question of when.
The reality - unless some of these new hires turn out to be better than they have looked to date, the SEC may be in for a serious down turn. Eventually the recruits will sign elsewhere. They want to win. Then what do you have? Schools with weak coaches and players - see the B1G just 3 years ago. One dominant team ruling the roost and everyone else desperate for a change.
I cannot disagree with anything here at all.
But as long as Alabama remains that team on top, do you really care? It is easier to make it to the playoffs in a weak conference than in a strong one. Your brand will get you in the playoffs as long as you win the SEC with fewer than 2 losses. This is just how you want it, even if you don't realize it.
True with one exception - season ticket holders who actually want games that aren't over at halftime. Other than that I agree with ya.
RTR
