News Article: SEC: Who, us panic?

[BamaNation]

This article is behind a paywall in the WSJ. However, this link is what they call a "gift link" and should work - at least for a period of time:

The SEC Confronts a New College Football Opponent: Panic
After back-to-back seasons without a national championship, the swaggering Southeastern Conference is feeling unusually uneasy about its place atop the sport

https://www.wsj.com/sports/football/sec-college-football-panic-860533f4?st=5Y6Kjk&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Here’s a 5-point summary of the article:

• SEC's Declining Dominance: After two consecutive seasons without a national title, the SEC enters 2025 Media Days with an unfamiliar sense of anxiety and vulnerability rather than its usual confidence.
• Recruiting and Brand Shifts: Top recruits like Bryce Underwood and Jeremiah Smith have recently chosen Big Ten schools over SEC programs, signaling a shift in football power and prestige.
• Big Ten’s Rising Power: Ohio State, Michigan, and Oregon have gained national prominence, with Ohio State now ranked as the most valuable college football program — a title long associated with SEC schools.
• Mixed Reactions from SEC Faithful: While some fans and analysts admit concern, others dismiss recent Big Ten success as temporary luck, confident the SEC will soon reassert dominance.
• Optimism and Reassertion: SEC leaders and coaches remain publicly bullish, using Media Days to promote the conference’s strength and touting an upcoming Netflix documentary as part of their brand reinforcement.

 

[colbysullivan]

2 years isn’t a large enough sample size to draw any definitive conclusions. The SEC didn’t win in 2013 or 2014 either, but then won 6 out of the next 8 titles. The SEC isn’t just going to lie down and accept their fate…

 

[BamaFossil]

The article is nuts. It's like drawing a line between two points and calling it a trend. Need lots more data points before the Big 10 can claim dominance. Meanwhile, the SEC has a pretty good collection of data points.

 

[arthurdawg]

So basically... Georgia and Alabama haven't been as strong for the last two years?

 

[lowend]

1. Michigan couldn't win until they had a scandal tainted season. They cheated, got a slap on the wrist, and won. Bump that.

2. Ryan Day had a Michigan problem. He couldn't win until Harbaugh left, then spent $20 million to buy the best team. Bump that, too.

That's all I need to know.

 

[colbysullivan]

1. Michigan couldn't win until they had a scandal tainted season. They cheated, got a slap on the wrist, and won. Bump that.

2. Ryan Day had a Michigan problem. He couldn't win until Harbaugh left, then spent $20 million to buy the best team. Bump that, too.

That's all I need to know.

Day still can’t beat Michigan

 

[denver]

The media wants the B10 to be relevant so badly....UM should have been thrown out for blatant cheating...and OSU imported SEC talent to win...and paid big....the article is probably written by a PennSt grad too! lol

 

[BamaMoon]

Blah, blah, blah.

But, we didn't do our part when UM won the title. That team just barely beat a team that was CNS's worst team since 2007.

 

[lowend]

Day still can’t beat Michigan

You're 100% correct. I had them in my mind beating Michigan this year, but they sure didn't. Thanks for the correction.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Hmmm.

1) Will Dehmel

The author is an Ivy League intern (what would he know about football?) who hasn't even graduated college yet. He graduated high school in 2022, so he was born around 2004. I can understand why someone who turned 8 in 2011 or 2012 would really think SEC dominance has been around forever because he's never experienced anything like it.

2) What "really" was this SEC thing? Mostly an Alabama thing.

Look, I take nothing away from Georgia ascending to their highest level ever with Kirby Smart. But let's be honest, when he's talking about the 13 titles in 17 years, he's talking mostly about ALABAMA, not the SEC as a whole. Florida hasn't really been in the title picture since 2009. Georgia right now is sort of like Florida then but appears to have better staying power. MAYBE. But six of those 13 titles belong to one particular team.

3) How lucky was Michigan in 2023?

Look, they were a good team, and I don't want anything to sound like sour grapes. They did beat us on the field. But this is a team with ill-gotten gains who used a spy - and now turn and whistle and want to say, "Well, the spy had nothing to do with us winning." Uh, so you mean you employed this guy to NOT try to gain an advantage? You risked your reputation for NOTHING?

But also - how lucky was Michigan in 2023 that:
- Washington also went undefeated and took a spot
- Georgia got taken out on one dreadful Saturday by Alabama (it's not like UGA was a bad team)
- Alabama's QB was, well, that's been covered.

4) Yeah, so the Big 10 went 2-0 in the playoff versus the SEC..

No, they didn't. OHIO STATE went 2-0 against the SEC, not the Big Ten. Ohio State has actually won something in the past two decades and without cheating. And I guess I could point out that Ohio State was brought back to resurgence by that same head coach who won those national titles at Florida.

And exactly how "SEC" is Texas at this point? I mean, I know Oregon is B1G, but they're still Pac-12 in my head.

5) Two years isn't a trend and neither is two games.

Acting like SEC teams never lost a player to a B1G team before is ridiculous. Look, they've got the deep pockets - but that in and of itself isn't going to create the chemistry necessary to win, either. Remember - we just crowned a national champion that would never have been there in previous years. That one season doesn't mean a trend. This guy is taking two different scenarios and combining them together to pretend they mean something.

They MIGHT.

But we don't know for sure yet.