Quote:

---

Since the implementation of name, image and likeness turned the economic model of college sports on its head, the SEC is no longer the competitive behemoth that it once was.

You can talk all you want about fan passion and gameday pageantry and even under-the-table cheating, but the SEC's biggest advantage over the last 20 years was owning the real estate where the highest concentration of great athletes (and particularly football players) came from.

When someone like Smart or Nick Saban could sit in a living room in Atlanta or Miami and talk about how many millions of dollars their former players were making in the NFL, there was no need to look beyond the SEC.

While the SEC's brass cries and complains because they no longer own college sports, they're missing a larger point about a potential breakaway.

Now, college athletics is more like any other American business where most people decide where to live based on money and opportunity, not staying close to home.

The SEC has great stadiums, fan bases and tradition, but SEC supremacy was largely an illusion based on favorable geography, the perception of being an NFL factory and probably a few dollars exchanging hands under the table.

That's gone now, and as it has become increasingly clear that the college sports model is never going back to the way it was, we are now hearing threats of the SEC going it alone because they're the ones who really care about being governed by rules.

---

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football/article/why-going-solo-would-lead-to-the-death-of-the-sec-174839907.html

This article couldn't be written if someone like Mike Slive was still running the sec.

From 1981-2005, the SEC only won 3 national championships. Going back even further, the SEC won only a handful of national championships from 1935-1980. Was the SEC's minimal national championship success from 1935-2005 due to NIL leveling the playing field or could it just be that sports are cyclical AND elite coaching actually still matters?

The SEC will always get their share of playoff spots and once the tournament starts anyone has a puncher's chance of winning.

I think this is much ado about nothing. At least 6 teams from the SEC are contenders for the national championship every year.

FDT 1999 said:

---

I don't think the SEC has necessarily lost its shine, but moreso the old blue blood schools that don't have deep pockets. That's changed and I'm all for it.

The ones screaming the loudest are the ones who were allowed to cheat in the past while deeper pockets (like us) were not.

---

However - if the blue blood SEC schools can't attract the best players anymore, and the conference overall becomes weaker, will the SEC still have the cache it has enjoyed the last couple of decades?

Seems inevitable that the schools with the biggest NIL budgets will eventually become the new blue bloods, regardless of conference.

The benefit of geography is still there, but much less significant now. Players more likely to leave home for big paydays.

The SEC is in the South.

The people making the decisions at ESPN and FOX have absolutely zero Fs to give about Southern sports culture. They are the Northeast/Ivy League/Private school crowd.

They are in the business of greed and are very, very good at making lots of money.

This has absolutely nothing to do with some stupid "powerless SEC" narrative that y'all are so willingly to be spoonfed by the media.

It has everything to do with making the rich richer via marquee sports content.

The very smart people in charge of making money off your eyeballs have begun promising the right people that they can make even more money by creating name-brand contests in a bracket format that has repeatedly worked in NCAA basketball and the NFL. Yeah ok, NBA and MLB too.

TV people certainly didn't invent playoffs, but they sure have solidified them into American sports entertainment.

ESPN as a company is against expansion right now since it has arguably the best season of content and own all the bowls that are already meaningless garbage. But the advertisers and the sponsors are still paying so ESPN is advocating for them.

But if you don't think for a second that "strategic advisors" aren't already planning out scenarios where they cannibalize the conference championships and bowls and use those timeslots as playoff TV spots, you're not paying attention.

Content delivery is always evolving due to pressure to squeeze new revenue out of people, and there likely is a faction in ESPN that would prefer it to be frozen like it is today. Someone will come up with a formula that makes money on paper. Then it will just be a matter of greasing the squeaky wheels like Sankey. He and probably a handful of other administrators stand to lose the most.

TXAG 05 said:

---

FDT 1999 said:

---

I don't think the SEC has necessarily lost its shine, but moreso the old blue blood schools that don't have deep pockets. That's changed and I'm all for it.

The ones screaming the loudest are the ones who were allowed to cheat in the past while deeper pockets (like us) were not.

---

We were cheating just like everyone else, we just weren't as good at it.

---

It's not a question of being "good" or bad at the off-field dimensions (which include a continuum from outright-illegal cheating all the way to fully-legal payments-in-kind from media, league offices, etc.). Those dimensions are just more games to be played, just like the on-field sport itself.

I'd say the top ~50 programs do a ~optimal job of playing the hand they've been dealt in those regards. It's just that the top 10 or so programs have been permanently gifted the aces and kings and the rules say they never have to allow those cards to be redealt. To the casual fan that can look like everyone else is just not as good at the game, but if you follow the sport for decades (as I have) the underlying unfairness becomes simply patent.

Perhaps the battle is not to be fought in directly assaulting the "bluebloods'" locked-in advantages, but rather in convincing said casual fans (and newcomers to the sport's audience) on how to more quickly observe the unfair nature of the off-field dimensions.

TXAG 05 said:

---

We were cheating just like everyone else, we just weren't as good at it.

---

The bolded is incorrect. The NCAA is very selective as to who they choose to punish. A school like Notre Dame could repeatedly do far worse than anything SMU ever did and never receive anything more than a slap on the wrist.

SMU didn't get punished for cheating. They got punished for beating tu (who had friends of the program on the compliance committee) too often.

Slicer97 said:

---

TXAG 05 said:

---

We were cheating just like everyone else, we just weren't as good at it.

---

The bolded is incorrect. The NCAA is very selective as to who they choose to punish. A school like Notre Dame could repeatedly do far worse than anything SMU ever did and never receive anything more than a slap on the wrist.

SMU didn't get punished for cheating. They got punished for beating tu (who had friends of the program on the compliance committee) too often.

---

I met the principal (a Mustang tight end) and it was reported by the Dallas Morning News.

I'm not contesting what you are saying, but a naked claim is naked.

Definition of Blue Blood - Allowed to cheat without major penalty.

This is a flat out naive take. The SEC's number of draft picks shows it's still got the best players in the sport.

2026 NFL Draft Picks
SEC: 87
Big Ten: 68
ACC: 38
Big 12: 38

2025 NFL Draft Picks
SEC: 79
Big Ten: 71
ACC: 42
Big 12: 31

So why isn't the SEC winning titles?

Simple, NIL has more evenly distributed that talent across the league. Instead of Bama and Georgia hoarding the majority of the talent, it's now spread out. The middle of the league has gotten better while the very top of the league is no longer elite.

Compare this to the Big Ten where this is not happening. Despite having 18 teams they've only got about 5 or 6 that are actually challenging for a title. The talent is all going to the top third of the league and mostly just the top 3.

The SEC had 12/16 teams with 4+ draft picks
The Big Ten had 7/18 teams with 4+ draft picks

SEC has won 13 of the last 20 national titles. Before this B1G 3 year run the SEC had won the previous 4 in a row.

NIL and infinite transfers have definitely helped level the field in the short term but it is way too early to just call it over for SEC dominance.

Hell, toss in the 2 from Clemson, another school from the south, and it hurts the 'south is no more' narrative even more.

Ever since sips and ou joined, to me, it just means less.

OldShadeOfBlue said:

---

This is a flat out naive take. The SEC's number of draft picks shows it's still got the best players in the sport.

2026 NFL Draft Picks
SEC: 87
Big Ten: 68
ACC: 38
Big 12: 38

2025 NFL Draft Picks
SEC: 79
Big Ten: 71
ACC: 42
Big 12: 31

So why isn't the SEC winning titles?

Simple, NIL has more evenly distributed that talent across the league. Instead of Bama and Georgia hoarding the majority of the talent, it's now spread out. The middle of the league has gotten better while the very top of the league is no longer elite.

Compare this to the Big Ten where this is not happening. Despite having 18 teams they've only got about 5 or 6 that are actually challenging for a title. The talent is all going to the top third of the league and mostly just the top 3.

The SEC had 12/16 teams with 4+ draft picks
The Big Ten had 7/18 teams with 4+ draft picks

---

Yep

Nil and the portal Together have caused this shifting in talent within the league, and there's a handful of big 10 teams with the ability to capitalize on it as well

TXAG 05 said:

---

FDT 1999 said:

---

I don't think the SEC has necessarily lost its shine, but moreso the old blue blood schools that don't have deep pockets. That's changed and I'm all for it.

The ones screaming the loudest are the ones who were allowed to cheat in the past while deeper pockets (like us) were not.

---

We were cheating just like everyone else, we just weren't as good at it.

---

I know we were cheating. My point is we were getting hammered for it while certain schools were not. Not because they were "good at it", but because the NCAA looked the other way.

KIrby Smart is the "SEC Brass?"

Bad article premise is bad.

awschux said:

---

Ever since sips and ou joined, to me, it just means less.

---

This


FIRE SNAKEY!

Jimbo4win said:

---

From 1981-2005, the SEC only won 3 national championships. Going back even further, the SEC won only a handful of national championships from 1935-1980. Was the SEC's minimal national championship success from 1935-2005 due to NIL leveling the playing field or could it just be that sports are cyclical AND elite coaching actually still matters?

---

Being an older fan and living through these eras, you've highlighted what most people have forgotten or never knew due to age.

2005-2022 was the SEC hay day. Many factors drive this. One is the population shift that began in the later half of the 20th century from the Midwest to the Deep South, especially places like Atlanta, Charlotte and Nashville. This combined with Nick Saban's rise at Alabama, LSU's success followed by Smart at Georgia.

The portal has changed the landscape for the SEC as much as anything. The Alabama's and Georgia's can no longer hold on to a full three or four deep depth chart when the third string and fourth stringers are nearly as equally talented as the starters and now transfer out for playing time. The lack of the ability to hoard depth is a game changer.

Bo Jackson telling the story of Alabama recruiting him and telling him he "might" get to play by late in his sophomore or early junior season is a good example. He played pretty well as a freshman at Auburn. Alabama won the NC in 1978 and 1979 so they were stock piled with talent.

Add in NIL, and the landscape has changed. The SEC is not dead or terrible. Just not the 800 pound Gorilla from the prior 20 years.

Quote:

---

SEC supremacy was largely an illusion based on favorable geography, the perception of being an NFL factory and probably a few dollars exchanging hands under the table.

---

It wasn't an illusion. It should just say "SEC supremacy was largely based on..."

FDT 1999 said:

---

I don't think the SEC has necessarily lost its shine, but moreso the old blue blood schools that don't have deep pockets. That's changed and I'm all for it.

The ones screaming the loudest are the ones who were allowed to cheat in the past while deeper pockets (like us) were not.

---

This and minus Nick Saban's clueless (or just stupid and claiming no awareness) ass about his players being paid off pre-NIL.

Yes, to some of the impact on NIL and Transfer Portal, but it's also true that the SEC has had 14 of the last 23 titles, but half of those are awarded to Saban coached teams. So there was a little talent drain when he left Alabama after 2023 season.

Maybe the Big Ten is also just having what the SEC had from 2006-2012 when the SEC had all 7 championships from 4 different teams.