moranis has only ever really argued this: The SEC isn't as good as many of you would have everyone believe.
He's right about that. Looking at the last 5 completed years of College Football, let me just point this out:
Vanderbilt, Mississippi & Kentucky were all outperformed by Arizona State over this span. An Arizona State team that went 26-31 & didn't have the boost of those great schedules that SEC teams have.
Tennessee, Mississippi State & Auburn.. Yes, Auburn won a National Championship over this time & that win is counted & probably deserves alittle extra credit, so keep that in mind.. However, TCU could be argued to have outperformed all 3 of those teams. If we look at Auburn's National Title as an 1 great moment out of 5 tries & then we see that TCU has went to a couple BCS Bowl games in that span & won a Rose Bowl, then you see why TCU has actually been more consistent & done more than Auburn. Auburn missed a bowl game completely in 2008 & performed significantly worse than TCU did that year.
Yes, you could nitpick this or that out of this arguement.. But, really? If you want to argue that MAYBE Kentucky is on the same level of an Arizona State squad that's had a losing record over the last 5 years, well then.. That's pathetic for the GREAT SEC anyway. If you want to argue that you're allowed a losing season in the SEC & that the 1 National Title instantly makes Auburn better than TCU over the last 5 years, then that just makes moranis even more right about the point he's been trying to hammer through here. Because TCU, considering 5 years instead of just 1.. has performed consistently & at a higher level than Auburn through most of that period.