SEC Recruiting Academics Advantage Over Pac-10
(Los Angeles, CA)
I will admit the top to bottom the SEC is superior to the Pac-10 in football this season and probably 60% of the time for any year. However, you cannot examine the reasons without a full analysis of the inherent advantages every school in the SEC (sans Vanderbilt) has over the Pac-10 institutions.
First of all, there are more teams in the SEC than the Pac-10 so that allows the SEC to have two additional shots at more quality teams. Therefore, the only true way to compare both leagues would be to eliminate one top team and one bad team for a total of 10.
Let's say you get rid of LSU and Miss St. for comparison. Now, things look a bit different especially prior to the last two years when Alabama was very good. Only Florida rates as a team that would win the Pac-10 or even have a legitimate shot and Georgia would probably be the second choice but that's it.
Second, the SEC teams other than Vanderbilt only have to meet the NCAA mandated minimum academic entry requirements which is huge for recruiting. In the Pac-10 Stanford is more difficult to recruit than Vanderbilt, UCLA more difficult than any other school and CAL also has higher entry requirements for high school recruits. The others are about equal to the rest of the Pac-10.
That means the SEC recruits from a much larger pool of high caliber athletes which is the lifeblood for college football. How else could you explain Vanderbilt's doormat status in that conference nearly every year? These reasons are why the SEC has an inherent advantage over the Pac-10 and with that they still trail in head to head matchups since 1999 so who is really superior?