I have an SEC problem

The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem. Well folks, I'm here to tell you, I have a problem. An SEC problem.

A little background for those who don't know me. I grew up in Columbia, SC. I was raised in a house divided - Mom was a Gamecock, Dad was a Tiger. I think somewhere around sixth or seventh grade, I finally picked sides. I cut myself one day to check and sure enough, my blood runneth orange! (I really didn't cut myself).

Growing up in South Carolina, particularly Columbia, you hear all the crowing about the SEC, but never see what all the fuss is about. Gamecock fans yell "SEC! SEC! SEC!" more than any other fan base. And as it has been noted, they have an "Alabama mouth and a Vanderbilt trophy case" - and that might be demeaning to Vandy.

This talkative bunch won their first bowl game in 1995 and hadn't experienced success until Steve Spurrier came along. Before he arrived, South Carolina's overall record was sub-.500. Since he left, they've slid back into mediocrity-at-best. Clemson owns the overall series record over South Carolina 68-42-4. In my lifetime, the Tigers are 19-11-1 against the Gamecocks, including last year's 56-7 thumping. Against other SEC foes since 2011, Clemson is 6-2 with wins over LSU, Georgia, Auburn and Alabama.

I tell you all that because that's where my personal disdain for the conference began. Thanks a lot, Gamecock fans.

On a whole, since the ACC didn't decide to become a "football conference" until very recently, ACC football was always looked down upon with the exception of Florida State. Many schools were on the verge of breaking through yet never did. The addition of Miami and Virginia Tech was supposed to upgrade the conference, but the Canes took five steps backward and Virginia Tech was barely relevant nationally early on in their ACC marriage.

Thus, SEC football was the king of the south. And everyone else had to deal with it.

I despise the SEC. I loathe it. The constant "we're better than thou" attitude despite the fact that most of them aren't. The "we won seven straight national titles" when it was four teams who won, not 14. Sorry, Georgia and Tennessee and South Carolina and Kentucky and Vanderbilt and Mississippi State and Ole Miss and Arkansas and Missouri and Texas A&M, but you didn't win a championship. As for LSU (2003 and 2007) and Florida (2006 and 2008), we're going on 10 years since you last won a title.

Most of all, I hate the arrogance that fans of SEC schools have, who don't give credit to other teams and conferences. Sure, a few SEC teams have been on top and are tough to beat, but that doesn't mean the success of others should be downplayed. Nor does it mean that everyone in your conference are world beaters. That's just Alabama.

Yes, the SEC experienced unprecedented success with the seven straight championships and the 2011 rematch in the title game between LSU and Bama. But the fans haven't come down as far as the play on the field has in the past few years.

There have been three CFB Playoff years. The ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12 have sent two different teams each to the first three semifinal matchups. Alabama is the only SEC representative to make the Playoff (all three years). In all likelihood, the Tide will once again represent the SEC in 2017. Not so favorable for the crowd screaming "The SEC has the most depth." Seems to me that a deep conference would be represented by more than just one school in college football's ultimate prized tournament.

But wait, there's more...

SEC media bias
Yes, ESPN has agreements with pretty much every conference, including the little guys like the MAC. But which one has the ESPN invested more money in? Which one did ESPN start a TV network for?

There is a media bias for the SEC, like it or not. Pick any college football Saturday this coming season and see which games are on in primetime. More often than not, you'll find SEC games on ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU in prime slots (read: after 3:30 PM ET).

Oh, and guess who spent the entire week at SEC Media Days with a full crew for not one, but two different shows (SEC Now and College Football Live). The four-letter network again.

Now, I'm not saying every analyst is told to pick SEC teams for this or promote an SEC player for that. I'm saying when your company has invested more money and more time in one conference, it's going to get way more play, eye balls across the country are going to see way more SEC coverage, and people are going to fall into the trap that is watching SEC more than other games.

Switch over to Fox or FS1 a few times this season and see how varying their coverage is. You won't get SEC crammed down your throat, I promise.

"We get beat up by the brutal SEC schedule"
Ah, the old "we're not good by the end of the season because we got roughed up early on" argument. Yeah, okay. This is what you will hear when an SEC team loses in a bowl game or a late regular season rivalry matchup. It's totally contradictory to the argument when an SEC team wins those games and they boast that the SEC has depth and is strong top to bottom. Also, what's the argument for when you lose one of the first few games of the season?

Let me get this straight, if you win it's because your conference prepared you for it, but if you lose it's because it's too tough and beat you up? I guess you can spin anything to make it fit your stance.

For one, I'd love for Clemson to play an SEC schedule. Heck, I'd love to see any team play an SEC schedule. I'd also love to see LSU or Alabama or Florida or Georgia play an ACC or Big Ten schedule. Or heck, go play the wide-open spread offenses in the Big 12 week in and week out.

Recall that Texas A&M and Missouri - two former Big 12 schools - entered the SEC, with Missouri winning the SEC East twice and A&M beating big, bad Alabama on their home field. Next.

"They're built like an SEC team"
This phrase is regularly used to justify another team being great. So they're built like Missouri? Kentucky? Mississippi State? Or do you really mean they're built like Alabama? To pump up your entire conference as if all 14 teams are in the Top 5 is ridiculous.

What does this even mean anyway? That only SEC teams produce fast, physical, athletic players? I'll give you that more players are drafted in the NFL than any other conference, but that doesn't mean Michigan and Oklahoma are producing minor leaguers. The best NFL running back in the last 15 years - Adrian Peterson, Oklahoma (Big 12). The best NFL quarterback - Tom Brady, Michigan (Big Ten). The best receiver - Calvin Johnson, Georgia Tech (ACC).

These things are cyclical. Twenty years ago, people wanted to be "built like" Nebraska and Florida State. When Tennessee won in 1998, nobody said they were built like a Big 12 or ACC team. Fifteen years ago, it was Miami. When LSU won in 2003, no one proclaimed the Tigers to be "built like a Big East team." Twelve years ago, USC was the darling. No one was going around when Florida won in 2006 saying, "They're built like a Pac-12 team."

So stop. Clemson, Florida State, Ohio State, and several others aren't built like an SEC team. They're built like a Top 5 CFB Playoff contender.

"It Just Means More"
I'll end on this one because it's my favorite. By now you've seen or heard this moniker from coast to coast. I'm not here to argue that it doesn't mean more than it does in Austin or Norman or Eugene or Ann Arbor.

I'm here to tell you to own it. If you're going to go around beating your chest that "It Just Means More" to you in the SEC, then don't get your panties in a wad when a non-SEC team beats your beloved school and does a little MORE bragging than usual.

Whatever it is might mean more to you, but it also means more to us to beat you.

This past season, you weren't first. You were second. You can't spell second with S-E-C. And that's a fACCt!

-BtW