Just citing facts here, NK.
Why is it so hard to acknowledge that Alabama, arguably the best football program of the last 5 years, has a pretty good offense?
There is a world of difference between having a pretty good offense vs. having an elite-level offense capable of lighting up the scoreboard on Notre Dame.
I never said Bama would light up the scoreboard on Notre Dame. Just that they have one of the best offenses in college football today. That really shouldn't be up for debate.
"Good" and "bad" are obviously pretty relative terms.
For example, I think Alabama's offense is almost as bad as Notre Dame's offense. Are both offenses capable of putting up big numbers against BC/Auburn type teams? Of course, but against the few good defenses each team has played, their offenses stink. The difference is that ND's offense has stunk against teams with bad defenses.
Listen, I get that the SEC has several really good defenses, but the SEC also has some stinkhole, overrated offenses that people give the benefit of the doubt because ZOMG SEC DEFENSE. Thing is, is that Alabama had an absolute cakewalk through the SEC this year. Props to them getting a W at LSU, but the offense was absolutely dreadful for 95% of that game and LSU's offense is stinkhole. After that, Bama's second best conference win was against who? Mississippi State (4-4 conference record) at home?
I don't buy it. The SEC is a largely a sham built upon the fact that (1) they play 4 noncon games and (2) the bottom half of the league is complete and utter dogshit, which results in inflated records (and rankings) for the top half of the conference, which rationalizes the hilarious fiction that 6 SEC teams are among the ten best teams in the country.
