Found bits of this article on Fox Sports very amusing. 
"Florida's decline under Zook is not encouraging, although he came to a program without a tremendous amount of talent and has since recruited well enough that he might win based on overwhelming talent rather than coaching acumen as his predecessor did."
"Nick Saban led LSU to a Sugar Bowl win and co-national title in 2003. I don't think anyone would argue with Nick Saban at the top of the list, although it must be said that he, like most defensively-oriented coaches, is one bad offensive coordinator hire away from coming back to the pack. It seems inevitable that Jimbo Fisher will get a head coaching gig and Saban will have to replace him well to retain this ranking. (If you need an illustration of a program that has struggled to replace a very good offensive coordinator, please see Tennessee, The University of.)"
"Well, get ready for a bunch of schlock in the opening weeks of this season. Outside of the "we don't have a choice about playing this game" rivalries (USC-Clemson, Georgia-Georgia Tech, etc.,) there are almost no marquee out-of-conference match-ups. The only teams that get any credit for risking their necks are LSU (against Oregon State,) Arkansas (against Texas,) and Tennessee (against Notre Dame.) After that, one has to scrape the barrel with Bama-Southern Miss, Ole Miss-Memphis, and Georgia-Marshall. I used to buy the "SEC play is too tough to add in additional challenging games" mantra, but how can that be right when teams played tough out-of-conference games when the schedule expanded to 12 games? I know that schools have athletic budgets to balance and they need home dates, but speaking solely as a fan of SEC football, I'm going to miss seeing the teams in the SEC tested against quality opposition."
"Much of Auburn's problem last year was their schedule. As mentioned, they played five teams that won 10+ games. They played at Baton Rouge and at Athens, where the current regimes lose very few games. They played at Arkansas and at Georgia Tech, two difficult locales. Their schedule did not set up for them like Ohio State's did in 2002 or LSU's did last year. In the end, the combination of their elevated expectations and a very challenging schedule did them in. (Well, that and a frighteningly inept offense.) This year, the schedule is much friendlier. The out-of-conference schedule is, as my grandfather would say, pusillanimous (an English way of saying timid and yes, I had to look it up.) LSU and Georgia both come to Auburn (although Auburn hasn't had a lot of success against the Dawgs at home.) The West will likely be weaker this year than it was in 2003. Auburn may go from 7-5 to 9-2 and still be a worse team than their 2003 outfit. Ah, the irony."
SEC Article
"Florida's decline under Zook is not encouraging, although he came to a program without a tremendous amount of talent and has since recruited well enough that he might win based on overwhelming talent rather than coaching acumen as his predecessor did."
"Nick Saban led LSU to a Sugar Bowl win and co-national title in 2003. I don't think anyone would argue with Nick Saban at the top of the list, although it must be said that he, like most defensively-oriented coaches, is one bad offensive coordinator hire away from coming back to the pack. It seems inevitable that Jimbo Fisher will get a head coaching gig and Saban will have to replace him well to retain this ranking. (If you need an illustration of a program that has struggled to replace a very good offensive coordinator, please see Tennessee, The University of.)"
"Well, get ready for a bunch of schlock in the opening weeks of this season. Outside of the "we don't have a choice about playing this game" rivalries (USC-Clemson, Georgia-Georgia Tech, etc.,) there are almost no marquee out-of-conference match-ups. The only teams that get any credit for risking their necks are LSU (against Oregon State,) Arkansas (against Texas,) and Tennessee (against Notre Dame.) After that, one has to scrape the barrel with Bama-Southern Miss, Ole Miss-Memphis, and Georgia-Marshall. I used to buy the "SEC play is too tough to add in additional challenging games" mantra, but how can that be right when teams played tough out-of-conference games when the schedule expanded to 12 games? I know that schools have athletic budgets to balance and they need home dates, but speaking solely as a fan of SEC football, I'm going to miss seeing the teams in the SEC tested against quality opposition."
"Much of Auburn's problem last year was their schedule. As mentioned, they played five teams that won 10+ games. They played at Baton Rouge and at Athens, where the current regimes lose very few games. They played at Arkansas and at Georgia Tech, two difficult locales. Their schedule did not set up for them like Ohio State's did in 2002 or LSU's did last year. In the end, the combination of their elevated expectations and a very challenging schedule did them in. (Well, that and a frighteningly inept offense.) This year, the schedule is much friendlier. The out-of-conference schedule is, as my grandfather would say, pusillanimous (an English way of saying timid and yes, I had to look it up.) LSU and Georgia both come to Auburn (although Auburn hasn't had a lot of success against the Dawgs at home.) The West will likely be weaker this year than it was in 2003. Auburn may go from 7-5 to 9-2 and still be a worse team than their 2003 outfit. Ah, the irony."
SEC Article
