Not ignoring your argument, I have conceded that when given the opportunity, the SEC has taken care of business. My point was that they have been given the opportunity (and the benefit of the doubt) most often. So, we might be talkng past each other, completely different points. As you can tell, I don't consider how a team did in the game relevant at all (maybe Okie State kicks the crap out of LSU. We will never know).
I know I had looked up 04-05 SOS once before and could have sworn that Auburn was ranked lower, but that isn't what I am seeing now. So, I guess I have to do a mea culpa:
My frustration regarding the benefit the SEC has gotten is from arguments with others who adopt positions that fit their argument at the moment. Some argued Florida should have played in 06-07 game because UM already had their shot. That argument was turned on its head in 2011 when bama fans insisted that Alabama should get the nod over Okie State because of a better quality loss. And I will never except two loss LSU getting a shot in '07 with two losses against four loss teams (and I know that '07 was a mess). These instances make it very difficult to argue that since Auburn (and maybe because of it), along with recent history, that the SEC hasn't been given the benefit of the doubt at the expense of other teams that had similiar or better resumes. Really my only point.