Started By
Message
(Final Draft) Evidence Mounts of a Scandal in the SEC
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:20 am
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:20 am
In case you haven't heard, there is a Conspiracy theory regarding the "SEC Bridge Schedules
Conspiracy theories happen all of the time, however, when they become backed up by facts, they are no longer conspiracy theories.
In 2013, there are only 2 teams out of 14 that benefited by "SEC Bridge Schedules", care to take a guess who they are?
After researching every SEC teams' rotating opponents, it is clear that in 2013, the "SEC Bridge Schedule" was created with intentional deceit and dishonesty, resulting in a scheduling advantage for Alabama and Auburn.
In 2013, they are the only 2 teams in the SEC, who are playing an easier opponent than they should be playing and it is clear how it was done.
The SEC schedule creator swapped the opponent that Alabama was "Due" to play with LSU, and swapped Auburn's opponent with Arkansas.
Alabama should be playing at Georgia in 2013 and LSU should be playing at Kentucky. Now, it's LSU at Georgia and Alabama at Kentucky.
Auburn should be playing at Florida in 2013 and Arkansas should be playing at Tennessee. Now, it's Arkansas at Florida and Auburn at Tennessee.
All of the facts needed to conclude how this was done are detailed in this report.
Background
What is the “SEC Bridge Schedule”?
In 2012, the SEC expanded from 12 to 14 teams, adding Missouri and Texas A&M. Prior to 2012, the SEC had 2 divisions with 6 teams, and a 5-1-2 scheduling format, totaling 8 conference games for each team. This means that each team would play the other 5 teams in their division, plus 1 permanent opponent from the other division, plus 2 rotating opponents from the other division.
After Missouri and Texas A&M joined the conference, there became 2 divisions with 7 teams, and the format changed to a 6-1-1 format, still totaling 8 conference games for each team. Every team would now play 6 teams from their division, 1 permanent opponent from the other division, and 1 rotating opponent from the other division.
In 2012 and 2013, the SEC called the schedule a “Bridge Schedule”. Every team would still play the 6 teams from their division and their permanent opponent from the other division. However, the rotating opponent would be selected by the SEC, and the conference stated that this opponent would not be based on any previous or future scheduling format. The SEC basically said that there would be no rhyme or reason as to how these schedules would be created. A Joe Pesci quote from the movie “JFK” sums up the SEC’s position on the “SEC Bridge Schedules”….“It’s a mystery wrapped in a riddle inside an enigma!”
This report will present evidence that proves that the SEC made a false statement, and that the “Bridge Schedule” was based on previous scheduling formats, and that intentional deceit and dishonesty occurred in the scheduling of 4 games.
The Mountain of Evidence
In order to understand how the “SEC Bridge Schedules” were created, it is necessary to view the most recent full rotation of rotating opponents from previous seasons. It is not necessary to view each team’s entire schedule from each season, since it is understood that each team played the other teams in their division, along with their permanent opponent from the other division. The permanent opponents are the following, Miss State / Kentucky, Ole Miss / Vanderbilt, Auburn / Georgia, Arkansas / South Carolina, Alabama / Tennessee, LSU / Florida, and Texas A&M / Missouri.
Presented are the 2 rotating opponents for the original 12 teams from 2007-2011. It is the most recent full rotation, and upon review, it becomes obvious if each team's opponent in 2012 and 2013 are based on the previous schedule rotation and makes sense, by playing the team that they were “Due” to play. It will also be obvious when the opponents don’t make sense and when games were swapped, and clearly who benefited most when this occurred. This evidence details exactly how the "SEC Bridge Schedules" were created.
Looking at the SEC West teams
Miss State
2007 - at South Carolina, Tennessee
2008 - at Tennessee, Vanderbilt
2009 - at Vanderbilt, Florida
2010 - at Florida, Georgia
2011 - at Georgia, South Carolina
2012 - Tennessee
2013 - at South Carolina
Miss State's opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2007, they played Tennessee at home and South Carolina on the road. In 2012, they played Tennessee at home and in 2013, they will play South Carolina on the road.
Ole Miss
2007 - at Georgia, Florida
2008 - at Florida, South Carolina
2009 - at South Carolina, Tennessee
2010 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2011 - at Kentucky, Georgia
2012 - at Georgia
2013 – Missouri
Ole Miss' opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2007, they played Georgia on the road and in 2012, they played Georgia on the road. They will play Missouri in 2013 and this makes sense, since someone has to play Missouri.
Auburn
2007 - at Florida, Vanderbilt
2008 - at Vanderbilt, Tennessee
2009 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2010 - at Kentucky, South Carolina
2011 - at South Carolina, Florida
2012 - at Vanderbilt
2013 - at Tennessee
Auburn played at Vanderbilt in 2012 and this does make sense, even though they were "Due" to play at Florida, like in 2007. The reason is because Florida had to play LSU at home in 2012. Since Florida could only play 1 SEC West team at home in 2012, it does make sense that the "Schedule Creator" moved down to the next road game in the rotation that they were ‘Due” to play, which was at Vanderbilt.
Auburn playing at Tennessee in 2013 makes zero sense, since they were still “Due” to play at Florida. We'll get back to that after reviewing Arkansas' schedule.
Arkansas
2007 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2008 - at Kentucky, Florida
2009 - at Florida, Georgia
2010 - at Georgia, Vanderbilt
2011 - at Vanderbilt, Tennessee
2012 - Kentucky
2013 - at Florida
Arkansas played Kentucky at home in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
Arkansas playing at Florida in 2013 makes zero sense, since they were "Due" to play at Tennessee, like in 2007. In 2013, Auburn is "Due" to play at Florida, however, the "Schedule Creator" swapped these games. Now, Auburn is playing at Tennessee, and Arkansas is playing at Florida.
Florida is expected to be a much stronger team than Tennessee in 2013, so the only reason to swap these games is to give a clear advantage to Auburn.
Alabama
2007 - at Vanderbilt, Georgia
2008 - at Georgia, Kentucky
2009 - at Kentucky, South Carolina
2010 - at South Carolina, Florida
2011 - at Florida, Vanderbilt
2012 - at Missouri
2013 - at Kentucky
Alabama played at Missouri in 2012 and this makes sense, since someone had to play at Missouri.
In 2013, Alabama is "Due" to play at Vanderbilt, however, in 2013 Vanderbilt has to play their permanent opponent, Ole Miss at home, and since they can only play 1 SEC West team at home, Alabama could not play at Vanderbilt in 2013.
Next in the rotation, Alabama is “Due” to play at Georgia in 2013. However, they are playing at Kentucky, which makes zero sense. We'll get back to that after reviewing LSU's schedule.
Conspiracy theories happen all of the time, however, when they become backed up by facts, they are no longer conspiracy theories.
In 2013, there are only 2 teams out of 14 that benefited by "SEC Bridge Schedules", care to take a guess who they are?
After researching every SEC teams' rotating opponents, it is clear that in 2013, the "SEC Bridge Schedule" was created with intentional deceit and dishonesty, resulting in a scheduling advantage for Alabama and Auburn.
In 2013, they are the only 2 teams in the SEC, who are playing an easier opponent than they should be playing and it is clear how it was done.
The SEC schedule creator swapped the opponent that Alabama was "Due" to play with LSU, and swapped Auburn's opponent with Arkansas.
Alabama should be playing at Georgia in 2013 and LSU should be playing at Kentucky. Now, it's LSU at Georgia and Alabama at Kentucky.
Auburn should be playing at Florida in 2013 and Arkansas should be playing at Tennessee. Now, it's Arkansas at Florida and Auburn at Tennessee.
All of the facts needed to conclude how this was done are detailed in this report.
Background
What is the “SEC Bridge Schedule”?
In 2012, the SEC expanded from 12 to 14 teams, adding Missouri and Texas A&M. Prior to 2012, the SEC had 2 divisions with 6 teams, and a 5-1-2 scheduling format, totaling 8 conference games for each team. This means that each team would play the other 5 teams in their division, plus 1 permanent opponent from the other division, plus 2 rotating opponents from the other division.
After Missouri and Texas A&M joined the conference, there became 2 divisions with 7 teams, and the format changed to a 6-1-1 format, still totaling 8 conference games for each team. Every team would now play 6 teams from their division, 1 permanent opponent from the other division, and 1 rotating opponent from the other division.
In 2012 and 2013, the SEC called the schedule a “Bridge Schedule”. Every team would still play the 6 teams from their division and their permanent opponent from the other division. However, the rotating opponent would be selected by the SEC, and the conference stated that this opponent would not be based on any previous or future scheduling format. The SEC basically said that there would be no rhyme or reason as to how these schedules would be created. A Joe Pesci quote from the movie “JFK” sums up the SEC’s position on the “SEC Bridge Schedules”….“It’s a mystery wrapped in a riddle inside an enigma!”
This report will present evidence that proves that the SEC made a false statement, and that the “Bridge Schedule” was based on previous scheduling formats, and that intentional deceit and dishonesty occurred in the scheduling of 4 games.
The Mountain of Evidence
In order to understand how the “SEC Bridge Schedules” were created, it is necessary to view the most recent full rotation of rotating opponents from previous seasons. It is not necessary to view each team’s entire schedule from each season, since it is understood that each team played the other teams in their division, along with their permanent opponent from the other division. The permanent opponents are the following, Miss State / Kentucky, Ole Miss / Vanderbilt, Auburn / Georgia, Arkansas / South Carolina, Alabama / Tennessee, LSU / Florida, and Texas A&M / Missouri.
Presented are the 2 rotating opponents for the original 12 teams from 2007-2011. It is the most recent full rotation, and upon review, it becomes obvious if each team's opponent in 2012 and 2013 are based on the previous schedule rotation and makes sense, by playing the team that they were “Due” to play. It will also be obvious when the opponents don’t make sense and when games were swapped, and clearly who benefited most when this occurred. This evidence details exactly how the "SEC Bridge Schedules" were created.
Looking at the SEC West teams
Miss State
2007 - at South Carolina, Tennessee
2008 - at Tennessee, Vanderbilt
2009 - at Vanderbilt, Florida
2010 - at Florida, Georgia
2011 - at Georgia, South Carolina
2012 - Tennessee
2013 - at South Carolina
Miss State's opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2007, they played Tennessee at home and South Carolina on the road. In 2012, they played Tennessee at home and in 2013, they will play South Carolina on the road.
Ole Miss
2007 - at Georgia, Florida
2008 - at Florida, South Carolina
2009 - at South Carolina, Tennessee
2010 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2011 - at Kentucky, Georgia
2012 - at Georgia
2013 – Missouri
Ole Miss' opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2007, they played Georgia on the road and in 2012, they played Georgia on the road. They will play Missouri in 2013 and this makes sense, since someone has to play Missouri.
Auburn
2007 - at Florida, Vanderbilt
2008 - at Vanderbilt, Tennessee
2009 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2010 - at Kentucky, South Carolina
2011 - at South Carolina, Florida
2012 - at Vanderbilt
2013 - at Tennessee
Auburn played at Vanderbilt in 2012 and this does make sense, even though they were "Due" to play at Florida, like in 2007. The reason is because Florida had to play LSU at home in 2012. Since Florida could only play 1 SEC West team at home in 2012, it does make sense that the "Schedule Creator" moved down to the next road game in the rotation that they were ‘Due” to play, which was at Vanderbilt.
Auburn playing at Tennessee in 2013 makes zero sense, since they were still “Due” to play at Florida. We'll get back to that after reviewing Arkansas' schedule.
Arkansas
2007 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2008 - at Kentucky, Florida
2009 - at Florida, Georgia
2010 - at Georgia, Vanderbilt
2011 - at Vanderbilt, Tennessee
2012 - Kentucky
2013 - at Florida
Arkansas played Kentucky at home in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
Arkansas playing at Florida in 2013 makes zero sense, since they were "Due" to play at Tennessee, like in 2007. In 2013, Auburn is "Due" to play at Florida, however, the "Schedule Creator" swapped these games. Now, Auburn is playing at Tennessee, and Arkansas is playing at Florida.
Florida is expected to be a much stronger team than Tennessee in 2013, so the only reason to swap these games is to give a clear advantage to Auburn.
Alabama
2007 - at Vanderbilt, Georgia
2008 - at Georgia, Kentucky
2009 - at Kentucky, South Carolina
2010 - at South Carolina, Florida
2011 - at Florida, Vanderbilt
2012 - at Missouri
2013 - at Kentucky
Alabama played at Missouri in 2012 and this makes sense, since someone had to play at Missouri.
In 2013, Alabama is "Due" to play at Vanderbilt, however, in 2013 Vanderbilt has to play their permanent opponent, Ole Miss at home, and since they can only play 1 SEC West team at home, Alabama could not play at Vanderbilt in 2013.
Next in the rotation, Alabama is “Due” to play at Georgia in 2013. However, they are playing at Kentucky, which makes zero sense. We'll get back to that after reviewing LSU's schedule.
This post was edited on 7/24/13 at 12:20 pm
43
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:26 am to McManus
LSU
2007 - at Kentucky, South Carolina
2008 - at South Carolina, Georgia
2009 - at Georgia, Vanderbilt
2010 - at Vanderbilt, Tennessee
2011 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2012 - South Carolina
2013 - at Georgia
LSU played South Carolina at home in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
LSU playing at Georgia in 2013 makes zero sense, since they were "Due" to play at Kentucky, like in 2007. In 2013, Alabama is “Due” to play at Georgia, however the "Schedule Creator" swapped these games. Now, Alabama is playing at Kentucky, and LSU is playing at Georgia.
Georgia is expected to be a much stronger team than Kentucky in 2013, so the only reason to swap these games is to give a clear advantage to Alabama.
Texas A&M
2012 - Florida
2013 - Vanderbilt
Texas A&M's opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. They had to play someone, so why not Florida and Vanderbilt, a tough opponent in 2012, followed by an easier opponent in 2013.
Looking at the SEC East teams
Missouri
2012 - Alabama
2013 - at Ole Miss
Missouri’s opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. They had to play someone, so why not Alabama and Ole Miss, and just like Texas A&M, a tough opponent in 2012, followed by an easier opponent in 2013.
South Carolina
2007 - at LSU, Miss State
2008 - at Ole Miss, LSU
2009 - at Alabama, Ole Miss
2010 - at Auburn, Alabama
2011 - at Miss State, Auburn
2012 - at LSU
2013 - Miss State
South Carolina's opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2007, they played LSU on the road and Miss State at home. In 2012, they played LSU on the road and in 2013, they will play Miss State at home.
Vanderbilt
2007 - at Auburn, Alabama
2008 - at Miss State, Auburn
2009 - at LSU, Miss State
2010 - at Arkansas, LSU
2011 - at Alabama, Arkansas
2012 - Auburn
2013 - at Texas A&M
Vanderbilt's opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2012, Auburn was "Due" to play at Florida, however, that could not happen because LSU was playing at Florida. Next in Auburn's rotation, they were “Due” to play at Vanderbilt in 2012, so this makes sense. In 2013, someone has to play Texas A&M, so why not Vanderbilt.
Florida
2007 - at Ole Miss, Auburn
2008 - at Arkansas, Ole Miss
2009 - at Miss State, Arkansas
2010 - at Alabama, Miss State
2011 - at Auburn, Alabama
2012 - at Texas A&M
2013 – Arkansas
Florida played at Texas A&M in 2012 and this makes sense, since someone had to play at Texas A&M.
In 2013, they are playing Arkansas, while they should be playing Auburn. From Florida's perspective, this is a "Wash", since not much is expected by Arkansas and Auburn in 2013, you can conclude that Florida is not receiving any benefit by playing Arkansas instead of Auburn.
Tennessee
2007 - at Miss State, Arkansas
2008 - at Auburn, Miss State
2009 - at Ole Miss, Auburn
2010 - at LSU, Ole Miss
2011 - at Arkansas, LSU
2012 - at Miss State
2013 – Auburn
Tennessee played at Miss State in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, they are playing Auburn, while they should be playing Arkansas. Just like Florida, from Tennessee's perspective, this is a "Wash", since not much is expected by Auburn and Arkansas in 2013, you can conclude that Tennessee is not receiving any benefit by playing Auburn instead of Arkansas.
Georgia
2007 - at Alabama, Ole Miss
2008 - at LSU, Alabama
2009 - at Arkansas, LSU
2010 - at Miss State, Arkansas
2011 - at Ole Miss, Miss State
2012 - Ole Miss
2013 – LSU
Georgia played Ole Miss at home in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, they are playing LSU instead of Alabama. From Georgia's perspective, this is a "Wash", since both LSU and Alabama are 2 of the best teams in the SEC West, you can conclude that Georgia is not receiving any benefit by playing LSU instead of Alabama.
Kentucky
2007 - at Arkansas, LSU
2008 - at Alabama, Arkansas
2009 - at Auburn, Alabama
2010 - at Ole Miss, Auburn
2011 - at LSU, Ole Miss
2012 - at Arkansas
2013 – Alabama
Kentucky played at Arkansas in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, they are playing Alabama instead of LSU. Just like Georgia, from Kentucky's perspective, this is a "Wash", since both Alabama and LSU are 2 of the best teams in the SEC West, you can conclude that Kentucky is not receiving any benefit by playing Alabama instead of LSU.
Conclusion
If you are going to accuse someone of being dishonest or cheating, it is a good idea to have all of the facts to back up your claim.
These are the facts and they back up the claim that in 2013, the "SEC Bridge Schedule" was created with intentional deceit and dishonesty, resulting in an easier schedule for Alabama and Auburn.
In 2012, Alabama played at Missouri, and since someone had to play at Missouri, it may difficult to claim that scheduling Alabama at Missouri in 2012 was dishonest or improper. However, when you combine it with the scheduling fiasco in 2013, it becomes crystal clear that Alabama's games against Missouri and Kentucky in 2012 and 2013, were both scheduled to provide a clear advantage to Alabama.
In 2013, Alabama and Auburn are the only 2 teams that clearly received a benefit by the "SEC Bridge Schedule". Since not much is expected from Auburn in 2013, you can conclude that the main goal of the dishonest schedule creation was to provide Alabama with an easier schedule. Perhaps the "Schedule Creator" decided to include another team, so that it would not be so obvious as to what he was doing. The fact that he picked Auburn is just another slap in the face to everyone in the SEC, outside of the state of Alabama.
To sum up, Alabama and Auburn received an improper scheduling benefit in 2013. This was accomplished by a blatant form of deceit and dishonesty by the creator of the "SEC Bridge Schedule". There is no doubt about it, and it is crystal clear how it was done and which teams were affected. Any response by the SEC Office to justify these actions will not have the facts on their side.
2007 - at Kentucky, South Carolina
2008 - at South Carolina, Georgia
2009 - at Georgia, Vanderbilt
2010 - at Vanderbilt, Tennessee
2011 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2012 - South Carolina
2013 - at Georgia
LSU played South Carolina at home in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
LSU playing at Georgia in 2013 makes zero sense, since they were "Due" to play at Kentucky, like in 2007. In 2013, Alabama is “Due” to play at Georgia, however the "Schedule Creator" swapped these games. Now, Alabama is playing at Kentucky, and LSU is playing at Georgia.
Georgia is expected to be a much stronger team than Kentucky in 2013, so the only reason to swap these games is to give a clear advantage to Alabama.
Texas A&M
2012 - Florida
2013 - Vanderbilt
Texas A&M's opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. They had to play someone, so why not Florida and Vanderbilt, a tough opponent in 2012, followed by an easier opponent in 2013.
Looking at the SEC East teams
Missouri
2012 - Alabama
2013 - at Ole Miss
Missouri’s opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. They had to play someone, so why not Alabama and Ole Miss, and just like Texas A&M, a tough opponent in 2012, followed by an easier opponent in 2013.
South Carolina
2007 - at LSU, Miss State
2008 - at Ole Miss, LSU
2009 - at Alabama, Ole Miss
2010 - at Auburn, Alabama
2011 - at Miss State, Auburn
2012 - at LSU
2013 - Miss State
South Carolina's opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2007, they played LSU on the road and Miss State at home. In 2012, they played LSU on the road and in 2013, they will play Miss State at home.
Vanderbilt
2007 - at Auburn, Alabama
2008 - at Miss State, Auburn
2009 - at LSU, Miss State
2010 - at Arkansas, LSU
2011 - at Alabama, Arkansas
2012 - Auburn
2013 - at Texas A&M
Vanderbilt's opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2012, Auburn was "Due" to play at Florida, however, that could not happen because LSU was playing at Florida. Next in Auburn's rotation, they were “Due” to play at Vanderbilt in 2012, so this makes sense. In 2013, someone has to play Texas A&M, so why not Vanderbilt.
Florida
2007 - at Ole Miss, Auburn
2008 - at Arkansas, Ole Miss
2009 - at Miss State, Arkansas
2010 - at Alabama, Miss State
2011 - at Auburn, Alabama
2012 - at Texas A&M
2013 – Arkansas
Florida played at Texas A&M in 2012 and this makes sense, since someone had to play at Texas A&M.
In 2013, they are playing Arkansas, while they should be playing Auburn. From Florida's perspective, this is a "Wash", since not much is expected by Arkansas and Auburn in 2013, you can conclude that Florida is not receiving any benefit by playing Arkansas instead of Auburn.
Tennessee
2007 - at Miss State, Arkansas
2008 - at Auburn, Miss State
2009 - at Ole Miss, Auburn
2010 - at LSU, Ole Miss
2011 - at Arkansas, LSU
2012 - at Miss State
2013 – Auburn
Tennessee played at Miss State in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, they are playing Auburn, while they should be playing Arkansas. Just like Florida, from Tennessee's perspective, this is a "Wash", since not much is expected by Auburn and Arkansas in 2013, you can conclude that Tennessee is not receiving any benefit by playing Auburn instead of Arkansas.
Georgia
2007 - at Alabama, Ole Miss
2008 - at LSU, Alabama
2009 - at Arkansas, LSU
2010 - at Miss State, Arkansas
2011 - at Ole Miss, Miss State
2012 - Ole Miss
2013 – LSU
Georgia played Ole Miss at home in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, they are playing LSU instead of Alabama. From Georgia's perspective, this is a "Wash", since both LSU and Alabama are 2 of the best teams in the SEC West, you can conclude that Georgia is not receiving any benefit by playing LSU instead of Alabama.
Kentucky
2007 - at Arkansas, LSU
2008 - at Alabama, Arkansas
2009 - at Auburn, Alabama
2010 - at Ole Miss, Auburn
2011 - at LSU, Ole Miss
2012 - at Arkansas
2013 – Alabama
Kentucky played at Arkansas in 2012, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, they are playing Alabama instead of LSU. Just like Georgia, from Kentucky's perspective, this is a "Wash", since both Alabama and LSU are 2 of the best teams in the SEC West, you can conclude that Kentucky is not receiving any benefit by playing Alabama instead of LSU.
Conclusion
If you are going to accuse someone of being dishonest or cheating, it is a good idea to have all of the facts to back up your claim.
These are the facts and they back up the claim that in 2013, the "SEC Bridge Schedule" was created with intentional deceit and dishonesty, resulting in an easier schedule for Alabama and Auburn.
In 2012, Alabama played at Missouri, and since someone had to play at Missouri, it may difficult to claim that scheduling Alabama at Missouri in 2012 was dishonest or improper. However, when you combine it with the scheduling fiasco in 2013, it becomes crystal clear that Alabama's games against Missouri and Kentucky in 2012 and 2013, were both scheduled to provide a clear advantage to Alabama.
In 2013, Alabama and Auburn are the only 2 teams that clearly received a benefit by the "SEC Bridge Schedule". Since not much is expected from Auburn in 2013, you can conclude that the main goal of the dishonest schedule creation was to provide Alabama with an easier schedule. Perhaps the "Schedule Creator" decided to include another team, so that it would not be so obvious as to what he was doing. The fact that he picked Auburn is just another slap in the face to everyone in the SEC, outside of the state of Alabama.
To sum up, Alabama and Auburn received an improper scheduling benefit in 2013. This was accomplished by a blatant form of deceit and dishonesty by the creator of the "SEC Bridge Schedule". There is no doubt about it, and it is crystal clear how it was done and which teams were affected. Any response by the SEC Office to justify these actions will not have the facts on their side.
This post was edited on 7/24/13 at 11:51 am
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:28 am to McManus
post this on the SECr
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:28 am to McManus
I'd rather play Georgia than Kentucky. The goal for the football season is to have good time watching your team, not to win national championships. People focus too much on the final result and not the actual season. Good opponents make for good games, I wouldn't trade 13 shite games for a national championship and you shouldn't either.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:34 am to McManus
Bitch I ain't reading all that.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:35 am to McManus
Conspiracy theorists
casty
casty
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:35 am to McManus
1st page
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:36 am to McManus
A whole lot of communists in here whining about "fairness."
Makes me sick to my stomach that such people are allowed to even live in this country.
Makes me sick to my stomach that such people are allowed to even live in this country.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:38 am to McManus
how are we due to play Vandy in 2013 if we played them in 2011? wouldn't they be "due" to rotate off in 2013
Also why isn't LSU's schedule written up? Poor presentation on your part I must say.
Also why isn't LSU's schedule written up? Poor presentation on your part I must say.
This post was edited on 7/24/13 at 11:40 am
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:38 am to McManus
was this you who drafted this up? because if so, you are fricking hilarious.
might want to check your "facts" as well. however all good conspiracy theories don't need them anyways
might want to check your "facts" as well. however all good conspiracy theories don't need them anyways
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:38 am to McManus
With the exception of playing Mizzou in 2012, Alabama is back on it's original rotation by playing Kentucky in 2013.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:42 am to McManus
What is it with LSU fans and conspiracy theories?
Posted on 7/24/13 at 11:58 am to McManus
For the '12 bridge schedule, they just kept the same cross-division rotation that had been used previously. Therefore, each team added the cross-division opponent that it last played in the '08 season with 4 exceptions:
1. Bama played Mizzou instead of UGA
2. UF played A&M instead of Ole Miss
3. UGA played Ole Miss instead of Bama
4. Ole Miss played UGA instead of UF
So, two teams (Bama and UF) were picked to play the new additions (Mizzou and A&M) and the two teams they were supposed to play (UGA and Ole Miss) played each other.
The exact same methodology is apparent in the '13 schedule. Each team added the cross-division opponent that it last played in the '09 season with 4 exceptions:
1. Ole Miss plays Mizzou instead of USC
2. Vandy plays A&M instead of State
3. USC plays State instead of Ole Miss
4. State plays USC instead of Vandy
So, two teams (Ole Miss and Vandy) were picked to play the new additions (Mizzou and A&M) and the two teams they were supposed to play (USC and State) played each other
Conclusion
A consistent methodology was used to create the bridge schedule based on the previous cross-division rotation.
1. Bama played Mizzou instead of UGA
2. UF played A&M instead of Ole Miss
3. UGA played Ole Miss instead of Bama
4. Ole Miss played UGA instead of UF
So, two teams (Bama and UF) were picked to play the new additions (Mizzou and A&M) and the two teams they were supposed to play (UGA and Ole Miss) played each other.
The exact same methodology is apparent in the '13 schedule. Each team added the cross-division opponent that it last played in the '09 season with 4 exceptions:
1. Ole Miss plays Mizzou instead of USC
2. Vandy plays A&M instead of State
3. USC plays State instead of Ole Miss
4. State plays USC instead of Vandy
So, two teams (Ole Miss and Vandy) were picked to play the new additions (Mizzou and A&M) and the two teams they were supposed to play (USC and State) played each other
Conclusion
A consistent methodology was used to create the bridge schedule based on the previous cross-division rotation.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:03 pm to McManus
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:04 pm to McManus
quote:
McManus
Who gives a frick? We're Bama.
We are the reason Southern Football earned a name and reputation. We're the reason the rest of the country took a step back stopped looking at the South as a joke - full of inept, uneducated, untalented hicks - following the Civil War.
We've carried the entire conference on our backs for decades, along with some occasional help from schools like Tennessee, Florida, and even Auburn.
Conclusion
We run this bitch, and we'll schedule whoever the frick we want... because we've EARNED it.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:06 pm to McManus
The only logical explanation for this is
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:16 pm to McManus
I'm sick of the subject but I didn't think this was that badly written or anything but JKF needs to be JFK.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:24 pm to McManus
This OP somehow reminds me of this one:
I. LEGITIMACY
We must go to the contract signed by the PAC 10 and SEC. There we will find the answer to the question of legitimacy. The BCS contract explicitly states that each year, there will be a National Champion Game between the two most worthy teams, based upon a pre-agreed system. The National Championship Game will determine the National Champion. USC agreed to this contract by agreeing to be in the PAC 10. For years, USC fans used the BCS webpage, which intimated a "split." But now if you go to the BCS Webpage, it upholds the BCS contract and clearly states that LSU is the one and only 2003 National Champion. The reason for the change was legal pressure arising from not honoring its own contract....
I. LEGITIMACY
We must go to the contract signed by the PAC 10 and SEC. There we will find the answer to the question of legitimacy. The BCS contract explicitly states that each year, there will be a National Champion Game between the two most worthy teams, based upon a pre-agreed system. The National Championship Game will determine the National Champion. USC agreed to this contract by agreeing to be in the PAC 10. For years, USC fans used the BCS webpage, which intimated a "split." But now if you go to the BCS Webpage, it upholds the BCS contract and clearly states that LSU is the one and only 2003 National Champion. The reason for the change was legal pressure arising from not honoring its own contract....
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:35 pm to McManus
First, tl;bcnr (but could not resist).
Second, there are many flaws to your arguments. In order to accept your premise, we have to accept the notion that teams that suck now have always sucked and will continue to suck.
As an example, Auburn "due" to play Florida, but now is playing Tennessee. Those who have a problem with that switch have made a projection of each team's strength going forward. But, just a couple of years ago, Florida was projected as a weaker opponent.
You have to assume that the "schedule maker" is making these projections and deliberately altering the scheduling with ONLY Alabama or Auburn (or even LSU in a negative way) in mind.
It seems that everybody tends to ignore the scheduling wants/needs of the other teams when these conspiracy theories start to materialize. It's all about them and totally short-sighted when considering the opponent's needs.
Georgia is not getting a break. LSU is getting screwed.
Kentucky is not getting a marquee match up at home. Alabama is getting a cakewalk.
Arkansas is not getting a marquee match up in very fertile recruiting grounds of the Sunshine State (which, given the population of Arkansas and relative local talent, this exposure is something Arkansas desperately needs). Auburn is getting a cakewalk at Tennessee (UT fans should be insulted).
The guys who talk about these scheduling conspiracies remind me of former rivals that were so self-centered and disinterested in the needs of their business partners that 4 programs left the conference. I'm not pointing fingers. I'm just making a point. Consider the conference needs as a whole.
Second, there are many flaws to your arguments. In order to accept your premise, we have to accept the notion that teams that suck now have always sucked and will continue to suck.
As an example, Auburn "due" to play Florida, but now is playing Tennessee. Those who have a problem with that switch have made a projection of each team's strength going forward. But, just a couple of years ago, Florida was projected as a weaker opponent.
You have to assume that the "schedule maker" is making these projections and deliberately altering the scheduling with ONLY Alabama or Auburn (or even LSU in a negative way) in mind.
It seems that everybody tends to ignore the scheduling wants/needs of the other teams when these conspiracy theories start to materialize. It's all about them and totally short-sighted when considering the opponent's needs.
Georgia is not getting a break. LSU is getting screwed.
Kentucky is not getting a marquee match up at home. Alabama is getting a cakewalk.
Arkansas is not getting a marquee match up in very fertile recruiting grounds of the Sunshine State (which, given the population of Arkansas and relative local talent, this exposure is something Arkansas desperately needs). Auburn is getting a cakewalk at Tennessee (UT fans should be insulted).
The guys who talk about these scheduling conspiracies remind me of former rivals that were so self-centered and disinterested in the needs of their business partners that 4 programs left the conference. I'm not pointing fingers. I'm just making a point. Consider the conference needs as a whole.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 12:49 pm to McManus
As I have already already shot this conspiracy theory down one time on tigerant, allow me to do the same here.And by the way, I noticed you left part of the original text off that stated Kentucky was next in line to play Bama after Georgia.
So, since Vanderbilt was unable to play Bama they were replaced with Kentucky, a comparable team to Vandy.Makes perfect sense to everyone but a biased fan.
So the original pattern would have been.......
2013-VANDY
2014-UGA
2015-Kentucky
So they swap Vandy with Kentucky which is just , except to the biased crybabies.....
NOW YOU HAVE...........
2013-Kentucky
2014-UGA
2015-VADY
Georgia bookended by 2 soft east teams as per the rotation is still UGA bookended by the scheduled rotation of to soft east teams , so, what the hell changed ? Not a damn thing.
So the biased, lunatic fringe want Georgia first , even though Kentucky is more in line with Vandy. !!!!!
What all the crying and byching is really about is... kind of like the race hustlers in the Trayvon Martin case , cry and bych untill hopfully you can place a guilt trip on someone,( SEC OFFICE ) and then maybe, you can get a quota ,errrr I mean maybe you can exchange Florida for Vandy, Kentucky or Mizzou on your permanent schedule.
So, since Vanderbilt was unable to play Bama they were replaced with Kentucky, a comparable team to Vandy.Makes perfect sense to everyone but a biased fan.
So the original pattern would have been.......
2013-VANDY
2014-UGA
2015-Kentucky
So they swap Vandy with Kentucky which is just , except to the biased crybabies.....
NOW YOU HAVE...........
2013-Kentucky
2014-UGA
2015-VADY
Georgia bookended by 2 soft east teams as per the rotation is still UGA bookended by the scheduled rotation of to soft east teams , so, what the hell changed ? Not a damn thing.
So the biased, lunatic fringe want Georgia first , even though Kentucky is more in line with Vandy. !!!!!
What all the crying and byching is really about is... kind of like the race hustlers in the Trayvon Martin case , cry and bych untill hopfully you can place a guilt trip on someone,( SEC OFFICE ) and then maybe, you can get a quota ,errrr I mean maybe you can exchange Florida for Vandy, Kentucky or Mizzou on your permanent schedule.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News