Should Division Records Be All That Matters | SECRant.com
Posted byMessage
Rodeonaut
Missouri Fan
Member since Nov 2013
810 posts

Should Division Records Be All That Matters


When determining who goes to the SECCG?

For instance, it would be pretty silly if UGA had only one loss, and that loss was to LSU. But didn't win the division race because whoever won the East only had to play Arkansas and Mississippi St as crossover games.







Back to top
Share:
TheSandman
Auburn Fan
Section 23
Member since Nov 2010
12637 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


No

/thread






Back to top
jbond
Alabama Fan
Atlanta
Member since Jun 2012
2038 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


Yes. I think division record is all that should matter and in the event of a tie, the only data used to break a tie should be from divisional games.





Back to top
NYCAuburn
Auburn Fan
TD Platinum Membership
Member since Feb 2011
30886 posts
 Online 

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


Offseason


/thread.






Back to top
pivey14
USA Fan
Starkville, MS
Member since Mar 2012
11211 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


Damn this is stupid





Back to top
pvilleguru
USA Fan
Member since Jun 2009
12168 posts
 Online 

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


I would be ok with that.





Back to top
Rodeonaut
Missouri Fan
Member since Nov 2013
810 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


quote:

No

/thread


Can you explain why?

How dumb would it be if two teams both went undefeated within the division, but one had to play a top 10 team, while the other played cupcakes as crossover games?

That makes no sense.






Back to top
Rodeonaut
Missouri Fan
Member since Nov 2013
810 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


quote:

Yes. I think division record is all that should matter and in the event of a tie, the only data used to break a tie should be from divisional games.



I agree






Back to top
PrivatePublic
Alabama Fan
Member since Nov 2012
3309 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


How could the other team win the East without beating said UGA team?

You may want to rethink this.






Back to top
Rodeonaut
Missouri Fan
Member since Nov 2013
810 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


quote:

How could the other team win the East without beating said UGA team?

You may want to rethink this.


Ahh, you're right.

I wanted to make the simplest example.

Let's say 3 teams all had 2 losses. All were 5-1 in the division, but one of them played highly ranked teams, while the others played no one. That could happen, and it wouldn't be fair.






Back to top
TheSandman
Auburn Fan
Section 23
Member since Nov 2010
12637 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


Because that turns cross-divisional games into effective non-conference games.





Back to top
Cockopotamus
South Carolina Fan
Member since Jan 2013
7072 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


Weak bait





Back to top
KSGamecock
South Carolina Fan
Junction City, Kansas
Member since May 2012
4105 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


This happened to Carolina in 2011. We beat every team in the east but lost to Auburn and Arkansas so Georgia, whose only loss was to us, won the division. Spurrier made same comments about it not being right at the time.

Personally I don't care as long as they keep it consistent...don't change the rule now.






Back to top
Rodeonaut
Missouri Fan
Member since Nov 2013
810 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


quote:

Weak bait


I'd guess most didn't know this was bait, or who it would be baiting. You're sharper than the average ranter.






Back to top
the808bass
Missouri Fan
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
12021 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


But next year, when a cross divisional opponent changes, a team might be better off. (Joking)

It's all cyclical. Going into this year, you'd have thought LSU had a horrible cross divisional schedule. It didn't actually turn out that way. Gotta just win. Take advantage of the opportunities and overcome the obstacles. No year is going to be "fair."






Back to top
weagle99
Member since Nov 2011
10883 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


quote:

Spurrier made same comments about it not being right at the time.


Spurrier = not making those comments now






Back to top
jbond
Alabama Fan
Atlanta
Member since Jun 2012
2038 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


I think we can all agree that the goal of the SEC Championship is to match up the best team from the East with the best team from the West. Toward that end, it is important to consider how those divisional champions are determined. Are we really doing the SECCG justice if we allow teams' cross-divisional schedules to affect who goes?





Back to top
Cockopotamus
South Carolina Fan
Member since Jan 2013
7072 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


LSU was projected to have probably the toughest cross division schedule and did play a great UGA team.

And it would be a helluva lot more fair if they did away with permanent opponents and finally out of us on a fixed rotating schedule.

This pulling random teams out of a hat bull shite is ridiculous.






Back to top
the808bass
Missouri Fan
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
12021 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


quote:

And it would be a helluva lot more fair if they did away with permanent opponents and finally out of us on a fixed rotating schedule.

Or went to a 9 game conference schedule.

Eta: but yes, if the goal is to get the best teams in the SECCG, it seems permanent cross divisional rivals may end up going away. I doubt that will actually happen.



This post was edited on 11/18 at 10:07 pm


Back to top
CockRocket
South Carolina Fan
Columbia, SC
Member since May 2012
6444 posts

re: Should Division Records Be All That Matters


Are you conceding a loss to one of the West opponents you have to play?






Back to top


Back to top