Started By
Message
re: Again, why does Auburn get to play UGA at home in back-to-back seasons?
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:35 pm to TideSatchel
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:35 pm to TideSatchel
OR, the only ones to call out bama bias w/o remorse !
Remember when bama fans/admin. complained about all their opponents' open dates....gues what it got "fixed" real quick and rightly so !
LSU calls out the "bridge schedule" bias...and what happens ????? NOTHING !
That's the difference !
Remember when bama fans/admin. complained about all their opponents' open dates....gues what it got "fixed" real quick and rightly so !
LSU calls out the "bridge schedule" bias...and what happens ????? NOTHING !
That's the difference !
0
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:38 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
I will take out the permanents(UT and UF) for their respective team, because the don’t change
And that's a huge problem right there. Our annual is a tier 1 opponent while their annual is a tier 2. So they get credit for the years they play our tier 1 permanent, but we get no recriprocal credit for the years we play their "tier 2" annual opponent.
That's the problem looking at this in a vaccuum. And it shows again that UT has to get things going if we are going to keep permanents.
This post was edited on 4/9/13 at 12:40 pm
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:39 pm to tickfawtiger
quote:
quote:
Let's put this another way you may be able to comprehend. Last 5 years of SEC play: Bama has played the top 3 SEC East teams FL,GA,SC....4{FOUR} times and GA not at all Last 5 years of SEC play: LSU has played the top 3 SEC East teams FL,GA,SC....8{EIGHT} times You can't possibly tell me you don't see an "issue"....come on REALLY ! ADD to this...the SEC will not even "imply" that the 2014 schedule going forward, will even address this obvious imbalance !
Well lets see your little figures here are skewed by your permanent, Those dont change, so how do the the schedule makers aka bama fans factor into that?
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:41 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
Well lets see your little figures here are skewed by your permanent, Those dont change, so how do the the schedule makers aka bama fans factor into that?
Easy solution...get rid of permanent opponents and rotate. That's really the only fair way to schedule long term. But that's not going to happen.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:42 pm to NYCAuburn
I'm sorry....I can't help you anymore, if you can't see a difference in strength of schedules between bama and LSU and how the SEC is involved...LOL
You are one twisted personality pal...LOL
You are one twisted personality pal...LOL
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:44 pm to tickfawtiger
quote:
I'm sorry....I can't help you anymore, if you can't see a difference in strength of schedules between bama and LSU and how the SEC is involved...LOL You are one twisted personality pal...LOL
I cant see it?
It's funny you guys cant see it. yall are so consumed with bama, that you cant see it.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:45 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
LSU played/plays 3 tier 1
+4
Yes, I know you took out permanents, but LSU's permanent is a tier 1 and bamers is a tier 2. If they were both tier 1, then it would be equal to take out permanents.
Haven't read this thread, but I assume its a bunch of LSU fans bitching about the schedule?
Are there really LSU fans crying over having an exciting schedule?
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:45 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
Not quite the same as playing a huge rivalry game away 2 years in a row.
Lucky for you we suck.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:46 pm to spslayto
quote:
Easy solution...get rid of permanent opponents and rotate. That's really the only fair way to schedule long term. But that's not going to happen.
So everything was gravy until UT collasped? Whats going to happen when UT has a decent team again? yall will have to find another argument
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:47 pm to JoLeUGA
SEC office in birmingham al.
They always help the home teams.
They always help the home teams.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:48 pm to TideSatchel
quote:
The absolute whiniest fanbase in the history of sports since 1/9/12.
fify
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:48 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
It's funny you guys cant see it. yall are so consumed with bama, that you cant see it.
I understand what you are saying, but no one can rationalize to me why we play Georgia again before Bama does. You can twist the bridge schedule any way you want.
And its sad that we look at our permanent as a tier 1, while their permanent is, according to your own analysis, a tier 2. This is why annual opponents should be done away with. I don't know when Tennessee will return to their top tier status.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:49 pm to spslayto
quote:
I don't know when Tennessee will return to their top tier status.
When were they ever top tier?
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:51 pm to USMC Gators
quote:
When were they ever top tier?
I'm not going to get in this argument over Tennessee with a gator.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:52 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
So everything was gravy until UT collasped? Whats going to happen when UT has a decent team again? yall will have to find another argument
Nope. Get rid of the permanent opponents. Simple as that.
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:56 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
So everything was gravy until UT collasped? Whats going to happen when UT has a decent team again? yall will have to find another argument
That is the question. It isn't Bama's fault that UT has totally collapsed. UT was one of the big 6 when permantent rivals were established. So do most people think UT can get back to where they were in the late 90's and early to mid-2000s? But for anyone to say that we should stop playing them every year in conference play is an exercise in futility. Plus UF doesn't complain about UGA playing auburn. But UT does need to get their act together and do their part.
And while we did draw UK this year, getting Mizzou last year wasn't necessarily a gimme game before the season started (and thus when the schedule was made). A lot of people picked Mizzou to compete for the east. They were given a better chance of succeeding in the first few years in the SEC than was aTm.
This post was edited on 4/9/13 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 4/9/13 at 12:58 pm to NYCAuburn
Damn...I'm sooo sorry now, I can see by your razor sharp analysis of the LSU / Bama scheduling controversey.....according to you, LSU has by far the easier schedule both prior to bridge scheduling ans especially during and probably after.... I hereby advocate we follow NYC's lead and dictate that LSU is no longer to play TN,Vandy,KY OR MO....until the OBVIOUS bias IS RECTIFIED !
You are one piece of work NYC...lmao
You are one piece of work NYC...lmao
Posted on 4/9/13 at 1:01 pm to Al Bundy Bulldog
quote:
We had to play at Kentucky 2 years in a row.
Oh the humanity!!!!!!!!
Posted on 4/9/13 at 1:02 pm to NYCAuburn
How then do you propose to "toughen" up LSU's "easier" schedule ? Maybe somehow "manipulate" these bridge schedules ?...Yeah, that's the ticket..LMAO @ NYC
Posted on 4/9/13 at 1:03 pm to spslayto
quote:
Nope. Get rid of the permanent opponents. Simple as that.
Ummm...no. The SEC will probably never do away with the Bama/UT game or the UGA/auburn game, nor should they. Both of those rivalry games deserve to be played annually (and in conference play for those that keep saying that it should be played as an OOC game).
This post was edited on 4/9/13 at 1:04 pm
Page 7 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News