Started By
Message
re: SEC Scheduling
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:10 pm to five_fivesix
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:10 pm to five_fivesix
quote:
For true balance and parity in scheduling, you need balance and parity in talent.
If you let it truly rotate it basically fixes the issue as it is just randomness of scheduling making the unbalance.
The idea that teams will necessarily be rebuilt or fall is just a stupid concept to depend on to balance everything out.
1
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:12 pm to Colonel Flagg
quote:
The idea that teams will necessarily be rebuilt or fall is just a stupid concept to depend on to balance everything out.
Then your concept of balancing out is equally as flawed. You'd just be trading hard for easy and giving another team advantages. Suck it up and quit crying.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:16 pm to Alahunter
quote:
11 of 14 schools disagree with you. And by schools, I mean coaches and AD's. Florida is among those that disagree. The had to play one of the toughest schedules this year, with Lsu on theirs. You don't see them whining.
All the votes can be linked to selfish reasons that are not fair.
The teams with weaker opponents voted to keep weaker opponents.
The teams with their bs rivalries voted to keep their rivalries.
UF voted the way they did because the rumor was the alternative was to potentially make the eastern division more difficult. They thought that might be worse than the current set up.
Why don't we use set ups that don't use bias agenda based reasoning to make scheduling? Use fricking geography and let things rotate.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:18 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Then your concept of balancing out is equally as flawed. You'd just be trading hard for easy and giving another team advantages. Suck it up and quit crying.
No I think UT will continue to suck and Bama knows it too. I do not expect UF to really ever suck.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:19 pm to Alahunter
quote:
11 of 14 schools disagree with you. And by schools, I mean coaches and AD's. Florida is among those that disagree. The had to play one of the toughest schedules this year, with Lsu on theirs. You don't see them whining.
If I'm Ole Miss and I have Vandy as my permanent do I want changes? Hell No. If I'm Miss State and I have KY, do I want changes? Hell No. If I'm Bama and we can get beneficial treatment from the league office and avoid FL and UGA as often as possible are they bitching? Hell No. Auburn wants to maintain a "Rivalry" game, so they don't complain.
Same on the East, if KY can keep MS State as a permanent, and avoid Bama and LSU, they don't want changes. Same for Vandy, hell, they beat Ole Miss, so why would they want to switch to Bama, LSU, or Arkansas? S. Carolina had Arky, do you think for one second they want to change to Bama, LSU, or Auburn? No, they don't. Missouri and A&M just showed up, so they are just happy to be here.
Again, it's all about personal agendas, and what's best for each individual school's best interest. Fairness and Equitable schedules is not in their best interest.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:20 pm to lob1284
quote:
I'm curious if anyone thinks UGA would have a play-in game for the MNC in 2 weeks if they had played UF's schedule this year.
Would UF have won the national title if they had to play bama twice in 2008?
It's a frickin rotating schedule, sometimes it benefits you and sometimes it sucks. That's just the way it goes. Even if we went to a damn 11 game conference schedule and every game was an SEC game except the last game of the year where you played an OOC rival, some team would inevitably avoid playing the 2 toughest SEC teams and people would complain.
And suggesting we do away with UGA/AU and UA/UT is simply pissing in the face of 100+ years of history.
This post was edited on 11/19/12 at 12:21 pm
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:22 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Then your concept of balancing out is equally as flawed. You'd just be trading hard for easy and giving another team advantages. Suck it up and quit crying.
There is absolutely NO REASON for permanent opponents from the other division.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:23 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
And suggesting we do away with UGA/AU and UA/UT is simply pissing in the face of 100+ years of history.
Most things have been pissed on. Those games aren't the two sacred things in college football that should be saved when everything else is free to change.
Those two things are not bigger than the the whole conference.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:23 pm to Colonel Flagg
quote:
All the votes can be linked to selfish reasons that are not fair.
What's Florida's selfish reason to keep Lsu on the schedule?
quote:
The teams with weaker opponents voted to keep weaker opponents.
Ahh. Fla doesn't want Bama and wants Lsu.
quote:
The teams with their bs rivalries voted to keep their rivalries.
Yep. Don't like it? Go watch the NFL. Rivalries are part of what makes college ball the great game that it is.
quote:
UF voted the way they did because the rumor was the alternative was to potentially make the eastern division more difficult. They thought that might be worse than the current set up.
Link? How would the East be made more difficult? Auburn instead of Mizzou in the East?
quote:
Why don't we use set ups that don't use bias agenda based reasoning to make scheduling? Use fricking geography and let things rotate.
Again, 11 of 14 feel it's fair. Quit being such a vagina.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:23 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
And suggesting we do away with UGA/AU and UA/UT is simply pissing in the face of 100+ years of history.
Sometimes history and tradition must die to move forward on to bigger and better things.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:24 pm to Colonel Flagg
quote:
Those two things are not bigger than the the whole conference.
You're trying to argue that 3 teams out of 14 are.
That's fewer than the 4 involved in the rivalries. Stupidass.This post was edited on 11/19/12 at 12:25 pm
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:27 pm to Alahunter
You can't argue with stupid arse Gumps.
As long as it benefits Bama they will never see something as a wrong practice. That is why people cannot stand Gumps.
As long as it benefits Bama they will never see something as a wrong practice. That is why people cannot stand Gumps.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:28 pm to Colonel Flagg
I'm busting up every argument you're making. Try making one that isn't contradictory.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:28 pm to WG_Dawg
Again, I'm on record for keeping Florida as LSU's opponent if we keep the current format. But the idea that using a true rotation would "do away" with the two big rivalry games is fricking stupid. No one has suggested that they never play again.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:30 pm to Colonel Flagg
quote:
Those games aren't the two sacred things in college football that should be saved when everything else is free to change.
We're not talking all of college football, we're talking the SEC. For some reason nobody had any complaints until the past 2 or 3 years, why? Nobody complained about the rotating schedule in the 90s and early 2000s. It seems like the only people that complain are ones that it hurts. Like I pointed out before, we got fricked by it in 2008 playing bama, @LSU, and @AU, but hey, that's just how it goes. I damn sure didn't want it to change simply because it hurt us.
quote:
Those two things are not bigger than the the whole conference
True, but they are a major, major part of the SEC and SEC history and there's no reason to do away with them.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:31 pm to Alahunter
If we don't get our way, One day you all are going to look up and realized LSU just jumped ship for the New Bayou Bengal NCAA THUG POS 14
LSU
UT
Baylor
SMU
USC
OU
Ok state
Kansas
WVU
TCU
Ohio state
Miami
Florida A&M
Arizona State
A conference that screams controversy and prison sentences.
No more gumbo for you motherfrickers!!!
LSU
UT
Baylor
SMU
USC
OU
Ok state
Kansas
WVU
TCU
Ohio state
Miami
Florida A&M
Arizona State
A conference that screams controversy and prison sentences.
No more gumbo for you motherfrickers!!!
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:32 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Alahunter I'm busting up every argument you're making. Try making one that isn't contradictory.
Again a stupid arse Gump.
You are like Obama. You think since it came out your mouth it is infallible. You have not "busted up an argument" yet. Just because you typed a response doesn't mean it actually addressed the issue which it basically did not.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:32 pm to MOT
quote:
No one has suggested that they never play again.
But it's suggested they shouldn't play every year, which is awful.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:32 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Yep. Don't like it? Go watch the NFL. Rivalries are part of what makes college ball the great game that it is.
No it's not. College football and everything about "traditions" have completely changed in the last 20 years. With every change, the sport gets more popular. Arkansas, Missouri, and Texas A&M left 100 years of traditions. I'm sure the vast majority of their fans are happy about where things are now compared to before. Every conference has changed it's membership. Bowl games have completely changed in terms of who plays in their games and even their names. Guess what? They are even more popular now then they were before.
We moved to the BCS and college football became more popular. Guess what? It will become even more popular with playoffs. Change is good and the TV ratings prove it.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:34 pm to Colonel Flagg
quote:
You are like Obama. You think since it came out your mouth it is infallible. You have not "busted up an argument" yet. Just because you typed a response doesn't mean it actually addressed the issue which it basically did not.
It addressed every point you made. You responded by crying. Again. Some Lsu fans are just wanting to get out of playing Florida. That's it. End of discussion. If yall had Georgia every year, you'd whine about that. If it were SC, it'd be them. NOBODY else's school has fanbases as womanlike as yall are when it comes to having to play teams. Nobody.
Memphis...
Page 3 of 7
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News