Started By
Message
re: SEC Scheduling
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:09 pm to tickfawtiger
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:09 pm to tickfawtiger
quote:
OBVIOUS bias bama seems to continually benefit from
0
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:10 pm to Alahunter
quote:
The question remains. How does it hurt the SEC or college football?
IDK.
Maybe scheduling and alignment.
This post was edited on 11/19/12 at 1:10 pm
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:10 pm to Colonel Flagg
quote:
IDK. Maybe scheduling and alignment.
How? 11 of 14 teams have no prob with it.
This post was edited on 11/19/12 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:11 pm to Alahunter
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:11 pm to Alahunter
quote:
Maybe because it hurt the conference to not have traditional powers playing their conference games. You lose something.
You're missing the point or ignoring it entirely. The Big 8, where Neb and Ok played annually, ceased to exist. Apparently that game couldn't carry them. They formed the Big 12 and at no point did they have a format where they played annually, and both still played for NCs. Those are facts and contradict the point you were attempting to make.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:13 pm to Alahunter
Speaking of alignment there is an SUV at chickfila that drove up one of their 500lb rocks outside. It's axle is balancing on it. That would suck
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:13 pm to MOT
quote:
They formed the Big 12 and at no point did they have a format where they played annually, and both still played for NCs
And that conference nearly crashed and burned and neither has won a NC. Nebraska is a shell of itself and Okie now has a one game schedule each year for all intents and purposes.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:15 pm to Alahunter
quote:
And that conference nearly crashed and burned and neither has won a NC. Nebraska is a shell of itself and Okie now has a one game schedule each year for all intents and purposes.
They are shells of their former self and all it takes to get back would be to schedule their game.
Yet they haven't done it.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:16 pm to Alahunter
That's absolute horseshite...ONE year and I could see some inequiteies which could NOT be addressed...BUT TWO years in a row....bullshite, the only possible explanation is there IS an obvious bias at work !
Do you actually recognize the inequities I've pointed out ?
Now IF the SEC office said beginning 2014 bama's LSU's etc. roating schedule WILL be....GA,SC,Vandy etc. that's one thing...BUT they won't say that...bama could begin with Vandy,MO and KY and nobody should be suspicious ?
Bamas next 3 SEC opponents HAVE to be GA,FL,SC....END of story !
Do you actually recognize the inequities I've pointed out ?
Now IF the SEC office said beginning 2014 bama's LSU's etc. roating schedule WILL be....GA,SC,Vandy etc. that's one thing...BUT they won't say that...bama could begin with Vandy,MO and KY and nobody should be suspicious ?
Bamas next 3 SEC opponents HAVE to be GA,FL,SC....END of story !
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:17 pm to Alahunter
quote:
And that conference nearly crashed and burned and neither has won a NC. Nebraska is a shell of itself and Okie now has a one game schedule each year for all intents and purposes.
While I am certainly chagrined at all of the LSU fan whining over the "unfair" part of scheduling....I assure you that the SEC would survive the de-coupling of AU/UGA and UA/UT.
In fact, I think the permanent opponent should go away...but, I'd HATE to lose the UF game every year. I just think the permanent opponent is anachronism and is kinda goofy.
We lose a lot of "tradition". This one is not holy, IMO
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:17 pm to memphisplaya
quote:
Speaking of alignment there is an SUV at chickfila that drove up one of their 500lb rocks outside.
I shouldn't have been replying to this thread while driving.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:19 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
I assure you that the SEC would survive the de-coupling of AU/UGA and UA/UT
It would hurt the programs involved in those to a degree though. College football has a uniqueness to it that the NFL and other games can't duplicate and rivalries are a big part of it.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:19 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
In fact, I think the permanent opponent should go away...but, I'd HATE to lose the UF game every year. I just think the permanent opponent is anachronism and is kinda goofy.
Thats where I stand. It is possible to be okay with playing Florida annually, and still think the entire setup makes no sense.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:21 pm to Alahunter
Like others have said, football is cyclical. If the SEC makes a format now that matches up the powers from each division, 5 or 10 years from now that will be unbalanced. People whine about Alabama getting to play UT every year, well guess what? In the 90's and early part of the 2000's UT was a perennial top 10 team winning SEC and National Titles and pumping 1st rounders into the NFL. Were you LSU fans whining about us "getting" to play UT then? Of course not. What about AU? Those guys won a natty 2 years ago and now they suck now. UGA was horrible in the 90's, and now they are good, same with LSU. Heck, look at Vandy now...once the doormat of the SEC and now they are winning 8 games and playing in bowl games most years. Bama pretty much sucked from 2000-2007.
The bottom line is these things shift every few years so you can't schedule permanents based on who is good right now. You preserve the rivalries that matter, and over time these things even out. Five years from now, it may be that LSU is considered to have an easier path than Bama. That's just the way it works you whinny little corndogs.
The bottom line is these things shift every few years so you can't schedule permanents based on who is good right now. You preserve the rivalries that matter, and over time these things even out. Five years from now, it may be that LSU is considered to have an easier path than Bama. That's just the way it works you whinny little corndogs.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:22 pm to tickfawtiger
Florida. 
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:25 pm to Alahunter
Finally...a reasonable, sound and well thought out response/argument from a gump...LOL !!!!
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:26 pm to Alahunter
quote:
It would hurt the programs involved in those to a degree though. College football has a uniqueness to it that the NFL and other games can't duplicate and rivalries are a big part of it.
College football will always be better than the NFL to me. But are you saying the NFL doesn't have rivalries? Because when they went to this alignment some of the divisions were formed to keep certain rivalries annual even though it made no geographical sense.
Sounds familiar, does it not?
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:28 pm to Alahunter
:byeweeks:
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:30 pm to tickfawtiger
quote:
bama could begin with Vandy,MO and KY and nobody should be suspicious ?
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:30 pm to MOT
EXACTLY...of course the gumps simply can't see or EVER admit any form of bias towards them...LOL
Page 6 of 7
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News