re: UGAs strength of schedule the last 2 years compared to other repeat champs

If UGA wins natty this year, there should be an asterisk * because of their pathetic weak schedule. Only decent team they play will be Tennessee.

To be fair 6 of those opponents were in post-season games (SECCG and Playoffs). Nebraska and Oklahoma only had regular season games to work with.

I’m not saying that suddenly negates your argument but comparing that metric to 90s era Nebraska especially seems misleading.

2011-2012 Alabama is the closest, and there was no playoff then either (removing a potential 2 more bowl opponents than during the playoff era)

quote:

---

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

---

It has been hard to sleep with all these rings making the light dance across the room

quote:

---

know I know, the SEC canx the game. But if Georgia wanted to play that game they woulda. It was

---

I have doubts that you know

quote:

---

Georgia plays Florida = easy schedule Florida plays Georgia = tough schedule Funny how that works.

---

???

Yeah basically

quote:

---

But the bottom line is we have a weak schedule. No selective data set can make a convincing argument otherwise

---

Meh

Same was said about last year and we ended playing/beating 7 ranked (AP final) top 25 teams...4 in the regular season schedule.

Gotta love these SECW yahoos chiming in on our schedule when their division was complete dogshit last year.

It's amazing to me how a team than won back to back natties can still be this damn insecure, whether it's their schedule, their QB, discussing injuries etc etc etc.

quote:

---

100%

---

Why don't you just say, "I don't like the facts presented because I can't argue against facts!"?

quote:

---

I mean weren't they inviting teams with only 5 wins to bowls last year?

---

Who did we play that had 5 wins and went to a bowl?

quote:

---

I seriously doubt that neither UGA nor Oklahoma was scared to play the game since they both agreed to do so...I also ain't buying that it had to be cancelled so the conference could expand...I get that it may have somehow been a stumbling block for scheduling in the future but I am pretty certain that UGA would have played on the road out of conference and OU could have played on the road in conference...but the SEC apparently wants the two newcomers to play the conference games as the home team initially and wanted UGA to play Baja Oklahoma in Austen so the OU/UGA game had to go. UT and Oklahoma series was also cancelled, no? It is ridiculous but for whatever reason someone in the SEC saw it as necessary...

By the way it is a break for OU...UGA would have stomped a mudhole in OU and walked it dry this season...what happened to TCU would have been a real possibility...no telling where the 2 programs will be when they do meet but in September of 2023 they will be about as different as day and night...

---

To me the schedules “pre” joining should stand. As of July 2024 then it all starts new. The Tenn future series was after go live so of course it was canx. But this game was pre SEC and I still say of GA had wanted to play it they would have.

We likely would lose but maybe not as big as you think. And it would have been a nice benchmark for both teams. I know the stated reason was the 2nd game couldn’t be played but thats life. It left us scrambling to find a makeup game when teams schedule OOC games a decade or more in advance.

Anyways, I was responding to a poster who claimed GA is playing everyone on schedule. Well, when that is manipulated it matters. No one will ever convince me that game could not be played if GA wanted to play it.

What would be ironic is if we win the B12 and make playoffs and line up vs GA. We’ll be a different team end of year vs start due to so many young players and portals (roster turnover). Once schemes are learned we’ll end better than the start.

But I like big games and regardless how bad our record was last year, I was lookimg forward to the game. Now we get Bama at home in 2024 instead. And Bama/TX didn’t canx their game this year. Credit to them