Started By
Message
Bridge Schedules explained
Posted on 5/24/13 at 2:29 pm
Posted on 5/24/13 at 2:29 pm
I know it's been discussed to death, but much of the discussion seems to be based on misinformation. I blame this on the SEC Office for stating the bridge schedules were "not based on any other previous or future scheduling formats" which is simply incorrect.
For the '12 bridge schedule, they just kept the same cross-division rotation that had been used previously. Therefore, each team added the cross-division opponent that it last played in the '08 season with 4 exceptions:
1. Bama played Mizzou instead of UGA
2. UF played A&M instead of Ole Miss
3. UGA played Ole Miss instead of Bama
4. Ole Miss played UGA instead of UF
So, two teams (Bama and UF) were picked to play the new additions (Mizzou and A&M) and the two teams they were supposed to play (UGA and Ole Miss) played each other.
The exact same methodology is apparent in the '13 schedule. Each team added the cross-division opponent that it last played in the '09 season with 4 exceptions:
1. Ole Miss plays Mizzou instead of USC
2. Vandy plays A&M instead of State
3. USC plays State instead of Ole Miss
4. State plays USC instead of Vandy
I don't know why the SEC Office has never explained this. Instead, they issued an incorrect statement that invited people to conclude that the cross-division games were either picked at random or were manipulated by biased officials in the SEC Office.
How were the teams picked to play A&M and Mizzou each year? That I don't know although one theory is that the SEC Office wanted A&M and Mizzou to each host high profile cross-division opponents their first season in the league.
Did Bama benefit? Yes, but no more than UGA (played Ole Miss instead of Bama) and Ole Miss (plays Mizzou instead of USC). The teams who might have reason to gripe are UF (played A&M instead of Ole Miss), Vandy (plays A&M instead of State), and State (plays USC instead of Vandy). Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Kentucky, and Tennessee all play(ed) the teams that were due to rotate on their schedules using the old rotation.
I know this won't end the discussion, but hopefully it will clear up any misconceptions that some have about the bridge schedules.
For the '12 bridge schedule, they just kept the same cross-division rotation that had been used previously. Therefore, each team added the cross-division opponent that it last played in the '08 season with 4 exceptions:
1. Bama played Mizzou instead of UGA
2. UF played A&M instead of Ole Miss
3. UGA played Ole Miss instead of Bama
4. Ole Miss played UGA instead of UF
So, two teams (Bama and UF) were picked to play the new additions (Mizzou and A&M) and the two teams they were supposed to play (UGA and Ole Miss) played each other.
The exact same methodology is apparent in the '13 schedule. Each team added the cross-division opponent that it last played in the '09 season with 4 exceptions:
1. Ole Miss plays Mizzou instead of USC
2. Vandy plays A&M instead of State
3. USC plays State instead of Ole Miss
4. State plays USC instead of Vandy
I don't know why the SEC Office has never explained this. Instead, they issued an incorrect statement that invited people to conclude that the cross-division games were either picked at random or were manipulated by biased officials in the SEC Office.
How were the teams picked to play A&M and Mizzou each year? That I don't know although one theory is that the SEC Office wanted A&M and Mizzou to each host high profile cross-division opponents their first season in the league.
Did Bama benefit? Yes, but no more than UGA (played Ole Miss instead of Bama) and Ole Miss (plays Mizzou instead of USC). The teams who might have reason to gripe are UF (played A&M instead of Ole Miss), Vandy (plays A&M instead of State), and State (plays USC instead of Vandy). Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Kentucky, and Tennessee all play(ed) the teams that were due to rotate on their schedules using the old rotation.
I know this won't end the discussion, but hopefully it will clear up any misconceptions that some have about the bridge schedules.
10
Posted on 5/24/13 at 2:30 pm to sarc
MORE SCHEDULE THREADS!!! 
WE IN Y'ALLS HEADS!
WE IN Y'ALLS HEADS!
Posted on 5/24/13 at 2:40 pm to sarc
quote:
Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Kentucky, and Tennessee all play(ed) the teams that were due to rotate on their schedules using the old rotation.
I wish arkansas, auburn, kentucky, and tennessee fans would stop making threads complaining about the schedules, it's getting old.
The premiere teams in each division were selected to visit the newcomers in year one...in other words they chose the only option that made sense.
Rotating opponents have been going on since '92 but the griping didn't start until Alabama started whipping arse on a regular basis...hence all the boohooing from BR.
The simple truth lost in all of this is that the division title runs through tuscaloosa in the west. If you want it, then beat us
Posted on 5/24/13 at 2:41 pm to sarc
quote:
How were the teams picked to play A&M and Mizzou each year? That I don't know although one theory is that the SEC Office wanted A&M and Mizzou to each host high profile cross-division opponents their first season in the league.
well this is somewhat obvious. The SEC was looking for ways to highlight the noobs. It was no accident we opened with Florida at home and Mizzou opened with Georgia at home. The SEC has a vested interest in building excitement in the two new brands. The core states are already SEC states but you need to win over the folks of Missouri and Texas for tv negotiations ASAP
Posted on 5/24/13 at 2:42 pm to sarc
but but but.... 
Posted on 5/24/13 at 2:42 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
Alabama Fan
quote:
SARC
quote:
I wish arkansas, auburn, kentucky, and tennessee fans would stop making threads complaining about the schedules, it's getting old.
quote:
The simple truth lost in all of this is that the division title runs through tuscaloosa in the west. If you want it, then beat us
We did, guess ya have to do it twice, amiright
Posted on 5/24/13 at 3:06 pm to TigerBait2008
quote:
We did, guess ya have to do it twice, amiright
there it is
Posted on 5/24/13 at 3:09 pm to TigerBait2008
you did and you won the SEC championship. Which is a great accomplishment. You should have practiced something other than the option after that.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 3:09 pm to sarc
Solid post, glad it wasn't a full flame fest, but...
How do you explain why Alabama played 4 division home games, A&M played 2, and every other team played 3.
Why did Bama not go to College Station?
How do you explain why Alabama played 4 division home games, A&M played 2, and every other team played 3.
Why did Bama not go to College Station?
This post was edited on 5/24/13 at 3:11 pm
Posted on 5/24/13 at 3:20 pm to Eighteen
quote:
Solid post, glad it wasn't a full flame fest
Thanks
quote:
How do you explain why Alabama played 4 division home games, A&M played 2, and every other team played 3
I don't know since the SEC has never given an explanation but I can give my theory. If Alabama had played A&M at CS, then one of either Arky, Mizzou, Tennessee, or LSU would've had to be switched to Tuscaloosa in order to give Bama 4 SEC home and away games. I don't think Arky, Tennessee, or LSU would have liked having to play back-to-back years at Bama plus it would've screwed up that team's home/away game balance. Switching Mizzou to Tuscaloosa would've deprived them of the high profile cross-division home game in their first year.
But I'm not sure. As you can see, when you start to make one change it has ripple effects that spread throughout the whole league schedule.
This post was edited on 5/24/13 at 3:23 pm
Posted on 5/24/13 at 3:21 pm to Eighteen
seems fairly obvious. There are two cross-division games. They sent Bama to Mizzou to give them a marquee home game. Bama was also scheduled to go to UT this year. The only way to give them 3/3 in division would have been to play UT in Tuscaloosa two years in a row.
The SEC instead choose to flip the Ole Miss games for Bama and A&M this year to guarantee the noobs the marquee games -- probably since Mississippi was so bad in 2011 no one thought it would matter. I know it's an LSU board, but even to this non-Bama fan y'alls obsession with this is getting tiresome.
The SEC instead choose to flip the Ole Miss games for Bama and A&M this year to guarantee the noobs the marquee games -- probably since Mississippi was so bad in 2011 no one thought it would matter. I know it's an LSU board, but even to this non-Bama fan y'alls obsession with this is getting tiresome.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 3:23 pm to sarc
quote:
How do you explain why Alabama played 4 division home games, A&M played 2, and every other team played 3
Well, Alabama did trade a home game with georgia for a road game with mizzou, that could have something to do with it
Posted on 5/24/13 at 4:16 pm to sarc
While I'm sure you thought long and hard about this, it is simply a lie. Alabama was originally going to be A&M's home opener. Saban bitched and moaned, and they made Florida the home opener, as they had plenty of dates firmly scheduled(including Mizzou not returning to Kyle Field for the third time in a row.
This is why Alabama had 4 division home games, A&M 2, And everyone else in the league had 3... since there are 6 division games, and division record is a tie breaker, it is of the utmost important no one have more home division games than anyone else. Except Alabama. I mean if they were to turn around and sign up for 2 this season, that would be awesome and super fair, but as you've noticed they didn't, since Alabama would never intentionally put themselves at a disadvantage even it was to compensate for past inequity engineered By themselves. Which is why they arent playing Georgia and are playing Kentucky instead. Which is why they had 4 division home games last year. Which is why when the new permanent schedule comes out, they'll avoid difficult opponents as long as they can.
This is why Alabama had 4 division home games, A&M 2, And everyone else in the league had 3... since there are 6 division games, and division record is a tie breaker, it is of the utmost important no one have more home division games than anyone else. Except Alabama. I mean if they were to turn around and sign up for 2 this season, that would be awesome and super fair, but as you've noticed they didn't, since Alabama would never intentionally put themselves at a disadvantage even it was to compensate for past inequity engineered By themselves. Which is why they arent playing Georgia and are playing Kentucky instead. Which is why they had 4 division home games last year. Which is why when the new permanent schedule comes out, they'll avoid difficult opponents as long as they can.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 4:22 pm to sarc
quote:You forgot USC...
The teams who might have reason to gripe are UF (played A&M instead of Ole Miss), Vandy (plays A&M instead of State), and State (plays USC instead of Vandy).
Our big gripe is that we were supposed to get Mississippi State at home in '12 (we played in Starkville in '11) but instead were sent to LSU. Meanwhile, UGA gets OM at home instead of playing Alabama.
Many USC fans agree that had we gotten State at home instead of being sent to LSU and UGA would have played Bama, USC would've won the East.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 4:25 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Saban bitched and moaned, and they made Florida the home opener
I've seen you post this plenty of times with nothing to back it up with. I think I'm going to start spreading the theory that Sumlin bitched and complained to the SEC Office about having to play the defending national champion at home early in the season (when his team and new QB were still adjusting to the new offensive system). Sumlin was scared he would get humiliated in his conference home opener, so the SEC Office agreed to let A&M play UF instead - a big name program that had been mediocre the previous 2 years and would seemingly be a more even match-up with A&M (both coming off 7-6 seasons).
Do I have anything to back up my theory? No, but neither do you but it doesn't stop you from posting it as fact.
quote:
Which is why they arent playing Georgia and are playing Kentucky instead
Reread the OP
Posted on 5/24/13 at 4:26 pm to CockRocket
quote:
You forgot USC...
Our big gripe is that we were supposed to get Mississippi State at home in '12 (we played in Starkville in '11) but instead were sent to LSU. Meanwhile, UGA gets OM at home instead of playing Alabama.
Many USC fans agree that had we gotten State at home instead of being sent to LSU and UGA would have played Bama, USC would've won the East.
It was all because Alabama and Nick Saban(primarily Nick, apparently the process couldn't handle having a reasonable conference schedule) thought it was unfair that they would have to play at Kyle Field after the Michigan game. Like the rest of the SEC gets punished for Alabama scheduling an OOC. Only in gumpland does that seem fair to anyone.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 4:30 pm to CockRocket
quote:
You forgot USC... Our big gripe is that we were supposed to get Mississippi State at home in '12 (we played in Starkville in '11) but instead were sent to LSU.
Every team dropped the 2nd half of whatever cross-division home-and-home series started in the '11 season (for example Bama dropped the 2nd half of its home-and-home with Vandy). Look at it as the cost of playing 6 division games instead of 5. LSU rotated onto your schedule in '12 as they would have even if there hadn't been expansion.
This post was edited on 5/24/13 at 4:32 pm
Posted on 5/24/13 at 4:31 pm to sarc
quote:
I've seen you post this plenty of times with nothing to back it up with.
4 SEC West home games isn't enough for you? Why doesn't Alabama have 2 this year in the other bridge schedule and wait til 2014 when a permanent rotation gets in?
I'm flabbergasted that not a single gump on here acknowledges it as even a possibility. I've not seen any reason, even with gump laced logic, that explains why exactly Alabama needed 4 division games, if in fact there was some unbiased and equitable architecture behind it. Your gump brains just shut down when faced with the truth. It is so strange.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 4:34 pm to TeLeFaWx
Your posting style is more like an art form.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 4:34 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
I've not seen any reason, even with gump laced logic, that explains why exactly Alabama needed 4 division games, if in fact there was some unbiased and equitable architecture behind it.
Then you didn't read the 7th and 8th posts above yours.
If Bama had played at CS in '12, then that would have given Bama 5 SEC road games and 3 home games.
This post was edited on 5/24/13 at 4:36 pm
Page 1 of 10
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News