re: (Final Draft) Evidence Mounts of a Scandal in the SEC

quote:

---

It takes 5 years to complete the rotating opponent cycle, meaning that if expansion had never happened, '12 would have copied '07. Do we agree so far?

---

Agreed

quote:

---

I am operating under the assumption that when expansion did happen, the appropriate thing to do is take the schedule that would have happened without expansion, and then adjust from there to accommodate the 2 new teams. Are we still on the same page?

---

Yes

quote:

---

And in many ways, the SEC did keep the '12 schedule the same as what it would have been without expansion. The divisional and permanent inter-divisional home-and-home configurations, for example

---

Still on the same page

quote:

---

Given this, it is strange that the SEC departed from that template in setting up inter-divisional rotating matchups, when they really didn't even have to. In fact, they departed so much in this area that it led you to believe they actually copied '08, not '07

---

This is where we're having a misunderstanding. To a degree it is semantics/phrasing.

I never said the SEC copied the '08 schedule in order to make the '12 schedule. I said they used the rotating cross-division opponent last played in '08 as the rotating cross-division opponent in '12. I could've just as easily said they were adding the cross-division opponent that last rotated onto a team's schedule in the '07 season. Or I could've said they were adding the cross-division opponent that was last played in '07 and '08.

Let's use LSU as an example:

2006: Tennessee, UK
2007: UK, USC
2008: USC, UGA
2009: UGA, Vandy

So in '12, with no expansion, LSU would've played UK and USC. We switched from a 5-1-2 format to a 6-1-1 format, meaning there's only room on the schedule for either UK or USC. If they were to play UK, then they would fail to play a different East opponent than they played in '11. This is not desirable when we're trying to rotate thru more teams while maintaining the same number of conference games. So, LSU dropped the 2nd half of it's home-and-home with UK and played USC which it had last played in '08. Similarly, every team, dropped the 2nd half of the home-and-home series, and added the team it had last played in '08 (with the 4 exceptions I noted). The 4 exceptions are easy to explain. Bama and UF played the new additions, and the 2 teams they would've played (UGA and Ole Miss) therefore played each other.

This same methodology plays out in '13. Every team plays the cross-division opponent it last played in '09 with the exception of the 2 teams playing the new additions and consequently the 2 teams they would've played. For example, LSU plays USC who they last played in '09.

Again, I'm not saying the '12 schedule copies the '08 schedule. I'm saying that the '12 schedule used the rotating cross-division opponent that was last played in '07 and '08.

And by this very clear methodology, Bama would've played UGA in '12 but played Mizzou instead. And they should play UK in '13 which it will.