Started By
Message
re: Bridge Schedules explained
Posted on 5/28/13 at 11:45 pm to sarc
Posted on 5/28/13 at 11:45 pm to sarc
quote:
That's why I'm not sure the '14 schedule will look like it should based on the '12 and '13 schedules. It would be kinda stupid to keep bumping cross-division match-ups with no plan to make them up.
It's pretty clear they built the 2012 schedule around the UF/aTm and the Bama/Zou games. I can almost forgive not having a plan then, they needed to get a schedule and get going.
To not have gotten around to a plan to move forward with 14 teams by the time the 2013 schedule came out was pretty inexcusable. It makes me think we must have been very, very close to more expansion and they thought they'd be making a 16 team schedule or something.
This post was edited on 5/28/13 at 11:46 pm
2
Posted on 5/28/13 at 11:47 pm to Vlad The Inhaler
quote:
Remember the college football world is anxious to see if the defending national champs can go through the gauntlet of their 1-15 cross divisional schedule
As you posted, Bama's '13 cross-division opponents are consistent with the rotation that was used prior to expansion. We'll probably get USC in '14 and Florida after than. LSU will probably get Vandy followed by Tennessee. I can promise you won't hear me complain about it.
Posted on 5/28/13 at 11:49 pm to CrippleCreek
quote:
To not have gotten around to a plan to move forward with 14 teams by the time the 2013 schedule came out was pretty inexcusable. It makes me think we must have been very, very close to more expansion and they thought they'd be making a 16 team schedule or something.
Yep, but they're looking stupid now. Really no excuse for not having a long term schedule ready to go by this year's spring meetings.
Posted on 5/28/13 at 11:51 pm to sarc
We'll see what happens.
Posted on 5/28/13 at 11:53 pm to sarc
This may (I emphasize may) be due to planning on a soon-to-be 16 team conference. Slive made it plain he wanted to expnad east after A&M and Mizzou. They probably made assumptions they should not have. After the grant of rights deal, this put the kabash on expansion so now 14 is the number for a very long time.
jmo
jmo
Posted on 5/28/13 at 11:54 pm to sarc
quote:
I can promise you won't hear me complain about
You bet your arse that you'd complain if in 2014 LSU has to play 1 preseason top 10 SEC school while Bama has to play 4 preseason top 10 SEC schools.
That will be the case for LSU in 2013, while Bama will play 1.
Posted on 5/28/13 at 11:55 pm to Choupique19
"Opportunity for accomplishment" -The Hat
Posted on 5/29/13 at 12:07 am to Choupique19
quote:
You bet your arse that you'd complain if in 2014 LSU has to play 1 preseason top 10 SEC school while Bama has to play 4 preseason top 10 SEC schools.
No I wouldn't because I understand the concept of a rotating schedule.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 12:13 am to sarc
Except this is a bridge schedule, and the Bama/UGA matchup just disappeared like a fart in the wind.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 12:22 am to Choupique19
So all this complaining and all these threads are because of 1 game? One game? Really?
Shame on the SEC Office for not keeping every single scheduled match-up the same while simultaneously adding 2 teams to the conference
Shame on the SEC Office for not keeping every single scheduled match-up the same while simultaneously adding 2 teams to the conference
Posted on 5/29/13 at 12:35 am to sarc
Basically it's because the 2012 and 2013 bridge schedules gave Bama cross divisional opponents with record of something like 3-29 in the SEC while LSU got opponents with records like 28-4. Seems fair.
Also, LSU fans loathe the idea of permanent opponents. This is the reason you end up with such lopsided cross divisional opponents when two teams are supposed to be playing equal schedules to decide a division champion.
Also, LSU fans loathe the idea of permanent opponents. This is the reason you end up with such lopsided cross divisional opponents when two teams are supposed to be playing equal schedules to decide a division champion.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 6:51 am to sarc
quote:
You mean when the 12 SEC members voted unanimously to put restrictions on the number of bye rested opponents that any SEC team faces in a season?
Bama should have played the games on its schedule and not cried about it.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:08 am to sarc
quote:
Shame on the SEC Office for not keeping every single scheduled match-up the same while simultaneously adding 2 teams to the conference
So now you're conceding Bama cheated, but you're diminishing how bad it really was? Gumps be gumpin.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:24 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
So now you're conceding Bama cheated, but you're diminishing how bad it really was? Gumps be gumpin.
I'll concede Bama cheated when you concede Sumlin is the one who bitched and moaned to the SEC office to have A&Ms schedule changed
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:33 am to Choupique19
quote:
Basically it's because the 2012 and 2013 bridge schedules gave Bama cross divisional opponents with record of something like 3-29 in the SEC while LSU got opponents with records like 28-4. Seems fair.
The bridge schedules kept the same rotation. Sorry that rotation has LSU playing difficult games
quote:
Also, LSU fans loathe the idea of permanent opponents. This is the reason you end up with such lopsided cross divisional opponents when two teams are supposed to be playing equal schedules to decide a division champion.
I'm all for releasing teams that want to from their permanent cross-division games. LSU and UF aren't rivals and shouldn't have to play each other if either of them doesn't want to play
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:39 am to sarc
why must we continue to discuss this? The rule of thumb is this : You play your division. You cant change that. Then the SEC makes everyones other division opponents. Then they go to Alabama who then tells them we play Tenn and Mizzou. Then this year we of course keep Tenn, then gives us Kentucky. SEC Office: But that may seem suspicious, seeings how LSU Plays Florida and we gave the USCe. We were thinking of giving them Kentucky this year, maybe yall play Georgia. Alabama: Shut the frick up. Were Alabama, Yall do what we say. We play Kentucky. LSU gets Georgia. Also, we want to discuss this whole division thing. Oh and next year, LSU gets USCe again. We will take vandy. Now go about your business.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:46 am to budlight34
quote:
We were thinking of giving them Kentucky this year, maybe yall play Georgia
Read the OP please
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:47 am to sarc
quote:
Read the OP please
Your OP doesn't deliver anything but a fairy tale.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:50 am to sarc
quote:
I'll concede Bama cheated when you concede Sumlin is the one who bitched and moaned to the SEC office to have A&Ms schedule changed
Changed to what? Why would Sumlin want two SEC West home games? That doesn't make sense.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:52 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Changed to what? Why would Sumlin want two SEC West home games? That doesn't make sense.
He saw that early Bama game at home and shite his pants. Didn't want to be humiliated at home in his first big game as A&M head coach so he begged the commish to change the schedule and give them a more comparable opponent (7-6 UF) in that slot.
Page 4 of 10
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News