Started By
Message
re: Bridge Schedules explained
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:54 am to sarc
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:54 am to sarc
quote:
The bridge schedules kept the same rotation. Sorry that rotation has LSU playing difficult games
No it doesn't. Alabama should have played Georgia before LSU if the rotation was the same. Do you go to sleep with elephant sheets? Are you really this delusional?
2
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:56 am to sarc
quote:
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.
So he could then get Alabama on the road? Hahahahaha. You're so cute.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:01 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
No it doesn't. Alabama should have played Georgia before LSU if the rotation was the same.
You're right, I see what the SEC Office should've done now. Bama should've played UT, UGA, and Mizzou while UF should've played LSU, Ole Miss, and A&M (drop the UGA-Ole Miss game). Bama and UF would've played 9 SEC games to everyone else's 8 but that's the only way you can add 2 teams to a schedule and still play every previously scheduled match-up. We already know Saban is in favor of playing 9 SEC games so he wouldn't have minded.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:03 am to sarc
quote:
You're right, I see what the SEC Office should've done now. Bama should've played UT, UGA, and Mizzou while UF should've played LSU, Ole Miss, and A&M (drop the UGA-Ole Miss game). Bama and UF would've played 9 SEC games to everyone else's 8 but that's the only way you can add 2 teams to a schedule and still play every previously scheduled match-up. We already know Saban is in favor of playing 9 SEC games so he wouldn't have minded.
So the only team that keep up with previously scheduled opponents is Alabama, everyone else skips someone in the rotation?
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:03 am to sarc
quote:
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.
Put the pipe down and walk slowly away.
In your Red Elephant Cult logic, you imagine that a coach would give up his home field advantage(which at aTm is considerable) to play a power opponent away?
Really?
That's your story?
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:05 am to Gray Tiger
quote:
Put the pipe down and walk slowly away.
In your Red Elephant Cult logic, you imagine that a coach would give up his home field advantage(which at aTm is considerable) to play a power opponent away?
Really?
That's your story?
Everything else is more plausible than the mighty and pure Alabama trying to gain an advantage. Everything.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:22 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
So the only team that keep up with previously scheduled opponents is Alabama, everyone else skips someone in the rotation?
Sure, after all, the only thing that matters apparently is UGA playing Bama. Doesn't matter how much the schedule gets contorted as long as that game is/was played.
This post was edited on 5/29/13 at 8:24 am
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:28 am to Gray Tiger
quote:
That's your story?
Well the 3 theories that have been offered are:
1. Saban and/or REC had schedule changed
2. Sumlin had schedule changed
3. SEC Office had schedule changed so that both A&M and Mizzou hosted marquee cross-division games in their first season in the SEC
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:34 am to sarc
I'm not saying it was aliens. But prove to me it wasn't aliens.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:46 am 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.
this conference rakes in how many millions a year?... they can't put together TWO plans at the same time (a 14 team and 16 team schedule)?... pretty sad, if true.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:49 am to sarc
quote:
SEC Office had schedule changed so that both A&M and Mizzou hosted marquee cross-division games in their first season in the SEC
i'm not saying this wasn't the justification, but that reasoning doesn't make much sense IMO.... A&M and Mizzou are new to the conference, so every SEC matchup unique... what's the difference in getting UF at home as opposed to LSU?
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:57 am to lowspark12
quote:
what's the difference in getting UF at home as opposed to LSU?
Like someone said on the 1st page, the idea was to generate a lot of buzz within the 1st year programs by giving them what amounted to an extra big-time home game in the first year. Sure they're going to get 1 or 2 of those caliber games from within the division, but hosting UF as opposed to Vandy or UK generates exposure and excitement.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 10:15 am to sarc
Fellas. I kinda think everyone is missing the point here.
We can argue til we're blue in the face about who drew who in the schedule.
The problem is that there has to be a scheduling methodology developed that is at least equitable for 7 out of 10 seasons. I understand a certain team's draw in a given year may look unfair. But you come up with a scheduling formula and stick to it. That ends all the bitching about fairness because you're sticking to a formula no matter what.
The SEC has botched this for 2 consecutive years because of certain special interests of a few schools. Hopefully things will work better with a 9 team schedule.
We can argue til we're blue in the face about who drew who in the schedule.
The problem is that there has to be a scheduling methodology developed that is at least equitable for 7 out of 10 seasons. I understand a certain team's draw in a given year may look unfair. But you come up with a scheduling formula and stick to it. That ends all the bitching about fairness because you're sticking to a formula no matter what.
The SEC has botched this for 2 consecutive years because of certain special interests of a few schools. Hopefully things will work better with a 9 team schedule.
This post was edited on 5/29/13 at 10:17 am
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:25 pm to sarc
quote:
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.
Of course you won't because you will still have your perennial waltz against pitiful Tennessee. Play Florida and Georgia in the same year while LSU skates through two of the three worst teams in the conference and don't complain, then you'll have done something. Hell, Alabama bitches about every perceived slight. One year they even bitched that too many teams had easy games the week before they played Alabama.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:30 pm to sarc
quote:
Yep, but they're looking stupid now
They're looking something, but it ain't stupid. They are doing exactly what everyone knew they would do. They are protecting Alabama. What else is new?
I can't wait to see the Gumps' excuses when the 2014 "bridge" comes out, any tough team that is line to play Alabama mysteriously ends up playing someone else, while Bama gets Vandy, Missouri or Kentucky to go along with that powerhouse Tennessee. Meanwhile, LSU's regularly-scheduled rotation to Vanderbilt will find a way to be replaced with a game vs. either SC or Georgia to go along with Florida...unless Vandy actually keeps getting better this year, then they'll be off the table for Bama, of course.
It's a fricking joke.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:37 pm to sarc
quote:
The SEC Office stated that the bridge schedules are independent of past and future schedules, so at first look it appears that the SEC Office just arbitrarily picked hard games for LSU and easy games for Bama. The reality is that they followed the normal rotation.
No, they didn't. Bama skipped Georgia. Yes, someone had to play Mizzou, but why automatically Alabama when preseason top 10 and supposed future "rival" Arkansas was sitting there right next door? And if they absolutely had to let Alabama skip Georgia in 2012, then why couldn't they, in another so-called "bridge" schedule in 2013, at least have them skip Kentucky, too, possibly in favor a team that actually won a game in the conference last year. Or, God forbid...Georgia?
Posted on 5/29/13 at 7:43 pm to sarc
quote:
For the same reason A&M got UF even though A&M wasn't considered to be a major player. Those marquee cross-division games hosted by A&M and Mizzou helped build buzz and anticipation in those programs about their 1st year home game slates.
Coming into the 2012 season, Georgia was more "marquee" than Florida. For that matter, so was South Carolina. As for Mizzou, LSU would have fit the bill just as well, and Arkie even better. Both were preseason top-5 and top-10, and Arkie is their supposed future rival. There was no need to simply give Alabama a break that very likely decided the SEC West title.
Of course, the heart of the problem is that Alabama gets a guaranteed cupcake every year in the form of Tennessee, while LSU gets easily and by far the dominant program in the SEC East every year. Keep the permanent opponents and just count division records in the standings, and then it'll be fair, or at least less unfair.
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:03 pm to TeLeFaWx
Come up with a point system to determine division champs. Something like points for wins/losses with a differential for quality/losses based on rank. You could leave the schedules set up like they are. When these weaker "rivalry"/permanent cross division games start preventing teams from making the SECG they will want to play the tougher conference opponents. Create a system where teams need tougher schedules to be successful.
This post was edited on 5/29/13 at 8:51 pm
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:20 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Yes, someone had to play Mizzou, but why automatically Alabama when preseason top 10 and supposed future "rival" Arkansas was sitting there right next door?
Arky was supposed to be good but you have to admit that they wouldn't quite have the same sex appeal as a team coming off 2 out of 3 national championships. Same with UF for A&M. Sure UGA had been better the previous season but UF would arguably generate more buzz in College Station due to winning a national championship recently
Posted on 5/29/13 at 8:22 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
The simple truth lost in all of this is that the division title runs through tuscaloosa in the west
Except for 2011....amirite?
Page 5 of 10
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News