re: Bridge Schedules explained

quote:

---

Even if you begin from the premise that it is valuable for the conference on some level to maintain the UT/Bama and AU/UGA games, the cons so heavily outweigh that single positive that it makes less than no sense to continue with the model.

---

Agreed. Anecdotally, I have never known anyone who is a college football fan without a betting or rooting interest has tuned into either of those games for the sake of tradition. Similar to Iowa/Minnesota nationally. I've lived in CO, on the east coast, Louisiana, and West coast for more than 3 years in each place. The same is not true for Alabama/Auburn.

Effectively ending every other East/West rivalry in the conference outside crossover games is unconscionable to me.

quote:

---

It's obvious other teams want to rotate through the opposing division more quickly. The two are not mutually exclusive. Let those that want to drop their permanent cross division game do it and rotate more frequently while allowing those that want to continue rivalries to do so.

---

Agreed. Do what the Pac 12 does with the California schools.

quote:

---

UGA and USC were coming off better seasons, but the shine from UF's recent NC's hadn't worn off yet. Can you honestly tell me as a A&M fan that you would've been more excited to see UGA or USC on your schedule than UF going into the '12 season?

---

Again. Stupid. "The shine"? This was a reason to justify all the crazy inequity? So Alabama HAD to play at Mizzou and Florida HAD to play at Texas A&M? This was literally the only option? Because of "the shine"? Do you really believe yourself? I seriously hope not.

quote:

---

How do you continually manage to read something into what people write that's not even close to what was written? I stated in the OP that Bama, UGA, and Ole Miss all benefited from A&M/Mizzou cross-division selections. But here's what you don't seem to understand; just because certain teams benefited doesn't mean that the schedules were unfair or there was some sort of collusion because no matter what teams were selected to play A&M & Mizzou; certain teams were going to benefit while others were going to have something to gripe about.

---

Having more division home games than anyone else, if you believe in home field advantage, and statistically, it is a real phenomenon, then having more division home games, given that it is a tie breaker, is unfair. How you don't see this is beyond me.

quote:

---

I've never stated they were the only option. I've repeatedly stated they were the best option as deemed by the SEC.

---

I seriously hope you don't believe yourself. How old are you?

quote:

---

That is the issue. When Bama kicks arse, everyone cries.

---

If you don't see the difference between the 5-2-1 schedule and the 6-1-1 then it's hopeless.

quote:

---

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.

---

According to Florida's coach Will Muschamp "At the end of the day, a 6-2 format is probably the fairest format -- if you want to be honest -- but I do enjoy the rivalry."

ESPN

quote:

---

When things change and there is 4 or 8 slots then the scheduling discrepancy will probably change to take full advantage of big picture.

---

except that every single SOS indicator shows the SEC as a conference has the highest SOS ( RPI, Sagarin, GBE, ISR (it doesn't show it by conf but just look at the top SEC schools). There is no legitimate formula you can build that doesn't have us on top. And yet the harping continues. That's the problem when people make these demands on the SEC to improve their schedule - it's simply not based in reality.

The current model works. And it works because the SEC plays and wins more big OOC games than any other conference. Going to 9 will reduce those games and make the comparisons between conferences more arbitrary since there will be so few matchups. When you are destroying the competition it's not the best time to change the rules of the game.

quote:

---

I've tried. You only argument so far has been that Florida had more "shine" than Georgia, and that Alabama HAD to play at Mizzou instead of LSU or Arkansas. HAD to.

---

That's exactly what I'm talking about. An adult doesn't feel the need to constantly misrepresent someone else's argument. NEVER once claimed Bama HAD to play Mizzou. I've acknowledged several times there were other options but the SEC chose that option.

In 2014, Bama will face its worst case senero in potential schedules

Tennessee & Florida or USC.

Who wants to bet they don't get Florida?

According to Florida fans on here, the Gators should have no problem with Bama, LSU, Georgia, USC, and Florida St. this year.

Complements of the permanent opponent rule.

A Bama fan with no sympathy for Florida's killer schedule due to the permanent opponent rule--surprise surprise.