Started By
Message
re: ESPN talking Bama LSU schedule differential......again.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 3:40 am to tbonebrah
Posted on 5/24/13 at 3:40 am to tbonebrah
The SEC can do the right thing and let all schools compete on a level playing field, or they can pretend to.
Arguing with the Bama fans is pointless; they obviously want to pretend the competition is fair and equitable, while preserving the right to miss the true powers in the SEC East as much as possible--for as long as possible.
Arguing with the Bama fans is pointless; they obviously want to pretend the competition is fair and equitable, while preserving the right to miss the true powers in the SEC East as much as possible--for as long as possible.
1
Posted on 5/24/13 at 5:15 am to JuiceTerry
Alabama has played some of their top 10 games in the SEC and national title games, assuming that top ten stat is including postseason play.
LSU has only played 1 top ten postseason opponent (Alabama '11 national title) since 2009 I'm pretty sure. Alabama has played 5 in the postseason since 2009 (Florida, Texas, LSU, Georgia, Notre Dame).
So that stat is skewed a bit, considering the regular season is what makes you qualify for those postseason games. The regular season schedules have clearly favored Alabama in the time span of Alabama's titles (starting 2009).
LSU has only played 1 top ten postseason opponent (Alabama '11 national title) since 2009 I'm pretty sure. Alabama has played 5 in the postseason since 2009 (Florida, Texas, LSU, Georgia, Notre Dame).
So that stat is skewed a bit, considering the regular season is what makes you qualify for those postseason games. The regular season schedules have clearly favored Alabama in the time span of Alabama's titles (starting 2009).
Posted on 5/24/13 at 5:42 am to BayouBengals03
The schedule did not favor us in 2009, we had USC on our schedule regular season. 2011 outside of Florida who was terrible we had the exact same sec schedule. This year coming is the only egregious scheduling differential with y'all playing GA and FLa.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 5:58 am to Sheetbend
quote:
Arguing with the Bama fans is pointless; they obviously want to pretend the competition is fair and equitable, while preserving the right to miss the true powers in the SEC East as much as possible--for as long as possible.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 6:00 am to BayouBengals03
quiet down now...you know bama fans hate it when you talk about their weak arse schedule....
Posted on 5/24/13 at 6:08 am to albanyla
Posted on 5/24/13 at 7:22 am to FourThreeForty
quote:
Last 2 times Alabama has played Georgia it has been a physical curb stomping
Um, did I watch a different SEC Championship game last year than you?
Posted on 5/24/13 at 8:09 am to LNCHBOX
What I find interesting about the graphic is that they choose three different time periods - from 1999, 2000, and 2007. Are those the time periods that help them make their argument? Seems selective to me.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 8:34 am to FourThreeForty
quote:
Last 2 times Alabama has played Georgia it has been a physical curb stomping.
I guess you watched a different SECCG last year than I did. I'm pretty sure UGA was in that one for most of the game. Bama did pull away towards the end, and by end I mean with about .5 seconds left.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 8:48 am to Rocco Lampone
quote:
What I find interesting about the graphic is that they choose three different time periods - from 1999, 2000, and 2007. Are those the time periods that help them make their argument? Seems selective to me.
Regardless of the timeframe being used with the changes to the conference and more likely coming its time to drop permanent cross division opponents.
This post was edited on 5/24/13 at 8:50 am
Posted on 5/24/13 at 8:57 am to sdmlsu1
8=====) - - - - ( . ) ( . )
Posted on 5/24/13 at 9:08 am to CheeseburgerEddie
I don 't know what to think about Ala fans as posters vs those I run into on a daily basis.
Most of those I know don't want any extra help from the SEC in scheduling and are a little embarrassed when Slive et al preside over this type of stuff.
Even if one assumes there was no intention to favors Alabama (that's kinda tough to get around, by itself)the result is precisely that, and it hurts the league's credibility as a whole.
Does Slive think nobody will notice?
Most of those I know don't want any extra help from the SEC in scheduling and are a little embarrassed when Slive et al preside over this type of stuff.
Even if one assumes there was no intention to favors Alabama (that's kinda tough to get around, by itself)the result is precisely that, and it hurts the league's credibility as a whole.
Does Slive think nobody will notice?
Posted on 5/24/13 at 9:12 am to nitwit
The college game is built on tradition and rivalry. If it gets rid of that, I'm done with it. Not like it offers much else...
I think Tennessee and Alabama knows this and will not allow it to happen. And the game works in cycles. Tennessee will be back.
I think Tennessee and Alabama knows this and will not allow it to happen. And the game works in cycles. Tennessee will be back.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 9:16 am to nitwit
I don't think it will hurt any legacy. Do you think in 5 years anybody but those in this thread will even remember anything about scheduling. I would prefer to have played a harder game or at least more a more interesting game, but we have to play kentucky some time. Alabama fans want to keep playing Tennessee because they are a rival. Not because they suck, we didn't try and get out of the game when we were on a 6 year losing streak.
I also think that it is just as likely that the proposed schedule is the one that just happened to work out the easiest, with minimal disturbances to the natural rotation. I know Georgia was supposed to rotate on last year but the wanted to give both new schools a big time cross division game. Thus we played Missouri, and Missouri was thought to be the more competitive team coming into this year. Kentucky was supposed to rotate on this year. And if you disregard the permanent opponent (when thinking about any possibility of the SEC Office favoring Alabama). You are really talking about a single game in the season.
I don't want to get into this again today. There will be something else to bitch about in a couple years and all of this will be forgotten everywhere except the message boards.
I also think that it is just as likely that the proposed schedule is the one that just happened to work out the easiest, with minimal disturbances to the natural rotation. I know Georgia was supposed to rotate on last year but the wanted to give both new schools a big time cross division game. Thus we played Missouri, and Missouri was thought to be the more competitive team coming into this year. Kentucky was supposed to rotate on this year. And if you disregard the permanent opponent (when thinking about any possibility of the SEC Office favoring Alabama). You are really talking about a single game in the season.
I don't want to get into this again today. There will be something else to bitch about in a couple years and all of this will be forgotten everywhere except the message boards.
This post was edited on 5/24/13 at 9:22 am
Posted on 5/24/13 at 9:16 am to RB10
quote:
I guess you watched a different SECCG last year than I did. I'm pretty sure UGA was in that one for most of the game. Bama did pull away towards the end, and by end I mean with about .5 seconds left.
quote:
Physical
Posted on 5/24/13 at 9:20 am to Patton
quote:quote:
I wonder why they chose 2007 to go back for top 10 opponents?
That's the start of our run brah
Why not use the start of LSU's run?
Posted on 5/24/13 at 9:24 am to FourThreeForty
quote:
FourThreeForty
Yep. When you give up 400 yards rushing and Bama is jamming 2 stud RBs straight up the middle for 10 yards every play.....you are gettin outphysicalled big time.
Bama ran the ball at one point in that game 20 out 23 times and like 14 straight.
Georgia got dommed big time.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 9:28 am to FlukerFlakes
I just can't fathom a UT schedule without Alabama on it, and worse, replacing Alabama with an Ole Miss or Miss St or some other team with zero meaning. And I could really care less what the rest of the conference thinks, at some point, you look out for yourself. And the Bama-UT rivalry is a big part of UT's football tradition.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 9:31 am to NukemVol
Agree completely.
Posted on 5/24/13 at 9:56 am to FlukerFlakes
quote:Well Gurley did dominate and out Physical the Bama defense for 120 yards and two touchdowns. Face it, that was an evenly match game where both defenses were over matched
Yep. When you give up 400 yards rushing and Bama is jamming 2 stud RBs straight up the middle for 10 yards every play.....you are gettin outphysicalled big time.
Bama ran the ball at one point in that game 20 out 23 times and like 14 straight.
Georgia got dommed big time.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News