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

quote:

---

GatorNation4Lyfe

---

No one will take you seriously until you can use the correct form of the word 'buy' in conversation here.

quote:

---

No one will take you seriously until you can use the correct form of the word 'buy' in conversation here.

---

Every week in Alabama football is a "buy" week. REC gonna REC

Seems probable, seems legit. Must be true.

You must not realize that the majority of fan bases here hate yours for being paranoid whiny shits

Like I give a shite if you take me serious? Bama is good at "buying" their way in football. Have the easiest schedule the last 3 years, get the least penalized most years, get do overs like porn stars but nothing to see here.

The only thing pathetic is the Bama fans that try to rationalize the bullshite. You know it, we know it so stop patronizing us. It is what it is. If posters want to vent, let them vent but to try and act like the shite's not in your favor is stupid.

quote:

---

No one will take you seriously until you can use the correct form of the word 'buy' in conversation here.

---

I really didn't think it was necessary. Each team should be able to decide where they want open dates and if it happens that it's when your team plays, then so be it.

But, obviously, many people felt that having a bye is an advantage. So it should help make things even across the board BUT it does not help everyone. It only helps the top teams because no one cares about a bye before UK or Mizz.

I just find it ironic that Bama fans clearly see how byes are an advantage but don't see how the overall schedule makes a difference. Of course you can't predict who will be good and who will be bad 10 years from now but we have a good idea who will be this year and next.

quote:

---

Does the new rule about byes not help everyone?

---

To me, it wasn't necessarily the byes. It was that the SEC allowed 6 of the 8 teams to not have to play another SEC team the week prior, which in turn allowed those 6 teams to either have a bye or a cupcake.

quote:

---

the 16 people who down voted are all Bama fans

---

And all the people who are flaming the LSU fans in this thread are 'Bama alters too. Gotcha.

quote:

---

Too stupid to grasp the fact that Bama had to give up a game with Vandy at our home-away-from home in Nashville last year. Spent God only knows how many hours of his life composing this drivel, yet didn't have the brain cells to grasp this fundamental point.

---

I also have to wonder if he expected his thread to be panned by pretty much everyone except a handful of LSU fans.

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.