Started By
Message
0
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:51 am to CheeseburgerEddie
(no message)
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:52 am to PortCityTiger82
quote:
ts not that most of us want to whine its just that it seems like the SEC knows about it but they are too ignorant or lazy to address it
They know exactly what they did.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:52 am to EST
quote:
No, its because of the following two games:
no it's because of all the rivalries, two of them just happen to be in different divisons
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:53 am to EST
Ya, they worked out a schedule to accomodate the two teams entering the SEC with a premier game and tried to stick close to the rotation.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:54 am to CheeseburgerEddie
when we go to this "bridge" schedule and certain teams get significantly easier paths than other schools is it any wonder that there is criticism? And just attacking the messenger pointing it out is just the weakest response ever I'm sorry.
The SECr as a whole has a huge problem with that in general. Any time someone says something you don't like a lot of you just launch straight into attack mode without even attempting to have a calm and rational discussion. It's pathetic really.
The SECr as a whole has a huge problem with that in general. Any time someone says something you don't like a lot of you just launch straight into attack mode without even attempting to have a calm and rational discussion. It's pathetic really.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:54 am to PortCityTiger82
quote:
I agree. My argument has been that if I worked on making an SEC schedule for one year it would be logical. Like Alabama has UT as a perm and LSU has UF as a perm so lets give Bama UGA or USC and give LSU Kentucky or Vandy/Mizzou as their second east opponent. I just dont see how they cant make a one year schedule balanced. Then we have the bridge for a second year and they do the same thing.
Its not that most of us want to whine its just that it seems like the SEC knows about it but they are too ignorant or lazy to address it
So, screw over UGA or USCe by giving them the hardest team in the nation, AND screw over Kentucky/Vandy/Missouri by giving them the 3rd hardest team in the nation behind Bama and A&M, just to make LSU happy? This is the shite I am talking about. It's clinical narcissism.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:55 am to PortCityTiger82
quote:
They know which teams will be weak or strong when they make this "bridge" schedule so they have every opportunity to balance it if they wanted to
Oh really? In 2012 where was UF predicted by almost everyone? At best 3rd. Mist had them behind UGA, USC and Mizzo.
Where was A&M predicted? At best 4the in the west.
Where was AU in 2010? Most had them 4th.
You want the SEC to access the teams each year and adjust schedules accordingly? Why is it the only team that LSu compares schedules with is Bama? Saban, 3 of 4 going for the 3rd in a row and 21-0 is why.
Yes, Bama got the luck of the draw on these bridge scheduled working in the 2 new members but the previous rotation has mostly been held in tact.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:55 am to spacewrangler
quote:
Hey man didn't LSU play UT, UK and a mediocre UF team in 2011?
Wait a minute in 2010 they also played UT, Vandy and a down UF team.
You mean to tell me they didn't play best of the east in those years? Funny I could've sworn they play the hardest teams from the east EVERY YEAR!
You seriously don't want to get into a comparison of Florida with ANYBODY in the east over the entire history of divisional play. It's such a joke it's not even worthy of discussion.
This whole Bama argument is that Florida, Tennessee and Georgia are all basically the same and it's just a short-term fluctuation that has it unbalanced right now. But that is complete bullshite. Florida has towered over the SEC East for more than 20 years. No one even comes close to comparing to them. No one from the East faces that kind of disadvantage because there is no team in the West that towers over all the others to such an extent.
Easy solution to the problem is just to let teams play whomever they want from the other division and only count division games toward the division title. After all, we only count SEC games toward the title now. Why? Because teams could play only OOC cupcakes and there's no reason those games should count. The same is true for non-divisional games. But then that wouldn't be enough to insure that Bama is handed the title, so it obviously couldn't be done.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:56 am to spacewrangler
didn't they pick mizzou to possibly win the east as well?
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:56 am to KaiserSoze99
a fan of another team with an easy schedule defending it 
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:56 am to CheeseburgerEddie
quote:
Now that I posted it they most likely stuck close to the rotation schedule so that people couldn't accuse them of having scheduling bias towards any teams. Seems to have backfired.
This is it exactly. The SEC Office also screwed up when they publically stated that the bridge schedules are independent of past and future schedules.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:57 am to Draconian Sanctions
I see the criticism. but then people post how we arrived at these schedules and there is a logical basis for it that some refuse to accept.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:57 am to bona fide
quote:
LSU has played 2 teams on their rotating schedule that finished the year above .500 in SEC play from 05-11.
So basically Mile's entire LSU career is based on unfair scheduling designed to give LSU advantages.
Alabama played UT and UGA and UT and Florida plenty of times in the same year back when Tennessee was one of the top 2 teams in the conference.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:57 am to spacewrangler
quote:
You want the SEC to access the teams each year and adjust schedules accordingly?
If we're going to keep on with this bridge schedules year after year then yes. Originally it was supposed to be just 2012. Then they said 2013 would be the last one. Now we know we're getting yet another one in 2014.
quote:
Why is it the only team that LSu compares schedules with is Bama? Saban, 3 of 4 going for the 3rd in a row and 21-0 is why.
No it's because we are the two powers in the West
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:58 am to Nuts4LSU
See you make a good post. Then have to add that last line in to ruin all chance of rational discussion.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:58 am to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Easy solution to the problem is just to let teams play whomever they want from the other division and only count division games toward the division title
So when Bama loses to 2 teams from the east and LSU doesn't, there will be no bitching
Quick question for LSU fans, were yall bitching about Auburn having the most difficult schedule prior to 2002?
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:59 am to CheeseburgerEddie
quote:
I see the criticism. but then people post how we arrived at these schedules and there is a logical basis for it that some refuse to accept.
I'm not one of the conspiracy people, but when you're the SEC office you should do all you can to even things out both for competitive balance reasons and to avoid even the perception of impropriety. They have done a piss poor job of doing that thusfar.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 10:59 am to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Easy solution to the problem is just to let teams play whomever they want from the other division and only count division games toward the division title.
Just think about this for a minute. Do you really think it is in the best interests of the conference to have cross division games have the same meaning as a non conference game?
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:00 am to CheeseburgerEddie
quote:
Now that I posted it they most likely stuck close to the rotation schedule so that people couldn't accuse them of having scheduling bias towards any teams.
Seems to have backfired.
UGA was supposed to still be playing yall this year. Why didnt yall pick them up?
Why do we have to stick with our rotation of USC and UGA instead of getting Mizzou?
Page 11 of 30
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News