Started By
Message
re: Les Miles on schedule disadvantage
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:00 am to NYCAuburn
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:00 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
Quick question for LSU fans, were yall bitching about Auburn having the most difficult schedule prior to 2002?
I have been against permanent opponents since I was old enough and interested enough to know how SEC scheduling works.
0
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:00 am to Draconian Sanctions
I think that they tried to stick close to the original rotation so that people wouldn't accuse them of favoring any one team or teams.
As I said, backfire.
As I said, backfire.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:00 am to Monticello
quote:
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?
This as well, now we have LSU fans in favor of games that don't count. Ive seen it all
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:01 am to CheeseburgerEddie
SEC scheduling goes like this:
Play every team in division, you're rivalry team and a rotating team on a home and home basis from the other division. I'd be interested in knowing what process was used to reschedule after aTm and Mizzou were added last year. I think Bama was supposed to play Georgia, but ended up with Mizzou in 2012. Did LSU's schedule get shuffled as did Bama? If so, who was LSU going to play before realignment?
Play every team in division, you're rivalry team and a rotating team on a home and home basis from the other division. I'd be interested in knowing what process was used to reschedule after aTm and Mizzou were added last year. I think Bama was supposed to play Georgia, but ended up with Mizzou in 2012. Did LSU's schedule get shuffled as did Bama? If so, who was LSU going to play before realignment?
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:02 am to PortCityTiger82
quote:
a fan of another team with an easy schedule defending it
Wrong. The bullshite I am hearing sound GD familiar. LSU fans are ignoring ALL other teams in the league, just to be "fair" in relation to Bama. LSU fans talk about being big daddy in the west, but don't act like other teams who now have to face them have increased their SOS. LSU fans talk like they are the big dog, but act like they are middle of the pack.
This post was edited on 7/18/13 at 11:03 am
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:02 am to CheeseburgerEddie
quote:
I think that they tried to stick close to the original rotation so that people wouldn't accuse them of favoring any one team or teams.
they did, and Mizzou wasnt supposed to be bad last year.
The other conferences with realignment possibilities and question marks really hurt the SEC as far determining a schedule
This post was edited on 7/18/13 at 11:04 am
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:02 am to NYCAuburn
Brock Huard: (paraphrasing)
"Let me play devil's advocate. If LSU had played Alabama's schedule, would LSU have won 3 of the last 4 national titles? No. So what are we really talking about here?"
"Let me play devil's advocate. If LSU had played Alabama's schedule, would LSU have won 3 of the last 4 national titles? No. So what are we really talking about here?"
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:02 am to Adam Banks
Mizzou was to get a premier cross division opponent. Who is the premier team in the SEC right now (sorry it is us). Same for UF in the east playing A&M.
The rotation now it seems to me you pick up a team the year you would have first played them in the old rotation and drop them the next year.
The rotation now it seems to me you pick up a team the year you would have first played them in the old rotation and drop them the next year.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:04 am to Monticello
quote:
"Let me play devil's advocate. If LSU had played Alabama's schedule, would LSU have won 3 of the last 4 national titles? No. So what are we really talking about here?"
Well if we had played Bama's schedule last year there's a good chance we would have won the BCSCG so that's a start.
2009 was pre-bridge schedule.
This post was edited on 7/18/13 at 11:04 am
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:04 am to EST
quote:
Recent, last minute changes made to schedules also smack of pro-Alabama bias at the SEC office.
quote:
They know exactly what they did.
This post was edited on 7/18/13 at 11:07 am
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:05 am to CheeseburgerEddie
quote:
The rotation now it seems to me you pick up a team the year you would have first played them in the old rotation and drop them the next year.
That is correct
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:07 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Well if we had played Bama's schedule last year there's a good chance we would have won the BCSCG so that's a start.
that's only assuming bama loses two
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:07 am to sarc
have they done schedule for next year yet? can we confirm this?
Hell they may change it up because of all the bitching if we have vandy coming up on the rotation
Hell they may change it up because of all the bitching if we have vandy coming up on the rotation
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:07 am to PortCityTiger82
quote:
"I think we may be the only team that can play this schedule year after year and do as well as we do!"
Bama gets all the special treatment since the SEC office is in their back yard. Mulligan and scheduling.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:07 am to Draconian Sanctions
Nope. Georgia would have beat you in the SECCG.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:08 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
that's only assuming bama loses two
It's one of those things that's impossible to know but I think it would have made quite a difference for both schools.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:08 am to CheeseburgerEddie
quote:
have they done schedule for next year yet? can we confirm this?
no, and from all accounts it favors LSU
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:08 am to Monticello
If LSU had won 1 or 2 of those NC's, Bama would NOT have 3 of 4.
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:08 am to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Nope. Georgia would have beat you in the SECCG.
doubt it
Posted on 7/18/13 at 11:09 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
it's because of all the rivalries, two of them just happen to be in different divisons
The tradition argument is bullshite. If you want tradition, go back to 10 teams and get rid of divisions. Expansion meant change in 1992, and again in 2012. Change means tradition has to be let go.
Over the years, beginning with changes made as a result of expansion in 1992 and with additional changes in 2002, the following traditional perennial matchups have been sacrificed:
Auburn-Tennessee
Ole Miss-Tennessee
Auburn-Florida
Ole Miss-Georgia (I think)
Miss. St.-Florida
LSU-Kentucky
Alabama-Vandy
and probably some others, these are just the ones I could think of off the top of my head.
BUT...look at the new perennial rivalries we have created as a result of that change:
LSU-Auburn
Florida-Tennessee
Georgia-Tennessee
Arkansas-Alabama
LSU-Arkansas
South Carolina-Georgia (was always a bit of a rivalry, but OOC and not always every year)
Those are some great perennial games that we have GAINED as a result of choosing change and progress over blind adherence to tradition. But now, all of a sudden, tradition is the only thing that matters. If that was how the SEC felt, then they should not have expanded. They wanted money, exposure and progress. They should have known and accepted that that meant sacrificing at least some "tradition".
Playing only once every six years (or twice-in-a-row every 12, depending on how they do the rotation), LSU might as well not even be in the same conference with Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vandy, Kentucky and Missouri. It's just more of the stupidity of the old days, when Herschel Walker, Bo Jackson and Peyton Manning all three went through the SEC and LSU never got to play against any of them.
This post was edited on 7/18/13 at 11:12 am
Page 12 of 30
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News