re: SEC needs to Clean Up & Move Offices

quote:

---

Looking at the SEC East teams in 2012 and 2013.

Missouri
2012 - Alabama
2013 - at Ole Miss

There is no problem with Missouri's schedule. They had to play someone, so why not Alabama and Ole Miss, and just like Texas A&M, a tough opponent in 2012, followed by an easier opponent in 2013.

South Carolina
2012 - at LSU
2013 - Miss State

There is no problem with South Carolina's schedule. These are the same exact games that South Carolina played in 2007. This makes sense.

Vanderbilt
2012 - Auburn
2013 - at Texas A&M

There is no problem with Vanderbilt's schedule. In 2012, Auburn was "Due" to play at Florida, however, that could not happen because LSU was playing at Florida. Next in Auburn's rotation was to play at Vanderbilt in 2012, so this makes sense. In 2013, someone has to play Texas A&M, so why not Vanderbilt.

Florida
2012 - at Texas A&M
2013 - Arkansas

In 2012, since someone had to play at Texas A&M, there is no problem here.

In 2013, they are playing Arkansas, while they should be playing Auburn. From Florida's perspective, this is a "Wash", since not much is expected by Arkansas and Auburn in 2013, you can conclude that Florida is not receiving any benefit by playing Arkansas instead of Auburn.

Tennessee
2012 - at Miss State
2013 - Auburn

In 2012, Tennessee played at Miss State, just like in 2007. This makes sense.

In 2013, they are playing Auburn, while they should be playing Arkansas. Just like Florida, from Tennessee's perspective, this is a "Wash", since not much is expected by Auburn and Arkansas in 2013, you can conclude that Tennessee is not receiving any benefit by playing Auburn instead of Arkansas.

Georgia
2012 - Ole Miss
2013 - LSU

In 2012, Georgia played Ole Miss, just like in 2007. This makes sense.

In 2013, they are playing LSU instead of Alabama. From Georgia's perspective, this is a "Wash", since both LSU and Alabama are 2 of the best teams in the West, you can conclude that Georgia is not receiving any benefit by playing LSU instead of Alabama.

Kentucky
2012 - at Arkansas
2013 - Alabama

In 2012, Kentucky played at Arkansas, just like in 2007. This makes sense.

In 2013, they are playing Alabama instead of LSU. Just like Georgia, from Kentucky's perspective, this is a "Wash", since both Alabama and LSU are 2 of the best teams in the West, you can conclude that Kentucky is not receiving any benefit by playing Alabama instead of LSU.

**********************************************************************

Conclusion

If you are going to accuse someone of being dishonest or cheating, it is a good idea to have all of the facts to back up your claim.

Conspiracy theories happen all of the time, however, when they become backed up by facts, they are no longer conspiracy theories.

These are the facts and they back up the claim that the "SEC Bridge Schedules" were created with one purpose in mind, to give Alabama an easier schedule.

Granted, in 2012, someone from the West had to play Missouri, in addition to Texas A&M, and on paper it could have been any of the other 6 teams in the West. So, while it may difficult to claim that scheduling Alabama at Missouri in 2012 was dishonest or improper, when you combine it with the scheduling fiasco in 2013, it becomes crystal clear that Alabama's games against Missouri and Kentucky in 2012 and 2013, were both scheduled to provide a clear benefit to Alabama.

In 2013, Alabama and Auburn are the only 2 teams that received a benefit by the "SEC Bridge Schedule". With the sole purpose of providing Alabama with an easier schedule, perhaps the "Schedule Creator" decided to included another team, so that it would not be so obvious as to what he was doing. The fact that he picked Auburn is just another slap in the face to everyone in the SEC, outside of the state of Alabama.

To sum up, Alabama and Auburn received an improper scheduling benefit in 2013. This was accomplished by a blatant form of dishonesty or cheating by the creator of the "SEC Bridge Schedule". There is no doubt about it, and it is crystal clear how it was done and which teams were affected. Any response by the SEC Office to justify these actions will not have the facts on their side.

What was the motivation for doing this?

In 2013, Alabama and LSU are expected to be 2 of the best teams in the SEC West. Any loss could impact who wins the division and advances to the SEC Championship Game, and perhaps to the BCS National Championship Game. There are 6 teams from the SEC that could start the season in the Top 10, (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, LSU, South Carolina, Texas A&M).

In 2013, playing less games against these 6 teams is advantageous to playing more games against them. With that in mind, here are the results of the "SEC Bridge Schedule".

Number of games against the Top 6 SEC teams

2 - Alabama (LSU, Texas A&M)
2 - Texas A&M (Alabama, LSU)
2 - South Carolina (Florida, Georgia)
3 - Florida (Georgia, LSU, South Carolina)
3 - Georgia (Florida, LSU, South Carolina)
4 - LSU (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Texas A&M)

Again, any response by the SEC Office to justify the "Bridge Schedule" will not have the facts on their side.

---

quote:

---

Very Operation Red Dog like.

---

quote:

---

All of the facts needed to conclude how this was done are detailed in this email, which was sent to some of the SEC Athletic Directors and Head Coaches, along with some of the Media and those who work in the SEC Office. From here, it will be up to some of those in the media to pursue this and ask questions.

---

quote:

---

quote: Birmingham international airport is a contradiction in terms.

---

quote:

---

Funny that you pick your biggest threat in the SEC West outside of the state of AL...

---