re: SOS of the Big 5 + A&M Since Expansion

quote:

---

Just spot checking your work:

2004
SEC-E ranked opponents: UGA (AP: 7) and UT (AP: 13)
SEC-W opponents: Alabama (6-6, unranked), Ole Miss, Arkansas (both finished w/ losing records and unranked)
OOC: Troy, USF, Clemson (finished 6-5, unranked)

---

In 2003, we played LSU, UGA, UTjr., Ole Miss, Clemson, and UF - all top 25 teams plus Saban's MNC LSU.

In 2005, we played Alabama and UGA - two top 10 teams, plus Auburn, UF, and Clemson. Again all top 25 opponents. You didn't "spot check", you cherry-picked.....

South Carolina has had several top 10 and even top 5 SOS's during our time in the SEC. We played the team that would end up winning the national championship that year in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010. From 2002 through 2012, the SEC had 27 teams (not named South Carolina) that finished in the Associated Press top 10 final polls, and USC played 18 (.667) of them.

Since 2012, the SEC has had 15 teams other than USC in the final top 10, and USC has played only 5 (.333) of them, so the schedules haven't been as tough overall in that time. But last season we played 2 of the 4 (UF & UGA), plus Clemson who was the NC, plus top 25 teams UK and Texas A&M.

We typically have very strong SOSs every season. Occasionally we have had some weaker ones as well. The 2004 season you chose to pick was about the weakest one we've had since 2002....

quote:

---

You get points for playing opponents that FINISH in the AP Top 25. 25 points for playing a #1 team; 24 points for playing a #2 team, etc. all the way down to getting 1 point for playing a team that finished #25.

---

So SEC West teams literally got 164 points from playing Alabama.

Without Alabama on their schedule, Auburn's SOS is practically the same as UGA's (328 to 319)

quote:

---

And before Bama fans reply back that its because they can't play themselves, you are wrong.

---

No, I'm pretty sure you cannot play yourself.

quote:

---

Bama somehow has failed to play a single team out of the East during the regular season that finished in the Top 20 at the end of the year. THAT is the biggest issue with the schedules today.

---

This is why Alabama employs only the best psychics. They knew back in the 90s when Tennessee was finishing Top 10 every year that they'd eventually suck (despite being the second most accomplished SEC school by a wide margin at that point). They also knew that Missouri wouldn't have a good team until the year after they played them, that Florida in 2014 would be terrible back when the schedules were made in 2012 (when Florida finished 11-2).

Here's another bit of intellectual dishonesty in your post:
Alabama in 2015 (national title year) played 10-3 Georgia (unranked - man, the Bulldogs get NO respect), #22 Tennessee (highest ranked SEC East team) and in the SECCG a 10-4 Florida team that finished #25. Literally the SEC East threw the best teams they had at Alabama and lost by a combined 86-39. The only team to come within one score of Alabama is your much maligned Volunteers. Georgia and Florida didn't even get Alabama winded.

2016 only saw two ranked East opponents, Tennessee being one of them. The other, Florida, Alabama beat in the SECCG.

So yeah, the East hasn't provided a lot of "finished in the final AP poll" that Alabama hasn't played.

Because this part:

quote:

---

MOST DIFFICULT DIVISION SCHEDULES:

1. Texas A&M- 330
2. Auburn- 325
3. LSU- 272
4. Alabama- 205

---

Literally makes the point of "Alabama doesn't get to play Alabama". The higher the number on THIS stat, it just means the crappier team has the higher rank when they're all in the same division and literally all PLAY EACH OTHER.

quote:

---

The gap between the hardest (Auburn) and the easiest (Alabama) is insane.... literally more than double.

---

Auburn plays Alabama every year. Alabama never plays Alabama. Unsurprisingly, AU's SOS is tougher. Alabama's cross division rival is in a historic low point despite being the 2nd best team in the SEC historically. I can assure you that when Alabama picked Tennessee as it's permanent opponent in 1992, it was not to make the schedule any easier.

quote:

---

Simple math would tell you that the best team in each division will have the worst divisional SOS and the worst team would have the hardest SOS.

---

quote:

---

You weren’t spot checking .... you were looking for one season.

---

I picked one year randomly.

Go see someone about your butt hurt.

Here's another year.

2011
SEC-E ranked opponents: UGA (AP 19)
SEC-W opponents: Auburn (finished 8-5, unranked), Mississippi St (7-6, unranked), Arkansas (AP 5).
OOC: Clemson (AP 18), The Citadel, Navy, East Carolina.

3 ranked opponents. Congrats I guess.

quote:

---

scrooster

---

Contributions by school:
Alabama - 164
LSU - 75 (1 season worth 0 points)
Auburn - 46 (3 seasons worth 0 points, over half come from 2013)
Texas A&M - 39 (4 seasons worth 0 points)

This is inverse to this:

quote:

---

1. Texas A&M- 330
2. Auburn- 325
3. LSU- 272
4. Alabama- 205

---

Alabama generates more points in this system in two seasons than Auburn or Texas A&M generate in 7. LSU is almost worth Auburn and Texas A&M combined.

Thing is, I bet if you expanded on this, you'd find the team that generated the least points would be ranked with the toughest schedule.



Or more to the point, removing just one game from each of those teams' schedules:

quote:

---

Without Alabama on the schedule:

Texas A&M - 166
Auburn - 161
LSU - 108

---

Suddenly their schedules are easier than SEC East schedules, by this logic.

Alabama literally makes the West tougher than the East all by their lonesome.

For once...I actually agree with scrooster. No relief in sight for USCe SOS as Clemson appears to have staying power and aTm is an ascending football program.

quote:

---

Big 5 

---

The 5 teams to have won a natty in the BCS/CFP era?

quote:

---

Here's another bit of intellectual dishonesty in your post:
Alabama in 2015 (national title year) played 10-3 Georgia (unranked - man, the Bulldogs get NO respect), #22 Tennessee (highest ranked SEC East team) and in the SECCG a 10-4 Florida team that finished #25. Literally the SEC East threw the best teams they had at Alabama and lost by a combined 86-39. The only team to come within one score of Alabama is your much maligned Volunteers. Georgia and Florida didn't even get Alabama winded.

---

And what does this have to do with anything I said?

I've said from the beginning the East is weak which is part of why we need change. You're basically agreeing with me above only you aren't smart enough to realize it.

quote:

---

Literally makes the point of "Alabama doesn't get to play Alabama".

---

I already proved that this is not the main factor. Refer back to page 1 of the thread when I said this:

you can take out the "Alabama can't play itself factor" by subtracting out the games played between Alabama and Auburn and also all common opponents (other West teams). Since 2012, these are the unique games for each of the two programs:

Alabama:
#3 USC (2016)
#21 Wisconsin (2015)
#22 Tennessee (2016)
#22 Tennessee (2015)
#24 Michigan (2012)

Auburn:
#1 Clemson (2016)
#2 Georgia (2017)
#4 Clemson (2017)
#5 Georgia (2012)
#7 Georgia (2018)
#9 Georgia (2014)
#11 Clemson (2012)
#13 Washington (2018)
#18 Kansas State (2014)
#23 Vanderbilt (2012)

So not counting games against each other or against other SEC West programs, Auburn has played nine Top 20 opponents during the past 7 seasons to Alabama's 1.

quote:

---

Auburn plays Alabama every year. Alabama never plays Alabama. Unsurprisingly, AU's SOS is tougher.

---

Now compare the East teams each has played....

Then compare the OOC teams each has played in the regular season. Let me know how that turns out.

quote:

---

Alabama's cross division rival is in a historic low point

---

How long are we going to pretend that this slump for Tennessee is just a short-lived blip on the radar?

Tennessee is on a SEVENTEEN year streak of not producing a Top 10 team. At some point we've got to admit this is not some cycle that will turn back around and that its simply the norm.

Folks need to realize that the Fulmer Golden Years were the true anomaly. Tennessee circa 1995-2001 was only a short, 7-year stint of great success due mostly to having arguably the greatest QB of all-time. That type of QB doesn't come around but once or twice in a generation, and the chance of the next one choosing Tennessee is zero.

From 1973-1994, Tennessee only had THREE Top 10 teams during a 22-year period. They were struggling as a program for decades and the true anomaly is their late '90s success.

If you take out the Manning Years and the few years that followed in his wake (1995-2001), Tennessee has produced just THREE Top 10 teams during 39 seasons of football (1972-1994; 2002-2018).

Of course Bama wants to continue with the lie that Tennessee is some great program because it makes their schedule so easy, but reality shows that Tennessee without Peyton Manning is really closer to Arkansas and Ole Miss than it is the current "Big 5".