Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

SEC schedule discrepancies explained in facts

Posted on 11/26/12 at 1:21 am
Posted by thunderbird1100
GSU Eagles fan
Member since Oct 2007
68296 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 1:21 am
Before anyone goes "not this shite again" or the "they're just crying" folks. This is simply a thread showing the cold hard facts of the SEC schedules (specifically cross-divisional games) recently, and how the SEC has essentially made sure things are more unequal than ever before. This is something the SEC MUST fix as this is simply a travesty comparing some teams schedules now. No, no one here is blaming the schedules for any extra loss or anything, just point out some facts, once again.

Before I begin with the breakdown, many folks main argument is "one year one team will benefit from a schedule, the other will suffer and it could be the opposite the next year, so that makes up for it". This is a poor argument, and here is why..You dont wrong a wrong to make it right. Simply seeing 1 team playing 2 ranked teams in the other division 1 year to the next them playing 0 ranked teams in the other division and saying the first year it "sucks" to the next saying "benefitted". It should be somewhat even across ALL teams EVERY year. Sure, adding an extra conference game wont solve the entire problem, but it certainly helps, a great deal. As you will see.

This will be a comparison of the two competing teams in the SEC West recently: LSU and Alabama, since this is who it is affecting on our side of things.

2011
Alabama - (5-7) Tennessee, (7-6) Florida, (6-7) Vanderbilt
LSU - (5-7) Kentucky, (7-6) Florida, (5-7) Tennessee

Verdict = Pretty much even, the teams played the same 2 teams and a third team that were close to each other (within 1 win)...neither had a ranked team...this was also the last year of playing 3 cross-divisional games, oh wait, you see there? Schedules that don't lend massive help one way or the other.


2012
Alabama - (5-7) Tennessee, (5-7) Missouri
LSU - (11-1) Florida, (10-2) South Carolina

Verdict = This is awful and shouldn't happen. One team gets to play 2 mediocre teams and the other 2 Top 10 teams...HUGE discrepancy. What say you would have happened if the 3rd game was added? Well, Alabama was going to play UGA, an 11-1 Top 10 team while LSU was to play Kentucky, a 3-9 team. Now, there's only 1 game of (ranked team) discrepancy, which most folks could at least live with and isn't totally terrible.


2013
Alabama - Tennessee, Kentucky
LSU - Georgia, Florida

Verdict - Now not trying to come to hasty conclusions. But I think MOST would agree you see two ranked teams there for LSU, and likely two unranked teams for Bama. Once again, something that looks at least similar to 2012. Bama was once again also scheduled to play UGA, so once again we see schedules get MORE evened out with an extra game. I honestly forgot who LSU was scheduled to play before expansion, but at least we know Bama was going to play a team we play anyways.


So over a 3 year span, you see LSU playing what looks to be 4 ranked teams out of a possible 7 (2 out of 5 for sure). Alabama plays what looks to be 0 ranked out of a possible 7 (0 out of for 5 for sure). While as a composite that looks bad, that's not what really counts. What really counts is each individual year and in 2011, things were basically even. In 2012, things were terribly different. In 2013, things LOOK to be terribly different once again...but with the extra game added, things would be evened out a bit in both 2012 and 2013.

So in conclusion, the SEC needs to get on the talks of adding a 9th conference game (again), and quick. For whatever reason, they lolly-gagged around on the issue initially and dropped the ball for at least 2 years here...and we have these stupid schedule discrepancies which never should have happened in the first place. This simply should not have happened, and shouldn't conitnue to happen. Down the road, say in 2014, if LSU plays 2 unranked teams, and Bama plays 2 ranked teams cross-divisional...that's also obviously equally unfair and doesn't "make up" for anything. Just once again wrongs a wrong.


And I know, TL;DR
This post was edited on 11/26/12 at 1:22 am
Posted by TigerBait1127
Houston
Member since Jun 2005
47336 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 1:24 am to
I couldn't believe the SEC decided to give us UGA next year instead of Bama.
Posted by Lazy But Talented
Member since Aug 2011
14441 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 1:28 am to
Solid post.
Posted by UAFanFromNOLA
NOLA
Member since Dec 2011
4882 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 1:30 am to
quote:

I couldn't believe the SEC decided to give us UGA next year instead of Bama.

Same, I am glad we get to play them this year though so I can say I got to see every team in the SEC in person.

ETA: Upon rereading that, it seemed like a flame, but it really wasn't meant to be.
This post was edited on 11/26/12 at 1:32 am
Posted by la_birdman
Lake Charles
Member since Feb 2005
31007 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 1:31 am to
I agree. It's not equitable. Not in the least.

We play Florida, UGA, A&M, Bama, and they play the crap teams in the East.

This and next season. No Florida, no Georgia, no South Carolina. Play Kentucky, the game they have to have with TN (who will be rebuilding with a new coach), 3 gimmie wins, the only thing in their way is us and A&M.

As long as they're ranked high in the preseason, they only have to win 2 big games, the rest is done before they even play.

Their schedule last year was crap, this year it's crap, and next year, it's crap.
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 1:34 am to
quote:



As long as they're ranked high in the preseason, they only have to win 2 big games, the rest is done before they even play.

Their schedule last year was crap, this year it's crap, and next year, it's crap.


They only have to win 1 big game. A&M will lose 2-4 games. LSU will likely lose one game against a team not named Alabama.
Posted by la_birdman
Lake Charles
Member since Feb 2005
31007 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 1:39 am to
quote:

LSU will likely lose one game against a team not named Alabama.



I don't know about that but it's possible. Thankfully, all but 1 of our tough games are at home.


And Alabama opens their season with Virginia Tech, at team that struggled to even get bowl qualified this season.

I have no idea how the scheduling stuff works, if it's decided by the coaches or the university or what but it's not equitable.
Posted by NoGeaux
New Orleans
Member since Jan 2004
5535 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 1:47 am to
No question the SEC scheduling is a crock. The only way for it to be fair is to play all divisional rivals and rotate the non divisional and go to 9 conf games.

The problem is the perma "rivalry" game; that has to geaux.

Yes even if we rotate some years some teams will get the bad luck of the draw and get a tough cross division slate, but that is luck and not folks in the SEC picking and choosing who plays whom and where based on a whim.


Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 3:38 am to
quote:


I have no idea how the scheduling stuff works, if it's decided by the coaches or the university or what but it's not equitable.



The 2012 and 2013 seasons are handcrafted by the SEC office as a 2-year temporary deal. Alabama was due to rotate Georgia onto their schedule and.. they get Mizzou and Kentucky instead..
Posted by EZE Tiger Fan
Member since Jul 2004
50268 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 7:50 am to
quote:

They only have to win 1 big game.


Actually, they don't.

See 2011.

Bama's position with the SEC in terms of scheduling should be the envy of every program in America. They literally get a free pass to Atlanta, but wait!!

If they don't make it to Atlanta, they still get to the BCSNCG...or in 2014, will simply be put in the playoff bc of "brand recognition".

CFB is slowly but surely becoming the farce I was afraid it was turning into. Here we are! Just wait until 2014. You haven't seen anything yet.
Posted by Papa Tigah
TIGER ISLAND, LA
Member since Sep 2007
18397 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 7:58 am to
A long read, but a good one.
Posted by tjtiger9
MS
Member since Aug 2005
3843 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 8:16 am to
quote:

Thankfully, all but 1 of our tough games are at home.



I believe we play at Bama and at Georgia next year

Posted by pensacola
pensacola
Member since Sep 2005
4629 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 8:18 am to
Use Divisional record for SECCG purposes. Use cross division for tie breaker.
Posted by memphisplaya
Member since Jan 2009
85795 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 9:02 am to
Before expansion we were going to play at UK in 2012. They dropped it for SC. Why? Idk ask them about their bridged scheduling.
Posted by elprez00
Hammond, LA
Member since Sep 2011
29376 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 9:09 am to
quote:

CFB is slowly but surely becoming the farce I was afraid it was turning into. Here we are! Just wait until 2014. You haven't seen anything yet.


I am afraid you are going to hear a lot of "eye test" comments.
Posted by dreaux
baton rouge
Member since Oct 2006
40881 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 9:24 am to
Oh the eye test. I recently did that when building my workshop. Instead of getting it surveyed, it now to close to the servitude. My eyes said it was good enough
Posted by dreaux
baton rouge
Member since Oct 2006
40881 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 9:27 am to
Also, look at the results of 2011. Lsu 13-1 Bama 12-1.


frick Bama. I am about to stop following college football. It's becoming professional wrestling. What a joke
Posted by Smoke Dinardo
NORTHSHORE
Member since Aug 2012
167 posts
Posted on 11/26/12 at 12:24 pm to
I disagree with the perma rival being the problem. I like playing Florida every year. If we did not, to me, it would seem weirder than not playing some other teams in the West every year.

The SEC needs to go to 9 games-period. The problem is that we go so long without playing certain teams from the East. I thought it was too long before expansion (4 years). Expansion does now give the SEC a perfect reason to fix this. Here is my suggestion:

LSU-plays the other 6 teams in the West every year and Florida. So, let's say, we begin with:

1) 2014-----even year so we will play AT Florida.
@Vanderbilt
Georgia

2) 2015
Florida
Kentucky
@South Carolina

3) 2016
@Florida
@ Missouri
Tennessee

4) 2017
Florida
Vanderbilt
@Georgia

5) 2018
@Florida
@Kentucky
South Carolina

6) 2019
Florida
Missouri
@Tennessee

That way, in a 3 year period, we play ALL teams in the SEC at least once. There may be one year like this year where we play 2 top 10 teams from the East and Bama plays 2 bad teams from the East. But, with this method, Bama is very likely to play at least one of those really good teams the very next year (and maybe both), so you would not have Bama playing to crap teams from the East in back to back years.

Also, LSU should always play 7 home games and 5 away games. I think we should also play one BCS non-conference opponent every year. So, with my format above, in the even years when we play at Florida, we play a non-conference quality opponent at home. In the odd years when we play Florida at home, we do a non-conference road trip.

This will solve everything!
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram