🏈 Changes could be coming to SEC schedule

[lilstat]

There’s a reason the SEC hasn’t released the league schedule for the 2010 season.

That’s because some games could be switching dates.

Charles Bloom, an SEC associate commissioner, said Thursday that the league is trying to provide some relief for Alabama so that the Crimson Tide won't have to play six of their eight conference games next season when the opponent is coming off a bye week.

As it stands now, Alabama’s final six SEC opponents during the 2010 season are scheduled to have bye weeks prior to facing the Crimson Tide.

Those six teams are South Carolina, Ole Miss, Tennessee, LSU, Mississippi State and Auburn.

Bloom said the entire schedule wouldn’t be torn up to accommodate Alabama, but that a more likelihood scenario was a handful of games moving so that the Crimson Tide wouldn’t have to play so many teams next season on the heels of byes.

“This is something that’s important to the entire league, because nobody wants to be in that same position a year or two from now,” Bloom said. “So we’re looking at a way to balance it out this year and for years to come. The difference is that it might be a little tweak this year with more widespread changes coming in future years.”

Blooms said the league hopes to have any changes finalized for the 2010 season prior to the spring meetings in Destin, Fla., in May

Courtesy of ESPN

 

[doemasters]

at least they are trying to move the games around some

 

[prothrofan4]

thank the lord! I'm a little more at ease now that we're not breaking in 8 new starters on defense to that schedule!

 

[joeman546]

That schedule change is the difference between me hoping to be competitive in the west and me hoping for a repeat. Attrition is going to be an unbeatable opponent as it stands.

 

[CtrlAltDel]

This has been going on for years. I really don't know how long but, I believe it has been for quite a while and not just the last 3 years or 5 years that was reported when the story broke.

I wonder if anything would have been done about this if Coach Saban had not come to 'Bama and we had not won the NC or won 12 games season before last or were generally on the upswing as a team and program.

You know, if 'Bama were still stuck in mediocrity and malaise, do any of you believe any pressure would have been exerted on the SEC to do something about this?

I believe the SEC probably would not have cared if Alabama didn't have new found leverage within the conference. We probably would have been blown off and any complaint just filed away.

 

[252BAMA]

This has been going on for years. I really don't know how long but, I believe it has been for quite a while and not just the last 3 years or 5 years that was reported when the story broke.

I wonder if anything would have been done about this if Coach Saban had not come to 'Bama and we had not won the NC or won 12 games season before last or were generally on the upswing as a team and program.

You know, if 'Bama were still stuck in mediocrity and malaise, do any of you believe any pressure would have been exerted on the SEC to do something about this?

I believe the SEC probably would not have cared if Alabama didn't have new found leverage within the conference. We probably would have been blown off and any complaint just filed away.

It has been going on since 1992 when the SEC took over the scheduling. I don't think any of those things you mentioned had anything to do with correcting it. The thing about it this year was that it was so blatantly egregious that they had no choice but to do something about it.

 

[CtrlAltDel]

It has been going on since 1992 when the SEC took over the scheduling. I don't think any of those things you mentioned had anything to do with correcting it. The thing about it this year was that it was so blatantly egregious that they had no choice but to do something about it.

You may be right, 252. Anyway, at least it is being addressed, finally.

 

[shipley00]

It kills me that they are not embarrassed by this. There are only two reasons this would happen. Incompetence, or purposefulness. If the former, they should be embarrassed. If the later, they should be either scared or ticked they got busted. Which is it? Or is it both?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o></o>

 

[CtrlAltDel]

It kills me that they are not embarrassed by this. There are only two reasons this would happen. Incompetence, or purposefulness. If the former, they should be embarrassed. If the later, they should be either scared or ticked they got busted. Which is it? Or is it both?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o></o>

Honestly, Shipley, it probably was not a coincidence. Yet, that doesn't mean it was done in collusion. It also doesn't mean that indifference by the SEC Office was not to blame either.

I don't believe all these teams got together and planned out a strategy to gang up on 'Bama. That being said, I don't think any of them particularly cared when it just kept happening year after year after year like it did.

The SEC office surely knew about it and didn't care until it was forced upon them to make a change by Mal Moore and the other AD's. Out of good faith, and to not be embarrassed among their colleagues as being unfair to a particular team, the other AD's agreed to see what could be done about it.

It just comes down to all these other schools want to beat 'BAma because it is something they have striven to do for over a hundred years. Even back in the 20's, if you beat 'Bama you were somebody.

As an example, just recently, the head coach for Louisiana Monroe said that the victory over a 6-6 regular season Alabama team in 2007 was the absolute biggest victory for their team ever.

Even in down years, 'Bama is a target. That is why Tennessee, LSU, Auburn, and on and on like to have an off week before 'Bama. They feel like somebody when they beat us.

When a privilege is abused, as was the privilege of individual teams teams being able to choose their off weeks, it has to be taken away.

Now, whether they like it or not, they will be told when to take their off weeks and it is going to be this way because they, most likely without foreknowledge, gave really bad odds to 'Bama.

They all should have made it their business to know that a single team was getting the short end of the stick.

 

[252BAMA]

It kills me that they are not embarrassed by this. There are only two reasons this would happen. Incompetence, or purposefulness. If the former, they should be embarrassed. If the later, they should be either scared or ticked they got busted. Which is it? Or is it both?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o></o>

There is no question that it was done on purpose. It has been done that way every year since the SEC took over the scheduling in 1992. Without a doubt, Roy Kramer's permanent #1 rule of scheduling at the outset was that ut would have an open date before their game with Bama. It has evolved from that. The more that Bama complained, the worse it got. They finally overdid it this year to the point they wound up with egg on their face. As I said in my previous post, it was so blatantly egregious that they had no choice but to correct it. I am surprised that it did not occur in 2007 or 2008, which are the only two years that ut has not had an open date set by the SEC prior to the Bama game. In those two years they made ut play MSU(ha, ha, ha) and gave ALL SEVEN of Bama's other conference opponents an open date prior to their games with Bama. In 2007, four of them took the week off and the other three scheduled OOC games. Cupcake OOC games. In 2008, it was just the opposite, three of them took the week off and four scheduled cupcakes. In both years, all seven could have taken the week off had they so chosen or been able to schedule their OOC games accordingly.

 

[252BAMA]

Obviously the SEC has gotten away with it in the past because ALL of the schools in any one year given an open date before Bama, have not taken, or been able to take, that week off. This year ALL six of them did, so they wound up with egg on their face.

 

[alagator]

Many here are noting, but not commenting directly on the true issue.

It is not per se that six of eight opponents have open dates the week prior to their contest with Alabama, which is something the SEC cannot completely control. But rather that the SEC scheduled no conference game for seven of eight Alabama opponents the week prior to their contest against Alabama, something the SEC office can completely control.

While it has been noted the SEC can pretty easily create some relief to Alabama by moving just three conference contests (by merely shifting the Miss State v. Kentucky, Auburn v. Georgia, and South Carolina v. Arkansas - at least I think those are the three contests that would result in no other adjustment to any of the six affected teams), I fully expect the SEC to not reschedule any conference game and merely require three or four of the teams currently enjoying an open date prior to playing Alabama to move one of their cupcake OOC opponents to the appropriate date. Some relief yes, but minor in results. I will be (pleasantly) surprised if this presumption is in error.

I still hope and pray the SEC will require the Auburn v. Georgia game be moved to one week later, resulting in both Alabama and Auburn having the same number of days in a short-week to prepare. THEN, Alabama announce a move of the Georgia State game to Thursday night. Resulting in Auburn having to play a serious opponent the Saturday prior to the UA v. AU game and us playing a cupcake early gaining a two day advantage in preparations. The howls that would begin from the plains would be music worthy of the gods - to my ears at least.

 

[252BAMA]

Many here are noting, but not commenting directly on the true issue.

It is not per se that six of eight opponents have open dates the week prior to their contest with Alabama, which is something the SEC cannot completely control. But rather that the SEC scheduled no conference game for seven of eight Alabama opponents the week prior to their contest against Alabama, something the SEC office can completely control.

While it has been noted the SEC can pretty easily create some relief to Alabama by moving just three conference contests (by merely shifting the Miss State v. Kentucky, Auburn v. Georgia, and South Carolina v. Arkansas - at least I think those are the three contests that would result in no other adjustment to any of the six affected teams), I fully expect the SEC to not reschedule any conference game and merely require three or four of the teams currently enjoying an open date prior to playing Alabama to move one of their cupcake OOC opponents to the appropriate date. Some relief yes, but minor in results. I will be (pleasantly) surprised if this presumption is in error.

I still hope and pray the SEC will require the Auburn v. Georgia game be moved to one week later, resulting in both Alabama and Auburn having the same number of days in a short-week to prepare. THEN, Alabama announce a move of the Georgia State game to Thursday night. Resulting in Auburn having to play a serious opponent the Saturday prior to the UA v. AU game and us playing a cupcake early gaining a two day advantage in preparations. The howls that would begin from the plains would be music worthy of the gods - to my ears at least.

I have tried to be clear in all of my posts on this subject that it is the school and not the SEC scheduling the off week. Bottom line, however, is that NO SEC team can take the week off before their game with Bama without the SEC giving them an open date in which to do so.

As far as the SEC requiring the schools in question to reschedule OOC games, that would almost have to depend on the OOC school having that same week open on their schedule. Otherwise you would be opening a can of worms in moving games around. It may not be like the 3 games you mentioned, whereas Arkansas has the same week off as SC, UK has the same week off as MSU, and UGA has the same week off as Auburn.

And from what I hear, even a move of an off site home game to Thursday night would be very unlikely. In Tuscaloosa? Forget about it!

 

[252BAMA]

You can just about take to the bank the move of Arkansas at SC to 10/2 thus eliminating SC's open date prior to Bama. I say that because as it stands, SC plays 6 straight SEC games in 6 straight weeks with the final game at UF. With this move they would still be playing 6 straight SEC games in 6 straight weeks, but the final game would be ut. Big advantage ut! Anything to ut's advantage, you can bank on. There are 3 schools(UK, SC, and Vandy) that are scheduled to play 6 straight SEC games in 6 straight weeks. There are two schools (UF and Bama) that are scheduled to play 5 straight SEC games in 5 straight weeks with Bama's fifth at ut. ut does not play more than 3 straight SEC games in 3 straight weeks. Need I say more!?

http://secfootball.itgo.com/2010schedule.html

 

[alagator]

I have tried to be clear in all of my posts on this subject that it is the school and not the SEC scheduling the off week. Bottom line, however, is that NO SEC team can take the week off before their game with Bama without the SEC giving them an open date in which to do so.

As far as the SEC requiring the schools in question to reschedule OOC games, that would almost have to depend on the OOC school having that same week open on their schedule. Otherwise you would be opening a can of worms in moving games around. It may not be like the 3 games you mentioned, whereas Arkansas has the same week off as SC, UK has the same week off as MSU, and UGA has the same week off as Auburn.

And from what I hear, even a move of an off site home game to Thursday night would be very unlikely. In Tuscaloosa? Forget about it!

The first paragraph was my point.

There is historical precedent for the SEC forcing member institutions to alter their OOC schedule to address a conference scheduling issue. In the mid '90s, Arkansas mistakenly scheduled an OOC game for the same weekend the SEC scheduled the Arkansas v. Alabama game. Rather than tell Arkansas to cancel that game and find another weekend, the SEC (granted it was Roy Kramer and his band of idiots then) made ALABAMA move three games, Ole Miss two games, and one other conference team one game to resolve the problem. So, the SEC could tell member schools to either move games or find new opponents for new weekends. I would bet they do this before they take the more simple move involving SC, Miss State, and Auburn.

I also am pretty sure Alabama would not move the GA State game to a Thursday. I was speaking more in the hypothetical of I wish UA would just for the angst it would create on The Plains. Especially if the SEC forced the Tiggers to move the UGa game down the calendar a week and eliminating their scheduling advantage - flipping things to a disadvantage for the Woe Eagles. The reaction, and cries of "SEC Conspiracy for the Bammers" would be pure gold.

 

[252BAMA]

Wait! There is more! I just realized that ALL of those five teams that I mentioned in my previous post as being smashed by the straight SEC games in straight weeks are common opponents of........ut. So let's take a look at their sixth and final common opponent, UGA. Surprise! Surprise! There is UGA tied with Arkansas for sixth place in that category with 4 straight SEC games in 4 straight weeks. Does anyone really believe that all of this is a coincidence? All one has to do is take a close look at the entire schedule, and it is quite apparent that the whole damn thing is geared to benefit ut as much as possible. And to put Bama at as much disadvantage as possible.

 

[4th-and-1]

who cares.. next year if bama plays to potential on offense, it doesn't matter if they have 2 months.. no one should be able to stop the running game without opening up some major holes in the passing game.. i want this team to get the respect they deserve.. i get sick of reading about bama not being the best team last year.. they were and are one of the most physically dominating teams i have ever seen.

 

[252BAMA]

who cares.. next year if bama plays to potential on offense, it doesn't matter if they have 2 months.. no one should be able to stop the running game without opening up some major holes in the passing game.. i want this team to get the respect they deserve.. i get sick of reading about bama not being the best team last year.. they were and are one of the most physically dominating teams i have ever seen.

I'm sure you meant to say that you don't care rather than who cares. Otherwise you would be dissing the several of us who have indicated here that we do care.

 

[252BAMA]

The most important spring decision for Alabama may take place in the SEC office. As currently constituted, the SEC's master schedule would force the Tide to play their final six conference games against teams coming off bye weeks. This was an issue for Alabama last year, but six games against rested teams is beyond ridiculous, especially when the rest of the league will play a combined three conference games against rested opponents. Fortunately for the Tide, the SEC is considering altering the schedule, because a slate that tough could fell even the most dominant team. - Andy Staples, SI.​

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/03/16/sec-spring/index.html#ixzz0iRFqGeNo
​

 

[252BAMA]

And more. The more I dig, the more I find.

The conference games that a school has to play each year are already deternmined years in advance. The only way to make those schedules more difficult or easier is with the order those games are scheduled. Cram them all together and make them play without rest and or against teams with byes makes it more difficult. Spread them out and give them open dates in which to schedule cupcakes or take a day off makes it easier. I have already pointed out that the top 6 schedules in degree of difficulty are ALL common opponents of ut while the next to last schedule in that category is that of ut? Only LSU plays less straight SEC games in straight weeks than does ut.

And if the top 6 in degree of difficulty are all common opponents of ut then look who the bottom 6, those with the easiest degree of difficulty, wind up being. That's right! The other 5 West schools and ut. ALL common opponents of Bama!

Does anyone really believe that all of that is a coincidence? Everyone needs to take a long hard look at this schedule. It is so pro ut and anti Bama that it stinks.