🏈 rollbamaroll: Nope. Wrong. RT @KevinScarbinsky: Time for the SEC to take away Alabama's annual guara

[RTB X Bot]

rollbamaroll: Nope. Wrong. RT @KevinScarbinsky: Time for the SEC to take away Alabama's annual guarantee game against Tennessee. http://t.co/0vol4RK35F

More...

---

Les Miles is right. The SEC football schedule is wrong, and it’s time for the league to do something about it.

Permanent cross-division opponents - or traditional rivals, if you prefer, old-timer - have got to go.

That’s right.

No more Third Saturday in October because it meant something to Bear Bryant and General Neyland. Or South’s oldest rivalry because it featured Bo Jackson and Herschel Walker. Or LSU-Florida because … tell me again why the Tigers and the Gators have to play every year?

Miles certainly would like to know.

Not to go all Sesame Street on you, but one of those things is not like the other. One of those things does not belong.

It’s Alabama-Tennessee.

With all due respect to UT AD Dave Hart, who’s made it part of his mission to preserve that game on an annual basis, the Tide vs. the Vols is no longer a rivalry. It’s a guarantee game.

When they play in Knoxville, Tennessee gets a crowd and a bruise, and Alabama gets a win. When they play in Tuscaloosa, Tennessee gets nothing but a bruise, and Alabama gets another win.

Meanwhile, while Alabama’s using its permanent cross-division game as a breather to prepare for LSU, LSU has to go through Florida before it even gets to
Alabama. Auburn has to prepare for Alabama by climbing into the ring with Georgia.

Miles and the LSU administration have been lobbying for some time to repair this imbalance, but without much support from other schools in the league.
“The most important thing the conference has to do is pick a champion in a fair, straightforward way,” Miles said at a charity golf tournament Monday, according to The Advocate in Baton Rouge. “I think everybody understands that.”

LSU should have an ally on this issue in Auburn, but the in-state Tigers seem to like playing Georgia every year. Given that the Bulldogs have won six of their last seven encounters, it’s hard to understand why.

With the SEC heading toward next week’s spring meeting in Destin, LSU doesn’t appear to have the votes to steer the league away from its 6-1-1 scheduling format, with six division games, one rotating non-division game and one permanent non-division game, but Miles hasn’t given up hope.

"I trust they will recognize with the upcoming playoff, and with the BCS bowls being so important, everyone should shoulder the burden of playing the better teams (in the league),” he said. “Everybody.”

That’s not happening now. Last year, LSU played Florida, as always, and South Carolina from the SEC East. The Gators and the Gamecocks each went 11-2. Compare that degree of difficulty with Alabama’s SEC East opponents: Tennessee, as always, and league newcomer Missouri. They each finished 5-7.

This year, Alabama plays Tennessee and Kentucky from the East, two programs that were so bad last year they fired their head coaches. LSU gets legitimate contenders Florida and Georgia.

Advantage, Alabama.

Again.

Tennessee is the real problem here. The Vols haven’t lived up to their history as one of the upper-echelon programs in the league in years.
They haven’t been ranked going into the Alabama game since 2007, Nick Saban’s first season in Tuscaloosa. They’ve put a top-10 ranking on the line against the Tide just once since 1999.

That was in 2006, when No. 7 Tennessee beat unranked Alabama and helped start the machinery that pushed Mike Shula out and ushered Saban in. The Vols haven’t beaten the Tide since.

It’s not uncommon for traditional powers to lose their way, which is another reason for the SEC to put the concept of permanent cross-division opponents in the past where it belongs. At the moment, from the Eastern Division’s perspective, it’s a lot easier for Georgia to play Auburn each year than it is for Florida to play LSU.

Beyond promoting basic fairness, rotating two cross-division opponents every year also would help realize Saban’s dream that every player in the league should get to play every other team in the league at least once during his college career.

So it would be a win-win deal, unlike the current set-up, which is winning for only one of the SEC West’s traditional powers. It’s the team in crimson, which gets to wipe its feet on the team in orange on or about the Third Saturday in October every year.

That’s a tradition Neyland never imagined.

 

[TerryP]

If you jump over to the twitter hub and look at the exchanges between 6-10 last night you can see both perspectives being voiced. It's an interesting subject to follow.

One thing Scarbinsky touches on here, but doesn't say it outright, is who is involved in this. You'd think, based on the tone of the article, this is something 10 of the 14 teams in the SEC are complaining about with UA, UT, UGA, and AU hanging on to something of the past. Yet, if you get down to the nuts and bolts about it, there is one team, one coach complaining about the permanent opponent.

It's LSU. The same school who had no complaints when Fulmer was coaching at UT. The same school who had no complaints when Zook was coaching at Florida.

Let there be no mistake. I fully realize this season Alabama gets a huge break when it comes to the schedule by getting Tennessee and Kentucky. Yet, let this be understood as well. I'm not so obtuse to realize that in the 2011 season—the year LSU had what is arguably the best season they've ever had as a football program—they had the same Tennessee, the same Kentucky, and a Florida team that won a total of six regular season games. Florida's best SEC win in 2011? A five point victory over a 6-7 Vandy.

Then we have 2010.

One thing that still strikes me is if you take Florida and LSU, then pick another SEC at random...we'll use UGA, Bama and UT have more SEC titles combined than those three combined. Yet, now, this is a huge deal to the SEC as a whole—at least that's what they'd have you believe.

The biggest farce in this whole discussion is the notion that removing permanent opponents is somehow going to make schedules more fair. 8 conference games in a 14 team league is never going to make schedules fair across the board.

I'm not going to presume to understand the mentality, or motivation, behind the suggestions and complaints coming from Baton Rouge. (It's important to note here we don't hear them coming from Gainesville.) Although, I'm not left without an opinion.

I'd be placated, if only for a moment, if I saw someone admit for only a minute that the people who want to see the Bama vs UT series continue aren't limited to residents of Knoxville and Tuscaloosa.

 

[TerryP]

An interesting graphic up on ESPN last night.

---

Let me draw your attention to the bottom part of that graphic.

Alabama with 12 games against top 10 ranked SEC teams, LSU with 13. Where's the disparity?

OK, it's obvious. It's in the number of wins.

I did take a minute to look over the SEC schedules of both team over the same time period. LSU has 15, Alabama has 10. What jumped out at me is six of those 15 losses were to a combination of Kentucky, Mississippi, and Arkansas. LSU has played Mississippi and Arkansas yearly and Kentucky twice. Alabama? The same.

 

[planomateo]

Honestly...they just need to worry about beating Alabama, they do that, they are in.

Excuses is all I see/hear from them - I've been poking around TD.

Whats funny, Nick Saban is saying lets go 9, Les is saying, lets stay 8.

 

[TerryP]

Honestly...they just need to worry about beating Alabama, they do that, they are in.

Excuses is all I see/hear from them - I've been poking around TD.

Whats funny, Nick Saban is saying lets go 9, Les is saying, lets stay 8.

He did say they're willing to go to nine IF the permanent opponent is dropped. Just to be fair to Les and all...

I saw someone mentioned how discombobulated a 6-0-3 schedule would look...but never studied it. Has anyone else put it to paper?

BTW, you're on to a point here.

The years they haven't made it to ATL for the SECCG, it's never been a loss to UF that kept them out of the game.

2012- Loss to Bama who was in ATL
2011- SECCG
2010- Loss to Auburn who was in ATL
2009- Three SEC losses, two in the west, lost to Bama who was in ATL
2008- Bama in ATL, losses to the Tide, Ole Miss, Arkansas, Georgia, and Florida
2007- SECCG with a loss to Kentucky and Arkansas.
2006- UArk in ATL who LSU beat, but they lost to Auburn as well. UArk with one SEC loss.
2005- In ATL, with a loss to Tennessee
2004- Auburn in ATL, LSU losses to Auburn and Georgia
2003- In ATL with loss to UF...NC title year.
2002- Three SECW losses.
2001- In ATL with losses to UT, UF, and Ole Miss
2000- Auburn in ATL, losses to Auburn, UF, and Arkansas. Auburn had two SEC losses to Miss State and UF. Arkansas keeps them out.

1999 and 1998 they didn't break .500. There are a few years where they had success earlier in the '90's, but again if you look at a year like 1996 it's a year they might have an argument. BUT, as they lost to UF with two SEC losses, Bama lost to UT. Importantly, Bama won the head to head.

 

[planomateo]

Smoke and mirrors from Les. He's trying to go about this the wrong way, rather than just beating Alabama. He's got his fan base up in arms about this, they are now claiming ESPN is biased...of course ESPN is biased, they have been for years...guess they didn't mind the love they got when Saban was their coach.

The fans should be questioning his will to stay at 8, the SEC will lose ground staying at 8. I hope we are focused 10 years out on our thinking...9 conference games is where we need to be.

 

[RTRGrad2006]

:nopity:

 

[planomateo]

Be careful how long you look at this

 

[bamafan4ever]

Did Miles have a problem when half of the SEC had an off week before they played Alabama up until a couple years ago? Probably not.

I am glad we don't have a coach that sits back, looks at the schedule and feels sorry for themselves. Hell, Saban wants the 9-team SEC schedule and along with better non-conference competition while other coaches seemed to be terrified of that notion. I know UGA and FSU are talking about a series right now but only contingent on the fact that the SEC does not move to a 9-game schedule. Chicken shites.

 

[TerryP]

Did Miles have a problem when half of the SEC had an off week before they played Alabama up until a couple years ago? Probably not.

I am glad we don't have a coach that sits back, looks at the schedule and feels sorry for themselves. Hell, Saban wants the 9-team SEC schedule and along with better non-conference competition while other coaches seemed to be terrified of that notion. I know UGA and FSU are talking about a series right now but only contingent on the fact that the SEC does not move to a 9-game schedule. Chicken shites.

No, but there's a twist there because the LSU game isn't one we asked for relief for...we had an off week before them in 2010.

Now, their opinions on our request for relief? I know a lot of their fans shed a few crocodile tears.

 

[252BAMA]

What pisses me off about the LSU-UF thing is the fact that LSU scheduled UF 36 of the 39 years prior to expansion in 1992. From 1953-1991, when schools made out their own schedules, LSU, with no gun to their head, scheduled UF every year except 1968-70. I wonder why the hell the SEC thought they might be rivals?:halo:

http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin...&end=1991&team1=Louisiana+State&team2=Florida

 

[252BAMA]

He did say they're willing to go to nine IF the permanent opponent is dropped. Just to be fair to Les and all...

I saw someone mentioned how discombobulated a 6-0-3 schedule would look...but never studied it. Has anyone else put it to paper?

BTW, you're on to a point here.

The years they haven't made it to ATL for the SECCG, it's never been a loss to UF that kept them out of the game.

2012- Loss to Bama who was in ATL
2011- SECCG
2010- Loss to Auburn who was in ATL
2009- Three SEC losses, two in the west, lost to Bama who was in ATL
2008- Bama in ATL, losses to the Tide, Ole Miss, Arkansas, Georgia, and Florida
2007- SECCG with a loss to Kentucky and Arkansas.
2006- UArk in ATL who LSU beat, but they lost to Auburn as well. UArk with one SEC loss.
2005- In ATL, with a loss to Tennessee
2004- Auburn in ATL, LSU losses to Auburn and Georgia
2003- In ATL with loss to UF...NC title year.
2002- Three SECW losses.
2001- In ATL with losses to UT, UF, and Ole Miss
2000- Auburn in ATL, losses to Auburn, UF, and Arkansas. Auburn had two SEC losses to Miss State and UF. Arkansas keeps them out.

1999 and 1998 they didn't break .500. There are a few years where they had success earlier in the '90's, but again if you look at a year like 1996 it's a year they might have an argument. BUT, as they lost to UF with two SEC losses, Bama lost to UT. Importantly, Bama won the head to head.

A 6-0-3 format with 7 team divisions would mean every school playing every other school at least 3 times in a 7 year period. It would take 14 years for every school to have played every other school an equal number (3&3) of home and away games. Insane!

By dropping both non permanent opponents annually from a 6-1-2 format would mean every school would have played every other school at least once in a 3 year period. And every school would have played every other school at least once home and away in a 6 year period. Sane!

 

[252BAMA]

OK, let's say they get a nine game conference schedule with a 6-0-3 format. It takes 14 years to completely rotate through it and get back where you started no matter if you rotate one off, two off, or all three off annually. Here is Bama's rotating one off annually:

UF, at UGA, UK
at UGA, UK, at MO
UK, at MO, SC
at MO, SC, at ut
SC, at ut, VU
at ut, VU, at UF
VU, at UF, UGA
at UF, UGA, at UK
UGA, at UK, MO
at UK, MO, at SC
MO, at SC, ut
at SC, ut, at VU
ut, at VU, UF
at VU, UF, at UGA

In the 15th year you would be back to UF, at UGA, UK where you started. Any one care for that format? I didn't think so. I'll use two more posts for two off and three off.

 

[252BAMA]

OK, here's two off annually.

UF, at UGA, UK
At UK, MO, at SC
SC, at ut, VU
at VU, UF, at UGA
UGA, at UK, MO
at MO, SC, at ut
ut, at VU, UF
at UF, UGA, at UK
UK, at MO, SC
at SC, ut, at VU
VU, at UF, UGA
at UGA, UK, at MO
MO, at SC, ut
at ut, VU, at UF

In the 15th year you would be back to UF, at UGA, UK where you started. I don't like it but I could live with this one. IIRC, the three off is as bad as the one off. If so, I'm going to pass on that one because I think the two off is what they would go with.

 

[252BAMA]

Three off is a possibility so here's Bama's:

UF, at UGA, UK
at MO, SC, at ut
VU, at UF, UGA
at UK, MO, at SC
ut, at VU, UF
at UGA, UK, at MO
SC, at ut, VU
at UF, UGA, at UK
MO, at SC, ut
at VU, UF, at UGA
UK, at MO, SC
at ut, VU, at UF
UGA, at UK, MO
at SC ut, at VU

In the 15th year you would be back to UF, at UGA, UK where you started. Again, I don't like it but I could live with it.

 

[TerryP]

OK, let's say they get a nine game conference schedule with a 6-0-3 format. It takes 14 years to completely rotate through it and get back where you started no matter if you rotate one off, two off, or all three off annually. Here is Bama's rotating one off annually:

UF, at UGA, UK
at UGA, UK, at MO
UK, at MO, SC
at MO, SC, at ut
SC, at ut, VU
at ut, VU, at UF
VU, at UF, UGA
at UF, UGA, at UK
UGA, at UK, MO
at UK, MO, at SC
MO, at SC, ut
at SC, ut, at VU
ut, at VU, UF
at VU, UF, at UGA

In the 15th year you would be back to UF, at UGA, UK where you started. Any one care for that format? I didn't think so. I'll use two more posts for two off and three off.

Wait a second here 252. Look at the bolded teams highlighted in the post quote. UK three times in the first go around, three times in the second. UF, UGA, and UK three times in the second go around.

1. UF, @UGA, UK
2. UGA, @UK, @MO
3. MO, SC, @UT
4. @SC, UT, @VU
5. VU, @UF, UGA
6. UF, @UGA, UK

In six years we've rotated back to the original schedule.

Unless a kid leaves early, they should face every team at least once. Most of them twice. A kid that redshirts is going to have some teams roll around three times.

 

['65 Cobra]

How quickly these morons forget history. All things come and go in cycles. We've won six in a row against the Vols. However, from 1995-2001 UT won seven in a row against us. From 1995-2006 they won 10 out of 12. That's not too long ago folks. Tennesse is usually not a doormat and they will be better again soon enough. Then LSU will only be so glad they don't have to play them every year.

 

[252BAMA]

All of this is based on 1-7 listed alphabetical. A random drawing for 1-7 would be preferable.

 

[252BAMA]

Wait a second here 252. Look at the bolded teams highlighted in the post quote. UK three times in the first go around, three times in the second. UF, UGA, and UK three times in the second go around.

1. UF, @UGA, UK
2. UGA, @UK, @MO
3. MO, SC, @UT
4. @SC, UT, @VU
5. VU, @UF, UGA
6. UF, @UGA, UK

In six years we've rotated back to the original schedule.

Unless a kid leaves early, they should face every team at least once. Most of them twice. A kid that redshirts is going to have some teams roll around three times.

Which is why rotating one off annually would not even be considered. What you have would have Bama playing UGA 6 times in 10 years and the rest of them only 4 times. And I don't think they are going to let Bama play 4 of the 6 at home and only 2 on the road in the fifth and sixth years.

However, you may have hit on a method whereby the permanent opponent would be played more often than the others. Your format would be perfect for the barn. Put ut in 3 times and you have Bama's. Put UF in 3 times and you have LSU's. Etc.

 

[bamaraider]

Oh this is complicated