SEC: Truly Pathetic

[TarheelHuskerFan_rivals]

Has the SEC always played the cupcake game in November, or did that start around the BCS era to pad their stats before bowl selection?

This drives me crazy. Nebraska would open with a non power 5 team like Wyoming or South Alabama and SEC teams play a conference game or a decent matchup and the media and SEC fans talk non stop trash. Then at the end of the regular season, Nebraska is playing conference games and SEC is playing literal FCS teams! Ridiculous... and the media and SEC fans justify it by saying they need the rest because they played against SEC competition all year and they're so much better

FCS teams should not count towards your teams record in college football. It should be considered an exhibition.

 

[Redmich]

for all the "you shouldn't reward easy scheduling" crowd:


1997 non-conf schedule

Michigan -- Colorado, Baylor, Notre Dame
Nebraska -- Akron, Central Florida, Washington

 

[Redscarlet]

for all the "you shouldn't reward easy scheduling" crowd:


1997 non-conf schedule

Michigan -- Colorado, Baylor, Notre Dame
Nebraska -- Akron, Central Florida, Washington

Now take a gander who Michigan is playing this fall.

East Carolina, UNLV, Bowling Green

 

[Redmich]

Now take a gander who Michigan is playing this fall.

East Carolina, UNLV, Bowling Green

yep terrible -- and they won't be penalized - just like we went penalized for playing an easier nonconf schedule in 97

 

[Redmich]

Who pays the most to schedule cupcakes?

4 of the 5 top schools paying out to cupcakes are BIG schools

 

[Huskers123456]

for all the "you shouldn't reward easy scheduling" crowd:


1997 non-conf schedule

Michigan -- Colorado, Baylor, Notre Dame
Nebraska -- Akron, Central Florida, Washington

Context though. I remember Baylor as being straight terrible in the 90's. Washington was a very good program in the 90's. Was ND any good during that stretch? UCF had Daunte Culpepper. Washington would have easily been the best team that year and we went to Seattle, which was a very tough place to play.

 

[Huskers123456]

Who pays the most to schedule cupcakes?

4 of the 5 top schools paying out to cupcakes are BIG schools

I don't think that chart is relevant at all. If LSU gets by paying someone like UL-Monroe less then OSU has to pay someone like Kent State, what difference does it make?

 

[Redmich]

Context though. I remember Baylor as being straight terrible in the 90's. Washington was a very good program in the 90's. Was ND any good during that stretch? UCF had Daunte Culpepper. Washington would have easily been the best team that year and we went to Seattle, which was a very tough place to play.

Schedules are made years and years in advance - no way of truly knowing who is going to be good or not other than when you a schedule non major conf schools.

The argument originally was surrounding who schedules more power 5 teams rather vs a nonpower 5 teams

 

[Huskers123456]

Schedules are made years and years in advance - no way of truly knowing who is going to be good or not other than when you a schedule non major conf schools.

The argument originally was surrounding who schedules more power 5 teams rather vs a nonpower 5 teams

Got ya. That makes sense.

 

[saluno22]

for all the "you shouldn't reward easy scheduling" crowd:


1997 non-conf schedule

Michigan -- Colorado, Baylor, Notre Dame
Nebraska -- Akron, Central Florida, Washington

1997 Colorado: 5-6, finished unranked (preseason #8), no bowl
1997 Baylor: 2-9, finished unranked, no bowl
1997 Notre Dame: 7-6, finished unranked (preseason #11), Independence Bowl

1997 Akron: 2-9, finished unranked
1997 Central Florida: 5-6, finished unranked, no bowl
1997 Washington: 8-4, finished #18 (preseason #4), Aloha Bowl

At the end, nothing really to write home about.

UW was #2 in the AP poll when Nebraska beat them in Seattle and UW climbed back up to #6 before a 3-game slide to end the regular season.
Colorado was #8 when they played at Michigan and exited the polls for good in mid-Oct.
Notre Dame's loss at Michigan was their third in a row (and they'd lose the next week to Stanford. ND was already unranked after their first loss at Purdue.

If anything, Michigan played all three of those games at home, while at least Nebraska was on the road for their game against #2 Washington.

 

[saluno22]

1997 Colorado: 5-6, finished unranked (preseason #8), no bowl
1997 Baylor: 2-9, finished unranked, no bowl
1997 Notre Dame: 7-6, finished unranked (preseason #11), Independence Bowl

1997 Akron: 2-9, finished unranked
1997 Central Florida: 5-6, finished unranked, no bowl
1997 Washington: 8-4, finished #18 (preseason #4), Aloha Bowl

At the end, nothing really to write home about.

UW was #2 in the AP poll when Nebraska beat them in Seattle and UW climbed back up to #6 before a 3-game slide to end the regular season.
Colorado was #8 when they played at Michigan and exited the polls for good in mid-Oct.
Notre Dame's loss at Michigan was their third in a row (and they'd lose the next week to Stanford. ND was already unranked after their first loss at Purdue.

If anything, Michigan played all three of those games at home, while at least Nebraska was on the road for their game against #2 Washington.

That all being said, I know in 1998 Washington was lacking depth dealing with scholarship reductions from NCAA sanctions. Not sure if that was the case in 1997, though, but they were #2 at the time NU played them and finished the season #18.

 

[Big bo fan]

Schedules are made years and years in advance - no way of truly knowing who is going to be good or not other than when you a schedule non major conf schools.

The argument originally was surrounding who schedules more power 5 teams rather vs a nonpower 5 teams

As usual the thread gets off the subject of the original post. Which like you said was scheduling of p5 teams.

 

[Redmich]

That all being said, I know in 1998 Washington was lacking depth dealing with scholarship reductions from NCAA sanctions. Not sure if that was the case in 1997, though, but they were #2 at the time NU played them and finished the season #18.

Yes. All the nine conf games is crap. Some of the worst power 5 football schools are at the bottom of the big ten yet we have fans and ADs pounding their chests about scheduling 9 conf games.

 

[Redscarlet]

1997 Colorado: 5-6, finished unranked (preseason #8), no bowl
1997 Baylor: 2-9, finished unranked, no bowl
1997 Notre Dame: 7-6, finished unranked (preseason #11), Independence Bowl

1997 Akron: 2-9, finished unranked
1997 Central Florida: 5-6, finished unranked, no bowl
1997 Washington: 8-4, finished #18 (preseason #4), Aloha Bowl

At the end, nothing really to write home about.

UW was #2 in the AP poll when Nebraska beat them in Seattle and UW climbed back up to #6 before a 3-game slide to end the regular season.
Colorado was #8 when they played at Michigan and exited the polls for good in mid-Oct.
Notre Dame's loss at Michigan was their third in a row (and they'd lose the next week to Stanford. ND was already unranked after their first loss at Purdue.

If anything, Michigan played all three of those games at home, while at least Nebraska was on the road for their game against #2 Washington.

We can’t let facts get in the way here.Winking

 

[Redmich]

We can’t let facts get in the way here.Winking

Exactly - all the big blowhards complaining about BIG scheduling vs SEC scheduling when I showed that 4 of the 5 season most difficult schedules last year were SEC schools

 

[Redscarlet]

Exactly - all the big blowhards complaining about BIG scheduling vs SEC scheduling when I showed that 4 of the 5 season most difficult schedules last year were SEC schools

So what does that have to do with Georgia schedule this year?

There is no Oregon or Clemson this year nor is there LSU or Alabama conference games either..

That’s been the reason why they‘ve had the top 5 schedules the last 2 years

 

[Huskers123456]

Yes. All the nine conf games is crap. Some of the worst power 5 football schools are at the bottom of the big ten yet we have fans and ADs pounding their chests about scheduling 9 conf games.

I get that but it boils down to does LSU playing scattered games against FSU, Grambling, Army, and Georgia Southern give them an advantage? Over someone like OSU? LSU plays a non-conference home game in September, October, and November for gods sake. That isn't random. That is designed to give then rest. They basically substitute a conference road game for a FCS home game at the end of the year. OSU has 6 road games. LSU has 5.

I personally wonder if there is some under the table agreement where ESPN purposely won't pay them for a 9th conference game. It allows the SEC to keep the perception they wanted to play 9 conference games, while also ensuring they stack the deck. Because I refuse to believe that a 9th conference SEC game after UT/OU join wouldn't make everyone boatloads of extra money.

 

[Redmich]

I get that but it boils down to does LSU playing scattered games against FSU, Grambling, Army, and Georgia Southern give them an advantage? Over someone like OSU? LSU plays a non-conference home game in September, October, and November for gods sake. That isn't random. That is designed to give then rest. They basically substitute a conference road game for a FCS home game at the end of the year. OSU has 6 road games. LSU has 5.

I personally wonder if there is some under the table agreement where ESPN purposely won't pay them for a 9th conference game. It allows the SEC to keep the perception they wanted to play 9 conference games, while also ensuring they stack the deck. Because I refuse to believe that a 9th conference SEC game after UT/OU join wouldn't make everyone boatloads of extra money.

if you are asking if SEC scheduling allows their teams to be ranked higher, play in more and better bowls, play in more playoff games and win more national championships

maybe it does -- but aren't those the main objectives of every team that kicks it off in August/September?

 

[Redscarlet]

I get that but it boils down to does LSU playing scattered games against FSU, Grambling, Army, and Georgia Southern give them an advantage? Over someone like OSU? LSU plays a non-conference home game in September, October, and November for gods sake. That isn't random. That is designed to give then rest. They basically substitute a conference road game for a FCS home game at the end of the year. OSU has 6 road games. LSU has 5.

I personally wonder if there is some under the table agreement where ESPN purposely won't pay them for a 9th conference game. It allows the SEC to keep the perception they wanted to play 9 conference games, while also ensuring they stack the deck. Because I refuse to believe that a 9th conference SEC game after UT/OU join wouldn't make everyone boatloads of extra money.

You would think that with OU and ut playing each other would have lead to everyone else playing another conference game..

How they work out ut Schedule will be interesting.. now that A&M is in the same conference that would leave the whorns with playing 6 other conference opponents..

 

[Huskers123456]

if your point is that the SEC scheduling allows their teams to be ranked higher, play in more and better bowls, play in more playoff games and win more national championships

maybe it does -- but aren't those the main objectives of every team that kicks it off in August/September?

Yep. I get that. But they are the only conference that does it and a lot of people refuse to acknowledge it helps them, when it clearly does.

The SEC has always claimed they are battle tested and should get credit for their schools running the gauntlet. So step up and prove it. ESPN refusing to offer more money for that 9th game is shady at best. Look at the extra ratings we bring to the Big 10 and we suck.

 

[Huskers123456]

You would think that with OU and ut playing each other would have lead to everyone else playing another conference game..

How they work out ut Schedule will be interesting.. now that A&M is in the same conference that would leave the whorns with playing 6 other conference opponents..

I assume they play 6 division games plus 2 crossovers. So now they would play 7 division games and a crossover. So I would think without a 9th game that UT and OU end up in the same division. But Bama would probably freak if they put them both in the west, unless they move LSU to the east.

 

[Redmich]

I

Yep. I get that. But they are the only conference that does it and a lot of people refuse to acknowledge it helps them, when it clearly does.

The SEC has always claimed they are battle tested and should get credit for their schools running the gauntlet. So step up and prove it. ESPN refusing to offer more money for that 9th game is shady at best. Look at the extra ratings we bring to the Big 10 and we suck.

ESPN already has a newly signed contract with the SEC - I don't think they are just going to pay more

also when you look at the SEC they space out their nonconf games so that every week there are marquee matchups involving the SEC - even in the second to last week when people say they all schedule dogs - there are 3 SEC conf games - including Georgia v Tennessee

ESPN can only show so many games on their main platform in primetime and the SEC schedule of 8 allows them to have really good games each week

 

[Redscarlet]

I assume they play 6 division games plus 2 crossovers. So now they would play 7 division games and a crossover. So I would think without a 9th game that UT and OU end up in the same division. But Bama would probably freak if they put them both in the west, unless they move LSU to the east.

But there isn’t going to be any divisions from what was said in the press release..

 

[Huskers123456]

But there isn’t going to be any divisions from what was said in the press release..

Ok. Thanks for the info. Didn't know that.

 

[Huskers123456]

I

ESPN already has a newly signed contract with the SEC - I don't think they are just going to pay more

also when you look at the SEC they space out their nonconf games so that every week there are marquee matchups involving the SEC - even in the second to last week when people say they all schedule dogs - there are 3 SEC conf games - including Georgia v Tennessee

ESPN can only show so many games on their main platform in primetime and the SEC schedule of 8 allows them to have really good games each week

That seems like a built in excuse. 2 years ago and for the rest of my lifetime no one cared about UT/UGA outside of 2 or 3 states. That's SEC marketing at its finest.

South Carolina at Georgia is the predicted SEC primetime game for September 16th. Anyone saying they are maxed out on marquee slots would have to be biased. There is a 0% I'm watching that game. Maybe someone can find me a great SEC matchup for September 23 because I certainly didn't find anything great for 1 timeslot, let alone 2.

 

[saluno22]

Maybe someone else said it earlier in the thread, so I apologize if that's the case.

Playing a ninth conference game guarantees an average of 0.5 more losses compared to those who play eight conference games. Most SEC teams are playing non-Power 5 teams in place of that ninth game, making the added losses an average much lower than 0.5 per team.

That perception of number of losses (regardless of opponent quality) paints the opinion of the conference as a whole, and then when tough decisions need to be made on qualifying/seeding, the opinion is already in place that the SEC is better than other conferences based on number of teams with high win totals, and they are given deference in those comparisons. Then when you really split hairs, you look at the number of elite teams beaten and the quality of the losses, and opinions are still painted that way.

That being said, other conferences could do themselves favors by beating the SEC head to head when they get the opportunity.

 

[Redmich]

 

[Redscarlet]

Well DAH!

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

SEC just announced they are disbanding divisions in 2024 and only requiring 8 conference games. Add Texas and Oklahoma, but only require 8 conference games? Huh? You would think there is more money to gain by playing one more conference game than playing another Abilene Christian-like school in week 9 like they have been scheduling. (No offense to Abilene Christian).

SEC, sans divisions, going with 8-game conference slate in '24

The SEC has decided to eliminate its conference divisions in 2024 while employing a temporary eight-game schedule, commissioner Greg Sankey announced Thursday.

www.espn.com

What's your point, last 2 years Big 10 with their 9 game conference schedule is 0-3 against the 8 conference game playing SEC in the playoffs. You need some cheese with that whine?

 

[GBR_Atlanta]

This drives me crazy. Nebraska would open with a non power 5 team like Wyoming or South Alabama and SEC teams play a conference game or a decent matchup and the media and SEC fans talk non stop trash. Then at the end of the regular season, Nebraska is playing conference games and SEC is playing literal FCS teams! Ridiculous... and the media and SEC fans justify it by saying they need the rest because they played against SEC competition all year and they're so much better

FCS teams should not count towards your teams record in college football. It should be considered an exhibition.

I agree. I wondered if it started in the BCS era to pad their wins and have the BCS jump them up.

 

[GBR_Atlanta]

For the most part, they play their biggest rivals to close out the year

These non-con games come the week before

Helps prevent things like having to start Logan Smothers in the games their fans (and the rest of the nation) care most about

Makes sense. I always thought one of the reasons was go give them the extra blow out Win going into bowl selection. I actually wouldn’t mind doing it if the B1G went to 8.