Then why not nine games? You still could do a non-conference game against a P4 school. I'd much rather see Alabama play an SEC opponent that the Little Sisters of the Poor Tuscaloosa Chapter or the Citadel or Furman or Georgia State, etc.
Bielema: SEC needs to have 9 conference games...because numbers matter.
- Thread starter BamaNation
- Start date
Because those "Little Sisters of the Poor" games provide opportunities for valuable game reps to our backups and younger players. If every game you play is against a P4, the coaches get more wrapped up in ensuring the game is won, which results in starters playing longer and backups getting limited reps, if they get any at all. I don't have a problem with those games as long as we schedule one good out-of-conference game per season.
But the BIG 10 foregoes providing valuable game reps to their backups and younger players. The SEC can't???? The SEC just doesn't want half of its mid teams to have another loss so they can appear better and remain higher ranked. PERIOD.
If we were playing against the depth of the Big 10 conference, we could play nine or ten or eleven conference games. Acting like their depth of quality is the same is ludicrous. If you want to watch the Clemsons and SMUs get in the playoffs against horrible schedules while 9-3 SEC teams get left out, go ahead and schedule nine SEC games, but don't whine about it afterwards.
Btw - lest anyone think I was exaggerating:
The Seminoles have enough returning talent to unseat Clemson in the ACC Atlantic. But FSU won't beat Alabama in Saturday's opener in Atlanta. Tide head coach Nick Saban is 10-0 all time against former assistants (Jimbo Fisher was his offensive coordinator at LSU), and the Tide have won nine straight neutral-site games in Atlanta. But after falling to the Tide, the Seminoles will win 12 straight games to win the ACC and punch their ticket to the College Football Playoff.
Yes....BEFORE the game, FSU was a great and worthy powerhouse opponent for Alabama to play.
The Seminoles have enough returning talent to unseat Clemson in the ACC Atlantic. But FSU won't beat Alabama in Saturday's opener in Atlanta. Tide head coach Nick Saban is 10-0 all time against former assistants (Jimbo Fisher was his offensive coordinator at LSU), and the Tide have won nine straight neutral-site games in Atlanta. But after falling to the Tide, the Seminoles will win 12 straight games to win the ACC and punch their ticket to the College Football Playoff.
Yes....BEFORE the game, FSU was a great and worthy powerhouse opponent for Alabama to play.
The SEC doesn't have the number of tomato cans the B1G has. I'll play nine every year if I can swap for last year's Indiana schedule! Rutgers, Perdue, NWstn, Maryland, UCLA, Illinois, etc., gimme a break. This is apples and handgrenades.
There's also the fact the Big Ten has....wait for it...TWO MORE TEAMS than the SEC.....
The "mid teams" argument is not wrong; bear in mind it was Nick Saban himself who was the only guy calling for the SEC to play a nine-game conference schedule all the way back in 2013.
Of course, we know he was only doing that because he was about to leave and go to Texas and wouldn't have had to deal with it, coward that he is!!!
But when they didn't take the bait, the 47-dimensional chess player figured he stay at Alabama and play a bakery of cupcakes and win a bunch of titles!!
If you're good enough, you win. Don't be afraid to play your conference teams. Only three SEC teams play 10 Power 4 teams this year compared to 12 B1G teams doing the same.
That's a wonderful stat, but not all power four teams are the same. In other words, I would bet their ten games against power four teams would still be easier than against eight SEC games and a ninth power four in most cases. Our strength of schedules still beats theirs, yet some folks fall for the media trap that we should make ours even more difficult. Someone also mentioned not being afraid to play our conference foes. It isn't fear. We're talking about trying to keep schedules equitable between conferences as far as difficulty is concerned. Some power four teams still have cakewalk schedules. If they were judged on those strengths of schedules for playoff appearances, that would be fine. However, they weren't last year.
What's your explanation for Indiana dropping Virginia? My conspiracy theory is that this was ordained by the B1G commish because they are angry about their 4 auto qualifiers deal not being accepted and they are freezing out the ACC and possibly the BIG 12 as well. Sure don't need a(n unlikely but all too possible) loss to a C or D-List ACC team come playoff decision time. Better to cut them out all together.
All this to say that the B1G know what and who they are.
Well maybe if we didn't get BLOWN out by a mediocre Oklahoma team and lose to a mediocre Vanderbilt team, then Indiana wouldn't have made the playoff. It's no one else's fault but ours. Take care of your own business and win and you're in. Play a ninth conference opponent.
I think it's weak but Indiana would have beaten Virginia any way. Virginia might be the worst team in the Almost Competitve Conference.
i just saw a stat on ESPN, while talking about Auburn they, had Auburn with the 13th hardest schedule in the SEC, Auburn has the 14th hardest schedule in all of FBS. And they want the SEC to schedule a ninth game? ( which I am in favor of , BTW)
So why do it? What is your theory? In a sane world, this should not benefit them. In a rigged world, ...
I agree that we had two really bad losses, and that was our own fault. However, there were still multiple teams with cakewalk schedules that made the playoffs, period. You can have your opinion, of course, but I still like the eight game SEC schedule by far.
Perhaps they see there's no benefit to playing a 10th P4 opponent since SEC teams play only eight or nine. Look at who replaced Virginia on Indiana's schedule: Kennesaw State and Austin Peay. If some SEC teams won't play nine P4 opponents why should Indiana play 10? Why should any Big Ten team play 10? You think this helps college football?
"SEC teams play only eight or nine"? Look, I get that in a perfect world, we'd all like to see better football. But I don't get why you are an apologist for this B1G propaganda nonsense. This year, every team in the SEC plays at least one OOC Power 4 team besides the 8 game sched so they ALL play a MINIMUM of 9 Power 4 games, with Alabama and Florida playing 2 so 10 in all. I get that you might consider Wisconsin to be a Division II team but hey, the B1G can't help they're in the conference.
The B1G (and now including the PAC-12) have always been a closed shop and tried to wish away the rest of college ball. From their black-balling of Notre Dame to their Rose Bowl monopoly, they fear competition. If you or anyone can give me compelling arguments as to why I should take this "Nine Games or Bust" argument seriously, I will. But right now, I'll switch Schedules with ANY B1G team. I imagine every team in the SEC would do the same. I bet the SEC would fare amazingly well if this could happen; might even sweep all the playoff berths.
You know what's funny?
Back in the early 80s, there was a Big Eight fan who wrote The Sporting News whining about how "the SEC only plays six conference games", this back when it was a ten-team conference. He made the argument about how great it would be for some lower rung team to be able to avoid Nebraska or Oklahoma one year.
This whining is not worth the paper upon which its printed.
Is the poster going to give Florida extra credit because their OUT OF CONFERENCE schedule has included FLORIDA STATE every year since they became well-known in 1987 (excluding the Covid year obviously)? I mean, Florida State won three national championships in a 20-year span and Florida played them every year - would folks say Florida should have played VANDERBILT instead (in years like 1987 or 1991)? MISSISSIPPI STATE? Who should have replaced OOC Florida State?
That - to me - is the problem in this whole thing. This whine has always been out there, and it's always been just as pointless as "the SEC won't play Big Ten teams up north in November," their excuse for getting clobbered in bowl games.
The first rule of the B1G Apologist Club is "never admit to being a member."
South Carolina is also playing Clemson and Va Tech.
Yeah, and their excuses are legendary.
I sure as hell don't recall this "you should play X conference games" back when there was a large number of independents and schools like Penn State, Notre Dame, and Miami could schedule carefully and win national championships, often without much competition (go look at the schedules of 1973 Notre Dame, 1976 Pitt, and 1983 Miami and tell me those are national championship schedules even for their time). The Canes played TWO TEAMS ranked at the end of the season...and okay, I'll give them Notre Dame....and went 1-1 and didn't beat a ranked team on the road INCLUDING in the Orange Bowl while Auburn played a top to bottom monster schedule and slipped up once (and oh yeah, beat the team who throttled Miami).
Did these guys insisting on tougher schedules for SEC teams give Auburn the national title vote?
Nope, they sure didn't. They went with "Nebraska was the greatest team ever and Miami beat them by one point at home with a month to prepare, so Miami is the champion despite not playing hardly anyone worth a damn. Tough break Auburn, you'd have been better to schedule EASY teams and go undefeated!" Same message they sent to the SEC last year when Indiana didn't beat anyone worth a damn and went to the playoff anyway. "Oh, you should have beaten Vandy." Yes because Indiana played and beat a team as good as Georgia, right?
Oh and then there's 1991, when the Florida Gators smashed everyone on their schedule but a road loss to a ranked team IN SEPTEMBER - and the Miami Hurricanes said, "We don't want a part of the Gators in the Sugar Bowl, the team that had an easier time with #1 FSU than we did, so we'll just stay home and play Nebraska."
Given what happened to Miami in the Sugar Bowls of 1986 and 1993 against SEC teams, I can understand their cowardice.
Guess what?
If the SEC did do this, they'd whine again.
They're never gonna drop "but you play Mercer" while pretending Purdue and Rutgers are powerhouses.
Then again - after Michigan lost to App State and Penn State nearly did, I can see exactly why they stick to the confines of home games against lowly conference foes.
Last edited:
Latest threads
-
Laura Loomer v. Bill Maher (Loomer's Looney)- Started by jthomas666
- Replies: 0
-
-
