Link: Alabama adds The Citadel to 2018 Football Schedule

BamaJama17

Hall of Fame
Sep 17, 2006
16,365
8
47
34
Hoover, AL
I think it can help us prepare for the barn's b.s. offense. Both teams makes sure we must stay at home on Defense. Of course I know they are two totally different offenses but still.

Like others have said I don't like playing teams who cut block like they do. I remember that FSU game all too well.
I doubt Gus Malzhan will still be at AU in 2018.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
No one has to go, just as pertinent, if not more so. With the exception of an occasional opening day, my Bama dollar and focus has been on our 8 game SEC regular season.
First, let me say this. No, it isn't as pertinent. What the team can endure is far more important in the bigger scheme of things than what you, or other fans want to see from a particular game. I can assure you, if the team Alabama puts on the field is battered and broken you will find them far less enjoyable to watch. We've seen it happen to other SEC programs who played brutal schedules (Auburn and Ole Miss in 2014 for example) and you might think you want to see that, but you don't. There is a breaking point for every team.

What you seem to be illustrating though is the difference between an entertainment value fan, and a supporter fan. I'll try not to disparage either, but there are two different goals and agendas here. I've seen the entertainment value fan's viewpoint represented over and over. A-Day doesn't matter, it's just a scrimmage, leaving in the third quarter doesn't matter if the game is "over", FCS games are bad or meaningless, etc... I've seen some people say they only care about "exciting" games. Of course those fans do have value though, they spend money to.

Now, let's think about this. Does A-Day not matter? Of course it matters, Saban says it helps recruiting, recruits have specifically cited the A-Day game. Why does staying the entire game matter? It shows support for the team. Why might scheduling a FCS program help Alabama football? It might give them a breather, and another home game. All these things do matter, but they don't matter as much in terms of sheer entertainment value. So, a supporter, someone who cares about the success of the football program is more likely to care about these things than someone who seeks out only entertainment (not claiming you meet this criteria).

The real question is what is better for Alabama? What hand should be guiding them? I'd argue that there's little to gain from catering to entertainment value fans. The Auburn game in 2012 is a testament to that. The stadium was never full! People were leaving in the third quarter! If you can't get people to show up and stay for the Alabama/Auburn game, if you can't hold the attention of entertainment value fans for that game, then you have proof positive these sorts of fans will never be happy! Alabama's 2015 schedule was one of the most difficult schedules ever, certainly the most difficult championship schedule ever and yet some fans still complained about the FCS opponent and lack of a ninth SEC opponent! The hardest championship schedule ever wasn't good enough! You simply can not appease the entertainment fan and compete at a championship level! You can't do it, because if you are kicking people's butts they're still going to get bored and walk out on the team. They've done it before, they'll do it again.

This leaves only one thing to do. Do what's best for the team. The supporters are going to continue supporting Alabama because their interest is not contingent on exciting games and the entertainment value fans are going to get championship games and the like to attend. Having said all of that, I don't blame you for only attending SEC games. I get that resources are limited, however are you saying you'd attend a 9th SEC game, you would gladly do that but just won't attend anything else? That seems to be an odd position to take. Personally, I do the opposite, I tend to seek out the lesser games, where I know my support matters more. I know the entertainment value fans are going to fill up the stadium for the "big" games, so I'll gladly go and support the team for other games.
 
Last edited:

TUSKtimes

1st Team
Sep 18, 2008
563
0
35
Right here, Right now
First, let me say this. No, it isn't as pertinent. What the team can endure is far more important in the bigger scheme of things than what you, or other fans want to see from a particular game. I can assure you, if the team Alabama puts on the field is battered and broken you will find them far less enjoyable to watch. We've seen it happen to other SEC programs who played brutal schedules (Auburn and Ole Miss in 2014 for example) and you might think you want to see that, but you don't. There is a breaking point for every team.

What you seem to be illustrating though is the difference between an entertainment value fan, and a supporter fan. I'll try not to disparage either, but there are two different goals and agendas here. I've seen the entertainment value fan's viewpoint represented over and over. A-Day doesn't matter, it's just a scrimmage, leaving in the third quarter doesn't matter if the game is "over", FCS games are bad or meaningless, etc... I've seen some people say they only care about "exciting" games. Of course those fans do have value though, they spend money to.

Now, let's think about this. Does A-Day not matter? Of course it matters, Saban says it helps recruiting, recruits have specifically cited the A-Day game. Why does staying the entire game matter? It shows support for the team. Why might scheduling a FCS program help Alabama football? It might give them a breather, and another home game. All these things do matter, but they don't matter as much in terms of sheer entertainment value. So, a supporter, someone who cares about the success of the football program is more likely to care about these things than someone who seeks out only entertainment (not claiming you meet this criteria).

The real question is what is better for Alabama? What hand should be guiding them? I'd argue that there's little to gain from catering to entertainment value fans. The Auburn game in 2012 is a testament to that. The stadium was never full! People were leaving in the third quarter! If you can't get people to show up and stay for the Alabama/Auburn game, if you can't hold the attention of entertainment value fans for that game, then you have proof positive these sorts of fans will never be happy! Alabama's 2015 schedule was one of the most difficult schedules ever, certainly the most difficult championship schedule ever and yet some fans still complained about the FCS opponent and lack of a ninth SEC opponent! The hardest championship schedule ever wasn't good enough! You simply can not appease the entertainment fan and compete at a championship level! You can't do it, because if you are kicking people's butts they're still going to get bored and walk out on the team. They've done it before, they'll do it again.

This leaves only one thing to do. Do what's best for the team. The supporters are going to continue supporting Alabama because their interest is not contingent on exciting games and the entertainment value fans are going to get championship games and the like to attend. Having said all of that, I don't blame you for only attending SEC games. I get that resources are limited, however are you saying you'd attend a 9th SEC game, you would gladly do that but just won't attend anything else? That seems to be an odd position to take. Personally, I do the opposite, I tend to seek out the lesser games, where I know my support matters more. I know the entertainment value fans are going to fill up the stadium for the "big" games, so I'll gladly go and support the team for other games.

The way you keep repeating yourself, in great detail I may add, you must believe the SOS advocates want Alabama to do this unilateral from everyone else? That would be no, no and no. But on a level playing field all this attrition you speak about would be shared by one and all. Which talented teams, with depth at all positions would that favor? Tiger-proofing golf courses really didn't work, unless you take into consideration all his opponents dropping like flies when every mistake was detailed and magnified. All major college conferences playing against each other will Bama-proof nothing.

Alabama's 1978 NC schedule:
1- Nebraska
2- Missouri
3 - Southern Cal
4 - Vandy
5 - Washington
6 - Florida
7 - Tennessee
8 - Va Tech
9 - Miss St.
10 - LSU
11- Auburn
Sugar Bowl - Penn St.

We still had a little something left in the tank to play one of the epic NC games the sugar bowl ever hosted.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
you must believe the SOS advocates want Alabama to do this unilateral from everyone else? That would be no, no and no.
I intend to dissect the rest at a later date. I'll note though, that you are pointing to a 12 game schedule, when the team had 95 scholarship players, and using that as an example of how things should be. Let's see, 15 games and 85 scholarship players vs. 12 games and 95 scholarship players. You really think you can draw a comparison or that the 1978 schedule was more difficult than 2015? Also, let's point out that this team still lost, they were 11-1. So you add 4 more tough games and can you be so sure they don't lose again? I wouldn't be...

That aside, you're an SoS advocate? I've been talking about SoS since I got here. The thing is Alabama already has the top SoS! If you add an extra SEC game, how in the heck does that make the schedule tougher for the other conferences? It doesn't! And guess what, the only way you can make the schedule as tough for no-SEC teams is if they play a SEC schedule! That's impossible, so what you are doing, is actually arguing on behalf of the other conferences who desperately want the SEC to commit suicide.

I'll also note you didn't address most of what I said, just labelled yourself and "sos advocate" while at the same time taking exception apparently to the #1 schedule... an odd position to take.

Edit: I will add this. I am an SoS advocate, but I want to see the SoS raised for other conferences so the gap between the SEC and the other conferences is narrowed. I don't at all see how Alabama raising their SoS can do anything but widen the gap that already exists. The SEC is the toughest conference, this makes SEC games the toughest games. There's no way around this and it is the other conferences that have distance to make up. I do believe 15 games are too many with 85 scholarship players, but that aside it is the other conferences that need to raise their SoS, not the SEC. If Alabama's schedule last year was tougher what good could it have done? They already had the toughest schedule, they were #1 on the SoS chart, you can't move up from there.

I think we'd agree completely that SoS matters, it's just that Alabama doesn't have a problem with that. It's Ohio State, it's ACC and Big 12 schools that have issues with low SoS.
 
Last edited:

ALA2262

All-American
Aug 4, 2007
4,977
393
102
Cumming, GA
I intend to dissect the rest at a later date. I'll note though, that you are pointing to a 12 game schedule, when the team had 95 scholarship players, and using that as an example of how things should be. Let's see, 15 games and 85 scholarship players vs. 12 games and 95 scholarship players. You really think you can draw a comparison or that the 1978 schedule was more difficult than 2015? Also, let's point out that this team still lost, they were 11-1. So you add 4 more tough games and can you be so sure they don't lose again? I wouldn't be...

That aside, you're an SoS advocate? I've been talking about SoS since I got here. The thing is Alabama already has the top SoS! If you add an extra SEC game, how in the heck does that make the schedule tougher for the other conferences? It doesn't! And guess what, the only way you can make the schedule as tough for no-SEC teams is if they play a SEC schedule! That's impossible, so what you are doing, is actually arguing on behalf of the other conferences who desperately want the SEC to commit suicide.

I'll also note you didn't address most of what I said, just labelled yourself and "sos advocate" while at the same time taking exception apparently to the #1 schedule... an odd position to take.
Something you can compare is teams with a winning record. 1978 Bama played 12 1A games. 2015 Bama played THIRTEEN 1A teams with a winning record!

Alabama's 1978 NC schedule:
1- Nebraska (9-3)
2- Missouri (8-4)
3 - Southern Cal (12-1)
4 - Vandy (2-9)
5 - Washington (7-4)
6 - Florida (4-7)
7 - Tennessee (5-5-1)
8 - Va Tech (4-7)
9 - Miss St. (6-5)
10 - LSU (8-4)
11- Auburn (6-4-1)
Sugar Bowl - Penn St. (11-1)

That's 8 of 12 1A with a winning record. 2015 Bama played 13 of 14 1A.

 
Last edited:

TUSKtimes

1st Team
Sep 18, 2008
563
0
35
Right here, Right now
I intend to dissect the rest at a later date. I'll note though, that you are pointing to a 12 game schedule, when the team had 95 scholarship players, and using that as an example of how things should be. Let's see, 15 games and 85 scholarship players vs. 12 games and 95 scholarship players. You really think you can draw a comparison or that the 1978 schedule was more difficult than 2015? Also, let's point out that this team still lost, they were 11-1. So you add 4 more tough games and can you be so sure they don't lose again? I wouldn't be...

That aside, you're an SoS advocate? I've been talking about SoS since I got here. The thing is Alabama already has the top SoS! If you add an extra SEC game, how in the heck does that make the schedule tougher for the other conferences? It doesn't! And guess what, the only way you can make the schedule as tough for no-SEC teams is if they play a SEC schedule! That's impossible, so what you are doing, is actually arguing on behalf of the other conferences who desperately want the SEC to commit suicide.

I'll also note you didn't address most of what I said, just labelled yourself and "sos advocate" while at the same time taking exception apparently to the #1 schedule... an odd position to take.

I'm not an SOS advocate in your Krazy definition, I'm an anti-Middle Tenn, ULM, Charleston Southern advocate. In this brave new world of big boy football, the football committee will quickly compensate for more attrition and we should see more two loss teams in the polls. LSU should love that.

If you think we can get these universities to legislate the money grab and reduce the regular season go for it, I doubt that. Playing 9 SEC games will come when all conferences agree to do the same. It's coming. In the meantime, the SOS advocates would like to see the small colleges replaced with a more competitive product for one and all.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
That's 8 of 12 1A with a winning record. 2015 Bama played 13 of 14 1A.
Thanks, I wanted to do a more in depth comparison because while there's no question that 1978 schedule is amazing, I think some things are easily overlooked now.
In this brave new world of big boy football, the football committee will quickly compensate for more attrition and we should see more two loss teams in the polls. .
If we could get the committee to back off conference champion criteria, and I saw them definitively rewarding SoS, I'd feel more comfortable. But in the current climate, I believe that the SEC has a lot to lose by making their schedule tougher and very little to gain. I would argue that other schools have something to gain and if they do toughen their schedules up enough perhaps the SEC will respond, there's just no need as of yet from my perspective. I don't mind the race to have the toughest schedules, and I do agree that Alabama/the SEC would prevail, I just don't want to SEC fall into a trap of making their schedules tougher while the other conferences only pretend to do so.
 

RTR91

Super Moderator
Nov 23, 2007
39,407
6
0
Prattville
I'm not an SOS advocate in your Krazy definition, I'm an anti-Middle Tenn, ULM, Charleston Southern advocate. In this brave new world of big boy football, the football committee will quickly compensate for more attrition and we should see more two loss teams in the polls. LSU should love that.
Don't want Alabama to play Middle Tennessee State?

No problem. It can play Colorado, Wake Forest, Rutgers, Purdue, Oregon State, or Kansas. Those are just teams ranked behind MTSU in the Sagarin rankings for the end of last season.

Looked at the four playoff teams along with Ohio State since they were so close to being in the playoff. Each team's OOC opponents' Sagarin rankings:

Alabama: 100
Clemson: 72.75
Oklahoma: 68.7
Michigan State: 60.75
Ohio State: 89.75

Now, their conference opponents:

Alabama (9): 19.4 (all 9 ranked in top 29)
Clemson (9): 52.6 (2 ranked in top 29, 5 ranked in top 50, all 9 ranked in top 100)
Oklahoma (8): 50.3 (4 ranked in top 29, 5 ranked in top 50, 8 ranked in top 100)
Michigan State (9): 53.7 (3 ranked in top 29, 4 ranked in top 50, 8 ranked in top 100)
Ohio State (8): 58 (2 ranked in top 29, 2 ranked in top 50, all 8 ranked in top 100)

So this idea the committee is going to really punish teams for their OOC schedule is not true if Alabama's OOC is so weak because Alabama clearly has a conference schedule to overcome any issues with the OOC.
 

ALA2262

All-American
Aug 4, 2007
4,977
393
102
Cumming, GA
It takes two teams (not one) to schedule a game. I have no reason whatsoever to believe that Bama is not attempting to schedule the best possible opponents under the one parameter that they will rarely, if ever, fall below. And that is scheduling seven home games.

I have visualized myself as an AD at a 1A school that has a football program that is almost always Bowl eligible. EVERY time the call comes in from the Bama AD, I am NOT in! I want them to ALWAYS be Bowl eligible. Playing Bama is not the way to do that!
 
Last edited:

TUSKtimes

1st Team
Sep 18, 2008
563
0
35
Right here, Right now
Don't want Alabama to play Middle Tennessee State?


2 - So this idea the committee is going to really punish teams for their OOC schedule is not true if Alabama's OOC is so weak because Alabama clearly has a conference schedule to overcome any issues with the OOC.

Your not paying attention. I DON'T want any power conference team to play middle tenn.

2 - Committees simply evaluate based on the decisions the power teams make. Once we are all locked in, that will be the new yard stick they use.
 

RTR91

Super Moderator
Nov 23, 2007
39,407
6
0
Prattville
Your not paying attention. I DON'T want any power conference team to play middle tenn.

2 - Committees simply evaluate based on the decisions the power teams make. Once we are all locked in, that will be the new yard stick they use.
And as the rankings I provided prove, your belief is not true.

The way you keep repeating yourself, in great detail I may add, you must believe the SOS advocates want Alabama to do this unilateral from everyone else? That would be no, no and no. But on a level playing field all this attrition you speak about would be shared by one and all. Which talented teams, with depth at all positions would that favor? Tiger-proofing golf courses really didn't work, unless you take into consideration all his opponents dropping like flies when every mistake was detailed and magnified. All major college conferences playing against each other will Bama-proof nothing.


Alabama's 1978 NC schedule:
1- Nebraska
2- Missouri
3 - Southern Cal
4 - Vandy
5 - Washington
6 - Florida
7 - Tennessee
8 - Va Tech
9 - Miss St.
10 - LSU
11- Auburn
Sugar Bowl - Penn St.


We still had a little something left in the tank to play one of the epic NC games the sugar bowl ever hosted.
There were 34 non-P5 teams ranked in Sagarin's top 100 from last season. Three P5 teams were outside the top 100. Seven P5 teams ranked below MTSU.

And look at those conference game average rankings I posted. You think the attrition will be the same throughout if P5 teams only play P5 teams, yet the SEC had 9 teams ranked in Sagarin's top 29 (all 7 SEC West schools made it) while the ACC had 3 (4 if you include ND), B1G had 4, Big 12 and Pac 12 had 5 each.

Please explain to me how attrition will be equal with that difference in level of competition.
 

CrimSonami

All-American
Jul 17, 2011
3,041
1,941
187
Ardmore, AL; too close to 10erC
It takes two teams (not one) to schedule a game. I have no reason whatsoever to believe that Bama is not attempting to schedule the best possible opponents under the one parameter that they will rarely, if ever, fall below. And that is scheduling seven home games.

I have visualized myself as an AD at a 1A school that has a football program that is almost always Bowl eligible. EVERY time the call comes in from the Bama AD, I am NOT in! I want them to ALWAYS be Bowl eligible. Playing Bama is not the way to do that!
Unless your program NEEDS the 600K or more to float the program. Especially in this day and age of EXTREMELY TOO MANY BOWL GAMES and monetary losses to travel and participate. Then whadaya do?
 

ALA2262

All-American
Aug 4, 2007
4,977
393
102
Cumming, GA
Unless your program NEEDS the 600K or more to float the program. Especially in this day and age of EXTREMELY TOO MANY BOWL GAMES and monetary losses to travel and participate. Then whadaya do?
A program that is almost always bowl eligible is most likely one that does not need 600K to float the program. Now you are talking about an AD that MIGHT answer the call from the Bama AD. That is not me.
 

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
11,042
907
237
76
Boaz, AL USA
Well I just can't wait to hear how we better not take them lightly and the moaning and groaning about fans being overconfident from The One Who scheduled this little jr college.
 

TUSKtimes

1st Team
Sep 18, 2008
563
0
35
Right here, Right now
And as the rankings I provided prove, your belief is not true.



There were 34 non-P5 teams ranked in Sagarin's top 100 from last season. Three P5 teams were outside the top 100. Seven P5 teams ranked below MTSU.

And look at those conference game average rankings I posted. You think the attrition will be the same throughout if P5 teams only play P5 teams, yet the SEC had 9 teams ranked in Sagarin's top 29 (all 7 SEC West schools made it) while the ACC had 3 (4 if you include ND), B1G had 4, Big 12 and Pac 12 had 5 each.

Please explain to me how attrition will be equal with that difference in level of competition.


I have no intention of trying to scientifically measure attrition. Someone else's argument about why not upgrade. Again, as far as I'm concerned attrition will happen to one and all when we upgrade our schedule equally. Again, level playing field, one and all in every major conference must upgrade.

I'm going to ask you to do something for me that will be difficult, maybe impossible. Step away from your numbers, stats, metrics, google search engine, maybe your calculator?

My argument was, is, will be, this stuff is hard to watch RTR. It's gotten to the point that I quit going to home games against these mismatches. Others have told me the same thing. That's personal, true enough, but I have and others have, none the less. What would home games, this year, be like in ticket sales and overall excitement, if just some of the OOC teams off that 1978 schedule was coming to a Bryant Denny Stadium near you? True enough, that schedule had Bama playing only 6 SEC games, but the balance of the season would be a hoot.

Your metric argument wouldn't make it passed our first opponent, USC this year. Ironically, one of our opponents on our 1978 schedule. How does metrics calculate the excitement in ticket sales, season expectations for fans and players in Jerry World? They are not projected to be world beaters, but they are a big name, historically great football program. And gameday USC will be a big enough threat to get everyone's sincere attention. No metric will measure the color of those uniforms and the history between our two teams. Now imagine Nebraska, Washington, or even a Va Tech team we've played recently? Ticket sales and excitement trumps, Middle Tennessee, ULM, or mighty Charlestown Southern.

OK, thanks for stepping away for a moment. Back to your metrics.
 

MikeD

Suspended
Feb 24, 2007
289
0
35
I have no intention of trying to scientifically measure attrition. Someone else's argument about why not upgrade. Again, as far as I'm concerned attrition will happen to one and all when we upgrade our schedule equally. Again, level playing field, one and all in every major conference must upgrade.

I'm going to ask you to do something for me that will be difficult, maybe impossible. Step away from your numbers, stats, metrics, google search engine, maybe your calculator?

My argument was, is, will be, this stuff is hard to watch RTR. It's gotten to the point that I quit going to home games against these mismatches. Others have told me the same thing. That's personal, true enough, but I have and others have, none the less. What would home games, this year, be like in ticket sales and overall excitement, if just some of the OOC teams off that 1978 schedule was coming to a Bryant Denny Stadium near you? True enough, that schedule had Bama playing only 6 SEC games, but the balance of the season would be a hoot.

Your metric argument wouldn't make it passed our first opponent, USC this year. Ironically, one of our opponents on our 1978 schedule. How does metrics calculate the excitement in ticket sales, season expectations for fans and players in Jerry World? They are not projected to be world beaters, but they are a big name, historically great football program. And gameday USC will be a big enough threat to get everyone's sincere attention. No metric will measure the color of those uniforms and the history between our two teams. Now imagine Nebraska, Washington, or even a Va Tech team we've played recently? Ticket sales and excitement trumps, Middle Tennessee, ULM, or mighty Charlestown Southern.

OK, thanks for stepping away for a moment. Back to your metrics.
What happens to ticket sales when Bama is knocked out of the playoffs when they slip up against a demanding schedule and have to watch someone else play, such as Ohio St who played a weaker schedule so they were able to win and get in in?

my goal is to win the national championship, not to have a huge game every week for my own entertainment. Heck, I enjoy these games as a fan because it gives me a break from me a nervous wreak every week.
 

TUSKtimes

1st Team
Sep 18, 2008
563
0
35
Right here, Right now
What happens to ticket sales when Bama is knocked out of the playoffs when they slip up against a demanding schedule and have to watch someone else play, such as Ohio St who played a weaker schedule so they were able to win and get in in?

my goal is to win the national championship, not to have a huge game every week for my own entertainment. Heck, I enjoy these games as a fan because it gives me a break from me a nervous wreak every week.
What schedule will Ohio State be playing at the same time, during the same season, trying to get into the same 4 team playoff?
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
as far as I'm concerned attrition will happen to one and all when we upgrade our schedule equally. Again, level playing field, one and all in every major conference must upgrade.
This is impossible! You can't level the playing field by making all out of conference schedules tougher! That's already been explained to you. Ironically, what you are arguing against is the only way to level the playing field. The other conferences must upgrade and the SEC must not upgrade and then and only then are things level. That's what you seem to be oblivious to. You also seem to be missing a lot from that 1978 season, like for instance the fact that Alabama has a nice long break after they played Nebraska, or before they played Auburn. Where do you fit those breaks into your imagined schedule? You can't!

The rest of your argument seems to be built on this naive notion of how things are. It's just not like that, and that's all there is to it.
What schedule will Ohio State be playing at the same time, during the same season, trying to get into the same 4 team playoff?
An easier one, because they play in the Big 10.
 
Last edited:

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.