Bielema: SEC needs to have 9 conference games...because numbers matter.

[selmaborntidefan]

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.

Damn, I'm old enough to remember when were told GOOD WINS counted more than BAD LOSSES. Seems like it was just, you know, about 2-3 years ago.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Very true statements.

Yes, but true statements can also be MISLEADING statements.

"The SEC doesn't play up north in December" is a true statement.

It's also misleading given neither does anyone else INCLUDING the Big Ten, who for some reason despite being one evolutionary step from the Abominable Snowmen chicken out and play indoors for their conference title game.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Just so everyone knows, I have ZERO problem with the fact that ONE LOSS Indiana (and their bakery schedule of teams they beat) got into the playoffs over three THREE LOSS SEC teams where an argument could be made for any of the three. I have no problem with that, those are the rules, and while an Alabama loss to Oklahoma could be explained a few years ago when the Sooners had a high octane offense, this was not that team.

But let's not for one second pretend the schedules were remotely equal AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT come at the SEC with "you should be playing more conference games." An SEC team could have played the Indiana schedule last year and would have had the exact same record AT WORST. (And I mean the contenders, I don't mean Vanderbilt).

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Has anyone ever noticed the very same people (and I'm referring here to the Tim Brandos of the world, not specifically this post) who rant incessantly about "the SEC should play nine conference games" ARE THE EXACT SAME PEOPLE who think Boise State and UCF should have access to a playoff WITHOUT PLAYING ANYONE WORTH A DAMN?????

"Hey, you folks playing the tougher schedule? It's not tough enough.
And you folks playing nobodies? Don't worry, your schedule is just fine."

 

[dtgreg]

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.

South Carolina is also playing Clemson and Va Tech.

Thanks for the catch. @saturdaysarebet, as well. If I'd read your post closer, you mentioned this.

 

[dtgreg]

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.

Also, sorry, Purdue. I'm sure the chicken processing company has a fine football team, as well, but they're more of a farm team, as I recall...

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Also, sorry, Purdue. I'm sure the chicken processing company has a fine football team, as well, but they're more of a farm team, as I recall...

One niece graduated Purdue, the other starts there this semester.

So Purdue is obviously in the forefront of my family's mind, especially as they do go to a game or two every year, usually Notre Dame (since yes they're Catholic).

 

[CrimsonNagus]

They can't even get the facts right because they keep saying that "some SEC teams won't play 9 P4 opponents," even though every SEC team plays 9 P4 opponents. Don't worry though, the goal post will be moved to playing 10 shortly. If the SEC ever mandates 10 P4 games, the critics will move it to 11 games.

It is not really football season until folks are crying about SEC schedules and how we "never play anyone". Never mind the fact that we are playing the top teams in the country every single year by just being in the SEC. The PAC 1.5 doesn't have that problem, nor does the ACC or Big 12. I'd even argue that the B1G doesn't have that issue to the level the SEC does. Whatever, who cares, nothing will ever change their tune that the SEC never plays anyone.

Losers whine, winners just keep winning. SEC, SEC, SEC!

 

[BhamToTexas]

On the radio here in Dallas this week they were talking about college football opening weekend and they stated how there are so many creampuff games. One guy, "yeah we call that Alabama week, where you play a McNeese St and then whine about being one of the top 12 teams at the end of the year." They all got a big laugh.

This talk track is just so tiresome and not even factual. We literally are playing FSU the first weekend and we have Wisconsin on top of the SEC schedule. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of our messaging.

 

[dtgreg]

On the radio here in Dallas this week they were talking about college football opening weekend and they stated how there are so many creampuff games. One guy, "yeah we call that Alabama week, where you play a McNeese St and then whine about being one of the top 12 teams at the end of the year." They all got a big laugh.

This talk track is just so tiresome and not even factual. We literally are playing FSU the first weekend and we have Wisconsin on top of the SEC schedule. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of our messaging.

I believe the phrase is "They hate us 'cause they ain't us."

 

[BamaInBham]

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.

It doesn’t matter how many P4 teams when you are playing Purdue vs playing Florida. The SEC has 10 of its 16 teams ranked in the top 25, that’s 62.5%, vs the Big10 who has 6 of their 18 teams, 33%. That’s a massive difference.

The SEC has 7 programs who have won NCs this century, the B10 has 3. The B10: OSU 3, USC 2, Mich 1, Total 6. The SEC: Alabama 6, LSU 3, UGA 2, UF 2, AU 1, UTx 1, OU 1, Total 16.

That’s the number 1 conference vs number 2. Big big difference. Yeah, no wonder why everyone wants the SEC to play itself.

What the B10 is doing by pushing the more conf game nonsense is twofold: forcing the SEC to cannibalize itself and shield themselves from having to play the SEC.

The SEC and B10 should enter into a pact whereby they play each other on a rotating basis each year. Thus, work their way through the entire league over time. It would take almost 2 decades to work through the entire B10 schedule, but it would be worth it. But Sankey, the worst P4 conf commissioner, doesn’t appear to be intelligent or courageous enough to push that in-your-face challenge. If he did he would gain the upper hand in the argument. But he’s been out-maneuvered at almost every turn and he frequently backhands Alabama whose exploits have given him his bully pulpit.

But now his object of worship is Texas who, over the decades, has wasted more talent than any program in the country. They are his object of veneration because after a 100 years they woke up one morning and were told they were sleeping in an ocean of oil. They didn’t DO anything ‘cept stick a spigot in the ground. So now they get to play the worst 7 teams in the SEC. They played 1 team out of the bottom 8 in the SEC last year - and lost it. Poor ole OU had to take up the slack, they probably played the toughest SEC schedule. Some of it was good & bad fortune, but IMO, some of it was design. You go Commish.

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Alabama could schedule the Philadelphia Eagles, The Kansas City Chiefs, the Buffalo Bills, 8 of the toughest SEC teams, and Mercer and the whiners would still focus on Mercer and the 8 game conference schedule and still say they don't play anybody.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

On the radio here in Dallas this week they were talking about college football opening weekend and they stated how there are so many creampuff games. One guy, "yeah we call that Alabama week, where you play a McNeese St and then whine about being one of the top 12 teams at the end of the year."

Hilarious given:
a) Alabama has never played McNeese St in football
b) Texas A/M played McNeese just last year
c) LSU and Florida have played them in the last five years
d) Alabama has faced BY FAR - and beaten BY FAR - more TOP TEN teams than any school the last 15 years or so.

They all got a big laugh.

I know, I laughed when Eric Dickerson took the Trans Am and went to SMU (in Dallas) myself.

This talk track is just so tiresome and not even factual. We literally are playing FSU the first weekend and we have Wisconsin on top of the SEC schedule. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of our messaging.

It's right alongside the "now that Saban isn't the only one paying players," which is comical on many levels.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

They can't even get the facts right because they keep saying that "some SEC teams won't play 9 P4 opponents," even though every SEC team plays 9 P4 opponents. Don't worry though, the goal post will be moved to playing 10 shortly. If the SEC ever mandates 10 P4 games, the critics will move it to 11 games.

Big Ten talking point:
"Alabama backed out of a home-and-home with Michigan State!"

Fact:
Alabama 38
Michigan St 0

They can't even use the excuse that "meh, it was a meaningless bowl game" for that one. So instead it's "yeah, but they couldn't have beaten Ohio State."

Which is funny since Michigan State DID beat Ohio State.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Here's the other funny thing:

"The SEC has likely destroyed itself with the creation of a conference championship game. A team that has to go through a gauntlet already now has an additional tough game against a foe that in the past they might have avoided. This may make the climb to a national championship go from difficult to impossible."

That was the basic assessment when the game was announced.

Now?

"SEC needs to add another conference game, their schedules aren't difficult enough and Mercer something something."

Any of y'all go look at Florida's 2008 schedule?
Miami
Florida State
Hawaii (undefeated in the 2007 regular season and supposedly snubbed)
8 SEC games, including 10-3 Georgia and 9-4 Ole Miss and 2007 national champ LSU
#1 Alabama in the SEC championship

But what do folks talk about?
"Florida shouldn't be allowed to play Citadel in November!"

Florida faced all four other teams in conference that won at least 8 games. They won 3 of the 4.
And their two biggest in-state rivals, who had combined for 7 national titles in the previous 25 years.

But apparently, Florida should have played Mississippi State (who lost to La Tech) rather than Citadel.

 

[CrimsonNagus]

On the radio here in Dallas this week they were talking about college football opening weekend and they stated how there are so many creampuff games. One guy, "yeah we call that Alabama week, where you play a McNeese St and then whine about being one of the top 12 teams at the end of the year." They all got a big laugh.

This talk track is just so tiresome and not even factual. We literally are playing FSU the first weekend and we have Wisconsin on top of the SEC schedule. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of our messaging.

Meanwhile, Indiana waltzed into the playoffs playing a schedule full of "McNeeses", but they were FBS "McNeeses". I guess that makes it all okay, even though they lost to the only good teams they played all season.

If you sit there and complain about SEC teams playing FCS teams, but not have a problem with Indiana making the playoffs playing a season full of crap teams, then you are a trash broadcaster.

 

[MikeInBama]

Indiana won't repeat their 2024 performance, they play:
#12 Illinois
@#7 Oregon
@#2 Penn State

I'd still take their ranked schedule vs ours:
@#5 UGA
#9 LSU
@#13 USCe
#18 Oklahoma
#24 Tennessee

 

[MikeInBama]

https://www.espn.com/college-footba...-college-football-sp+-rankings-every-fbs-team

Both the SEC and Big Ten boast three of the projected top seven teams, but if we measure conferences by average ratings, the SEC still has a commanding lead due, as always, to the lack of dead weight. Only two of 16 SEC teams are projected lower than 43rd overall, while the Big Ten has six such teams, including three ranked 70th or worse. That helps explain why, despite playing only eight-game conference schedules, SEC teams occupy 13 of the top 15 spots in the strength of schedule rankings.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

This "but we play 9 games in the Big Ten" didn't even happen until 2016.

The SEC and Big Ten BOTH played EIGHT CONFERENCE GAMES from 1992-2015.

National Championship Count 1992-2015
SEC - 12
Big 10 - 3
SEC vs B1G national title game record: 2-0

Hmmm.....looks to me "playing the same number of conference games" doesn't have a damned thing at all to do with who winds up on top.

Just because the Big Ten added an extra conference game, don't be blaming the SEC for your screwup.

And you can't even use the "but that's all Alabama" because those titles include Florida, LSU, Auburn, and Tennessee and DO NOT include Georgia.

Folks, it's just another in the long line of Yankee excuses.

The Big Ten hasn't even had the lead in the overall series versus the SEC since 1980.
And oh yeah, who tied it up the last time it was tied?
MISSISSIPPI STATE when they beat Illinois in 1980.

We never heard these excuses until they got smashed to pieces in the 1980s by the SEC about the same time they were going 3-17 in the Rose Bowl. And yeah, MOST of those games are "Kentucky vs Indiana," but since the Hoosiers lead that one 18-17-1, it HURTS the Big Ten's case.

Does anybody with a brain think it makes any difference if:
2016 Alabama replaces UTC with Mizzou?
2017 Alabama replaces Mercer with Florida? (How does this help Ohio State not get slaughtered by Iowa?)
2018 Alabama replaces Citadel with Vandy?
2019 LSU didn't play any cupcakes in November so I guess they get a pass....
2020 doesn't count
2022 UGA didn't play any cupcakes in November, either; they'd have killed aTm, too.

It MIGHT make a difference if 2021 UGA had to play LSU, but I doubt it.

What's funny is the Big Ten:
a) scheduled an extra game
b) decided their excuse for failing to win a national title was that extra game
c) demanded someone else do the same stupid thing they did

I mean, how arrogant can you get?

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Oh and here it is:

Big Ten Conference to use 9-game league schedule in football in 2017 - ESPN

That's from 2011.
They moved it up a year to 2016 later.

Btw.....how can you even call your schedule fair if one of the teams has four home games and five road games in conference?

There's some delicious irony in this article, too:

The Pac-12 (formerly the Pac-10) went to a nine-game conference schedule in 2006 and will continue to do so now that Utah and Colorado have joined the conference.

The Big 12, now with 10 members, will begin playing nine-game league schedules this season, although the league no longer has a championship game, something the Big Ten adds this year.

With three of the top conferences playing nine-game conference schedules, Delany said the Big Ten will not be at a major competitive disadvantage.


So they did this and NOW they claim to be a competitive disadvantage.....