SEC scheduling cupcakes this season

[Wexahu]

Also one less chance to lose in Conference is one less chance of missing the conf champ game. If you think it doesn’t matter think about Iowa State last year. We had to play them. 8 or 9 Times out of 10 the frogs would win that game. But if you don’t play the extra conf game at all the odds of losing are exactly zero. It’s easier with 8.

I’m going to get t shirts made.

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's like saying a 9-game AAC schedule would be just as difficult as a 9-game Big 12 schedule.

All P5 games are not the same degree of difficulty. An 8-game SEC schedule that would include Bama, LSU, Georgia, Auburn, A&M, Mississippi State, Florida, and Ole Miss would be more difficult than a 9-game Big 12 schedule just like a 9-game SEC schedule that included USC, Kentucky, Vandy, Missouri, Tennessee, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Miss State and A&M would be easier than almost any 8-game Big 12 schedule.

 

[Sebastian S]

Strength of schedule 2018
Top 40
SEC - 8
ACC - 8
B12 - 9
B10 - 8
Pac 12 - 6

Top 20
SEC - 1
ACC - 3
B12 - 5
Big 10 - 4
Pac 12 - 6

Top 10
SEC - 1
ACC - 2
B12 - 2
Big 10 - 4
Pac 12 - 2

1 UCLA
2 FSU
3 LSU
4 Texas
5 Michigan
6 Purdue
7 Pitt
8 Northwestern
9 West Virginia
10 Arizona State
11 Oregon State
12 Stanford
13 USC
14 TCU
15 Clemson
16 Maryland
17 Kansas State
18 Texas Tech
19 Utah
20 Notre Dame
21 Georgia Tech
22 Michigan State
23 Iowa State
24 Oklahoma
25 Kansas
26 Duke
27 Boston College
28 Alabama
29 Texas A&M
30 Auburn
31 Miss St
32 Penn State
33 Nebraska
34 Rutgers
35 Baylor
36 Syracuse
37 Missouri
38 Wake Forest
39 Kentucky
40 Vanderbilt

SEC
3 LSU
28 Alabama
29 Texas A&M
30 Auburn
31 Miss St
37 Missouri
39 Kentucky
40 Vanderbilt

Pac 12
1 UCLA
10 Arizona State
11 Oregon State
12 Stanford
13 USC
19 Utah

Big 10
5 Michigan
6 Purdue
8 Northwestern
16 Maryland
22 Michigan State
32 Penn State
33 Nebraska
34 Rutgers

Big12
4 Texas
9 West Virginia
14 TCU
17 Kansas State
18 Texas Tech
23 Iowa State
24 Oklahoma
25 Kansas
35 Baylor

ACC
2 FSU
7 Pitt
15 Clemson
21 Georgia Tech
26 Duke
27 Boston College
36 Syracuse
38 Wake Forest

 

[Chico Dusty]

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's like saying a 9-game AAC schedule would be just as difficult as a 9-game Big 12 schedule.

All P5 games are not the same degree of difficulty. An 8-game SEC schedule that would include Bama, LSU, Georgia, Auburn, A&M, Mississippi State, Florida, and Ole Miss would be more difficult than a 9-game Big 12 schedule just like a 9-game SEC schedule that included USC, Kentucky, Vandy, Missouri, Tennessee, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Miss State and A&M would be easier than almost any 8-game Big 12 schedule.

But that SEC slate you just listed doesn’t happen, so your point is moot.

 

[Mean Purple]

We schedule SMU & an FCS every year.

and play 10 Power 5 schools.

 

[Wexahu]

and play 10 Power 5 schools.

So if we played Houston and SMU every year instead of Kansas and SMU we'd have an easier schedule?

 

[Mean Purple]

So if we played Houston and SMU every year instead of Kansas and SMU we'd have an easier schedule?

 

[Mean Purple]

So if we played Houston and SMU every year instead of Kansas and SMU we'd have an easier schedule?

Easier than playing Maryland and Indiana...no.

 

[Wexahu]

Easier than playing Maryland and Indiana...no.

You are obsessed with Ohio State.

And if you really want to debate, no, SMU and Kansas aren't better than Maryland and Indiana, but that has nothing to do with what's being talked about.

 

[Spike]

SEC, non conference opponents:
View attachment 4659

Made me hungry, bully! Now you owe me a plate of ribs. In fact I think you should buy a plate of ribs for every KFC member who shows up to Railhead tomorrow at 11.

Guys, be at RH tomorrow at 11. Wear purple. Lunch is on Face.

 

[Spike]

So if we played Houston and SMU every year instead of Kansas and SMU we'd have an easier schedule?

Houston is decent and I would not mind rotating them in periodically, especially if it means we don't play SMU or a 1AA every year.

 

[Virginia Frog]

Personally would like to ditch the 1AA bodybag in years that we have 5 conference home games.

Instead, ad a G-5 "bodybag", highly beatable but at FBS level. (NM, TxSt, UTEP, Arky St, UT-SA, Tulsa, either 1 of the 2 U of LAs., etc)

 

[f_399]

I wouldn't do a thing with how we schedule until sec schools changes theirs.

We are already at a disadvantage having to possibly win out or at least win the big 12 to get into the playoffs, might as well put in 1 or 2 cupcakes, we all know Kansas isn't a gimme.

 

[Peacefrog]

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's like saying a 9-game AAC schedule would be just as difficult as a 9-game Big 12 schedule.

All P5 games are not the same degree of difficulty. An 8-game SEC schedule that would include Bama, LSU, Georgia, Auburn, A&M, Mississippi State, Florida, and Ole Miss would be more difficult than a 9-game Big 12 schedule just like a 9-game SEC schedule that included USC, Kentucky, Vandy, Missouri, Tennessee, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Miss State and A&M would be easier than almost any 8-game Big 12 schedule.

You are being difficult to defend your ground. I get it. Wex never backs down. But you can not truly believe it is balanced when one Conference plays 9 games and no FCS while another Conference plays 8 plus FCS. The competition from game to game will never be exactly equal but when wins and losses are used to determine rankings which becomes the argument why one school should make the playoff over another it is clearly biased in favor of the Conference that has teams with less losses/higher rankings because they don’t play each other as many times.

Here’s a real plausible scenario from last season:

If USC only has to play 8 conf games they theortetically avoid WSU and end the season at 11-1 and in the playoffs. Alabama doesn’t get in.

Alabama plays 9 conf games and draws UGA. One loses and doesn’t get in playoffs. Then only one SEC team is in and everyone isn’t jerking each off about how two SEC teams made the championship proving their superiority.

Yes there are more “good” teams but playing less conf games makes them appear better than they are.

 

[Wexahu]

You are being difficult to defend your ground. I get it. Wex never backs down. But you can not truly believe it is balanced when one Conference plays 9 games and no FCS while another Conference plays 8 plus FCS. The competition from game to game will never be exactly equal but when wins and losses are used to determine rankings which becomes the argument why one school should make the playoff over another it is clearly biased in favor of the Conference that has teams with less losses/higher rankings because they don’t play each other as many times.

Here’s a real plausible scenario from last season:

If USC only has to play 8 conf games they theortetically avoid WSU and end the season at 11-1 and in the playoffs. Alabama doesn’t get in.

Alabama plays 9 conf games and draws UGA. One loses and doesn’t get in playoffs. Then only one SEC team is in and everyone isn’t jerking each off about how two SEC teams made the championship proving their superiority.

Yes there are more “good” teams but playing less conf games makes them appear better than they are.

Here's another equally plausible scenario. USC plays 8 conference games but loses to Boise State in OOC and misses the playoffs. Alabama plays 9 conference games and adds South Carolina to what would otherwise be an 8-game conference schedule and wins easily. They still go 11-1 and make the playoffs.

The idea that 9-game conference schedules are easier than 8-game schedules is nonsense. In some years, and in some conferences, that very well may be the case depending on which teams are involved. Even in most years that would generally be the case. But just for example, our schedule would be much, much more difficult if we had a 7-game Big 12 schedule and didn't play Kansas and Baylor and instead played Houston and Boise State. You have to measure each team's SOS by who they play, not simply by how many P5 teams they play.

 

[Sebastian S]

You have to measure each team's SOS by who they play, not simply by how many P5 teams they play.

Exactly.

The SEC has 1 team in the top 25 SOS, the Big 12 has 8.

 

[Wexahu]

Exactly.

The SEC has 1 team in the top 25 SOS, the Big 12 has 8.

Whose SOS and how is it measured? What I've found out about SOS rankings is you can usually find one that supports whatever argument you want to make.

 

[MTfrog5]

I can agree with both points being made. The thing that drives me crazy about Wex point is when a school like Florida plays two FCS teams. That’s a joke and their fans should be embarrassed. You can call out that we have Kansas or Baylor on our schedule, but they are still better than the schools the SEC is scheduling in November. Let’s not act like North Dakota State is going down there to play any of the SEC teams.

 

[Sebastian S]

Whose SOS and how is it measured? What I've found out about SOS rankings is you can usually find one that supports whatever argument you want to make.

From ESPN lol

SEC's Network

http://www.espn.com/college-football/statistics/teamratings/_/sort/sosRemainingRank/order/false

I made a long post further up about the whole thing.

 

[Peacefrog]

Here's another equally plausible scenario. USC plays 8 conference games but loses to Boise State in OOC and misses the playoffs. Alabama plays 9 conference games and adds South Carolina to what would otherwise be an 8-game conference schedule and wins easily. They still go 11-1 and make the playoffs.

The idea that 9-game conference schedules are easier than 8-game schedules is nonsense. In some years, and in some conferences, that very well may be the case depending on which teams are involved. Even in most years that would generally be the case. But just for example, our schedule would be much, much more difficult if we had a 7-game Big 12 schedule and didn't play Kansas and Baylor and instead played Houston and Boise State. You have to measure each team's SOS by who they play, not simply by how many P5 teams they play.

You are avoiding my point.

And now you are ignoring your own earlier point about not looking at 1-2 years as a measure of strength of a team. Not long ago Houston was awful and KU was going to play for a national championship until they went ahead and lost to Missouri.

Look we are both using extreme examples. But no matter what KU is a tougher 9th game than any FCS team would be. Notice that Alabama isn’t playing Houston or Boise State.

 

[tcudoc]

It has been mentioned previously, but SEC teams also get propped up higher for playing each other. They claim they are the best and preseason ESPN polls agree, so they are penalized less for losing to each other and get more street cred for beating each other. So, the losers of their conference games remain highly ranked because they lost to another "great" SEC team and the winners of the games immediately get thrust to top 5 because they beat the almighty SEC team. So, when a number 20 Ole Miss beats a number 1 Alabama, Ole Miss jumps up to top 5 while Alabama stays in the Top 10, because their only loss is to the top 5 Ole Miss juggernaut. It is a circular argument and the 2014 TCU team proved it in the Peach Bowl.