Should the SEC adopt a 9 game conference schedule?

[Kaplony]

You're a one trick pony. No one is "crying" about anything. You have no logical response. But rather than just admit that others may have a point. You accuse them of crying.

Reality is, you cry about every change that anyone talks about and take it as an attack on the SEC. As an SEC fanboy, you can't have that, so you just say everyone else is crying to make yourself feel better.

Maybe not crying but there sure is a lot of complaining. This is thread #4 complaining about the number of conference games and/or FCS games on just the first two pages of this board withan average of 138 replies per thread.

 

[smilesid]

Sorry you aren't relevant?

So why do you keep hiring MW teams to come play you (only at home, of course)?

It's deliberate, a pattern that many power teams do, but the SEC has it down to a science. It's kind of a Catch-22 for G5 teams. They don't get consideration in the rankings because "they don't play enough good teams." But the "good teams" will only play them at home, where they not only have a big money and recruiting edge, but home field to boot.

Last year, Boise scheduled 2 power 5 teams plus BYU, the only G5 team they played was Troy, who won the Sun Belt and beat LSU in Baton Rouge. I'll put what my team does, year in and year out, up against anyone. And we have the best winning percentage of ANY FBS team this century.

And all you can come up with is that we "aren't relevant?" Weak.

 

[DHoey]

Sorry, if you think all 7-5 teams are equal, then you aren't suited for this discussion.

Win% is about the dumbest method for SoS you can find....well except for quoting P5 games and conference games.

BCF Toys - 2017 SOS Ratings

Here, this one is done by people who know wtf they are doing.

So that SOS rating is based off of Wins and Loses, which I just proved is directly related to how many conference games a team plays.

 

[4down20]

So why do you keep hiring MW teams to come play you (only at home, of course)?

It's deliberate, a pattern that many power teams do, but the SEC has it down to a science. It's kind of a Catch-22 for G5 teams. They don't get consideration in the rankings because "they don't play enough good teams." But the "good teams" will only play them at home, where they not only have a big money and recruiting edge, but home field to boot.

Last year, Boise scheduled 2 power 5 teams plus BYU, the only G5 team they played was Troy, who won the Sun Belt and beat LSU in Baton Rouge. I'll put what my team does, year in and year out, up against anyone. And we have the best winning percentage of ANY FBS team this century.

And all you can come up with is that we "aren't relevant?" Weak.

Again, if Boise St wants to come to Alabama for a paycheck I'm pretty sure they would do that.

But you aren't relevant enough for more than that. We don't go to Mercer either.

 

[4down20]

So that SOS rating is based off of Wins and Loses, which I just proved is directly related to how many conference games a team plays.

So you used a shit SoS method and that's why 9 conference games is tougher than 8?

 

[The Oldtimer]

Sorry you aren't relevant?

Apparently Boise State is not relevant, but Mercer is.

 

[trojanfan12]

Maybe not crying but there sure is a lot of complaining. This is thread #4 complaining about the number of conference games and/or FCS games on just the first two pages of this board withan average of 138 replies per thread.

Yeah, tends to be a topic that comes up fairly often. All I can say is what I've been saying, I think all conferences should have the same number of conference games. I don't care what the number is or how we get there, I just think it should be the same. Not sure how that's complaining or crying.

As for scheduling FCS schools. This also comes up pretty often. Personally, I don't think P5 teams should be scheduling them. I understand the financial benefit to those schools, but there are plenty of lower division FCS schools that could use the same financial assistance and would also be the guaranteed wins/glorified scrimmages that FCS schools are. But if they're going to do it, it should be in September, not November.

 

[4down20]

Apparently Boise State is not relevant, but Mercer is.

We don't travel to Mercer either dipshit.

 

[The Oldtimer]

Again, if Boise St wants to come to Alabama for a paycheck I'm pretty sure they would do that.

But you aren't relevant enough for more than that. We don't go to Mercer either.

If I remember correctly, Boise wanted to schedule a 2 for 1 with Bama. Boise would go to Bama for 2 games and Bama would go to Boise for 1 gameh .I believe that it never worked out, because Bama didn't like the arrangements.

 

[4down20]

If I remember correctly, Boise wanted to schedule a 2 for 1 with Bama. Boise would go to Bama for 2 games and Bama would go to Boise for 1 gameh .I believe that it never worked out, because Bama didn't like the arrangements.

You don't remember correctly. You never know your head from your ass most days, which is why I rarely respond to you.

It was Nebraska that made that offer to Boise St, and Boise St turned it down.

Good demonstration of how you guys create fantasies that you want to believe though.

 

[The Oldtimer]

We don't travel to Mercer either dipshit.

Boise was willing to come to Bama you dumb fuck.

 

[4down20]

Boise was willing to come to Bama you dumb fuck.

Go yell at the clouds.

 

[smilesid]

So you used a shit SoS method and that's why 9 conference games is tougher than 8?

Again, if Boise St wants to come to Alabama for a paycheck I'm pretty sure they would do that.

But you aren't relevant enough for more than that. We don't go to Mercer either.

Well, every SOS system is "shit" to use your own words. First, I know of a dozen ways to calculate it, and everyone in this discussion hand picks the system that rates them the highest. So dueling SOS arguments are fails before they even start. This is why they are only used as factors in tie-breaking between teams with similar records or as one of many determinations. The most fundamental problem is that every form of SOS is only rating the teams you played, not you. The real point should be "how good is my team?" and the only way to truly do that is on the field.

Next, poo pah all you want, if there is any team in G5 that has earned the "relevant" title, it's mine. The fact that you have to repeat it over and over again, is proof that they are. The thing that pisses you off is that we turn down sucker games. Your school prefers to hire hookers.

 

[4down20]

Well, every SOS system is "shit" to use your own words. First, I know of a dozen ways to calculate it, and everyone in this discussion hand picks the system that rates them the highest. So dueling SOS arguments are fails before they even start. This is why they are only used as factors in tie-breaking between teams with similar records or as one of many determinations. The most fundamental problem is that every form of SOS is only rating the teams you played, not you. The real point should be "how good is my team?" and the only way to truly do that is on the field.

Next, poo pah all you want, if there is any team in G5 that has earned the "relevant" title, it's mine. The fact that you have to repeat it over and over again, is proof that they are. The thing that pisses you off is that we turn down sucker games. Your school prefers to hire hookers.

You think they are all equal because you don't know shit about the fallacies in calculating them.

I do, I post the good one. You can either accept it, or make excuses.

 

[The Oldtimer]

You don't remember correctly. You never know your head from your ass most days, which is why I rarely respond to you.

Then maybe you ought to tell us all, what arrangement that Boise wanted with Bama. Tells us all about that 2 for 1 that Boise wanted, that is if you can get your head out of your ass long enough. You don't want to respond to me very often, because you are usually wrong.

 

[DHoey]

So you used a shit SoS method and that's why 9 conference games is tougher than 8?

I didn't use any SOS method. I was showing you how a conference schedule effects win %, and how it is a disadvantage to have a 9 game slate.

 

[The Oldtimer]

Go yell at the clouds.

LOL, you know I'm right!!

 

[4down20]

Then maybe you ought to tell us all, what arrangement that Boise wanted with Bama. Tells us all about that 2 for 1 that Boise wanted, that is if you can get your head out of your ass long enough. You don't want to respond to me very often, because you are usually wrong.

Or you can read the thread where your question has already been answered.

 

[Kaplony]

Yeah, tends to be a topic that comes up fairly often. All I can say is what I've been saying, I think all conferences should have the same number of conference games. I don't care what the number is or how we get there, I just think it should be the same. Not sure how that's complaining or crying.

As for scheduling FCS schools. This also comes up pretty often. Personally, I don't think P5 teams should be scheduling them. I understand the financial benefit to those schools, but there are plenty of lower division FCS schools that could use the same financial assistance and would also be the guaranteed wins/glorified scrimmages that FCS schools are. But if they're going to do it, it should be in September, not November.

I can't speak for anyone else but when it comes to Clemson and South Carolina (and probably Coastal Carolina once they get their FBS sea legs) it was "suggested" by the SC Legislature that we play in-state FCS teams to keep the money home. In SC if you don't listen to "suggestions" from the legislature they typically become state law shortly thereafter, so both teams have played an in-state FCS team since except for last year when due to Coastal declining to play FBS games while still FCS they pulled out of a game scheduled with South Carolina and no other in-state program had an opening so they played Western Carolina instead.

In Clemson's case, I prefer the games against in-state FCS schools to renting a win against the ULM's or Eastern Michigan's of the world because A. we have actual history with most of them B. they actually bring fans to the game (SC State's traveling contingent rivals most ACC programs and blows away any of the G5 programs we have played recently except Appalachian State) C. It gives the in-state kids on their roster an opportunity to play in the big stadiums they dreamed of as a kid. and D. There is actually some fan interest because chances are there's a Furman or a Wofford fan you see on a regular basis. Utah State fan? Not so much.

C. wasn't a big deal until I talked with a kid I used to coach way back in his B team days in high school who played for SC State in their first trip to Williams-Brice to play the Gamecocks. They lost the game but he said it was the favorite game in his entire Bulldog career. Having talked to several others who played these games for the FCS programs they all pretty much have these type games at the top of their list as well.

 

[4down20]

I didn't use any SOS method. I was showing you how a conference schedule effects win %, and how it is a disadvantage to have a 9 game slate.

Any SoS method that uses win% in any way shape or form is bad. It's to say every 7-5 team is equal, without regards to who those 7 wins and 5 losses come to. So while you may think the difference in conference win% is a big deal, the reality is that it's not.

What matters is the strength of the team, which you can find in what occurred during the game, not a tick in the win/loss column.