Big XII Commissioner Says Schedule Will Include WVU
"But our conference fully expects West Virginia to participate in the Big 12, beginning July 1, 2012," Neinas said. "We've had continual assurances from [WVU] President [Jim] Clements and Athletic Director Oliver Luck [the Mountaineers] will be here to kick off the new year."
The Big 12 commissioner said his league hasn't made scheduling plans to move forward for 2012-13 without West Virginia.
"No,'' he said. "We have a schedule with West Virginia. We have a contractual commitment with our television partners that we must release a schedule by Feb. 1 and we will do that.
"Aside from our television partners, our schools are anxious to release their schedules and we'll meet the required deadline."
As you know, Florida State has a game with WVU scheduled for September 8. I am told that FSU wants out of this game, and WVU certainly wants out if it goes to the Big XII, as it will play nine conference games.
Let's see if the commissioner is correct.
4 months ago
Bud Elliott
257 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Pleasssssssse let this happen
I want no repeats of 2011.
by SarasotaSeminole on Jan 26, 2012 3:15 PM EST up reply actions
Do you think Spetman was just posturing when he indicated that we would like to keep WV for ticket sales?
Go tell it to Moses.
by FLpanhandler on Jan 26, 2012 3:16 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Spetman was posturing...
…but not for ticket sales. He did it because the team who requests the cancellation, pays a fat penalty.
GO NOLES!
FEAR THE SPEAR!
>>>--------,,,-----/>
Good
As long as the Big East doesn’t try to force a home and home on us in place of WVU, best FSU could hope for
by Jonathan Loesche on Jan 26, 2012 1:33 PM EST reply actions
They can't force anything on us
We agreed. They let the team we were playing out cause they fell apart and we moved on. Tought tattas
A Seminole warrior killed in battle is a legend remembered. A Gator lost in battle becomes a pair of boots and a belt.
twitter of random stuff and tons of confessing FSU love Follow @caine115
F THE ACC ..|.. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Any thoughts
on who we would/should replace them with if they are removed?
UAB, please UAB.
Want no part of Southern Miss.
They would give us their best shot and it wouldn’t be a game we need to get some rotation in for the depth chart.
Even without Fedora, that team is still loaded.
'Gentlemen, it is better to have died a small boy than to fumble this football.' John Heisman
I started being a Nole fan In the early eighties
With the mantra of anyone, anywhere, anytime. Ducking good competition does you no favors, as when you finally play someone and get your arse kicked ala VT, perenially. I will consider myself banned , but I must say this pussy attitude on this site in football makes me sick to to my G&G fn stomach
by realnole1128 on Jan 26, 2012 10:04 PM EST up reply actions
VT's arse kickings have nothing to do with their normal level of competition
They simply do not get enough talent to compete consistently with the big boys. This year, they have five 4-star commits (no 5-stars). Last year they had four 4-stars, no 5s. Only five 4s in 2010. That’s FOURTEEN 4-stars in three years; we have TEN 4-5 star players committed this year alone.
And for the record: we had FIFTEEN 4-5 star players last year. That’s the talent deficit VT faces when they play elite teams. When those teams are equally well coached, it’s very hard for VT to win. Thus their stellar BCS and Top 5 Opponents records.
by Invictus13 on Jan 26, 2012 10:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not trying to be combative, but do you even read the articles here?
Any of them?
We have covered (almost to the point of ridiculousness) on how this line of thinking is just…. wrong in TODAY’s scheduling.
'Gentlemen, it is better to have died a small boy than to fumble this football.' John Heisman
How are using my site via typewriter?
Oh, wait, you changed to utilize the current system of the internet?
Why would you consider yourself banned for expressing your opinion?
Many here will disagree with you, will tell you why, and will try to convert you, while others may just accept that there is no point in trying to make you understand the logic behind working the system to get to the NC game and not even bother responding, but expressing your opinion here is not something that you will get banned unlike other sites.
>------::----::------->Spearing 'em and Scalping 'em like it's 1999
I'm not so sure this Jimbo fella is the right man for the job.
by FrankDNole on Jan 27, 2012 1:35 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Classy
“this pussy attitude on this site in football makes me sick to to my G&G fn stomach”
Whatever tough guy. Let me know how things are back in 1982.
And we lost to USM early in the season once before. Irrelevant, yes…
"I got a PBS mind in an MTV world"...Jimmy Buffett
by The Ryno and I Know on Jan 26, 2012 4:20 PM EST up reply actions
F*** the ACC and Big East
Why were we even scheduled to play USF and WVU to begin with? It shoulda been just one of those.
The ACC does us no favors
In terms of when it schedules our in conference games. Like @Clemson the week after Oklahoma. But OOC games are our makings. We had to play WV cause of the ACC raid of the BE as part of a contract. But USF was on our AD’s shoulders. Think he is finally learning not to schedule these games and play them in the BCS. BYU, Oklahoma, USF, Alabama ect with UF already OOC means add extra cupcake and win the ACC=national title. Jimbo and company I think have made this point for the future. But those games were scheduled years before
A Seminole warrior killed in battle is a legend remembered. A Gator lost in battle becomes a pair of boots and a belt.
twitter of random stuff and tons of confessing FSU love Follow @caine115
F THE ACC ..|.. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
We are dealing with the athletic director for FSU...
so before we all get happy and we indeed are able to get WVU off of our schedule I wouldn’t be surprised if he booked us with another contender of equal strength if there is an opening. The athletic director does dictate who we play correct or am I off base here?
Are you suggesting maybe Alabama has an open date?
'Gentlemen, it is better to have died a small boy than to fumble this football.' John Heisman
Heard this is Spetman's ultimate goal:
A) Go independent
2) Permanently schedule the entire SEC West
D) Add in the Big 12 South
Foxtrot) Rotate between Florida, Notre Dame, Souther California, and Ohio State as OOCs.
'Gentlemen, it is better to have died a small boy than to fumble this football.' John Heisman
Their AD must be a complete dumbass...
According to people here.
Not the biggest fan of Spetman, but some people seem to go overboard on their venom.
What's your take on Spetman, FSU?
I know a lot of people despise him, but he’s so behind-the-scenes (i.e., not in the spotlight) that I don’t really have much of an opinion on him. Although considering that he IS less visible than most Vice Presidents, and he ducked out of the Bowden announcement… well, neither of those things is a ringing endorsement. (Arguably the football scheduling, too…)
Otherwise, is he lousy? Competent? Behind-the-scenes superb?
Playing Michigan in Jerry World wasn't a bad move for Alabama
The game was agreed to when Michigan had Rich Rod lead them to a 5-7 record, they get paid enough by Jones to do the game that it pays Saban’s salary for the year, I believe, and even with Michigan somewhat recovered with Hoke and the Tide losing a bunch of players, they’re still well ahead of the Wolverines at this time.
If all sports fandom is a form of emotional gambling, football is poker and hockey is Russian roulette.
Yeah, Bama loses a lot but they should beat Michigan by 10+ I would think.
Michigan was one of the luckiest teams in the country this past year. Denard’s arm punts won’t work against them lol.
A lot of BCS teams already
have their OOC schedules locked in, so the best team we would probably play is Southern Miss. The last time we played them they beat us with a QB named Brett Favre. No thanks! All kidding aside, I want NO part of Alabama. Even in down years, they are better than most BCS teams.
"The helmet doesn't make you, you make the helmet"- Jimbo Fisher
Formerly known as MattChampNole12
by Matt Champion on Jan 26, 2012 4:14 PM EST up reply actions
I guess you mean even in their pre-Saban years.
Go tell it to Moses.
by FLpanhandler on Jan 26, 2012 11:41 PM EST up reply actions
How does this impinge on Syracuse and Pittsburgh moving to the ACC?
Will the Big East decide to drop their fight with West Va and focus on retaining Syracuse and Pitt for as long as possible for BCS AQ purposes?
Come and see the violence inherent in the system!!!
Unrealistic but i think
we should schedule Texas for the 1st Game, for recruiting purposes and strength of schedule
win everyday
>------::----::------->Spearing 'em and Scalping 'em like it's 1999
I'm not so sure this Jimbo fella is the right man for the job.
by FrankDNole on Jan 26, 2012 2:28 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
I beg thats sarcasm
Please god let it be, please please please
A Seminole warrior killed in battle is a legend remembered. A Gator lost in battle becomes a pair of boots and a belt.
twitter of random stuff and tons of confessing FSU love Follow @caine115
F THE ACC ..|.. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I wasn't sure, so I only opened up one of the floodgates.
>------::----::------->Spearing 'em and Scalping 'em like it's 1999
I'm not so sure this Jimbo fella is the right man for the job.
by FrankDNole on Jan 26, 2012 2:35 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Hard to find a chink elsewhere
And that’s coming from a big Trickett fan. While I don’t agree that last year was his fault, or that OL recruiting has been “bad” because of him, I can see where the perception might come from.
My only real gripes besides scheduling are the conference we are a part of (along with the c-rate ref jobs we get each game) and the questionable 4th and short calls we make at times inside the 5 yard line. IE: kicking field goals when we should be playing position.
'Gentlemen, it is better to have died a small boy than to fumble this football.' John Heisman
I didn't :)
'Gentlemen, it is better to have died a small boy than to fumble this football.' John Heisman
Most people that complain about playcalling have no idea what they are talking about
Me included.
Follow @RobbedbyJT
I fully admit that I know little about "play calling," per se
But I do absolutely criticize college (or professional) coaches when I am able to guess with some regularity what play they are going to call in a given circumstance. If I can guess too often, I expect that the DCs who get paid to stop offenses can probably accurately predict the plays even more frequently.
That’s how I knew Jeffy was a really bad OC…
I’m not sure I have any complaints about Jimbo’s play calling; if I did, it might be that I think he can go too conservative sometimes. At least it FEELS that way, but then I remember other times that he was more aggressive. So… no major complaints from me right now.
Most people that complain about most things on here have no idea what they are talking about.
by jmunole on Jan 27, 2012 9:12 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
A Seminole warrior killed in battle is a legend remembered. A Gator lost in battle becomes a pair of boots and a belt.
twitter of random stuff and tons of confessing FSU love Follow @caine115
F THE ACC ..|.. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
by caine115 on Jan 26, 2012 3:22 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I never paid attention to your sig phrase
Mind if I send that phrase to someone? they’ll love it
send away
A Seminole warrior killed in battle is a legend remembered. A Gator lost in battle becomes a pair of boots and a belt.
twitter of random stuff and tons of confessing FSU love Follow @caine115
F THE ACC ..|.. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I don't think he's going nearly far enough.
Should schedule the Cowboys in Jerry’s World.
If all sports fandom is a form of emotional gambling, football is poker and hockey is Russian roulette.
So this is what is looks like when a conference Commissioner has balls.
>------::----::------->Spearing 'em and Scalping 'em like it's 1999
I'm not so sure this Jimbo fella is the right man for the job.
by FrankDNole on Jan 26, 2012 2:25 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
Pretty neat
'Gentlemen, it is better to have died a small boy than to fumble this football.' John Heisman
I wonder how neat that is?..... Pretty neat.
"The worst kind of non-smokers are the ones that come up to you and cough. That's pretty f*^@ing cruel isn't it? Do you go up to cripples and dance too?"
- Bill Hicks (another dead hero)
Sorry, I thought ours' was
Carolina and Duke Blue.
"The only place success comes before work is in the dictionary." Vince Lombardi
"We'll win games with talent, we'll win championships with character." Jimbo Fisher
by RishiM on Jan 26, 2012 3:22 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Blue balls…hehe
"When you go out there and put numbers on the scoreboard, everything changes. We went out there and executed." -- FSU coach Jimbo Fisher
by xfactor159 on Jan 26, 2012 10:12 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
If they go into the B12, the game has to go
With the 9 game league slate, some B12 teams obviously have to play 5 road games. It’s a pretty safe bet that conference newcomer WVU would be one of the teams that gets stuck with 5 roadies. Add on a trip to Tallahassee and that’s 6 games @BCS opponents. Nobody in WVU’s position would do that.
I don't care if it's the "smart" thing to do
Whenever I see the obsession with getting out of “hard” games it makes me very uneasy. So much for anybody, anywhere, anytime
We play in the ACC
Agree with it or not, the media considers us to be at best the 5th best conference in the nation. And who decides who plays in the MNC? The media.
SEC schools might not need to schedule hard OOC games to help their BCS resume, but we do.
It also sends a terrible message to the team.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 4:34 PM EST up reply actions
Right. Like the WVU game
And anyway, if you guys are really that scared about losing to WVU… then that pretty much shows that we’re not national title caliber anyway.
I understand not playing Alabama, USC, LSU, etc. This is WVU. If you think they’re such a big risk to play then you’re pretty much admitting we aren’t that good.
How about we grow some balls and stop worrying about losing to mediocre teams.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
No its called walking around the wall instead of climbing over it. It’s of more benefit not to – Florida’s your tough OOC game. Having just one is enough to get you into BCS game & BCS money
by FSU on Jan 26, 2012 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't understand the argument people make that having UF right before an ACCCG isn't difficult.
By mid November, if you’re an undefeated FSU, you’re likely top 5.
Then you beat an SEC team, and win your conference convincingly.
9 years out of 10, an undefeated FSU with UF as only real OOC game goes to MNC.
by jmnpb996 on Jan 26, 2012 4:48 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Mobile Rec
"When you go out there and put numbers on the scoreboard, everything changes. We went out there and executed." -- FSU coach Jimbo Fisher
by xfactor159 on Jan 26, 2012 10:15 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
You've been around this site long enough to know the importance of smart scheduling.
Everyone brings their A game against FSU. It’s hard to be up for every single game, and when you are playing teams that have the ability to beat you every single week, you are setting yourself up to not have a chance in the MNC game.
It’s not that FSU is scared of WVU, it’s that smart scheduling lands you in BCS games.
all I see in this discussion is a bunch of people afraid of losing
Instead of excited in anticipation of winning.
I was a young kid the last time we were good. Were people back then demanding we remove as many of our hard OOC games as possible? I’m gonna guess no, because back then people actually had confidence in the team.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 4:52 PM EST up reply actions
We were the most dominant program of the era
I’m guessing we had no problems with the media overlooking us. We didn’t need to play hard OOC games to get their attention. We still did.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 4:56 PM EST up reply actions
Different time
now. In that time, tough scheduling was rewarded. Now the BCS looks at record and not resume.
"The helmet doesn't make you, you make the helmet"- Jimbo Fisher
Formerly known as MattChampNole12
by Matt Champion on Jan 26, 2012 4:58 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Disagree
The media is all about wins over big names.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
Okie State
thrashed OU and beat Texas. Two big name program victories, where did that get them? On the outside looking in of the BCS National Championship.
"The helmet doesn't make you, you make the helmet"- Jimbo Fisher
Formerly known as MattChampNole12
by Matt Champion on Jan 26, 2012 7:32 PM EST up reply actions
My friend, there is no strength of schedule reward. Win the games on your schedule and your in the discussion. Might as well manipulate the system while we can. Look at all the other programs that do it
"When you go out there and put numbers on the scoreboard, everything changes. We went out there and executed." -- FSU coach Jimbo Fisher
by xfactor159 on Jan 26, 2012 10:18 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
like Alabama?
oh wait
SOS factors into the voters opinions.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 11:28 PM EST up reply actions
No it doesn't.
Oklahoma State was rated #2 by the computers because it actually had a tougher strength of schedule than Alabama. OSU had the same record but beat more teams ranked in the top 25 then even Alabama did. The only reason Alabama got in was because:
1) the name Alabama
2) SEC prestige
They didn’t get in because they had a tougher strength of schedule.
Are you referring to the 1999 season when we played OOC games against
Miami, Florida and La Tech?
Or 2000 when we played a bad BYU team, a bad Louisville team, Miami and Florida?
Or 2001 when we played UAB, Miami and Florida?
Because those are the last 3 years that FSU was a “good” team.
Or the 93 game where the only game not won before NC by 2 possessions or more was against an OOC opponent?
Does FSU have 2 NC’s if Notre Dame doesn’t flop against BC in 93?
we were good in 2001?
In 1998 we played Texas A&M (top 15 at the time), USC (top 20 at the time) and Florida (#4 at the time)
97 we also played USC who was ranked.
96 we played a ranked southern mississippi team
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 5:04 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, but look at the ACC at that time
We only had a couple semi-problematic conf games. GT, and maybe one other game. Otherwise, the conf was a cakewalk. From 1992-2000 We only had TWO seasons in which TWO ACC teams stayed within a TD of us. I think only NINE games in those nine years – average of one conf game a year – were decided by a single score.
Every other conf game we won comfortably. Often by huge margins. Even when we are back up to speed, I doubt we’ll plow through the ACC at the same rate we did back then. So, we already have a tougher schedule.
In fairness
The LaTech and Louisville games were on the schedule because Auburn backed out of a home and home and that was the best we could do. And LaTech ended up being a pretty good team (beat SEC champ Alabama that year). Same thing happened in 1995, when a game with Notre Dame was cancelled and we could only get UCF to replace them. If you’re questioning the strength of FSU’s ooc schedule during their run of dominance you’re fighting a losing battle.
by BobLoblaw113 on Jan 26, 2012 8:43 PM EST up reply actions
The goald is to create as
few roadblocks to a MNC game as possible. WVU while not as big of a roadblock as OU is still nonetheless a roadblock. Do I think we beat WVU? Absolutely they would not hang 70 points on our D. Get as many winnable games as possible. I won’t beat the dead horse here, just putting in my two cents.
"The helmet doesn't make you, you make the helmet"- Jimbo Fisher
Formerly known as MattChampNole12
by Matt Champion on Jan 26, 2012 4:48 PM EST up reply actions
Until there is a playoof it will always be
That fact that I'm paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't a conspiracy against us
by stevegrizzle on Jan 26, 2012 6:26 PM EST up reply actions
They have a playoff in the NFL and it’s resulted in a team barely over .500 in the regular season playing for the title.
That seems more mythical to me.
So youre arguing against a playoff?
I’ll take merit based vs perception based all day
That fact that I'm paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't a conspiracy against us
by stevegrizzle on Jan 26, 2012 9:07 PM EST up reply actions
Yes I’m against it.
Merit based would be nice, but thanks to “automatic bids” for division winners, the NFL playoffs aren’t really merit based. The Seahawks once made the playoffs with a losing record and then HOSTED a playoff game against a team with a superior record. That’s the opposite of merit based!
by 38Noles on Jan 26, 2012 9:18 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Not to mention the difference in the size of the leagues
32 in the NFL?
120 in BCS
by BenDNole on Jan 26, 2012 9:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
That argument loses a little steam
once you consider that Seattle went on to win the game you’re talking about. I don’t like rewarding mediocrity, but any other system will be subjective.
by BobLoblaw113 on Jan 27, 2012 7:24 PM EST up reply actions
No, that helps his argument
A 7-9 team had no right being in the second round of the playoffs.
And had they not hosted the game, they probably would have lost.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 28, 2012 9:03 AM EST up reply actions
Why don't they have a right?
That’s the system established in the NFL. They won their first PO game. Some teams with better records probably had easier schedules.
If we're talking about teams that don't deserve to be there
I’d say that the team that lost to a 7-9 team probably leads the list. I don’t care if it was on the road or not. If they were so inferior, then why didn’t New Orleans beat them?
by BobLoblaw113 on Jan 28, 2012 6:10 PM EST up reply actions
So the regular season means nothing?
Sometimes the better team doesn’t win. I’ll take the 16 game season resume over a one game playoff in Seattle.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 28, 2012 8:38 PM EST up reply actions
Who said that the regular season means nothing?
They had to win their division in the regular season in order to get there. And teams aren’t static. They develop as the season goes on. So while Seattle may have struggled at points during that season, they were playing well at the end. Well enough, in fact, to embarrass the defending champions. And what about this Super Bowl? The Giants were at times awful his year, and won a relatively weak division in the final week of the season with a less than stellar 9-7 record. If they win, are they somehow less deserving as champions than if New England were to win?
Since you’re criticizing the playoff system, I have to ask what do you suggest as an alternative? A ranking system similar to college, where subjective biases determine championship match-ups? Perhaps just take the best record alone, regardless of competition, and crown them champions. Who needs a postseason at all, since one game match-ups are irrelevant? Do we just give the trophy to whoever looks like the best team and that’s that?
by BobLoblaw113 on Jan 28, 2012 8:58 PM EST up reply actions
The Giants were at times awful his year, and won a relatively weak division in the final week of the season with a less than stellar 9-7 record. If they win, are they somehow less deserving as champions than if New England were to win?
Of course they would be less deserving.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 30, 2012 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
I think instead of MNC
it should be HNC, hypothetical national championship game.
"The helmet doesn't make you, you make the helmet"- Jimbo Fisher
Formerly known as MattChampNole12
by Matt Champion on Jan 26, 2012 7:29 PM EST up reply actions
And if we win all those games and lose to WVU
Just imagine how bad we’d have gotten thrashed by an elite SEC team
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
Better to lose in MNC...
Its better to lose in the MNC then @ WVU during the season. We also open up other issues, such as having to play WVU hurt or tired (See Clemson this year…). The MNC usually gives you 3+ weeks of rest and coaching.
I’m not saying I’m scared of WVU, but most pollsters are going to say “Its WVU, big deal” if we beat them. If we lose then we are out of the race.
This
Its WVU not USC, Bama, tOSU, or OU. There is just not that much upside here. They are 2nd/3rd tier brand. They will be ranked in the 10 to 20 range so while its a nice win its not the Win heared around the world.
Its basically a no upside but lots of downside game. In the play anyone anywhere days those games where all upside and little to no downside. You beat Nebraska in Nebraska you make a name for yourself you lose well you were supposed too. You play at the Big House the next week and lose well who can win there but you win its time to take notice.
This is where Boise is now they win against Va Tech or UGA its a great win but they lose well they where the little guy to begin with.
FSU is at the point where they are supposed to beat WVU or its a failure.
F the Deacs - Notre Dame, Rutgers and UConn to the ACC
Anything
can happen in 1 game. Check bama vs lsu early in the year. Why risk it if you don’t have to??
by Seminole4Life on Jan 26, 2012 4:51 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Anything
can happen in 1 game. Why risk it if you don’t have to??
by Seminole4Life on Jan 26, 2012 4:53 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Because it could also help
If we have one loss and it comes down to us and Oklahoma State/Oregon/Ohio State etc for that #2 BCS spot, a win over a team like WVU could push us over the edge.
You guys act like there’s ZERO possible benefit from the game.
Even if it doesn’t help us in the polls it can have great intrinsic value. Beating a team like WVU could be a big confidence boost to certain players/the team.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 4:54 PM EST up reply actions
Didnt help OSU much
OSU this year had a lot tougher schedule then Bama, but they still didnt get pushed over the edge. I think the FSU name and us being “back” will help that more then a win over WVU.
Even VT with their soft schedule got a BCS bid. Thats better then getting left out if we slip up in the ACC.
Bama schedule was perceived as harder
If Bama didn’t play PSU, OSU might have beat them in the polls.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 5:05 PM EST up reply actions
Beating a 9-4 Penn State got Alabama to the national championship.
If this is your logic, not sure what to say.
Well
Alabama also played LSU, Auburn, Florida and Arkansas in the regular season. Adding Penn St. to the mix makes it that much harder. He’s saying that a regular ACC schedule with a poor OOC schedule doesn’t match up with a regular SEC schedule with a poor OOC schedule in the voters mind
by cerebralstatic on Jan 26, 2012 5:45 PM EST up reply actions
If that is what you got from my posts, I'm not sure what to say
You think playing PSU over a cupcake had NO impact on their BCS total? They barely beat out OSU. That game very well could have put them over the top.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 5:53 PM EST up reply actions
Losing it would certainly have kept them out, though
I understand your point, but I think FSU gets left out in the cold less frequently by winning out against a lesser schedule (i.e., having the voters put us at #3 despite being 13-0) than we do by playing a second tough OOC game and either losing it or having it affect us negatively (via injuries, less prep time for @CU the next week, etc.).
If our lack of SOS keeps us out ONE year, we can always correct it then. But we have most of the 90s to prove that ONE loss can keep us from winning the NC.
I would Contend
That if a FSU team couldn’t beat a WVU team at home then it isn’t ready to play in a MNC
by cerebralstatic on Jan 26, 2012 6:16 PM EST up reply actions
No one is saying we WILL lose the game
It’s a possibility, sure, but even more so you want to limit the risk of injury (starters would likely sit earlier), get more experience for the back ups, and maximize the likelihood of winning that one game.
Injury
Injury is random at best. A team that plays FAMU of WVU could both see injuries. And when it comes to resting starters we’re talking about a quarter possibly a half. In the long run a half of football should not affect the conditioning of a championship team.
by cerebralstatic on Jan 26, 2012 6:41 PM EST up reply actions
That is why you minimize the risk.....
It is less likely you will have serious injury to your starters with 2 or 2.5 quarters vs a 1-AA team (with 1-AA athletes…..), rather than playing 4 quarters with a BCS-level team.
Also in response to tdchrisdavis, Alabama’s schedule was not “perceived” as harder, because OSU had the higher SoS (The Big 12 was ranked as the strongest conference in the nation). There is no point in playing unnecessary difficult games. Just win the games and try to keep that “0” in the loss column as long as you can.
Yeah, injuries are random
But probably getting hit by bigger, stronger, faster BCS players ups the chances a bit. Not to mention, in a completely random scenario like what you presented, our starters would have 25-50% fewer chances for injuries in a non-WV (rather than WV) type game.
Limit the risk where you can. EJ got hurt with about 5 minutes left in the 3rd. Against a lesser team, he likely would’ve been out by then.
Alabama is one of the biggest problems with the “drop the schedule to the floor, record over resume” idea.
They obviously have one of the best names and traditions in all of CFB, and more money than anyone else. They also play essentially the most challenging conference schedule in the country (best conference and best division of that conference. only LSU could say they play a better conference schedule since they get Florida every year to Alabama’s Tennessee.)
Even with all of that in their favor, Nick Saban (the father of the process) has still gone out and pursued big OOC games and the CFA Kickoff. It doesn’t quite add up.
It doesn’t quite add up.
by 38Noles on Jan 26, 2012 6:00 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
They don't have a natural OOC rival.
No one is saying that we should play all cupcakes OOC. Like Alabama, we should play 1 elite level OOC team.
by BenDNole on Jan 26, 2012 7:10 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This fails to take into account how much tougher Alabama’s conference schedule is than ours.
They can meet (or quite likely exceed) the same level of difficulty we are after with Florida and 3 cupcakes with just their conference schedule. Yet Saban doesn’t seem content to stop there.
Thats fine.....
An undefeated FSU will trump a one loss ANY TEAM (Including Bama or whatever historical power you want to throw in).
We have a natural rival who is (usually) an elite level OOC team. They are the florida gators.
That may very well be. I still think the case of Alabama is a problem for those who tout “record > resume,” and a huge problem for those who act like anyone who challenges the idea doesn’t understand CFB in 2012.
Nick Saban gets this game better than anyone, and he appears to be scheduling far more aggressively than a team in Alabama’s position needs to.
Saban is a CFB genius I agree
But I will never understand the logic of the Penn State (which may have been for historic/Paterno reasons) games and their upcoming Michigan game.
Schedule strength just doesnt mean what it used to anymore. Voters dont watch every game, they really only care about who won and who lost.
In todays CFB world, FSU losing to Oregon, WVU, Bama, Texas, USC…or whomever is ALWAYS worse than FSU blowing out a 1-AA team for a win
$$ combined with exposure.
Both the Michigan and Virginia Tech games are opening weekend “Kickoff classics” where the schools are getting paid similar to what they’d get for a home game vs. random cupcake without having to pay said cupcake. Michigan’s getting $4.7 million, though Alabama’s payout wasn’t in Michigan’s contract when the Detroit papers FOIA’d it but it’s at least the same. Combine that with a national TV game and ta-da.
The next scheduled Alabama road game is at Michigan State in 2017 as far as non-conference scheduling goes. They’ve got Western Kentucky, FAU and Western Carolina as their other three next year and Chattanooga in 2013.
If all sports fandom is a form of emotional gambling, football is poker and hockey is Russian roulette.
We need money and exposure far, far more than Alabama does, but something tells me if Florida State was rumored to be playing Michigan in Dallas it would be seen as “scheduling dumb” around here.
Well it would be.
If we make the same money playing Michigan in Texas, as we would as playing Chattanooga in Tally, why would we not play Chattanooga?
If our goal is the NC game, starting out potentially 0-1 is very detrimental to that. I would rather have FSU undefeated then have to potentially have a 1-loss team and have to compete for votes with some other 1-loss team.
Of course, since everyone agrees Saban is sharp
We should consider whether Saban analyzes teams and predicts when they will not be at their peak.
Is it ballsy of him to play VT? Probably not. Bama has a great staff, and they FAR out talent VT. Clem in 2008? Us in 2007? Penn St. in 10-11? Oh, and then there was Duke in 2010.
Sure, predictions are tricky, but analyzing name-recognition teams and estimating which programs are currently (and for the foreseeable future) down… I wouldn’t put it past Saban.
I mean, now might be a good time to schedule Rutgers for 2013 or 14… not a traditional power, but has some recent good press, but just lost the HC who has made them decent over the last several years.
Michigan was agreed to when Rich Rod was burning everything.
If all sports fandom is a form of emotional gambling, football is poker and hockey is Russian roulette.
I wouldn't be surprised
This is how I think UF “finds a way” to schedule Miami every now and then.
by BobLoblaw113 on Jan 26, 2012 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
Thats not what I read. Actually, most of what I read about Bama/OSU was OSU played the tougher schedule, the SEC was down this year, and the only good thing Bama had going for them is they were 3 points from being undefeated and those 3 points were against LSU (Undisputed #1). OSU lost to Iowa State, who was unranked.
FSU is rarely going to be the one left out
To maximizie your chances of making the NCG you have to go for the likely outcomes not the rare outcomes. Sure there might be years when a 1 loss FSU gets edged out by tOSU or Michigan or USC or Texas or Bama. But that will be more than offset by the years we get in to the game because the 1 loss teams are FSU and Utah or Iowa or TAM or ASU.
F the Deacs - Notre Dame, Rutgers and UConn to the ACC
Add on
FSU that is undefeated is going to play for the title 99 out of 100 times. FSU with 1 loss or any team with 1 loss is going to be at the mercy of the coaches and harris pole. Its better to control your dystany than to trust these two groups.
F the Deacs - Notre Dame, Rutgers and UConn to the ACC
OK, and where's the benefit? If we beat VT, CU, UF, UM, ACCCG, we go to BCSNG.
If we trip up and lose to WVU because of something stupid (missed field goal, bad call by ACC refs), we don’t go. If we skip them on the schedule, we do go.
So, again, what is the benefit? Being the toughest 1-loss team to ever make the Orange Bowl?
see above. WINNING the game is a benefit
Crazy, I know.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 4:55 PM EST up reply actions
which would you prefer?
playing 1 more tough OOC game or having a much higher likelihood of making it to the MNC game?
You tell em I'm coming, and Hell's comin with me!!!!
by DownByTheRiverWalkinOnWater on Jan 26, 2012 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
Or...
How about Florida St. lose one game and a SEC team loses one game and FSU miss out on the MNC because of the perceived idea that the SEC regular season is more daunting than the ACC schedule. The argument is a double edged sword
by cerebralstatic on Jan 26, 2012 5:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
No, if we win all those other games we go anyway. Beating WVU doesn't change that we still go without beating them.
So there is, in fact, NO benefit of playing the game. There is a lot to lose by playing the game. Even if we win say something like 31-21, but we were only up 31-10 midway through the third quarter, EJ is still in and gets crushed because a three td lead isn’t enough in the third for that high powered offense. EJ is out five weeks, we won the game anyway but got NO benefit in the game as we go on to lose two of the next five.
Not worth playing the game.
It really isn't
What if FSU, Bama and USC all finished undefeated. A win over WVU sure would look better than a win over Troy or whoever we schedule in their place.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 5:54 PM EST up reply actions
Our odds of losing one game are like 100x greater than that happening.
That fact that I'm paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't a conspiracy against us
by stevegrizzle on Jan 26, 2012 6:23 PM EST up reply actions
Really
have you seen the last championship game?
by cerebralstatic on Jan 26, 2012 6:43 PM EST up reply actions
Cincinatti is the only team from a BCS conference
in the BCS era to be undefeated and not make the BCS Title game. That was because the #1 and #2 teams all season long were the SEC leader of the week between Florida/Alabama and Texas.
So yes, in the incredibly unlikely scenario where Florida is a bad football team still and two other “King” programs are ranked 1 and 2 to start the year and run the table, Florida State might get left out.
And the last championship game involved a team that lost in the regular season and would have been passed by an undefeated BCS conference champ anyway, so I’m not sure what you’re actually trying to prove.
If all sports fandom is a form of emotional gambling, football is poker and hockey is Russian roulette.
True. Was that before or after they took every kind of SoS out of the schedule?
If all sports fandom is a form of emotional gambling, football is poker and hockey is Russian roulette.
schedule= BCS formula. Doh.
If all sports fandom is a form of emotional gambling, football is poker and hockey is Russian roulette.
It was before
If Auburn had played anyone at all ooc they would have gone, but they played the 3 bad Louisiana teams (Tech, Monroe, Lafayette) and I think a 1AA. Funny thing is that they played a home and home with GT, but it was 2003 and 2005. That would have been enough to spring them (assuming that they won).
by BobLoblaw113 on Jan 26, 2012 8:51 PM EST up reply actions
Exactly.
Assuming they won. However, GT beat Auburn both games. The probability of losing to GT in 2004 was FAR, FAR greater than Auburn being left out of the MNC game.
Yeah for sure
I’ve actually had this argument with a few Auburn fans. Not to mention that if they did get to the NC game, they just would have gotten dismantled by USC the same way Oklahoma was.
by BobLoblaw113 on Jan 27, 2012 7:28 PM EST up reply actions
And what are the odds of us being one of 3 or more 1-loss teams?
Last I checked, there are multiple 1-loss teams every year.
It’s like some of you are assuming we run the table. What if our 1 loss isn’t WVU, but Miami? All of a sudden, we need that WVU game to boost our SOS.
I have a sinking feeling that one day, maybe not this year or the next, we will be the ones getting screwed out of a title game appearance with the nod being given to to an SEC/Big 10 team who played a “tougher” (according to the media) schedule.
And as I said above int he post that started this… I understand the reason for an easier schedule. Yes, I can see how playing WVU could come back to haunt us. However, if I can acknowledge that you all should be able to acknowledge that it can also help us, with our SOS and team morale/confidence.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 8:53 PM EST up reply actions
thats the point....
If there are multiple 1-loss teams you dont want to be mixed up with them. So try to be a 0-loss team and let the rest work itself out.
The easier the sched, the more likely that is.
I understand that 0 losses is better than 1 loss
But beating WVU > beating a cupcake.
It’s like you guys are predicting we run the table, but the WVU would be the only hard one.
What if I told you right now we lose 1 ACC game. Would you want to play WVU then?
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 11:30 PM EST up reply actions
That is not how voters vote though
Voters don’t really vote based on the conference the team is in at least at the top end of the poll. Sure they might slip in the 4th or 5th place team in from the SEC or Big 12 because of conference rep or they might use it as their own tie breaker or some such.
But, at the end of the day the voters are easy to read. They vote based on 2 things. Where a team was ranked last week and if they won or lost. You lose you drop. You win you stay the same unless teams above you lost. Its very rare for teams to jump other teams and it usally requires just steam rolling teams.
F the Deacs - Notre Dame, Rutgers and UConn to the ACC
On WVU - the BIGGEST reason to drop the series isn't just 2012, it's 2013.
Apart from having to play 3 BCS OOC games in 2012, 2013 gets bad.
If we leave WVU on the schedule for 2013, we will have 6 ROAD games. Among those: WVU, GT, Clemson, UF. If you can’t see why removing the WVU series doesn’t make sense, I can’t help you.
This
Next year’s game doesn’t bother me as much as the 2013 game, which would mean an absolute disaster of a schedule.
by Jonathan Loesche on Jan 26, 2012 6:22 PM EST up reply actions
They both bother me and anyone that doesn't get it (not referring to you) is either trolling or not capable of such "high level" thought
Either way I wish we could just ban anyone who debates this in the year of our lord 2012
That fact that I'm paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't a conspiracy against us
by stevegrizzle on Jan 26, 2012 6:26 PM EST up reply actions
I agree that we should get out of the WVU game and look to schedule smarter, but would you say that Nick Saban isn’t capable of high level thought when he stocks his already loaded schedule with challenging OOC games year after year?
The man has shaped
As I've stated elsewhere
I’ll have less of a problem playing a WVU-type team once we’ve reached the level that Bama has. Which shouldn’t be long, but until we’ve proved it on the field we can’t say we’re there yet.
That’s what I’m aiming for as well.
But Saban was scheduling aggressively OOC even before Alabama was back to juggernaut status.
In 2007 it was FSU in a neutral site game he didn’t have to play, and in 2008 it was Clemson (a game Alabama was the underdog in, as crazy as it is to think now).
Did Saban schedule those early games?
He started there in 2007, so they would’ve been last minute adds. (Though Bama’s later scheduling does indicate that he would’ve been okay with those games.)
I ignored the entire conversation above, but I have to respond to this
not capable of such “high level” thought
completely wrong, and arrogant of you to say that. There is a reasonable debate here. Additionally, the post that started all of this:
I don’t care if it’s the “smart” thing to do
Whenever I see the obsession with getting out of "hard" games it makes me very uneasy. So much for anybody, anywhere, anytime
TRMNole has also discussed this ad nauseum. Its not that people dont “get it”, they just dont agree. So how about we all relax.
"However, I say, let UM burn." -onebarrelrum
thank you
I was about to toss my laptop when I saw steve’s post
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 8:46 PM EST up reply actions
I'd also like to reiterate something I said earlier that didn't receive any attention
Removing this game from the schedule is not a good message to send to the team. I think some of you get too caught up in numbers and percentages and forget that there is a human element to all of this. I’ve said for years that this team is very soft. No killer instinct, a poor track record of “showing up” every game, mentally weak, etc. The administration fighting to get an easier schedule is not going to help.
Yes, I understand some of you can skew this into the administration doing whatever it takes to win which should be a good example for the players, but get real, that’s a terrible attitude to have. The administration can set a positive example by providing new weight rooms, facilities, advertising campaigns, etc.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 8:59 PM EST up reply actions
The administration is not going to publically push to drop the game.
They’ll sit and wait for WVU to make the first move. The game is going to be cancelled for a very simple reason. West Virginia is going from 7 conference games to 9. They have a home game vs. Marshall that is all but state enforced. That’s not being dropped. They have a neutral site game vs. James Madison at Fed Ex Field (speaking of stupid scheduling…) That’s not getting dropped because cancelling a game at a NFL stadium is likely a PITA. That leaves @FSU and home vs. Maryland in part of a series through 2017.
If they keep the road FSU game and reschedule the Maryland game instead and end up as one of the 5 Big XII teams with 5 road conference games, they will have 5 home games at Mountaineer Field. Combined with FSU potentially having 6 home games in 2013, the whole thing will go away because it was poorly planned.
If all sports fandom is a form of emotional gambling, football is poker and hockey is Russian roulette.
I can understand that teams can be too soft, but that's the last term I'd use to describe FSU right now.
And how do you call a team soft for years, when we’ve just finished the 2nd year under a new head coach?
Incapable of high level thought.
The first FSU team in years that hasn’t quit, and he’s calling them soft.
2013 is the key to the wvu argument. Playing 6 road games, likely against 4 top 25 teams?
Incapable of high level thought? lmao
Yes, we were soft. Not as badly as in years past, but it was still there.
Did you watch the wake game? Did you see how the defense responded after their great OU performance vs Clemson? Did you see the way the offense performed in the end of the year?
We had a really nice comeback vs Notre Dame. Yes, I was proud of the team that day. But that game is really clouding a lot of your judgements. We played 13 games, don’t let the last one overshadow the rest.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
I also forgot to mention the Virginia game
Play poor the entire game vs a team with far inferior talent.
When the game is on the line and it’s time to close it out, what happens? We fold and let Virginia march right down the field.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 11:37 PM EST up reply actions
PS
I think resorting to personal attacks instead of actually refuting arguments is a pretty good indicator of someone who is incapable of high level thought.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 26, 2012 11:35 PM EST up reply actions
Do you know what is a good message to send to the team?
Do what you need to do to win. If you can exploit the system, legally, do it.
I addressed that point in the very post you quoted
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 27, 2012 12:43 AM EST up reply actions
Yes, I understand some of you can skew this into the administration doing whatever it takes to win which should be a good example for the players, but get real, that’s a terrible attitude to have. The administration can set a positive example by providing new weight rooms, facilities, advertising campaigns, etc.
What example is that setting? What the F are you talking about? How do advertising campaigns send the right message to the team? Learning how to compete effectively against your COMPETITION is NEVER a bad lesson.
Cutting corners and finding the easy way out
Is not a good message. That’s my point. If you don’t think that’s the message it sends then fine, we can agree to disagree.
If I was on the team and I saw the administration trying to get out of games I’d be pissed.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 27, 2012 12:55 AM EST up reply actions
Really?
I wouldn’t be pissed.
My view, if I was a player:
Please, schedule lightly so that I am more likely to make it to a BCS game, get drafted higher, and make more money.
No
Its not about finding the easy way out.
Its about taking the path of least resistance and not putting yourself in situations you do NOT need to be in.
If it was that cut and dry, Nick Saban and Les Miles would take the path of least resistance. Over the last few years they haven’t done anything close to that.
Sounds about right
You guys need to put up some pink ribbons in your avatars in honor of the FV 4
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 27, 2012 1:13 AM EST up reply actions
You, Boom, Shammy, Sickem, Gator were the originals to get whacked.
Boom and Gator are already back with aliases though. You should try it.
boom wasnt even involved
just saw your parking lot post. i can only view 1st post on each page when logged in as guest
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 27, 2012 1:16 AM EST up reply actions
You contradict yourself in the same post.
Reasonable debates don’t hing on emotion over logic
“I don’t care if it’s the "smart" thing to do
Whenever I see the obsession with getting out of “hard” games it makes me very uneasy. So much for anybody, anywhere, anytime"
I’m done this is a waste of time.
That fact that I'm paranoid doesn't mean that there isn't a conspiracy against us
by stevegrizzle on Jan 27, 2012 12:18 AM EST up reply actions
Tomorrow we'll run a win prediction poll for 2012, so we can have a discussion about how record expectations work.
Saturday we’ll invite [insert Miami blogger’s name] to discuss the significance of recruiting rankings.
And Monday, we’ll discuss why “scoreboard” and total yards are the best indicator of team strength.
by BenDNole on Jan 26, 2012 7:08 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
And Tuesday we'll anticipate one of the most impressive recruiting classes of all time.
Cheers to everyone :-D
by FSUActuary on Jan 26, 2012 8:34 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I still say we need a permanent article to refer people to here at TN about why scheduling smarter is superior to scheduling tough OOC games. Some people still do not get it.
Times have changed, and so has the criteria to get to the big game. Study Schedule smarter, not harder!
I agree.
Someone wrote an article on it before. I think it was either MattDNole or RaysnNoles. I can’t remember. It was a new perspective, and probably should be stickied.
Is it his intellectual property or does it belong to the magazine?
We just need a link to provide people, b/c it is amazing how this still comes up.
I’d be interested to see an article that addressed the topic and also noted that Nick Saban and Les Miles seem to represent two extremely high profile examples that there is more than one way to skin the scheduling cat.
Are we really going to keep acting like this is the most obvious thing in the world and anyone who debates it is clueless or just looking for an argument, while two of the best coaches in the game right now appear to be going in the opposite direction?
When you already play in the SEC West, scheduling one tough OOC game is like us scheduling two or three.
So in other words, scheduling harder OOC games impresses writers
And can help move a team up the polls.
Unless you’re FSU apparently.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 27, 2012 6:53 PM EST up reply actions
And before you mention that FSU is already playing Florida
There is a decent chance they won’t even be ranked, and the media hates the ACC. If Bama only needs one impressive OOC game, FSU needs at least 2.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 27, 2012 6:54 PM EST up reply actions
Not if you run the table in the ACC league is the point. If you run the table in the ACC & beat UF that’s good enough to get in the BCS title game if you’re FSU. A loss vs. UF & another high profile BCS school and probably not looking at any BCS bowl anymore. Then you have to absolutely win the ACCG to get to a BCS bowl.
Minimize chances for losses vs. potential $ gained. It’s smart business.
If you run the table in the SEC west you are good enough to get into the BCS title game
Yet Saban still does it.
FSU hasn’t finished a year with 4 or fewer losses since when, 2003? This isn’t even an issue for 2012.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 27, 2012 7:05 PM EST up reply actions
*Saban still does it = schedule hard OOC games
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 27, 2012 7:06 PM EST up reply actions
How far in advance are these games scheduled?
A couple points. First, Bama/Saban normally schedules one difficult OOC game (yes, we have uf). Second, Bama’s recent big OOC games have featured:
2011: PSU (9-4)
2010: PSU (7-6), Duke (LOL)
2009: VT (always overrated)
2008: Clemson (7-6)
2007: (Saban’s first year; doubt he had any say)
Not a single game on there that Bama should lose. How do you know Saban doesn’t analyze and prognosticate to select opponents who look good but will probably be down?
As I said elsewhere, now would be a great time to schedule Rutgers for 2013-14. They’ve been respectable lately, but just lost the coach who brought them up to that level. Good chance they sink back down, unless they get a great hire. But we’d still get the shine of beating a “solid” Rutgers program.
So was Les Miles predicting that Oregon would be down this year?
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 28, 2012 9:07 AM EST up reply actions
People usually don't claim that Les Miles is smart.
I mean, he doesn’t even read books…
LSU won a BCS title with 2 losses
not too long ago. Bama just won an MNC with 1-loss, without winning their division or league, while playing all of 5 bowl teams from their conference (2 of them 6-6 teams), and one somewhat tough OOC game.
If there’s an argument to be made, it’s that SEC teams can afford to schedule harder since they are punished less for losses.
LSU scheduled extremely hard in 2012 and look where it got them…a rematch with a team they beat who played a lighter schedule than they did.
And we beat them just a few years ago
When we were down. had they been up a year or 2 earlier they would have had to face us and if we would have beat them as we were still able to beat anyone at any given time we could have cost them a title shot for playing us as OOC when we could have beat them.
A Seminole warrior killed in battle is a legend remembered. A Gator lost in battle becomes a pair of boots and a belt.
twitter of random stuff and tons of confessing FSU love Follow @caine115
F THE ACC ..|.. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Post time 1:33 AM
I’m assuming you were drunk or something here. I read this 5 times and still don’t understand what you are saying.
by tdchrisdavis on Jan 28, 2012 9:06 AM EST up reply actions
Saban doesn't buy the soft sell argument
Played Clemson and VT in KickOff Classics, Penn State this year and opens with Michigan in TX next year, all while playing in the SEC West. All this in the 21st century. Of course it helps to win the games.
Bama can afford to lose one of those games
And Bama made a lot of money playing Clemson and VT but you’ll notice they also played 3 other cupcakes at home OOC and did not play UF in the regular season those years. The “SEC West” then was Arkansas in Petrino’s bad first two years and Auburn in Tubby’s last (5-7)/Chizik’s first (7-5) and the Mississippi schools.
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE TOMAHAWK NATION STORE
