• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

SEC (It just means more.. even its losses are wins)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
ScriptOhio said:
Click to expand...


Nutriaitch said:
what ranking are they using?
AP at time of game?
CFB Playoff at end of season?
Click to expand...

I have no idea; however, here's another article (very similiar but for all CFP years) that uses "SEC team’s record against teams that actually finished the season in the AP Top 25".

How does each SEC team perform against the real Top 25? Breaking down an interesting Playoff era trend

Here’s the team-by-team breakdown:
  • Alabama — 18-5 (.783)
  • Georgia — 9-6 (.600)
  • Ole Miss — 8-11 (.421)
  • Auburn — 7-14 (.333)
  • LSU — 6-12 (.333)
  • Arkansas — 5-15 (.250)
  • Florida — 4-12 (.250)
  • Tennessee — 4-12 (.250)
  • South Carolina — 4-12 (.250)
  • Mississippi State — 3-12 (.200)
  • Texas A&M — 2-14 (.125)
  • Kentucky — 1-12 (.078)
  • Mizzou — 0-10 (.000)
  • Vanderbilt — 0-11 (.000)

Entire article: https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/s...od-teams-ap-top-25-interesting-playoff-trend/
 
Upvote 0
jenkinswoody said:
"Texas A&M — 2-14 (.125)"

Wow...
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised Texas A & M is that low; I'm surprised
d54wow.gif
Ole Miss, Tennessee, and Arkansas are that high:
  • Ole Miss — 8-11 (.421)
  • Tennessee — 4-12 (.250)
  • Arkansas — 5-15 (.250)
 
Upvote 0
DZ83CK said:
Is there a reason why Bama plays Tennessee every year, other than it would hurt the league's playoff chances to have them play Georgia in the regular season once every 3-4 years instead of once every 7 years?
Click to expand...


A. Traditional Rivalry

B. when divisions were first split, top 3 historically from each division was given a permanent foe from opposite division.
Bama got Tennessee
Auburn and Georgia is the “oldest rivalry in deep south”
LSU and Florida has played every year (with a few exceptions) since the late 40s

so those became the permanent rivalries.

literally nobody complained until Bama became what they are now coinciding with Tennessee being worse than liquid dog shit most year.
 
Upvote 0
Nutriaitch said:
A. Traditional Rivalry

B. when divisions were first split, top 3 historically from each division was given a permanent foe from opposite division.
Bama got Tennessee
Auburn and Georgia is the “oldest rivalry in deep south”
LSU and Florida has played every year (with a few exceptions) since the late 40s

so those became the permanent rivalries.

literally nobody complained until Bama became what they are now coinciding with Tennessee being worse than liquid dog shit most year.
Click to expand...
You know what would have been good for traditional rivalries? Not expanding the conference to include Mizzou and A&M. They should have not expanded if inter-division rivalries were that important.

Bama being a permanent rival with Tennessee makes just a little more sense than OSU and Illinois having a protected annual rivalry game.

The SEC should re-evaluate this permanent rivalry setup because it helps ease the schedule for Bama while making it harder for those other 4 teams to win the conference every year. I don't think any of those 3 "rivalry" games really need to be played every season. You can't keep some inter-division rivalries and have a 14-team league and just 8 league games without some teams almost never playing each other.
 
Upvote 0
DZ83CK said:
You know what would have been good for traditional rivalries? Not expanding the conference to include Mizzou and A&M. They should have not expanded if inter-division rivalries were that important.

Bama being a permanent rival with Tennessee makes just a little more sense than OSU and Illinois having a protected annual rivalry game.

The SEC should re-evaluate this permanent rivalry setup because it helps ease the schedule for Bama while making it harder for those other 4 teams to win the conference every year. I don't think any of those 3 "rivalry" games really need to be played every season. You can't keep some inter-division rivalries and have a 14-team league and just 8 league games without some teams almost never playing each other.
Click to expand...


i was OK with adding A&M, because they are actually a traditional rival of LSU.

but Missouri was just a freaking Joke.
 
Upvote 0
DZ83CK said:
You know what would have been good for traditional rivalries? Not expanding the conference to include Mizzou and A&M. They should have not expanded if inter-division rivalries were that important.

Bama being a permanent rival with Tennessee makes just a little more sense than OSU and Illinois having a protected annual rivalry game.

The SEC should re-evaluate this permanent rivalry setup because it helps ease the schedule for Bama while making it harder for those other 4 teams to win the conference every year. I don't think any of those 3 "rivalry" games really need to be played every season. You can't keep some inter-division rivalries and have a 14-team league and just 8 league games without some teams almost never playing each other.
Click to expand...

I don't care how good they are from time to time, I like having LSU on the schedule every year. Hell, we schedule them for homecoming some years.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top