forums

2025 Schedule

Advertisement
ghost2 said:
Is *rough* y'all, at least right now on paper:

Notre Dame
Bethune-Cookman
USF
Florida
@ FSU
Louisville
NC State
@ Pitt
@ SMU
Stanford
Syracuse
@ VTech

We could play as many as 5 ranked teams next year, depending on how things shake out maybe more. ND, UF (bleh), SMU, Cuse, maybe Pitt? Louisville, @VT, and NCST will also be tough outs IMO.
Click to expand...
Great, we won’t have to hear our schedule is weak, and if we win 10 games we’re definitely in the playoffs
 
Flynell7 said:
They don’t have to schedule tough non conference games because it just means more playing in the SEC.
Click to expand...
SEC hasn’t added a 9th conference game. Just crème puffs.

UGA plays Austin Peay, Charlotte, Marshal and GT.

TN plays UAB, NMST, ETSU and Syr.

Missouri plays Central Arkansas, Louisiana, UMass and Kansas.

Ole Miss plays GST, Tulane, Citadel, Washington St.
 
RF-4CCane said:
SEC hasn’t added a 9th conference game. Just crème puffs.

UGA plays Austin Peay, Charlotte, Marshal and GT.

TN plays UAB, NMST, ETSU and Syr.

Missouri plays Central Arkansas, Louisiana, UMass and Kansas.

Ole Miss plays GST, Tulane, Citadel, Washington St.
Click to expand...
Trust me I know, I was being sarcastic
 
Advertisement
It all plays into the perception of the SEC, that everybody buys into.

They gerrymander their schedules to make it look like they play the toughest & best competition, but they're no different from any other teams in other conferences.

The SEC is just a top heavy conference, like they always are. It's 3, sometimes 4 teams at max that are actually "good", the rest are middling. They just play such weak schedules on an annual basis their records look better than they actually are.

The majority of the SEC are average teams, it's a couple good ones at the top, but the rest of the conference is right in the middle with everybody else.

The only reason why people think they're so great & powerful, is because of well crafted media propaganda.
 
Memnon said:
The SEC is just a top heavy conference, like they always are. It's 3, sometimes 4 teams at max that are actually "good", the rest are middling.
Click to expand...
In the SP+ Top25 to end the season:
SEC had 11 (69% of the conf)
Big Ten had 6
ACC had 4
Big 12 had 3
+ ND

9 of 18 Blue Chip Ratio teams are SEC, 5 Big Ten, 3 ACC, + ND

15 1st round picks, NFL record 79 total picks in the '25 draft

The SEC is playing good football, stacking talent, and producing picks. There's no 'bias' they're doing it in all 3 areas (acquisition, development and deployment)

The last time the SEC didn't win the natty two years in a row was FSU-OSU in 13-14... the previous 2 in a row was USC-Texas in 04-05.

3 in a row you have to go back to 99-2002 (although Oklahoma is now in the SEC, we won't count that chit)
 
Ironmanfootball said:
In the SP+ Top25 to end the season:
SEC had 11 (69% of the conf)
Big Ten had 6
ACC had 4
Big 12 had 3
+ ND

9 of 18 Blue Chip Ratio teams are SEC, 5 Big Ten, 3 ACC, + ND

15 1st round picks, NFL record 79 total picks in the '25 draft

The SEC is playing good football, stacking talent, and producing picks. There's no 'bias' they're doing it in all 3 areas (acquisition, development and deployment)

The last time the SEC didn't win the natty two years in a row was FSU-OSU in 13-14... the previous 2 in a row was USC-Texas in 04-05.

3 in a row you have to go back to 99-2002 (although Oklahoma is now in the SEC, we won't count that chit)
Click to expand...
All that proves is that you bought into the propaganda machine, congratulations.

In terms of the 11 SP+ teams, that's exactly what I mean about gerrymandering their schedules. They had good records, because they don't actually play anybody all year & because their toughest games are only actually within their conference, it makes them look better than they are.

9 out of 18 Blue-chip ratio teams are SEC, does that mean there are 9 SEC teams that are better than teams in every other conference? If so, who? Who are these Blue-chip juggernauts & who are they so much better than?

As far as them winning Natty's, who were the champions? Which SEC teams have been winning titles over the decade timespan?

Was it a large mix of the SEC, or was it like 3 teams at most?
 
Advertisement
RF-4CCane said:
I point out 16 OOC games against mediocre and crème puff teams and you latch on to two mediocre teams we inexplicably lost to.

Never mind that we’ve beaten Syracuse 5 of the last 6 games.
Click to expand...
IMG_7109.jpeg
 
Memnon said:
All that proves is that you bought into the propaganda machine, congratulations.

In terms of the 11 SP+ teams, that's exactly what I mean about gerrymandering their schedules. They had good records, because they don't actually play anybody all year & because their toughest games are only actually within their conference, it makes them look better than they are.

9 out of 18 Blue-chip ratio teams are SEC, does that mean there are 9 SEC teams that are better than teams in every other conference? If so, who? Who are these Blue-chip juggernauts & who are they so much better than?

As far as them winning Natty's, who were the champions? Which SEC teams have been winning titles over the decade timespan?

Was it a large mix of the SEC, or was it like 3 teams at most?
Click to expand...
the SP+ adjusts per opponent

BCR is just the % of roster that’s 4-5* vs non

Nick Saban helped the numbers.
 
Back
Top