615 Vol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 7,492
- Likes
- 100
Lil Lane never does that, does he? (Officials conspiring for UF & UA; cheating UT from it's rightful "do-over" FG kick vs UA...etc.)ost-4-1090547912:
Imagine level of "It's a conspiracy!!!" rant that would be spewed on this board if UT were in Bama's shoes on this SEC bye week situation.ost-4-1090547912:
Since 2007, Bama has faced 17 SEC opponents coming off byes. The next closest are LSU who faced five and UT who faced four.
Next season, Bama faces six straight SEC opponents comming off byes.
The SEC ADs agreed with Bama AD Mal Moore that it is unfair and needs to be addressed.
A legitimate gripe IMO, they have played 17 games where teams had a bye week since 07.the next team has played 5 in that time span. We are scheduled to play six next year.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
:hi:I'm not sure where you are getting your information. I just looked back at the past three years schedules and found 10 SEC teams that had a bye before their game with bama. Not sure if you're 17 is non-conference also but that is up to the individual schools to schedule those game.
Although 10 is still a good amount for 3 years, it isn't the end of the world, and it definitely isn't 17.
There are considerations such as the team with the bye perhaps getting out of sync/rythm somewhat by not playing for a week, but I think most coaches would say the team with the bye has several key advantages. Those include the ability for players to get some rest and recovery from injuries, extra time for coaches to gameplan and add wrinkles, and extra time for the players to study/prepare/practice against a better prepared scout team. Consider that the teams that gave Bama the biggest challenge this season were UT and Auburn, who both had byes prior to playing Bama.IMO, a bye week is not always good. Its not that cut and dry, that it is a good thing for the team with the open week.
It's all good. The first guy to post said "they have played 17 games since 2007". The way he wrote that he was implying they had played 17 in the previous 3 years. You can see where there would be some confusion.
Which would you prefer----That schedule or a promise of no HOLDING CALLS?