Color me impressed with how Miles handled the schedule question today...

Interesting post... I didn't realize the flip flop between LSU/Bama and Auburn/Arkansas. You can see why this is a hot topic among all the coaches other than at Bama and AU.

Sorry I had to split this up because of the length.

Someone built evidence showing the SEC schedule bias for Alabama and Auburn... (Posted on 7/23/13 at 11:51 am)81
Subject: Evidence mounts of a Scandal in the SEC
In case you haven't heard, there is a Conspiracy theory regarding the "SEC Bridge Schedules".
Conspiracy theories happen all of the time, however, when they become backed up by facts, they are no longer conspiracy theories.
In 2013, there are only 2 teams out of 14 that benefited by "SEC Bridge Schedules", care to take a guess who they are?
After researching every SEC West teams' rotating East opponents, it is clear that in 2013, the "SEC Bridge Schedule" was done with one purpose, to give an easier schedule to Alabama and Auburn.
In 2013, they are the only 2 teams who are playing an easier opponent than they should be playing and it is clear how it was done.
The SEC schedule creator swapped the opponent that Alabama was "Due" to play with LSU, and swapped Auburn's with Arkansas.
Alabama should be playing at Georgia in 2013 and LSU should be playing at Kentucky. Now, it's LSU at Georgia and Alabama at Kentucky.
Auburn should be playing at Florida in 2013 and Arkansas should be playing at Tennessee. Now, it's Arkansas at Florida and Auburn at Tennessee.
All of the facts needed to conclude how this was done are detailed in this email, which was sent to some of the SEC Athletic Directors and Head Coaches, along with some of the Media and those who work in the SEC Office. From here, it will be up to some of those in the media to pursue this and ask questions.

 

The Mountain of Evidence
Below are the 2 rotating SEC East opponents for all teams in the SEC West from 2007-2011. It is the most recent full rotation, and upon review, it becomes obvious if each team's opponent in 2012 and 2013 are justified and make sense. It is also clear to see who benefited most by the "SEC Bridge Schedule", and exactly how it was created.
Miss State
2007 - at South Carolina, Tennessee
2008 - at Tennessee, Vanderbilt
2009 - at Vanderbilt, Florida
2010 - at Florida, Georgia
2011 - at Georgia, South Carolina
2012 - Tennessee
2013 - at South Carolina
Miss State's opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2007, they played Tennessee at home and South Carolina on the road. In 2012, they played Tennessee at home and in 2013, they will play South Carolina on the road.
Ole Miss
2007 - at Georgia, Florida
2008 - at Florida, South Carolina
2009 - at South Carolina, Tennessee
2010 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2011 - at Kentucky, Georgia
2012 - at Georgia
2013 - Missouri
Ole Miss' opponents in 2012 and 2013 make sense. In 2007, they played Georgia on the road and in 2012, they played Georgia on the road. They will play Missouri in 2013 and since someone has to play Missouri, there is no problem.
Auburn
2007 - at Florida, Vanderbilt
2008 - at Vanderbilt, Tennessee
2009 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2010 - at Kentucky, South Carolina
2011 - at South Carolina, Florida
2012 - at Vanderbilt
2013 - at Tennessee
Auburn played at Vanderbilt in 2012 and this does make sense, even tough they were "Due" to play at Florida. The reason is because Florida had to play LSU at home in 2012. Since Florida could only play 1 SEC West team at home in 2012, it does make sense that the "Schedule Creator" moved down to the next road game in the rotation, which was at Vanderbilt.
Auburn playing at Tennessee in 2013 makes zero sense. We'll get back to that after reviewing Arkansas' schedule.
Arkansas
2007 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2008 - at Kentucky, Florida
2009 - at Florida, Georgia
2010 - at Georgia, Vanderbilt
2011 - at Vanderbilt, Tennessee
2012 - Kentucky
2013 - at Florida
Arkansas played Kentucky at home in 2012, just like they did in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, Arkansas plays at Florida, even though they were "Due" to play at Tennessee like in 2007. In 2013, Auburn is "Due" to play at Florida, however, the "Schedule Creator" swapped these games. Now, Auburn is playing at Tennessee, and Arkansas is playing at Florida. The only reason to do this is to give a clear advantage to Auburn in 2013.
Alabama
2007 - at Vanderbilt, Georgia
2008 - at Georgia, Kentucky
2009 - at Kentucky, South Carolina
2010 - at South Carolina, Florida
2011 - at Florida, Vanderbilt
2012 - at Missouri
2013 - at Kentucky
Alabama played at Missouri in 2012 and since someone had to play at Missouri, there is no problem.
In 2013, Alabama is "Due" to play at Vanderbilt, however, in 2013 Vanderbilt has to play their permanent opponent, Ole Miss at home, and since they can only play 1 SEC West team at home, it does make sense that Alabama could not play at Vanderbilt in 2013.
Next in the rotation is for Alabama to play at Georgia in 2013, however, they are playing at Kentucky, which makes zero sense. We'll get back to that after reviewing LSU's schedule.
LSU
2007 - at Kentucky, South Carolina
2008 - at South Carolina, Georgia
2009 - at Georgia, Vanderbilt
2010 - at Vanderbilt, Tennessee
2011 - at Tennessee, Kentucky
2012 - South Carolina
2013 - at Georgia
In 2012, LSU played South Carolina at home, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, LSU plays at Georgia, even though they were "Due" to play at Kentucky, like they did in 2007. In 2013, since Alabama could not play at Vanderbilt (Mentioned Above), next in their rotation was to play at Georgia, however the "Schedule Creator" swapped these games. Now, Alabama is playing at Kentucky, and LSU is playing at Georgia. The only reason to do this is to give a clear advantage to Alabama in 2013.
Texas A&M
2012 - Florida
2013 - Vanderbilt
There is no problem with Texas A&M's schedule. They had to play someone, so why not Florida and Vanderbilt, a tough opponent in 2012, followed by an easier opponent in 2013.
re: Someone built evidence showing the SEC schedule bias for Alabama and Auburn...
Looking at the SEC East teams in 2012 and 2013.
Missouri
2012 - Alabama
2013 - at Ole Miss
There is no problem with Missouri's schedule. They had to play someone, so why not Alabama and Ole Miss, and just like Texas A&M, a tough opponent in 2012, followed by an easier opponent in 2013.
South Carolina
2012 - at LSU
2013 - Miss State
There is no problem with South Carolina's schedule. These are the same exact games that South Carolina played in 2007. This makes sense.
Vanderbilt
2012 - Auburn
2013 - at Texas A&M
There is no problem with Vanderbilt's schedule. In 2012, Auburn was "Due" to play at Florida, however, that could not happen because LSU was playing at Florida. Next in Auburn's rotation was to play at Vanderbilt in 2012, so this makes sense. In 2013, someone has to play Texas A&M, so why not Vanderbilt.
Florida
2012 - at Texas A&M
2013 - Arkansas
In 2012, since someone had to play at Texas A&M, there is no problem here.
In 2013, they are playing Arkansas, while they should be playing Auburn. From Florida's perspective, this is a "Wash", since not much is expected by Arkansas and Auburn in 2013, you can conclude that Florida is not receiving any benefit by playing Arkansas instead of Auburn.
Tennessee
2012 - at Miss State
2013 - Auburn
In 2012, Tennessee played at Miss State, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, they are playing Auburn, while they should be playing Arkansas. Just like Florida, from Tennessee's perspective, this is a "Wash", since not much is expected by Auburn and Arkansas in 2013, you can conclude that Tennessee is not receiving any benefit by playing Auburn instead of Arkansas.
Georgia
2012 - Ole Miss
2013 - LSU
In 2012, Georgia played Ole Miss, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, they are playing LSU instead of Alabama. From Georgia's perspective, this is a "Wash", since both LSU and Alabama are 2 of the best teams in the West, you can conclude that Georgia is not receiving any benefit by playing LSU instead of Alabama.
Kentucky
2012 - at Arkansas
2013 - Alabama
In 2012, Kentucky played at Arkansas, just like in 2007. This makes sense.
In 2013, they are playing Alabama instead of LSU. Just like Georgia, from Kentucky's perspective, this is a "Wash", since both Alabama and LSU are 2 of the best teams in the West, you can conclude that Kentucky is not receiving any benefit by playing Alabama instead of LSU.

 

Conclusion
If you are going to accuse someone of being dishonest or cheating, it is a good idea to have all of the facts to back up your claim.
Conspiracy theories happen all of the time, however, when they become backed up by facts, they are no longer conspiracy theories.
These are the facts and they back up the claim that the "SEC Bridge Schedules" were created with one purpose in mind, to give Alabama an easier schedule.
Granted, in 2012, someone from the West had to play Missouri, in addition to Texas A&M, and on paper it could have been any of the other 6 teams in the West. So, while it may difficult to claim that scheduling Alabama at Missouri in 2012 was dishonest or improper, when you combine it with the scheduling fiasco in 2013, it becomes crystal clear that Alabama's games against Missouri and Kentucky in 2012 and 2013, were both scheduled to provide a clear benefit to Alabama.
In 2013, Alabama and Auburn are the only 2 teams that received a benefit by the "SEC Bridge Schedule". With the sole purpose of providing Alabama with an easier schedule, perhaps the "Schedule Creator" decided to included another team, so that it would not be so obvious as to what he was doing. The fact that he picked Auburn is just another slap in the face to everyone in the SEC, outside of the state of Alabama.
To sum up, Alabama and Auburn received an improper scheduling benefit in 2013. This was accomplished by a blatant form of dishonesty or cheating by the creator of the "SEC Bridge Schedule". There is no doubt about it, and it is crystal clear how it was done and which teams were affected. Any response by the SEC Office to justify these actions will not have the facts on their side.
What was the motivation for doing this?
In 2013, Alabama and LSU are expected to be 2 of the best teams in the SEC West. Any loss could impact who wins the division and advances to the SEC Championship Game, and perhaps to the BCS National Championship Game. There are 6 teams from the SEC that could start the season in the Top 10, (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, LSU, South Carolina, Texas A&M).
In 2013, playing less games against these 6 teams is advantageous to playing more games against them. With that in mind, here are the results of the "SEC Bridge Schedule".
Number of games against the Top 6 SEC teams
2 - Alabama (LSU, Texas A&M)
2 - Texas A&M (Alabama, LSU)
2 - South Carolina (Florida, Georgia)
3 - Florida (Georgia, LSU, South Carolina)
3 - Georgia (Florida, LSU, South Carolina)
4 - LSU (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Texas A&M)
Again, any response by the SEC Office to justify the "Bridge Schedule" will not have the facts on their side.

 

Also don't forget that Alabama made a huge fuss about Bye Weeks...No huddle, etc...