Obviously, this is just an exercise in stats, but Bill Connelly takes this year’s SEC F+ ratings and games out the 2012 season. If you’re a Georgia fan, it comes out just like you’d hope.
East Conf. Rec. Record Diff Georgia 7-1 10-2 South Carolina 5-3 9-3 -1 Win Vanderbilt 5-3 9-3 +3 Wins Florida 4-4 7-5 +1 Win Missouri 4-4 7-5 Tennessee 1-7 5-7 Kentucky 0-8 3-9 -2 Wins
Sure, there are a few things that will be in play not reflected there (for example, I think Bill’s statistical optimism about Vandy is going to run into the reality of the 2012 team being far less experienced than 2011’s), but it gives you a good idea of how powerful an impact next season’s schedule will have.
By the way, I’m assuming the non-conference loss is to Georgia Tech. If so, we’ll see. (Next time, I’ll read the comments section.)
Get The Picture 
Why not Buffalo?
LikeLike
Seems a lot more likely than losing to Tech.
LikeLike
I think Bill was just carrying over OOC results from the previous year.
LikeLike
How accurate would that be? Except for Tech the teams are all different. Kind of invalidates the analysis, don’t you think?
LikeLike
Unless we suspend the whole first team on the depth chart, we aren’t losing to the nerds next year. They know it. We know it. Paul Johnson has a better chance of being named Miss Congeniality at next year’s ACC Media Days than the pencil necks do of beating UGA in 2012.
LikeLike
Read the comments. Bill wasn’t predicting an OOC loss so much as carrying over the loss from Boise. He was focusing more on providing a benchmark as to how the new schedule conference benfitted certain teams.
LikeLike
Bill has us losing to South Carolina by 10, then South Carolina losing to Florida by 2, then Florida losing to us by 4. I know these are the thinnest of the thinnest speculations, but these transitivity situations always bring a smile.
LikeLike
I know what you mean. For example, in 2011 Florida beat Vandy fairly soundly. Vandy beat Wake Forest fairly soundly. Wake Forest beat FSU and FSU beat Florida (at Florida).
Transitive property is one way to describe it. I tend to enjoy a phrase I coined 20 years ago; the calculus of common opponents.
LikeLike
We are 0 – 1 in 2012.
I did not set that standard, our HC did.
LikeLike
Let it go, Aus. You’re usually positive. This blew up in his face. That last thing he needs is our own fans dwelling on it. We’ll regroup and be back in 2012.
LikeLike
Michigan employed virtually the exact OT strategy is exactly the same set of circumstances last night and won the Sugar Bowl. The kicker made the FG and all is well in the north land again with Big Blue hailed as a program on the rise. While I didn’t like the strategy anymore last night than I did on Monday in Tampa, it was not the playcalling/strategy that made the difference it was the result of the kicker. To jump off the deep end over whether a kick was made or not seems extreme to me. (To be fair, in the Sugar Bowl the kick was made off carpet with no wind to consider.) We need to be worried about the offensive line, not the coach’s decisions, everyone will look better if we can block effectively.
I would also say that Beamer’s decision to try the fake punt at the end was equally wrong with UGA’s to not be aggressive in OT #1. Bowls are so weird by definition, perhaps they interfere with brain waves.
LikeLike
Last night, neither coach elected to kick the field goal on third down. Both tried to pick up as much yardage as they could to shorten the kick.
LikeLike
I said “virtually” the exact strategy, and I will stick to that. Michigan’s 3 offensive plays looked nothing like the series of calls I saw throughout the game. They knew they could not run the ball against VT, yet they dove into the middle. Running 3 plays or 2 is irrelevant to the theme, imo.
LikeLike
Did Michigan’s kicker have a yearlong case of the yips?
If not, then the comparison isn’t even worth discussing.
LikeLike
I disagree, I would have felt the decision was bad if it had been last year with Walsh. Any kick from 40+ is too iffy when you have three opportunities to shorten the kick.
LikeLike
How ’bout running plays sideways/backwards?
LikeLike
I think the first play sweep we ran was designed for ball security and to advance the ball. The second play was to center it, losing yards wasn’t the objective. With double digit tackles for loss, a failed 4th and 1 earlier, who had any doubt about us blocking their front?
We are splitting hairs here, neither us, nor Michigan had any hope of gaining yardage running the football based on the first 60 minutes of play. If the intent was to advance the football it was going to take a successful pass, or a trick play of some sort.
The real story, to me, is how clearly the “play calling issue is brought into focus by the result of a player (s). The decision was a lousy one from my standpoint but look at the difference the result made: Michigan is now a program on the rise and UGA is doomed and will never succeed with CMR. Same decision, 4 feet off the mark from Walsh, and all is lost.
LikeLike
Senator to kick it on 3rd down in Overtime or in the Pro’s is a well used strategy. In fact if you will recall GT beat the Dawgs in Overtime by doing just that. GT’s kick was blocked but they recovered and had another down. They re-kicked and won. If it’s good enough for George O’Leary it’s good enough for us. The game should have been a blow-out if we had played the second half with a QB who protects the damn ball.
LikeLike
It’s not done as much as you think, especially if you’re looking at a longer kick. Again, see last night.
LikeLike
The difference between trying a VT fake punt and UGA going into turtle-mode is tremendous from my perspective. VT was playing to win. UGA was playing not to lose. This is a bowl game. Throw everything at them.
LikeLike
No, for the very reason Blackledge pointed out, kicking from mid-field to an offense that had 160 yards of offenseagainst your D had a large percentage of success. By risking the fake punt he lost the game, in my opinion and I would equate that as a decision as bad as UGA’s taking a knee. You can argue differently because we will never know for sure, but Beamer laid an egg too.
LikeLike
Exactly. For a coach as renowned for his special team prowess as Beamer, he made the boneheadest of all calls by not punting from midfield, given the game situation
LikeLike
Well damn. Wish you’d said that before I jumped off the ledge.
Anybody got a parachute? ;-0
LikeLike
As of January, Florida was 0-1 in 2008, losing to a team that couldn’t beat Appalachian State.
LikeLike
They also had a QB that didn’t create turnovers and a coach not afraid to try to make a first down.
LikeLike
Florida had a GPOOE and UGA has……?
LikeLike
…The greatest college football player of all time, a greater all time won/loss record, a better series record, nicer looking uniforms, a coach that can win in the SEC, a nicer campus that actually enjoys four seasons rather than just damn hot, better looking women, tastier beer… Do I need to go on? 🙂
LikeLike
Hell no. I went and opened a beer.
LikeLike
I don’t see this defense losing by ten to anyone on the schedule. If that happens the offense and special teams will be at fault.
Georgia’s strengths and weaknesses are starkly evident. That’s good. It’s always easier to fix something if it’s plainly broken.
I can’t imagine who the OOC loss would be to. I also believe this is based on the loss to BSU. If there IS to be an OOC loss, it would be to Buff or GSU.
LikeLike
Actually, Bill’s using OOC results against the 2011 schedule. So Georgia “loses” to Boise again.
LikeLike
Thanks for the catch.
LikeLike
Which four confernce teams is Missouri supposed to beat? Kentucky, maybe Vandy….and? Who do they play in the West?
LikeLike
Oh,yeah…duh…Tennessee would be 3…And then one from the West.
LikeLike
Texas A&M.
LikeLike
I don’t think I set this post up very well. It was intended to replay the 2011 season, only with the 2012 conference schedule (so that we could see which teams’ schedules get a lot harder or a lot easier). It was in no way a prediction for 2012.
LikeLike