Home Field Advantage

[wardamneagle 0]

All this talk of Auburn having an easier schedule because all of our major games are at home got me thinking: Is there really any such thing as a home field advantage? Now, I'm not talking against "lesser" opponents like Buffalo, Tulane, or UAT . There should be an advantage over these teams simply because of the intimidation factor of playing at J-H. I'm talking about top tier teams like UGA, UF, UT, LSU, etc.

It seems over the past several years and beyond you can name a ton of "upsets" of teams on their home field. We beat the hell out of UT in Knoxvegas a couple of years ago. It seems the UGA game goes back and forth with AU beating them at home and UGA beating AU at home. Last year, if AU can go 2 for 5 in FG's we win that game at LSU. Was Vaughn scared of kicking at LSU or did he just have an off night? UT should have beaten UAT at home last year. the Cocks beat UT in Knoxville last year. AU had home field over GaTech and got it handed to us. We can all name plenty more instances where the home team lost, even with it's perceived home field advantage. So is there anything to it?

Can Home Field Advantage really be a disadvantage? I say yes. There is obviously more pressure to win the games you should against big time opponents at home because of the perceived home field ad. Play those games on the opponents home field and that pressure is off you and on them and you have the team unity of going into a hostile environment.

StatTiger if you're out there, do you have any stats on Home Field Advantage Winning % (against major opponents, not the cake-walk games). I'd be willing to wager that it's pretty close to 50% of the time home team wins and 50% opponents win. If that is the case, it's a 50/50 coin flip, so is there an advantage?

What say you all? Discuss.

[saniflush 0]

All this talk of Auburn having an easier schedule because all of our major games are at home got me thinking: Is there really any such thing as a home field advantage? Now, I'm not talking against "lesser" opponents like Buffalo, Tulane, or UAT .

What say you all? Discuss.

I say you are right. SPUAT keeps bringing down our strength of schedule. We need to get someone like a Toledo in lieu of them.

[wardamneagle 0]

All this talk of Auburn having an easier schedule because all of our major games are at home got me thinking: Is there really any such thing as a home field advantage? Now, I'm not talking against "lesser" opponents like Buffalo, Tulane, or UAT .

What say you all? Discuss.

I say you are right. SPUAT keeps bringing down our strength of schedule. We need to get someone like a Toledo in lieu of them.

[BamaGrad03 0]

I think you're right. Homefield against teams who play in big venues consistently isnt that big of a deal.

Now...homecourt advantage in basketball is a HUGE deal. The numbers really do support that.

[WinCrimson 61]

All this talk of Auburn having an easier schedule because all of our major games are at home got me thinking: Is there really any such thing as a home field advantage? Now, I'm not talking against "lesser" opponents like Buffalo, Tulane, or UAT .

What say you all? Discuss.

I say you are right. SPUAT keeps bringing down our strength of schedule. We need to get someone like a Toledo in lieu of them.

I know it. That once defeated/Top 10 team you guys played last year really hurt your SOS.

[saniflush 0]

All this talk of Auburn having an easier schedule because all of our major games are at home got me thinking: Is there really any such thing as a home field advantage? Now, I'm not talking against "lesser" opponents like Buffalo, Tulane, or UAT .

What say you all? Discuss.

I say you are right. SPUAT keeps bringing down our strength of schedule. We need to get someone like a Toledo in lieu of them.

I know it. That once defeated/Top 10 team you guys played last year really hurt your SOS.

The problem is they look at everybody else that ya'll played.

[WinCrimson 61]

All this talk of Auburn having an easier schedule because all of our major games are at home got me thinking: Is there really any such thing as a home field advantage? Now, I'm not talking against "lesser" opponents like Buffalo, Tulane, or UAT .

What say you all? Discuss.

I say you are right. SPUAT keeps bringing down our strength of schedule. We need to get someone like a Toledo in lieu of them.

I know it. That once defeated/Top 10 team you guys played last year really hurt your SOS.

The problem is they look at everybody else that ya'll played.

Huh? We play in the SEC. Everyone's schedule is tough.

That made no sense.

[big dude 0]

Just a hunch here, but I bet he was talking about your OOC schedule, genius.

[RadioWryn 0]

Well, the home team has won Auburn/LSU every year since 2000..

[BamaGrad03 0]

The problem is they look at everybody else that ya'll played.

We beat more bowl teams than AU...so whats your point?

[SouthLink02 8]

Not at all. With that said, will AU just switch it over to Athens this year then? <insert AU joke about always beating us in Athens>

[kingfish 73]

I'll take the home filed any day and feel in AU's case it is an advantage. I believe CT and CD both would agree.

[CircleDrill 178]

I know it. That once defeated/Top 10 team you guys played last year really hurt your SOS.

Alabama was almost single-handedly responsible for all the "SEC needs to play tougher OOC games" BS in the media the last two years. This year, if that crap starts up, I am going to blame Alabama yet again for an absolutely pathetic schedule...particularly for a team that talks so much about national championships.

[BamaGrad03 0]

Alabama was almost single-handedly responsible for all the "SEC needs to play tougher OOC games" BS in the media the last two years. This year, if that crap starts up, I am going to blame Alabama yet again for an absolutely pathetic schedule...particularly for a team that talks so much about national championships.

You have GOT to be kidding. Go back and look at how many 1AA schools we have played vs you.

We did a home and home with UCLA and Oklahoma. And we play southern miss EVERY SINGLE YEAR...up until this year.

The last time we played hawaii they were a 9 game winner.

Remember, you live in a glass house.

[CircleDrill 178]

We could argue this all day. The bottom line is that it is a moot point. All SEC teams play the toughest conference schedule of any conference, so we all need the lighter OOC games so our players don't die. Those games are not going away, and the media is always going to say "SEC needs tougher OOC games" with total disregard for the conference schedule that contains so many top 10 teams and so many top 25 teams.

And don't worry, I find a way to blame anything on Bama.

[BamaGrad03 0]

We could argue this all day. The bottom line is that it is a moot point. All SEC teams play the toughest conference schedule of any conference, so we all need the lighter OOC games so our players don't die. Those games are not going away, and the media is always going to say "SEC needs tougher OOC games" with total disregard for the conference schedule that contains so many top 10 teams and so many top 25 teams.

This, i can agree with.

How can they in one breath say that the SEC is so tough and nobody will escape without a loss...but in the next slam us for not playing a tough OOC schedule?

I think its funny how EVERY year there's always 3 or 4 sec teams in the top 10 SOS.

We already have 5-7 top 25 teams built into our schedule by virtue of playing in the SEC. How many should we play? 9? 10? Its funny that they dont hold other teams to the same standard for their IN conference schedules.

[CircleDrill 178]

How can they in one breath say that the SEC is so tough and nobody will escape without a loss...but in the next slam us for not playing a tough OOC schedule?

I think its funny how EVERY year there's always 3 or 4 sec teams in the top 10 SOS.

We already have 5-7 top 25 teams built into our schedule by virtue of playing in the SEC. How many should we play? 9? 10? Its funny that they dont hold other teams to the same standard for their IN conference schedules.

This is my pet peeve. It is either extreme ignorance or some kind of conspiracy. When you play good teams, you play good teams. Why does it matter what conference they are in?

[DKW 86 7,431]

and Home team usually wins.

& visiting team usually wins.

& the visiting team usually wins, on a lesser degree though.

We havent lost one yet in T-Town.

Only lost 2 to in JHS in 8 games to Bama so far.

Just of the top of my head.

[aucanucktiger 1,794]

The opponent's conference matters for several reasons. A UGA comes to Auburn w/ a MUCH more fired up fan base than a cross-country USC (or an Oklahoma for Bama). The players know several of the other team's players from high school, recruiting or last year's game (unlike a USC or Ok). Series history (e.g. AU vs. Bama) as we all know can make all the difference in the world too.

At the time Bama wa playing 1A Temple, Marshall and a host of other 1-AA schools @ that time were better than Temple. Buffalo is not as good as a dozen 1-AA schools. That's one of the most intellectually dishonest bowl prerequisites the NCAA has come up w/.

Hey Bammer, after going undefeated in 2004, defeating 5...FIVE...top 10 teams along the way, and not even getting a chance to PLAY IN the national title game, exactly what incentive do we have for schudling tough OOC competition? See also 1983 when we played NINE bowl teams (one of the toughest schedules of all time, the toughest that year of any other team by far), won the Sugar Bowl while #3 and although both #1 AND #2 lost their bowls, we finished...#3. Bear bullied his way into a half dozen NC games (when coaches ran the NCAA and the NCAA picked major bowl opponents) that had nothing to do w/ strength of schedule (see virtually every MNC Bama claims before '92) or even head to head competition (see 1978, 1973, 1964 and 1941). In most of Bammers "12 NCs" Bama lost @ least one game to a team that finished outside the top 10 and in NONE did Bama PLAY 5 top 10 teams. Don't lecture an Auburn fan about our schedule, no team except maybe Penn State has been more screwed despite their tough schedule than AU. I applaud our admin. for continuing to schedule the folks we do.

Southern Miss? Just because you lose to them every now and then doesn't make them a solid OOC opponent.

[HomanAU 0]

SEC schedule is the toughest for any team and Alabama plays just a hard of a schedule as we do. End of story

[BamaGrad03 0]

Southern Miss? Just because you lose to them every now and then doesn't make them a solid OOC opponent.

No but 12 straight winning seasons and 8 bowl trips in 9 seasons is too.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

The problem is they look at everybody else that ya'll played.

We beat more bowl teams than AU...so whats your point?

We beat bama four in a row. What other point do you need?

[aucanucktiger 1,794]

"Alabama plays just a hard of a schedule as we do. End of story"

Can't let that one go. When for years we've virtually never played Vandy or Kentucky compared to Bama, while Bama virtually never played Florida or Georgia compared to us, that's a significant difference. SEC top tier does NOT equal SEC lower tier.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

"Alabama plays just a hard of a schedule as we do. End of story"

Can't let that one go. When for years we've virtually never played Vandy or Kentucky compared to Bama, while Bama virtually never played Florida or Georgia compared to us, that's a significant difference. SEC top tier does NOT equal SEC lower tier.

This was absolutely a valid argument before the league expanded in 1992 and before it moved to two rotating opponents in the other division. Bama played Vandy almost every year, plus Ole Miss. Meanwhile we played Florida, Georgia and Tennessee every year. But now that the schedule automatically rotates, the SEC schedules are dead even. And we haven't had much room to talk lately on OOC opponents.

[aucanucktiger 1,794]

I'm not getting the "we have no room to talk about OOC opponents" point.