For some strange reason, the human voters rate more recent losses as much more important than older losses. Case in point is Oregon vs Alabama. Both teams have one loss against very strong opponents, but since Oregon lost more recently, they are placed well below Alabama. Last week, right after Alabama lost, they were put into 5th. It make no sense at all.
So, yes, given this system, the SEC scheduling of weak non-conference opponents very late in the season could be looked at as “gaming” the human BCS voters.
Well, it might be that Oregon has ZERO top ten wins this year, compared to Alabama’s TWO top ten wins...could be.
Georgia also has two top ten wins. LSU has one, Florida has one. Again, Oregon has none.
BTW, the movement in the polls you mention (Alabama up, Oregon down) are only projections, made by sportswriters (the official BCS rankings come out Monday)...using computers. Nothing released yet reflects human voting. Its all numbers right now, and the UNIVAC spits out a large Oregon drop....no human factor at all. Zip. Nada. (although it will likely mimic the computers).
If scheduling the ‘powder puffs’ late is such a winning strategy, the other conferences could certainly follow suit...oddly, I doubt they will though.