Started By
Message
re: Finebaum took up the "Auburn to the East" thing again today.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 12:59 pm to WG_Dawg
Posted on 5/1/15 at 12:59 pm to WG_Dawg
but isn't the problem some (LSU) fans are railing against is permanent cross divisional games in general. We have ours that we love, they have theirs that they hate for one reason or another. I like your idea, but i'm just doubting it would satisfy them.
1
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:00 pm to piggidyphish
quote:
what about exchanging UT and AU?
Except it wouldn't make any sense to do that and still have Mizzou in the east as well.
Mizzou in the east is one of the big issues.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:00 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Iron bowl.
You realize if AU went to the east, they would be each other's cross division opponents and still play the IB every year...
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:00 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Iron bowl.
In his scenario that still happens. Auburn vs. bama as cross division foes. Would probably have to play it earlier in the season because back to back iron bowls would be weird as shite.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:01 pm to piggidyphish
quote:
(LSU) fans are railing against is permanent cross divisional games in general. We have ours that we love, they have theirs that they hate for one reason or another. I like your idea, but i'm just doubting it would satisfy them.
the wants of one fanbase are irrelevant when compared to the needs of the SEC as a whole. There are some games that need to and will be played every year, no matter what.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:02 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Except it wouldn't make any sense to do that and still have Mizzou in the east as well.
Mizzou in the east is one of the big issues.
Well they're here and we can't boot them so that's already done with. The problem with moving them to the west is that we would need to send another non-big 6 member in their place, which doesn't really work.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:03 pm to piggidyphish
quote:
In his scenario that still happens. Auburn vs. bama as cross division foes. Would probably have to play it earlier in the season because back to back iron bowls would be weird as shite.
I'm slow on the uptake here...why wouldn't they still play the last game?
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:04 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
We played Missouri every year from 2010-2014. Time for a break.
How many of those did you lose?
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:05 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
the wants of one fanbase are irrelevant when compared to the needs of the SEC as a whole. There are some games that need to and will be played every year, no matter what.
Oh I agree...never suggested otherwise.
Just giving you the inevitable argument against it.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:06 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
You realize if AU went to the east, they would be each other's cross division opponents and still play the IB every year...
But the whole point of moving teams would be to ELIMINATE the cross division opponents...
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:06 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
I'm slow on the uptake here...why wouldn't they still play the last game?
On the off chance that both won their division and then played the next weekend for the sec championship. Likely wouldn't happen but very rarely, but one of those things I can see the conference pushing for so it's not back to back games.
I seem to remember (although i've been unable to find any support) being told that's east vs. west games (until recently) didn't occur less than 3 weeks from the end of the season.
This post was edited on 5/1/15 at 1:09 pm
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:07 pm to piggidyphish
You might want to read(you are old enough to read..right) some other posts after mine. I am not the only one that has the same opinion of why Auburn wants to move to the East.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:09 pm to bama my heart
quote:
you are old enough to read..right
No.
I know you struggle thinking about auburn most of the time, but you do realize how stupid of a question, even for trying to talk shite, that is, right?
quote:
I am not the only one that has the same opinion of why Auburn wants to move to the East.
Great, you guys should form a club, you could have a neato slogan like 'no booger eaters allowed.'
This post was edited on 5/1/15 at 1:10 pm
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:09 pm to piggidyphish
quote:
On the off chance that both won their division and then played the next weekend for the sec championship
oh, duh. Forgot about that.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:11 pm to WG_Dawg
Don't know if it has been posted in this thread, but this is the easy answer to all issues.
LINK
LINK
quote:
Bedrock rivalry games are played ANNUALLY.
Rotate through the entire conference every TWO YEARS.
Round-robin DIVISIONS are maintained each year (per NCAA rules for the SEC championship game). Each student/athlete gets to both HOST AND VISIT every other school in a four-year SEC career.
All done in an 8-GAME schedule (or 9 if/when desired).
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:12 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Well they're here and we can't boot them so that's already done with. The problem with moving them to the west is that we would need to send another non-big 6 member in their place, which doesn't really work.
Send Vandy (Nashville (86.7833° W) and Tuscaloosa ( 87.5346° W) are virtually the same Longitude). It is what it is.
East
Alabama
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
West
Arky
LSU
Miss St
Missou
Ole Miss
TA&M
Vandy
This post was edited on 5/1/15 at 1:16 pm
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:14 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
There are some games that need to and will be played every year, no matter what.
there's an element of self-importance in that statement you probably don't recognize.
play these games. play them twice a year for all I care. if it's a strong enough rivalry it'll hold up to not counting as a SEC game except in regular rotation years. if not, then maybe southern football won't collapse.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:15 pm to SFVtiger
quote:
there's an element of self-importance in that statement you probably don't recognize.
I think we all recognize it. I don't think anyone isn't saying that some games are more important than others. Is that conceited...probably so, is it true...also probably so.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:16 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
East
Alabama
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
I don't know why you continue to ignore the fact that you can't have friggin FIVE of the big 6 in the same division.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:17 pm to WG_Dawg
As a fan of a school who left a conference after decades playing the same teams I understand what rivalries are all about. Tradition is important. What some teams can't seem to get over is there was football for the new guys as well. Other teams left traditions to be a part of this conference. It was odd at first not playing aTm, Texas, and others every year but we adjusted fine and made new traditions. Things evolve and change, hell the sec has been a front-runner the last few decades in making those changes
I don't agree with moving both AU and UA to the east. I really don't see a problem with an AU Mizz swap at all. 1 common opponent and rotate 3. Seems to be the easiest and most fair model.
As far as the big 6 talk goes, the swap of Mizz and AU wouldn't hurt the balance of the conference at all
Side note: for all the big 6 pumpers in here, have you ever stopped to think that the way the divisions were set originally had an influence on who became the big 6? Imagine for a minute if the divisions were originally set differently, where the powers might have been different. I know in the grand scheme of the conference divisions are relatively new, but the "powers" certainly wouldn't be the same today as they are with an original tweak or 2.
Also, scheduling will never be fair as long as Kentucky and Vandy are in the same division every year. Talk about a built in advantage
I don't agree with moving both AU and UA to the east. I really don't see a problem with an AU Mizz swap at all. 1 common opponent and rotate 3. Seems to be the easiest and most fair model.
As far as the big 6 talk goes, the swap of Mizz and AU wouldn't hurt the balance of the conference at all
Side note: for all the big 6 pumpers in here, have you ever stopped to think that the way the divisions were set originally had an influence on who became the big 6? Imagine for a minute if the divisions were originally set differently, where the powers might have been different. I know in the grand scheme of the conference divisions are relatively new, but the "powers" certainly wouldn't be the same today as they are with an original tweak or 2.
Also, scheduling will never be fair as long as Kentucky and Vandy are in the same division every year. Talk about a built in advantage
Page 8 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News