Started By
Message
1
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:37 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Yep, several years after. It was obviously on shaky ground though since people were looking for a way out. Do you see anyone trying to get out of the SEC?
I'm gonna give you a pass since I don't think you are old enough to know, but Arkansas and usc are here because the sec wanted to play a championship game, not because their conferences were falling apart. Its a good story though it dumps all over your traditions theory
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:39 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Tell it to Tennessee who has to play Alabama every year as a cross division rival
And AU has to play UGA. and LSU has to play florida. So what?
From 1990-2001, UT went 8-4 against bama (including 7 in a row) on the way to 2 SEC titles and a national title. Did it matter then?
No, you just can't seem to grasp the fact that teams ebb and flow every so often. Bama was hot garbage for a while and UT was a national power. Now they are reversed.
Eveyr team is 0-0 to start the year. There is nothing stopping them from winning the SEC other than the play of their own team.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:40 pm to WG_Dawg
Now that part we agree on WG
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:40 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Tell it to Tennessee who has to play Alabama every year as a cross division rival. In other words, it's NOT equal.
Like I have said you do not understanding the SEC!
Take Bama off the Schedule for an every year game and I am going Baltimore/Ferguson on someone!
This post was edited on 5/1/15 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:42 pm to lefty08
quote:
Its a good story though it dumps all over your traditions theory
Does it? We have 2 teams that willfully left where they were (sc going from the acc to indep beforehand) to come join the SEC. That should speak to our conference shouldn't it? That people packed up and left to come here?
Again, we shouldn't be metaphorically changing all our road signs and menus to spanish to accommodate people who come here. You want to be here, you adapt to what we do. We have some rivalry games that aren't leaving, like it or not.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:43 pm to lefty08
quote:
Now that part we agree on WG
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:44 pm to thirdlawson
quote:
quote: 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. First of all, you're all stupid. Second, the MAIN reason Auburn wants to move to the East is because almost ALL of our traditional rivals are in the East. The CORRECT divisions should be: East Auburn Florida Georgia Tennessee Kentucky Vanderbilt South Carolina West Alabama Arkansas Ole Miss Mississippi State LSU Missouri Texas A&M Alabama(West) is our main rival. After that, its Georgia(East), Florida(East, who we've only played 3 times since 2002) and Tennessee(East). LSU has developed into a rival but they're not a traditional rival. Arkansas wants to be us so they're trying hard. MSU and Ole Miss are rivals with the other West teams but not us. And A&M is new...and in Texas. The expansion left us hanging in the middle, but in fairness 3 of our 4 traditional rivals reside in the East.
Commissioner Lawson bringing the hammer.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:44 pm to DoUrden
Lonnie from Utah has the dumbs
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:47 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Again, we shouldn't be metaphorically changing all our road signs and menus to spanish to accommodate people who come here. You want to be here, you adapt to what we do. We have some rivalry games that aren't leaving, like it or not.
I have yet to see 1 Arkansas fan complaining about scheduling, yet you continue to puff your chest out.
Yes the SEC is the best conference for the last 2 decades. Arkansas and S Carolina had a hand in helping the conference to reach that status.
Now aTm and Mizzou are here to keep the conference moving in that direction. As a trendsetter the SEC is known for.
I personally don't want to not play Auburn every year, but I will gladly accept those terms of its best for the conference. The fact you are personally scared of a competition in balance speaks more to what you think is best for Georgia and not what is best for the conference
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:49 pm to DoUrden
quote:I couldn't care less about SEC history when it's the only reason why we have a terrible set up in scheduling
The only posters that say this don't understand the history of the SEC
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:50 pm to lefty08
quote:
I have yet to see 1 Arkansas fan complaining about scheduling, yet you continue to puff your chest out
I lose track of who I'm arguing with. In that post I was just defending the need to keep the main cross division rivalries intact.
quote:
the SEC is the best conference for the last 2 decades. Arkansas and S Carolina had a hand in helping the conference to reach that status.
In football? I'm not gonna pile on but that is very debatable at best, flat out wrong at worst.
quote:
The fact you are personally scared of a competition in balance speaks more to what you think is best for Georgia and not what is best for the conference
It has nothing to do with scared and everythign to do with logic. All these scenarios have a stacked east, what if 5 of the big 6 were in the west and UGA was the only one in the east? Would people go for that?
And to the second part of that sentence, you could not possibly, fathomably be more 100% spot on correct. Your'e fricking right I care more about Georgia than I do for the conference, as should anyone who claims to be a fan of a school. Why should I care more about the SEC than my own school? Damn right I want what's best for UGA, it's be insane not to.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:50 pm to lefty08
I would agree fully. This would be a great decision for Auburn as their only cross-conference team would be Alabama.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:51 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
I couldn't care less about SEC history when it's the only reason why we have a terrible set up in scheduling
The reason we have a terrible set up is because atm and missouri came in. It wasn't a problem with 12 teams.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:51 pm to lefty08
quote:
I have yet to see 1 Arkansas fan complaining about scheduling,
Well we did it...we found the one thing arkansas fans aren't complaining about.
To think, they said it couldn't be done. Banner day for the rant. Give yourselves a nice round of applause.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:52 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
I couldn't care less about SEC history when it's the only reason why we have a terrible set up in scheduling
Have an upvote!
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:53 pm to BromHarris
quote:
This would be a great decision for Auburn as their only cross-conference team would be Alabama.
Yea but then you don't have UT/Bama. While my insignia would indicate i don't care about that game, i'd still don't think they should lose it.
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:54 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
The reason we have a terrible set up is because atm and missouri came in. It wasn't a problem with 12 teams.
And the idiotic decision to put Mizzou in the east...
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:54 pm to WG_Dawg
You do realize the conference championship game could not have happened without expansion?
And the championship game was a big part of the SEC's dominance since the 90s.
The SEC has been more dominant as a whole since expansion than it was before. Its the thing other conferences hate the SEC for. There were other conferences playing football back in the day as well, and it was a lot more even then than it has become recently (the last 25 years) yet you seem to think expansion had nothing to do with that?
And the championship game was a big part of the SEC's dominance since the 90s.
The SEC has been more dominant as a whole since expansion than it was before. Its the thing other conferences hate the SEC for. There were other conferences playing football back in the day as well, and it was a lot more even then than it has become recently (the last 25 years) yet you seem to think expansion had nothing to do with that?
Posted on 5/1/15 at 1:57 pm to lefty08
quote:
You do realize the conference championship game could not have happened without expansion?
yes, I'm fully aware we needed 12 teams.
My point was that any 2 warm bodies would have let us get there, Arkansas and SC specifically as football programs didn't really do a whole lot to propel the SEC brand.
Page 10 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News