Started By
Message
1
Posted on 5/10/16 at 7:35 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Four 4 Team Divisions, four team SEC Championship and the winner gets automatic berth in playoff.
Posted on 5/10/16 at 7:46 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
How does adding Bama to the SEC East help Mizzou?
We would be moving to the West...
Posted on 5/10/16 at 9:49 pm to Hawgeye
I'm making no judgement on either school add but you've repeated this a bunch hawgeye and you clearly have no idea what you are talking about
I don't know where you live, but in Texas, SECN is on basic cable and has been since launch. It's the same level as ESPN on virtually all cable systems so all sooners in Texas that care about sports already get it.
Time Warner is the biggest cable company in Texas (and owns all of Dallas). Here's a LINK
as a sample
Dallas zip is 75201
Arlington zip is 76001
McKinney zip is 75071
Try any and you'll see SECN is the same package as ESPN. If you want NFLN, MLBN, ESPNU, FS2, etc, you have to upgrade but SECN is "standard".
If you have directv you actually need the SECN level to get FS1 (and ESPNU) and a higher pacakge to get FS2 which is what channels OU and OSU actually play on now. So those schools could actually downgrade their packages and still be sure to see all their games if they moved to the SEC.
quote:
IF they have the package that has the extra ESPN's and SEC Network. You gain more money in the Dallas metro because of OU being in the SEC when their huge alumni base now cares about spending just a bit more money each month to get that package.
I don't know where you live, but in Texas, SECN is on basic cable and has been since launch. It's the same level as ESPN on virtually all cable systems so all sooners in Texas that care about sports already get it.
Time Warner is the biggest cable company in Texas (and owns all of Dallas). Here's a LINK
as a sample
Dallas zip is 75201
Arlington zip is 76001
McKinney zip is 75071
Try any and you'll see SECN is the same package as ESPN. If you want NFLN, MLBN, ESPNU, FS2, etc, you have to upgrade but SECN is "standard".
If you have directv you actually need the SECN level to get FS1 (and ESPNU) and a higher pacakge to get FS2 which is what channels OU and OSU actually play on now. So those schools could actually downgrade their packages and still be sure to see all their games if they moved to the SEC.
Posted on 5/10/16 at 11:46 pm to Old Sarge
quote:
I like both Oklahoma schools
Yeah? Well, I like slamming my penis between the toilet seat and the lid of the bowl about 4 or 5 times first thing in the morning. Sounds like we're both stupid.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 12:15 am to SummerOfGeorge
If we had to expand to 16, this would be the best set-up. But, honestly, the only real problem with the current non-16 team expansion is Missouri. Everything else works pretty evenly, from the geography (yes, Auburn is further east than a couple East teams, but it's only blatant with aforementioned Missouri problem) to the split of the Big 6 (three per division) to the intrastate rivalries (OM/MSU, Bama/Auburn, us/UT.) I know the Bama/UT Auburn/UGA inter-divisional rivalries piss off some people, but that's a problem that could be significantly ameliorated with a 9 game SEC schedule. Adding OU and OSU would make a tidy set-up, as shown here, but it would also unbalance some of the traditional power balance by having only LSU and OU as major traditional powers out west. I'm not sure I want to see a division with 5 of the Big 6 with only the addition of OU to off-set the change on the other end of the teeter-totter.
Obviously, if programs like TAMU, Arkansas and OM can maintain strong showings over the next few years, the "Big 6" label won't matter much on a practical level. Still, I like the way they're divvied up right now.
Obviously, if programs like TAMU, Arkansas and OM can maintain strong showings over the next few years, the "Big 6" label won't matter much on a practical level. Still, I like the way they're divvied up right now.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 9:02 am to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
I could dig dropping the permanent and implementing the yearly rotation. Would certainly seem fair.
FAIR????!!!
Scheduling has NEVER been about what's fair! It has always been about what benefits the Gumps and screws LSU!
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:10 am to SummerOfGeorge
When the SEC expanded in 2012 I don't think most fans thought it would be with Mizzou. When the SEC expands it will be for money not for its southern history. The Oklahoma, Texas, or Florida schools don't add enough money.
The money would be in adding Illinois and a school from Virginia or NC. Almost all of the SEC fans would hate adding Illinois, but it would bring in the most money. I don't like the thought of adding Illinois, but I don't think the southern history of the league matters to the SEC. If it did matter Mizzou would not have been added and a southern school would have been added. Mizzou is in the Midwest and A&M is in the west they are not in the southeast.
The money would be in adding Illinois and a school from Virginia or NC. Almost all of the SEC fans would hate adding Illinois, but it would bring in the most money. I don't like the thought of adding Illinois, but I don't think the southern history of the league matters to the SEC. If it did matter Mizzou would not have been added and a southern school would have been added. Mizzou is in the Midwest and A&M is in the west they are not in the southeast.
This post was edited on 5/11/16 at 10:12 am
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:14 am to Snizzzo
quote:
Yeah? Well, I like slamming my penis between the toilet seat and the lid of the bowl about 4 or 5 times first thing in the morning. Sounds like we're both stupid.
Why did I ever doubt you Arky fans? frick me.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:21 am to SummerOfGeorge
I like it it
Posted on 5/11/16 at 10:58 am to Patton
quote:
I'd rather keep playing LSU and Ole Miss every year than have Okla in the conference.
I'd rather the option that gets us playing in Athens more often than every 20 years.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 2:51 pm to BHMKyle
quote:
I like this. The real losers would be LSU, Ole Miss, and Miss. State..... their annual opponents would look far different than what they were accustomed to 25 years earlier. Not sure I'd like that set-up if I were them.
This. The East gets to stay all original members outside of SC, who's still been around long enough anyway so they're all going to like this.
As an LSU fan, I am opposed to a world where we don't play Bama, UF, Ole Miss, and "dem other Tigahs" every year. That's not SEC football. You're essentially putting us in the big 12 with consolation games against the MS schools. This pill would be much easier to swallow if Mizzou could be replaced with Auburn or Bama for the west.
An annual game against OU would quickly become a big and enjoyable rivalry, but as an SEC fan I don't want to be in a division where there are only three founding members out of 8 teams and I don't even get a permanent cross division so we can keep UF, Bama, or Auburn. Thats fricked and any LSU fan that doesn't think so is just tired of playing Saban every year and is being incredibly short sighted.
If just OU wanted to come (somehow) that would be fine, but we'd have to go east as well. They shouldn't alienate LSU and MS from the original members.
TL;DR: LSU would be fricked out of half their "historic rivalries," we should go back to 12 teams.
Posted on 5/11/16 at 3:02 pm to Purplehaze44
quote:
I am opposed to a world where we don't play UF
quote:
LSU would be fricked out of half their "historic rivalries"
Hell, now LSU is bitching about LOSING the Florida game? Make up your damned minds.
Posted on 5/12/16 at 11:25 am to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Hell, now LSU is bitching about LOSING the Florida game? Make up your damned minds.
I've always been for the UF game. I think it's a lot of fun and produced a hell of a lot of good games. Some LSU fans are just winey bitches that don't like playing hard teams. But real LSU fans know that the UF game has produced some landmark games that most of us would be upset never happened (97 and 07 come to mind, but even looking at last year, Tiger Stadium was packed and rocking for that game).
I'd say it's a great rivalry but they crucify you for just throwing that word around on here, so I'll say it's a great series and I don't want to lose it. The rest may not say they agree but deep down they do.
This post was edited on 5/12/16 at 11:27 am
Posted on 5/12/16 at 11:26 am to SummerOfGeorge
Not this again
Posted on 5/12/16 at 7:11 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Send Missouri to the B1G and add Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State.
Posted on 5/12/16 at 8:33 pm to AmazinGrace
I like it. Geographically it makes sense and keep traditional rivalries and rekindles the AU-uf game. Arkie, LSU and A&M are a lot closer to each other and oklahoma than they are to Alabama, Georgia and Florida.
Posted on 5/12/16 at 9:51 pm to Old Sarge
You got any better ideas? Oklahoma is the most recognizable name in college football that's in play from an expansion standpoint. Okie Lite don't bring much in football, but pretty good hoops tradition. Carolina would bring more TV sets and bigger basketball tradition, but their football sucks. I think in the long run, the Oklahoma schools would be a better fit.
Posted on 5/12/16 at 9:53 pm to phil4bama
quote:
You got any better ideas? Oklahoma is the most recognizable name in college football that's in play from an expansion standpoint. Okie Lite don't bring much in football, but pretty good hoops tradition. Carolina would bring more TV sets and bigger basketball tradition, but their football sucks. I think in the long run, the Oklahoma schools would be a better fit.
Seems like everyone is worried about the bottom line.
Population
Oklahoma - 3.8 M
N Carolina - 9.9 M
Virginia - 8.3 M
Seems like it makes more sense to get some east coast schools. The SECN is in NC after all.
Posted on 5/12/16 at 9:53 pm to phil4bama
Ou = great addition that might barely cover its piece of the pie with tv money
But if you pick up both schools the math is simple, we will all take a pay cut
I like both schools but why expand if we won't make more money? Why expand if it costs us money?
Just as good as the bottom 3rd of sec now
But if you pick up both schools the math is simple, we will all take a pay cut
I like both schools but why expand if we won't make more money? Why expand if it costs us money?
quote:
Okie Lite don't bring much in football,
Just as good as the bottom 3rd of sec now
This post was edited on 5/12/16 at 9:55 pm
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News