Started By
Message
re: AU to the East ?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:21 pm to undecided
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:21 pm to undecided
I'd love to be in the East.
UGA, UF, Tenn, and Bama every year.
Much easier commutes for the Ga based AU fans.
We can stop going way the hell out to Arky and A&M(although I am ok with that one myself)
UGA, UF, Tenn, and Bama every year.
Much easier commutes for the Ga based AU fans.
We can stop going way the hell out to Arky and A&M(although I am ok with that one myself)
2
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:21 pm to wartiger2004
Does the SEC East want Auburn?
Would Florida want to play AU-UGA-SCarl-UT-LSU-FSU every year?
Would Florida want to play AU-UGA-SCarl-UT-LSU-FSU every year?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:22 pm to bona fide
quote:
never, it would benefit no other team except maybe Mizzou.
Read the Presidents comments.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:22 pm to L S Usetheforce
quote:
There goes the sec's lack of insight into the ten Bama rivalry....that fricker hasn't ranked top 5 in TV ratings in like 6 years
LSU/A&M had to play the breakfast game in the 11am slot last year while the TSIO was held in primetime. Now that's funny.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:23 pm to Irons Puppet
RIVALRY DIVISION A
-------------------
Alabama
Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Kentucky
RIVALRY DIVISON B
-----------------
LSU
Arkansas
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
Texas A&M
Missouri
South Carolina
There. Everyone is happy and no need for permanent opponents
-------------------
Alabama
Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Kentucky
RIVALRY DIVISON B
-----------------
LSU
Arkansas
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
Texas A&M
Missouri
South Carolina
There. Everyone is happy and no need for permanent opponents
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:23 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
There was talk of Auburn moving to the East during this latest expansion. The article I read said bama and LSU would have none of it.
Alabama, UGA, and UF vetoed because they felt
it would give Auburn a competitive advantage (i.e the sccaarred). Auburn tucked tail and didn't push the issue
The end result is that we're now playing UGA and Bama on the road every other year and our games with UF and Tennessee are essentially extinct
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:24 pm to goldennugget
quote:
There. Everyone is happy and no need for permanent opponents
No, LSU would need to be Bamas permanent opponent
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:25 pm to goldennugget
Frick no everyone would not be happy because you have 5 of the big 6 in Division A
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:26 pm to parkjas2001
quote:
We can stop going way the hell out to Arky
I blame the distance for our shitty record against them in Arky
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:26 pm to undecided
quote:
Alabama, UGA, and UF vetoed because they felt it would give Auburn a competitive advantage (i.e the sccaarred). Auburn tucked tail and didn't push the issue
The lie seems to be growing more hilarious
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:26 pm to Irons Puppet
quote:
Read the Presidents comments
I did, maybe you can be more specific. All I see is
quote:and I stated the only two that it would benefit, AU and Mizzou.
also noted that Missouri would like to trade places with Auburn and move to the SEC West
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:26 pm to undecided
quote:So are Gogue and Jacobs planning to pull out their tails and push the issue at the conference meetings?
Auburn tucked tail and didn't push the issue
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:26 pm to goldennugget
quote:
RIVALRY DIVISON B
-----------------
LSU
Arkansas
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
Texas A&M
Missouri
South Carolina
Let's get the team that is the farthest east against the teams that are the farthest west.
This post was edited on 5/27/14 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:27 pm to parkjas2001
obviously being biased i think it woudl be a great thing for auburn's fans. However, I see the problems as outweighing the benefit.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:27 pm to northalabamacracker
quote:
The east will be much easier to win. We should do it.
Interesting.
Without going back and doing hard research, I'm going to guess AU wouldnt' have won the east at all in the 90s.
They would have in 04 for sure. Would have in 05 I believe. Not 06-09. Yes in 10. Not 11 or 12.
It's not like you would just be running away with the division every year.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:28 pm to bona fide
quote:Both won their divisions last year - why do they want to swap?
and I stated the only two that it would benefit, AU and Mizzou.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:29 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
It's not like you
please realize you are talking to a bama troll
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:29 pm to TreyAnastasio
just about any high profile intra-division game amongst 'big six' teams is going to be more important than an inter-division one... AU/Bama, LSU/Bama, AU/LSU, UF/UT, UF/UGA, UT/UGA... since 1992, these games have pretty consistently been more important that matchups like UT/Bama.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:30 pm to lowspark12
While I like the UT game, I would be fine without it. I would much rather have UT in the West and get to play Auburn again every year.
We did this for 10 years, granted some of the teams are much better now.
quote:
Would Florida want to play AU-UGA-SCarl-UT-LSU-FSU every year?
We did this for 10 years, granted some of the teams are much better now.
This post was edited on 5/27/14 at 3:35 pm
Posted on 5/27/14 at 3:31 pm to RT1941
quote:
Both won their divisions last year - why do they want to swap?
Mizzou- location
AU- not sure but the prez says that is what they want
Problem is, they are the only two that want it, that is why it is never happening.
Page 2 of 13
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News