Started By
Message
re: Division record should determine division championships
Posted on 12/25/12 at 8:21 pm to TigerDice
Posted on 12/25/12 at 8:21 pm to TigerDice
Who did we both play last year? Huh
UT and UF both, you had UK and we had Vandy.
We get a slightly more favorable schedule for 1-2 years and you assholes are looking up who makes the sec schedules, starting leaving rumors about Saban, breaking down Barrets holding film, and wanting to succeed from the sec.
UF wasnt that great until they beat you all. Its your own fault.
UF got lucky that it was JFF's first game, got lucky at beating you, beat a team that you beat and beat an overrated FSU. Yes they were better than UT but that wont always be the case.
Eventually all the things you bitch about now will benifit you later. Be glad you are doing this well when the supposed "whole cfb world is out to get you".
UT and UF both, you had UK and we had Vandy.
We get a slightly more favorable schedule for 1-2 years and you assholes are looking up who makes the sec schedules, starting leaving rumors about Saban, breaking down Barrets holding film, and wanting to succeed from the sec.
UF wasnt that great until they beat you all. Its your own fault.
UF got lucky that it was JFF's first game, got lucky at beating you, beat a team that you beat and beat an overrated FSU. Yes they were better than UT but that wont always be the case.
Eventually all the things you bitch about now will benifit you later. Be glad you are doing this well when the supposed "whole cfb world is out to get you".
2
Posted on 12/25/12 at 8:50 pm to tt54l32v
So why are Bama fans so opposed to competing on a common opponent basis for divisional crowns?
Even if LSU or TAM had gone to the SEC C.G. with 2 losses this year, Bama would still be in the BCS C.G. with a better overall record. What are you all afraid of?
As long as you get to keep a softer Tennessee on your schedule, what is the problem?
Even if LSU or TAM had gone to the SEC C.G. with 2 losses this year, Bama would still be in the BCS C.G. with a better overall record. What are you all afraid of?
As long as you get to keep a softer Tennessee on your schedule, what is the problem?
Posted on 12/25/12 at 9:00 pm to TigerDice
quote:
With LSU having to play Florida every year, we will have to survive a tougher SEC schedule on average than another other SEC school
How bout we switch LSU's permanent cross-division game to Kentucky? Will that make everyone happy?
Posted on 12/25/12 at 9:11 pm to sarc
quote:
How bout we switch LSU's permanent cross-division game to Kentucky? Will that make everyone happy?
That wouldn't be do able or fair?
How about letting schools that want a permanent cross-divisional opponent keep them, and schools that don't want one, rotate on a home and home basis?
That is somthing do able, but probably not acceptable with the powers that be in Birmingham.
Posted on 12/25/12 at 9:13 pm to TigerDice
quote:
With LSU having to play Florida every year, we will have to survive a tougher SEC schedule on average than another other SEC school.
I say this with all love for this great site LSU fans created, but UF has done pretty damn well dominating the SEC East over the last 20 years and they have to play LSU every year.
Who would have won the West this year if they went by division records? Weren't three tied at 4-1? What would the tie breaker have been? Over all record? Highest BCS ranking at the end of the regular season? Record in night games in death valley against division opponents? Bama had the tie breaker in all three of those.
Posted on 12/25/12 at 9:37 pm to Aman
quote:
I say this with all love for this great site LSU fans created, but UF has done pretty damn well dominating the SEC East over the last 20 years and they have to play LSU every year
I have a great idea. Bama to the SEC East and Missouri to the SEC West. I wonder why nobody thought of this before.
Instead of forcing Missouri to the SEC East, Bama would keep their beloved Tennessee on their schedule, and we all know Bama wouldn't have a problem with playing Florida every year, and Florida never complains about anything. So what is stopping this perfect solution?
Bama could play Auburn every year too!
This post was edited on 12/25/12 at 9:45 pm
Posted on 12/25/12 at 9:44 pm to TigerDice
Auburn would still be in the west, which means we would still need permanent opponents, which means LSU fans will still be crying.
Posted on 12/25/12 at 9:46 pm to TigerDice
This wouldn't affect the results this year (presumably the first tiebreaker in a three-way tie is overall conference record, which breaks the pair of three-way ties in favor of Alabama and Georgia), but as a whole it's the only thing that makes sense.
As far as the debate about permanent cross-division opponents: I like the concept, and I would hope that LSU keeps Florida as a permanent opponent no matter the circumstance, because that game is almost always a good one. But the Pac-12 does something that makes too much sense not to implement, in my opinion: they allow individual pairs of teams that want to remain permanent opponents to do so, and allow those who don't want a permanent opponent to rotate the game. This would be ideal, in my opinion, because it would allow for the preservation of legitimately important cross-division rivalries (Alabama/Tennessee, Auburn/Georgia) without forcing rivalries that don't fit (upcoming Texas A&M/South Carolina "rivalry") or forcing significant schedule imbalance (LSU/Florida compared to Alabama/Tennessee).
As far as the debate about permanent cross-division opponents: I like the concept, and I would hope that LSU keeps Florida as a permanent opponent no matter the circumstance, because that game is almost always a good one. But the Pac-12 does something that makes too much sense not to implement, in my opinion: they allow individual pairs of teams that want to remain permanent opponents to do so, and allow those who don't want a permanent opponent to rotate the game. This would be ideal, in my opinion, because it would allow for the preservation of legitimately important cross-division rivalries (Alabama/Tennessee, Auburn/Georgia) without forcing rivalries that don't fit (upcoming Texas A&M/South Carolina "rivalry") or forcing significant schedule imbalance (LSU/Florida compared to Alabama/Tennessee).
Posted on 12/25/12 at 9:58 pm to attheua
quote:
Auburn would still be in the west, which means we would still need permanent opponents, which means LSU fans will still be crying.
I bet LSU fans wouldn't be crying as much as Bama, Florida, Georgia, and S.C. fans. The collective hypocritical whining would be deafening.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 12:26 am to TigerDice
Damn, Mr. Dice, you've been whining about your schedules and champion procedures all Christmas.
Go on to bed aand sleep good.
Tomorrow, get started on proposing a good 9 game schedule. This will help for sure.
Or look into Big 12 enrollment procedures.
Go on to bed aand sleep good.
Tomorrow, get started on proposing a good 9 game schedule. This will help for sure.
Or look into Big 12 enrollment procedures.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 2:26 am to East Coast Band
Bama fans have made it very clear they have no interest in letting go of their unfair scheduling advantage against LSU.
We shall see how far the SEC administrators will go to preserve the Bama advantage against LSU in the future.
We shall see how far the SEC administrators will go to preserve the Bama advantage against LSU in the future.
This post was edited on 12/26/12 at 3:39 am
Posted on 12/26/12 at 7:57 am to TigerDice
I think I've made it clear that I agree - LSU has had a disadvantage for the last couple years. For years, when Alabama played the second most successful team in the SEC every single year, nobody seemed to have a problem with it.
I would like to see us come up with something more consistently equitable, rather than have varying degrees of inequity each year. Basing the champion on divisional games would be one solution.
I would like to see us come up with something more consistently equitable, rather than have varying degrees of inequity each year. Basing the champion on divisional games would be one solution.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 8:03 am to crispyUGA
quote:
Isn't Death Valley where dreams go to die?
They did.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 8:16 am to tt54l32v
quote:
UF got lucky that it was JFF's first game, got lucky at beating you, beat a team that you beat and beat an overrated FSU
UF was lucky 4 times against top 12 teams.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 8:18 am to TigerDice
Steve Spurrier agrees with you, OP'er.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 8:24 am to EST
quote:
Steve Spurrier agrees with you
Now there's an endorsement from the king of comedy
Posted on 12/26/12 at 8:27 am to TigerDice
"Biased" is the word you're looking for. "Bias" is a noun.
Also how many LSU threads about Alabama's schedule can we start before the new year?
Also how many LSU threads about Alabama's schedule can we start before the new year?
Posted on 12/26/12 at 9:27 am to TigerDice
quote:
Georgia missed the four strongest teams in the SEC West: Bama, LSU, Texas A&M, and Mississippi St.
Are you
???Posted on 12/26/12 at 11:14 am to McRebel42
quote:
Georgia missed the four strongest teams in the SEC West: Bama, LSU, Texas A&M, and Mississippi St.
Mississippi St. beat Tennessee 41 to 31. Bama's "so called " favorite cross-divisional opponent they just can't live without.
Posted on 12/26/12 at 11:25 am to TigerDice
As long as Bama can play UT every year, I don't care. Hell, let us play UT and only rotate with UF, UGA, and USC.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News