Started By
Message
re: Some of yall fit right in to an Orwell novel
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:22 am to WG_Dawg
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:22 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
WG_Dawg
What is your "Room 101?"
ETA: Not sure what mine would be. Rats seemed a little lacking in imagination in the book though.
This post was edited on 12/27/13 at 8:25 am
1
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:23 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Well we are getting recruits left and right from our rival in Austin and recruits frequently mention the SEC as one of the reasons
A very large part of that is because of the newness. Same with missouri. That's a selling point you haven't had in over 100 years that you do now. That's slightly different. Plus Texas isn't in the SEC and you don't play them every year. You may get some kids that were 50/50 on yall and texas, but the kids that are 50/50 between yall and lsu, bama, auburn, etc. will go there instead, because they're winning titles.
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:24 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
I think it may help the new members or teams on the geographic fringe of the SEC, but for the majority of members, another SEC team winning the national championship does not help recruiting.
Again recruits have stated they want to play in the SEC and pick SEC teams because of this and that pertains to all SEC teams, not just the lesser teams or new teams
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:24 am to WG_Dawg
I understand some of your points, but I disagree with a lot of them.
Winning games creates more exposure and followers for any team. We all (those that are winning) pick up sidewalkers who may not have ever attended our University, but who probably live fairly close and want to be a part of that winning atmosphere. Beating up on the non-conference teams only spreads the sidewalker exposure. Spread sidewalker exposure increases viewership. Increased viewership means more money and negotiating power with the networks.
As far as rankings, the SEC dominance of non-conference teams in the bowls helps with our preseason rankings the following year. It's probably a reason why so many SEC team are ranked in the pre-season Top 25 polls, as compared to the rest of the conferences. Now Pre-Season rankings mean jack shite, BUT they help with positioning to make sure a few of our teams who consistently win during the season are in contention at the end for the Championship.
Alabama started the season as #1 and almost finished the season as #1, but a preseason unranked winning Auburn team was able to clime the rankings all year, beat Bama and "replace" them in the rankings to get another shot at the BCSCG. When we start with 6+ teams ranked, we are almost guaranteeing the same if not more teams ranked in the end, which helps with SOS.
Winning games creates more exposure and followers for any team. We all (those that are winning) pick up sidewalkers who may not have ever attended our University, but who probably live fairly close and want to be a part of that winning atmosphere. Beating up on the non-conference teams only spreads the sidewalker exposure. Spread sidewalker exposure increases viewership. Increased viewership means more money and negotiating power with the networks.
As far as rankings, the SEC dominance of non-conference teams in the bowls helps with our preseason rankings the following year. It's probably a reason why so many SEC team are ranked in the pre-season Top 25 polls, as compared to the rest of the conferences. Now Pre-Season rankings mean jack shite, BUT they help with positioning to make sure a few of our teams who consistently win during the season are in contention at the end for the Championship.
Alabama started the season as #1 and almost finished the season as #1, but a preseason unranked winning Auburn team was able to clime the rankings all year, beat Bama and "replace" them in the rankings to get another shot at the BCSCG. When we start with 6+ teams ranked, we are almost guaranteeing the same if not more teams ranked in the end, which helps with SOS.
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:25 am to Smoke7024
quote:
I disagree. If SEC teams had been getting drummed in NC games, I definitely think other teams would have a chance to slide past them
Hold on. So if, hypothetcially, alabma last to notre dame last year, and every single thing in 2013 went exactly as it did, you think AU wouldn't be in the title game?
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:25 am to Smoke7024
quote:
If SEC teams had been getting drummed in NC games,
example Michigan State/Big 10
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:26 am to DrunkenStuporMan
quote:
What is your "Room 101?"
Video clips from pre-1960 when tech was good on repeat
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:26 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
bama plays for and wins national titles
We must be crazy huh?Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:28 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
Again recruits have stated they want to play in the SEC and pick SEC teams
Sure, I get that. But when it comes down the true playmakers, the elite of the elite, they aren't going to schools simply because "it's the SEC". They go to them because those schools win national titles. Like I said in the OP, what sense does it make to sell a recruit on the league winning titles, when a school a few hours away that we play yearly can say that THEY actually win titles?
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:28 am to WG_Dawg
So is this like a UGA Manifesto?
is where your hurt and anger stems from? Maybe thUGA and tFlagship should form a support group to help them get through this trying time
quote:
Auburn getting in the title game THIS YEAR
is where your hurt and anger stems from? Maybe thUGA and tFlagship should form a support group to help them get through this trying time
This post was edited on 12/27/13 at 8:32 am
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:28 am to WG_Dawg
Using one year isn't fair. It's a cumulative effect. If the SEC had been losing in championship games, then I definitely think a team like Michigan State could've easily been pushed to play in the game, instead of Auburn. Do you think that with the run the SEC has had lately that 2004 would happen again?
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:29 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Video clips from pre-1960 when tech was good on repeat
Ooooh that is bad. Mine would definitely involve cowbells.
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:29 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
Again recruits have stated they want to play in the SEC and pick SEC teams because of this and that pertains to all SEC teams, not just the lesser teams or new teams
Right. That's for recruits that are choosing between an SEC team and teams from other conferences. For UGA, UA, AU, UT, LSU, the Miss schools, that isn't all that common. We're recruiting against each other, mainly(FSU as well, and that's why I think this is the worst case scenario NCG matchup from UGA's perspective, but I'll cheer for the team we don't play every year)
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:30 am to CockInYourEar
quote:
the SEC dominance of non-conference teams in the bowls helps with our preseason rankings the following year
quote:
a preseason unranked winning Auburn team was able to clime the rankings all year
YOu said it...auburn won 3 games last year and was unranked this year. They climbed the rankings because they kept winning, not because of what SEC teams won bowls last year. And yes, I get your point that that affected preseason rankings, but after about week 4 those preseason rankings are essentially meaningless as the cream rises to the top. Auburn would be in the title game this year had they started at #5 or unranked.
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:31 am to undecided
quote:
So is this like a UGA Manifesto?
I only mentioned UGA because that's who I follow, but it applies to everyone. No bama, UGA, UT, or Vandy fan should be pulling for auburn because those schools most directly recruit against auburn. Teams like aTm might not GAS because they don't really go head to head much with auburn in recruiting, but for teams that share a recruiting ground, and play against Auburn every year, it matters.
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:31 am to TeLeFaWx
I agree to a point, but I think the geographical outliers like A&M, Mizzou, S. Carolina, Kentucky, etc. can use the pitch differently. Mizzou isn't going head to head with other SEC teams for a lot of the players they recruit. Georgia isn't going to recruit a 3* kid in Iowa because they can find 20 of them in GA, but for that kid in IA Mizzou might be his only shot at getting an offer to an SEC program.
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:32 am to Smoke7024
quote:
Do you think that with the run the SEC has had lately that 2004 would happen again?
If 2 big time teams in major conferences started the year ranked 1 and 2 and went undefeated, and an SEC team started around 20th..yes, I do.
However, in this completely hypothetical situation, it's impossible to know the strength of the 3 teams' schedules. Nobody knows what would happen in this made up scenario. I do know that South CArolina winning or losing the citrus bowl this year wouldn't have any affect on that scenario next year.
This post was edited on 12/27/13 at 8:34 am
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:35 am to NEMizzou
quote:
but I think the geographical outliers like A&M, Mizzou, S. Carolina, Kentucky, etc. can use the pitch differently
And I've addressed that, that has SOME merit for those outliers. Missouri recruiting against kansas and using the SEC is a selling point, I get that.
UGA and AU going head to head for a kid in Columbus...not the same.
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:36 am to WG_Dawg
I live in an area with an influx of ACC folks. I can assure you up here it means a lot when the SEC does well.
Posted on 12/27/13 at 8:37 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
If 2 big time teams in major conferences started the year ranked 1 and 2 and went undefeated, and an SEC team started around 20th..yes, I do.
We'll just have to agree to disagree then. There was talk of a one loss SEC team jumping an undefeated Ohio State before they lost. I just don't see your scenario happening with the run the SEC is on right now.
This post was edited on 12/27/13 at 8:38 am
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News