Started By
Message
re: Just realized that Missouri gets a lot of shite around here. What is the deal?
Posted on 8/1/23 at 9:19 am to wadewilson
Posted on 8/1/23 at 9:19 am to wadewilson
quote:
Honestly I have a hard time remembering they're in the conference.
Always the last team I think of but to be fair I have been a UGA fan for 50 years and UGA is often the last team I think of when making a list of SEC teams.
0
Posted on 8/1/23 at 9:21 am to BreakawayZou83
Pathetic fan support. They had a losing conference record in Football, Basketball and Baseball last. Can’t think of another sec school that continuously sucks at everything. Even Vandy is a national power in baseball. In short they aren’t SEC quality.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 9:28 am to Krampus
quote:
There is no Missouri
The Missouri Myth??? I have heard of the Montana Myth but Missouri seems like a fitting place for a similar myth...
For the undereducated, the un-civilized and younger folks among us who do not remember Ludlow Porch he was a talk show host in Atlanta for about 350 years and was a southern humorist...not the political tripe that is on talk radio today. For about 30 years he maintained an ongoing gag that Montana was a myth and any marriage licenses, birth certificates or similar documents issued by the mythical state were fraudulent and the person presenting them up to no good. He'd run this out every couple of years and folks would get tore up over it but nary a one could offer proof of Montana's existence beyond anecdotal evidence.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 9:59 am to BreakawayZou83
quote:
Do you think the SEC expanded out of charity? If you want to see how your theory plays out, take a look at the Pac-12. If they had added Texas and Oklahoma when they had the chance, do you think we would be watching that conference collapse into nothing? If the SEC had stood pat at 10 or 12 teams, it would have been just a matter of time until schools like Alabama, Georgia, and Florida left the Mississippi States and Vanderbilts of the conference behind for greener pastures. Expansion ensured the SEC remains intact at its core.
I disagree.
The major programs in this conference have been in the same conference since 1933, and a few even predated that in the old Southern Conference.
Your assumptions about the major power programs in this conference leaving for "greener" pastures are just that: assumptions.
Oh, by the way, what greener pastures would they have left for? You realize this conference is the green pasture, right?
This post was edited on 8/1/23 at 10:00 am
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:03 am to BreakawayZou83
quote:
Do you think the SEC expanded out of charity? If you want to see how your theory plays out, take a look at the Pac-12. If they had added Texas and Oklahoma when they had the chance, do you think we would be watching that conference collapse into nothing? If the SEC had stood pat at 10 or 12 teams, it would have been just a matter of time until schools like Alabama, Georgia, and Florida left the Mississippi States and Vanderbilts of the conference behind for greener pastures. Expansion ensured the SEC remains intact at its core.
Another thing: can you really compare the standard program in the Pac 10 to the standard program in the SEC?
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:04 am to Tornado Alley
If the SEC stayed at 12, the B1G's media deal would be significantly higher than the SEC's. If you think that Alabama, Georgia and Florida wouldn't be jealous and flirt with the idea of a bigger payout, you're being myopic.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:05 am to El Segundo Guy
quote:
If the SEC stayed at 12, the B1G's media deal would be significantly higher than the SEC's. If you think that Alabama, Georgia and Florida wouldn't be jealous and flirt with the idea of a bigger payout, you're being myopic.
Well no, I don't. Can you tell me a time Alabama, Florida, or Georgia have flirted with another conference?
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:08 am to Tornado Alley
quote:
Oh, by the way, what greener pastures would they have left for? You realize this conference is the green pasture, right?
No one will address this because it's the truth.
Where are Bama, LSU, and Georgia going to go that wouldn't cause an outright riot among their fans? What conference would be better?
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:08 am to Tornado Alley
quote:
Well no, I don't. Can you tell me a time Alabama, Florida, or Georgia have flirted with another conference?
Because the SEC has always been at the forefront of expansion. First modern conference to move to 12 teams. First conference to include a championship game and divisions. First conference to 14 teams. First conference to 16 teams. The conference’s leadership has always understood the game.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:10 am to Tornado Alley
If the SEC was at 12 and were getting $50 mil/year then they would absolutely be looking.
If these expansions haven't shown you that teams are willing to give up rivalries and conferences in order to get a bigger paycheck, then you're in la-la land.
If these expansions haven't shown you that teams are willing to give up rivalries and conferences in order to get a bigger paycheck, then you're in la-la land.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:16 am to El Segundo Guy
quote:
If the SEC was at 12 and were getting $50 mil/year then they would absolutely be looking.
If these expansions haven't shown you that teams are willing to give up rivalries and conferences in order to get a bigger paycheck, then you're in la-la land.
I think what you meant to say is some teams would be willing to disregard their rivalries and conferences for a bigger paycheck.
But what you haven't shown me is any time an SEC member has even remotely flirted with leaving this league. At this point, you're just assuming it would happen.
Do you not think Auburn boosters would fricking revolt at the idea of playing in another league? Georgia too? What about Florida?
What y'all are refusing to see is this conference is, and has always been, different. It's because y'all are different. You're not a cultural (or geographic) fit. That's why you can't see it. I mean, come on man, y'all aren't even the biggest draw in your state, unlike every other SEC team (sans A&M), and so you just don't get it.
This post was edited on 8/1/23 at 10:17 am
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:16 am to father2sons
1. Not a founding member
2. Not good @ sports
3. Not great @ academics
4. Not a revenue factor
5. Not a cultural fit
IOW.. they bring nothing to the table
2. Not good @ sports
3. Not great @ academics
4. Not a revenue factor
5. Not a cultural fit
IOW.. they bring nothing to the table
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:18 am to BurntOrangeMan
And yet you followed us here. Get fricked Horn.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:19 am to El Segundo Guy
We can sit here and waste time going back and forth.
You think SEC programs would jump for a bigger TV deal, which I believe is an incorrect assumption. I asked you to show me any evidence of any SEC program even remotely considering leaving the conference, but there is none.
Conversely, I told you (or whoever I was arguing with, one of you Mizzou people) the ties in this conference go deeper than money, as evidenced by history and time. I gave an example of Auburn boosters raising straight hell at the thought of playing in another conference without Georgia, Bama, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, etc. I told you Mizzou folks don't get that it "just means more" because you aren't a cultural fit, which is true. You, of course, believe that is an assumption.
At this point let's just agree to disagree and let this thray continue.
You think SEC programs would jump for a bigger TV deal, which I believe is an incorrect assumption. I asked you to show me any evidence of any SEC program even remotely considering leaving the conference, but there is none.
Conversely, I told you (or whoever I was arguing with, one of you Mizzou people) the ties in this conference go deeper than money, as evidenced by history and time. I gave an example of Auburn boosters raising straight hell at the thought of playing in another conference without Georgia, Bama, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, etc. I told you Mizzou folks don't get that it "just means more" because you aren't a cultural fit, which is true. You, of course, believe that is an assumption.
At this point let's just agree to disagree and let this thray continue.
This post was edited on 8/1/23 at 10:21 am
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:20 am to father2sons
quote:
I understand they aren’t the best, but holy hot damn y’all roast the ever living shite out of them around here.
They lost to Harsin and Ashford.
Come on dude. Get with it.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:22 am to Tornado Alley
The SEC teams never flirted, because they didn't have to.
They did expand which kept media deals at the highest/competitive with the B1G. You were arguing that expansion was never necessary in the SEC. You're absolutely wrong. If they hadn't expanded, their payouts would not be on par with the B1G which would lead to schools peeking around.
If you think Alabama has such a loyalty to your Ole Miss that it would leave millions on the table to stay, you're crazy.
They did expand which kept media deals at the highest/competitive with the B1G. You were arguing that expansion was never necessary in the SEC. You're absolutely wrong. If they hadn't expanded, their payouts would not be on par with the B1G which would lead to schools peeking around.
If you think Alabama has such a loyalty to your Ole Miss that it would leave millions on the table to stay, you're crazy.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:25 am to El Segundo Guy
I think we’re wasting our energy here. He hates Mizzou and has a delusional belief that Florida wouldn’t ditch Vanderbilt and Mississippi State if it meant $40 million more per year.
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:27 am to El Segundo Guy
quote:
ou were arguing that expansion was never necessary in the SEC.
No, I argued against continued expansion. The statement I took exception to was "It's expand or die," which I strongly disagree with. My response to that post was:
"I'm curious why you think expansion is necessary, because I do not believe it is.
The SEC is never going to fade into obscurity if its major teams are televised. We still have the best players, best recruits, most passionate fanbases, and most successful teams. None of that is attributable to expansion. If anything, it's a product of demographics and history."
This post was edited on 8/1/23 at 10:30 am
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:27 am to BurntOrangeMan
quote:
1. Not a founding member
2. Not good @ sports
3. Not great @ academics
4. Not a revenue factor
5. Not a cultural fit
6. NOT A REAL PLACE
Posted on 8/1/23 at 10:34 am to Tornado Alley
If you stay at 16 and say the B1G expanded to 20 by adding FSU, etc then the B1G's contract would outpace the SEC's. The Big Boys don't want to make less than other Big Boys.
Especially with the SEC tied to the Mouse.
Especially with the SEC tied to the Mouse.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News