Who do you want as our three permanents?

AU, UT, Miss St

No one. Fully rotating is the most fair way.........but if we must play auburn, the game needs to be moved away from season's end.

Several reasons. The timing of the game works in au's favor. Playing Bama is their bowl game and their "national championship" on national tv every year. They have nothing to lose. If they lost in October they would have nothing to look forward too and be a forgotten after thought by Nov most seasons. auburn needs the Bama game to stay relevant. If they didn't play Bama, they would literally have no reason to have a football team. They play to beat Bama, not win championships.

Either

LSU TN MSST

Or Auburn TN and MSST

I honestly just want equitable schedules for everyone and I get any sec team can put together a great team any given year and it will never be perfect but putting 3 historically great team all with NC in the the last 25 yrs is tough. Imagine having LSU TN and Auburn then rotating FL and Ga or Texas and aTM as well. It becomes too difficult to manage and make playoffs which will become the new standard.

I'll get downvoted into oblivion, but I don't care. I want AUB, TN, and LSU. AUB and TN are non-negotiable for obvious reasons. But, LSU is a bigger rival than MSU and there is no sensical argument otherwise.

MSU has beaten Bama 7 times since 1958 - 7... Is that a rivalry? Sure, we have played them a lot, and they are right down the road, but does that really matter? We've played Vanderbilt a lot and UAB is just down the road. I guess you have to have these two magical ingredients together to form a rivalry.

Sure, Alabama has dominated both series historically, but LSU has beaten Alabama 10 more times than MSU despite playing them 17 times less.So, even going down the logic trail these people have saying, "it wasn't a rivalry before Saban." Historically, yes it was. It decided the west much more often, and has a closer series.

But, another reason that position is stupid is because it effectively, tells you to omit roughly two decades of history (not to mention Saban) from the equation. That is just idiotic. When you take those into account and how impactful most of those games were - not just for the programs, but nationally, they are clearly the bigger rival. There is no argument.

The only argument with any merit for MSU is simply wanting the weaker opponent - just like they have historically always been. And that is fine, but quit trying to argue MSU is a bigger rival (or LSU isn't a rival).

quote:

---

I'll get downvoted into oblivion, but I don't care. I want AUB, TN, and LSU. AUB and TN are non-negotiable for obvious reasons. But, LSU is a bigger rival than MSU and there is no sensical argument otherwise.

---

No arguments there; however, if we are dealt with AUB, TN, and LSU that is probably going to be one of if not the toughest schedule in the conference. I love the matchups as a person that goes to these big home games as the atmosphere is electric. In saying that, if that is something we want as a fanbase than expectations need to be lowered. We all know how AU gets every other year they get us at their place. That is hard enough. TN has started to become that way as well (along with the officials). LSU has been the most consistently strong program the past 20+ years and will probably stay that way.

quote:

---

Fully rotating is the most fair way.........but if we must play auburn, the game needs to be moved away from season's end.

---

I agree a full rotation is most fair, but CFB is/should be about traditions. Enough has happened on the college landscape over the last decade to stress/break many of those traditions. I'd prefer to keep traditional rivals when and where possible.

That said, Thanksgiving rivalry weekend is a tradition. Hard to keep that if you move the Iron Bowl and not switch it with TSIO, which would also screw that up.

I'd rather have 2 permanent rivals and kill the conference championship game.

Auburn, Tennessee, LSU

i suppose bama will get whoever the big ten tells sankey to saddle us with. after all, it seems to me sankey cows-down to whatever the big ten wants. with that in mind. we'll proly rotate venues with texas and uga while playing every year at jordan hair

quote:

---

if we are dealt with AUB, TN, and LSU that is probably going to be one of if not the toughest schedule in the conference.

---

I agree 100%. I guess my main point was to attack these stupid arguments people were making saying it shouldn't be LSU because they aren't a rival and MSU is more of a rival.

Just call it what it is - we want the historically weaker opponent.

Maybe that is the right decision for getting to the playoffs more often. But, considering the playoff committee has said it would consider strength of schedule more that isn't clearly the right choice me (obviously concern about whether they follow through with that is clearly a valid concern).

But, for example, if we drop a game against South Carolina on the road (or a Vanderbilt even). Which schedule helps our argument to get in more? One in which beat LSU or beat MSU?

And for those that really watch these games - MSU is a physical game historically. So, from a physical toil standpoint, I am not convinced they are that much easier than LSU based on physicality alone even if they translate to a win more often then not. Sure we may get the win against MSU more often, but I don't think it is clear cut that helps our playoff chances more often too.

The real issue that needs to get addressed is bye weeks.