Started By
Message
re: I know I will get blasted by lsu fans but?
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:03 pm to BIG DADDY 73
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:03 pm to BIG DADDY 73
quote:
aubarn's
Aren't you special.
1
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:05 pm to Patton
quote:
That thread got deleted?
What a shame
It was going so well.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:05 pm to NYCAuburn
I try.. lol
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:09 pm to BIG DADDY 73
quote:
How would moving aubarn's name to the SEC East suddenly make them a recruiting powerhouse to be feared anyway? It's not like they would move the university to Atlanta.
And why would moving to the east increase their recruiting there. Bama gets a lot of players out of GA & FL, yet we are still in the west last I checked. If there were some Bama folks that didn't want auburn to move east, it was because we would lose at least one of our rivalry games, if not both. Would the auburn fans have wanted to move if it meant that the permanent cross-divisional game was done away with (and thus lost the yearly Iron Bowl game)? I know that I don't want to lose either the TSIO or the Iron Bowl. I could care less about them moving east because of recruiting, because I don't see how them moving east would help them any in recruiting.
This post was edited on 5/3/13 at 4:11 pm
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:18 pm to Bamatab
quote:
And why would moving to the east increase their recruiting there
Ask bama officials that made the decision to oppose Mizzou entering the SEC if AU moved east and specifically cited the concern of AU growing stronger through recruiting if they moved east.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:20 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
Ask bama officials that made the decision to oppose Mizzou entering the SEC if AU moved east and specifically cited the concern of AU growing stronger through recruiting if they moved east.
Link me an article that quotes a Bama official stating that.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:26 pm to Bamatab
quote:
Link me an article that quotes a Bama official stating that.
I have already linked enough articles, from your own fricking beat writer no less, quoting bama officials.
Just because you do not want to belive it does not mean it isn't true.
Remember, this is the same school that had to be threatened in the alabama judicial system to even agree to play Auburn at Jordan Hare a few short decades ago.
Similar to then when AU had just won 3 in a row against bama and 5 out of 7, when bama was worried about AU moving East, AU was the defending national champ who had just beaten bama for the past 7 out of 9 times.
As I said, bama would probably vote differently today than they did then.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:36 pm to iluvredboxx
I'm not going to read the whole thread and it's probably way off topic now and/or has degenerated into a flame fest like every other thread on the SECRB.
The issue isn't about us having to play Florida every year - anyone trying to make that into the issue is focused on the wrong topic. I like playing Florida every year, it's always a great matchup. I don't even mind the permanent matchups. Where it gets fricked up is the arbitrary process of making "bridge" schedules in lieu of a a pragmatic, logical schedule making process. Some teams appear to be getting preferential treatment as to their schedules, giving them a much easier path to SEC and national championships. Even if its innocent or accidental, there shouldn't even be a hint of impropriety. Creating a schedule shouldn't generate any questions of fairness, because the process should be formulaic and inherently fair. But that's not how it is at the moment. It's not about UF-LSU.
The issue isn't about us having to play Florida every year - anyone trying to make that into the issue is focused on the wrong topic. I like playing Florida every year, it's always a great matchup. I don't even mind the permanent matchups. Where it gets fricked up is the arbitrary process of making "bridge" schedules in lieu of a a pragmatic, logical schedule making process. Some teams appear to be getting preferential treatment as to their schedules, giving them a much easier path to SEC and national championships. Even if its innocent or accidental, there shouldn't even be a hint of impropriety. Creating a schedule shouldn't generate any questions of fairness, because the process should be formulaic and inherently fair. But that's not how it is at the moment. It's not about UF-LSU.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:36 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
I didn't read every one of those articles, and I'm not. But I have yet to read where anyone directly quoted an Alabama official.
And why would they say that considering just moving their name to the east wouldn't help recruiting anyway.
And why would they say that considering just moving their name to the east wouldn't help recruiting anyway.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:44 pm to Bamatab
quote:
Link me an article that quotes a Bama official stating that.
I've got a quote from Paul Bryant Jr.
quote:
Nick Saban wasn't behind the power play to put Mizzou in the East. As much power as he wields, he's only a football coach. Undoubtedly, the charge was led by Paul Bryant Jr., the chairman of the University of Alabama Board of Trustees. It's likely Little Bear commanded Alabama president Robert Witt to deny Mizzou entry unless it kowtowed to the Tide's whims.
There it is. INDISPUTABLE evidence!!!
quote:
Alabama didn't have to be so petty. It would be simple to solve the Tide's dilemma. Alabama and Auburn could move to the East together, and either Kentucky or Vanderbilt would shift to the West.
Why did you frickers have to be so petty???
LSU could have been living the dream. Kentucky and Vandy every year.
I hate the REC.
LINK
ETA: Author of that article is legit as shite:
quote:
Didn't go to an LSU game until I was 16--one of the great regrets of my early childhood. Attended LSU and graduated with a degree in accounting and 36 hours in political science
Freelance writer for The Advocate in Baton Rouge for many years, but could not find my way until after Hurricane Katrina in 2005
Bleacher Report FTW.
This post was edited on 5/3/13 at 5:41 pm
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:45 pm to BIG DADDY 73
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't read every one of those articles, and I'm not. But I have yet to read where anyone directly quoted an Alabama official.
Cmon dude, they were closed door meetings. You will not find an official quote from ANY representative of any SEC school on how they voted and why. The closest thing you can find will be Gouge simply saying AU would accept a move to the east if that was how the vote came down.
Use some common sense and quit trying to deny something that does not appear to sit well with you for whatever reason.
You want to go find me a link disputing what was reported by the bama beat writer and reported on every news site covering the Mizzou addition back then? Or any bama official disputing the accuracy of the reporting?
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:50 pm to BrerTiger
quote:
Alabama didn't have to be so petty. It would be simple to solve the Tide's dilemma. Alabama and Auburn could move to the East together, and either Kentucky or Vanderbilt would shift to the West.
SEC East would have been way too strong.
quote:
Nick Saban wasn't behind the power play to put Mizzou in the East. As much power as he wields, he's only a football coach. Undoubtedly, the charge was led by Paul Bryant Jr., the chairman of the University of Alabama Board of Trustees. It's likely Little Bear commanded Alabama president Robert Witt to deny Mizzou entry unless it kowtowed to the Tide's whims.
Doesn't say anything about being scared of aubarn being a recruiting powerhouse.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:52 pm to ASAP
quote:
ASAP
Easiest poster to troll ever?
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:53 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
Alabama, which resides in the SEC minority of wanting No. 14 from the East Coast, would support Missouri if it joined the SEC East, not the West, multiple sources said. According to the sources, Alabama has two objectives: Keep its annual cross-division rivalry game against Tennessee, and not watch Auburn move to the East and possibly grow its recruiting presence in talent-rich Florida and Georgia.
Okay, let's have a non-flammable discussion about this paragraph if we can.
1) Those are unnamed sources. Let's take it with a little bit of a grain of salt. Not saying it's untrue. Doesn't make it Gospel either.
2) Doesn't it make sense that Bama would be primarily motivated by wanting to keep both rivalry games? That wouldn't be possible if AU moved to the East unless Bama also moved to the East or a move was made back to having two permanent cross division games (something that was tried before and wasn't popular). I can accept that Bama *may* have been partially motivated by fears of Auburn gaining recruits in Florida and Georgia if you can admit that Bama's overwhelming likely concern was about having to choose between one rivalry game or the other. Because one of those concerns is very real and justifiable and the other isn't. I think you know which is which.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:56 pm to BrerTiger
Really, Mizzou is who should be pissed. Bama fricked them over pretty hard due to Bama's concerns.
The situation is going to have to be fixed eventually. It is not fair for Mizzou to have to pay for constant cross country journies in every sport and their fans to have to travel so far if they want to watch them play all because bama got its panties in a wad.
The situation is going to have to be fixed eventually. It is not fair for Mizzou to have to pay for constant cross country journies in every sport and their fans to have to travel so far if they want to watch them play all because bama got its panties in a wad.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:57 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
Use some common sense and quit trying to deny something that does not appear to sit well with you for whatever reason.
That's what everybody has been telling yall about scam-gate.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:59 pm to lsu711
quote:
most Florida fans seem to like the game.
Because they pretty much dominated us throughout the 80's and 90's and have held their own against us since our resurgence in the past 10-12 years. With the exception of past 2 years they have actually needed us to improve their SOS since the rest of SEC East has sucked so bad.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 4:59 pm to BIG DADDY 73
quote:
SEC East would have been way too strong.
That's because the SEC East is in possession of more powerful sarcasm meters.
quote:
Doesn't say anything about being scared of aubarn being a recruiting powerhouse.
This is what he's referring to:
LINK
quote:
Alabama, which resides in the SEC minority of wanting No. 14 from the East Coast, would support Missouri if it joined the SEC East, not the West, multiple sources said. According to the sources, Alabama has two objectives: Keep its annual cross-division rivalry game against Tennessee, and not watch Auburn move to the East and possibly grow its recruiting presence in talent-rich Florida and Georgia.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 5:00 pm to BIG DADDY 73
Well, every news site out there reported that bama blocked AU to the east and cited concerns over recruiting advantages gained by AU. NBC, the sporting news, SEC blogs, AJC, Bham news.
And not a single thing written by anyone disputing the accuracy of all the news articles stating such.
Face it. Bama was worried about AU in the East and buttfricked Mizzou due to their pettiness and worries.
And not a single thing written by anyone disputing the accuracy of all the news articles stating such.
Face it. Bama was worried about AU in the East and buttfricked Mizzou due to their pettiness and worries.
Posted on 5/3/13 at 5:06 pm to BrerTiger
quote:
Bama's overwhelming likely concern was about having to choose between one rivalry game or the other
This I can see, but BAMA being scared of aubarn magically becoming a recruiting machine just because their school NAME got move to the east is bullshite.
Page 7 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News