Started By
Message
1
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:07 am to Alahunter
quote:
It's odd that I've never seen Tenn fans complain about having to play Alabama every year, especially with them as down as they are, and Bama winning as many Championships as they are winning. I've never seen a Florida fan complain about having to play Lsu either.
I dont remember Auburn fans complaining when we had to play both UGA and UF as our two permenants up until 2002, either. I seem to recall Auburn trying to restart the series with UF as well. I guess some people aint skurred
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:07 am to wadewilson
quote:
That's right. Kentucky and Vanderbilt had the exact same SEC records.
One team had a better overall record. It's nice you just side stepped 2010 as well
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:11 am to NYCAuburn
But you just said overall records didn't matter. So, the SEC schedules only were a wash btw Bama and LSU in 2011.
And in 2010, LSU played Vandy, Tenn and UF to Bama's South Carolina, Tenn and UF.
It's not our fault South Carolina decided to not suck.
ETA: have fun with this anchor
And in 2010, LSU played Vandy, Tenn and UF to Bama's South Carolina, Tenn and UF.
It's not our fault South Carolina decided to not suck.
ETA: have fun with this anchor
This post was edited on 4/11/13 at 10:11 am
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:15 am to wadewilson
quote:
But you just said overall records didn't matter.
Are you really this dense? seriously Can you not see what I was clearly refering to?
quote:
It's not our fault South Carolina decided to not suck.
Ahh, so LSU fan's entire argument is lost then.
This post was edited on 4/11/13 at 10:16 am
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:26 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
Are you really this dense? seriously Can you not see what I was clearly refering to?
Okay, so let's get this straight: LSU's nonconference opponents don't matter for LSU's strength of schedule, but the fact that Kentucky had EXACTLY ONE MORE LOSS than Vanderbilt, and that it was to a NONCONFERENCE OPPONENT, means LSU's 2011 schedule was weaker than Alabama's?
I bow to your reasoning.
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:26 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
It's not our fault South Carolina decided to not suck.
quote:
Ahh, so LSU fan's entire argument is lost then.
I hope you saw the sarcasm in my comment. Did I not lay it on thick enough?
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:30 am to wadewilson
quote:
Okay, so let's get this straight: LSU's nonconference opponents don't matter for LSU's strength of schedule
Well considering your(LSU fans) gripe is about cross divisional games, not divisional, not OOC games. Why would divisional and ooc games be used in a debate? it has absolutly nothing to do with the argument.
Now as to the argument, cross divional games and the strength of the opponent, yes their overall record comes into play. Why do you ask? because we are debating them and how they faired in that year, not divisonal opponents, not OOC opponents
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:33 am to wadewilson
quote:
hope you saw the sarcasm in my comment. Did I not lay it on thick enough?
I saw it, but its nice for you to admit one way or the other. So LSU has played weaker opponents from the east in the two previous years to 2012 and 2013. Yet you guys continue to bitch about bama playing weak teams despite the fact that LSU just got through a weak schedule. I guess whats good for the goose and all
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:37 am to NYCAuburn
can we stop the argument for second and reflect on how LSU fans, Alabama fans, and one Auburn fan just got epically trolled by a Kentucky fan?
ETA: Oh and
ETA: Oh and
quote:
I'd like it on record that this is not an LSU poster.
This post was edited on 4/11/13 at 10:38 am
Posted on 4/11/13 at 10:41 am to Buck_Nasty
be careful they have been deleting those. this thread would be another page or two at least
Posted on 4/11/13 at 11:05 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
It's odd that I've never seen Tenn fans complain about having to play Alabama every year, especially with them as down as they are, and Bama winning as many Championships as they are winning. I've never seen a Florida fan complain about having to play Lsu either.
quote:
I dont remember Auburn fans complaining when we had to play both UGA and UF as our two permenants up until 2002, either. I seem to recall Auburn trying to restart the series with UF as well. I guess some people aint skurred
^^This
Some folks welcome a challenge. I've seen tons of AU fans wanting to get the FLA series back.
Posted on 4/11/13 at 11:07 am to NYCAuburn
How many losses would UK have with our schedule?
Take it a step further. How many losses would the preseason 2nd ranked OSU have with this schedule, or FSU?
Exactly how easy is it really? It only appears easy because we'll be favored in every game. The #1 team should be favored in every game. Kind of goes with the ranking don't you think?
Take it a step further. How many losses would the preseason 2nd ranked OSU have with this schedule, or FSU?
Exactly how easy is it really? It only appears easy because we'll be favored in every game. The #1 team should be favored in every game. Kind of goes with the ranking don't you think?
This post was edited on 4/11/13 at 11:23 am
Posted on 4/11/13 at 11:44 am to bama1959
I'm not reading this entire thing to endure all the whining and crying about Bama's schedule but here's my take:
If USC/Ohio St/ND/OU/Any freakin team not in the SEC had this as their 2013 schedule, EVERY media outlet in the world would have them with the toughest schedule in the country. EVERY one.
VaTech in ATL
AT A&M
AT MSU
AT AU
LSU
Arky
UT
UGA/FLA/USCe (If they make the SECCG)
There's not a team outside the SEC with a tougher one. Period.
Stop crying about Bama not playing FLA/UGA/USCe. Bama has played at least one of them every year the last 5 seasons and has 3 SECW titles, 2 SEC titles, and 3 BCS national titles.
If USC/Ohio St/ND/OU/Any freakin team not in the SEC had this as their 2013 schedule, EVERY media outlet in the world would have them with the toughest schedule in the country. EVERY one.
VaTech in ATL
AT A&M
AT MSU
AT AU
LSU
Arky
UT
UGA/FLA/USCe (If they make the SECCG)
There's not a team outside the SEC with a tougher one. Period.
Stop crying about Bama not playing FLA/UGA/USCe. Bama has played at least one of them every year the last 5 seasons and has 3 SECW titles, 2 SEC titles, and 3 BCS national titles.
Posted on 4/11/13 at 11:47 am to KPCrimson
Damn this thread exploded.
Posted on 4/11/13 at 12:02 pm to boXerrumble
I haven't read the entire thread either but I'll assume it's a lot of bitching about Bama getting some sort of special treatment in the bridge schedules.
What most people don't seem to realize is that the bridge schedule, while touted as being totally independent of previous and future schedules, actually used the same rotation of cross-division games as before. It just made them all 1 game series instead of 2 game series.
For example, prior to expansion LSU was scheduled to add USCe in '12 and UGA in '13. That's exactly what happened; they're just 1 game series instead of 2 game series.
Prior to expansion, Bama was scheduled to add UGA in '12 and UK in '13. UGA got swapped for Mizzou because Mizzou obviously had to have a 2nd cross-division game.
People seem to be under the impression that the bridge schedules were supposed to be totally random yet LSU got 2 very difficult cross-division games whereas Bama got 2 weak cross-division games by way of collusion. That's not the case.
What most people don't seem to realize is that the bridge schedule, while touted as being totally independent of previous and future schedules, actually used the same rotation of cross-division games as before. It just made them all 1 game series instead of 2 game series.
For example, prior to expansion LSU was scheduled to add USCe in '12 and UGA in '13. That's exactly what happened; they're just 1 game series instead of 2 game series.
Prior to expansion, Bama was scheduled to add UGA in '12 and UK in '13. UGA got swapped for Mizzou because Mizzou obviously had to have a 2nd cross-division game.
People seem to be under the impression that the bridge schedules were supposed to be totally random yet LSU got 2 very difficult cross-division games whereas Bama got 2 weak cross-division games by way of collusion. That's not the case.
Posted on 4/11/13 at 4:19 pm to spslayto
quote:
But...but...but that's LSU's permanent opponent. Alabama's is Tennessee. We promise Tennessee used to be really good. We're sorry Tennessee isn't good right now nor do we know when Tennessee will get better. But this game is so important to us. Why don't you LSU fans understand? Who cares about competitive balance in scheduling? We need to play that game every year.
Rivalries are important to college football, that is why it's greater than all the other sports. Bama/UT is a historic rivalry and we won't stop playing it, but you already know that, you just can't come up with any valid points to make.
Posted on 4/11/13 at 4:21 pm to spslayto
quote:
There is no year that LSU has had a cakewalk in the East simply due to that fact. But I appreciate your argument. We can't help that Florida has been pretty good while Tennessee hasn't the last few years.
2011, Florida wasn't good that year. Neither was UK or UT.
Posted on 4/12/13 at 7:12 am to UKWildcatsFAN
quote:
Damn 10 pages and still going this morning.
And still no one from LSU in here bitching. 
Page 12 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News