Started By
Message
re: Bowen Loftin (Fmr A&M and Mizzou Pres)-Adding Texas would break the Gentleman's Agreement
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:12 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:12 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
We should be playing Texas every year for sure.
I don’t think that’s a given at all
1
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:13 pm to Draconian Sanctions
We will see. It would be disappointing for me if that isn’t the case. I find it tough to believe this would happen and the SEC wouldn’t want to have it as a yearly rivalry from a TV perspective
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:14 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
Maybe but in that scenario they’re in your pod as is Oklahoma which doesn’t seem fair.
You haven’t played them in 10 years, why does it have to be annual now?
You haven’t played them in 10 years, why does it have to be annual now?
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:16 pm to aggressor
I remember the gentleman's agreement back in 2010 being mentioned in the first talks to the SEC. That was one of the initial draws. Isn't that why Florida State, Miami, Louisville, Georgia Tech, or Clemson would never get offers to join the SEC, unless y'all are ok with it now?
What I would like is that we at least play the whorns OOC despite their antics. They went from boycotting us right after the move to the SEC (getting their Big 12 pawns to do the same) to scheduling other SEC opponents not named A&M for their OOC schedule to full on desperation mode begging to join the conference.
What I would like is that we at least play the whorns OOC despite their antics. They went from boycotting us right after the move to the SEC (getting their Big 12 pawns to do the same) to scheduling other SEC opponents not named A&M for their OOC schedule to full on desperation mode begging to join the conference.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:16 pm to Draconian Sanctions
We share a conference with them, we should absolutely be playing them every year. I was never opposed before, I just didn’t like the idea of trading fun home and home games like UCLA and Clemson for it. And we seemed dead set on having one P5 opponent for a while at least under Sumlin/Hyman and Woodward
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:17 pm to vl100butch
quote:
Over the years, having been stationed at Ft Sill and Ft Hood, I've developed a detestation for both Texas and Oklahoma and would prefer that they stay the hell away from the SEC..
Personally, if I had to have one of the two, it'd be Oklahoma...
I think Texas is far more trouble than they're worth, let them both go to the PAC 12 and stew in their irrelevance to the big picture of college football...
Agreed. Texas is conference cancer.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:17 pm to Draconian Sanctions
It doesn’t really, but if the league wants to maximize the value that is the call.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:21 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
There are a lot of moving parts in setting up the new schedule, to make this work you can’t have the current system where certain teams don’t play a complete home and a home but once every 17 years or whatever. You do the pod system with 3 permanents and the other 12 rotate home and home every 4 years with the top 2 teams playing in the SECCG.
I’m assuming (could be wrong) that Texas and Oklahoma make keeping their annual game a condition of them joining. If so, adding A&M would make the pods unbalanced (that’s a compliment to A&M btw)
What makes more sense is Texas/OU/Arky/Missou or some equivalent + LSU/A&M/Mississippi schools
There’s no way you can accommodate every single traditional rivalry. LSU is losing 3 of them in this alignment.
I’m assuming (could be wrong) that Texas and Oklahoma make keeping their annual game a condition of them joining. If so, adding A&M would make the pods unbalanced (that’s a compliment to A&M btw)
What makes more sense is Texas/OU/Arky/Missou or some equivalent + LSU/A&M/Mississippi schools
There’s no way you can accommodate every single traditional rivalry. LSU is losing 3 of them in this alignment.
This post was edited on 7/22/21 at 8:24 pm
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:23 pm to aggressor
Mike Slive probably did say that. Greg Sankey wants to define his legacy. shite changes. O well.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:24 pm to EastTXHorn
quote:
A&M needs to get out the way, this is a beneficial move for everybody outside of College Station.
No it's not. It's beneficial for you. The SEC doesn't need Texas.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:26 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
There’s no way you can accommodate every single traditional rivalry. LSU is losing 3 of them in this alignment.
I am kinda amazed LSU fans aren’t more upset about that.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:27 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Yeah, I haven’t had a ton of time to look into how the schedules work with the pods honestly. I’m guessing this is with 9 conference games (thinking about it in my head)? I would imagine 10 conference games is probably pushing it and would make this a logistical nightmare as well
My selfish condition for this is I’d like to play Texas LSU and Arkansas every year. Arkansas maybe less important than the other two, but those are the three schools we have history with. I guess that would be extremely difficult or impossible though without having an insane schedule
My selfish condition for this is I’d like to play Texas LSU and Arkansas every year. Arkansas maybe less important than the other two, but those are the three schools we have history with. I guess that would be extremely difficult or impossible though without having an insane schedule
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:27 pm to aggressor
Sounds like A&M's mystifying defense mechanism. Kind of like how they are convinced that their cheerleaders makes sense. Even their female population buy this.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:31 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
I am kinda amazed LSU fans aren’t more upset about that.
Well we do have a lot of hate spread around. We are keeping 2 of our 5 and don’t want to be in an over stacked pod.
Losing the Bama game every year is worse than I think most realize but they’ve beaten us so much recently I don’t think people can see it at the moment.
Losing Auburn and Florida also sucks but again you can’t keep them all, as long as we’re playing one of the two every year that’s not too bad.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:35 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Losing the Bama game would seem to be a deal breaker but this sport is changing quickly so it makes sense to be flexible. We just don’t want to get stuck in a Big 12 redo pod after getting away from that jail cell.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:39 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
Losing the Bama game would seem to be a deal breaker
I personally would be really upset about it but I think most here will see it as getting away from Saban and won’t realize what they’ve lost until maybe that 2nd or 3rd time they aren’t on the schedule.
Those kinds of games are what makes your school a great place for college football, both for players and fans. They’re will still be a lot of great matchups for us obviously but that’s a special game.
This post was edited on 7/22/21 at 8:44 pm
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:45 pm to cardboardboxer
Well we definitely didnt make that bed and dont want to sleep in it either. 
Some original sec schools are gonna have to give up more than you new comers (not a dig), are giving it enough thought
Some original sec schools are gonna have to give up more than you new comers (not a dig), are giving it enough thought
This post was edited on 7/22/21 at 8:47 pm
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:46 pm to BluegrassBelle
Delete
This post was edited on 7/22/21 at 8:47 pm
Posted on 7/22/21 at 8:50 pm to aggressor
Well aren’t you faggies wishing you hadn’t been sick pricks now. (Lol)
We allowed you in the conference to expand our recruiting base into Texas (check) and to occasionally beat bama (one time, Ole Miss is better than that.)
Instead you sucked up to bama like little tittie babies. No you are about to get bitch slapped.
We allowed you in the conference to expand our recruiting base into Texas (check) and to occasionally beat bama (one time, Ole Miss is better than that.)
Instead you sucked up to bama like little tittie babies. No you are about to get bitch slapped.
Posted on 7/22/21 at 9:02 pm to cardboardboxer
All trolling aside-
There's certainly going to be a gentlemen's agreement taking place.
One of the numbers I see tossed around, I don't know the deal if it's true or not: you need 11 of 14 yea votes to do something like this.
If A&M raises a stink (and they are), I see Arkansas backing them. You then have 2 Tigers in play...
Missouri will join in with anyone if it strengthens their conference bonds. They need a partner, this could be that. That gives you 3, technically could still pass.
But then you factor in LSU. You gotta figure LSU is kinda A&M's sponsor, and maybe Arky's too. You know that LSU did have to consent to those 2 being added, hell we ended up being paired with both during rivalry weeks.
So, I see LSU as the go-between, trying to broker a deal between the "traditional" SEC teams and A&M with this. I think ultimately, LSU will back A&M's call, but might be trying to get them to agree to it, on behalf of the rest of the league.
If that's the case, if A&M won't give in, you would likely see 4 nays minimum if it came to a vote. And the SEC won't have a vote unless it's a guaranteed pass.
This 4 team bloc makes a fair bit of sense, because the more the SEC adds, the more it gets diluted. If you put in 2 teams from the West, the split pushes "the real SEC" to the East, and LSU gets stuck in with a bunch of SWC and Big 8 relics (and the Mississippi schools). That might not be in LSU's best marketing interests.
There's certainly going to be a gentlemen's agreement taking place.
One of the numbers I see tossed around, I don't know the deal if it's true or not: you need 11 of 14 yea votes to do something like this.
If A&M raises a stink (and they are), I see Arkansas backing them. You then have 2 Tigers in play...
Missouri will join in with anyone if it strengthens their conference bonds. They need a partner, this could be that. That gives you 3, technically could still pass.
But then you factor in LSU. You gotta figure LSU is kinda A&M's sponsor, and maybe Arky's too. You know that LSU did have to consent to those 2 being added, hell we ended up being paired with both during rivalry weeks.
So, I see LSU as the go-between, trying to broker a deal between the "traditional" SEC teams and A&M with this. I think ultimately, LSU will back A&M's call, but might be trying to get them to agree to it, on behalf of the rest of the league.
If that's the case, if A&M won't give in, you would likely see 4 nays minimum if it came to a vote. And the SEC won't have a vote unless it's a guaranteed pass.
This 4 team bloc makes a fair bit of sense, because the more the SEC adds, the more it gets diluted. If you put in 2 teams from the West, the split pushes "the real SEC" to the East, and LSU gets stuck in with a bunch of SWC and Big 8 relics (and the Mississippi schools). That might not be in LSU's best marketing interests.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News