Started By
Message
re: Permanent opponents leaked
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:06 pm to molsusports
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:06 pm to molsusports
quote:We've heard from LSU fans for years that they don't have any rivals. Well, this is what happens when you don't have any rivals. Every other team that you want LSU to play has someone slightly higher on their preferred opponent's list, or is a geographic mismatch.
This is the worst case scenario if true. LSU loses their top three most desirable opponents since expansion in 1992. No Florida. No Alabama. No Auburn
There's nothing wrong with playing Arkansas or A&M. But that's just not it. My interest is in the games against teams that won national championships in my lifetime. The hook was set when I saw LSU upset Spurrier's Florida to break their unbeaten streak or watching LSU and Auburn battle while a fire blazed in the dark.
It will be OK. You will play all those teams on a regular basis, just every other year instead of every year, and you'll see some good opponents that you almost never saw in divisional play.
1
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:12 pm to BrohemAlem11
quote:
make college football regional again!
A&M is a lot closer to LSU than UF. As a matter of fact the campuses of Alabama and A&M are nearly the same distance from Baton Rouge. So I guess you pretty much got what you wished for. You could argue that they should have replaced Arkansas with Bama, as that is the farthest of your 3 annual opponents.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:13 pm to BigBro
quote:
From the outside looking in, here is my take. LSU has played Florida 52x since 1971. LSU has played A&M 29x since 1971. So about a 2-1 ratio. If they had made Florida their permanent rival, then they would have kept the 2-1 ratio in tact. Every year vs Every other year. It should have been Florida imo.
I would have been fine with any of UF AU or TAMU.
Auburn has the least history in terms of games played than the other 2 but there is so much in the way of unique game history that it makes up for it. Also auburn Baton Rouge isn’t WAY out of the way. Auburn is down but is always willing to bend the rules to turn it around and get the toilet paper flying.
UF has the most history total and has the unique history but geographically is far away. They are also down. They won’t always be down but they’re own fans seem to think the admin is less focused on football.
TAMU has enough history and enough overlap that the games potential is higher than auburn or UF for LSU. It’s a relatively close drive from baton rouge and Houston is easy stop in the way and LSU grad migration to Houston is like gravity. Tamu will always have the potential and money to be on the brink as well.
Rivalry week is really the issue as the suits want lsu tamu which is fine but then that forces lsu to have arky to fill out rivalry week. So now stuck with 2 non charters and non big 6 which just feels weird.
This post was edited on 9/22/25 at 3:16 pm
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:18 pm to twk
quote:
This is the worst case scenario if true. LSU loses their top three most desirable opponents since expansion in 1992. No Florida. No Alabama. No Auburn
There's nothing wrong with playing Arkansas or A&M. But that's just not it. My interest is in the games against teams that won national championships in my lifetime. The hook was set when I saw LSU upset Spurrier's Florida to break their unbeaten streak or watching LSU and Auburn battle while a fire blazed in the dark.
We've heard from LSU fans for years that they don't have any rivals. Well, this is what happens when you don't have any rivals.
It is like you read my post and then created a straw man argument representing LSU opinion as the complete opposite.
Most of the people saying no true rival stuff is just troll material from stupid people on the Internet.
The typical LSU fan obviously really valued the games against specific teams for reasons associated with the time when they became fans. This is too self evident to argue about. Over the last 33 years I don't see how that isn't Florida, Auburn, or Alabama. Granted older fans alive in the late 50s might argue for Ole Miss.
quote:
It will be OK. You will play all those teams on a regular basis, just every other year instead of every year, and you'll see some good opponents that you almost never saw in divisional play.
FWIW here you are really amazing at being really condescending while saying useless and obvious things. If you ever marry your spouse may be tempted to strangle you in your sleep
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:20 pm to jlovel7
quote:
And our newest forced rivalry with TAMU. Which again is completely one sided. They are at best annoying to LSU fans because they were foisted upon us and latched onto us like we were their new Texas.
We have played them a frickload and we've traded off winning each of the last 8 meetings (home team won). They funnel a lot of money into that program and it'll stay a competitive game.
I can't stand them and don't want them in the SEC, but to call it lopsided or forced is disingenuous. We have no true rivals.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:23 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
I can’t speak for them, but I recall some epic games with Bama and Auburn. To get neither of them seems a slap in the face.
3 permanent games
6 rotating games with remaining 12 opponents.
We will still play everyone twice every 4 years, right? It's not disappearing completely.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:25 pm to TheGhostofBud
quote:
A&M is a lot closer to LSU than UF. As a matter of fact the campuses of Alabama and A&M are nearly the same distance from Baton Rouge. So I guess you pretty much got what you wished for. You could argue that they should have replaced Arkansas with Bama, as that is the farthest of your 3 annual opponents.
My bigger point is the SEC should have stayed as is and not started admitting the big 12 piece by piece. but fair enough. what I mean is keep in tact the rivalries from when cfb was a regional sport. LSU auburn was a great rivalry that we lost even before this in the name of expanding... now losing LSU/UF and LSU/bama.... this sucks.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:27 pm to Mstate
I hope this is just a trial run and not the future.
I know some of the good matchups were destined to become ancient history. But man… there were nine core permanent matchups when the SEC ascended to the pinnacle of college football. Five of them are gone. And the only one that was added with the same gravitas was Texas-OU.
Granted, 2/3 of the games are rotating anyway, so it’s not like we’ll never see those games again. But I’d argue this is a reason in favor of keeping the awesome games. The difficulty will wash out.
Bottom line, this doesn’t keep some of the premium matchups that made the conference so compelling in the first place. And I don’t think it’s totally reflective of the “state of the conference” in terms of rivalries and strength of schedule, either.
I know some of the good matchups were destined to become ancient history. But man… there were nine core permanent matchups when the SEC ascended to the pinnacle of college football. Five of them are gone. And the only one that was added with the same gravitas was Texas-OU.
Granted, 2/3 of the games are rotating anyway, so it’s not like we’ll never see those games again. But I’d argue this is a reason in favor of keeping the awesome games. The difficulty will wash out.
Bottom line, this doesn’t keep some of the premium matchups that made the conference so compelling in the first place. And I don’t think it’s totally reflective of the “state of the conference” in terms of rivalries and strength of schedule, either.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:27 pm to BrohemAlem11
quote:
LSU auburn was a great rivalry that we lost even before this in the name of expanding... now losing LSU/UF and LSU/bama.... this sucks.
The new schedule will be much better for this honestly though.
This isn’t the old east west rotation where it seemed like a decade to make it around the circle.
We will play at least one of Au bama Florida per year and the next year have 2/3.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:28 pm to Adam Banks
quote:
The new schedule will be much better for this honestly though.
This isn’t the old east west rotation where it seemed like a decade to make it around the circle.
We will play at least one of Au bama Florida per year and the next year have 2/3.
All true, and the new model was guaranteed to be a massive improvement for this reason alone. But there had to be a way to keep more of the core SEC games intact.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:29 pm to molsusports
You ignored the most important point. While you may value the Bama rivalry, they simply don't have playing LSU quite as high on their priority list. That's not a slight to LSU, it's just a fact that Tennessee and Auburn are their two biggest rivals, and Saban didn't want LSU as his 3rd annual opponent. Same deal with Auburn--Bama and UGA were the games that had to be played, and their AD lobbied for Vandy as their 3rd. Florida wasn't a geographic fit.
I see the same thing from A&M fans upset about playing Missouri. It's not all about what we want, but, rather, making the jigsaw puzzle fit. Birmingham did a decent job on this. There was just no way to please everyone.
I see the same thing from A&M fans upset about playing Missouri. It's not all about what we want, but, rather, making the jigsaw puzzle fit. Birmingham did a decent job on this. There was just no way to please everyone.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:30 pm to Boomer88
quote:
Two hates and the Grove. Freaking love it!
Who the hell hates Mizwho? They are like OSwho - I think most of us pity them.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:33 pm to OKBoomerSooner
quote:
there were nine core permanent matchups when the SEC ascended to the pinnacle of college football. Five of them are gone.
Exactly
quote:
this doesn’t keep some of the premium matchups that made the conference so compelling in the first place.
Yes. The programs and the conference have a value strongly affected by if not based upon the big games people plan on watching. That's the baby, not the bathwater.
College football is inferior to the NFL in every single way except the history and fan experience. That's what has to be identified and preserved. The nine permanent matchups for starters
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:34 pm to Harry Boutte
I know OU has played Missouri a lot but they were never more of a rival than Iowa State.
Kick Missouri out and add in Nebraska. I know they don't fit geographically but neither does Missouri, and it would be nice to have OU/NU back.
Kick Missouri out and add in Nebraska. I know they don't fit geographically but neither does Missouri, and it would be nice to have OU/NU back.
This post was edited on 9/22/25 at 3:35 pm
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:38 pm to twk
The real problem for the LSU fan is TA&M doesn't move the passion needle. We just don't care about them. It's hard to get fired up for someone you don't think about.
We really cared about our annual meetings with Ala. and Fla. (and Auburn, for the couple decades we had them as an annual game).
We really cared about our annual meetings with Ala. and Fla. (and Auburn, for the couple decades we had them as an annual game).
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:38 pm to Mstate
Swap out A&M with auburn and I’m good
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:47 pm to Mstate
That sucks.
Arky, aTm and 0U?
Arky, aTm and 0U?
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:48 pm to ChapelHillSooner
quote:
Kick Missouri out and add in Nebraska.
How about you beat Mizzou first time in the SEC before you go all crazy. Maybe you can cheat and hide a WR near the sidelines to pull it out this year.
Posted on 9/22/25 at 3:56 pm to Tha crook
I understand what the LSU fans are saying. It's like our annual with Mizwho. Even though it makes sense geographically - it has never moved the needle to OU fans. They hate us, just like the little brother in Stillwater. That being said - we pity both schools. Neither has ever won shite, nor beaten us enough times to make us give a shite. If we beat them - well we are supposed to, if we lose - they feel like they won the goddamned Natty. They beat their fricking chests like they have killed Darth Vader. Seriously - look at the crowing after last season's game. Jackson gifted them the game from our worst team since Boo Blake was coach, and they act like they did something.
I was hoping to see LSU or Bama or any two of the so called big 6, along with TexAss. I prefer the schedule be as hard as hell. If we survive the gauntlet - then we have accomplished something. No matter what with the remaining 6 teams, the schedule will be a bitch!
I was hoping to see LSU or Bama or any two of the so called big 6, along with TexAss. I prefer the schedule be as hard as hell. If we survive the gauntlet - then we have accomplished something. No matter what with the remaining 6 teams, the schedule will be a bitch!
Posted on 9/22/25 at 4:00 pm to Mstate
Not having the DSOR just seems wrong, imo. I always thought that rivalry, along with the World's Biggest Cocktail Party and TSIO were the three untouchables in the SEC.
Page 17 of 23
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News