Started By
Message
re: Spurrier doesn't think the SEC should keep permanent cross-division foes.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:22 pm to wadewilson
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:22 pm to wadewilson
You bitch a lot 
0
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:24 pm to Roger Klarvin
Again, including your best era and discounting ours goes a long way towards making the programs look equal 
Now let's throw out your best era and put ours back in. How do the numbers look then? Ill make sure to look them up when I get home and post them here.
Now let's throw out your best era and put ours back in. How do the numbers look then? Ill make sure to look them up when I get home and post them here.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:24 pm to therick711
quote:
They recently changed their position vis-a-vis permanent opponents, but this statement proves you don't know what you're talking about.
Link?
This post was edited on 4/24/13 at 4:25 pm
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:25 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
quote:
College Football is what it is because of rivalry and traditions, we're not gonna piss on that because some of you can't handle playing a good team every year. There was a time when UT was better than UF, and that day will come again.
...says the team that is actively trying to limit the games vs. Georgia and Florida.
If Tenn isn't on your SEC schedule, and you want to play Tennessee, then schedule a non-conference game with Tennessee. I am 100% sure that wouldn't happen. The "rivalry" game doesn't mean nearly as much as you pretend it does.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:25 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Well, for starters we won ten more conference titles in that time frame. We had the same number of national titles, same number of Heisman winners and similar winning percentages. We finished ranked in the AP poll 25 times.
Oh, and in before someone not up on their CFB history says the SWC conference was much weaker than the SEC for all those years.
LSU leads TAMU 28-19-3 in the series.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:25 pm to Finkle is Einhorn
quote:
From 2007-2010, these are the number of SEC games played when the opponent had an open week prior to the game
17—Alabama, 5—LSU, 4—Vanderbilt, 4—Florida, 4—Tennessee, 3—Georgia, 3—Auburn, 2—Kentucky, 1—Ole Miss, 1—Mississippi State, 0—Arkansas, 0—South Carolina
Legitimate argument
And in that same time period, Bama has played UGA 3 times (2-1), FLA 4 times (3-1), SoCarl 2 times (1-1). Bama has played the powers of the SEC East and has a current record of 6-3 against them in the last 6 years. So WTF is the problem?
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:27 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
And no, it's not moot because their ceiling is significantly lower than UF and UGA's
Lets assume for a minute this is true: So what? Will you be complaining the years Florida wins six and Tennessee nine or ten?
I really have no schedule preference and am neither for or against the current format, im just amazed at how much time LSU fans spend bitching about it. Where are all the Auburn fans complaining about Georgia?
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:29 pm to Bamatab
quote:
Bamatab
They are suggesting that and currently have a leg to stand with UT being hot garbage for the last 5 or so years. But the assertion that UT is a dead program is fricking retarded. Almost 100 years of football history suggests otherwise.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:29 pm to RT1941
quote:
And in that same time period, Bama has played UGA 3 times (2-1), FLA 4 times (3-1), SoCarl 2 times (1-1). Bama has played the powers of the SEC East and has a current record of 6-3 against them in the last 6 years. So WTF is the problem?
So a team that has gone 27-2 over the past two seasons has only a 66% win percentage against the Eastern powers. That isn't a good argument for scheduling balance at all.
This post was edited on 4/24/13 at 4:30 pm
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:31 pm to moneyg
quote:Bama has played UGA 3 times and FLA 4 times in the last 6 seasons. Who the hell is trying to limit those games?
...says the team that is actively trying to limit the games vs. Georgia and Florida.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:31 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Lets assume for a minute this is true: So what? Will you be complaining the years Florida wins six and Tennessee nine or ten?
I really have no schedule preference and am neither for or against the current format, im just amazed at how much time LSU fans spend bitching about it. Where are all the Auburn fans complaining about Georgia?
Those will be fewer and farther between. If we go to a pure rotation where everyone then that benefit is spread evenly rather than given to 1 team most years.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:31 pm to Robert Goulet
quote:
They are suggesting that and currently have a leg to stand with UT being hot garbage for the last 5 or so years. But the assertion that UT is a dead program is fricking retarded. Almost 100 years of football history suggests otherwise.
I agree. All programs go through down years. We went through ours, and LSU & UF have gone through theirs in the past. It's not like UT as lost the ability to ever be competitive again.
This post was edited on 4/24/13 at 4:33 pm
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:31 pm to therick711
quote:
has only a 66% win percentage against the Eastern powers.
I can't imagine he typed that with a straight face.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:32 pm to wadewilson
I bet if Bama was moved to the SEC East for Missouri, the whole traditional opponent thing would be history.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:32 pm to wadewilson
I agree with Spurrier
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:35 pm to JimMorrison
quote:
Spurrier doesn't think the SEC should keep permanent cross-division foes.
Spurrier is always flapping his jaws about something...so badly he wants to be in the limelight.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:36 pm to Sheetbend
quote:
I bet if Bama was moved to the SEC East for Missouri, the whole traditional opponent thing would be history.
And auburn/UGA, Bama/auburn, Ole Miss/Vandy would be pretty upset that they would have to stop their yearly games (as well they should).
This post was edited on 4/24/13 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:37 pm to Sheetbend
quote:
I bet if Bama was moved to the SEC East for Missouri, the whole traditional opponent thing would be history.
That's really not a bad idea at all.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:37 pm to wadewilson
The bridge schedules have been fricked up in favor of Bama. There it is. Beyond that, where is the inequity? Seriously. The schedules don't really bear that out for the past 20-some odd years. Let's move on.
Posted on 4/24/13 at 4:38 pm to Sheetbend
quote:
I bet if Bama was moved to the SEC East for Missouri, the whole traditional opponent thing would be history.
I bet if Florida went into an amazing period of complete suckage and Tennessee won a couple titles and a heisman you would also stop hearing about it.
Page 12 of 18
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News