Started By
Message
re: Why is Alabama scared to play Florida more often?
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:31 am to GoBigOrange86
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:31 am to GoBigOrange86
quote:
Again, if it were just about fairness in scheduling, then Tennessee would be on LSU's side because we don't benefit from playing Alabama every year.
Let's just clear this up once and for all. UT-k UA-t UGA and AU will NEVER willingly give up the system because it was setup to placate them and to satisfy their wants without regard to anyone else. UK, Ole Miss, Vandy, and State won't complain because they got good draws. So don't act like UT isn't complaining is a worthwhile point because you set the system up that way. OF COURSE you wouldn't complain about it.
1
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:31 am to RT1941
quote:
Then LSU should have voted against expansion in 1992 and in 2012. Cross-division opponents were agreed upon by everyone in 1992, including LSU. Funny how LSU had no problem with UF being their cross-opponent back when Florida was just starting to win a few games and now bitches when UF turned into a national power. In 1992 when this was agreed upon, Tennessee was by far the best East program and Bama agreed to that with open arms.
UF was back-to-back SEC champs in 90 and 91. They were ineligible in 90 due to a previous coaches probation, but they had the best record.
UT also won a grand total on 1 more game than UF in the 80's. (77-38 vs 76-38)
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:31 am to WDE24
quote:
I'm going to need you to show your work.
i don't have time to teach you football, son
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:31 am to WDE24
quote:
I don't know. All of those teams had different opponents than the other teams. That isn't fair and you can't tell who was actually good to be able to tell who had the tougher schedule.
Your spin is magnificent. You truly have embraced all the teachings of the Barn. You're training is complete. Now go forth, and bring forth justice and equality in universe.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:32 am to GoBigOrange86
quote:This will ruin the SEC if 14 teams hasn't already done so.
when we inevitably go to 16.
Or at least change it into a product completely different than it ever has been.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:33 am to Waffle House
quote:
UF was back-to-back SEC champs in 90 and 91. They were ineligible in 90 due to a previous coaches probation, but they had the best record.
UT also won a grand total on 1 more game than UF in the 80's. (77-38 vs 76-38)
uh oh
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:34 am to therick711
quote:
So don't act like UT isn't complaining is a worthwhile point because you set the system up that way. OF COURSE you wouldn't complain about it.
But how was it to our benefit? Alabama is one of the best programs in the nation; the only reason it benefits us is because of the traditional aspect -- or as your coach might say, "we had a want". Except for 2007 I haven't had much of a prayer that we would beat Alabama in their current winning streak, but I still don't want to get rid of the game. It WOULD directly benefit us to not have to play the Tadd every year, but we don't want that even in spite of the fact that they've been dragging us up and down the field for the last several years.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:34 am to Waffle House
quote:
UF was back-to-back SEC champs in 90 and 91. They were ineligible in 90 due to a previous coaches probation, but they had the best record.
And they lost to Tennessee 45-3
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:34 am to WDE24
quote:
This will ruin the SEC if 14 teams hasn't already done so. Or at least change it into a product completely different than it ever has been.
Completely agree. The entire makeup of the SEC will change if that happens and that is why this expansion ordeal is incredibly short-sighted.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:35 am to Choctaw
quote:
i don't have time to teach you football, son
I am actually having fun at work. This is great. DS starts a troll thread against Alabama and now has half the SEC fanbases working against him, INCLUDING Auburn fans.
I know this is a little late in the thread but
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:35 am to Monticello
quote:
My solution is a 9 game schedule with a 6-2-1 format. It is what the fans want and we need it for legitimacy now that the other Big 4 conferences are going 9 game.
^^^this^^^
Assuming by legitimacy you mean the argument '9 game slate has too many negatives' simply hold not water, I agree wholeheartedly.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:36 am to ThaKaptin
Cotton has truly been entertaining this morning.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:37 am to GoBigOrange86
quote:
But how was it to our benefit? Alabama is one of the best programs in the nation; the only reason it benefits us is because of the traditional aspect -- or as your coach might say, "we had a want". Except for 2007 I haven't had much of a prayer that we would beat Alabama in their current winning streak, but I still don't want to get rid of the game. It WOULD directly benefit us to not have to play the Tadd every year, but we don't want that even in spite of the fact that they've been dragging us up and down the field for the last several years.
Tradition and prior to, let's say 2007, Alabama was coached by a bunch of stiffs during UT's golden age. From 95-04 they beat you once. If you go to 2007 they beat you twice. It wasn't a disadvantage. UT just couldn't get by the Gators for the most part. So during the time you played them as a permanent opponent, UT was up UA was down and you got tradition/rivalry surplus from it. That argument is stupid. You made the rules and are bragging about not complaining about them.
This post was edited on 5/31/12 at 11:39 am
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:38 am to GoBigOrange86
quote:
And they lost to Tennessee 45-3
And have a 15-5 series edge vs Tennessee since '92
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:38 am to therick711
quote:
Tradition and prior to, let's say 2007, Alabama was coached by a bunch of stiffs during UT's golden age. From 95-04 they beat you once. It wasn't a disadvantage. UT just couldn't get by the Gators for the most part. So during the time you played them as a permanent opponent, UT was up UA was down and you got tradition/rivalry surplus from it. That argument is stupid. You made the rules and are bragging about not complaining about them.
But now Bama isn't coached by a stiff, and we still aren't complaining. Yeah, we made the rules, but now if they've backfired on us so much, shouldn't we be incentivized to back out?
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:38 am to Waffle House
quote:
And have a 15-5 series edge vs Tennessee since '92
Only we were talking about 1990.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:39 am to GoBigOrange86
quote:
It WOULD directly benefit us to not have to play the Tadd every year, but we don't want that even in spite of the fact that they've been dragging us up and down the field for the last several years.
I gotta hand it to the Vols. They at least take their beatings like men. The corndogs however bitch endlessly about referees, scheduling fairness, and how it was bullshite that we were even in the game to begin with.
More so in this thread than in ANY other thread I can ever remember seeing, it is PAINFULLY obvious who is old money and who is new money in this league.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:40 am to therick711
Doesn't the 9 game schedule screw up the number of home games that teams have in a year while also making it tough for teams like UGA, USCe, and Florida to play anyone else OOC?
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:40 am to ThaKaptin
quote:
I am actually having fun at work.
you better not burn my frickin' burger
Posted on 5/31/12 at 11:41 am to Choctaw
quote:
you better not burn my frickin' burger
I hope you choke on a pickle
That would tickle me to death
Page 17 of 30
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News