Started By
Message
1
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:25 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
WHY ARE YOU AGAINST COMPETITIVE BALANCE?!?!?
We arent against anything other than losing our rivalry game that we have enjoyed for more years than you and I and at least one other poster have been cumulatively alive.
Is it really that hard to believe that we just really enjoy the rivalry and believe that it is rivalries like these that make the SEC what it is?
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:25 am to therick711
quote:
I dont think very many Bama fans care if you play Florida every year or if we play Florida more often. We simply want to keep playing UT every year, and keeping permanent rivals ensures that this happens.
quote:
So does moving to the same division with UT.
So now you want to avoid a permanent game with Florida AND you want Bama in the east so you can avoid a permanent with us too?
Gottdamn - get some balls and realize you've got a damn strong football team that can go toe to toe with any team in the nation right now. Man up and freaking play ball anytime, anywhere, against anybody. Quit the crybaby shite.
This post was edited on 5/31/12 at 10:29 am
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:25 am to therick711
quote:
LSU administrators were saying, since we all seem to be concerned about competitive fairness at this moment, how about that whole permanent opponent thing.
Permanent rivals don't affect competitive balance unless you make the false assumption that teams never get better or worse from year to year.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:25 am to CNB
quote:
Because it changes every year you tard.
So randomizing it wouldn't solve the problem?
And the idea that UT will one day be as good as UF is a bad joke
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:26 am to RT1941
quote:
So now you want to avoid a permanent game with Florida AND you want Bama in the east so you can avoid a permanent with us too?
you're trying too hard.
quote:
Man up and freaking play ball anytime, anywhere, against anybody. Quite the crybaby shite
unless they have a bye week before, right?
This post was edited on 5/31/12 at 10:28 am
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:27 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Because it changes every year you tard.
quote:So you don't want competitive balance, just slightly more random imbalance?
So randomizing it wouldn't solve the problem?
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:27 am to Choctaw
quote:
So now you want to avoid a permanent game with Florida AND you want Bama in the east so you can avoid a permanent with us too?
Gottdamn - get some balls and realize you've got a damn strong football team that can go toe to toe with any team in the nation right now. Man up and freaking play ball anytime, anywhere, against anybody. Quite the crybaby shite.
you're trying too hard.
He is. Couldn't we move UT to the West? It doesn't have to be that Bama moves.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:28 am to therick711
quote:
So does moving to the same division with UT.
But then we would want to keep Auburn or LSU as a permanent rival, and you guys would still be stuck with a tough opponent.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:28 am to WDE24
quote:
So you don't want competitive balance, just slightly more random imbalance?
I think it is reasonable to say that UGA's sked last year was random lucky. Ole Miss's is institutionalized lucky
I think random lucky is preferable to institutionalized.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:29 am to PMHBammer
quote:
But then we would want to keep Auburn or LSU as a permanent rival, and you guys would still be stuck with a tough opponent.
Move Arkansas to the West. It was good enough for Missouri.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:29 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
ADDRESS THE frickING ISSUE. WHY ARE YOU AGAINST COMPETITIVE BALANCE?!?!?
We've played UT since 1901. We're not gonna stop now to make things easier for y'all. You need to grow a pair btw.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:30 am to therick711
quote:Ole Miss has to play Bama, Auburn, LSU and Arky every year.
Ole Miss's is institutionalized lucky
While LSU, AU, Bama and Arky get to substitute one of those games for Ole Miss. Seems fair to me.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:30 am to WDE24
quote:
So you don't want competitive balance, just slightly more random imbalance?
Its competitive balance because no team is being systematically favored or disfavored.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:30 am to therick711
quote:
Couldn't we move UT to the West?
Geographically it doesn't make sense but if we had a leaders and legends division it would be perfect!
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:31 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:I don't think you know what competitive balance means.
Its competitive balance because no team is being systematically favored or disfavored.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:31 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
And the idea that UT will one day be as good as UF is a bad joke
Because it could never happen, right?
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:31 am to crimsonsaint
quote:
We've played UT since 1901. We're not gonna stop now to make things easier for y'all. You need to grow a pair btw.
When this thing ends at its logical conclusion which seems to be 16 teams, you may be singing a different tune. The search for more money has begun in earnest. Provided the SEC keeps divisions aligned by geography, it may fall to the wayside.
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:31 am to crimsonsaint
quote:
You need to grow a pair btw.
meh....we just played the toughest schedule in college football history. we're good.
y'all could step up the scheduling though
Posted on 5/31/12 at 10:32 am to Choctaw
quote:Then why all of the crying?
we're good.
FWIW- I would rather AU play better teams. It makes the games more fun to watch/anticipate.
This post was edited on 5/31/12 at 10:33 am
Page 6 of 30
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News