re: Will Alabama continue to fight against the 9 game schedule?

quote:

---

I'd also easily trade Florida or UGA long term as a permanent because of the SEC CG battles.

---

UGA and Bama makes as much sense as Bama vs LSU. UGA and Bama have played 73 times despite not being in the same division the last 30+ Seasons. Both teams are pretty big names.

Bama and LSU have played 88 times being in the same division.

Despite playing 15 more times, LSU has one more win in their series with Bama than UGA does in theirs.

UGA vs Bama makes more sense for having a top flight matchup yearly for networks and it's historically a better matchup. UGA is also a better team than LSU right now.

But I still believe the third team for Bama will be MSU, not LSU or UGA. They've played 107 times. The last time they didn't play was 1947.

UGA on the other hand will get SC to go with Auburn and Florida. UGA and SC played a ton prior to SC joining the SEC and UGA is the SEC team that SC has played the most in their history because of it.

Preserving those kinds of matchups are why there are 3 permanent opponents for each team. LSU has played both MSU and Ole Miss more often then Bama. Arkansas has played them more than any other SEC team. LSU is also geographically closer to the Texas schools and Oklahoma than any other SEC team from the original SEC schools. They simply have better matches available than Alabama.

quote:

---

Would Alabama be the only school playing 3 “Big 6” opponents every year? If so, yes, I hope we continue to fight against that

---

George went nuts leaving Gumps with this coward

quote:

---

No, it will make the records slightly worse. It won't make the conference weaker. Given that the only conference other than the SEC that matters will be playing 9 games, it really has little to no negative impact on the SEC.

The only negative impact would be on borderline bowl teams missing bad bowls.

---

Well you just don't understand how polls and rankings work. You are literally just adding more losses to the conference and that's going to lower everyone's rank.

Because instead of the top team being able to cite a #10 10-2 team it beat in conference, that teams gonna be a #15 9-3 team. And on down the list.

Sure it won't change the actual strength of the teams, but the records and how everything is seen towards the teams will be weaker. Just no way around that.

There is no benefit to the conference unless it's a money deal. And I don't give a shite about the money.

quote:

---

Would Alabama be the only school playing 3 “Big 6” opponents every year?

If so, yes, I hope we continue to fight against that.

---

Alabama is 34-15-1 over Tennessee and 30-20 vs Auburn the last 50 years. Why do y'all act like playing them every year is so incredibly unfair?

What's next? Forcing the Iron Bowl back to Birmingham b/c it's not fair Auburn leads the series when the games are played on campus?

quote:

---

I know, for a fact, that SC was fine with 9 games, even preferred 9 games, as long as the Tennessee, Georgia and Florida games remained on the schedule, along with the sheep humping sister bangers.

---

There's your issue: you're wanting 4 teams in 3 perm slots.
(Or is "sheep humping sister bangers" your description of Clemson?)

I recall NS wanting a 9 game schedule as he said it would help with overall scheduling

quote:

---

It’s just one of the many reasons he was smarter than all the other coaches.

---

Eh...being for something while others are against it...only to do a 180* stance later on does question "he was smarter".

MIRMAR BEACH, Fla. – We fell into a time machine Tuesday morning, and Nick Saban was discussing a nine-game SEC schedule again.

Saban, for a decade, has pounded the drum that the SEC should add an additional conference game. The league never embraced the Alabama coach's suggestion.

How do you swamp idiots continue to display your stupidity on this forum, over and over, and never realize how you appear to the rest of us?...just READ your thread title!!