You are correct. I feel that if you can't go at least .500 in your own conference you don't deserve the bowl game. There are to many bowl games and to many crappy teams playing at the end of the season. A 6 and 6 team doesn't deserve to play at the end of the season. There are roughly 120 teams in D-1 ball and have of them get to play an extra game. That is completely watered down. Name me one other sport where the percentage of post season players is this high. Ah but I digress, this is the system that has been created and I will always watch my Bulldogs regardless of record who we play, when we play, or where we play. Houston is a hell of a lot nicer than playing in New Orleans or Jackson.
MSU/OK State in Reliant Stadium(Houston) to open 2013?
- Thread starter engie
- Start date
- Status
I love it
Most of you sound like pussies. I like that it's in Houston and not in Jerry World. They've been doing big college games there since it opened. I'm not aware of any similar college games in Houston at that stadium.
It would be a unique opportunity and makes sense for a lot of reasons.
Most of you sound like pussies. I like that it's in Houston and not in Jerry World. They've been doing big college games there since it opened. I'm not aware of any similar college games in Houston at that stadium.
It would be a unique opportunity and makes sense for a lot of reasons.
Houston has never had the allure of Dallas, but it is the largest city in TX and one of the larger metro regions in the country. Houston is a big city with big-time money and it's a great area to expand our recruiting base. This game would be beneficial here.
We have got to have more "fans" that don't watch football
than any other other school. For the people in this thread that apparently don't watch football, we played Bama, LSU, Arkansas, and USCe last year, and all of those teams are good. You can tell by the small numbers beside their name when scores are flashed on the nightly news or if you happen to see it on ESPN while you're flipping channels. We also played a UGA team that was pretty good and decent teams in Auburn and La Tech. That is not what football fans would typically call a ****** schedule, except maybe fans outside of the SEC would say, "why the 17 would you make a schedule that hard. It's ******."
For the other people that think this is a good idea, I'm afraid you have a short memory. It would be a fun game and good exposure, but the most important thing we can do is go to bowl games. As long as we're going to have six teams on our schedule that are in or on the border of top 25, we really don't need to make anything harder for us with non-conference.
than any other other school. For the people in this thread that apparently don't watch football, we played Bama, LSU, Arkansas, and USCe last year, and all of those teams are good. You can tell by the small numbers beside their name when scores are flashed on the nightly news or if you happen to see it on ESPN while you're flipping channels. We also played a UGA team that was pretty good and decent teams in Auburn and La Tech. That is not what football fans would typically call a ****** schedule, except maybe fans outside of the SEC would say, "why the 17 would you make a schedule that hard. It's ******."
For the other people that think this is a good idea, I'm afraid you have a short memory. It would be a fun game and good exposure, but the most important thing we can do is go to bowl games. As long as we're going to have six teams on our schedule that are in or on the border of top 25, we really don't need to make anything harder for us with non-conference.
On board...
I like it. A good coach's line of thinking here is that his team has 7 months to prepare for that first game. So, in the middle of summer workouts when a player gets a little bit tired, he is reminded of the first opponent to make him push harder... Not comparing us to Bama, but, this is why Saban schedules a top program 1st or 2nd game every year.
Also, ratings for a good ooc match up for the first game of the year drew better ratings than the SEC championship. The one example I looked up was 2010 Boise v. V. Tech.
carry on
I like it. A good coach's line of thinking here is that his team has 7 months to prepare for that first game. So, in the middle of summer workouts when a player gets a little bit tired, he is reminded of the first opponent to make him push harder... Not comparing us to Bama, but, this is why Saban schedules a top program 1st or 2nd game every year.
Also, ratings for a good ooc match up for the first game of the year drew better ratings than the SEC championship. The one example I looked up was 2010 Boise v. V. Tech.
carry on
Yesterday on Mike and Mike Saben said that he likes to open the year with a strong OOC team because it changes how the team prepares leading into opening day.
That probably makes sense for Bama who is likely to beat whoever they play not named LSU, not for us.
That probably makes sense for Bama who is likely to beat whoever they play not named LSU, not for us.
I live about 1 mile from Reliant Stadium and would love to see us play there... but I'd rather not play OK State. We're just not ready for that yet. Play Baylor or Texas Tech? I'd be ok with that. But not OK State.
I dont get that line of thinking...
If we play and lose to OK State its not that bad.
If we play and lose to Baylor/TTech its bad.
Playing OK State is win/win and Im all for it. I dont want us to play mid-tier BCS schools... we gain nothing by beating them and lose alot by losing to them.
WTF are you talking about?
Do you even know? I said USM has ****** schedules, not us. I'm just pointing out the fact that if the only games you can win are the ones against your crappiest opponents, then you haven't done much. Whether its 5-6 per year in our case (OM & KY + OOC) or 8-10 in southern's case. They like to beat their chests about beating up on the ****** teams on their schedule, so if that's what you like then USM is right up your alley. I get that our SEC schedule is brutal, but it is what it is. 2-6 conference records shouldn't be acceptable to us. And as far as the short memory thing, I think you are confused. If anything your memory is too short by bringing up Oregon and Georgia tech. Because when we were actually good in the 90s and 2000, we were routinely scheduling (and beating) The likes of Oklahoma St, BYU, Baylor, and Texas. It's the right step if you truly believe we can compete for championships. There is no debating that. The only debate is whether it's too early or not.
Do you even know? I said USM has ****** schedules, not us. I'm just pointing out the fact that if the only games you can win are the ones against your crappiest opponents, then you haven't done much. Whether its 5-6 per year in our case (OM & KY + OOC) or 8-10 in southern's case. They like to beat their chests about beating up on the ****** teams on their schedule, so if that's what you like then USM is right up your alley. I get that our SEC schedule is brutal, but it is what it is. 2-6 conference records shouldn't be acceptable to us. And as far as the short memory thing, I think you are confused. If anything your memory is too short by bringing up Oregon and Georgia tech. Because when we were actually good in the 90s and 2000, we were routinely scheduling (and beating) The likes of Oklahoma St, BYU, Baylor, and Texas. It's the right step if you truly believe we can compete for championships. There is no debating that. The only debate is whether it's too early or not.
If Coach Mullen thinks we're ready for it then I think we should do it. He's in the best position to make that call.
I love it........
A lot of folks would feel it's better to add Samford or Birmingham Southern. Not Me. Know who you are and we are M-State. Adding a Gardner-Webb to enhance our chance to go to the Liberty Bowl instead of the Independence bowl, that stool don't flush with me. If you're scared, you're scared. Let's prove our manhood.
A lot of folks would feel it's better to add Samford or Birmingham Southern. Not Me. Know who you are and we are M-State. Adding a Gardner-Webb to enhance our chance to go to the Liberty Bowl instead of the Independence bowl, that stool don't flush with me. If you're scared, you're scared. Let's prove our manhood.
As I told the other guy, I never compared our schedule to USMs. So let me put it this way - if you enjoy watching a team rack up as many wins as possible (without ever beating anyone), go watch USM. This is MSU football, SEC football. If we are too scared to play anyone better than MTSU OOC, then wtf is our goal here? Are we accepting 6-6 or 7-5 as our ceiling? Not me. I believe Mullen when he talks about competing for championships. This is the logical next step. That much is obvious. Is 2013 too soon? Not sure, but it could be. But if we go 7-5 in 13 with Ok St on the schedule or 7-5 this year, which year do you think we go to a better bowl? This is how we keep from getting hosed come bowl selection time.
As of right now, the answer is no, and this is why
We don't know what our SEC football schedule in 2013 is going to look like. When they made the 2012 schedule it was tweaked, we dropped @SC in lieu of the TAMU game, and we're going back to Lexington again. Templeton and the SEC said the 2013 schedule could be completely different (I know, the 6-1-1), but we don't know the home and away structure.
If we're home vs LSU, Bama, UK, OM next year, then I say do it, because I think we can sneak a win @UT (if this stays) or @TAMU to get us to 6-6 assuming losses @Arky and @Aub.
But we dont sign that contract until we know the structure of the SEC games next fall.
We don't know what our SEC football schedule in 2013 is going to look like. When they made the 2012 schedule it was tweaked, we dropped @SC in lieu of the TAMU game, and we're going back to Lexington again. Templeton and the SEC said the 2013 schedule could be completely different (I know, the 6-1-1), but we don't know the home and away structure.
If we're home vs LSU, Bama, UK, OM next year, then I say do it, because I think we can sneak a win @UT (if this stays) or @TAMU to get us to 6-6 assuming losses @Arky and @Aub.
But we dont sign that contract until we know the structure of the SEC games next fall.
It really seems like we are the only SEC team that actually buys into the whole schedule 4 cupcakes idea. I don't see how people can not want to actually play a really good team on a national stage. If we are where we think we are, then we should be able to play good teams from other conferences. And if we are not where we think we are, then I've got some bad news for you- it might never happen. We compare ourselves against the same SEC teams every year, why not compare ourselves to another good team from a different conference? Like others have said, national coverage and good recruiting tool for us in Texas is a very good thing. Also, if losing this one game knocks us out of the bowls, then we suck anyway. But I would much rather play OK State on the national scene opening day, than play the winner of C-USA in the Liberty Bowl because we went 6-6. I mean yea we go to a bowl game, but the Liberty Bowl is crap and we all know that. So if you want to keep considering stringing together Liberty Bowls and Music City bowls at 6-6 an accomplishment, then go ahead.
Also People keep saying its bad because if we lose.....
How good does it look if we win. Get the freaking loser mentality off your mind and actually step up every now and then.
Here's the other SEC teams non-con notable opponents last year so that you see how pitiful ours is.
Alabama-Penn State
Arkanas- Texas A&M
Auburn- Clemson
Florida- Florida State
Georgia- Boise St and Georgia Tech
Kentucky- Louisville
LSU- West Virginia and Oregon
Mississippi State- La Tech?
Ole Miss- BYU?, La Tech? (they had Boise scheduled but game was taken from them, Texas this year)
South Carolina- Clemson, Navy
Tennessee- Cincinnati
Vanderbilt- Connecticut, Army, Wake Forest
That's embarrassing
Also People keep saying its bad because if we lose.....
How good does it look if we win. Get the freaking loser mentality off your mind and actually step up every now and then.
Here's the other SEC teams non-con notable opponents last year so that you see how pitiful ours is.
Alabama-Penn State
Arkanas- Texas A&M
Auburn- Clemson
Florida- Florida State
Georgia- Boise St and Georgia Tech
Kentucky- Louisville
LSU- West Virginia and Oregon
Mississippi State- La Tech?
Ole Miss- BYU?, La Tech? (they had Boise scheduled but game was taken from them, Texas this year)
South Carolina- Clemson, Navy
Tennessee- Cincinnati
Vanderbilt- Connecticut, Army, Wake Forest
That's embarrassing
relatively meaningless bowl games where 18-22 year olds are wined and dined in a big city for a week is not a good measuring stick.
either way, if we play okla st and lose and only go 7-5, then so be it. if they are the difference between a 7 and 8 W season, then we should have beaten them. if we go 5-7 instead of 6-6 because we lost to them, then so be it. if we need 4 gimme Ws plus ole miss and kentucky just to claw our way to bowl eligibility, then maybe we don't really deserve to go bowling. i hate that CFB has become a race to make sure you are eligible for the papa johns bowl. either aim high or just drop the sport. i get no satisfaction from beating jackson st, troy st, mtsu, etc. i'd prefer the highest level of CFB end up being about 75 programs so that we have marquee games every week and low end programs bump down a level.
either way, if we play okla st and lose and only go 7-5, then so be it. if they are the difference between a 7 and 8 W season, then we should have beaten them. if we go 5-7 instead of 6-6 because we lost to them, then so be it. if we need 4 gimme Ws plus ole miss and kentucky just to claw our way to bowl eligibility, then maybe we don't really deserve to go bowling. i hate that CFB has become a race to make sure you are eligible for the papa johns bowl. either aim high or just drop the sport. i get no satisfaction from beating jackson st, troy st, mtsu, etc. i'd prefer the highest level of CFB end up being about 75 programs so that we have marquee games every week and low end programs bump down a level.
The one thing that hasn't been mentioned as a negative yet is this would potentially mean two trips to Texas next year. I'd really like to, and might, go to both the OKSt and the A&M games, but I assume that most fans would have to choose one or the other, which would give us less of a good showing at both.
4th, actually. It's Memphis by far, then Atlanta, Birmingham (dropped to 3rd now that Tuscaloosa is it's own chapter), then Houston.
The thing a lot of people are forgetting is recruiting
Recruits care less if we open with OK State or JSU. It does gives us some national media attention playing at better OOC thus more recruits can see the game; however, i think recruits care more that we are in the SEC and that we play in a bowl game. Recruits want to play for teams that play in bowl games. So it's very important for us to go to a bowl game. I'm not saying we should go out and schedule all cupcakes for OOC but there is a huge difference in OK State and maybe Texas Tech or Virginia or Arizona State etc. playing a top team of a conference for OOC for us is just not smart. Playing a mid tier team is ok too me.
Recruits care less if we open with OK State or JSU. It does gives us some national media attention playing at better OOC thus more recruits can see the game; however, i think recruits care more that we are in the SEC and that we play in a bowl game. Recruits want to play for teams that play in bowl games. So it's very important for us to go to a bowl game. I'm not saying we should go out and schedule all cupcakes for OOC but there is a huge difference in OK State and maybe Texas Tech or Virginia or Arizona State etc. playing a top team of a conference for OOC for us is just not smart. Playing a mid tier team is ok too me.
You know what the difference between MSU and USM is?
They play in a weak conference. They can't control that. We can't control that we play in the SEC. That's why USM schedules people like Virginia, Nebraska, South Carolina, etc. non-conference. You would have a point if they scheduled 12 cupcakes- but they never do.
And guess what? If we don't go to bowls- we're going to STAY at 2-6 in the SEC because recruits are going to say "well, they suck so I'll go to wherever else." No one cares that we played the toughest schedule in the country a few years ago. Heck, it's not even that easy now. Did you see anyone say last year- well, MSU only won two conference games so they don't deserve to be in a bowl? NO! Did you feel like we didn't deserve to be in a bowl last year? I didn't.
And how is my proposed schedule ******? You do realize that it would include ****** teams such as Alabama and LSU right? Auburn, Texas A&M, and then someone from the SEC East? What a shameful schedule.
If you want to gear up for "bigger and better" things- it's going to take a little bit longer than six seasons. Think more like ten or so. Let's not fall into the 2001 trap again.
They play in a weak conference. They can't control that. We can't control that we play in the SEC. That's why USM schedules people like Virginia, Nebraska, South Carolina, etc. non-conference. You would have a point if they scheduled 12 cupcakes- but they never do.
And guess what? If we don't go to bowls- we're going to STAY at 2-6 in the SEC because recruits are going to say "well, they suck so I'll go to wherever else." No one cares that we played the toughest schedule in the country a few years ago. Heck, it's not even that easy now. Did you see anyone say last year- well, MSU only won two conference games so they don't deserve to be in a bowl? NO! Did you feel like we didn't deserve to be in a bowl last year? I didn't.
And how is my proposed schedule ******? You do realize that it would include ****** teams such as Alabama and LSU right? Auburn, Texas A&M, and then someone from the SEC East? What a shameful schedule.
If you want to gear up for "bigger and better" things- it's going to take a little bit longer than six seasons. Think more like ten or so. Let's not fall into the 2001 trap again.
Alabama- legit. But when you have a depth chart full of 4-5 star guys- I guess they should schedule the Falcons.
Arkansas- rivalry game.
Auburn- legit.
Florida- rivalry game
Georgia- regrets scheduling Boise St. and then GT is a rivalry game.
UK- rivalry game. See a theme here?
LSU- See Bama. We're not LSU or Bama.
Mississippi- Regrets BYU, we played La Tech.
USC- Rivalry game and Navy is a cup cake in my book.
Vandy- Army is a cup cake.
You're not understanding how this whole bowl thing works.
I'm just pointing out the fact that if the only games you can win are the ones against your crappiest opponents, then you haven't done much. Whether its 5-6 per year in our case (OM & KY + OOC) or 8-10 in southern's case. They like to beat their chests about beating up on the ****** teams on their schedule, so if that's what you like then USM is right up your alley.
If you get six wins, you get to go to a bowl. Last year, even though we didn't beat anybody great, we still got to go to a fun bowl and, more importantly, got our young players additional practice time. Had we beaten a good team, we would have gotten to beat our chest about that too (and potentially gotten to go to a better bowl). Playing easy OOC games doesn't prevent us from doing that.
I get that our SEC schedule is brutal, but it is what it is. 2-6 conference records shouldn't be acceptable to us.
You seem like you almost understand this, but I'm not sure. The 2-6 record you're referencing has to do with conference games, which you seem to get. Winning OOC games doesn't change the conference record (not sure you get this). So if a 2-6 conference record is unacceptable, it's unacceptable. Winning OOC games doesn't make it more acceptable, although it will allow you to go to a bowl while going 2-6 and get your players extra practice time, which it would seem they need if they're going 2-6 in conference.
And as far as the short memory thing, I think you are confused. If anything your memory is too short by bringing up Oregon and Georgia tech. Because when we were actually good in the 90s and 2000, we were routinely scheduling (and beating) The likes of Oklahoma St, BYU, Baylor, and Texas. It's the right step if you truly believe we can compete for championships. There is no debating that.
There is plenty to debate about that. Going undefeated in the SEC right now gets you in the national championship game. There is no need to schedule more difficult OOC games to compete for a national championship. That said, this seems like a bridge we should cross when we get there. As long as an extra loss is the difference between the Liberty/Music city versus staying home, or the gator v. Liberty/Music City, we need to schedule four wins for OOC. It will be fun if we get to the point that we need to schedule good OOC games, but we're not there yet and honestly Mullen could have a tremendous career without us ever getting to that point.
I'm just pointing out the fact that if the only games you can win are the ones against your crappiest opponents, then you haven't done much. Whether its 5-6 per year in our case (OM & KY + OOC) or 8-10 in southern's case. They like to beat their chests about beating up on the ****** teams on their schedule, so if that's what you like then USM is right up your alley.
If you get six wins, you get to go to a bowl. Last year, even though we didn't beat anybody great, we still got to go to a fun bowl and, more importantly, got our young players additional practice time. Had we beaten a good team, we would have gotten to beat our chest about that too (and potentially gotten to go to a better bowl). Playing easy OOC games doesn't prevent us from doing that.
I get that our SEC schedule is brutal, but it is what it is. 2-6 conference records shouldn't be acceptable to us.
You seem like you almost understand this, but I'm not sure. The 2-6 record you're referencing has to do with conference games, which you seem to get. Winning OOC games doesn't change the conference record (not sure you get this). So if a 2-6 conference record is unacceptable, it's unacceptable. Winning OOC games doesn't make it more acceptable, although it will allow you to go to a bowl while going 2-6 and get your players extra practice time, which it would seem they need if they're going 2-6 in conference.
And as far as the short memory thing, I think you are confused. If anything your memory is too short by bringing up Oregon and Georgia tech. Because when we were actually good in the 90s and 2000, we were routinely scheduling (and beating) The likes of Oklahoma St, BYU, Baylor, and Texas. It's the right step if you truly believe we can compete for championships. There is no debating that.
There is plenty to debate about that. Going undefeated in the SEC right now gets you in the national championship game. There is no need to schedule more difficult OOC games to compete for a national championship. That said, this seems like a bridge we should cross when we get there. As long as an extra loss is the difference between the Liberty/Music city versus staying home, or the gator v. Liberty/Music City, we need to schedule four wins for OOC. It will be fun if we get to the point that we need to schedule good OOC games, but we're not there yet and honestly Mullen could have a tremendous career without us ever getting to that point.
Todd I understand they are rivalry games, but that doesn't take away from the fact that we are the only team that doesn't play ANY quality opponents out of conference. The national perception that the SEC plays 4 cupcakes in non-con is in fact not true, except for Mississippi State. Rivalry game or not, they still are playing quality opponents. Just because they are rivalry games doesn't mean they have to schedule them. They do. We don't.
I like it too
We play the SEC West schedule because we have no choice. Yes it's tough, but in the eyes of the national rankings we need to play one or two competitive teams rather than four cupcakes. We played OK State several years ago, and if memory serves me correctly we split with them. Granted, they thought they should have been in the NC game last year, but if we can give LSU and Bama a good game we can certainly stay on the field with them, and quite possibly beat them.
We play the SEC West schedule because we have no choice. Yes it's tough, but in the eyes of the national rankings we need to play one or two competitive teams rather than four cupcakes. We played OK State several years ago, and if memory serves me correctly we split with them. Granted, they thought they should have been in the NC game last year, but if we can give LSU and Bama a good game we can certainly stay on the field with them, and quite possibly beat them.
You're right, they never schedule 12 cupcakes, it's usually 11. This year it's only 10. Fact remains they thump their chest over their consecutive winning seasons yet nobody outside of Hattiesburg gives a **** because they realize 10-2 means 10 cupcakes and two real teams. I don't want MSU to fall into that same situation. Except for us it will be 6-6 with wins over 6 crap schools and 6 losses against the SEC. I just want to see us take the next step. As I've said, it may be a year or two too early in 13, but it's the logical next step. Us scheduling 4 **** schools a year for OOC is basically our administration and coaches saying we don't believe we can compete on a national level. I fully understand your side of the argument, I just have a differing opinion on it. So does auburn, Missouri, south Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas. It's ok to have different opinions, but not on here I guess. There are a lot of people on here that think anyone that disagrees with them is an idiot. Not you Todd, but a lot.
That's a very fair point. I'd much rather play 4 OOC teams that are cupcakes than any of those schools mentioned. It just seems to me that we're trying to take a bite of the pie and that OK State might be too big a bite for us... where as a TTech or Baylor would be something we could handle.
Bowl committees can only choose from the teams that play that year. So it's really not relevant to compare a 7-5 team from '12 to a '7-5 team from 13. What you should be considering is how a game against Ok St. affects our bowl chances the year it's played. Obviously, if we win, it's better to play Ok St. than a cupcake. But if we lose, we're much worse off than if we had played a cupcake and won. Beating Ok St. only gives us an edge in a situation where we otherwise are competing with somebody with a similar resume. Losing to Ok. St. is typically going to push us down at least one bowl slot, if not several. It's generally a bad risk to take.
No- us scheduling four easy non-conference games is out administrations way of saying that we want to build this program so we aren't going to bit off more than we can chew.
USM is apples and oranges for us. They don't draw because a large percentage of their alumni are in Starkville or Oxford on Sats. That has nothing to do with how they schedule. Historically they NEVER have drawn well. It wouldn't matter if they scheduled the top 12 teams in the country. It also doesn't matter how much they win- I don't care if they go 14-0- they still won't draw as well as State or Ole Miss.
I don't think the home and away is going to change for us. If it does, the changes will be minor. I don't think it really matters though because if ESPN wants us to play that game, we don't really have a choice. We're playing it. As for the 6-1-1 rotation, Tennessee won't be the rotating team next year. They're going to go with a 1-year rotation. I expect we'll probably get either at Vandy or at Missouri.
While normailly I would agree
with Dan - this is the excepetion. We have to keep our non-conf. schedule with 4 cupcake wins. We do not want a schedule like TSUN. If we had their schedule this year we would be lucky to win 7 instead of 10.
with Dan - this is the excepetion. We have to keep our non-conf. schedule with 4 cupcake wins. We do not want a schedule like TSUN. If we had their schedule this year we would be lucky to win 7 instead of 10.
Yes it does make a difference
Because I can guarantee you that if Florida State and Georgia Tech were in the SEC- those schools wouldn't schedule an equally tough team in their place. Those games are played out of tradition- as well they should be. If Mississippi was in the Sun Belt or whatever- I would want that as a non-conference game so long as they are D-I. I think the majority of this board even on the four easy wins side would agree with me on that.
Because I can guarantee you that if Florida State and Georgia Tech were in the SEC- those schools wouldn't schedule an equally tough team in their place. Those games are played out of tradition- as well they should be. If Mississippi was in the Sun Belt or whatever- I would want that as a non-conference game so long as they are D-I. I think the majority of this board even on the four easy wins side would agree with me on that.
I like the idea.
I just don't care for the OK State match-up or the location. If I could pick, I'd take Florida State in New Orleans. Or how about Michigan State in St. Louis (I really like the idea of a Big10 matchup in St. Louis)
I'm cool with us playing a really good BCS opponent every two years. For example:
2012: Jackson St, @Troy, South Alabama, MTSU
2013: FSU (Nola), @South Alabama, Troy, home game vs FCS school
I just don't care for the OK State match-up or the location. If I could pick, I'd take Florida State in New Orleans. Or how about Michigan State in St. Louis (I really like the idea of a Big10 matchup in St. Louis)
I'm cool with us playing a really good BCS opponent every two years. For example:
2012: Jackson St, @Troy, South Alabama, MTSU
2013: FSU (Nola), @South Alabama, Troy, home game vs FCS school
USM was not supposed to be a comparison. Guess I 17ed that up. My point was if you want to watch a decent team beat up ****** competition, then USM is a good place to do that. I want to watch good football. MSU vs JSU will not be good football. The other thing is we will never get any respect, preseason rankings or recognition, or move up the SEC bowl pecking order by beating 4 JUCO teams and OM & KY. I understand that the opportunity is always there by being in the SEC, but getting beyond 3-4 SEC wins is tough as hell. If we go 3-5 in the SEC but beat another BCS school in OOC, it does us a lot more good then going 3-5 in the SEC and beating OOC jokes. Not saying OKST is the right team or 2013 is the right season, but it's the right idea in my opinion. You're entitled to disagree but my opinion is not dumb and is just as valid as anyone else's. And for the other guy, I recognize the risk but it's worth it in my opinion. Of course the only opinions that matter are those of Mullen and Strickland anyway.
You're missing the point. Those teams are not in the SEC. Therefore they are non-conference games. Therefore those teams are playing competitive non-conference games. We are not. And we are the only team in the SEC that is not. While yes, it is beneficial on our part to schedule four cupcakes, it looks terrible and we have no excitement with playing other teams from good conferences. Football for me is about excitement. I want to see exciting games. The fact is we are one of the only teams in the nation that did not play an out of conference team from a BCS conference last year. Call that smart if you want, but I call it boring and cowardly. As others have said, if we can't win 3 SEC games, we don't deserve to go bowling.
This is what the bowl system has done to us
We'd rather play a crappy team instead of a good one because if we don't get a win we might miss out on going to some third tier bowl the day after Christmas.
We'd rather play a crappy team instead of a good one because if we don't get a win we might miss out on going to some third tier bowl the day after Christmas.
This is about how I feel
Early on I used to be pretty gung-ho about scheduling tougher OOC teams, but over the past year, I've begun to take a liking to scheduling weaker to assure that we go at least 6-6. But I must admit, I still like the thought of possibly getting a test in an area that I personally like going to from time to time. I don't like the prospect of this being as early as 2013 though. If it happens... I wouldn't complain, but I can see why people don't like it too.
Early on I used to be pretty gung-ho about scheduling tougher OOC teams, but over the past year, I've begun to take a liking to scheduling weaker to assure that we go at least 6-6. But I must admit, I still like the thought of possibly getting a test in an area that I personally like going to from time to time. I don't like the prospect of this being as early as 2013 though. If it happens... I wouldn't complain, but I can see why people don't like it too.
right, playing the type teams you listed is fine. but if you mention playing a BCS non-conference game, people act like you suggested we schedule ohio st, usc, texas, and oregon for out non-conference games. no that's not the case at all. i just think that for 1 out of 4 games we should play someone like okie st or georgia tech or north carolina or nc st or colorado or something is the kinda thing we should avoid. we might get unlucky and catch one of those teams having a great year, but those are the odds, i feel like we'd also catch some of them having a terrible year sometimes too.
Listing TAMU and Tenn as difficult teams? Lol. Osu will play OU, UT, TCU, WVU and KSU every year from here on out.
There are no "good" losses. A Loss is a loss no matter how you cut it. If we lost to OSU, it counts the same as a loss to Baylor.
I see what everyone that is saying "no" is getting at, but really why should we be scared to play OK ST? Granted they are a high scoring Big XII offense, but what has happened the last few times a high scoring Big XII offense met a good SEC defense? Also, their defense was ranked in the 100s last year (the University of Mississippi was ranked like 107 or so). Will they be any better in 2013?
Bad as I hate to, I have to agree with Saban on the scheduling. Last year, Auburn definitely benefited more from almost losing to Utah State than we did in steamrolling Memphis. They learned where they needed to improve and did. We really didn't learn anything until the Auburn game and by then it was too late.
Bad as I hate to, I have to agree with Saban on the scheduling. Last year, Auburn definitely benefited more from almost losing to Utah State than we did in steamrolling Memphis. They learned where they needed to improve and did. We really didn't learn anything until the Auburn game and by then it was too late.
- Status