Whining little *****
- Thread starter biteyoudawg
- Start date
I agree lets make it balanced for all teams.
Therefore all revenues derived from home games played in SEC stadiums (Conf and Non-conf) must be pooled together and then divided equally amongst the schools.
Balance, right Les?
Therefore all revenues derived from home games played in SEC stadiums (Conf and Non-conf) must be pooled together and then divided equally amongst the schools.
Balance, right Les?
These idiot coaches can't look past the immediate past or future. When they draw the easy schedule they will be quiet as a mouse. **** Les Miles. **** is just random.
Until Tennessee gets good again, or when Florida sucks again. Or any combination in between.
They are all about fairness as long as they have the advantage. I bet he thinks LSU playing Kentucky every year and MSU playing Florida every year is more than fair. Give me a break.
They are all about fairness as long as they have the advantage. I bet he thinks LSU playing Kentucky every year and MSU playing Florida every year is more than fair. Give me a break.
Les forgets one little fact on schedule strength. Even if MSU and LSU play the exact same schedule, our schedule is harder. Because the only difference is now they get a game against lowly MSU. And we get a game against a National Championship contender.
BFB
BFB
The definition of "balanced schedule" is relative to the one who is defining it.
If Stoops turns KY around in three years, it is suddenly a different story. With Vandy competitive, I love that the Rebs have to play them every year. Miles is right that LSU, by luck of the draw, has a tougher situation than Bama, TAMU, and others. But he is wrong to cry about it. That could change year over year.
Nothing that he said makes him sound like a whiny little *****. We are all in the same conference so it should be fair.
Why not just do away with the cross divisional rivals all together? Then play all the teams in the west and rotate the 2 (maybe 3 sometime) teams we will play from the east.
Lets go over these (so called) cross divisional rivals.
MSU vs Kentucky: not a traditional rival at all
Ole Miss vs Vandy: not a rival at all. A few Ole Miss fans will tell you it's a match-up between two "Fine Suthun Institutions", but that's BS.
LSU vs Florida: You read the article, it's not steeped in tradition
South Carolina vs Arky: Meh
Alabama vs Tennessee: There is tradition here, but it's not what it used to be
Georgia vs Auburn: same here but with even less tradition
Mizzou vs A&M: Other than former Big 12 members, not much here. Plus they will have to get over it because they're new.
So pretty much it's all down to two rivalries. Both of which are not that heated anymore. Is it worth throwing a monkeywrench in the entire system to keep these two rivalries?
Why not just do away with the cross divisional rivals all together? Then play all the teams in the west and rotate the 2 (maybe 3 sometime) teams we will play from the east.
Lets go over these (so called) cross divisional rivals.
MSU vs Kentucky: not a traditional rival at all
Ole Miss vs Vandy: not a rival at all. A few Ole Miss fans will tell you it's a match-up between two "Fine Suthun Institutions", but that's BS.
LSU vs Florida: You read the article, it's not steeped in tradition
South Carolina vs Arky: Meh
Alabama vs Tennessee: There is tradition here, but it's not what it used to be
Georgia vs Auburn: same here but with even less tradition
Mizzou vs A&M: Other than former Big 12 members, not much here. Plus they will have to get over it because they're new.
So pretty much it's all down to two rivalries. Both of which are not that heated anymore. Is it worth throwing a monkeywrench in the entire system to keep these two rivalries?
Last edited:
Fair enough, but my point remains the same. Still 2 rivalries holding it all up. When we go to 16 teams, some of them might be pod-mates anyway.
I agree on both games, but also think the permanent should go away. I think the league screwed up by not putting AU and Bama in the east, bringing Vandy west, and adding TAMU and Mizzou to the west. All rivals keep their games, it makes more sense geographically, and you you rotate all cross divisional games.
Sounds to me like someone doesn't have the chest for that schedule.
Last year, USC played UGA at home and then LSU and UF on the road. Don't remember Les bringing it up. The bottom line is that sometimes you get a tough schedule and some years you don't. I don't see a real option that would leave UT-Bama and AU-UGA in place. Therefor, its just whining.
Last year, USC played UGA at home and then LSU and UF on the road. Don't remember Les bringing it up. The bottom line is that sometimes you get a tough schedule and some years you don't. I don't see a real option that would leave UT-Bama and AU-UGA in place. Therefor, its just whining.
That may be the best answer in all honesty.
But there's NO way that Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida and Georgia will allow themselves to have to play each other every year.
But there's NO way that Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida and Georgia will allow themselves to have to play each other every year.
College football is nothing without tradition. It's one reason why the SEC is so great. They are working hard to screw it all up right now, though. aTm was a good add, but not playing Texas anymore? WTF, seriously? Then Missouri? Geez.
With LSU playing Florida every year, there will be virtually no years they get 2 easy games in the East like Bama is doing for the 2nd year in a row this fall. And several years they get screwed. Same with us and Kentucky. There will be virtually no year we have 2 tough games in the East. The thing that makes this really look like a set-up job by the league office is that last year and this year, the rotating opponent was not set by a rotation, but by the league office. LSU football is getting screwed like MSU baseball is and it looks like it's inentional, whether it actually is or not.
They may be getting screwed, but it hasn't exactly stopped them. They played for a national championship in 2011 and was in the top five for a good bit of last year. I'm not worried about LSU; they will be fine. And I still say that five years from now it may all be completely different. Kentucky and UT could become powerhouses and Florida and Georgia could slip. It's not likely, but it's not unrealistic, either. Vanderbilt went from the cupcake of the league to the team nobody is really happy about having to play in the span of two years.
It's pretty unrealistic to think that Kentucky will ever be a powerhouse or that Florida or Georgia will slip far. Georgia maybe some but they will still be pretty good. Tennessee will probably come back some, but I doubt they will ever be what they were in the Majors/Fulmer era.
