- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 10/15/11 at 3:28 pm to AU86
Making sure teams are in the right divisions is more important than keeping one traditional rivalry (Bama-UT or Bama-AU). If Missouri came to the SEC, they would fit much better in the West and Auburn would fit in nicely with the East. It makes sense geographically and match-up wise.
This post was edited on 10/15/11 at 3:30 pm
Posted on 10/15/11 at 5:58 pm to Jon Ham
The correct answer here is to poach a southern ACC school such as FSU, Clemson, NC State or Virginia Tech.
Everyone keeps their rivals, and strength would be about equal (unless it is NC State, b/c they are pretty weak).
Everyone keeps their rivals, and strength would be about equal (unless it is NC State, b/c they are pretty weak).
Posted on 10/16/11 at 1:05 am to GumBro Jackson
North Carolina would be awesome.
Posted on 10/16/11 at 1:37 am to Jon Ham
I honestly think no other school would vote with UA. Either against accepting Mizzou to the SEC...solely based on UA's wishes...or against accepting Mizzou and placing the Tigers in the West, and then moving Auburn's Tigers to the east.
I think every other team in the west, UA included, would rather play the Mizzou Tigers as opposed to the Auburn Tigers.
I can't see a single other team in the west, other than Alabama, who would be worried that Auburn might get a recruiting advantage by moving to the east.
So to sum up, unless Alabama can drum up support for their position among the eastern teams...which I admit is possible...than the Tide is SOL on this matter.
Just sayin'
I think every other team in the west, UA included, would rather play the Mizzou Tigers as opposed to the Auburn Tigers.
I can't see a single other team in the west, other than Alabama, who would be worried that Auburn might get a recruiting advantage by moving to the east.
So to sum up, unless Alabama can drum up support for their position among the eastern teams...which I admit is possible...than the Tide is SOL on this matter.
Just sayin'
This post was edited on 10/16/11 at 1:39 am
Posted on 10/16/11 at 1:49 am to TigersOfGeauxld
Bottom line, bama is scared of AU as usual.
Hell we had to threaten to take them to court to get them to play us in Auburn in the 80's.
Just business as always in turdtown.
Hell we had to threaten to take them to court to get them to play us in Auburn in the 80's.
Just business as always in turdtown.
Posted on 10/16/11 at 6:03 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
Did not realize you retard up this board as well
Posted on 10/16/11 at 9:09 am to AU86
quote:
Bama scared to let AU go to the east.
Or maybe Bama just wants to keep playing UT and AU every year. Of course AU is ok with moving to the east, they'd be able to keep their UGA rivalry. If y'all were at risk of losing that you'd probably be a little hesitant too.
Then again, maybe it's because the East is weaker than the West and you're scared to keep competing with Bama
Posted on 10/16/11 at 10:13 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
Bottom line, bama is scared of AU as usual.
I usually try not to respond to your bullshite, but I had to LOL at this.
It would seem to me that Auburn is the team trying to run away from Bama and the West. If we had it our way, we'd play both AU and Tennessee every year, and that's clearly what we're trying to do here. Maybe you can float your bullshite somewhere else where people might actually believe it...
Posted on 10/16/11 at 11:06 am to attheua
AU wants to keep playing bama. I am sorry that you do not appear to comprehend that.
Bama has stated their posistion. They are willing to attempt to block Mizzou to the SEC and affect the entire league and Mizzou negatively for one primary reason:
Bama calls it "concern" about AU getting stronger.
I call it scared.
I am not surprised. I was around and witnessed the fear when bama refusd to play at Jordan Hare.
We saw how that has turned out.
Bama has stated their posistion. They are willing to attempt to block Mizzou to the SEC and affect the entire league and Mizzou negatively for one primary reason:
Bama calls it "concern" about AU getting stronger.
I call it scared.
I am not surprised. I was around and witnessed the fear when bama refusd to play at Jordan Hare.
We saw how that has turned out.
Posted on 10/16/11 at 11:23 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
They are willing to attempt to block Mizzou to the SEC and affect the entire league and Mizzou negatively for one primary reason:
Bama calls it "concern" about AU getting stronger.
Let's just fricking ignore the 100 year rivalry game Alabama is trying to save
No, your're right, it's all about Auburn and whether they get to recruit the same grounds they've been recruiting for decades now.
fricking idiot
This post was edited on 10/16/11 at 11:24 am
Posted on 10/16/11 at 1:47 pm to attheua
It is all about Auburn. It always is for alabama. AU had a 100 year rivalry better than UT/bama. AU gave it up for the good of the conference.
Too bad bama has lil baby balls and can't nut up like AU did.
Being scared sucks. I am glad I am not a fan of a university that is scared of its rivals.
Too bad bama has lil baby balls and can't nut up like AU did.
Being scared sucks. I am glad I am not a fan of a university that is scared of its rivals.
Posted on 10/16/11 at 2:04 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
Bama has stated their posistion. They are willing to attempt to block Mizzou to the SEC and affect the entire league and Mizzou negatively for one primary reason:
Actually it is 2 reasons:
1. We want to play Tennessee every year.
2. We want our in state rival Auburn to stay in the same division as us. We recruit head to head with Auburn more than any other team, and a huge amount of those players are in Georgia and Florida. Why would we vote to let Auburn gain any recruiting advantage over us? Also, why would we vote to travel to Columbia, Missouri every other year? Plain and simple, we like the SEC West just how it is and will not be voting to move any West teams to the East. Neither will Tennessee.
Posted on 10/16/11 at 5:23 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
It is all about Auburn. It always is for alabama. AU had a 100 year rivalry better than UT/bama. AU gave it up for the good of the conference.
Which rivalry would that be?
Posted on 10/16/11 at 5:54 pm to ohiovol
quote:
It is all about Auburn. It always is for alabama. AU had a 100 year rivalry better than UT/bama. AU gave it up for the good of the conference.
Which rivalry would that be?
Ga Tech?
Posted on 10/16/11 at 6:37 pm to SteelersFan
Auburn gave up a 100 year old rivalry with Georgia Tech for the good of the SEC? And that was a better rivalry than Tennessee/Bama?
Posted on 10/16/11 at 6:41 pm to ohiovol
quote:
Which rivalry would that be?
Florida was given up when they dropped the 2nd perm cross div game. More accurately he should have said what would have been a 100 year rivalry. They played them eighty something times.
This post was edited on 10/16/11 at 6:55 pm
Posted on 10/16/11 at 6:49 pm to ohiovol
quote:
Auburn gave up a 100 year old rivalry with Georgia Tech for the good of the SEC? And that was a better rivalry than Tennessee/Bama?
Yeah, you got it. You really know your SEC football..
AU/FL played the first time 99 years ago. When the SEC split in 1992, AU/UF had been played 68 times. UT/Bama 72. Through 2002, AU/UF have played 80 times. Bama/UT 84. Practically the same number of games and AU/UF have had 33 games decided by less than 1 score. It was and is a great rivalry that was sacrificed.
Mizzou in the SEC in the West with AU to the east renews a great rivalry and ends another. There is no doubt it is in the best interest of the SEC and the reason most of the SEC wants it.
But as discussed, bama is scared as they have been in the past. We will see what happens next.
This post was edited on 10/16/11 at 6:55 pm
Posted on 10/16/11 at 7:31 pm to Monticello
If AL is for it, I am against it, if they are against it, I am for it.
I hate me some AL.
I hate me some AL.
Posted on 10/16/11 at 7:34 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
Regardless of Alabama's motives, I think keeping Auburn in the West and puting Missouri in the East is the right move for now.
Let's take the Tennessee game out of the equation--having Alabama and Auburn in separate divisions would create the possibility of a rematch in the SEC title game, which is a little bit unfathomable, and would probably necessitate the Iron Bowl being played earlier to avoid having a rematch in such close proximity. That game is one of the best on the SEC calendar, and the TV folks certainly won't be interested in having that messed up.
All this talk about Missouri not fitting geographically with the East is either written by people with an agenda or no ability to read a map. The SEC "East" is as much as the SEC "North" as it is East. Missouri share's a border with two SEC East states. The highway connections from Columbia are better East and West than North and South.
Finally, everyone needs to remember that Alabama doesn't have the votes to block this on its own. There are most likely some Eastern schools who don't like the prospect of the division alignment changing, and only want Missouri coming as 14 if that means preservation of the status quo.
Let's take the Tennessee game out of the equation--having Alabama and Auburn in separate divisions would create the possibility of a rematch in the SEC title game, which is a little bit unfathomable, and would probably necessitate the Iron Bowl being played earlier to avoid having a rematch in such close proximity. That game is one of the best on the SEC calendar, and the TV folks certainly won't be interested in having that messed up.
All this talk about Missouri not fitting geographically with the East is either written by people with an agenda or no ability to read a map. The SEC "East" is as much as the SEC "North" as it is East. Missouri share's a border with two SEC East states. The highway connections from Columbia are better East and West than North and South.
Finally, everyone needs to remember that Alabama doesn't have the votes to block this on its own. There are most likely some Eastern schools who don't like the prospect of the division alignment changing, and only want Missouri coming as 14 if that means preservation of the status quo.
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News