- 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
re: we gotta stop this permanent rivalry shite
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:24 pm to signalizer
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:24 pm to signalizer
California-Colorado
Different circumstances, but proves it can be done without counting as a conference game. This is a fact, I'm sorry.
Different circumstances, but proves it can be done without counting as a conference game. This is a fact, I'm sorry.
1
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:26 pm to signalizer
You show me where it says anywhere that you can't schedule a non conference game against a conference opponent when it's not scheduled as a conference game. Show me. And yes, I realize that every nonconference rivalry game that I mentioned involves teams from totally different conferences. The reason I mentioned those games is because, previously, some gumps asked why should they have to play a tough Tennessee game non conference just because of Missouri joining. Show me where it frickin says ANYWHERE that Bama can't schedule Tennessee as an out of conference game.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:27 pm to MOT
That was only allowed because of the game already being scheduled before they moved to the same conference. That is the only reason it was allowed. This is a fact, sorry
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:29 pm to Daigeaux
OK my rebuttal is show me ANYWHERE that is is allowed by the SEC by-laws. Get a life dude. It is a dumb arse idea and smoke is starting to come out of your ears.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:30 pm to signalizer
Hey dumbass...you're good at talkin shite. You show me where it says this can't be done.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:33 pm to Daigeaux
quote:Why should it be done? it doesn't have to be, and it won't. There is no reason to complicate the schedule further and harm the OOC schedule on the basis of teams that have no tradition bitching..
You show me where it says this can't be done
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:34 pm to signalizer
quote:
That was only allowed because of the game already being scheduled before they moved to the same conference. That is the only reason it was allowed. This is a fact, sorry
Nope
It happened because it was previously scheduled, no question about that. The PAC 12 didn't put them on the first rotation of the schedule, and then they just decided to keep it. They didn't need permission from anyone. I can find multiple links to support my claim, I will wait for you to show one link that says it isn't "allowed" under any other circumstance.
Nobody does it, but that doesn't mean there is a rule against it.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:36 pm to signalizer
quote:
No they can't schedule them as an OOC game when not are the schedule. That would give them one more conference game in the standings.
Lets say LSU and Bama are tied in the west and we won the head to head with them. They then play UT and win. They then have a 1/2 game lead in the west and would win the division.
Not to smart now is it.
You really can't be this stupid. One more time...it doesn't count as a conference game in years that they are not scheduled to meet IN conference. This isn't rocket science...
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:39 pm to signalizer
quote:
No they can't schedule them as an OOC game when not are the schedule. That would give them one more conference game in the standings.
Lets say LSU and Bama are tied in the west and we won the head to head with them. They then play UT and win. They then have a 1/2 game lead in the west and would win the division.
Not to smart now is it.
YOu can schedule a OOC game with a conference opponent.
It happened just this year with Colorado and Cal.
Its odd yes, but its not impossible and no, that game would not count towards your conference standings.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:40 pm to Daigeaux
I'm good at finishing shite also. Been doing it for years professionally.
I want to do away with the permanent opponent bullshite but we not. Deal with it. It does you no good to blow out a blood vessel in your head over it.
I want to do away with the permanent opponent bullshite but we not. Deal with it. It does you no good to blow out a blood vessel in your head over it.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:40 pm to Dr RC
(no message)
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:42 pm to Dr RC
quote:
Dr RC
How do they not get this? It's the frickin solution to keeping the UA - TN rivalry if it's important enough to them. It's also the solution to the AU - UGA game.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:46 pm to Daigeaux
I dunno. Its not rocket science.
Unless it is in the SEC rules that you can't play an SEC team as an OOC opponent I don't see any issue with that as a solution.
Unless it is in the SEC rules that you can't play an SEC team as an OOC opponent I don't see any issue with that as a solution.
This post was edited on 10/18/11 at 7:47 pm
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:46 pm to Dr RC
Poor example.
LINK
LINK
quote:
Feb. 3, 2004
quote:But I'm sure this was pre-planned as an OOC Conference game 7 years ago. Nice logic.
Colorado, which missed going to a postseason bowl game this year for only the second time in the last 14 seasons, will play Cal in a home-and-home set in 2010 and 2011.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:50 pm to Daigeaux
IF....LSU had a true 100 year rivalry with, let's say aTm, and this was the situation, I would GLADLY play them every year no matter whether it counted in the SEC standings or not. A rivalry is a rivalry...and I understand that it is very important to UA - UT and AU - UGA. But, sorry, those two games don't mean jack shite to the other nine teams in the conference unless they have a direct bearing on those teams.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:53 pm to ACT
quote:
Poor example.
Not really. The context in which it was played means nothing. We have only used it as an example to prove it can be done, and has been done, without counting in the conference standings.
No one has claimed it is done on a regular basis in football, only that it could be.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 7:55 pm to signalizer
quote:
OK my rebuttal is show me ANYWHERE that is is allowed by the SEC by-laws.
Two things.
1) In general terms anything is allowed that is not specifically prohibited by statute, i.e. I'm smoking a cigarette and drinking a beer as I write this. I didn't bother to check if the statutes of the United States specifically allow me to do so.
2) If necessary then the freaking SEC by-laws can be changed to accommodate to Gump and Hillbilly whiners.
You were really grabbing at straws, my friend.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 8:00 pm to MOT
quote:Actually, context means everything. You're example is a fluke. You're talking about a game that was scheduled 7 years ago and because of a set of occurrences over the last 2 years just happens to fit your argument today. We aren't talking about a rivalry that dates back 110 years.
The context in which it was played means nothing.
Posted on 10/18/11 at 8:01 pm to RhodeIslandRed
Bylaws are linked above. It says nothing, but by all means someone check behind me in case I missed it.
Page 2 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News