Conference Cohesion - Cross Divisional opponents

quote:

---

I am not in favor of adding more schools because I think it will dilute the product and make the conference weaker.

---

quote:

---

Since joining, in 19 seasons:

Arkansas has played

Vanderbilt - 5 times
Kentucky - 6 times

---

So your point is that Arkansas will play Vandy and KY less in an 14-16 team conference and ergo playing Vandy and KY less will make the conference weaker?

quote:

---

No that is not my point.

---

Whatever your point is its dumb.

With 14 teams you would play 9 conference games and with 16 you would likely play 10. It wont be as bad as you think

I'm not upset about anything.

I'm just pointing out how 14 teams or 16 teams will mean that new members will take even longer to become familiar foes to cross-divisional members.

quote:

---

I'm just pointing out how 14 teams or 16 teams will mean that new members will take even longer to become familiar foes to cross-divisional members.

---

The National Football Conference has 16 teams and somehow they make it work.

So long as we play all our divisional opponents, one constant/rivalry team from the East and at least one rotating team team from the East, I'm fine.

I don't really care how "familiar" we are with every team in the East. Even before the SEC expanded in 1992, LSU was never all that familiar with the teams that now reside in the SEC East. We've played Tennessee a mere 31 times since 1925, with 9 of those games since 1992. We've played Georgia 28 times since 1928, with 8 of those games since 1992. We've played Vandy 30 times since 1902, with 6 of those games since 1992. We didn't play Vandy even once between 1957 and 1976.

So, if anything, I could make the argument that divisional play and conference expansion has led directly to LSU playing more games against a wider variety of SEC East foes.

ETA: Florida (58 games since 1937) and Kentucky (55 games since 1949) were the only current SEC East schools that LSU had played on a regular basis prior to 1992 -- which is exactly why the SEC made Florida and Kentucky our two permanent opponents between 1992 and 2002 before the SEC reduced the number of permanent cross divisional opponents to just one.

Damn dude quit wigging out. It's obvious the point he was trying to make and you are trying to completely change the issue around to fit your needs.

Holy shite dude you are really still wigging out over this.

See we come from a conference where we actually played everyone in the league in one season. That was considered normal. I realize that is different than the SEC you are used to where you guys got to pick and choose who you played for 70 years. Personally, I would rather play EVERYONE in a year then keep making it bigger and bigger so we only play an East team once or twice every decade. Yes, I do realize that your stock answer to this is that we can go to another league then because you don't want us.

And gtfo with your high and mighty bullshite. You and every other fan on this board knows you love when Vandy comes on the schedule.

$$$$$$, and the recruiting thing too. I would completely understand why some of ya'll would be opposed if it messed up traditional rivalries and such though.

In the 40 years from 1950 - 1989, LSU played Georgia 8 times, Auburn 8 times, UT 12 times, and Vandy 7 times.

back in the days of 5-6 conference games schedules, it wasn't uncommon to not see an SEC foe for quite some time.

quote:

---

I would completely understand why some of ya'll would be opposed if it messed up traditional rivalries and such though.

---

Quite the contrary.

From a rivalry perspective, A&M is a great addition.

But I hope that Slive and the SEC member schools are doing a real financial gut check about how adding A&M (or any other school) helps the bottom line for each school.

I think culturally A&M would fit in just fine. But if LSU is going to get a smaller slice of the pie in an expanded SEC, I would urge them to vote "NO" no matter how cool expansion may sound. Then again, if Stallings is right and superconferences are a matter of when, not if, then the SEC may feel like it has to scoop up as many big "gets" as it can before other conferences do.

But we all see where expanding in a direction that wasn't quite the right fit did for the Big 8.