- 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: SIAP: Mike Slive cowers down to status quo, changes South Carolina vs. Arkansas
Posted on 5/29/12 at 1:51 pm to Tiger Authority
Posted on 5/29/12 at 1:51 pm to Tiger Authority
Personally I prefer a good football season against tough opponents. I could care less about playing a bunch of cupcakes just to make it to one big game, the NC.
Like all of you, I wait all off season for football. I want to see some great games, not just a final result of the season. Florida provides that opportunity.
If Vanderbilt was our permanent opponent, OP wouldn't be bitching about the "constant". WTF are you talking about anyway? It's like reading a moron talking in circles. WHO THE frick TALKS AND WRITES LIKE THAT? I've said that before to you, I think. You are an imbecile, btw.
Recruits come here to play in big games and play for championships. You can have both. I like the gauntlet we have to go through to reach our objective. It's entertainment all year.
Like all of you, I wait all off season for football. I want to see some great games, not just a final result of the season. Florida provides that opportunity.
If Vanderbilt was our permanent opponent, OP wouldn't be bitching about the "constant". WTF are you talking about anyway? It's like reading a moron talking in circles. WHO THE frick TALKS AND WRITES LIKE THAT? I've said that before to you, I think. You are an imbecile, btw.
Recruits come here to play in big games and play for championships. You can have both. I like the gauntlet we have to go through to reach our objective. It's entertainment all year.
1
Posted on 5/29/12 at 1:52 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
I'd like to have played against Peyton Manning once in his 4 years at Tenn
Or Herschel Walker at Georgia or Bo Jackson at Auburn. We never got to play against them, either.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 1:54 pm to H-Town Tiger
My admittedly radical suggestion is that every team play a neutral site game every year to make it 4-4-1. Or go with the Les Miles suggestion that only divisional records determine who goes to Atlanta. That way you’re back to a 3-3 and the other three games are only used to break a tie in the division. Though that is problematic as well.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 1:54 pm to Baloo
quote:
the existing framework, which has been pretty damn successful for the SEC
No, it hasn't. The "existing framework" has not been tried yet. It doesn't start until next season. The 5-1-2 framework has been successful because it permitted us to play every other SEC team twice every five years. The previous 5-2-1 format was dumped in 2002 because rotating teams only got to play each other twice every eight years. Now with 6-1-1 it'll be twice every 12 years. What failed before is now being tried again, only worse.
This post was edited on 5/29/12 at 1:55 pm
Posted on 5/29/12 at 1:56 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
LSU vs. Florida
Ole Miss vs. Vandy
Maybe Slive can swap them for you. LSU can get the easy opponent you want and Ole Miss can have UF.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:00 pm to attheua
Bama fans can DIAF. Not every team gets a mulligan.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:00 pm to attheua
quote:
Maybe Slive can swap them for you. LSU can get the easy opponent you want and Ole Miss can have UF.
Seems only fair. You get to play a team coached by Dooley every year.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:01 pm to LoyalTiger
You cannot say UGA didn't belong there because they were in that game at the break.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:01 pm to Tiger Authority
Go to a 9 game conference schedule. Play your 6 division opponents and 3 from the other side home and away then rotate to the next 3. You would then play every conference team twice (some more) each 6 years.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:02 pm to CajunFootball
quote:
You cannot say UGA didn't belong there because they were in that game at the break.
They got beat by over 30. You're going to have to make a better point than they were in it at half to say they belonged there.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:06 pm to therick711
Lets see...UGA had more first downs, and more total yards on offense. I guess LSU didn't belong in the title game since we got rolled also.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:10 pm to CajunFootball
quote:
Lets see...UGA had more first downs, and more total yards on offense. I guess LSU didn't belong in the title game since we got rolled also.
I'm not going to waste my time explaining to you why this makes no sense. I, instead, choose to believe you already know that, you are just defending your point that you think UGA belonged. Fair enough. You are free to persist in that belief. I would just caution you to not make your point with illogical banalities.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:11 pm to Baloo
quote:
How is the current structure unfair? Teams have a permanent rival of the same relative quality. I don't see how that's unfair.
2011: South Carolina beats Georgia and they both win all their other division games. They both play Auburn and Mississippi State from the west. South Carolina loses to Auburn, but Georgia beats them, so through these games they are tied in record with USC holding tie-breaker advantage because of their head-to-head win. So, it comes down to the other SEC West opponent for both...Georgia's is Ole Miss, South Carolina's is Arkansas (their permanent opponent). Georgia beats Ole Miss and USC loses to Arkansas, so Georgia wins the East because of their easier schedule against the West.
2006: LSU beats Arkansas and we both finish 4-1 against the SEC West. From the East, we both play Tennessee and we both beat them. So, through these games, we're tied in record and we hold the tie-breaker due to head-to-head win. So, it comes down to our other two SEC East opponents. Theirs are Vanderbilt and South Carolina (bottom two teams in the East that year), while ours are Florida (National champions-our permanent opponent) and Kentucky (3rd place in the East that year). They beat their bottom feeders, while we lose on the road to the national champions, so they win the division.
If you don't see either of these examples as unfair, then there's no hope for you.
This post was edited on 5/29/12 at 2:12 pm
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:13 pm to therick711
Original Claim: UGA did not belong in the game. Proven by LSU beating them badly.
I say UGA did belong in the game, and it was closer then the box score would lead someone to believe.
You then said I would need more proof because it was 30+ beating to which I refute that LSU was beaten badly by Bama in a game that we must not have belonged in going by your logic.
I say UGA did belong in the game, and it was closer then the box score would lead someone to believe.
You then said I would need more proof because it was 30+ beating to which I refute that LSU was beaten badly by Bama in a game that we must not have belonged in going by your logic.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:13 pm to CajunFootball
quote:
You cannot say UGA didn't belong there because they were in that game at the break.
Because our pathetic play calling and QB play allowed them to be. Unfortunately, that same game plan didn't work a month later.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:13 pm to Baloo
quote:
As it stands now, there are teams that play neutral site conference games, so you have that problem no matter what.
quote:
My admittedly radical suggestion is that every team play a neutral site game every year to make it 4-4-1
I have this argument with some UT friends all the time and i HATE neutral site conference games. I'd much rather play some one at their place. Besides, its much more fun to win on the road than to beat some one at a neutral site.
quote:
Or go with the Les Miles suggestion that only divisional records determine who goes to Atlanta. That way you’re back to a 3-3 and the other three games are only used to break a tie in the division. Though that is problematic as well
That's better and maybe something to consider if/when it gets to 16 teams. It would only be tie breaker with a 3 team tie where they all beat each other a la Big 12 2008.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:18 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
Or Herschel Walker at Georgia or Bo Jackson at Auburn. We never got to play against them, either
That's ture, but it was before divisions and permanent opponents. Basically the SEC has never been about playing everyone, which is a shame.
quote:
The previous 5-2-1 format was dumped in 2002 because rotating teams only got to play each other twice every eight years
and by sheer coincidence I'm sure, Florida was the last SEC east team on Alabama's rotation.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:19 pm to CajunFootball
quote:
The LSU/UF game has only been a real game recently. They used to take us to the woodshed. We've played them annually since 71 and our record is 16-23-2 against them. It wasn't even close until '02.
LSU led the all-time series with Florida until 1992. We're about five games down in the series now. Spurrier kicked our asses. Otherwise, LSU has, if anything, had the upper hand. But even with the Spurrier domination of the '90s, it's still a pretty even series.
quote:
I like playing Florida, but I'd much rather get to see some other schools more often.
Agree 100%. I wish we would go to a 9-game conference schedule so we could keep annual rivalries AND get to play rotating opponents with reasonable frequency with a 6-1-2 format. I hope the TV networks will push for this when we are re-negotiating our TV deals.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:25 pm to Nuts4LSU
quote:
2006: LSU beats Arkansas and we both finish 4-1 against the SEC West. From the East, we both play Tennessee and we both beat them. So, through these games, we're tied in record and we hold the tie-breaker due to head-to-head win. So, it comes down to our other two SEC East opponents. Theirs are Vanderbilt and South Carolina (bottom two teams in the East that year), while ours are Florida (National champions-our permanent opponent) and Kentucky (3rd place in the East that year). They beat their bottom feeders, while we lose on the road to the national champions, so they win the division.
So they got their chance to play Florida in the SEC Championship game, and lost. We had our chance earlier in the season and lost. What, do you want a rematch? We had our chance, and we lost! Who do you think we are...Alabama? We don't get the rematch.
At least we got to beat the crap out of Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl.
Posted on 5/29/12 at 2:25 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
That's ture, but it was before divisions and permanent opponents
There weren't divisions back then, but there were permanent and rotating opponents. We had five permanent opponents (Kentucky, Ole Miss, Miss. St., Florida and Alabama) and rotated the other four teams through one schedule slot (SEC played 6 conference games back then), meaning we'd play them twice every eight years. That was a problem, so we went to a 7-game schedule in 1988, rotating those four teams through two slots so we would play them twice every four years.
In '92, with expansion, we went to an 8-game 5-2-1 format with two permanent opponents from the other division and rotating the other four through the other spot. Again, we were back to playing teams only twice every eight years and that was a problem, so we <gasp!> ditched some traditional rivalries (Auburn-Florida notably) and switched to the current 5-1-2 format, so we would play rotating teams twice every five years.
So, twice in the last 25 years we have changed the SEC scheduling format because playing rotating opponents only twice every eight years didn't work. And now we're going to play twice every 12 years. And it's not going to work. Again.
Page 5 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News