"You do know that Auburn has played LSU and Ole Miss more since the first expansion than all the years prior going back to before conference play?" True in the case of Ole Miss, not LSU. Like mentioned earlier, with the growth of the conference and collegiate football as a whole losing the permanent opponent component of the scheduling seems inevitable. I have no problems with that. I briefly mentioned even if UT wasn't schedule as a permanent opponent there's no reason they couldn't be scheduled every year. We'd have to step back a few decades, but there are seasons in the past where Alabama played UT and UT wasn't a part of the conference schedule that year. I see no reason why it couldn't happen again. Traditional games: I'd guess the closest thing to compare with LSU would be Ole Miss if we try to draw an analogy between the Bama vs UT game. I say that based on the number of games played. If I recall correctly, LSU has played Ole Miss three or four times more than Bama has faced UT. I suspect if there was as much at stake playing Ole Miss as there has been against UT over the years you'd view traditional rivalries differently. Make no mistake about this. I would MUCH rather have had UGA on our schedule this year than Mizzou. Any given chance to beat UGA ranks very high in my desire for games scheduled! On a bit of a separate note, but related... It's my understanding they worked on preliminary options for adding two more teams when the group worked on the 2012/2013 schedules. Hopefully it'll run smoother for all concerned next time around. But, logic dictates, some will still be upset about how it falls together.
Hah! Flashback. I was using the University's ISP in '92 for surfing around—as limited as it was then. I had one of the IT guys as a next door neighbor who gave me a floppy disk with programming to allow me to surf from home after dialing into the University's system. Damn...was that on a 286? BUT, I did have an account with America Online at that point as well if I'm not mistaken. That was back when it was billed per hour used. In fact, I still use the same email address I picked up with American Online back then. Geez...memories of this in its infancy.
Good article but no thanks, makes winning the SEC that much more sweet knowing you won when the chips are obviously stacked against you.
It wouldn't lean to the east, it would BE the east. What, Mizzou doesn't scare you? Bama's success right now, is making many a prisoner of the moment. A lot of things can happen in this world, but the Flagship university in the SEC, going east, ain't one of them.
There is no flagship university in the SEC. Got that, chief? If there were, it might go to the school with the most NCAA championships. LSU leads the SEC with 43. Bama has 8. Rightly or wrongly Alabama is considered a "nothing matters but football" school. Flagship my ass.
The vetting process of the Birmingham SEC offices, has already revealed 2 Bamanese grads, in charge of LSU's scheduling & in charge of SEC officiating. Haven't really touched on Bama's recruiting influences, but I fear the worst.
Realize this: LSU does not need the SEC. Why? We are earning more in petroleum product than the state of Texas at this time. Alabama's fiscal output is a unit of wee-wee in comparison. Get rid of the morons. Happy New Year
