Auburn Moving To The East?

#76
#76
bamawriter said:
If it were to happen, Auburn would become Bama's cross-division rival, and UT would get Mizzou. I'm not saying I like that, but it's reality. The Iron Bowl isn't going away.
Click to expand...

That's not logical. What is logical is that if they switch with Mizzou then they would assume Mizzou's schedule which is precisely why the will NEVER switch with Mizzou.
 
#78
#78
gunner said:
That's not logical. What is logical is that if they switch with Mizzou then they would assume Mizzou's schedule which is precisely why the will NEVER switch with Mizzou.
Click to expand...

Why is it illogical to assume the SEC would guarantee that the Iron Bowl gets played? It would win out over the TSIO, whether or not any of us agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#80
#80
bamawriter said:
Why is it illogical to assume the SEC would guarantee that the Iron Bowl gets played? It would win out over the TSIO, whether or not any of us agree.
Click to expand...

Because they are switching with Mizzou NOT Tennessee. The Iron Bowl has nothing to do with with the switch. If they did switch Mizzou would assume Auburn's schedule and Auburn theirs and that's why it will NEVER happen.
 
#81
#81
gunner said:
Because they are switching with Mizzou NOT Tennessee. The Iron Bowl has nothing to do with with the switch. If they did switch Mizzou would assume Auburn's schedule and Auburn theirs and that's why it will NEVER happen.
Click to expand...

Changing schedules is not too complicated. They already changed two of the cross-division pairings two years after A&M and Mizzou joined.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#82
#82
Vol8188 said:
I assumed it'd be about equal to Missouri
Click to expand...

Population of Missouri: 6,093,000 (largest cities - St Louis at a metro area of around 2.9 mil people and Kansas City with a metro area of around 2.1 mil people).

Population of West Virginia: 1,831,102 (largest city - Charleston, with a metro population of 222,000 people).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#84
#84
John Adams in a piece in the Tennessean today said what a lot of orange fans are thinking: "Tennessee Vols shouldn't have to play Alabama every year."

Unlike the barners, Adam's seem to feel that a lot of Tennessee's misery is self-inflicted:

"As a card-carrying member of the SEC East, Tennessee isn’t required to play Alabama every year in football. It does so voluntarily. And what does it have to show for treasuring tradition and maintaining Alabama as its permanent rival?

Ten consecutive losses by a combined count of 351-119.

I know the counterpoint: Rivalries are cyclical. There are ups and downs in every series.

But here’s Tennessee’s problem: When Alabama is up, it’s really up. It doesn’t just have a good stretch. It goes full dynasty.

Bear Bryant managed one dynasty. Nick Saban is overseeing another one.

The way Alabama is rolling under Saban, there’s no relief in sight for anyone in its way.

That’s why UT would be better off not having the Tide as a regular opponent. The SEC also would be better off from a competitive standpoint without permanent non-divisional rivals."

http://www.knoxnews.com/story/sport...uldnt-have-play-alabama-every-year/366998001/


Looks like Mr. Adams has gone full white flag on the 3rd Saturday in October.
 
#85
#85
TrueOrange said:
Except for the money all the conference teams are getting from the St Louis and Kansas City markets in a state with around the same population as TN.
Click to expand...

Exactly; all this "Missouri doesn't fit in the SEC" talk is irrelevant, because it has nothing to do with that anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#86
#86
TUSKtimes said:
John Adams in a piece in the Tennessean today said what a lot of orange fans are thinking: "Tennessee Vols shouldn't have to play Alabama every year."

Unlike the barners, Adam's seem to feel that a lot of Tennessee's misery is self-inflicted:

"As a card-carrying member of the SEC East, Tennessee isn’t required to play Alabama every year in football. It does so voluntarily. And what does it have to show for treasuring tradition and maintaining Alabama as its permanent rival?

Ten consecutive losses by a combined count of 351-119.

I know the counterpoint: Rivalries are cyclical. There are ups and downs in every series.

But here’s Tennessee’s problem: When Alabama is up, it’s really up. It doesn’t just have a good stretch. It goes full dynasty.

Bear Bryant managed one dynasty. Nick Saban is overseeing another one.

The way Alabama is rolling under Saban, there’s no relief in sight for anyone in its way.

That’s why UT would be better off not having the Tide as a regular opponent. The SEC also would be better off from a competitive standpoint without permanent non-divisional rivals."

http://www.knoxnews.com/story/sport...uldnt-have-play-alabama-every-year/366998001/


Looks like Mr. Adams has gone full white flag on the 3rd Saturday in October.
Click to expand...

We all knew he was a craven fool and contrarian before he typed this one up. Apparently you're only now becoming aware. Otherwise, it would not have seemed noteworthy to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#87
#87
VFL-82-JP said:
We all knew he was a craven fool and contrarian before he typed this one up. Apparently you're only now becoming aware. Otherwise, it would not have seemed noteworthy to you.
Click to expand...

Problem is sounds like many Vol fans are starting to agree with him. So apparently we have some craven fool fans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#89
#89
TUSKtimes said:
John Adams in a piece in the Tennessean today said what a lot of orange fans are thinking: "Tennessee Vols shouldn't have to play Alabama every year."

Unlike the barners, Adam's seem to feel that a lot of Tennessee's misery is self-inflicted:

"As a card-carrying member of the SEC East, Tennessee isn’t required to play Alabama every year in football. It does so voluntarily. And what does it have to show for treasuring tradition and maintaining Alabama as its permanent rival?

Ten consecutive losses by a combined count of 351-119.

I know the counterpoint: Rivalries are cyclical. There are ups and downs in every series.

But here’s Tennessee’s problem: When Alabama is up, it’s really up. It doesn’t just have a good stretch. It goes full dynasty.

Bear Bryant managed one dynasty. Nick Saban is overseeing another one.

The way Alabama is rolling under Saban, there’s no relief in sight for anyone in its way.

That’s why UT would be better off not having the Tide as a regular opponent. The SEC also would be better off from a competitive standpoint without permanent non-divisional rivals."

http://www.knoxnews.com/story/sport...uldnt-have-play-alabama-every-year/366998001/


Looks like Mr. Adams has gone full white flag on the 3rd Saturday in October.
Click to expand...

Adams is a hack and always has been.
 
#90
#90
VFL-82-JP said:
Agreed, and ain't that sad.

But I wouldn't say "many." There are certainly a few.
Click to expand...

I think it's more than you think, and the number appears to grow each year. I mean there are people in this thread alone that are for it.
 
#92
#92
Move Alabama and Auburn to the East, and move Missouri and Vandy to the west. Tuscaloosa and Nashville are about the same distance west, anyway.
 
#95
#95
IMO the SEC East and the SEC West are balanced at the top.

Bama/Barn/LSU and FL/TN/GA are balanced in the long term.

However, TX A&M plus Arkansas are better than USCe and Missouri. Mississippi plus MSU are better than KY and Vandy.
 
#96
#96
Bms4880 said:
Move Alabama and Auburn to the East, and move Missouri and Vandy to the west. Tuscaloosa and Nashville are about the same distance west, anyway.
Click to expand...

Awesome. I mean LSU is the kind of program that deserves a permanent spot in the SEC Championship after all :ermm:

They can finally get a timeshare in Atlanta with that spot.
 
#98
#98
05_never_again said:
Duh, yeah, I'm an idiot.

It would make Alabama/Auburn a cross-division game, which would mean Tennessee likely wouldn't play Alabama every year anymore as volfanngatorland said
Click to expand...

Does that mean our permanent cross-division rival would be Missouri?
 
#100
#100
bamawriter said:
Either Mizzou or Arkansas. UGA would get the other.
Click to expand...

In your opinion, who would theoretically be more likely to be paired with whom? I could see arguments made for either.

(UT and Arkansas share a natural border and were previously paired during then SEC's original 2-permanent-opposite-division-opponents set up used from 1992-2002. On the other hand, Missouri and Tennessee also share a natural border, and one could also reasonably push Arkansas and UGA having a better connection than Missouri and UGA.)
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top