How do you feel about the current makeup of the SEC?

#101
#101
pimo1 said:
Missou might not win championships but they field competitive teams in pretty much all sports on a regular basis. They are not bottom feeders. You have to have solid teams in the middle to justify the SOS of the teams at the top. One knock against other conferences like the PAC12, BIG12 and BIG10 is they had 2-3 big bullies that dominated the conference year in year out. In the SEC in any given year in any given sport there are 4-5 teams in the hunt every year and they change out. If Vandy or Kentucky show up in an out-of-conference game they get some level of respect because they are SEC teams.. trust me when an OOC beats them they chalk that up and an SEC win and celebrate it. We see them as bad teams because they are compared to other SEC teams in football. The new 4 are all legit threats to go tier 2 any given year. What realistic teams could we have added other than Missouri? Those were the 2 biggest names that made sense and were available. Geographically of all the 4 teams we added Missouri makes the most sense in the SEC all 3 states border multiple other SEC teams. Texas 3 (2 OG states), Missouri 4 (3OG's) Oklahoma is the outlier 3(1) only bordering one original SEC state.
Click to expand...
UNC, VT, FSU, WV, Clemson, Virginia and even Louisville would have all been better choices than Missouri. They are all better regionally and culturally in terms of fitting in with the SEC.

In reality, Virginia Tech was the first choice over Missouri but their stupid president declined for whatever reason.

Missouri was supposed to bring the SEC 2 things:

1. Better basketball: Missouri before joining the SEC(and historically) has been a great basketball school with a winning record most years. Since joining the SEC, they’ve had a winning record 4 times.

2. St. Louis/KC TV Markets: This, in my opinion, is probably the reason we signed them on in the first place. Expanding into these was a huge deal and was supposed to bring in a ton of revenue from those areas. Problem is, if you talk anyone that actually lives in these areas you’ll quickly realize that they are primarily fans of the Cardinals, Chiefs and Blues. They don’t care about Missouri athletics. Missouri just doesn’t get huge in-state support like we are blessed to have. This probably is the reason why Missouri athletics most years has revenue levels almost equal to Kentucky.

I think Missouri was an awful move for the SEC but I’m sure Missouri the institution feels differently considering they’ve profited massively from the deal through conference profit sharing that they’ve contributed very little to throughout the years.

​
 
  • Like
Reactions: JacketVol, volbound1700 and Woodlawn VOL
#102
#102
pimo1 said:
Missou might not win championships but they field competitive teams in pretty much all sports on a regular basis. They are not bottom feeders. You have to have solid teams in the middle to justify the SOS of the teams at the top. One knock against other conferences like the PAC12, BIG12 and BIG10 is they had 2-3 big bullies that dominated the conference year in year out. In the SEC in any given year in any given sport there are 4-5 teams in the hunt every year and they change out. If Vandy or Kentucky show up in an out-of-conference game they get some level of respect because they are SEC teams.. trust me when an OOC beats them they chalk that up and an SEC win and celebrate it. We see them as bad teams because they are compared to other SEC teams in football. The new 4 are all legit threats to go tier 2 any given year. What realistic teams could we have added other than Missouri? Those were the 2 biggest names that made sense and were available. Geographically of all the 4 teams we added Missouri makes the most sense in the SEC all 3 states border multiple other SEC teams. Texas 3 (2 OG states), Missouri 4 (3OG's) Oklahoma is the outlier 3(1) only bordering one original SEC state.
Click to expand...
Vandy does not get respect outside of baseball and women’s bowling. Kentucky, yes, because of the SEC. Vandy is the worst power 4 team, period. No one respects them, because they don’t respect the sport enough to invest. A bunch of “academics” that thumb their nose at physical activity. Mind-blowing that they don’t understand the opportunity they have but choose to piss away annually.
 
#103
#103
Rockytop10nessee said:
Vandy does not get respect outside of baseball and women’s bowling. Kentucky, yes, because of the SEC. Vandy is the worst power 4 team, period. No one respects them, because they don’t respect the sport enough to invest. A bunch of “academics” that thumb their nose at physical activity. Mind-blowing that they don’t understand the opportunity they have but choose to piss away annually.
Click to expand...
I can name you about 4 teams in the BIG 10 that are way worse than the worst team in the SEC I could grab you 3 from the ACC and don't get me started in the BIG12 and I mean OG before they got watered down. Vandy has historically had good teams in every sport except for football. Please don't do the National Championships because UT would be behind them for the last few decades. These are not dominant teams... they are good teams there is a huge difference. OOC celebrate wins against Vandy. Not so much against Iowa unless its wrestling Trust me these bottom-dweller SEC teams are better than you think when compared nationwide.

I would not trade Vandy in the 2000's for
Maryland, Iowa, Purdue, Northwestern, Rutgers, Indiana. Big10
Cal, Boston College, Georgia Tech, SMU, Syracuse, Pitt, Virginia, Wake Forest ACC
any team left in the Big12 (they have a few decent teams but culturally/geographically total mismatch) I think the best teams left there would be Arkansas level in the SEC Cincinnati and Arizona are probably their top overall teams when you look at all sports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFL-82-JP
#104
#104
25vol said:
UNC, VT, FSU, WV, Clemson, Virginia and even Louisville would have all been better choices than Missouri. They are all better regionally and culturally in terms of fitting in with the SEC.

In reality, Virginia Tech was the first choice over Missouri but their stupid president declined for whatever reason.

Missouri was supposed to bring the SEC 2 things:

1. Better basketball: Missouri before joining the SEC(and historically) has been a great basketball school with a winning record most years. Since joining the SEC, they’ve had a winning record 4 times.

2. St. Louis/KC TV Markets: This, in my opinion, is probably the reason we signed them on in the first place. Expanding into these was a huge deal and was supposed to bring in a ton of revenue from those areas. Problem is, if you talk anyone that actually lives in these areas you’ll quickly realize that they are primarily fans of the Cardinals, Chiefs and Blues. They don’t care about Missouri athletics. Missouri just doesn’t get huge in-state support like we are blessed to have. This probably is the reason why Missouri athletics most years has revenue levels almost equal to Kentucky.

I think Missouri was an awful move for the SEC but I’m sure Missouri the institution feels differently considering they’ve profited massively from the deal through conference profit sharing that they’ve contributed very little to throughout the years.

​
Click to expand...
None of those schools was interested.....joining the SEC would have been a bad business move for all of those schools except for maybe Louisville.

UNC/Duke are linked
VA/Vatech/WV also linked
FSU/Miami

Louisville would have created a Kentucky/Louisville thing maybe. that one would have made the most sense but they were definitely not interested. We got the schools we got because the big 12 was imploding. The ACC would be our natural place to poach for teams but why would they leave? The ACC and big10 are fine on money and that's what matters most to these teams.
 
#105
#105
“Texas games to be Super Bowl for SEC opponents” - Texas AD

You kiddin me? What a bunch of idiots, huge mistake to let them in this conference.
 
#106
#106
Orange931 said:
“Texas games to be Super Bowl for SEC opponents” - Texas AD

You kiddin me? What a bunch of idiots, huge mistake to let them in this conference.
Click to expand...
When did Spencer Rattler become the Texas AD?

71023540007-kn-sut-sc-bp.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: lukeneyland, Woodlawn VOL and Orange931
#108
#108
It has all gotten ridiculously stupid IMO.

And, frankly, as much as I don’t like some of the SEC expansion schools, the SEC looks a whole lot better than the other conferences.

The ACC and Big Ten span the entire country for goodness sakes. Think of the travel for basketball to mid-week games (students could lose two days in class) and even weekend games (one day). And it isn’t much better for football, baseball and softball losing a Friday and maybe a Monday to travel to weekend games. Plus, the jet lag of traveling three time zones.
 
#113
#113
Toss all the noobs!? Reinstate Georgia Tech, Sewanee, and Tulane while we’ve at it. I guess Sewanee gets an expansion draft or something…
Things ain’t like they used to be, and they never was. Will Rogers.
 
#114
#114
pimo1 said:
I can name you about 4 teams in the BIG 10 that are way worse than the worst team in the SEC I could grab you 3 from the ACC and don't get me started in the BIG12 and I mean OG before they got watered down. Vandy has historically had good teams in every sport except for football. Please don't do the National Championships because UT would be behind them for the last few decades. These are not dominant teams... they are good teams there is a huge difference. OOC celebrate wins against Vandy. Not so much against Iowa unless its wrestling Trust me these bottom-dweller SEC teams are better than you think when compared nationwide.

I would not trade Vandy in the 2000's for
Maryland, Iowa, Purdue, Northwestern, Rutgers, Indiana. Big10
Cal, Boston College, Georgia Tech, SMU, Syracuse, Pitt, Virginia, Wake Forest ACC
any team left in the Big12 (they have a few decent teams but culturally/geographically total mismatch) I think the best teams left there would be Arkansas level in the SEC Cincinnati and Arizona are probably their top overall teams when you look at all sports.
Click to expand...
Every team you named is better historically than Vanderbilt in the most important sport. And lately in basketball too, ever since stallings left.
 
#115
#115
25vol said:
UNC, VT, FSU, WV, Clemson, Virginia and even Louisville would have all been better choices than Missouri. They are all better regionally and culturally in terms of fitting in with the SEC.

In reality, Virginia Tech was the first choice over Missouri but their stupid president declined for whatever reason.

Missouri was supposed to bring the SEC 2 things:

1. Better basketball: Missouri before joining the SEC(and historically) has been a great basketball school with a winning record most years. Since joining the SEC, they’ve had a winning record 4 times.

2. St. Louis/KC TV Markets: This, in my opinion, is probably the reason we signed them on in the first place. Expanding into these was a huge deal and was supposed to bring in a ton of revenue from those areas. Problem is, if you talk anyone that actually lives in these areas you’ll quickly realize that they are primarily fans of the Cardinals, Chiefs and Blues. They don’t care about Missouri athletics. Missouri just doesn’t get huge in-state support like we are blessed to have. This probably is the reason why Missouri athletics most years has revenue levels almost equal to Kentucky.

I think Missouri was an awful move for the SEC but I’m sure Missouri the institution feels differently considering they’ve profited massively from the deal through conference profit sharing that they’ve contributed very little to throughout the years.

​
Click to expand...

Missouri Basketball has been a MAJOR disappointment. They have actually been better than I expected in Football.

Missouri fits a little better with Oklahoma now in it.
 
#116
#116
25vol said:
And here you are. Whining about a “whiny” thread. If you don’t have anything substantial to offer in this discussion except complaining about its merits, why bother replying at all?
Click to expand...
I did offer something substantial, a suggestion to stop watching resulting in lost revenue. Is my contribution so outlandish to you? It's the only way that fans could initiate true change.

Then you asked me a direct question (Do these criticisms bother you personally?) which resulted in a direct response. Why are you being such an agitator?
 
#117
#117
The media including the SEC Network is making a big deal about TU & OU coming to the SEC. The SEC has been the best football and the best overall sports conference in college sports for a long time. We didn't need these two teams to maintain that. Neither one of these teams have won anything of consequence in the past 10 years.

Didn't need em, didn't want em. They should just shut up and accept their SEC checks and go to work to try and get better.
 
#118
#118
Rockytop10nessee said:
Every team you named is better historically than Vanderbilt in the most important sport. And lately in basketball too, ever since stallings left.
Click to expand...
First off, incorrect. the view of Vandy and Kentucky has always been quite skewed just like the view of certain other teams has been skewed because they play scrubs. Vanderbilt would be mid-pack at worst in any league except for the SEC. People do not get how deep the SEC is in football talent. Vandy is a bad SEC team but they are miles ahead of most teams we could get to replace them. Before Joining the SEC missou went to 7 straight bowls and was seen as a decent team.. because they played in the Big 12. End game is The SEC is easily the strongest conference in the nation in football and also across all sports. Every team in the SEC brings something to the table. Football si the most important sport financially and in the hearts and minds of us Southerners...but you have to have more because those other sports matter and they exist when football isn't happening..

When I was in high school I played sports and was a decent football player. But I was a much better wrestler. TBH if I wasn't already a UT fan I would have probably ended up a big10 fan.. guess what SEC schools are the bigger wrestling programs? Missou and Oklahoma.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernardKingGOAT
#119
#119
pimo1 said:
First off, incorrect. the view of Vandy and Kentucky has always been quite skewed just like the view of certain other teams has been skewed because they play scrubs. Vanderbilt would be mid-pack at worst in any league except for the SEC. People do not get how deep the SEC is in football talent. Vandy is a bad SEC team but they are miles ahead of most teams we could get to replace them. Before Joining the SEC missou went to 7 straight bowls and was seen as a decent team.. because they played in the Big 12. End game is The SEC is easily the strongest conference in the nation in football and also across all sports. Every team in the SEC brings something to the table. Football si the most important sport financially and in the hearts and minds of us Southerners...but you have to have more because those other sports matter and they exist when football isn't happening..

When I was in high school I played sports and was a decent football player. But I was a much better wrestler. TBH if I wasn't already a UT fan I would have probably ended up a big10 fan.. guess what SEC schools are the bigger wrestling programs? Missou and Oklahoma.
Click to expand...
Vandy would be a bottom two team in the ACC, B1G, or the Big 12
 
#121
#121
Rockytop10nessee said:
Vandy would be a bottom two team in the ACC, B1G, or the Big 12
Click to expand...
Their record against teams in those conferences begs to differ. Vandys record is Vandys record because they play in the SEC... if they got to play the bottom of the BIG10/BIG12/ACC half the year they would have a much better record. Vandy has a winning record against every conference except for the SEC and BIG10 and that's only because they have played Michigan and Ohio State 6 of their 24 matchups.. In the 2000's Vandy is 4-1 vs big10 opponents. Facts show that Vandy is not weak vs OOC especially in the 2000's. When they play midpack teams from other power conferences they more often than not win historically.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VFL-82-JP
#123
#123
Rockytop10nessee said:
Vandy would be a bottom two team in the ACC, B1G, or the Big 12
Click to expand...
I don't think so.

I've no love for Vandy, but consider:

-- The ACC has Boston College, Duke, Georgia Tech, Louisville, SMU, Syracuse, Wake Forest, and Virginia. On any given year, one or two of those can be 'up' and have a decent season or three, but that always ends and most of these teams spend most of their time at the bottom of their conference. And when they're down there, Vandy is probably somewhere toward the upper end of that group. So I'd say on average, Vandy would be whupping 4 or 5 of them.

-- The B10 has Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Northwestern, Purdue and Rutgers. Same comments as above. So on a given year, Vandy probably beats 2 or 3 of these fellas.

-- The B12 has Arizona State, Baylor, Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, and Kansas State, plus the recent arrivals from the G5, Cincinnati and Houston. Vandy could probably find 3 or 4 wins a year here.

This is what makes the SEC so much better a conference than anyone else. It's not at the top, at the top other conferences can compete (as Michigan showed last year). It's at the middle and the bottom where we're much better. We only have one Vandy, with a Mississippi State thrown in. The other conferences have 5, 6, 7, even 8 of that caliber.

Anyway, screw Vandy.

Go Vols!
 
#124
#124
25vol said:
Question is in the title. Answer below if you please.

My answer: I despise it wholeheartedly. I have never liked playing A&M or Missouri because it just feels wrong. We have no history with these teams and that’s just no fun. Who cares about playing teams you haven’t played but a handful of times in the past 50 years?

And yet it just keeps getting worse. I don’t know about you guys, but I can count on 1 hand the number of people I know personally in East TN that are longhorn or OK fans. How is that supposed to be better? To me, part of the whole fun of rivalries is being able to discuss games with Georgia fans, bammers, etc. We have no history with these other teams and we live so far from them how is that going to change? All this expansion does is make teams like A&M feel more at home.

It just sucks because there were plenty of teams I’d rather have seen us get in this conference. FSU, Clemson, NC, VT, WV. All of these teams we at least know about and live within a close enough proximity that it feels like a true regional rivalry. But instead money won the day and the SEC is all the worse for it.

Guess on the bright side we can look forward to getting to see what OK and TU stadiums are like within the next few years but I honestly could care less. I’d rather kick these weirdo Texas/Midwest teams back to their loser conferences and forget about them.
Click to expand...
WV would have been a way better sec fit with a team in NC or VA
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top