Wow that guy is delusional. I doubt there is an iota of interest at Texas or Texas A&M to join the SEC. Not to mention a 16 team SEC would be very difficult from a scheduling stand point. The WAC tried that and failed. Terry
Terry, he also mentioned the possibility of Texas to the Big 10, what do you think about that? I also thought he was pretty far out.
I can't see Texas leaving the B12, we're the dominant program overall and I don't see the advantage of leaving the B12 for any other conference. SEC would make more sense than the B10. There used to be talk that Missouri would leave for the B10, or that the PAC10 wanted to lure Texas. But that's just crazy talk. I do think something will happen to the Big East. Right now they are short on the football side and that forces them to go out and get a lot of non-conference games. On the plus side it has allowed them to craft schedules that maximize their better teams making it deep into the season before they start knocking each other off. Big East games on Thurs night have given us a lot of very big games that have drawn good viewing audiences. The problem the Big East faces is that some of their traditional basketball powers don't mean anything in football and the football schools aren't very good at basketball. There has been talk of Memphis, East Carolina and UCF joining the Big East to bolster the football side, but that would make it very unwieldy for the Basketball side. Terry
Here's some more musings on the future of College Football from a writer in the State of Fla!! :roll: :roll: :roll: Wait'll you read the article about how he realigns things!! Realign College Football
Notre Dame in the Pac 16? Seems the current Big 10 came out on the short end of this Scenario. Alabama and Auburn move to the SEC East. That would be some division. Interesting scenarios in the off season.
that dude <t>is bat sh*t crazy.<br/> <br/> the sec just got a 2 loss team to play for the title in a system created by its former commissioner. no conference has benefited from the 'new design' of college football like the SEC. the system benefits the conference it was designed to favor. shame on the other commissioners for buying into this sham.<br/> <br/> this is a system that rewards the undeserving (bad teams, conference bottom feeders) and punishes anyone who so much as dare show that they don't totally agree with the way things are done. only in this retardo world of modern college football could a conference like the pac10 come under fire for having the audacity to actually have all the teams in the conference play one another. there are no questions, no what ifs. you know who is ranked where in that conference because they played on the field. how do we even dare have the audacity to claim that its even a true division one championship when we automatically exclude one half of division one?<br/> <br/> if we want a beauty pageant, then bring back the old bowl system. if you want it 'settled on the field' then go to a playoff. either way, this system we currently use is crap... but its a big pay day.<br/> <br/> ugh.</t>
Yeah Corey but the last two SEC Champions beat the champion of the All-World conference by a combined 41 points so that must be impressive to you right? Don't you think that was a great accomplishment and worthy of the national championship? It's been made evident to me by discussion on this board that the SEC participants played the most deserving and most capable opponent available so what's your beef? Also...while the SEC members don't all play each other the league does offer that little matter of a title game in Atlanta. Would have liked to see Tenn play LSU and Auburn last year however as the East Representative in that title game.
Why the sarcastic reference to the Big 10? I don't recall that anyone here has touted the Big 10 as more than a competitive conference, and I don't recall that anyone has shown a lack of respect for the SEC. Some may have issues with out-of-conference scheduling or how the SEC ranks in comparison to other conferences, but no one has expressed disdain for the conference as a whole as you have for the Big 10. You are the only person on this board who spends more time consistently denigrating other teams and conferences than you spend extolling your own team.....or so it seems. You live in your own private world of self-justification of your conduct on this board. I agree with others that you probably are a pretty good guy who just has a strange outlook on how the world turns. Because of that you provoke spirited conversations, which, as long as they remain civil - which they do - is not a bad thing......but let's not ignore the elephant in the room.
Yes...I was being sarcastic a bit because it seems as if Corey is unhappy with the system utilized in which Ohio State was selected last year and yet he has defended Ohio State as that selection. On the other hand I detect some dissatifaction on his part with the way the PAC 10 has been left out and the SEC has been left in. Seems to me given "on the field" results he shouldn't be unhappy with what the SEC accomplished the last two years if he thinks Ohio State was the best selection on the other side of the field. Gipper....it's funny how as a last resort you guys always mention 1995..... I've been over that one for about say....ever since the year after when UF beat the snot out of FSU to win the next NC. Now if Nebraska had been your average team playing for the NC (sorta like Florida was in 2006) instead of the juggernaut the Huskers were and then they beat the snot out of Florida anyway I may have had more lingering questions than answers about the state of Florida Gator football. As things turned out since then I have long forgotten that asswhipping even if Steve Spurrier and Danny Weurffel have not. :wink: :roll:
my contention <t>is that this system blows:<br/> <br/> 1. It is designed to benefit those conferences who decided to sell out their identity and 'play ball' the way Roy Kramer decided it should be played.<br/> 2. It punishes those who actually decide matters on the field.<br/> 3. It excludes half of Division 1 football.<br/> 4. Its nothing more than a money generating beauty pageant. <br/> <br/> Some folks still shed a tear for Auburn (stop laughing KP) and perhaps they should. At the same time, I can point to many Pac10 champs left to play in 'other' BCS games where they can 'prove their worth' only to have that team prove its worth over and over again.<br/> <br/> I like how you decide to go ad hominem on me while taking a poke at the Big10, rather than address the factual points that I made regarding how this thing was formed, and exactly who this system serves.</t>
Yup, I was just saying to my wife the other day what a shame it was that Auburn got shafted like that! :wink:
Corey, it's ok, truly it is....it's unfortunate that the dude has decided to share his issues with us. Perhaps it's therapeutic - who knows. Maybe one day he'll overcome his demons, but I'm not optimistic.....in the meantime, everybody sing..... 8) <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jR4C6vmDao0&hl=en"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jR4C6vmDao0&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
MCG funny that the team that got blown out in '95 was allowed to play for the NC the following year and somehow that's just fine with some folks.
Corey....if you would share a tear for Auburn at all or feel someone should how is it then that the system serves the SEC when that year it was the Big 12 and PAC 10 who were better served? I bring up the last two years because the SEC accounted for itself very well and in fact the SEC is 4-0 in BCS title games with Auburn's exclusion precluding a possible 5-0 record. Given that stat what conference would you say should have weight when the selections are made? Or as I said before is it possible you just don't think the competition was what it should have been? That it should have been the PAC 10's USC instead of the Big Ten's OSU the last two years? I would agree that USC would have been a wonderful addition to the NC title game but given the results on the field in the game itself you couldn't/shouldn't say that the SEC shouldn't have been there as well.
In defense of the BCS system discussed in this topic it would have been AZSt vs. FSU in 1996 because they were unbeaten along with the Seminoles and the Sun Devils probably would have ranked slightly above UF in the final BCS selection poll. Thankfully Florida got the chance to prove it's narrow loss to the noles at Tallahassee was just a fluke.