(03-21-2021 04:27 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 11:08 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 05:45 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(03-14-2021 08:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  And the SEC makes the most money because in the Southeast football is a religion and because donors give more annually (with the gate) than media outlets pay, though the new contract may challenge that. The SEC does well because it panders to the people who care about Ole Miss, Miss State, and those who even care about Vanderbilt. They don't care, nor should they, what fans from lesser regions think.

It's our thing and we don't give a damn what anybody else thinks. And that's why the SEC is great, beloved in its region, and hated elsewhere. And we like it that way!

We might care what others think when national championships are won somewhere besides the Deep South and Southwest, and yes Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech and Miami are Deep South too. They aren't SEC but they attend the same Church.

Well at least you admit the SEC is disliked outside the Southeast and you've just shown why they are.

This is another post from the past weekend:
https://csnbbs.com/thread-918568-post-17...id17325836

"You know you're a cheerleader for a conference when you campaign for their bottom feeders. I might love the Big Ten but when have I ever campaigned for Rutgers? Yeah Illinois and Ohio State are playing in the Big Ten championship today. It's two top ten teams and two teams that are going to be seeded #1 or #2 in the NCAA Tournament. You should watch. If the Big Ten final today was Nebraska vs. Northwestern, why should you watch? Umm, you shouldn't."

My comment was referenced to:

"Bill Walton is adamant Oregon St is getting in with a loss 03-lmfao"

JRSec is to the SEC as Bill Walton is to the Pac-12.

You want me to like the Mississippi schools as much as Alabama and Florida. My response? No.

Bill Walton wants me to like Oregon State as much as Oregon and UCLA? My response? No. Or "Prove it on the court" (of course they did but to me that just tells me Oregon and UCLA suck).

I'm not saying I'm not a Big Ten cheerleader, of course I am. But when I try to sell you on the Big Ten, I sell you on Ohio State. I'm not pushing Rutgers on you. If I push Rutgers on you, you'll tell me the Big Ten sucks or they don't belong in the Big Ten. The Big Ten is playing well in men's basketball and I'm making you all sick right now. But Michigan, Iowa, and Ohio State are winning right now, deal with it. But you don't want to hear me brag about Minnesota basketball right now. What's good about Minnesota basketball? Their coach sucks so bad his dad coaches better than he does! You know you suck at your job when your dad's better than you and he's 68 years old!

IMO if you want to brag about your good teams, I get it. In fact, I'll join you. Alabama football deserves to be praised. Don't brag about your bottom feeders and act like they're good or better than they really are. That's what ticks me off. Usually the more people praise schools that I think don't deserve praise the more I want to insult them. How often do I insult FCS schools? Exactly. I don't feel the need to.

I don't ask you to like anything. I do ask you to quit trolling schools of conferences that you don't know a damn thing about. You don't know their history, their mission, their relationships to the other schools in the conference, but none of that stops you from prattling on about some obscure need to feel superior to something that must be rooted deep in your psyche.

You pull the same crap on the ACC forum. Nobody is bragging about the bottom of their conferences, but Purdue is beloved in the Big 10, Wake Forest is a secure member of the Carolina family of 4 as long as there is an ACC, and the Mississippi schools are friends and neighbors even if they don't always produce athletically and nobody in the Southeast wants them kicked out.

The ignorance of your point of view on this is appalling, and smacks of the kind of troll that a Northeast Basketball only, jealous of everyone else, kind of poster has illustrated here before, and it isn't going to play well, or last much longer, if you keep that schtick up. Capisce?

And one more thing, stating facts when there is misinformation is not a boast.

That's another reason why I am very hesitant to add the Longhorns to the SEC: UGa would practically never get to play Ole Miss again, a series that both teams liked. But I guess we (UGa) could do what UNC did with Wake Forest, and just play the Rebs/Bears/Landsharks OOC..

LMAO.. you just want an easy win, right?

No, not necessarily. IMO, you're just as bad as Schmolik because you don't know SEC history either, otherwise you wouldn't have made that comment.

The Dawgs and the Rebs/Landsharks played each other annually for awhile until cross division games were dropped to one from the original two. I'm thinking this occurred back when the Aggies and the Tigers joined the conference, but I could be wrong. Regardless, it is an annual series that both teams enjoyed for awhile, much like Auburn-Florida.

(03-22-2021 05:09 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  No, not necessarily. IMO, you're just as bad as Schmolik because you don't know SEC history either, otherwise you wouldn't have made that comment.

The Dawgs and the Rebs/Landsharks played each other annually for awhile until cross division games were dropped to one from the original two. I'm thinking this occurred back when the Aggies and the Tigers joined the conference, but I could be wrong. Regardless, it is an annual series that both teams enjoyed for awhile, much like Auburn-Florida.

The issue actually resolves itself with expansion. Add Texas and another to the West and move Alabama and Auburn to the East. You no longer have to protect Auburn / Georgia or Alabama / Tennessee. You move to 9 conference games with 16 members. You play 7 divisional and 2 crossover which may both be rotated or 1 permanent and 1 rotated. Anyway it's a non issue than can be resolved with divisional reallignment.

(03-22-2021 05:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-22-2021 05:09 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  No, not necessarily. IMO, you're just as bad as Schmolik because you don't know SEC history either, otherwise you wouldn't have made that comment.

The Dawgs and the Rebs/Landsharks played each other annually for awhile until cross division games were dropped to one from the original two. I'm thinking this occurred back when the Aggies and the Tigers joined the conference, but I could be wrong. Regardless, it is an annual series that both teams enjoyed for awhile, much like Auburn-Florida.

The issue actually resolves itself with expansion. Add Texas and another to the West and move Alabama and Auburn to the East. You no longer have to protect Auburn / Georgia or Alabama / Tennessee. You move to 9 conference games with 16 members. You play 7 divisional and 2 crossover which may both be rotated or 1 permanent and 1 rotated. Anyway it's a non issue than can be resolved with divisional reallignment.

There are some trades that need to be made for the betterment of all.
A Maryland for Pitt trade comes to mind, another would be Missouri for West Virginia.
Texas would ruin the SEC and ultimately they will be smart enough to steer clear of them.
Shedding Missouri for West Virginia and picking up USF would be ideal for the SEC and for ESPN.
If the Pitt/Md thing didn't work the addition of West Virginia allows for the return of the Backyard Brawl as an ACC/SEC match up. Since those match ups need to exist with even numbers (scheduling) the addition of Tennessee/Virginia Tech.
Also as an effort for ESPN to seal off their holdings from the B1G, the ACC adds Cincinnati and UCF, while the Big 12 can remain it's own buffer to hem the Big Ten in from the west.

To review:
The Big 12 stays intact with Missouri instead of West Virginia (10 members). Creates a western buffer that hems the B1G in from the west.
The SEC adds West Virginia and USF. Creates two more SEC/ACC match ups (West Virginia/Pitt and Tennessee/Virginia Tech).
The ACC moves to 16 with Cincinnati and UCF. The West Virginia add (SEC) and Cincinnati add further seals off the B1G in the east.

The SEC could always pick up West Virginia and South Florida without shedding Mizzou. It won't make them extra money but it would address some of the issues with having 14, all the while placing MU in a more geographically sensible division and opening the state of Florida further to the western programs.

West Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, Auburn, Alabama
Missouri, South Florida, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Arkansas, Texas A&M, LSU, Vanderbilt

The Big 12 would probably look to either adding BYU, look into a partial merger with the PAC or try to pull back Nebby and/or Colorado.

(03-25-2021 07:20 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  The SEC could always pick up West Virginia and South Florida without shedding Mizzou. It won't make them extra money but it would address some of the issues with having 14, all the while placing MU in a more geographically sensible division and opening the state of Florida further to the western programs.

West Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, Auburn, Alabama
Missouri, South Florida, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Arkansas, Texas A&M, LSU, Vanderbilt

The Big 12 would probably look to either adding BYU, look into a partial merger with the PAC or try to pull back Nebby and/or Colorado.

No way would the Big12 add BYU. I think they do need to get back to it's name and have two divisions again..but it's gonna be a battle narrowing schools that add value alone. I don't see Colorado or Nebraska returning.

Think best case scenario for the Big 12 would be adding two of the following AZ, ASU, Tulane or Cincy (if WV is indeed here to stay).