Big mistake by SEC leaders!!!

Now that is hilarious.....I do pray that doesn't happen to my Hogs, but if it does I may stop watching!........But really, I am an SEC fan and enjoy watching LSU, Bama, Georgia and a couple of others.

I like to watch some SEC teams, but other than Mizzou (my grad school), I'm not a fan of any particular team, though I do like to watch good games, so I would watch good games between two good teams, but if 7-1 LSU is playing 3-5 MSU, I could really care less unless Mizzou is 7-1, then I'd be hoping for MSU to upset LSU.  If Mizzou is also 3-5 the game becomes irrelevant to me as it's not likely to be interesting and neither of them losing will help Mizzou's case.

It may take a while for Missouri to get to that level in the SEC and with Florida and Tenn getting better, Missouri may not make it to 4th. 

I think they will do 4th easily enough, but I don't know if they can get higher than that.  I'm not worried about UT at all, but if Florida comes back this year that would be a factor--though last year's team didn't look like much for Mizzou to worry about.  Plus we'll see if SC can actually continue their brief 2-year good streak as their schedule isn't as easy next year.  They have 2 teams in the west with a pulse this year, plus Mizzou to go with Georgia and Florida--they could have 5 losses right there and throw in Clemson and they could be back to their usual 6-7 wins. 


   

   
  

Dang Steels, I feel like I am all over you but it is not my intent.  Just need to clear up something about the West teams with a pulse SCAR is playing this year.  As opposed to recent years?  2011 Lost to Auburn and Arkansas, beat Miss St 14-12.  2010 Lost to Auburn and Arkansas and beat Alabama then lost to Auburn again in SECCG.  2009 Lost to Alabama and Arkansas and beat Ole Miss.  In three seasons that is a 3-7 record agains the West.  But you are right, they do play Arkansas and LSU from the West this coming up season.

Florida is just one of those scary teams. They havent been playing well and they record dictates you should win the game, but they have a lot of talent. When your team plays them you just pray before kick-off that this is not the week everything starts to click for them

2011 Lost to Auburn

Sorry as I know you're an Auburn fan, but they didn't have a pulse last year......they needed a miracle from heaven to beat Utah State and really other than that win over SC had nothing to brag about last year.  

  

In a year where Auburn lost 18 of 22 starters 8-5, in playing one of the toughest scheds in the nation, is acceptable...hopefully an improvement in record and consistency for this year.

I agree.  Auburn was a barely above average team last year.  The 8-5 record showed it.  Five teams were able to exploit our weaknesses last year, and did so with more ease than I care to see again.  I'll be the first to admit we caught them at the right time, when they were going through yet another Garcia debacle.  But they did lose to Auburn none the less.

Ray, while only returning three starters, I did not have a major problem with the 8-5, from a strictly looking at the record point of view.  It was the way the five were accumulated I found unacceptable.  We were completely smoked in those five games and I do not accept that.  I think the biggest part of that problem now resides in Happy Valley, PA, Ted Roof.  Looking forward to what BVG will bring to the Plain.  I think the talent is there on the DL and secondary.  LB worries me some however.

Agree, botta. Wish we had more consistency and picked up some young blood at LB. We need some big stoppers there.

We could have beaten Clemson but the way we gave up chunks of yardage was just disgusting.

I think things, overall, are looking up. I'm hoping for 9-10 this year but really have to see improvement on first the line(s), then QB. Very excited about the season.

Picking up Texas A&M was a super move. But what does Missouri really bring in that adds more value to the conference? I was afraid the ACC was going to lose Virginia Tech. I think adding Mizzou over VT was a really bad move that makes little sense to me. Sure, Mizzou has the St. Louis and Kansas City markets, but VT adds value with their market and their proven better product. VT vs. the SEC East teams would all be great matchups among the Southern teams. Mizzou - not so much.

Thanks, SEC, for leaving VT alone. I do like the GT-VT rivalry of the ACC Techs.

As far as keeping the old rivalries goes, the SEC should just go ahead and play 9 IC games. That would alleviate a lot of the "lost rivalries" problems. Texas A&M will bring new rivalries to the West but Mizzou brings to the East - not much. VT would have been a far better add.

     Picking up Texas A&M was a super move. But what does Missouri really bring in that adds more value to the conference? I was afraid the ACC was going to lose Virginia Tech. I think adding Mizzou over VT was a really bad move that makes little sense to me. Sure, Mizzou has the St. Louis and Kansas City markets, but VT adds value with their market and their proven better product. VT vs. the SEC East teams would all be great matchups among the Southern teams. Mizzou - not so much.

Thanks, SEC, for leaving VT alone. I do like the GT-VT rivalry of the ACC Techs.

As far as keeping the old rivalries goes, the SEC should just go ahead and play 9 IC games. That would alleviate a lot of the "lost rivalries" problems. Texas A&M will bring new rivalries to the West but Mizzou brings to the East - not much. VT would have been a far better add. 

   
I do wish VT would have been the school  other than Mizzou.....I don't know why VT didn't plead their case a little harder to the SEC to join, it is the number one conference in football, has the most money, best TV package and all around sports the best in the country!.....match up against the east by far much better than Mizzou and great match ups with the west powers.....as far as rivalries, your right!......AM has been a rival of Ark since way back in the SWC days and I'm sure LSU and AM will become one also....VT and Georgia would become a great one as would VT and FL......just sorry the SEC didn't get VT.   

    

I think things, overall, are looking up. I'm hoping for 9-10 this year but really have to see improvement on first the line(s), then QB. Very excited about the season. 

  
I hope you're not taking about wins.....with the schedule Auburn has to play, no way that many wins.....maybe in a couple of years, the other big 3 of the west are still too strong this year for Auburn......but tell me, do you think the lose of Malzan set the Tiger offence back a little?     

Bornahog, that is an interesting question about Malzahn.  Our offense was Tony Franklin bad this past season WITH Malzahn.  But the two seasons previous we set all time offensive records at Auburn.  One with Cam, and one with Chris Todd.  But I think it is safe to say it had something to do with the offensive line as much as anything.  In 09, the group had mostly been playing together for two seasons.  In 10, the offensive line had something like a combined 118 starts.  In 11 the offensive line had something like 18 combined starts.  Not sure I have the numbers exactly right but do know that the combined starts dropped about 100 games.  Yes, Loeffler will be an unproven comodity but he will have something that Gus was not afforded the luxury of, a proven defensive coordinator.  VanGorder led some terriffic defenses at UGA in the early 2ks.  I think we have talent at DL and the secondary but not quite up to snuff at LB.  If Frazier can take the leadership role and the O and D build a synergystic relationship, which was missing with Roof, I think we can be a better, more rounded, team than in 11.  Will we see the numbers we saw from Malzahn in 09 and 10?  Probably not.  But like I said, those were all time numbers at Auburn.  What I'd like to see us achieve is that balance between O and D more like in 04.  Will 2012 be our year?  My thinking is that we are setting up really more for a 2013 and 2014 run.

Bornahog, that is an interesting question about Malzahn.  Our offense was Tony Franklin bad this past season WITH Malzahn.  But the two seasons previous we set all time offensive records at Auburn.  One with Cam, and one with Chris Todd.  But I think it is safe to say it had something to do with the offensive line as much as anything. 

You have hit the nail on the head with this response.......with Cam, Malzahn had a real luxury with his talent and a couple of great running backs, and you're right about the offensive line, makes all the difference in the world when you have experience at the line positions.....with Todd he came up with a great game plan for his talent.......I do believe that the Tiger defence will again be as big and bad as it has ever been with VanGorder, what a great hire!......the SEC West is going to be unbelievable in the next couple of years, don't think there will be an undefeated team from this division for a long time.....but even with one loss it will be hard to deny a top ranking.

Question.....just how great do you think Dyer will be in the Sun Belt?  

I sincerely hope Mike gets his head on straight at Ark. St.  The kid has amazing talent.  Of course I hate the way things played out for him at Auburn but I think his transfer was best for everyone.  And what a shame that is.  He had the chance to go down as one of the real special ones to come through a school that has had the pleasure of hosting many top notch college RBs.  Wisodm says he will do well there, providing he ever plays a down.  It is realistic to think he may go pro even after sitting out this season b/c of the transfer (assuming he won't get any kind of hardship waiver).  He will meet the NFL requirement of being three seasons removed from his high school graduating class and may take a chance, even with the character issues.  Again, I hope all turns out well for Mike, he will be great in that league, providing he plays.

VT has no real incentive to leave the ACC. They've dominated their division since joining the league which has gotten them a ton of BCS money. Sometimes it really is better to be the big fish in a small pond.

Sometimes it really is better to be the big fish in a small pond.

I agree completely, which is why Mizzou moving to the SEC really baffles me.  With Nebraska gone they had the B12 North sewed up and were guaranteed a shot at the CCG every year virtually--now they have to fight to make 2nd or 3rd in the SEC east?   I wish my grad school had stayed in the B12, but alas that's gone.  I also wish my favorite team, the Pitt Panthers had stayed in the Big E as I don't think they have much chance of winning the ACC anytime soon, but were often in the running in the Big E.  I hate the realignment and superconferences..........and I'm going to miss the Backyard Brawl.  CFB is starting to suck for me.......

what can Missouri possibly add to make the SEC better?

A respected school.

VT has no real incentive to leave the ACC. They've dominated their division since joining the league which has gotten them a ton of BCS money. Sometimes it really is better to be the big fish in a small pond.

True, they have dominated the division and conference. But VT must split that BCS money up evenly between the ACC schools. Usually the ACC only gets 1 team into the BCS while the SEC usually gets 2. The SEC take home from their split is so much greater than the ACC that VT would be foolish not to jump into the SEC - if invited. The SEC's bowl payouts are better, TV contract is better and the money is almost twice as good as what the ACC teams get. If that isn't incentive enough I don't know what is.

The one big problem will arise if the Virginia legislature decides to veto the move.

Excellent point, Pig fan.  The SEC just watered down its league by adding 2 irrelevant programs like MIZZOU and Aggy.  Not sure why the SEC wanted to expand at all, as its brand was just fine as is.