OFFICIAL 2022-2023 COLLEGE FOOTBALL THREAD

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just to be clear, I’ve been listening to Leb for like 14-15 years. By Hoch I was referring to Marc Hochman :lol:

But I agree with everything else you said.

Marc Hochman is another local radio legend who now does a show with Channing Crowder. I listen to it every day as well.
 
Yes but making those teams Alabama's permanent opponents on top of rotating Georgia, Texas A&M, Florida, Oklahoma, etc would give Alabama a more difficult schedule than other teams. We don't know for sure but a pairing of Tennessee, Auburn and LSU would be by far the most difficult permanent three opponents we've heard about.
Bama has always played these teams every year though. If he isn't playing his historical rivals, who should they be paying?

And Saban is 38-11 against them since being hired. They've only lost to Tennessee once since he was hired.

If the issue is that NOW they'll have to play Georgia and Florida, are we really going to let him complain that their schedule will be TOO difficult because they have to play the other teams IN THEIR CONFERENCE?

Isn't the whole SEC bump thing that the teams all play murderer's row in-season. Or are we finally admitting that most of those teams don't even ever face each other?
 
Bama has always played these teams every year though. If he isn't playing his historical rivals, who should they be paying?

And Saban is 38-11 against them since being hired. They've only lost to Tennessee once since he was hired.

If the issue is that NOW they'll have to play Georgia and Florida, are we really going to let him complain that their schedule will be TOO difficult because they have to play the other teams IN THEIR CONFERENCE?

Isn't the whole SEC bump thing that the teams all play murderer's row in-season. Or are we finally admitting that most of those teams don't even ever face each other?

I understand that Alabama already plays all of those teams but their current draw is significantly more difficult than any other teams permanently opponents. I think it's more of a fairness issue than anything else.

Also, moving into the 12 team playoff, that an SEC team would have to play a very difficult regular season schedule, a conference title game against another top 10 opponent in order to get a buy in the first round and an ACC team or pac 12 team has a much easier schedule and gets the same result.
 
I think he has a right to complain especially when it would make more sense for a school like A&M to be playing OU every year rather than a bottom feeder like MSST.
 
I understand that Alabama already plays all of those teams but their current draw is significantly more difficult than any other teams permanently opponents. I think it's more of a fairness issue than anything else.

Also, moving into the 12 team playoff, that an SEC team would have to play a very difficult regular season schedule, a conference title game against another top 10 opponent in order to get a buy in the first round and an ACC team or pac 12 team has a much easier schedule and gets the same result.
So to be clear... they should get the credit and prestige of potentially playing a tough, NFL lite, SEC schedule... without actually having to play the tough schedule? We should be giving them credit for Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and LSU being SEC teams, when their schedule consists of Mississippi State, Mizzou, Vanderbilt, and Arkansas?
 
So to be clear... they should get the credit and prestige of potentially playing a tough, NFL lite, SEC schedule... without actually having to play the tough schedule? We should be giving them credit for Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and LSU being SEC teams, when their schedule consists of Mississippi State, Mizzou, Vanderbilt, and Arkansas?

When one conference has produced so many national champions, it's not about getting credit or prestige. The literal proof is in your face every year. Are you trying to say the SEC is overrated, or isn't that good?

It would be one thing if the SEC were like the Big Ten and only had two viable teams but over the last two decades Georgia, Florida, LSU, Auburn and Alabama have all one national championships. I don't even understand what point you're trying to make here?

Alabama shouldn't complain about their difficult schedule because they are in the SEC, a conference who beats its chest for playing the best competition?
 
When one conference has produced so many national champions, it's not about getting credit or prestige. The literal proof is in your face every year. Are you trying to say the SEC is overrated, or isn't that good?

It would be one thing if the SEC were like the Big Ten and only had two viable teams but over the last two decades Georgia, Florida, LSU, Auburn and Alabama have all one national championships. I don't even understand what point you're trying to make here?

Alabama shouldn't complain about their difficult schedule because they are in the SEC, a conference who beats its chest for playing the best competition?
Alabama has played Georgia twice in the regular season in the last 10 years. If you're going to beat your chest about playing the best competition, shouldn't you... idk actually play the best competition?

You don't see how silly it is that Alabama already dodges the other best team in their conference every year, and now they're complaining about having to play their own self-determined historical rivals? You want credit for being Bama who can beat anybody anywhere, but want to play Miss State 12 times.

Put that 3 deep of 5 stars to use or join the sun belt.
 
2-loss Bama is a playoff lock almost regardless of anything else in a 12-team scenario.

The SEC obviously emphasized their traditional rivalries/big dollar games over what’s best for Bama. It should.

Reality is everyone's schedules are gonna be a **** show when they draw the "wrong side" of the 6-team rotator.

Saban's complaining cuz he finally might get the short end of a stick that he's received every benefit possible from since taking that job.
I think he has a right to complain especially when it would make more sense for a school like A&M to be playing OU every year rather than a bottom feeder like MSST.
A&M doesn't really have history with Oklahoma like that. They've only played each other like 30 times.

More surprised A&M didn't keep Arkansas, but the SEC valued Arkansas having Texas, I guess.
 
The SEC obviously emphasized their traditional rivalries/big dollar games over what’s best for Bama. It should.
This. This is what CFB is all about. Rivalries and big time matchups. I don’t wanna hear “SEC! SEC!” then see coaches whining about matchups, especially ones with their long-standing rivals.

Nick Saban is literally the last person I’ll feel sorry for in the sport.
 
only thing I will say is that they probably should play Miss State every year as they’ve played them regularly for like the last 100+ years or something like that. Obviously it’s a very lopsided rivalry but it is Bamas longest running opponent.
 
only thing I will say is that they probably should play Miss State every year as they’ve played them regularly for like the last 100+ years or something like that. Obviously it’s a very lopsided rivalry but it is Bamas longest running opponent.
Bama don't care anything about that game and neither do the SEC's TV partners.

How far down the Bama rivalry list do you think even their own fans get before one of them mentions MSU? 6? 7?

End of the day, the conferences gotta pay the piper. And Bama is in the unfortunate circumstance of helping do that by being the biggest TV draw with the biggest "traditional SEC" rivalries.
 
I was about to say… longest standing opponent =/= biggest rival. Nobody cares about that matchup :lol:
 
I never said that was their biggest rival cmon now :lol:

Sabans got no ground to stand on. Now if they threw in UGA in the mix I’d understand his reasoning but trust he will still have two weeks playing the Men’s YMCA football team and Devry University in November
 
I was about to say… longest standing opponent =/= biggest rival. Nobody cares about that matchup :lol:
Stanford, for example, is USC's oldest rivalry. No one would argue it's one of their biggest rivals. The game doesn't even have a trophy.
 
Stanford, for example, is USC's oldest rivalry. No one would argue it's one of their biggest rivals. The game doesn't even have a trophy.
Are they rivals because of their strong academics or does it extend to athletics?
 
Are they rivals because of their strong academics or does it extend to athletics?
Athletics. They are both private universities though which is part of the deal, and they've been playing since 1905, which is before USC was playing UCLA and Notre Dame.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom