Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Neyland Stadium

  1. #21
    TheDynastyIsDead TUSK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In your head.
    Posts
    13,245
    vCash
    1000619
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarius View Post
    That too, but mainly your school’s rivalry with a powderpuff is what’s holding the conference scheduling back. There is no need for that game to keep things the way they are scheduling wise. It makes no sense.

    How does it “hold back” the SEC. if you don’t mind me asking? it’s still generating good money & viewership.
    "It is not courage to resist TUSK; It is courage to accept TUSK."

    No.


    Easy there buddy. Tusk is...well Tusk is Tusk. Tireddawg 12.20.17

  2. #22
    Bennie Brown Know-It-All
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    4,084
    vCash
    3138
    Quote Originally Posted by TUSK View Post
    How does it “hold back” the SEC. if you don’t mind me asking? it’s still generating good money & viewership.
    It is keeping kids that play the game on the field from getting to experience playing every team in the conference while they are at a school. It is also completely unfair for State and OM and Bama to play their constant east teams and LSU and Auburn to be required to play Georgia and Florida every year.

  3. #23
    TheDynastyIsDead TUSK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In your head.
    Posts
    13,245
    vCash
    1000619
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarius View Post
    It is keeping kids that play the game on the field from getting to experience playing every team in the conference while they are at a school. It is also completely unfair for State and OM and Bama to play their constant east teams and LSU and Auburn to be required to play Georgia and Florida every year.
    Ahhh. You wanna do away with permanent cross division games & just rotate all the teams. That would be more equitable. I sure would have liked that the years UT was kicking the shit outta Bammer.

    I don’t think the SEC would be willing to give up the money that UT/UA & AU/UGA generates, though.
    Last edited by TUSK; 05-02-2019 at 11:45 AM.
    "It is not courage to resist TUSK; It is courage to accept TUSK."

    No.


    Easy there buddy. Tusk is...well Tusk is Tusk. Tireddawg 12.20.17

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9,664
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by TUSK View Post
    As an ole school Bammer, I follow UT pretty well... Back in the day they got into a "capacity war" with the Big House in Ann Arbor...

    As I understand it, they didn't so much "add seats", they just decreased seat size.

    The TSIO (Bammer/UT game) is still the biggest day of the year, to me... regardless of their suckitude....
    Pretty smart in one sense to increase seating by not spending a dime (UT has a good business school). But the backend of that decision leads to a low tier stadium experience.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9,664
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by TUSK View Post
    How does it “hold back” the SEC. if you don’t mind me asking? it’s still generating good money & viewership.
    Conference realignment. Swap Auburn and Mizzou. Auburn to SECE makes sense and they keep the UGA game however Auburn would become the permanent rivalry with Bama and they would have to give up the out of date UT rivalry.

    For your second part, SEC football is going to generate money no matter who plays who. If you want more competition and fairness in the SEC then realignment should be done. If you want just more of same blue bloods every year then don't realign. Easy to see why some schools want to swap and some don't. Just like basketball divisions a few years ago.
    Last edited by R2Dawg; 05-02-2019 at 12:25 PM.

  6. #26
    TheDynastyIsDead TUSK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In your head.
    Posts
    13,245
    vCash
    1000619
    Quote Originally Posted by R2Dawg View Post
    Conference realignment. Swap Auburn and Mizzou. Auburn to SECE makes sense and they keep the UGA game however Auburn would become the permanent rivalry with Bama and they would have to give up the out of date UT rivalry.

    For your second part, SEC football is going to generate money no matter who plays who. If you want more competition and fairness in the SEC then realignment should be done. If you want just more of same blue bloods every year then don't realign. Easy to see why some schools want to swap and some don't. Just like basketball divisions a few years ago.
    You may have convinced me....I like the idea of swapping UT for Mizzou and the chance to play Vandy, KY, and SC more often...
    "It is not courage to resist TUSK; It is courage to accept TUSK."

    No.


    Easy there buddy. Tusk is...well Tusk is Tusk. Tireddawg 12.20.17

  7. #27
    General Public Political Hack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    General Public
    Posts
    17,420
    vCash
    7178
    Yeah, I wish auburn would move to the East and make Bama their permanent. Doesn't disrupt UGA vs Auburn and keeps the iron bowl in tact. The UT vs Bama game is old news. No one outside of T-town or Knoxville cares anymore.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9,664
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by TUSK View Post
    You may have convinced me....I like the idea of swapping UT for Mizzou and the chance to play Vandy, KY, and SC more often...
    Modern SEC, I think UT and Mizzou is a wash for Bama. The others, you play the same % of time so no change. I see little change for Bama. Now for majority of the SECW it gets a little better replacing Auburn with Mizzou. Auburn has down years but they have some up years where they compete for SECW. I don't see Mizzou doing that. They will compete for bottom in SECW.

  9. #29
    Bennie Brown Know-It-All
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    4,084
    vCash
    3138
    Quote Originally Posted by TUSK View Post
    You may have convinced me....I like the idea of swapping UT for Mizzou and the chance to play Vandy, KY, and SC more often...
    Tennessee has not had a better program than Missouri or South Carolina in a decade.

  10. #30
    TheDynastyIsDead TUSK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In your head.
    Posts
    13,245
    vCash
    1000619
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarius View Post
    Tennessee has not had a better program than Missouri or South Carolina in a decade.
    Can’t disagree. However, if you don’t believe UT has a higher ceiling, I’d have to disagree.

    It’s really irrelevant, little would change in the short term, save a slight ratings drop.
    "It is not courage to resist TUSK; It is courage to accept TUSK."

    No.


    Easy there buddy. Tusk is...well Tusk is Tusk. Tireddawg 12.20.17

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.