Jump to content

Playing the SEC East


War Knight

Recommended Posts

Some things baffle me as I look at some old records. We haven't lost to Florida in a little more than 14 years. We don't play again until 2019. Meaning most of the Florida players will have been 0-6 years old the last time they beat us.

 

Tennessee last beat us in 1999. Meaning the players the next time we face in 2018 would have been either not born or 3 years old.

 

South Carolina 2002 beat us so 0-6 there as well.

 

Random notes: Ohio State has never beaten us. (13-5) against FSU, never played Stanford, never played Notre Dame, haven't played Miami since 1984.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





I am curious why the SEC East has just seemed to collapse in the past few years.    Solid schools in HS football rich states.....and across the board some good teams are really under-performing.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, AU64 said:

I am curious why the SEC East has just seemed to collapse in the past few years.    Solid schools in HS football rich states.....and across the board some good teams are really under-performing.   

 

It's what happens when you replace good coaches with poor ones IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, War Knight said:

Some things baffle me as I look at some old records. We haven't lost to Florida in a little more than 14 years. We don't play again until 2019. Meaning most of the Florida players will have been 0-6 years old the last time they beat us.

 

Tennessee last beat us in 1999. Meaning the players the next time we face in 2018 would have been either not born or 3 years old.

 

South Carolina 2002 beat us so 0-6 there as well.

 

Random notes: Ohio State has never beaten us. (13-5) against FSU, never played Stanford, never played Notre Dame, haven't played Miami since 1984.

With League expansions,

Memories of past encounters inevitably fade. Besides,

playing in the SEC, of late, has become, well, um,

playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

Urban and Kirby were probably 2 of the best coaches in the history of the East...James Franklin might've been Vanderbilt's best in recent memory the way it's going for them now. 

I'm guessing you meant Richt instead of Kirby?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

Urban and Kirby were probably 2 of the best coaches in the history of the East...James Franklin might've been Vanderbilt's best in recent memory the way it's going for them now. 

Don't forget the Old Ball Coach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, gr82be said:

Don't forget the Old Ball Coach. 

I think Muschamp, as evidence right now, will have those boys at least top 3 in that conference every year. He's actually getting some pretty solid pieces together in terms of recruiting and the Bentley kid we missed on is the truth. I don't know if he'll be fielding entire NFL squads like Spurrier had for a short time, but he'll have them at least better than Vandy and Kentucky going forward

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I think Muschamp, as evidence right now, will have those boys at least top 3 in that conference every year. He's actually getting some pretty solid pieces together in terms of recruiting and the Bentley kid we missed on is the truth. I don't know if he'll be fielding entire NFL squads like Spurrier had for a short time, but he'll have them at least better than Vandy and Kentucky going forward

Didn't miss on him. He was always going to go wherever his pops was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SEC east should be called the SEC Lite.  Its just a weaker division.  

The SEC East has 4 historically weak schools in football.  The SEC west has really only two.    The SEC did not do the SEC east any favors putting Missouri in that division.   In the 1992 and 2012 conference expansions the West got the stronger football schools (A&M and Arkansas) the east the weaker (South Carolina and Missouri).  

Odly, it's reversed in basketball.   The east division is stronger.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, cptau said:

The SEC east should be called the SEC Lite.  Its just a weaker division.  

The SEC East has 4 historically weak schools in football.  The SEC west has really only two.    The SEC did not do the SEC east any favors putting Missouri in that division.   In the 1992 and 2012 conference expansions the West got the stronger football schools (A&M and Arkansas) the east the weaker (South Carolina and Missouri).  

Odly, it's reversed in basketball.   The east division is stronger.    

 

Don't think that's odd. Not too many schools are strong in both sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you look at SEC titles the top six are Auburn , LSU and the Updykes in the West and Tennessee, Georgia and Florida in the East, so at the time of expansion in 92 it was fair. The East is just in transition the West was weaker in the 90's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

Don't think that's odd. Not too many schools are strong in both sports.

Just odd that it's exactly opposite between the divisions.  The east does have an advantage in basketball attendance as its schools tend to be in or near major cities. Nashville, Lexington, Knoxville, and Columbia are all much larger that Auburn, Tuscaloosa, Starkville, Oxford.   That may help those programs get more attention from basketball recruits. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...