On this day in 2012, Mizzou and A&M officially join the SEC. Regular season conference records since last SEC Expansion...Football records since then.....
On This Date 6 Years Ago (SEC Expansion)
- Thread starter WMack4Bama
- Start date
The shocker has got to be that Auburn is only one game better than MSU.
Our losses (for those who like me start musing):
2012 ATM
2013 Auburn
2014 Ole Miss
2015 Ole Miss
2017 Auburn
Our losses (for those who like me start musing):
2012 ATM
2013 Auburn
2014 Ole Miss
2015 Ole Miss
2017 Auburn
This tells me aTm with a good head coach can contend in the West, and MO has benificted by a weak East for the past several years. I still hope the SEC can replace MO one day.
A&M had a good coach. (Sumlin's winning % at TAMU is higher than Coach Bryant's at TAMU). But he, much like many of the SEC coaches that have resigned or been fired over the last 10 years aren't being fired because they're losing. They're getting fired because they're losing to Alabama and/or that they're not Alabama (Nick Saban). It's really an unfair standard to be held to, as the run Alabama is on right now is truly historic and may not be duplicated ever again. But it is what it is.
The previous six years in the Big 12 they had a combined record of 54-42. No surprise the SEC is a bit tougher than the HUNH bunch.
What I dont get is that a good chunk of this board says this over and over, but when it comes to the question if "Mac is a good coach" the whole bad East argument is ignored.
Will never happen. The markets in KC and St Louis are big reasons why the SECN exist and continue to thrive, and a big reason why the LHN continues to dwindle. I still dont see why so many folks have this animosity towards Missouri, and continue to go out of their way to discredit them for actually doing far better than what any sane poster on here thought.
Last edited:
I agree with you about this. Missouri was for market share but we could have done a lot worse. Missouri is traditionally a mid-pack football team and they fit in here pretty well. I am neutral on Mizzou, neither love nor hate them -- thus far.
If Im being honest, I was hoping for Virginia Tech as a fan, but Missouri was always my #2 pick for the companion of aTm. I think future expansion is going to be done like the 2nd expansion rather than the 1st. The SEC already has many behemoths, but is always in the market for more profitable markets. Thats why I believe NC St is more likely to get am invitation before OU if it came down to it.
But anyways, the point is that Missouri was a market pick, and it was a great one. I still dont get why there is such dislike towards a team that we've only played twice since 1979. If its their competitiveness then why arent people up in arms about the other .500 and below teams on that list?
I think it had more to do with A&M unable to beat LSU. A&M padded their conference record against the bottom feeders of the SEC.
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
I think Missouri was the plan B when we did not get Oklahoma. What the Sooners lack in TV market size they more than make up for in prestige and tradition. After all we are talking about one of the top 3 blue bloods in all of the sport.
Last edited:
I honestly don’t think OU was ever a part of the plan. From what I recall the SEC flirted with VT and then quickly went with MO. OU’s name came up later when it looked like the Big XII was going to desolve after the 4th member left but any and everyone knew at that point the SEC wasn’t going to let OU force Okie St on them so it was never serious.
But I know a lot on here really want OU but I constantly wonder “Why?” Do we really want another big time football and softball challenger to potentially trip us up for the sake of tradition, or would we like to have a basketball/ baseball school that adds to the market value to the SEC. I’m choosing the latter and I hope the SEC continues to as well.
Momma says Rebels are so ornery 'cause they spent all that money but ain't got no titles.
Can I be the first to say I love seeing UT dead even with Vandy? Yes, I can be the first.
The two newbies, both within one game of .500, are probably close to where they were expected to be. Mizzou actually made it to the title game two years in a row thanks to the weak east. aTm had a much tougher road.
Both aTm and Mizzou opened up lucrative markets for the SEC. They aren't going anywhere.
Alabama's absolute dominance is remarkable. I'm praying for an undefeated season and #18 this year and depending on the breaks that could happen.
Can I be the first to say I love seeing UT dead even with Vandy? Yes, I can be the first.
The two newbies, both within one game of .500, are probably close to where they were expected to be. Mizzou actually made it to the title game two years in a row thanks to the weak east. aTm had a much tougher road.
Both aTm and Mizzou opened up lucrative markets for the SEC. They aren't going anywhere.
Alabama's absolute dominance is remarkable. I'm praying for an undefeated season and #18 this year and depending on the breaks that could happen.
The records are so telling... We all know how dominant Bama has been and we know that the Barners always have a lot more talk than results.
Out of curiosity, does anyone remember the guy with a website that had some good breakdowns of the SEC expansion possibilities? There were links for each SEC school and flags/banners for each school at the top of the page. Something like SEC guy or guru or something.
I saw that and was also surprised to see the numbers showing Auburn's record as bad as it is for that period. Guess I haven't been paying much attention. I also would have guessed A&M had a bit better record than that, and that UF and LSU were better than UGA.
Mizzu has never "felt" right, but that ship sailed and they'll never give up the $$$.
I think the thing that needs fixing is to get them in the SECW, where they geographically belong. That would probably mean putting Auburn in the east. Probably won't happen, but right now it would give a little more balance between the two divisions.
I think the thing that needs fixing is to get them in the SECW, where they geographically belong. That would probably mean putting Auburn in the east. Probably won't happen, but right now it would give a little more balance between the two divisions.
Auburn being 3-9 in 2012 helps them look like the poor team they are. Take that year away and they are 25-15 since 2013. TN being equal with Vandy for that period is really the shocker.
A few random thoughts -
On the barn: they are a mostly "above average" program who CAN be deadly when they get the right payroll mix on the field - Witness 2010, 2013, and 2017. At aub, it's all about the "Benjamin's".
On UGa - much like the comments on Sumlin, above - Richt was NOT fired for being a "Bad" coach - he's actually a Very good coach, and a GREAT Recruiter. He had 12+ win talent Almost every year at UGa. He was fired because he usually only won 10-11 games with 12+ win talent. The idea that Kirby will cause a "Seismic" shift in the talent level at UGa is a bit of a misnomer. He will (and already has) raise(d) it SOME. But they've had NC Contender talent there for most of the past 15-20 years.....
And just FWIW, you could almost say the same about Les Miles - GREAT Recruiter, GREAT "Maintainer", but maybe not the best "big game" Coach. Both Miles and Richt can make a decent argument for being among THE very best to ever coach at those respective SEC schools.
On Sumlin - Yet another similarity between two very different men - Coach Byrant and Coach Saban: - Can't remember who said it, may have been Coach Stallings, or Bill Battle, or pat dye, but in any event - words to the effect of: "Everyone talks about how many men Coach Bryant put IN to coaching; but we never talk about how many he put OUT of coaching!"
On Mizzou and aTm- that expansion was about ONE thing, and ONE thing alone - TV money (i.e. "Mammon"). And from that perspective it's been a great success. But otherwise, it's done LITTLE TO NOTHING to make the SEC a better conference "on the field" in almost any sport.......
We can argue whether aggsy belongs: it's at least debatable.
But Mizzou? No way.
There's just no connection there. Not Geographically, Not Culturally, Not Historically, Not Academically, NOT from any perspective of improving SEC Sports. Mizzou itself NEVER really wanted to be in the SEC, we were simply "any port in the storm" in their crisis to get out from under U. of Texas. - For a decade prior to 2012 they begged and pleaded for an Invite to the B1G-EGO conference, and even today, they'd drop the SEC like a bad habit if the B1G gave them a bid.
And worse, the culture on their main campus is beyond toxic - to the point that it's decimating their enrollment. It's a CANCER, and we need to seriously hope it doesn't spread to other SEC campuses.
Regarding OU, there actually WAS a brief time many years ago when at least some part of the leadership at OU very much wanted to leave the "Texas-10" Conference and join the SEC. But it was a complicated matter, and there were various factions within OU battling for different results, including one faction that wanted OU to join the PAC. There was also an implied THREAT from the Oklahoma Legislature that they might block any move by OU that didn't include Okie.St. - and that was a "Poison Pill" to ANY Conference that wanted OU. OF course, as we all know, the contingent at OU that wanted to stay on as Texas' .... what's the word? I guess we could say "Whipping Boy"..... that's the contingent that won the day, and OU remains in the "Texas-10" conference, which remains almost completely under the control of the Univ. or Texassssss.........
Bama and Auburn to the east and Vandy and Mizzou to West would be the best solution.
Latest threads
-
-
-
SIAP there was an article that Joe K interviewed for assistant coach
- Started by mlingerfelt31
- Replies: 11
-
Final Home Midweek for Alabama Brings Samford to The Joe- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
-
