I didn't like the 10-year agreement with Tulane but is was made slightly more palatable when we learned that LSU would recive 40K tickets. I still don't really like it but there was pressure to help out Tulane as their program was already having financial difficulties and would be hurt more after Katrina.
I don't think LSU had much choice in scheduling Tulane, so that leaves us with only three OOC opportunities each year. As a result of Title IX and escalating overhead costs, LSU is not going to pass on an opportunity to make a few million dollars by scheduling more than 1-2 home & home series at a time. As a season ticket holder I would LOVE to see top programs come to Tiger Stadium and would enjoy traveling to their campus as well. Unfortunately many of those top schools are in the same position and unwilling to concede too much. I think one strong home & home series each year would suffice. I'm not concerned with any national publications or fans of other conferences suggesting that our OOC schedule is weak. They rarely mention our conference schedule because it ruins their argument and intent. Although I would like to see a regional matchup (Texas A&M, FSU, Oklahoma, Georgia Tech) each year, I think our overall schedule can still challenge most regarding strength. I wish more emphasis was placed on strength of schedule and less on the almighty goose egg in the loss column. I'm still ticked that BYU won it all in 1984. :angryfire
Terry, it's my opinion that the SEC games should be split up evenly. If we don't go round robin, then we should rotate every team in the east evenly. It's my contention that it was done the way it is for the bama/tenn game, not to help bama win championships. but you can't tell me that this set up is in any way fair. We get Fla and Ga this year, do you think bama's conference schedule is as tough as ours? It's can be an advantage in getting to the SECCG.
They are split evenly. Just because LSU didn't have a traditional "rivalry" against a East opponent doesn't mean that the system is wrong. In all honesty, I understand where the decision came from. $. And, it makes sense considering all the schools in the SEC benefit from it.
I would like that better also. I can handle helping out an in-State school, even though the game is of little interest to me but would like at least one BCS school- like others have mentioned. It's on the way, at least in the works- as Terry pointed out earlier. Yeah, I honestly don't see UT in Neyland as any kind of gimme by any stretch. Which ones? Most years that seems to be taking care of itself but why not beef it up? Like you said, at least one quality OOC game. btw, it's more our conference championship game putting our (SEC) teams over the top, not the conference schedule itself. Our adversaries also say that, in the current system, we often get a pass not having to face a "Major player" from the other side. ie UGA '07. Can't have it both ways though. If that happened there's no way we could continue with the Troy State's of CFB...and how would we fund our Title IX programs without all those extra millions? :wink: .
You didn't answer my question, do you feel that bama's conference schedule is as tough as LSU's year in and out? and more specifically, this year?
RHaving a common opponent is just as fair. We were able to play Kentucky, South Carolina, and Vanderbilt the last four years...so it all evens out.
I didn't say they had an easy schedule, I just think our road to the SECCG is a little tougher, that's all. :wink:
