Yeah, Bama's really been beating the best of the East the last few years. Permanent opponent is a ridiculous concept and ditching it is long overdue, rotate cross-division teams and be done with it. That simple.
Agree with him or not, you really gotta admire Terry for his taking the high road through all the contradictory opinions he faces here. I've yet to see him resort to name-calling. Not only that (or maybe because of it) he counters with solid information. If everyone who posted on football forums would adopt his MO, there would be much greater insight gained imo.
Agree. The irony is the SEC wrote the book on how to exploit the path to the BCSCG under the current system. Such to an extent that other conferences, like the PAC10 for example, changed to "our way". Now we go and alter ours, phucking up an overall good conference system.
If that is what I wanted to say, you wouldn't have had to fix it. Furthermore, your attempt at being cute is about as successul as Les Miles trying to make a coherent statement.
Simple as it may be and regardless of the concept, you still have to win to have championships. And doesn't it mean more when you have beat everyone that has been put in front of you? And I personally wouldn't want the head coach of my team whinning and bitching about scheduling. Shouldn't he have the mentality that he can beat anyone, anywhere, anytime?
BULLSHIT Did bama play the best? It's no coinicdence that the teams with the easiest cross conference opp ended up in the SEC championship game
Not completely on Muschamp. No matter who's at Tenn, they're at least 2 years away, need to upgrade their talent
LSU is not Bama, the fact that Bama did or did not play a easy schedule, does not matter. LSU beats everyone else including Bama, they get a championship. I'd rather play for a coach who gave the impression that he could outcoach anyone on the field instead of being a pu$$y trying to get out of competing against championship calibre teams.
