The downward spiral hit UT when they fired Fulmer. If we look at 1992-2008 they were 100-40 in conference play. UGA comes in at 87-51 in the same period. UF at 116-29. In the entire 22 year period: UGA 108-64-1 (.627) UF 138-40 (.775) UT 109-63-1 (.632) The twenty years before the expansion: UGA 92-40-2 (.694) UF 80-53-2 (.600) UT 74-55-4 (.571) The biggest change is at Florida. That's not surprising. I recall reading Coach Bryant's comments made back in the late '70's calling Florida a sleeping giant just needing the right coach to push them to the next level. 105-68-1 (.606) is LSU in the last 22. 66-62-5 (.515) in the previous 22. Three of those four teams have shown in upswing in winning percentage since the divisional split. Just one of those trivia things: Bama shows a downswing of .167 versus UGA's .067. Ole Miss is a downswing of .019. In that 20 years stretch with Vaught they're clicking at a .700 winning percentage in conference play. In the last 40 they are right around .400. (His tenure there is worth looking at...a virtual roller coaster.)
Well then, they are all flippin stupid and need to wake up. Look no further than what ATM did. Big boy pants people.
Awwww . . . . yes, we'd best leave Alabama with an advantage. Nothing else will do. Wouldn't work because Bama insists on TWO traditional rivals that must be accommodated.
I would have no problem whatsoever with maintaining permanent cross divisional opponents for the sake of traditions of two games, if the conference was to allow LSU to maintain its conference tradition. Hosting conference games at night is a tradition to us and that went out the window in 2011 without a single conference game on Saturday night in Tiger Stadium.
The 19th and 20th centuries are irrelevant. LSU and Florida have both been ranked in the Top 25 in NINE of their past 10 meetings. Alabama and Tennessee have both been ranked in the Top 25 in ONE of their past 10 meetings. And also for the last TWELVE seasons.
Frankly, I would add that the home and away side of the schedule can have as much to say about the bottom line as who you play, in the course of a season. How well is your team playing at the time you have tough match ups? Every team peaks and every team slumps. If you beat the teams in your division, I would think it would be extremely difficult not to be in Atlanta.
Then change the system so that the division is only determined by division games. The whole point is that east division losses hurt us disporortionally.
That's completely ignoring what I pointed out red. Simple logic says the current eastern divisional teams would object to having two more of the original top six added to their conference leaving a 1 compared to 5 scenario. It has nothing to do with Alabama. A question I posed earlier in this thread was answered with the year 2006 as being the season a loss to Florida had any bearing on ATL. One out of 22 times "hurt us disporortionally?" Was that answer wrong? Setting that aside, it's the same scenario here as the suggestion of moving two teams east. School administrations won't vote for it with the exception of probably UofSC. It certainly didn't get serious attention when Spurrier suggested such last season. It seems the general consensus was he was whining.
Tell us about your most recent east division loss and how that particular loss cost you a trip to Atlanta?
No need for all that twelve years ago stuff. We have seen plenty of the best the East can offer. Getting Florida four times and rotating through South Carolina is just par for the course. Georgia was able to avoid Bama and LSU. Of course the SECCG, not so much. Just sad Florida wasn't good enough to beat Georgia in 2012. Just ain't a championship season unless you get a chance to thump the Gators just once. 2007 Georgia 2008 Georgia, Florida 2009 South Carolina, Florida 2010 Florida, South Carolina 2011 Florida 2012 Georgia
