I'd personally vote WVU because I think WVU has more character as a general matter, and also has way better fans. And I can't focking stand VT; they get my silver medal of hatred coming in comfortably behind Florida but, surprisingly, winning by a nose against every other SEC school. That being said, a man that didn't hate VT, and who wanted to thus argue the merits of them vis a vis WVu, has some good points that can be made. VT is bigger, it has more money, its in a state with more than a single area code, ti's in a shithole, but at least an accessible shithole. Academics are way better. Geography makes more sense. Etc.
I think TAMU fits in well. Mizzou was a headscratcher when they were added, are no less a headscratcher today. They don't fit in on any level.
Why not? The oft-floated notion of outward geographic expansion as a positive is flat wrong. "Oh, but now we've got everybody from the state of Missouri tuning in to the SEC," said lotsa people. Not how it works. I don't know how this obvious fallacy has been propagated for so long and believed by so many. You add the team with the better national brand recognition. Doesn't matter if its 12 miles from an existing school in the same conference.
I'd like the SEC to add the following: Top Tier OU, OSU (because they'd have to be a pair), Duke, UNC Honorable Mention: Clemson, Kansas, UVA I'd rather disband the SEC before adding: VT, WVU, FSU, Miami, GaTech I'd support armed insurrection before agreeing to add: Memphis
Why would Kentucky want Kansas in the conference? Why would anybody else want another Kentucky in the conference?
You can bet that SC will do everything within its power to stop Clemson from coming, just as UK will do with UofL or Florida with FSU. Why share money and glory with the mother****ers you hate most in the world and compete with in every area on a daily basis?
I was assuming KidB was throwing those factors out the window and speaking purely in terms of how well they'd fit and improve the conference. After his comment about Missouri being a headscratcher I guess I may have been wrong.
Call me old fashioned but I just don't want to see any new teams. Despite my hatred of both schools I could probably tolerate Clemson and FSU just because I think both more or less fall in with SEC culture and footprint. TAMU has worked out well so far and Mizzou is just one team. The thought of traveling to focking Raleigh or Morgantown to watch an SEC game is repulsive to me.
I think it'd be a good move at making the league stronger in basketball and would hopefully increase the quality of basketball. How the concussion stuff plays out in the future is also going to be interesting and could end footballs run on top.
I appreciate your burning hatred but calling Auburn an afterthought is downright comical.[/QUOTE] They are so far in Alabama's shadow that they are as white as Seamus.
They are so far in Alabama's shadow that they are as white as Seamus.[/QUOTE] In terms of fans, yeah. In terms of Nattys, yeah. Nobody is going to make the argument that Auburn is on their level all time. With that being said, Auburn leads the series in the past 35 years, so afterthought isn't the word I'd use.
