CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Four => SEC => Topic started by: utee94 on September 22, 2025, 01:42:17 PM
-
Figured this deserves its own thread. This seems to be the list of official matchups, and I gotta say there are a couple of curious ones. I guess they were going for competitive balance over some annual games that I think were fairly important.
(https://i.imgur.com/Vdu2iZe.png)
-
First thing I notice is... no Florida-Tennessee? Really? As an outsider, I've always liked this game.
-
Looks like Missouri basically got the "leftover" rivals. They all sort of make sense. Obviously Mizzou's traditional rival is the B12's Kansas.
-
As it was originally described, the upper-tier teams were each supposed to have 2 upper-tier annual rivals and 1 lower-tier annual rival. Maybe I have a mistaken idea of which teams are in which tier, but I see some schedules that don't seem to match that description. Texas A&M, for example, has what I would think are 3 top-tier annual rivals. So does Arkansas, I think.
FTR, I'm happy with OU's annual rivals. Texas was mandatory and Missouri was almost a given, since it was a conference mate going back to Big 6 days. Ole Miss is a pleasant surprise. Our about-to-retire A.D. Joe Castiglione loves the game-day experience in Oxford. I wonder if he put in a personal request for Ole Miss.
-
As it was originally described, the upper-tier teams were each supposed to have 2 upper-tier annual rivals and 1 lower-tier annual rivals. Maybe I have a mistaken idea of which teams are in which tier, but I see some schedules that don't seem to match that description. Texas A&M, for example, has what I would think are 3 top-tier annual rivals. So does Arkansas, I think.
FTR, I'm happy with OU's annual rivals. Texas was mandatory and Missouri was almost a given, since it was a conference mate going back to Big 6 days. Ole Miss is a pleasant surprise. Our about-to-retire A.D. Joe Castiglione loves the game-day experience in Oxford. I wonder if he put in a personal request for Ole Miss.
A lot of Aggies, in fact a large majority of Aggies, really wanted LSU. There are multiple reasons for that, not the least of which is that we had developed something of a nice rivalry with LSU in our time in the SEC. It is a little lopsided, especially the first 5-6 games, but we have had some really good games over the years and our history goes way back, I think there's something like 30-50 games played between the schools. Also, I think outside of UT, it's the closest school to College Station at 359 miles. Arkansas I believe is the next closest at 512 miles.
I know a lot of people wanted us to play Arkansas, and I'm sure it would be a net positive for A&M as we're like 12-1 against them or something. I don't remember the exact number, but I can tell you we've only lost one game against them the whole time we've been in the SEC. We've had some really close games, a couple of scares, but somehow we manage to pull it out at the end, search for the Oink Doink for instance.
I'm neutral on Mizzou. We've won some, we've lost some, nobody gives a shit. I'd much rather play either Ole Miss, or Miss State. Ole Miss because they're kinda cool, and sometimes they're really good. Miss State has really been a tough game for us, and the DNA of the schools is kinda similar. Maroon colors, Ag school, etc, Jackie Sherrill and Emory Bellard. But honestly I don't care to play them every year. They're absolutely atrocious at least 30-40% of the time, and the rest of the time beating them gives you nothing because they spend so many years in the crapper. It's almost like Baylor in the old Big 12. They were so bad for so long, I can never ever think of them as a good or decent football team, even when they're not bad.
I'm sure you're all smirking because A&M's not far from that situation, but all the more reason not to play them.
Jesus, I just had to look up Emory Bellard to make sure I spelled his name right, and I discovered his middle name is Dilworth.
-
I know I surprised a couple of people when I said I didn't want Texas in our perma-rival. One of the reasons is because I wanted LSU, and over the last 25 or so years LSU is a superior program to Texas and most other teams in the SEC and even in NCAA. That being said, Texas is a true blue blood, and most years pretty damn good. So now our 3 perma-rivals are a blue blood, and a 21st Century blue blood. I guess maybe it won't matter as much now that the playoff is expanding to 16 teams or whatever, but I think it's stupid for a non-blue blood to play that difficult of a schedule, especially in the SEC. I get it, that we will still play a lot of tough teams year in and year out, but every once in awhile maybe you can catch a bit of a break with a good team in a down year, plus match-ups with teams that you've historically had success against.
Besides, Wouldn't we still play them twice in three years? Not sure how the new format works.
-
Besides, Wouldn't we still play them twice in three years? Not sure how the new format works.
Twice every 4 years for the non-perma-rivals.
And not two years in a row, either, which I think is dumb. The 4-year rotation will look like this for the 6 SEC games that are not perma-rivals:
2026: A B C @D @E @F
2027: G H I @J @K @L
2028: @A @B @C D E F
2029: @G @H @I J K L
-
Twice every 4 years for the non-perma-rivals.
And not two years in a row, either, which I think is dumb. The 4-year rotation will look like this for the 6 SEC games that are not perma-rivals:
2026: A B C @D @E @F
2027: G H I @J @K @L
2028: @A @B @C D E F
2029: @G @H @I J K L
It won't matter anyways. It's only a matter of time before the SEC takes in FSU and Clemson and we'll have to start all over. Or whatever the next step brings. We might be forming new leagues before this is all over.
-
Could be. I'm sure more changes are coming, no idea when.
Anyway, I'm happy with our three perma-rivals. Younger Horns don't understand Arkansas at all and don't view it as a rivalry, but there are still plenty of us oldtimers around who appreciate the history.
-
Kinda feels like Texas joined the league and just unboxed the trunk from 1980.
-
Kinda feels like Texas joined the league and just unboxed the trunk from 1980.
I'm happy about that. For me the best thing about joining the SEC and having OU join as well, was being able to get all three of our historical rivals back on the schedule.
-
I'm happy about that. For me the best thing about joining the SEC and having OU join as well, was being able to get all three of our historical rivals back on the schedule.
I agree with it, and understand it couldn't ever be any other way. It's a good thing.
It just kinda feels like moving into a brand new mansion, and having your buddy say, "Hey! We saved your old couch! It's in the living room!".
Nice to have familiarity, but...
-
I agree with it, and understand it couldn't ever be any other way. It's a good thing.
It just kinda feels like moving into a brand new mansion, and having your buddy say, "Hey! We saved your old couch! It's in the living room!".
Nice to have familiarity, but...
I hear ya, but Florida, Georgia, Alabama, LSU, and Tennessee weren't ever hanging out on that couch with us before. We've got some fun new furniture in addition to that old couch.
-
Twice every 4 years for the non-perma-rivals.
And not two years in a row, either, which I think is dumb. The 4-year rotation will look like this for the 6 SEC games that are not perma-rivals:
2026: A B C @D @E @F
2027: G H I @J @K @L
2028: @A @B @C D E F
2029: @G @H @I J K L
I think it's dumb too.
-
Wow, Tennessee has got to be overjoyed with this. UK and Vandy? WTF?
-
Florida and Tennessee had to have wanted it this way. No way the SEC just did that.
-
We? just weren't elite based on our record the past decade. So there was no urgency to give us 2 big-boy teams. Carolina is decent year in and year out, but idk.
To get UK and Vandy.....the Vols kissed the right asses on that one.
-
Florida and Tennessee had to have wanted it this way. No way the SEC just did that.
I guess so. Maybe I find the game more valuable and interesting than their own administrators do.
-
Shit like this is what makes me not even care about conferences anymore. Similar to OU-Nebraska not playing every year in the Big 12.
-
Yeah conferences larger than ten were the beginning of the end. 16 and 18 is just flat out ludicrous.
-
We? just weren't elite based on our record the past decade. So there was no urgency to give us 2 big-boy teams. Carolina is decent year in and year out, but idk.
To get UK and Vandy.....the Vols kissed the right asses on that one.
Correction, it was based on league record the past 4 years. OU and Texas' records from the Big XII were used.
You know, just half-ass this shit.
-
One can criticize the choices easily, but coming up with alternatives gets tough.
-
We? just weren't elite based on our record the past decade. So there was no urgency to give us 2 big-boy teams. Carolina is decent year in and year out, but idk.
To get UK and Vandy.....the Vols kissed the right asses on that one.
It certainly looks to be advantageous, and historically relevant, but I wanted Florida.
I love to hate the Gators, and I’m sure y’all feel the same way about us.
-
our rival's not in the league so it was always going to be a mashup.
arkansas amuses me b/c they think they're better than us. their floor (cellar) is the same as ours as are our ceilings in that neither one of us is ever winning the league unless a "philanthroper" shows up for either school & juices the bejeezes out of the roster. it's a 4 hr drive from my house so for that reason alone i hope to play them forever.
we have no history with atm. they're a fine opp but it's whatev to me. been there once, other than their obv weird chants & such the fans were nice both before & after we won so i have no slights.
as for ou they're a traditional rival in the sense that we've played 90+ times but not really, we win like 1 in 4. there is a tiger sooner peace pipe that we see every once in awhile that i would guess they're rarely bothered to wipe their ***'s with. as for our side of it beating them is a big deal b/c of who they are but i don't otherwise especially hate them. their rivals guy is a doosh - that's about all i got - heck stoops seems like a decent guy albeit arrogant. didn't like lincoln but he's long gone. as an old big 8 competitor & another easy day trip it's as good as we could hope for.
-
our rival's not in the league so it was always going to be a mashup.
arkansas amuses me b/c they think they're better than us. their floor (cellar) is the same as ours as are our ceilings in that neither one of us is ever winning the league unless a "philanthroper" shows up for either school & juices the bejeezes out of the roster. it's a 4 hr drive from my house so for that reason alone i hope to play them forever.
we have no history with atm. they're a fine opp but it's whatev to me. been there once, other than their obv weird chants & such the fans were nice both before & after we won so i have no slights.
as for ou they're a traditional rival in the sense that we've played 90+ times but not really, we win like 1 in 4. there is a tiger sooner peace pipe that we see every once in awhile that i would guess they're rarely bothered to wipe their ***'s with. as for our side of it beating them is a big deal b/c of who they are but i don't otherwise especially hate them. their rivals guy is a doosh - that's about all i got - heck stoops seems like a decent guy albeit arrogant. didn't like lincoln but he's long gone. as an old big 8 competitor & another easy day trip it's as good as we could hope for.
Yeah I think the 4-year look-in is made for teams like Missouri and OU that just kind of had some "rivals" slapped onto their schedule. After 4 years these could be switched up without making too many ripples.
-
I really don't think they could have done all that much differently, a nudge here and there, change one and you change something else and it ripples.
-
The 6/6 opponents' schedule is out for all teams now, which will run from 2026-2029.
I couldn't find a concise listing out there for all schools, and it would be pretty lengthy anyway. Here's the one for Texas:
(https://i.imgur.com/3JRWtWs.jpeg)
-
There were bound to be some repeats and the SEC front office warned of such.
Outside of the 3 perma-rivals, for Texas, the 2025-2026 repeats are Florida and Miss State. But they did manage to keep up with the home/away so nobody has to play an away game twice in a row.
The same can't be said for the perma-rivals. Since for some idiotic reason they already had Texas A&M and Arkansas either both away, or both home, in 2024/2025, it was inevitable they were going to have to switch one in 2026. Arkansas is the lucky winner who will have to play in Austin two years in a row.
TX-OU is of course a neutral site game so no issues there.
-
So, UGA plays at DKR in 2027 but the return is in 2029. A lot can happen in two years.
I will be interested in seeing how UGA modifies their 2030+ OOC slate.
Smart, Players Preview Alabama - University of Georgia Athletics (https://georgiadogs.com/news/2025/9/23/football-future-bulldog-sec-schedules-for-2026-29-announced)
Georgia's insane nonconference schedules through 2034 (https://ugawire.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/bulldogs/football/2022/06/09/georgia-football-schedule-with-future-nonconference-opponents/79087054007/)
-
So, UGA plays at DKR in 2027 but the return is in 2029. A lot can happen in two years.
Right. For whatever reason, the league office decided to alternate the "other 6" to be every other year, rather than in successive years.
I think it's silly. As you say, the team makeup can be entirely different over two years, especially in the current portal/NIL world.
This format basically eliminates the "revenge game" which is useful for forming mini-rivalries or at least big emotional matchups from year to year.
If, say, Texas went to Knoxville and lost in 2026, but got the Vols in Austin in 2027, that would be a big deal. As it is, two years later, whatever emotional charge came with that prior game, will be mostly lost on the fans, and completely lost on the team that is possibly not even 25% the same players as two years prior.
Dumb choice IMO.
-
I haven’t looked but I heard A&M goes to Baton Rouge two years in a row.
-
I haven’t looked but I heard A&M goes to Baton Rouge two years in a row.
Yup, looks like y'all are playing them @LSU this year, and then again in 2026.
(https://i.imgur.com/OKwdhus.png)
-
If your three rivals are not what you want, what would you change?
And what else would ripple from that?
-
Texas is set.
I'd like to see Florida-Tennessee remain an annual game but I don't know what I'd change to make it happen. And presumably if those two schools felt strongly about it, then it would have remained.
-
Texas is set.
I'd like to see Florida-Tennessee remain an annual game but I don't know what I'd change to make it happen. And presumably if those two schools felt strongly about it, then it would have remained.
I can't remember--did Florida and Tennessee hate each other prior to Steve Spurrier's time as Gators' HFC?
-
This isn't very user-friendly, but it does show each SEC team's conference opponents from 2026 through 2029.
(https://storage.googleapis.com/secsports-prod/upload/2025/09/24/8c322741-8289-4495-bfe2-04f0ffe00624.gif)
-
. . . Anyway, I'm happy with our three perma-rivals. Younger Horns don't understand Arkansas at all and don't view it as a rivalry, but there are still plenty of us oldtimers around who appreciate the history.
Tempus fugit.
From my perspective, you were one of the youngsters back on the old CFN board.
-
Rivalries like UF-Tenn often were spawned from a period a few decades back where both were good. If you go back further you can find they rarely played when it was a Big Game.
That doesn't mean the rivalry is not "real", just that it's more recent than some like UGA-Auburn. But if you swap out UK for example for UF for Tennessee, you have to juggle UK to be someone else's rival for whatever reason. Then it ripples. There really are only a handful of "real rivalries" in the SEC.
-
I can't remember--did Florida and Tennessee hate each other prior to Steve Spurrier's time as Gators' HFC?
Nope. The SEC realignment in 1992 spawned the UT/UF rivalry.
The old timers still prefer Bama, but UT/UF is my favorite game.
-
Behind Georgia, Auburn was Florida's biggest rival in the conference. FSU and Miami were, too, obviously, OOC.
But Florida was only Auburn's 3rd rival, if that.
-
I'm OK with all the rivals decisions, especially the review every four.
Would I have done differently? Maybe a bit, not much.
-
I think in general they did a pretty good job. It wasn't a straightforward task with obvious choices, in most cases.
-
the cotton holdings lone star showdown? what corp putz contrived that abomination?
-
the cotton holdings lone star showdown? what corp putz contrived that abomination?
This corporate putz:
https://cottonholdings.com/lone-star-showdown
I really have no idea how that branding helps Texas, Texas A&M, or Cotton Holdings, but I'm sure they paid both schools a ton of money for the privilege.
"Cotton Holdings provides infrastructure support services, focusing on commercial restoration and recovery after disasters, but also offers construction, roofing, consulting, workforce staffing, temporary housing, and culinary services to public and private entities globally. Headquartered in Houston, Texas, the company has a diversified structure with various subsidiaries operating under different brands to deliver turnkey solutions for damage recovery and large development projects worldwide. "
-
This corporate putz:
https://cottonholdings.com/lone-star-showdown
I really have no idea how that branding helps Texas, Texas A&M, or Cotton Holdings, but I'm sure they paid both schools a ton of money for the privilege.
"Cotton Holdings provides infrastructure support services, focusing on commercial restoration and recovery after disasters, but also offers construction, roofing, consulting, workforce staffing, temporary housing, and culinary services to public and private entities globally. Headquartered in Houston, Texas, the company has a diversified structure with various subsidiaries operating under different brands to deliver turnkey solutions for damage recovery and large development projects worldwide. "
I mean, I guess it worked because I'd never heard of them before this. I still don't know what they are really.
-
Lane Kiffin has expressed his unhappiness with the annual rivals, particularly the fact that Ole Miss gets Oklahoma as one of them.
Brent Venables doesn’t care about SEC scheduling, but Lane Kiffin does
Sep 30, 2025 Updated 1 hr ago
Berry Tramel
Tulsa World Sports Columnist
Brent Venables doesn’t care who the Southeastern Conference makes his Sooners play. And that’s OK.
Lane Kiffin does care who the SEC makes his Rebels play. And you know what? That’s OK, too.
OU and Ole Miss have been paired as annual rivals in the SEC’s new nine-game format, at least for the next four seasons, and Mississippi’s Kiffin was less than thrilled.
“Oklahoma is really disappointing,” Kiffin said on the SEC teleconference last week. “We don’t have anything in common with them, or our fans. So that doesn’t make any sense at all.
“And so that’s unfortunate with so many great teams that we’ve played for a long time here, especially from our SEC West (division) years. So that’s unfortunate, but it is what it is.”
Kiffin, of course, has fallen victim to tunnel vision. The SEC schedule is not an Ole Miss world. It’s a big jigsaw puzzle, and all kinds of pieces must fit together.
Venables is one of those coaches who doesn’t get caught up in politics — he’s too busy thinking of how to stop 3rd-and-3 — and can’t get caught up in who he’s asked to play.
So Venables was unmoved when the Sooners were given Texas (expected), Missouri (expected) and Ole Miss (unexpected) as OU’s annual foes.
“Yeah, it’s great,” Venables said. “Whatever schedule they give us, I’m happy. I say that respectfully. Honestly.”
A lot of Oklahomans were hoping for Arkansas; it’s only 235 miles from campus to campus, yet the Sooners and Razorbacks haven’t played in the regular season since the 1920s. SEC schedule-makers could legitimately ask if OU and Arkansas are natural rivals, why haven’t they done something about it in 100 years?
Others were hoping for Texas A&M instead of Missouri, since disrespecting Mizzou has become a hobby for some Sooner loyalists.
But the SEC must serve 16 masters in making a schedule. It can’t produce a schedule for, say, Georgia, then move on down the line. All the schedules must work in harmony.
Ole Miss, for example, got its two traditional rivals, Louisiana State and Mississippi State. And Kiffin apparently wanted Auburn or Arkansas or Alabama to round out the slate.
But Auburn’s trio was the easiest to decide — historic rivals Georgia and Alabama, plus Vanderbilt to ease the weight of having to play Georgia and Alabama.
Arkansas’ options were loaded, with old Southwest Conference rivals Texas and Texas A&M, plus new SEC rivals LSU and Missouri, who both have extended turns as the Thanksgiving weekend showdown game.
And Alabama’s rivals were somewhat set. Tennessee and Auburn are ancient foes, as is Mississippi State, 84 miles from Tuscaloosa. That’s almost three times closer than Norman to Fayetteville.
That left Ole Miss without a third partner. Hello, Oklahoma.
The SEC could have tried to keep the new west wing of the conference playing within its circle.
Texas got its three old-school rivals: OU, Texas A&M and Arkansas. It would have been a scheduling crime to do anything else.
And the SEC could have paired OU and A&M, subbing out Missouri or LSU for the Aggies, and Ole Miss for the Sooners. Could have paired Arkansas and A&M, dropping LSU from the Razorbacks and Missouri from the Aggies.
But that kind of doctoring leaves holes elsewhere.
In the end, the SEC did a fairly solid job of juggling geography, history and competitive balance.
The latter is not easy. How is the SEC supposed to know who’s going to be stout in 2029? We don’t know who’s going to be stout on Saturday.
OU didn’t get an easy draw. Texas is Texas. Missouri has been solid under Eli Drinkwitz. Ole Miss has been more than stout under Kiffin. But what if Florida fires Billy Napier and hires either Drinkwitz or Kiffin? Who knows if the Mizzou and Mississippi success continues?
The schedules of Alabama (Auburn, Tennessee and Mississippi State) and Georgia (Auburn, Florida and South Carolina) look relatively light, but that’s in part because Alabama and Georgia aren’t each other’s annual foe.
Texas A&M’s three annual rivals look rough — Texas, LSU and Missouri. And the Aggies didn’t even want the expanded SEC in the first place.
Sports Illustrated ranked A&M and Arkansas (LSU, Texas and Missouri) tied for the toughest annual opponents, with OU third.
But who knows? In the end, Venables is right. Just make the schedule, then make sure your team shows up for kickoff.
berry.tramel@tulsaworld.com
https://tulsaworld.com/sports/college/ou/article_c2f98861-49b9-43c2-a23f-c3145701bedc.html
-
I have to think OM-OU was the very last "what do we have left" matchup.
-
Imagine it was 2000, or 1990, or 2010, when these rivals were made. One might think one program got off easy, and another very hard, and then found four years later teams had shifted from very good to mediocre, and the reverse.
-
Imagine it was 2000, or 1990, or 2010, when these rivals were made. One might think one program got off easy, and another very hard, and then found four years later teams had shifted from very good to mediocre, and the reverse.
I'm not even really sure it even matters all that much. For A&M, outside of Texas and possibly LSU, the 3rd "rival" is questionable at best. We got stuck with South Carolina for the first dozen years, it never really garnered much interest. We got stuck with Mizzou now, ho hum as well. I mean, I guess we were conference mates for 16 years in the XII, and now 12 in the SEC but I don't think anybody could tell you much of anything about Mizzou/A&M. I barely remember we played them last year and won.
With a 9 game schedule we should have a lot of interesting matchups, and finally a true home and away rotation, even if it's not sequential years.
-
I'm not even really sure it even matters all that much. For A&M, outside of Texas and possibly LSU, the 3rd "rival" is questionable at best. We got stuck with South Carolina for the first dozen years, it never really garnered much interest. We got stuck with Mizzou now, ho hum as well. I mean, I guess we were conference mates for 16 years in the XII, and now 12 in the SEC but I don't think anybody could tell you much of anything about Mizzou/A&M. I barely remember we played them last year and won.
With a 9 game schedule we should have a lot of interesting matchups, and finally a true home and away rotation, even if it's not sequential years.
Yeah all this. Plus, as you have noted before, it's all likely to change again in the relatively near future anyway, when the SEC expands again.
-
Yeah all this. Plus, as you have noted before, it's all likely to change again in the relatively near future anyway, when the SEC expands again.
What do you call it? The South Eastern Big Atlantic Conference? SEBAC?
-
I'm not even really sure it even matters all that much. For A&M, outside of Texas and possibly LSU, the 3rd "rival" is questionable at best. We got stuck with South Carolina for the first dozen years, it never really garnered much interest. We got stuck with Mizzou now, ho hum as well. I mean, I guess we were conference mates for 16 years in the XII, and now 12 in the SEC but I don't think anybody could tell you much of anything about Mizzou/A&M. I barely remember we played them last year and won.
With a 9 game schedule we should have a lot of interesting matchups, and finally a true home and away rotation, even if it's not sequential years.
I've said in previous posts that OU-Mizzou was almost a given. Prior to Mizzou's move to the SEC, we were conference mates going back to 1920 in the MVIAA, which soon split into the MVC and the Big 6, which would become the Big 7 with the addition of Colorado and the Big 8 with the addition of oSu. So there's a long history there. It includes Don Faurot developing the Split-T offense just before WWII and teaching it to Jim Tatum and Bud Wilkinson at Iowa Pre-Flight during the war. Tatum got hired as OU's HFC in 1946, with the condition that he would bring Wilkinson as his assistant. Tatum left after a year (in a squabble over who had control over the recruiting slush fund) and Wilkinson went on to use Faurot's offense to build OU into the winningest program of the 1950s.
For various reasons, OU fans never got fired up to play Missouri. OU usually (72% of the time) won, although a lot of the games were close ones. OU fans did not enjoy the atmosphere in games at Columbia. The Mizzou fans were supposedly hostile. Mizzou supposedly watered the field and cut the grass high to slow down the wishbone offense. Anyway, we figured that we would get Missouri as an assigned rival, and we did, and that's fine. We've played 97 games with each other, might as well play some more.
So the question was who would be the 3rd assigned rival. And it's Ole Miss, which seems fine with me. It's too bad that Lane Kiffin does not like it. And worse that he's complaining about it in public. Not a good look.
-
I'd rather play Ole Miss. I've heard their gameday experience is great, the fans are super chill, and they are usually not a great football program. Good, yes, sometimes. Bad, yes, often. Great? Hardly ever. I think Kiffin has them at the highest level they've played since Archie was there in the 60's, but I don't really know their history. Mizzou seems to be more even keeled...hardly ever great, but also hardly ever terrible.
-
Ole Miss has zero SEC or even shared SEC championships since 1963 (60+ years).
They never won the West division, in 31 years.
.
There's a reason they were initially paired with Vanderbilt....and even that wasn't enough to help them.
-
"we may not win every game, but we've never lost a party."
the grove rules. if you've not been put it on your list.
-
Imagine it was 2000, or 1990, or 2010, when these rivals were made. One might think one program got off easy, and another very hard, and then found four years later teams had shifted from very good to mediocre, and the reverse.
Uhh, no. Tennessee got off easy in any and every era. It's bullshit.
-
Uhh, no. Tennessee got off easy in any and every era. It's bullshit.
Dumb AF.
-
You're right, UK and Vandy are perpetual threats.
-
You're right, UK and Vandy are perpetual threats.
Vandy is more dangerous than Florida. So there is that.
Guess we didn’t dodge the bullet after all.
Long live Sunbelt Billy.
-
Back up and take a wider view, friend.
Vandy + Kentucky's 4-year record will be better than ________'s and ________'s.
Fill in the blanks with another pair anyone else faces. I'll hang up and listen.
-
Back up and take a wider view, friend.
Vandy + Kentucky's 4-year record will be better than ________'s and ________'s.
Fill in the blanks with another pair anyone else faces. I'll hang up and listen.
Hello, 911? I’d like to report a murder.
OAM woke up today and chose violence.
-
Back up and take a wider view, friend.
Vandy + Kentucky's 4-year record will be better than ________'s and ________'s.
Fill in the blanks with another pair anyone else faces. I'll hang up and listen.
Could be your 2. Also Kentucky and USCjr.
-
What would you like to bet?
-
I don't really understand what the controversy is. Anybody, whether it is Tennessee or Alabama, who gets two of the historically weakest SEC teams as their "Perma-Rivals" should just own up to it and be happy. Vanderbilt....probably the worst team historically in the SEC. We can look up the records easy enough, but I don't think we need to. They're OK this year, but c'mon. Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining.
Kentucky can have good and great teams at times, but as far as I know they've never won the East Division, and have not won the SEC since the 70's. FFS they've lost 16 straight to Georgia.
I'd wager, worst teams in the SEC year in and year out over the last 30 years..in order...Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Miss State, Ole Miss, Arkansas. And Arkansas HAS in fact won the West division at least 3 times that I know of, while Miss State has won once. Ole Miss has never won.
-
We cannot expect the irrational to act rational.
-
We cannot expect the irrational to act rational.
Short term memory loss, or retarded?
(https://i.imgur.com/6kOtEpm.png)
-
I don't really understand what the controversy is. Anybody, whether it is Tennessee or Alabama, who gets two of the historically weakest SEC teams as their "Perma-Rivals" should just own up to it and be happy. Vanderbilt....probably the worst team historically in the SEC. We can look up the records easy enough, but I don't think we need to. They're OK this year, but c'mon. Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining.
Kentucky can have good and great teams at times, but as far as I know they've never won the East Division, and have not won the SEC since the 70's. FFS they've lost 16 straight to Georgia.
I'd wager, worst teams in the SEC year in and year out over the last 30 years..in order...Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Miss State, Ole Miss, Arkansas. And Arkansas HAS in fact won the West division at least 3 times that I know of, while Miss State has won once. Ole Miss has never won.
Don't read, or can't read? Or slinging shit is just more fun?
(https://i.imgur.com/P8pyyce.png)
-
Don't read, or can't read? Or slinging shit is just more fun?
(https://i.imgur.com/P8pyyce.png)
Let's get one thing straight. On a college football board, slinging shit is always more fun.
Don't act like you didn't try to defend the picks just a few posts later and say that Vandy and Kentucky were harder than Florida. We can dig up those receipts too.
I think it was discussed, multiple times by various parties, that it was questionable why out of all the rivalries UF/UT did not make the cut while somewhat lesser rivals did. And given the UF/UT record over the last 20 or so years, I think I'd be furious if I were a UT fan that you couldn't scratch back some of that lopsided record vs Florida, while it looks like UT is trending up and Florida is at best treading water, and possibly staring down another decade of mediocrity.
-
Dumb AF.
So you're John Kerry then? A big, fat flip-flopper!!!
-
Florida is at best treading water, and possibly staring down another decade of mediocrity.
I'm sending this to Napier to hang on the lockers!!!
-
Let's get one thing straight. On a college football board, slinging shit is always more fun.
Don't act like you didn't try to defend the picks just a few posts later and say that Vandy and Kentucky were harder than Florida. We can dig up those receipts too. Vandy is ranked -- FLorida is not. Currently, Vandy is a better team. There's your receipt. No one ever said Kentucky was, a team that is also a UF perma-rival (trash).
I think it was discussed, multiple times by various parties, that it was questionable why out of all the rivalries UF/UT did not make the cut while somewhat lesser rivals did. And given the UF/UT record over the last 20 or so years, I think I'd be furious if I were a UT fan that you couldn't scratch back some of that lopsided record vs Florida, while it looks like UT is trending up and Florida is at best treading water, and possibly staring down another decade of mediocrity. The "lesser" rivals aren't "lesser". They just are mostly doormats, but they are our doormats -- for a century and change. I clearly said I'd rather have Florida, so it was vaguely discussed, but traditionally --- Vandy and KY make perfect sense. You Johnny Come Lately SWC/BIG 12/BIG 8 infiltrators have much to learn.
And, FTR -- I misinterpreted one of OAM's posts -- this one:
"Tennessee got off easy in any and every era."
So that was my bad, but he continues to harp on our cake rivals --- so I keep gassing him up, because he's a douche'. Don't align yourself with a douche', Gig'em --- it's unbecoming.
-
So you're John Kerry then? A big, fat flip-flopper!!!
No flip flop, good sir. I've always thought you were Dumb AF.
-
There's that SECSECSEC vitriol!
-
And, FTR -- I misinterpreted one of OAM's posts -- this one:
"Tennessee got off easy in any and every era."
So that was my bad, but he continues to harp on our cake rivals --- so I keep gassing him up, because he's a douche'. Don't align yourself with a douche', Gig'em --- it's unbecoming.
I disagree with OAM on a lot of stuff, but sometimes he's like a stopped clock....sooner or later he'll be right (just not twice a day)...LOL.
The "any and every era" I took as mere trash talk, because I'm not sure what else to make of it in in the divisional era (both UF and UT played in the east division so they should have had common opponents).
-
I disagree with OAM on a lot of stuff, but sometimes he's like a stopped clock....sooner or later he'll be right (just not twice a day)...LOL.
The "any and every era" I took as mere trash talk, because I'm not sure what else to make of it in in the divisional era (both UF and UT played in the east division so they should have had common opponents).
This is true ^^^. And we had the most difficult SEC WEST crossover perma-rival for 33 years, but Florida man probably doesn't want to talk about that. Only that we got 2 cupcakes this time.
-
At least Bama was a rival of yours. You all hijacked the rest of the conference and invented all the other "rivalries" besides UGA-AU.
And I'd much rather be a douche than whatever you are. You and your friend Dan can crawl back into your shithole cesspool at your earliest convenience.
-
At least Bama was a rival of yours. You all hijacked the rest of the conference and invented all the other "rivalries" besides UGA-AU.
And I'd much rather be a douche than whatever you are. You and your friend Dan can crawl back into your shithole cesspool at your earliest convenience.
(https://i.imgur.com/A94Bt6s.gif)
-
Some of the proposed annual rivals that circulated on the internet the last few years as possible solutions to the current conference configuration were more to my liking. However, I don't recall each and every team's draw, and it's possible fans of some other teams wouldn't have been happy with those.
This worked out "okay" for us. Not great, but not bad. If it were up to me, I'd have kept Ole Miss, Florida, and either of the Alabama schools. Alternatively, I'd be just about as okay with Ole Miss and both Alabama schools, dropping Florida.
Ole Miss needs no explanation.
Florida won't pass mustard for a lot of older fans, and very young fans probably don't feel the same about that game as I do, but for my age group, Florida is a real thing, even though we know the SEC contrived it in 1992. But I was 13 and now it's hard to remember before that when we didn't play them every year. The Florida game has generally been such a great barometer of what the team is in a given year, and whether both teams are good, bad, or uneven, many of the games have been memorable.
LSU and Auburn is also something of a "new" thing, but for fans no older than myself, AU has basically been there forever, and however memorable the LSU/UF games are, multiply that x2 or x3 for the AU game. Alabama is a team that we've always played, there's no question about the history there, and of course, they are historically so good that it's one of games you really look forward to. Bama/LSU is a marquee game for fans of all ages, far as I can tell.
Now, I fully expected to get A&M, because it's the kind of thing the conference thinks we would want. And, I have to say, I'm not really against that. Though I personally don't care about playing A&M every year, many LSU fans remember the old ooc ongoing series and have found them to be a good addition to our schedule in recent years. I'm meh on the whole thing, but it's important to note that I'm not cold to the idea. I understand the history, but it is ooc history, and this is about locking in conference history, not a fun ooc opponent. Nevertheless, history in some fashion is there, and the geography works, so A&M was both expected, and an acceptable addition to Ole Miss.
Arkansas is the one that really disappoints me. Nobody I know cares anything about Arkansas, or ever has. They are well below the wish-list toppers of Alabama, Auburn, and Florida. Either of those three would've been preferable to Arkansas. That's one I hope is part of the "revisit" in 4 years.
Competitively, seems like Ole Miss, Arkansas, and A&M is a favorable draw. Whether that amounts to anything for us, I don't know, I doubt it. But from a fan wish-list perspective.....it's okay.
-
Some of the proposed annual rivals that circulated on the internet the last few years as possible solutions to the current conference configuration were more to my liking. However, I don't recall each and every team's draw, and it's possible fans of some other teams wouldn't have been happy with those.
This worked out "okay" for us. Not great, but not bad. If it were up to me, I'd have kept Ole Miss, Florida, and either of the Alabama schools. Alternatively, I'd be just about as okay with Ole Miss and both Alabama schools, dropping Florida.
Ole Miss needs no explanation.
Florida won't pass mustard for a lot of older fans, and very young fans probably don't feel the same about that game as I do, but for my age group, Florida is a real thing, even though we know the SEC contrived it in 1992. But I was 13 and now it's hard to remember before that when we didn't play them every year. The Florida game has generally been such a great barometer of what the team is in a given year, and whether both teams are good, bad, or uneven, many of the games have been memorable.
LSU and Auburn is also something of a "new" thing, but for fans no older than myself, AU has basically been there forever, and however memorable the LSU/UF games are, multiply that x2 or x3 for the AU game. Alabama is a team that we've always played, there's no question about the history there, and of course, they are historically so good that it's one of games you really look forward to. Bama/LSU is a marquee game for fans of all ages, far as I can tell.
Now, I fully expected to get A&M, because it's the kind of thing the conference thinks we would want. And, I have to say, I'm not really against that. Though I personally don't care about playing A&M every year, many LSU fans remember the old ooc ongoing series and have found them to be a good addition to our schedule in recent years. I'm meh on the whole thing, but it's important to note that I'm not cold to the idea. I understand the history, but it is ooc history, and this is about locking in conference history, not a fun ooc opponent. Nevertheless, history in some fashion is there, and the geography works, so A&M was both expected, and an acceptable addition to Ole Miss.
Arkansas is the one that really disappoints me. Nobody I know cares anything about Arkansas, or ever has. They are well below the wish-list toppers of Alabama, Auburn, and Florida. Either of those three would've been preferable to Arkansas. That's one I hope is part of the "revisit" in 4 years.
Competitively, seems like Ole Miss, Arkansas, and A&M is a favorable draw. Whether that amounts to anything for us, I don't know, I doubt it. But from a fan wish-list perspective.....it's okay.
Welcome back, Mike!
Hoping your health is holding up.
-
Welcome Back! We missed you.
One thing about the rivalries, even if it doesn't make a lot of sense to you, is that there is a huge contingent of A&M fans who do in fact view LSU as a rival because we did play a lot of games in the 70's/80's/90's and earlier (first game 1899!) In fact, LSU and A&M have played 63 total games, and only the last 13 have been a conference game. Curiously, a good number of the games were played in Baton Rouge for some reason so there are 40 games played in BR, 20 in CS, and 3 neutral.
Now I get it that you never really viewed A&M as much as a fan, but the last game we played before resuming was 1995, and the next game we played was 2011. By my math, you were about 14 years old the last time we played, and over 30 by the time we resumed. Of course you don't see us as a rival, there was nothing there for 16 years, and then we lost the first 7 games when we resumed play. Just like right now we have absolutely dominated Arkansas in the SEC conference play, hardly any Aggie wants to keep that game. We stopped playing them on a regular basis in 1991 or 1992, way before my time, and didn't start playing them again until 2009. We're 12-1 vs Arkasnas in the SEC, better than any other team we've played more than twice.
So all this to say that even if you don't like having A&M as a semi-permanent opponents, who would you then pair A&M up with that makes sense for A&M? OU? meh, I don't think either party cares much for that. Too much Big 12 bad blood. Miss State? Ole Miss? Nobody else makes much sense.
-
. . . So all this to say that even if you don't like having A&M as a semi-permanent opponents, who would you then pair A&M up with that makes sense for A&M? OU? meh, I don't think either party cares much for that. Too much Big 12 bad blood. Miss State? Ole Miss? Nobody else makes much sense.
FWIW, a lot of OU fans would have rather had A&M than either Mizzou or Ole Miss.
For reasons I can't quite remember, there was a lot of "expert" opinion on why we wouldn't get A&M. Maybe it was because A&M already had its dance card filled, with LSU taking the last slot.
If the bad blood you mention is about A&M leaving the Big 12, I don't think OU fans have much, if any, over that. OU was perfectly willing to leave the Big 12 and join an expanded Pac-12. I can understand if A&M fans have bad blood over the 2003 game, though.
-
Eh, more like bad blood in that OU regularly kicked our asses. Truthfully, we were totally uncompetitive with OU the last 10 years of the XII. I really don’t feel too bad about it though because they pretty much kicked everyone’s asses from 2000-2018 or whenever. They may not be done yet.
At least with LSU we’ve been much more competitive, winning all the home games since 2018 and losing a couple very close ones in BR.
-
As a kid, I'd get those Classic-brand draft pick cards, in their college uniforms and A&M-LSU just LOOKED cool on the same field.
I have no other reason for them to play than that, lol.
-
Welcome Back! We missed you.
One thing about the rivalries, even if it doesn't make a lot of sense to you, is that there is a huge contingent of A&M fans who do in fact view LSU as a rival because we did play a lot of games in the 70's/80's/90's and earlier (first game 1899!) In fact, LSU and A&M have played 63 total games, and only the last 13 have been a conference game. Curiously, a good number of the games were played in Baton Rouge for some reason so there are 40 games played in BR, 20 in CS, and 3 neutral.
Now I get it that you never really viewed A&M as much as a fan, but the last game we played before resuming was 1995, and the next game we played was 2011. By my math, you were about 14 years old the last time we played, and over 30 by the time we resumed. Of course you don't see us as a rival, there was nothing there for 16 years, and then we lost the first 7 games when we resumed play. Just like right now we have absolutely dominated Arkansas in the SEC conference play, hardly any Aggie wants to keep that game. We stopped playing them on a regular basis in 1991 or 1992, way before my time, and didn't start playing them again until 2009. We're 12-1 vs Arkasnas in the SEC, better than any other team we've played more than twice.
So all this to say that even if you don't like having A&M as a semi-permanent opponents, who would you then pair A&M up with that makes sense for A&M? OU? meh, I don't think either party cares much for that. Too much Big 12 bad blood. Miss State? Ole Miss? Nobody else makes much sense.
Yeah, I get that. If aTm'ers have a large contingent that want LSU, that obviously has to factor as much as what LSU wants. And to reiterate, I think a lot of LSU fans are happy with A&M, and I'm okay with it. Just because they're below Alabama, Auburn, and Florida on my list doesn't mean they're not a preferred team. I'm just noting that for my money, I'd take either of those three before A&M. Which would've been possible without the Arkansas addition.
What I try to remember is that in any given year, we'll probably get 1 or 2 out of Alabama, Auburn, and Florida, and it's not like it we'll never be playing any of them.
-
Yeah, I get that. If aTm'ers have a large contingent that want LSU, that obviously has to factor as much as what LSU wants. And to reiterate, I think a lot of LSU fans are happy with A&M, and I'm okay with it. Just because they're below Alabama, Auburn, and Florida on my list doesn't mean they're not a preferred team. I'm just noting that for my money, I'd take either of those three before A&M. Which would've been possible without the Arkansas addition.
What I try to remember is that in any given year, we'll probably get 1 or 2 out of Alabama, Auburn, and Florida, and it's not like it we'll never be playing any of them.
Yeah the "new" scheduling system means you'll get to play every SEC team twice every 4 years. So you'll still get to see Alabama, Auburn, and Florida regularly.
Which I think is a lot better than the previous methodology that ended up with A&M only playing Georgia once in 13 years or whatever it was.
-
Yeah the "new" scheduling system means you'll get to play every SEC team twice every 4 years. So you'll still get to see Alabama, Auburn, and Florida regularly.
Which I think is a lot better than the previous methodology that ended up with A&M only playing Georgia once in 13 years or whatever it was.
For all the wishes that the permanent rivals were different, this is the best scheduling methodology that the SEC has ever had.
That's my new-kid-on-the-block opinion, anyway.
-
Yeah the "new" scheduling system means you'll get to play every SEC team twice every 4 years. So you'll still get to see Alabama, Auburn, and Florida regularly.
Which I think is a lot better than the previous methodology that ended up with A&M only playing Georgia once in 13 years or whatever it was.
I think what we've had since A&M and Missouri's entrance is "bridge" schedules, which were just made up every year by the SEC front office. Would need to fact-check that. I believe this will be the first time in a while that we're going back to an ordered rotation of teams.
-
I think what we've had since A&M and Missouri's entrance is "bridge" schedules, which were just made up every year by the SEC front office. Would need to fact-check that. I believe this will be the first time in a while that we're going back to an ordered rotation of teams.
The SEC did this intentionally. It was part of their standard practice for "protecting" or "favoring" certain teams by not locking the conference schedules years in advance. That, plus playing only 8 conference games, and then the annual late-season creampuff Saturday for many of the teams, and finally, hand-picking their bowl matchups rather than letting the bowls decide (like every other conference did), were all intentional practices aimed at gaming the polls and post-season. And it worked quite well.
Before OAM jumps in here with his standard, "everyone else could have done it" schtick, I'm not suggesting any of this was against the rules, and yes any other conference could have done it. Other conferences put themselves at a disadvantage to the SEC, by not also doing these things.
But that doesn't change the fact that these practices were intentional, and that they worked.
-
For all the wishes that the permanent rivals were different, this is the best scheduling methodology that the SEC has ever had.
That's my new-kid-on-the-block opinion, anyway.
Things were pretty solid in the pre-A&M/Missouri days where each division had just 6 teams. Everybody pretty well had the annual games they wanted, the possible exception being LSU and Florida not wanting to play every year, but even still, the fans loved it regardless of what the schools wanted. At least LSU fans loved the Florida game, and I was under the impression that most Florida fans similarly enjoyed the LSU game. Everything got weird after A&M and Mizzou entered the picture.
This is even better though, from the standpoint of cycling through all teams. In those days I believe it took 5 years for a team to play all other SEC teams home and away. Now it will be every 4 years.
There are some glaring losses though. Such as--as a neutral observer--I'm still trying to wrap my head around no UT/UGA and UT/UF every year. Those are always fun games to watch for having no skin in the game.
Interestingly, and unexpectedly, I've heard a few older LSU fans (my dad being one) say they were rooting for an OU pairing.
-
Welcome Back! We missed you.
Copy That - Hope things are well with you MDT and getting better
-
Things were pretty solid in the pre-A&M/Missouri days where each division had just 6 teams. Everybody pretty well had the annual games they wanted, the possible exception being LSU and Florida not wanting to play every year, but even still, the fans loved it regardless of what the schools wanted. At least LSU fans loved the Florida game, and I was under the impression that most Florida fans similarly enjoyed the LSU game. Everything got weird after A&M and Mizzou entered the picture.
This is even better though, from the standpoint of cycling through all teams. In those days I believe it took 5 years for a team to play all other SEC teams home and away. Now it will be every 4 years.
There are some glaring losses though. Such as--as a neutral observer--I'm still trying to wrap my head around no UT/UGA and UT/UF every year. Those are always fun games to watch for having no skin in the game.
Interestingly, and unexpectedly, I've heard a few older LSU fans (my dad being one) say they were rooting for an OU pairing.
I remember hearing/reading of SEC teams that would go a decade or so without playing each other during the with-Arkansas-pre-A&M & Mizzou period.
I looked up how often Arkansas played Vanderbilt. Arkansas joined the SEC in 1992. They played Vandy in 1994 and 1995. The two programs didn't play each other again until 2005 and 2006. Then they played each other in 2010 and 2011. They've played once since then--in 2018.
OTOH, Arkansas and LSU have played each other every year, starting in 1992. And Arkansas played Auburn every year. And Alabama every year. SEC West teams, I guess.
Per the Font of All Wisdom and Knowledge:
From 1992 through 2002, each team had two permanent inter-divisional opponents, allowing many traditional rivalries from the pre-expansion era (such as Florida vs. Auburn, Kentucky vs. LSU, and Vanderbilt vs. Alabama) to continue. However, complaints from some league athletic directors about imbalance in the schedule (for instance, Auburn's two permanent opponents from the East were Florida and Georgia – two of the SEC's stronger football programs at the time – while Mississippi State played Kentucky and South Carolina every year) led to the SEC reducing the number of permanent inter-division opponents to one starting in the 2003 season. The TV networks televising SEC games were also pressuring for the change so attractive match-ups between non-traditional opponents would happen twice every five years instead of twice every eight years.
There's the 5-year cycle you described.
-
Even in the olden days of yore, the 50s and 60s and 70s and 80s, scheduling was kind of wonky in the SEC. It was more a loose confederation of schools, than a tight-knit conference. @MikeDeTiger (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1588) has talked about it but I believe there were years way back when, that LSU might only play 5 or 6 of the other 9 teams in the SEC.
-
Georgia Tech played neither Miss. school for decades, they refused to visit or host. The head coaches ruled the roost in effect.
The odd history between Georgia Tech, Mississippi State, Ole Miss (https://www.ajc.com/sports/college-football/the-odd-history-between-tech-mississippi-state-ole-miss/zUwORXYzjdL2W1z4HmSsPJ/)
During his legendary 22-year tenure as Georgia Tech coach, Bobby Dodd took his team across the Southeast, to Dallas to play SMU, to South Bend, Ind., for Notre Dame and across the country to play USC.
But, though Tech was an SEC member for most of Dodd’s career, he never deigned to play Mississippi State, the Yellow Jackets’ opponent in the Dec. 31 Orange Bowl. Tech played Ole Miss but twice, once in a bowl game and once in a regular-season game scheduled by Dodd’s predecessor, William Alexander.
-
Even in the olden days of yore, the 50s and 60s and 70s and 80s, scheduling was kind of wonky in the SEC. It was more a loose confederation of schools, than a tight-knit conference. @MikeDeTiger (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1588) has talked about it but I believe there were years way back when, that LSU might only play 5 or 6 of the other 9 teams in the SEC.
Yeah, something like that. And it seems much of the time it was the same handful of schools. There are other SEC schools that LSU hardly ever played. For example, LSU has met Tennessee a shockingly low number of times considering we've purported to be in the same conference with them for, like, 100 years or something.
That's why the A&M lock-in makes some sense and I consider it fine. Truth is we've played them way more than some SEC schools, such as Tennessee.
-
Yeah, something like that. And it seems much of the time it was the same handful of schools. There are other SEC schools that LSU hardly ever played. For example, LSU has met Tennessee a shockingly low number of times considering we've purported to be in the same conference with them for, like, 100 years or something.
That's why the A&M lock-in makes some sense and I consider it fine. Truth is we've played them way more than some SEC schools, such as Tennessee.
I actually had no idea it was that low. Knew it was lower than many others, but still, only 34 meetings?
(https://i.imgur.com/k8eWktZ.png)
-
https://twitter.com/secnumbersguy/status/1976089089637220711?s=61
-
I actually had no idea it was that low. Knew it was lower than many others, but still, only 34 meetings?
(https://i.imgur.com/k8eWktZ.png)
Wow that’s crazy.
-
So what you're saying is, clearly, the SEC should have made LSU-Tennessee perma-rivals.
-
https://twitter.com/secnumbersguy/status/1976089089637220711?s=61
That's what I'm saying.
-
Basically, the league office has been a room of good ole boys dictating to some lady how the schedule would go.
No one young.
No one sharp.
No math involved.
Or logic.
Just do it how it's always been done. Good enough. Lights their cigars.
-
You just know the good ol' boys absolutely hate this "order" that has been forced upon the scheduling. And that thought makes me smile.
-
For some reason we’ve played Florida more than any other former SEC East opponent, I think. I wouldn’t call it a rivalry yet, but I really enjoy the series and there has been some great games. I wouldn’t mind having Florida on our list, I have always admired their program, traditions and history.
Roast ‘em!
https://twitter.com/barstoolsports/status/1977082556236669073?s=61