Albama Arkansas Auburn Florida Georgia Kentucky LSU Mississippi State Missouri Ole-Miss USC Tennessee Texas A&M Vanderbilt
Latest News

SEC Meeting Recap: Slive’s League Dangerously Close To Doing Some Very Stupid Things

The Southeastern Conference gets its power from the people.

Good, bad or just plain weird, we Southerners — the SEC’s people — cling to our traditions like no other bunch.  Whether it’s Sunday lunch at Mama’s or heading downtown for the 4th of July parade, we do what we we’ve always done.  It takes a lot to change us.  The fact that you can still spot images of the Confederate battle flag affixed to cars from South Carolina to Louisiana speaks to that fact.  (Could a German-American put a Nazi bumper sticker on his car and explain it away by saying, “It’s heritage, not hate?”  Best of luck to him.)

We are also a people known for our clannishness.  Perhaps that comes from our Scotch-Irish ancestors who settled much of Appalachia and kept moving right on across the Deep South.  If you’ve lived in the South for any number of years you’ve at some point probably heard someone say something to the effect of “Why, he’s dating one of those Jenkins girls,” or “Northing good ever came out of Washington County.”  In the South, there’s yourn and there’s mine and the difference between the two cannot easily be bridged.

Traditions.  Clannishness.

Two things that have bred passion in Southerners since the formation of our nation.  And darn sure since the founding of the Southeastern Conference.  If you think folks associated with Oregon and Oregon State don’t like each other, do a little studying up on the Alabama-Auburn rivalry.  If you believe nothing could be more important than a Notre Dame-Michigan football game, check out the attendance for a run of the mill SEC football game.

SEC athletic departments boast most of the biggest budgets in the country.  That money rolls in from passionate fans who are willing to give an extra buck or two each year if it will help Georgia beat Florida or vice versa.  The league’s football stadiums — as well as a couple of its basketball arenas — are among the nation’s largest.  Those seats are filled by passionate fans who’ll drive from from near and far to see LSU battle Arkansas.

But now the SEC is toying with the idea of throwing away some of its traditions, dividing some of its clans.  If it does so, the league will most assuredly suffer.  Just as the Big 12 committed an original sin in disrupting the classic Oklahoma-Nebraska football game, Mike Slive seems hellbent on allowing men who care only for their own programs to end those games that have made the SEC special for its fans.

“Ah, they’ll come around,” many in Destin must be thinking.

But will they?

If the SEC thinks HD television is an issue now, wait’ll some of the conference’s oldest games are replaced with matchups between teams that share no real history.  Interest and attendance and donations will wane… and the league will suffer.  With new ESPN and CBS contracts — and a new SEC Network tossed in to boot — the league’s coffers won’t take a hit in the short-term, mind you.  But over time — long after Slive has handed his gavel to a new commissioner — as interest and passion erode, troubles will arise.  The next time the networks come looking to negotiate new contracts, will SEC stands be full?  Will the passion that makes the SEC stand out still exist?

Sound over the top to you?  Okay.  Just know that 100 years ago horse racing and boxing were the country’s top sporting events.  Fifty years ago no one dreamed that baseball could lose its claim on being “America’s Pastime.”

If the SEC wants to take what makes it strong for granted, it’s leaders have every right to do so.  But they’re taking an awfully big risk.

 

We here at MrSEC.com were not anti-expansion last year.  As we wrote a full year before Texas A&M joined the SEC, the Aggies are a match for the conference, had flirted with the league for decades, and would eventually make a perfect dance partner.  After adding a 13th school, business interests took control.  The league needed a 14th school and Missouri made business sense (for both parties).  We still believe both schools will fit in just as well as Arkansas and South Carolina have.

But there is the difference.  When Arkansas and South Carolina entered the SEC, despite a switch to divisional play and the addition of a conference championship game, the leaders of the SEC did their best to protect the league’s most-important rivalries in its two main sports — football and men’s basketball.

Though coaches wept over the decision, Roy Kramer and crew expanded the conference’s football schedule to insure more classic games could survive the inclusion of two new schools.  What are the league’s caretakers doing today?

Just the opposite.

Instead of adding a ninth football game and saving extra rivalries — it’s good to hear Alabama’s Nick Saban trumpeted a nine-game slate yesterday — some in the league are pushing for the end to permanent cross-division rivalries altogether.  LSU officials are suddenly scared to play Florida even though they’ve done so every year for four decades now.  Amazingly, Tiger AD Joe Alleva said yesterday that some people aren’t doing what’s best for the league, but what’s best for their own schools by trying to keep classic rivalries alive.

We agree.  The league best needs to protect games like Auburn-Georgia, Alabama-Tennessee, and even Ole Miss-Vanderbilt — three of the league’s oldest contests.  It needs top notch television draws like LSU-Florida, too.  In other words, anyone voting against those things — Alleva, for example — is a person who’s doing what’s best for himself and not for the league.  Anyone voting like that is simply following in the footsteps of Big 12 leaders who destroyed a bit of old Big 8 soul when they said, “The league doesn’t need the Sooners and Cornhuskers to play ever year.”  Seeds were sown and a message was sent in that action.  The Big 12 would never become what the old Big 8 had been.

It seems the SEC is perilously close to deciding that the new SEC will never be what the old SEC has been.

Even in basketball, rather than using a simple 4-1-8 plan that we proposed months ago to protect those games that have been played most often, the league is looking instead at a 1-4-8 plan because, well, just because.  Some of the most important SEC hoops games will no longer be played twice a year under such an unnecessarily stupid plan.

LSU and Ole Miss have played more than 200 times in basketball.  So have LSU and Mississippi State.  So have Tennessee and Kentucky.  So have Florida and Georgia.

But under the needless abomination that is a 1-4-8 plan (one permanent home-and-away foe, four rotating home-and-away foes, eight one-game-per-year foes), those rivalries would all cease to be annual home-and-away series.  There’s no need for that, of course.   Expansion hasn’t caused that.  We’ve shown you how the league can protect those games if it so wanted.

 

Unfortunately, the people running the league have no sense of its history.  Kentucky’s John Calipari — for example — has proven himself to the be an absolute perfect match for Wildcat basketball.  He’s make UK the nation’s top program and helped earn the SEC more hoops respect in the process.

But he could give a damn about tradition.

Calipari isn’t worried about playing UK’s rivals.  He’s shown he’s not interested in playing big games at Rupp Arena in front of his own fans, either.  He’s a new man for a new age with a new kind of program.  Neutral sites, big games.  College basketball’s version of the Harlem Globetrotters.

But what price will Kentucky’s athletic department have to pay for those decisions five, 10 or 20 years from now?

Cat fans will love to win — something that Calipari will continue to do — but will they eventually stop forking over huge dollars for so-so games at Rupp Arena?  Can an annual game with Florida — because that’s who’s hot in the league right now — really replace the SEC’s most-heated basketball rivalry of UK-UT?  (I spent eight years as a boy on the Kentucky/Tennessee state line and I can assure you that no two groups are more passionate in their hatred for one another or more clannish.)  And if children grow up watching UK on television rather than at Rupp, won’t there be some type of decline in fan passion and interest?

This isn’t to pick on Calipari.  Slive and most of the current coaches and ADs and presidents don’t know or care as much about SEC history as the fans who breathe life into their league and programs with their throats and wallets.  That’s the problem.  They’re focused first, second and third on revenue, revenue and revenue.  Hey, in this economy, it’s hard to blame them.

But the SEC can schedule wisely, protect those games that mean the most to its fans and have meant the most to the conference long-term, and make money.  The focus on who’s good now is folly.  Check the league’s record books and you’ll find that success and failure are cyclical.

How good was Florida basketball before Billy Donovan?  How bad was Kentucky basketball with Billy Gillispie on hand?  How good was Alabama or LSU football before Saban rode into Baton Rouge and then Tuscaloosa?  How bad was South Carolina before Steve Spurrier?

That’s why we say point blank:  To hell with the current state of Kentucky basketball.  And Alabama football.  And Tennessee women’s basketball.  And Florida baseball.  All will rise and fall and rise and fall again.

Tradition should be protected at all costs with no regard paid to who’ll have a tougher schedule this year or the next.  As we said, that stuff’s cyclical and the cream rises.  I’m pretty sure LSU went undefeated against an unbelievably brutal football schedule last year, whether they were quaking in their boots about playing Florida or not.  And as Dan Mullen so ruthlessly and correctly pointed out yesterday: “I’ve been in this league for a while and I have a national championship ring from when my crossover games at the University of Florida that year were Auburn, Alabama and LSU.  Is that fair?  But we still won a national title… it all balances out.”

Hopefully Mullen then dropped a microphone and walked off stage a la Randy Watson from “Coming To America.”

 

If Slive and the people in charge of protecting the SEC’s legacy are wise, they will do whatever it takes over the next two days to protect as many important, historic rivalry games as possible.  The Southeastern Conference was built on those types of games.  They are most important to the fans who have helped fuel an SEC arms race that helped lead directly to its current fat cat state.  And though expansion will require the end of some rivalry games, there’s absolutely no reason those games ended can’t be some of the youngest rivalries as opposed to some of the most tradition-rich.

The SEC is at a crossroads.  This website supported expansion into Missouri and Texas because it made business sense and because we had faith in Slive and his fellow leaders to bring those schools in while keeping the best interest of the league — not the individual schools — in focus.

Unfortunately, we might have placed our faith in the wrong men.  It’s one thing to make a buck.  It’s another to remember who gave you your first buck and why.  The fans made the SEC.  They deserve their most precious games.  And they deserve them a hell of a lot more than millionaire coaches and self-centered athletic directors deserve what in the short-term look to be easier schedules.

 

Commissioner Slive is fond of saying “the First Amendment is alive and well in the SEC.”  In fact, he says it every time there’s a mic placed anywhere near his lips.  We’ve all heard him say it.  We at MrSEC.com are tired of hearing him say it.

Instead of saying the same tired line, we at this site — on behalf of all those faceless fans who are on the verge of being forgotten in the race for simpler schedules and bigger bucks — would prefer him do something instead.

Lead.

 


40 comments
10Vol85
10Vol85

If you're all that concerned about tradition and rivalries, adopt Spurrier's proposal.  Then, teams could schedule their cross-divsional games anyway they darn well please with no impact to the rest of the conference.  Cross-divisional games have really only affected the standings 5 out of 40 times, anyway - no big loss.

 

And I'll take the bait.  I agree with HungaryGator.  Your Nazi comments were out of line.  I guess your happy if you get a rise out of a few people, though.

SEC Fan
SEC Fan

 @10Vol85 But you're also taking in consideration that a lot of those cross-division rivalries are part of what makes up the SEC's rich history.  As other people have said, why shift to something totally new if you're going to forget about the past that got you there?

10Vol85
10Vol85

Perhaps my last sentence confused the issue.  I meant "no big loss" in respect to the standings, not that the games themselves were no big loss.  If the cross-divisional games didn't count in the standings, teams could choose their own cross-divisional games and thus maintain or terminate any rivalry they so choose.

SEC Fan
SEC Fan

 @10Vol85 Okay, so with that thinking (teams choose their own opponents), don't you think Les Miles' comment @ the meetings saying that teams weren't good matches was his way of saying he wants a weaker opponent (like Kentucky or Vandy) - pretty much a guaranteed win?  If you compare the current cross-division rivalries, the 2 teams are almost identical in their positions in the SEC (upper tier, middle of the pack, & lower tier fb teams).  I hardly think that when they were initially set up in the '90's that anybody could have predicted that outcome!

 

With all that said & done, it still seems to be the fans see more solutions with a 9 game conf. schedule than the coaches.

 

& let's not forget that we don't know if further expansion is about to unfold (hince why a rush job for 2012, but let's discuss 2013+).  That & I believe (like others), they're wanting to wait a few years to get those already scheduled games to be played before introducing a 9th game.  Say they've already decided that in 2015 it'll occur.  But right now, it's "up in the air".  (Yet would make sense if that was the case to at least make that public.)  I'm guessing it's a mix of the 2.

SEC Fan
SEC Fan

It may have been worded differently on this site (as well as others), but it's strange to me that as much as the coaches say they're trying to do what the fans want.....it seems like NOT moving to 9 games (which several pointed out makes MORE sense & can free up the scheduling headache) is crazy..

 

Here's my input on it:  Go to the 6-1-2 format.  But some say you have 5H games one year & only 4 the next.  Simple solution - most schools have a yearly OOC team on their schedule.  When you have the 4H SEC years, that's when you host your OOC rival.  When you have 5H SEC years, you visit your OOC team.

 

Boom!  Right there is a 10 game schedule with GUARANTEED 5 home games!

 

 

 

 

On a different note, anybody notice how Slive said that "we weren't in expansion mode when TA&M & Missouri joined us, & we're not in expansion mode now"?  Seems like a clever way of saying "It's just a matter of time to officially announce Teams #15, 16, 17, & 18 (maybe on those last 3 because a 15, 16, or 18 team conference can be easier to manage schedule-wise).

HungaryGator
HungaryGator

It is ironic that the title of the piece is that the SEC is on the verge of doing some very stupid things considering you yourself did a very stupid thing in even attempting to make any kind of lame comparison between the Confederate Battle flag and the flag of the Nazi party.  I could go into detail about how one was a democracy with freedom of speec religion, assembly, a free press, trial by jury, etc (ie the exact same rights Americans had from the beginning) and was only interested in defending its own territory, while the other was a party which had a murderous ideology that spawned death camps and a program of deliberate genocide, respected no individual rights and which was bent on world conquest.but you weren't even remotely interested in historical accuracy were you?   

djbillyd
djbillyd

 @HungaryGator

 And I could go YOU one better, and point out that those "Freedoms" were NOT being fought for, for ALL of the people. In fact, as a Nazi would, the confederates were fighting to maintain the indentured servitude of the poor black slaves that they were holding on to.

 

I, for one, think the comparison is more than adequate. It is appropriate!!!

HungaryGator
HungaryGator

 @djbillyd and I could go YOU one better still and point out that they were not fighting for slavery.  Doubt it?  Read Lincoln's inaugural address.  He explicitly endorses the Corwin Amendment.  What was that you ask?  Oh you see, that was the North's "slavery forever" amendment to the constitution.  That's right.  They offered a constitutional amendment which passed both houses of the now Northern dominated Congress (remember the Southern delegation had withdrawn) with the necessary supermajority and was signed by the president and was even ratified by 3 states.  All the Southern states would have had to do was indicate that this would address their concerns and agree to come back and ratify the amendment - which would have then passed. 

 

They could have preserved slavery by remaining in the US.  They did not choose to do so.  Go ahead.  Google Lincoln's inaugural address and the Corwin Amendment.  See if everything I said is not true. 

 

Its amazing the history they don't teach you in government schools!

djbillyd
djbillyd

 @John at MrSEC  @HungaryGator  @John

 Even more so, I wish that they would learn from it. Learn that the ugly stigma of racism is still just as alive now as it was 150 years ago. I hope that they learn that, to some people, their "history" is hat they aspire to. While we should not forget our history, wanting to LIVE our history again is going to make us "problem people".

HungaryGator
HungaryGator

@John at MrSEC @djbillyd John the drivel was the ad hominem portion of your posts. You could not handle the fact that somebody disagreed with your POV without resorting to that which is something one would hope an adult would be above.

 

I could give you a factual reply with lots and lots of quotes but you will not allow a factual reply that runs contrary to what you wish to believe - which rather pathetic. 

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

 @gatorwhisperer 

 

Just promise me you won't call it "drivel" if I use an old Jeff Davis quote to help break down the best cheerleaders.

 

Thanks for reading,

John

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

 @HungaryGator  @djbillyd 

 

I gave you line after line and post after post, so it's a little silly to claim I don't allow disagreements ont he site.  But I'll leave your post up.  I think people reading this chain will be able to see who's clinging to a dogma, facts be darned.  (Why they would want to read this chain I don't know.)

 

As for spewing drivel, I just gave you straight quotes from the leaders of the Confederacy as they explained that slavery was the "cornerstone" of their nation and the cause of the war.  You may not like reading that, but those documents are all easily obtained.

 

John

gatorwhisperer
gatorwhisperer

 @John at MrSEC John, in light of the site (or comments) going on the history lesson tangent I would like to again lobby for a "Best of the SEC" cheerleading article... or SEC vs. PAC12 vs. Big12... that would be interesting.

 

-just sayin'

 

;)

HungaryGator
HungaryGator

 @John at MrSEC  @djbillyd  Very good of you to spew a bunch of drivel and then get in the "last word" portion.

 

LOL!  I knew you could not handle any disagreement with the dogma you cling to.  Delete away.

 

PS.  The sad thing is I kind of like your blog and the sports reporting you've done.  Its just a shame that you're so insecure you cannot handle any disagreement without acting like a 3 year old in a sandbox.

 

Dave Evans

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

 @HungaryGator  @djbillyd 

 

(Continued quote from Davis from above):

 

"... A continuous series of measures was devised and prosecuted for the purpose of rendering insecure the tenure of property in slaves. Fanatical organizations, supplied with money by voluntary subscriptions, were assiduously engaged in exciting amongst the slaves a spirit of discontent and revolt; means were furnished for their escape from their owners, and agents secretly employed to entice them to abscond; the constitutional provision for their rendition to their owners was first evaded, then openly denounced as a violation of conscientious obligation and religious duty; men were taught that it was a merit to elude, disobey, and violently oppose the execution of the laws enacted to secure the performance of the promise contained in the constitutional compact; owners of slaves were mobbed and even murdered in open day solely for applying to a magistrate for the arrest of a fugitive slave; the dogmas of these voluntary organizations soon obtained control of the Legislatures of many of the Northern States, and laws were passed providing for the punishment, by ruinous fines and long-continued imprisonment in jails and penitentiaries, of citizens of the Southern States who should dare to ask aid of the officers of the law for the recovery of their property. Emboldened by success, the theater of agitation and aggression against the clearly expressed constitutional rights of the Southern States was transferred to the Congress; Senators and Representatives were sent to the common councils of the nation, whose chief title to this distinction consisted in the display of a spirit of ultra fanaticism, and whose business was not “to promote the general welfare or insure domestic tranquillity,” but to awaken the bitterest hatred against the citizens of sister States by violent denunciation of their institutions; the transaction of public affairs was impeded by repeated efforts to usurp powers not delegated by the Constitution, for the purpose of impairing the security of property in slaves, and reducing those States which held slaves to a condition of inferiority. Finally a great party was organized for the purpose of obtaining the administration of the Government, with the avowed object of using its power for the total exclusion of the slave States from all participation in the benefits of the public domain acquired by all the States in common, whether by conquest or purchase; of surrounding them entirely by States in which slavery should be prohibited; of thus rendering the property in slaves so insecure as to be comparatively worthless, and thereby annihilating in effect property worth thousands of millions of dollars. This party, thus organized, succeeded in the month of November last in the election of its candidate for the Presidency of the United States.

 

In the meantime, under the mild and genial climate of the Southern States and the increasing care and attention for the wellbeing and comfort of the laboring class, dictated alike by interest and humanity, the African slaves had augmented in number from about 600,000, at the date of the adoption of the constitutional compact, to upward of 4,000,000. In moral and social condition they had been elevated from brutal savages into docile, intelligent, and civilized agricultural laborers, and supplied not only with bodily comforts but with careful religious instruction. Under the supervision of a superior race their labor had been so directed as not only to allow a gradual and marked amelioration of their own condition, but to convert hundreds of thousands of square miles of the wilderness into cultivated lands covered with a prosperous people; towns and cities had sprung into existence, and had rapidly increased in wealth and population under the social system of the South; the white population of the Southern slaveholding States had augmented from about 1,250,000 at the date of the adoption of the Constitution to more than 8,500,000 in 1860; and the productions of the South in cotton, rice, sugar, and tobacco, for the full development and continuance of which the labor of African slaves was and is indispensable, had swollen to an amount which formed nearly three-fourths of the exports of the whole United States and had become absolutely necessary to the wants of civilized man. With interests of such overwhelming magnitude imperiled, the people of the Southern States were driven by the conduct of the North to the adoption of some course of action to avert the danger with which they were openly menaced. With this view the legislatures of the several States invited the people to select delegates to conventions to be held for the purpose of determining for themselves what measures were best adapted to meet so alarming a crisis in their history."

 

Link: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_m042961.asp

 

 

I could go on, but you're not worth the time.  You are a neo-Confederate who -- history major or no -- picks and chooses what he wants to believe and not believe.

 

If you are angered by this post, then I hope you direct your anger at the proper people -- the Confederate leaders who made their views on slavery quite clear (much to your chagrin, I assume) and toward your UF professors who clearly didn't spend much time on the Civil War.

 

But our discussion ends here.  Post another note on this topic, and it will be deleted as soon as you post it.  You've been given your say time and again... and you've been sufficiently debunked, time and again.

 

I don't intend to keep coming back here just because you have to get in the last word on a cause that died off 150 years ago.

 

And as for your love of small federal government.  Remember, it was Davis -- who passed the first draft law in American history, by the way -- who kept asking for more centralized power in order to hold his country together.  He didn't get it.  Which is why he once said that upon the CSA's tombstone should be written: "Died of a theory."

 

 

John Pennington

 

 

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

 @HungaryGator  @djbillyd 

 

(Continued from above)

 

* And then there is this lengthy explanation of the causes of the war from Jefferson Davis, President of the CSA, writing to the Confederate Congress on April 29, 1961 regarding the ratification of the Confederate Constitution (interesting that you didn't include this rather important quotation in your post):

 

"When the several States delegated certain powers to the United States Congress, a large portion of the laboring population consisted of African slaves imported into the colonies by the mother country. In twelve out of the thirteen States negro slavery existed, and the right of property in slaves was protected by law. This property was recognized in the Constitution, and provision was made against its loss by the escape of the slave. The increase in the number of slaves by further importation from Africa was also secured by a clause forbidding Congress to prohibit the slave trade anterior to a certain date, and in no clause can there be found any delegation of power to the Congress authorizing it in any manner to legislate to the prejudice, detriment, or discouragement owners of that species of property, or excluding it from the protection of the Government.

 

The climate and soil of the Northern States soon proved unpropitious to the continuance of slave labor, whilst the converse was the case at the South. Under the unrestricted free intercourse between the two sections, the Northern States consulted their own interests by selling their slaves to the South and prohibiting slavery within their limits. The South were willing purchasers of a property suitable to their wants, and paid the price of the acquisition without harboring a suspicion that their quiet possession was to be disturbed by those who were inhibited not only by want of constitutional authority, but by good faith as vendors, from disquieting a title emanating from themselves. As soon, how ever, as the Northern States that prohibited African slavery within their limits had reached a number sufficient to give their representation a controlling voice in the Congress, a persistent and organized system of hostile measures against the rights of the owners of slaves in the Southern States was inaugurated and gradually extended...

 

More to come...

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

 @HungaryGator  @djbillyd 

 

Do you really want to go down this road?  I don't think you're giving the University of Florida's history department a very good reputation, but if we must...

 

While you quote Jefferson Davis and an author, I'll stick a bit closer to the heart of the matter and quote politicians and papers of the time... including Davis in a letter that he sent to the Confederate Congress upon the ratification of the CSA constitution.

 

Do yourself a favor and read every word of these quotations:

 

 

* This from the Charleston Mercury in 1865 -- one of the newspapers that stirred the passions of South Carolina secessionists:

 

"In 1860 South Carolina seceded alone from the old union of States. Her people, in Convention assembled, invited the slaveholding States (none others) of the old Union to join her in erecting a separate Government of Slave States, for the protection of their common interests. All of the slave states, with the exception of Maryland and Kentucky, responded to her invitation. The Southern Confederacy of slave States was formed.

 

It was on account of encroachments upon the institution of slavery by the sectional majority of the old Union, that South Carolina seceded from that Union. It is not at this late day, after the loss of thirty thousand of her best and bravest men in battle, that she will suffer it to be bartered away; or ground between the upper and nether mill stones, by the madness of Congress, or the counsels of shallow men elsewhere."

 

Link: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=1485

 

 

* This from Georgia Governor and future CSA vice-president Alexander Stephens in his 1861 "Cornerstone" speech:

 

"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition."

 

Link: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=76

 

 

* This from Georgia Governor Howell Cobb -- who had also served as the President of the Provisional Confederate Congress at the war's start -- in a letter to CSA Secretary of War James Seddon in 1865, upon hearing of plans to use black soldiers in the Confederate army:

 

"The day you make soldiers of them is the beginning of the end of the revolution. If slaves make good soldiers our whole theory of slavery is wrong — but they won’t make soldiers. As a class they are wanting in every qualification of a soldier. Better by far to yield to the demands of England and France and abolish slavery and thereby purchase their aid, than resort to this policy, which leads as certainly to ruin and subjugation as it is adopted; you want more soldiers, and hence the proposition to take negroes into the Army. 

 

Link: http://deadconfederates.com/2010/10/26/real-confederates-didnt-know-about-black-confederates/

 

More to come...

HungaryGator
HungaryGator

 @John at MrSEC  @djbillyd What do armories being raided (you realize those arms were purchased from tax money partially paid by Southerners right?) have to do with the fact that the war was not over slavery as has been claimed?  That's the real horse crap here John.  Shall I provide you with some quotes and factual sources to back that statement up>  OK

 

"I tried all in my power to avert this war. I saw it coming, for twelve years I worked night and day to prevent it, but I could not. The North was mad and blind; it would not let us govern ourselves, and so the war came, and now it must go on till the last man of this generation falls in his tracks, and his children seize the musket and fight our battle, unless you acknowledge our right to self government. We are not fighting for slavery. We are fighting for Independence, and that, or extermination." - President Jefferson Davis

 

In his book What They Fought For, 1861-1865, historian James McPherson reported on his reading of more than 25,000 letters and more than 100 diaries of soldiers who fought on both sides of the War for Southern Independence and concluded that Confederate soldiers  "fought for liberty and independence from what they regarded as a tyrannical government." The letters and diaries of many Confederate soldiers "bristled with the rhetoric of liberty and self government," writes McPherson, and spoke of a fear of being "subjugated" and "enslaved" by a tyrannical federal government. 

 

So you see John, the real horsecrap was your pathetic attempt to compare the CSA or its symbols in any way with those of the Nazis.

 

Now as to your childish little personal remarks....no I am not in Hungary.  I was born and raised in Florida and graduated from UF.  Oh....and as for "loving" the CSA....what I love is the original constitution....you know...the one the Founders set up....a voluntary union based on consent with a limited federal government unlike what we have today. Radical huh? 

 

Its best that you stick to writing about sports rather than making a fool of yourself and spewing your ignorance trying to write about history.

 

Dave Evans

UF history major 1994

 

 

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

 @HungaryGator  @djbillyd 

 

Actually, it's fairly well known by all that Abraham Lincoln famously said he would save the Union all-slave, all-free, or half-and-half if he could.  The Union came first.  

 

Of course, US armories were still raided and arms were still stolen before Lincoln even took office... despite his statements.  So your "they were slavers, too" argument either a) looks like horse crap or b) makes your beloved Confederacy leaders look like a treasonous rabble.  

 

After reading your nonsense, I can only hope by your anonymous signature that you ARE in Hungary.  Anyone who loves the Confederate States of America more than the United States of America should either a) be living 1000s of miles away or b) b living 150 years in the past.  You can't love both.

 

I respect my Southern heritage and my Confederate ancestors.  I can do that without agreeing with their politics or primitive views.  I can't, however, imagine making pro-Confederate comments in 2012.  

 

With that, I think it's best that you go find a Neo-Confederate site to read, rather than this sports site.  

 

Besides, Preston Brooks and 1856 are calling.

 

John

 

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

 @HungaryGator 

 

I'm not particularly interested in historical accuracy from your perspective, no.

 

You write that one flag represented "a democracy with freedom of speech, religion, assembly, a free press, trial by jury," and -- aren't you leaving something out in your list?  Isn't something missing?

 

Oh, yes, slavery.  (Not to mention a laughable lack of centralized government which led to North Carolina hoarding uniforms and Georgia threatening to secede from the CSA.)

 

My ancestors fought for the Confederacy, you see.  Two were captured at Vicksburg at the surrender of General Pemberton on July 4, 1863.  I've wandered over battlefields from the Yazoo to the Edisto to Gettysburg and half the places in between.  My Civil War library -- like any good Southerner's-- includes at least a hundred books on the subject.  

 

That said, thankfully my views of the value of a man in 2012 are different than my ancestors' views on the value of a man in 1861.  Which is why I'll not be flying a battle flag anytime soon (though you're welcome to fly yours and offend whoever you like).

 

I must say, however, the hate I receive every single day as a result of this site does make me question that whole "value of a man" thing from time to time.

 

John 

HungaryGator
HungaryGator

 @John at MrSEC What was "missing" that had not been present in America for 80 years?....indeed that was not still present in the Northern states throughout the war? 

 

Kind of odd how the other flag...you know the one that is still flown all over the place today and which was flown over slave ships for 80 years (New England was the hub of the slave trade industry) and which flew over the troops who carried out the ethnic cleansing of native people's from numerous places not to mention their confinement to the most marginal lands or various other wars of aggression is somehow not the hate symbol or offensive but the one which flew over people standing up for the same values the Founders championed ("Government derives its legitimacy from the Consent of the Governed"  Sound familiar?) has somehow magically become offensive over the last generation thanks to PC revisionism. 

dchauncey21
dchauncey21

Gatorwhisperer: I think the pods would work because you would get a lot of flexibility in the schedule. I am mixed on FSU because I think they bring the most to the SEC brand outside of possibly UNC or OU. On the other hand, UF dominates the state of Florida and I don't want to give a hand up in any way. Pods would work though because of the fact it provides so much flexibility in the schedule. Instead of playing a definite 6 teams every year, you are only playing a definite 3. You would also be able to get two permanent rivals possibly.

 

SEC North

Tennessee (Georgia and Alabama)

Kentucky (Mississippi State and Missouri)

Virginia Tech (NC State/FSU/UNC and Missouri)

Vanderbilt (Ole Miss and Arkansas)

 

SEC East

 

Florida (LSU and Auburn)

Georgia (Auburn and Tennessee)

South Carolina (Texas A&M and Missouri)

NC State/FSU/UNC (Va Tech and Texas A&M)

 

SEC DEEP South

Alabama (LSU and Tennessee)

Auburn (Florida and Georgia)

Miss State (Kentucky and Texas A&M)

Ole Miss (Vandy and Arkansas)

 

SEC West

 

Arkansas (Ole Miss and Vandy)

LSU (Alabama and Florida)

Texas A&M (Miss St and NC State/FSU/UNC)

Missouri (South Carolina and Kentucky)

 

Maybe something like this is a solution to some of the problems in the future.

 

In the meantime, why not let some teams go on permanent rivalries that want them and others rotate? If LSU, South Carolina, Texas A&M, Kentucky, Mississippi State and Florida want to rotate, why not?

 

Danny
Danny

Scheduling should have been worked out and agreed upon BEFORE EXPANSION. Not after.

jschooltiger
jschooltiger

I experienced a nine-game conference schedule for all of one season last year as a Mizzou fan, and you know what ... I liked it. Sure, we probably would have won one more game if we'd had one more pasty OOC opponent (and yes, I know eight game wouldn't have fit into a 10-team conference schedule, blah blah) but it wasn't the end of the world to play nine games. And I want to be able to see all the SEC West teams come through Faurot Field before I'm 50. I think nine games with one protected rivalry makes a lot of sense. 

 

BTW, here's a plan for a schedule that would allow for true "conference" scheduling where teams play one another more often than once every several years as well as preserve rivalries. Might be worth a shot. 

 

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/2/17/2802303/sec-football-scheduling-realignment-rivalries

AllTideUp
AllTideUp

I posted a version of a 9 game SEC schedule a while back.  I called it a "floating schedule" because of how the teams were paired.  It was not based on divisions, but on protected rivalries.  5 protected rivalries and 4 rotating games.  With 14 teams that still means you play everyone twice every 4 years.  You just get to maintain 5 rivalries instead of 3.

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

jschooltiger...

 

PLEASE do not link to other blogs on this site.  We've had a number of people give themselves free advertising on our site -- something we don't do in other folks' comment boxes -- by posting links back to their own stuff.

 

If our coverage and our previous schedule breakdowns aren't good enough, so be it.  But we've done more realistic SEC schedule breakdowns that can be found in our Blue Chip Stories section.

 

Thanks for reading,

John

jschooltiger
jschooltiger

 @John at MrSEC and ... unsubscribed from your RSS. I'm not Bill Connelly. 

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

Cliff...

 

I don't know what you're talking about.  I don't follow.

 

We don't go to other sites and post links of our stuff on other people's sites... as some have done to us. 

 

As for being "plastered all over ESPN right now," I'm lost.

 

Thanks for reading,

John

Cliff
Cliff

 @John at MrSECFunny that you say you don't link on other sites when your blog is plastered all over ESPN right now

 

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

 @reinhardt  @John leghumper...

 

There was no debate to frown upon.  The poster agreed with what we wrote.  

 

But we have no way of knowing who's linking to what.  We've had to clear out advertising links in our comments boxes AND we've found people who've linked to their own stuff.

 

Hell, I don't care anymore.

 

Link to your own stuff.  Link to adds.  Call each other names.  Call me names.  Cancel your RSS feed if I ask not to post links to blogs that attempt to cover things we've covered previously.  

 

I surrender.

 

John

leghumper
leghumper

 @reinhardt  @jschooltiger  @John Huh.  I guess reading comprehension fails over here. Jschooltiger appears to be giving an opinion and linking up an example, as opposed to trolling and pimping a blog (that isn't even his). 

 

Seems to me "Mr. SEC" is the one that is "tender" as you put it.  I guess reasonable debate is frowned upon here.

reinhardt
reinhardt

@jschooltiger @John at MrSEC Lighten up- John did say please. If all Mizzou fans are so tender, you're in for an awakening. PS I'll be in town this fall. GO DAWGS!

Bubba Gump
Bubba Gump

John, solid post but....

 

Scotch - Irish = Irishman who drinks Scotch

Scots - Irish = Descendants of the Scotti tribe in Ireland who migrated to present day Scotland, and later migrated to the USA

 

I know you do not like links but (insert proper front part here) people.virginia.edu/~mgf2j/irish.html is a good source considering how many Scots - Irish who settled in the south came through Virginia in the first place. Some folks living in the south descend from the folks that forced Hadrian to build not 1 but 2 walls to keep the natives in their own part of the British Isles. :)

 

Frankly I think the modern attempt to burn history will be the undoing of the SEC long term. When donors pay big money for big home games will they be happy when they must spend more for worse seats in neutral venues? Alabama playing Michigan in Texas! Kentucky playing Baylor in Texas instead of Indiana in a car ride game! The problem with chasing the money, is sooner or later the fans gets tired of playing the game and start to follow other sports. Just ask folks how big the crowds were in the heyday of Boxing and Horse Racing. In the past you knew the folks in the schools ticket office who knew how to reward loyalty. Now it is a faceless computer in an office outside the state owned by a for profit corporation who could care less if you actually enjoy the experience.

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator like.author.displayName 1 Like

Bubba Gump...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch-Irish_American

 

First paragraph.

 

John

Bubba Gump
Bubba Gump

 @John at MrSEC quoting wik who is quoting an english monarch on the affairs of Ireland and Scotland. The folly of modern life, with no context in disinformation. Mary Stuart was Queen of the Scots, NOT Queen of the Scotch. While nobody will dismiss Elizabeth as a wallflower or shrinking violet - in truth she was a total badass - having her set context would be like having Hitler rewrite the history of the Chinese because he was not Chinese by birth, action, or belief. Had Mary and the Catholics survived the power struggle with Elizabeth and the Protestants maybe we would call it Angland today, even if it is not historically correct.

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

Bubba Gump...

 

Sorry.  Being of Scotch-Irish-English heritage myself, I figured that since most people I've ever known say Scotch-Irish and since both are deemed acceptable according to every source I can find I didn't think anyone would make a point to correct such minutiae.

 

I was wrong. 

 

Scots-Irish it is.  My apologies.

 

John

 

You may want to get in touch with these folks, though:

 

http://www.ulsterscotslanguage.com/en/texts/scotch-irish/scotch-irish-or-scots-irish/

Some Yahoo
Some Yahoo

Completely agree...except with giving the nod to the current state of Florida Baseball as the status quo?  Maybe after this season, but until then lets take some SEC pride in the Yardcocks.  Yes, its petty (its all us carolina guys have).

dchauncey21
dchauncey21 like.author.displayName 1 Like

Auburn and Florida was one of the premier rivalries of the SEC for generations. From Spurrier's field goal win in 1966 to the 1985 shutdown of Bo and the 1994 last second toss by Auburn to beat #1 Florida, this was a great one, and nothing mattered more for years for folks in the panhandle than this game. 83 times these two universities have played but expansion originally put a damper on this one of the past decade and expansion again will make this a once every 12 year event to see Auburn at Florida Field. This year would be the 100th anniversary of UF-AU playing their first football game, and instead of playing this year as scheduled, UF and Auburn will be apart again. The SEC should move to a 9 game schedule and it should happen now to preserve at least some sort of regular scheduling of these old rivalries. The funny thing is, adding 16 teams in pods would also provide some more flexibility to keep these old rivalries alive.

gatorwhisperer
gatorwhisperer

 @dchauncey21 I remember the Auburn UF rivalry as a kid. I'd much rather have that back than keep the LSU rivalry. Like the pods too, unless FSU is in one of them.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] conference in the country.  They want to forget where the SEC came from.”  (For the record, here’s our take on the same topic from yesterday [...]

  2. the blog:i) start blog writing with making

    a plan that ought to include the people, the purpose, and the start date.ii) make a plan to measure the effects of the blog.iii) keep a marketing plan ready with detailed maneuvers as to how the company will promote the blog.



Follow Us On:
Mobile MrSEC