The old "SEC" is better argument

[sunshinehog]

I heard Grant Hall talk about how much more money we make in the SEC over the big 12.  First of all this is not true.  It's about the same, in fact Missouri made as much money as we did last year. 

Secondly, even if it were true and like Grant said we have this great big nice stadium to play in I have one question.

Would you rather win in the old stadium than lose in the new stadium?

[ClubChubby]

The sec is great. Too bad that money can't be spent on good head coaches. Frank doesn't care about being competitive any more.

[AltaHog]

I heard Grant Hall talk about how much more money we make in the SEC over the big 12.  First of all this is not true.  It's about the same, in fact Missouri made as much money as we did last year. 

Secondly, even if it were true and like Grant said we have this great big nice stadium to play in I have one question.

Would you rather win in the old stadium than lose in the new stadium?

I vote for winning.

Since the new stadium opened in 2001, we have played 3 conference games a year in Fayetteville. Thru 2005 our record in those games was 6-9. We have played 2 significant non-conference games in Texas and USC. Lost both. So, counting the overpowering, manhandling victory we posted against Bama lost Saturday, our record  (only counting real opponents, not Weber State, etc.) in the "great big nice stadium" is:  7-11

Not impressive.

[Feralhog]

So the solution is to tuck tail to a weaker conference instead of trying to become a force in the SEC.  Why not go all out and join the Sun Belt? 

[oldbooniehog]

This argument is very easy to gut like a big fish when you look at a certain perception combined with a certain fact.

1) Which football programs do you believe are the better programs from the following list?

Mississippi State
Ole Miss
Arkansas


I know that the vast majority of Hog fans would rank Arkansas above Ole Miss, and way above Mississippi State.

I mean c'mon. Mississippi is a state that's even more poor than Arkansas. It's got its small talent base split amongst at least three Division programs (Southern Miss is in there, too).

2) Here's the fact.

Since 1990, here is how many times these three programs have finished in the AP Top 25

Ole Miss--5 finishes in the Top 25
Miss St--4 finishes in the Top 25
Arkansas--2 finishes in the Top 25

If Ole Miss and Miss St can finish in the Top 25 four or five times in the last 16 years, don't you think Arkansas ought to have at least the same level of success?

Ole Miss and Miss St both play against brutal SEC schedules, yet they seem to have about twice the success as Arkansas lately.

I don't think it's the conference or talent base.

I think it just might be something else.....let's see, what could that be? Hmmmmm..........


oldbooniehog

[duckhunter]

We are in one of the toughest conferences in college football. We could drop down to the Big Twelve and whoop up on all the Miss St. and be overrated and go to a national champion ship like OU and get spanked..    but I think we deffinately do not need to tuck our tails and run. But, we do need to make the changes neccessary to be one of the power houses in the SEC. And as far as Franky, he stopped caring the day he quit coaching.

[AltaHog]

So the solution is to tuck tail to a weaker conference instead of trying to become a force in the SEC.  Why not go all out and join the Sun Belt? 

No. Not at all.

My post was geared toward the question about winning in the old stadium vs losing in our nice one. I am sick of not being able to take care of business at home. I do not blame this on the conference we are in, and it should not be an excuse (other than the early years in the SEC where we definitely had a rude awakening from the good old days of the SWC, that had been in a slide)

This is our 15th year. We have had all the time we need to adjust. The stadium and our facilities should help, not hurt. We should be competing in this league. If we are not, should we leave?  No, we should hire a coaching staff that can.

[Conway Cool Daddy]

This argument is very easy to gut like a big fish when you look at a certain perception combined with a certain fact.

1) Which football programs do you believe are the better programs from the following list?

Mississippi State
Ole Miss
Arkansas


I know that the vast majority of Hog fans would rank Arkansas above Ole Miss, and way above Mississippi State.

I mean c'mon. Mississippi is a state that's even more poor than Arkansas. It's got its small talent base split amongst at least three Division programs (Southern Miss is in there, too).

2) Here's the fact.

Since 1990, here is how many times these three programs have finished in the AP Top 25

Ole Miss--5 finishes in the Top 25
Miss St--4 finishes in the Top 25
Arkansas--2 finishes in the Top 25

If Ole Miss and Miss St can finish in the Top 25 four or five times in the last 16 years, don't you think Arkansas ought to have at least the same level of success?

Ole Miss and Miss St both play against brutal SEC schedules, yet they seem to have about twice the success as Arkansas lately.

I don't think it's the conference or talent base.

I think it just might be something else.....let's see, what could that be? Hmmmmm..........


oldbooniehog

Ouch!

That hurts.

[longtimeHogfan]

I wouldn't care if we left the SEC and joined the little-12, but I do have a request:  Go out on top.  Win the SEC first, then go.  I don't want to give Phat Phil Phulmer and the (yuck, spit) viles any reason to say, "....they couldn't make it in the SEC so they jumped to the little-12 where they can compete.  Win the SEC first, then we can tell Phat Phil, "...we had nothing left to prove."

[hoggystyle78]

I don't want to trade playing Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama etc., for playing Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa State etc. We committed to the SEC and I say we get our act together and become significant in the best college football conference in America. I'm proud to be in the SEC, and I don't wanna be known as the football program that ran off and hid in the Little 12.

[HedgeDweller]

Doesn't take long for a thread talking about conference affiliation, money and stadium  to draw a response that belongs in a 'fire nutt' thread.
In fact, it came about in the first response....

[Ross U (HDHF)]

This argument is very easy to gut like a big fish when you look at a certain perception combined with a certain fact.

1) Which football programs do you believe are the better programs from the following list?

Mississippi State
Ole Miss
Arkansas


I know that the vast majority of Hog fans would rank Arkansas above Ole Miss, and way above Mississippi State.

I mean c'mon. Mississippi is a state that's even more poor than Arkansas. It's got its small talent base split amongst at least three Division programs (Southern Miss is in there, too).

2) Here's the fact.

Since 1990, here is how many times these three programs have finished in the AP Top 25

Ole Miss--5 finishes in the Top 25
Miss St--4 finishes in the Top 25
Arkansas--2 finishes in the Top 25

If Ole Miss and Miss St can finish in the Top 25 four or five times in the last 16 years, don't you think Arkansas ought to have at least the same level of success?

Ole Miss and Miss St both play against brutal SEC schedules, yet they seem to have about twice the success as Arkansas lately.

I don't think it's the conference or talent base.

I think it just might be something else.....let's see, what could that be? Hmmmmm..........


oldbooniehog

Dang. Someone ate his wheaties this morning.

[Pa-Paw]

I don't want to trade playing Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama etc., for playing Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa State etc. We committed to the SEC and I say we get our act together and become significant in the best college football conference in America. I'm proud to be in the SEC, and I don't wanna be known as the football program that ran off and hid in the Little 12.

I admit that I selfishly desire Arkansas to move to the B12. I'm just one guy over here in Texas who would enjoy watching them play as often as I could. I don't know what the split is on pro or con, but it's probably something like 60/40% in favor of the SEC. I'm with you with the fact that the SEC is probably the strongest conference of the two. You did purposely mention the trade off of the high rung SEC teams for the low rung teams in the B12. If you subtracted Arkansas from the SEC and placed them in the B12, the two conferences just might be very equal in strength. The biggest problem for either conference is the championship game, which adds to the chance of a loss.

[Torqued pork]

People talk about how we lost our rivalry with Texas when we joined the SEC, but the truth is it was only a rivalry for us. OU and A&M were almost always bigger games for the Horns.

The overall quality of the SEC and the passion among its fans is what elevates it over the BIG12 and is why the Hogs need to stay imo.

[Sao Ming]

People talk about how we lost our rivalry with Texas when we joined the SEC, but the truth is it was only a rivalry for us. OU and A&M were almost always bigger games for the Horns.

The overall quality of the SEC and the passion among its fans is what elevates it over the BIG12 and is why the Hogs need to stay imo.

You first point out how we were hardly a rivalry in the SWC, then point out how good we have it in the SEC with the "Big Boys"  Can you name who feels we are their rival in the SEC?  Are you thinking about the real deals in the SEC who actually have a rivalry (AL/UA - GA/FLA etc.)?  You see, to me, being surrounded by greatness does not make you great nor does it make our football special. 

Again, what in the hell makes winning in the Big 12 N WORSE than getting our ass continually kicked in the SEC W?

[Sao Ming]

I don't want to trade playing Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama etc., for playing Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa State etc. We committed to the SEC and I say we get our act together and become significant in the best college football conference in America. I'm proud to be in the SEC, and I don't wanna be known as the football program that ran off and hid in the Little 12.

Another hilariuos post (sorry he is not on to defend it).  Named 3 E teams and 1 W team.  Actually believes that in the Big 12, we would only play the teams listed above and not the other really good teams...2 of which have won NC's in the past 7 years.  Nice.

[Torqued pork]

I'm sorry Sao. You are right and I was wrong. It does make more sense to wave the white flag and quit dreaming about ever being upper-tier in the SEC. And if after ten or so years in the Big 12 we still find ourselves struggling, we could see if Conference USA would be kind enough to let us join. I'm sure the atmosphere at an Arkansas-Cincinatti game would be positively ELECTRIC!

[311Hog]

This argument is very easy to gut like a big fish when you look at a certain perception combined with a certain fact.

1) Which football programs do you believe are the better programs from the following list?

Mississippi State
Ole Miss
Arkansas


I know that the vast majority of Hog fans would rank Arkansas above Ole Miss, and way above Mississippi State.

I mean c'mon. Mississippi is a state that's even more poor than Arkansas. It's got its small talent base split amongst at least three Division programs (Southern Miss is in there, too).

2) Here's the fact.

Since 1990, here is how many times these three programs have finished in the AP Top 25

Ole Miss--5 finishes in the Top 25
Miss St--4 finishes in the Top 25
Arkansas--2 finishes in the Top 25

If Ole Miss and Miss St can finish in the Top 25 four or five times in the last 16 years, don't you think Arkansas ought to have at least the same level of success?

Ole Miss and Miss St both play against brutal SEC schedules, yet they seem to have about twice the success as Arkansas lately.

I don't think it's the conference or talent base.

I think it just might be something else.....let's see, what could that be? Hmmmmm..........


oldbooniehog

Wow just wow this is the single best post i have seen on this board in a very very long time. Never had it layed out so clearly before. We are and have been in some dark times.

[Sao Ming]

You are arguing my point, and I thank you for that.  You see, if we struggle in the Big12, we never win in the SEC.  We struggle period.  I guess I am wrong...we should just be strugglers in the "best" conference and be satisfied. 

Having said that, Go Nutt.  Can't get better, can't get worse.  We are Us, but we are SEC Us.

[Torqued pork]

You are arguing my point, and I thank you for that.  You see, if we struggle in the Big12, we never win in the SEC.  We struggle period.  I guess I am wrong...we should just be strugglers in the "best" conference and be satisfied. 

Having said that, Go Nutt.  Can't get better, can't get worse.  We are Us, but we are SEC Us.

I'm hardly satisfied and like you, I want Nutt outta here. I just think leaving the SEC while we are struggling would be a defeatist thing to do. A couple more seasons like we've had and I may agree with you, but I would like to see what a new hc could do first.

[werehog]

All through my childhood Mississippi and LSU were bigger rivals than any Texas school. JFB dropped those two games because he claimed we cared more about beating those two teams than we did winning SWC games. I don't think I could muster much enthusiasm for sticking it too Iowa State or K State.

[Sao Ming]

All through my childhood Mississippi and LSU were bigger rivals than any Texas school. JFB dropped those two games because he claimed we cared more about beating those two teams than we did winning SWC games. I don't think I could muster much enthusiasm for sticking it too Iowa State or K State.

OU and Texas both dealt with the embarrasment of having to beat those teams en route to their National Championships.  I cannot imagine how wearing the rings must feel for those kids knowing how they got it.

[lyon98]

Suppose Frank had picked the last coach and White had not organized a committee, where would we be now? Tubby had success at ole piss and would have had the same at Arkansas. Would he be here now? Who knows but he would not have had the problem he did with people going to Louisville like he did at Auburn. If he was winning, the money to keep him would have been forthcoming, as it was for the current coach to keep him from getting on the plane.

That robbery about the plane was a bigger heist than the Brinks robbery.

[Root Hog]

I don't want to trade playing Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama etc., for playing Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa State etc. We committed to the SEC and I say we get our act together and become significant in the best college football conference in America. I'm proud to be in the SEC, and I don't wanna be known as the football program that ran off and hid in the Little 12.

I admit that I selfishly desire Arkansas to move to the B12. I'm just one guy over here in Texas who would enjoy watching them play as often as I could. I don't know what the split is on pro or con, but it's probably something like 60/40% in favor of the SEC. I'm with you with the fact that the SEC is probably the strongest conference of the two. You did purposely mention the trade off of the high rung SEC teams for the low rung teams in the B12. If you subtracted Arkansas from the SEC and placed them in the B12, the two conferences just might be very equal in strength. The biggest problem for either conference is the championship game, which adds to the chance of a loss.

He listed those teams to make a point.  He could have said Baylor, Kansas, K State, Missouri, Iowa State, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Colorado, Oklahoma State and even Nebraska.   Ten teams in the Big 12 are on the level of lower rung teams in the SEC.  There are six powerhouses in the SEC year in and year out.  There is a huge difference.

[Root Hog]

All through my childhood Mississippi and LSU were bigger rivals than any Texas school. JFB dropped those two games because he claimed we cared more about beating those two teams than we did winning SWC games. I don't think I could muster much enthusiasm for sticking it too Iowa State or K State.

OU and Texas both dealt with the embarrasment of having to beat those teams en route to their National Championships.  I cannot imagine how wearing the rings must feel for those kids knowing how they got it.

The Big 12 is the best example of what is wrong with college football.  Think about it.  If Texas and OU schedule 4 easy wins in OOC, then the winner of the Texas/OU game will almost certainly be undefeated.  Why do you think OU is so enraged over the Oregon deal?  They know that all they have to do is get by Texas and they would have been put back in the title game, even though they don't belong and would probably get killed, AGAIN.

[Sao Ming]

I don't want to trade playing Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama etc., for playing Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa State etc. We committed to the SEC and I say we get our act together and become significant in the best college football conference in America. I'm proud to be in the SEC, and I don't wanna be known as the football program that ran off and hid in the Little 12.

I admit that I selfishly desire Arkansas to move to the B12. I’m just one guy over here in Texas who would enjoy watching them play as often as I could. I don’t know what the split is on pro or con, but it’s probably something like 60/40% in favor of the SEC. I’m with you with the fact that the SEC is probably the strongest conference of the two. You did purposely mention the trade off of the high rung SEC teams for the low rung teams in the B12. If you subtracted Arkansas from the SEC and placed them in the B12, the two conferences just might be very equal in strength. The biggest problem for either conference is the championship game, which adds to the chance of a loss.

He listed those teams to make a point.  He could have said Baylor, Kansas, K State, Missouri, Iowa State, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Colorado, Oklahoma State and even Nebraska.   Ten teams in the Big 12 are on the level of lower rung teams in the SEC.  There are six powerhouses in the SEC year in and year out.  There is a huge difference.

I know this is an exercise in futility but I will pose this directly as you Roothog...this question is glazed over more than a Krispy Kreme so far.

What makes winning in the Big 12 N WORSE than getting our ass continually kicked in the SEC W?  Nevermind the entire SEC, just focus on the W.

[kitshicker]

This argument is very easy to gut like a big fish when you look at a certain perception combined with a certain fact.

1) Which football programs do you believe are the better programs from the following list?

Mississippi State
Ole Miss
Arkansas


I know that the vast majority of Hog fans would rank Arkansas above Ole Miss, and way above Mississippi State.

I mean c'mon. Mississippi is a state that's even more poor than Arkansas. It's got its small talent base split amongst at least three Division programs (Southern Miss is in there, too).

2) Here's the fact.

Since 1990, here is how many times these three programs have finished in the AP Top 25

Ole Miss--5 finishes in the Top 25
Miss St--4 finishes in the Top 25
Arkansas--2 finishes in the Top 25

If Ole Miss and Miss St can finish in the Top 25 four or five times in the last 16 years, don't you think Arkansas ought to have at least the same level of success?

Ole Miss and Miss St both play against brutal SEC schedules, yet they seem to have about twice the success as Arkansas lately.

I don't think it's the conference or talent base.

I think it just might be something else.....let's see, what could that be? Hmmmmm..........


oldbooniehog

That kinda puts things in perspective of how low our program has been.........Dammitt

[Sao Ming]

All through my childhood Mississippi and LSU were bigger rivals than any Texas school. JFB dropped those two games because he claimed we cared more about beating those two teams than we did winning SWC games. I don't think I could muster much enthusiasm for sticking it too Iowa State or K State.

OU and Texas both dealt with the embarrasment of having to beat those teams en route to their National Championships.  I cannot imagine how wearing the rings must feel for those kids knowing how they got it.

The Big 12 is the best example of what is wrong with college football.  Think about it.  If Texas and OU schedule 4 easy wins in OOC, then the winner of the Texas/OU game will almost certainly be undefeated.  Why do you think OU is so enraged over the Oregon deal?  They know that all they have to do is get by Texas and they would have been put back in the title game, even though they don't belong and would probably get killed, AGAIN.

Really?  Wrong with college football?  So when USC runs the table on the Pac 10 for the 4th straight year the Pac 10 is OK, but not the Big 12?  At least the B12 has a B12CG as the SEC does - the Pac 10, Big 10 do not.  How about Miami?  Florida St?  Get past Boston College or Va. Tech and your gold, right?  After all, 1 loss teams (when Miami/FlaSt. devour themselves early) still ahve a chance to go to the BCSCG (OSU/USC/OU/LSU/etc)  Funny thing about winning year in/year out.  You make those you dominate look like ass.  Not OU/UT's fault they dominate - just as it's not AUB/LSU's fault they are able to beat us regularly.     

[Pa-Paw]

Look folks, like it or not it's all about the money "and prestige". All of the big time schools are scheduling cup cakes, in some form or fashion, whether it's in conference or out. Blame it on the BCS, for lack of a better culprit. The deal is to get through the gauntlet and grabbing the golden ring. I'm of the opinion that fans for all big time schools want to play only the best competition, but the way things are sat up, it will not work for the athletic directors. The athletic directors have to walk the fine line to put butts in the seats and also win that brass ring.

[Root Hog]

All through my childhood Mississippi and LSU were bigger rivals than any Texas school. JFB dropped those two games because he claimed we cared more about beating those two teams than we did winning SWC games. I don't think I could muster much enthusiasm for sticking it too Iowa State or K State.

OU and Texas both dealt with the embarrasment of having to beat those teams en route to their National Championships.  I cannot imagine how wearing the rings must feel for those kids knowing how they got it.

The Big 12 is the best example of what is wrong with college football.  Think about it.  If Texas and OU schedule 4 easy wins in OOC, then the winner of the Texas/OU game will almost certainly be undefeated.  Why do you think OU is so enraged over the Oregon deal?  They know that all they have to do is get by Texas and they would have been put back in the title game, even though they don't belong and would probably get killed, AGAIN.

Really?  Wrong with college football?  So when USC runs the table on the Pac 10 for the 4th straight year the Pac 10 is OK, but not the Big 12?  At least the B12 has a B12CG as the SEC does - the Pac 10, Big 10 do not.  How about Miami?  Florida St?  Get past Boston College or Va. Tech and your gold, right?  After all, 1 loss teams (when Miami/FlaSt. devour themselves early) still ahve a chance to go to the BCSCG (OSU/USC/OU/LSU/etc)  Funny thing about winning year in/year out.  You make those you dominate look like ass.  Not OU/UT's fault they dominate - just as it's not AUB/LSU's fault they are able to beat us regularly.     

Really?  Look at USC's schedule.  They play Notre Dame every year.  This year they play Arkansas and Nebraska, two lower tier teams but still BCS conferences.  Texas plays Sam Houston State Saturday.

Pac 10 not as good as Big12?  Dallas Morining News Big12 beatwriter, Keith Whitmire, disagrees with you.  Head to head record of Pac10 5-0 disagrees with you.

Big12 Champ game is between Big12N and Big12S.  Last year's Big12N champion Colorado might have been last place in any other conference. 

[Root Hog]

Some of the things you point out are problems with college football.  What I said was that the Big 12 formula is the most glaring example of what is wrong.

[Root Hog]

I don't want to trade playing Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama etc., for playing Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa State etc. We committed to the SEC and I say we get our act together and become significant in the best college football conference in America. I'm proud to be in the SEC, and I don't wanna be known as the football program that ran off and hid in the Little 12.

I admit that I selfishly desire Arkansas to move to the B12. I’m just one guy over here in Texas who would enjoy watching them play as often as I could. I don’t know what the split is on pro or con, but it’s probably something like 60/40% in favor of the SEC. I’m with you with the fact that the SEC is probably the strongest conference of the two. You did purposely mention the trade off of the high rung SEC teams for the low rung teams in the B12. If you subtracted Arkansas from the SEC and placed them in the B12, the two conferences just might be very equal in strength. The biggest problem for either conference is the championship game, which adds to the chance of a loss.

He listed those teams to make a point.  He could have said Baylor, Kansas, K State, Missouri, Iowa State, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Colorado, Oklahoma State and even Nebraska.   Ten teams in the Big 12 are on the level of lower rung teams in the SEC.  There are six powerhouses in the SEC year in and year out.  There is a huge difference.

I know this is an exercise in futility but I will pose this directly as you Roothog...this question is glazed over more than a Krispy Kreme so far.

What makes winning in the Big 12 N WORSE than getting our ass continually kicked in the SEC W?  Nevermind the entire SEC, just focus on the W.

Its a very good point, SAO.  If those are my two choices, I would choose winning in the Big12 N.  But I don't believe that we will continually be a loser in the SEC.  If we are saddled with Nutt for eternity, we will be a perennial loser, but I still have hope that Nutt is gone this year and that Arkansas can compete in football.

[Sao Ming]

Ohio State?  Isn't UT/AR striking up the 'rivalry' again?  Are we now UT's SHSU?  Colorado took GA to the woodshed only to be bailed out in a Miracle on Markham like fashion.  OU beat OR...if you believe the NCAA referees board.  Again, your stats are OK, but does that explain why OU/UT each have NC's in such a horrible conference?  How is it even possible? 

Anyway.  Here is Auburns, LSU's TENN, FLA and GA's OOC for 2006:

AUB:  Wash. St.  Buffalo  Tulane  Arkansas St.  Grade:  D+
FLA:  Southern Miss.  Central Fla.  Western Carolina  Grade:  F
GEO:  W. Kentucky  UAB  Colorado  Georgia Tech  Grade:  B
LSU:  ULaLa  Arizona  Tulane  Fresno St.  Grade:  C+
TEN:  Cal  Air Force  Marshall  Memphis  Grade:  C+

Texas:  North Texas  Ohio St.  Rice  SHSU

Distinguish for me how UT's schedule (OOC) is any worse than the others above.
TEN: 

[Conway Cool Daddy]

Sao, Tennessee's schedule is much harder than LSU's.

[kuhog]

I remember the season before the Big 12 formed, the Big 8 had 4 teams (Nebraska, Colorado, K-State, & Kansas) finish the season in the top 10, while the old SWC had 3 teams (Texas, A&M, & Tech) finish in the top 20. That is 7 out of 12 teams finishing in the top 20. At the early stages of the Big 12, they were a "power conference". A conference that would easily compare to our beloved SEC.

Since then, the conference has been in a declining stage. But to think that these programs can't get back to where they once were, is considered naive. Every program has it's up and down years.

We call the conference the "little 12" right now, but eventually they will earn our respect. As they continue to pump billions of dollars for facility upgrades, and stadium expansions throughout the campuses, I fully expect to see in a few years the Big 12 to be on a similar playing field as the SEC.

[NaturalStateReb]

I heard Grant Hall talk about how much more money we make in the SEC over the big 12.  First of all this is not true.  It's about the same, in fact Missouri made as much money as we did last year. 

Secondly, even if it were true and like Grant said we have this great big nice stadium to play in I have one question.

Would you rather win in the old stadium than lose in the new stadium?

Isn't moving to the Big 12 in order to get more wins basically an admission that the program just couldn't hack it at the top level and had to move down?

I think moving to the Big 12 has virtually no upsides.  You might win a game or two more sometimes, but their bowl tie ins are horrible, the venues are miserable, most of the area isn't that crazy for football, and the money's not as good.

[kuhog]

Isn't moving to the Big 12 in order to get more wins basically an admission that the program just couldn't hack it at the top level and had to move down?

I think moving to the Big 12 has virtually no upsides.  You might win a game or two more sometimes, but their bowl tie ins are horrible, the venues are miserable, most of the area isn't that crazy for football, and the money's not as good.
[/quote]

We have not "hacked" it in last 15 years. My question is, if we don't "hack" it in the next 15 years, then what do we do? Stay at the bottom of the SEC?

[Hong Kong Sooey]

You are arguing my point, and I thank you for that.  You see, if we struggle in the Big12, we never win in the SEC.  We struggle period.  I guess I am wrong...we should just be strugglers in the "best" conference and be satisfied. 

Having said that, Go Nutt.  Can't get better, can't get worse.  We are Us, but we are SEC Us.

Right now we are like Vanderbilt for rednecks.  We don't win or excel academically.  We are known for chicken poop and Wal Mart.  Why would we ask for anything more?

[Root Hog]

Ohio State?  Isn't UT/AR striking up the 'rivalry' again?  Are we now UT's SHSU?  Colorado took GA to the woodshed only to be bailed out in a Miracle on Markham like fashion.  OU beat OR...if you believe the NCAA referees board.  Again, your stats are OK, but does that explain why OU/UT each have NC's in such a horrible conference?  How is it even possible? 

Anyway.  Here is Auburns, LSU's TENN, FLA and GA's OOC for 2006:

AUB:  Wash. St.  Buffalo  Tulane  Arkansas St.  Grade:  D+
FLA:  Southern Miss.  Central Fla.  Western Carolina  Grade:  F
GEO:  W. Kentucky  UAB  Colorado  Georgia Tech  Grade:  B
LSU:  ULaLa  Arizona  Tulane  Fresno St.  Grade:  C+
TEN:  Cal  Air Force  Marshall  Memphis  Grade:  C+

Texas:  North Texas  Ohio St.  Rice  SHSU

Distinguish for me how UT's schedule (OOC) is any worse than the others above.
TEN: 

I'm saying look at their schedules as a whole.  Year in and year out, Auburn will play at least two or three top ten programs in their SEC schedule alone.  Who cares about their OOC sched?  In the Big 12, Texas and OU are it.  There is no team, year in and year out, that can compete with them.  I applaud Texas for finally having the guts to schedule one good opponent per year, but have you heard how much they have cried about it?  This isn't something I dreamed up.  Read the Dallas Morning News.  Mack Brown is sick about playing Ohio State because he knows, and has said publicly, that if Texas played only cupcakes in the OOC, then if they get by OU, they can expect to be in the NC game again. 
   Do you think OU belonged in the NC game instead of AUburn in 2004?  Do you think OU belonged in the NC game instead of USC in 2003?   HELL NO.  They got there because of the joke of a conference they play in. 

[Fatty McGee]

So the solution is to tuck tail to a weaker conference instead of trying to become a force in the SEC.  Why not go all out and join the Sun Belt? 

Stupid comparison.

If you win the SEC and go undefeated, will you play in the National Championship game?  Yes.

If you win the Big 12 and go undefeated, will you play in the NC game?  Yes.

If you win the Pac 10 and go undefeated, will you play in the NC game?  Yes.

If the winner of each of those conferences has one loss, who gets left out? 

So, if your goal is to win the NC, which conference makes the LEAST sense to be in?

[Hogs of Hazzard]

Just my two cents. I just want to compete. SEC or B12. I would prefer the Big 12 because I could go to more away games. But, the real reason I think being in the B12 MIGHT improve the program has nothing to do with our opponents. It has everything to do with recruiting. Considering we get most of our athletes (I think) from Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma, and some Louisiana, it's hard to tell a great athlete from Texas that his parents may never see him play a game unless it's on national television. BUT, if we were to play OK and TX teams several times every year, it might help.

I also believe that we can be successful in the SEC. I think kids want to play in a high powered offense- which scores more points - which wins more games - which improves your record - which increases the status of your program - which increases the potential level of talent. If Louisville can do it, so can we.

That's all I've got.

Go Hogs!!

[Fatty McGee]

Another great point - recruiting.

And here's another - rivalries.  We have no natural rivals in the SEC, in large part because they already had rivals, and because our school is located so far away from the other schools.  We're not even second or third rival for most schools in the SEC.

[Hong Kong Sooey]

So the solution is to tuck tail to a weaker conference instead of trying to become a force in the SEC.  Why not go all out and join the Sun Belt? 

Stupid comparison.

If you win the SEC and go undefeated, will you play in the National Championship game?  Yes.

If you win the Big 12 and go undefeated, will you play in the NC game?  Yes.

If you win the Pac 10 and go undefeated, will you play in the NC game?  Yes.

If the winner of each of those conferences has one loss, who gets left out? 

So, if your goal is to win the NC, which conference makes the LEAST sense to be in?

I hate to fault your post, but I seem to remember an undefeated Auburn team not playing in the BCS Championship game just two years ago.  The fact is, playing in the SEC does nothing for Arkansas except guarantee that we not only are, but that we appear mediocre year in and year out.  A new coach might change that equation, a new conference surely would.  Both would win a NC in 5 years.

[Hong Kong Sooey]

Another great point - recruiting.

And here's another - rivalries.  We have no natural rivals in the SEC, in large part because they already had rivals, and because our school is located so far away from the other schools.  We're not even second or third rival for most schools in the SEC.

Recruiting Texas as part of the Big 12 would certainly be easier than it is in the SEC.  And, I can guarantee that we would have rivalries in the Big 12.  Several on here have posted that Texas never considered Arkansas a rivalry, but growing up in Texas, I can state differently.  And, does anyone think that OU would not come unglued if Arkansas beat them even once?  Imagine doing it 3 years straight and you have yourself a heck of a rival.

[Pa-Paw]

Another great point - recruiting.

And here's another - rivalries.  We have no natural rivals in the SEC, in large part because they already had rivals, and because our school is located so far away from the other schools.  We're not even second or third rival for most schools in the SEC.

Recruiting Texas as part of the Big 12 would certainly be easier than it is in the SEC.  And, I can guarantee that we would have rivalries in the Big 12.  Several on here have posted that Texas never considered Arkansas a rivalry, but growing up in Texas, I can state differently.  And, does anyone think that OU would not come unglued if Arkansas beat them even once?  Imagine doing it 3 years straight and you have yourself a heck of a rival.

AMEN, and AMEN!

[Fatty McGee]

So the solution is to tuck tail to a weaker conference instead of trying to become a force in the SEC.  Why not go all out and join the Sun Belt? 

Stupid comparison.

If you win the SEC and go undefeated, will you play in the National Championship game?  Yes.

If you win the Big 12 and go undefeated, will you play in the NC game?  Yes.

If you win the Pac 10 and go undefeated, will you play in the NC game?  Yes.

If the winner of each of those conferences has one loss, who gets left out? 

So, if your goal is to win the NC, which conference makes the LEAST sense to be in?

I hate to fault your post, but I seem to remember an undefeated Auburn team not playing in the BCS Championship game just two years ago.  The fact is, playing in the SEC does nothing for Arkansas except guarantee that we not only are, but that we appear mediocre year in and year out.  A new coach might change that equation, a new conference surely would.  Both would win a NC in 5 years.

Actually, that was my point.  Being in the "Best Conference" (which is debatable in some years) guarantees you nothing more than more chances to lose your shot at your ultimate goal.  You gain nothing, because if you win or are second in any of the BCS conferences you've got a damn fine shot of playing for a NC.

And if you're second (sometimes) or third and in the Big 12, you go to the Holiday Bowl.  And personally, I like San Diego much better than Orlando.

[Root Hog]

Moving from the SEC to the BIG 12 is a step DOWN.  No one does that.  No one leaves a conference that is littered with 90,000 seat stadiums to join one littered with 40,000 seat stadiums.  You can dream all you want about us playing a Mountain West or Big 12 type schedule but the UofA will never take a pay cut to move to a weaker conference.  That's not just the UofA, no one else would do it either.

[Fatty McGee]

It wouldn't be a pay cut.

In fact, the only difference between the conferences is that the middle tier of the SEC is typically stronger than the middle tier of the Big 12, although that is not always the case. 

There are bigger stadiums in the SEC as a whole, and that proves what?  That our facilities have more competition and are less likely to impress recruits from GA, FL, 'Bama?  That Tennessee has cut down the seat size to where it's really, really uncomfortable?  What's your point?

And we're not talking about the Mountain West, so that doesn't make sense.  We're talking about the Big 12.  Winning the MWC isn't going to put you in the NC or the BCS w/o quite a bit of luck.

[kuhog]

Moving from the SEC to the BIG 12 is a step DOWN.  No one does that.  No one leaves a conference that is littered with 90,000 seat stadiums to join one littered with 40,000 seat stadiums.  You can dream all you want about us playing a Mountain West or Big 12 type schedule but the UofA will never take a pay cut to move to a weaker conference.  That's not just the UofA, no one else would do it either.

Actually there are no 40,000 seat stadiums in the Big 12. More like 50,000 - still depressing though.

Here's a look at the rounded version comparisons:

Tenn. 102,000         Okl.     82,000
Ala.     92,000         A&M     81,000
LSU     92,000         Tex.     80,000
Geor.   92,000         Neb.    75,000
Flor.    91,000         Mizz.    62,000
Aub.    86,000         Colo.    54,000
S.Car.  80,000         Ok.St   53,000
Ark.     72,000         Tech.   50,000
Kent.    67,000        Bay.     50,000
Miss.    60,000         Kan.     50,000
Ms.St.  55,000         K.St.    50,000
Vand.   41,000         Iowa S. 50,000    
_____________        ______________
930,000 total            737,000 total

[Sao Ming]

I find it ironic that we are 7th in stadium size and yet something as arbitrary as size 'matters' to some in this argument.  Interesting who we are behind in terms of size as well.  Not to mention we have C.o.c.k. envy - they out-seat us by a good amount.  But hey, we are the SEC.  We're a proud member and noone can take that away from us.  Ugh.