From: mcconnel@b11.b11.ingr.com (Guy McConnell)
Subject: Re: SEC East shoots itself in the foot
Reply-To: mcconnel@b11.b11.ingr.com (Guy McConnell)
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:23:57 GMT

In article <398@rd1.interlan.com> tonyf@rm1.interlan.com (Tony Fernandez) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.181603.24175@b11.b11.ingr.com>, mcconnel@b11.b11.ingr.com (Guy McConnell) writes:
>>In article <Bx63po.Erw@encore.com> jfrederi@encore.com (Justin Frederich) writes:
>>>
>>>There is a BIG difference in scheduling a team and playing one in a Bowl.
>>>The fact we played Alabama in the Sugar Bowl has nothing to do with
>>>the Tide refusing to play Miami during the regular season. I think it
>>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>    And y'all wonder why Miami fans got the nickname "blowhards"? 
>>The closest thing to a chance to play each other that I can recall
>>is when Miami was shopping for a conference.  They elected to go to
>>one they felt they could dominate instead of coming to the SEC and
>>take the greater risk of being beaten on any given week.  If there
>
>I can't believe you guys are still upset about this.  

    I, for one, am not upset at all about this.  I *am* a little
weary of hearing how everyone in the world trembles at the prospect
of facing the fading canes.

>First of all, the
>SEC never, NEVER invited Miami to join.  In fact, they were so concerned 
>with getting FSU that they never considered Miami until after FSU had joined
>the ACC.  By that time, the Big East had already approached Miami and
>everything was pretty much settled.  And don't forget that basketball was
>a big reason why Miami wanted to join a conference.  

    And, as I indicated, Miami got the type of conference they were
shopping for.  But of course (in your best Wizard of Oz intonation) you
can't blame the canes, you can't blame the canes, you can't...

>And as for dominating a conference, if you take a look at the polls, you will
>notice that there are 3 Big East teams in the Top 10.  And how many SEC teams
>are in the Top 10?  Just 1, 

    Well, there is "just 1" that really matters to me anyway.  It
just so happens that that "1" is the same you are talking about. 
There were more SEC teams in the top 10 during the year but other
SEC teams have knocked them out.  Business as usual in the SEC.

>and what is more impressive is that the SEC has
>12 teams, while the Big East has only 8 teams.

    I must say that the impressiveness of this one (as well as the
relevance) totally escapes me.  What does it matter how many teams
the Big Easy has?

>I personally am glad that Miami didn't go to the SEC for the simple reason
>that those schools have refused time and time again to play Miami in any
>sort of home and home series.  I can't remember the last time that an
>SEC school other than Florida played Miami in the Orange Bowl.  

    Coming to the SEC would have given them the chance to eventually
play *all* of the SEC in a home and home series.  Once again though,
there in only your accusation that "those schools have refused time
and time again to play Miami in any sort of home and home series." 
Where are the facts?  Has Miami tried to play Alabama in a home and
home series?  I honestly don't know but, as I indicated before, I
seriously doubt that Alabama would have declined.  Why should a
school with the tradition of Alabama refuse to play an upstart?

>I don't think that Alabama and the rest of the SEC schools just refuse to
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Many things are now explained.

>play Miami.  They refuse to play anyone good outside the Southeast.
>What more evidence do you need than just the fact that with very few
>exceptions (LSU-Texas A&M, Florida-FSU), SEC schools play very weak out
>of conference schedules.

    Powers come and powers go.  A traditional patsy may become a
dynasty (witness Miami) and vice-versa.  Besides, when you play in
what is traditionally the toughest conference in the nation, and the
*only* one with a playoff, as well as playing 8 teams within it (as
many as the *total* teams in the Big Easy), there is little room for other 
games.  This is (hopefully) the face of things to come; the battles
will be fought within the conferences and the winners will meet in a
playoff system in which a true national champion can be crowned
instead of a "mythical" one as it is now.

>>to having the chance for a meeting this year in Miami's court. 
>>Alabama is locked into the Sugar (if they win the conference) and
>>Miami is welcome to come on down again.
>
>I can't wait.  I just hope the Sugar Bowl people don't invite ND again 
>instead.  

   Me too.  And I hope Miami won't elect to stay home and try and
extend their home winning streak.

>>>Can you now begin to understand that it's not Miami's choice on which
>>>Bowl - even with the Alliance rules ???  
>>
>>    Sure.  Poor, misunderstood canes.  Nothing is their fault.
>>
>If Alabama and Miami win out, the only way that they may not play each
>other is if the Sugar Bowl invites FSU or ND instead of Miami.  There are
>only three reasons for Miami not to accept the bid and neither will 
>apply since Miami didn't go to the Sugar last year, didn't play Alabama 
>during the season and the Orange payoff is comparable to the Sugar.  So if
>the game is not realized, it sure won't be Miami's fault.  

    Yes, I know.  You can't blame the canes, you can't blame the
canes, you can't blame...

--
Guy McConnell  guy@mspe5.b11.ingr.com