The Goat Pen

Old Grumpy Fart. State run schools should support other state run schools no matter their massive profits. Its sad how the big schools in the state keep the brothers down. Denying exceptional Alabama High School Athletes who aren't good enough to play at UA or AU the chance to earn a college scholarship and play close to home in front of family and friends makes me sick. Shame on you AA for denying young Alabama kids a chance at a future.

No they shouldn't. There is no reason one state school should artificially support another state school's athletic department. Fuck that, that school, its students and alumni should support it or let it die.

There is no reason Cincinnati should send money to Akron or whatever. It's idiotic.

I'd be OK with the state of Bama requiring Auburn and Bama to play an in-state team (at Home of course) to pump revenue back into the lesser schools programs. Its not like Auburn or Bama would ever lose to UAB or USA

I wouldn't. It would be complete socialist horseshit. If they want to play them, fine. Artificially mandating the support of a program its own students don't care about?

No fucking way.

[img2]http://blogs-images.forbes.com/briangof ... 12/uab.jpg[/img2]

I"m not sure I'd be throwing socialism around when talking about state run colleges but to each his own

Given that Alabama has played Western Carolina in recent seasons I don't see why the Todd wouldn't play Bammy-Hammy a time or 2.

I'd bet that if Mike Price was still Head Coach at Alabama that he'd have no problem scheduling UAB.

If Bama or Auburn wants to play them, fine. If they don't, there should be no mandate. There is zero profit in Bama or AU propping up UAB.

Are we gonna mandate that each state school support their instate teams in all sports? How many basketball teams are there in Kentucky or North Carolina? Bet you could fill up a schedule with those teams. How about a state mandate?

In Ohio, we can mandate that Ohio State play Cinci, Akron, Bowling Green, Kent State, Miami(Oh), Ohio U., and Toledo ...which would cut down on the conference games.

In Alabama, we'd play UAB, Troy, South Al, and Auburn...so no more OoC games against VaTech, Wva, Ckemsom, Michigam, Wiscinsin, and the like for the expressed purpose of propping up a team its own students and alums couldn't care less. About.

Yeah. No thanks. That's the height of idiocy.

AlabamAlum wrote:If Bama or Auburn wants to play them, fine. If they don't, there should be no mandate. There is zero profit in Bama or AU propping up UAB.

Are we gonna mandate that each state school support their instate teams in all sports? How many basketball teams are there in Kentucky or North Carolina? Bet you could fill up a schedule with those teams. How about a state mandate?

In Ohio, we can mandate that Ohio State play Cinci, Akron, Bowling Green, Kent State, Miami(Oh), Ohio U., and Toledo ...which would cut down on the conference games.

In Alabama, we'd play UAB, Troy, South Al, and Auburn...so no more OoC games against VaTech, Wva, Ckemsom, Michigam, Wiscinsin, and the like for the expressed purpose of propping up a team its own students and alums couldn't care less. About.

Yeah. No thanks. That's the height of idiocy.

I don't think anyone is pushing the idea of playing them all, but if you're going to put cupcake filler teams on your schedule, why not keep the economy local?

Well, if you mandate one, why not all? They all need cash.

But the reason why a Bama or Auburn don't want to play them is simple: there are zero positives for Bama or Auburn and many potential negatives.

Aka, skeered

Yeah. Sure. That's it.

It's either that or you hate poor people.

AlabamAlum wrote:Well, if you mandate one, why not all? They all need cash.

But the reason why a Bama or Auburn don't want to play them is simple: there are zero positives for Bama or Auburn and many potential negatives.

More of a negative than playing Western Carolina?

Yes.

the negative is that in the off chance Bama has an off year and UAB were to have a competitive game with them, then Saban might not lose an in-state player to UAB.

all serious program rationalize like that - but Bama and Auburn are so far off the scale in terms of competitiveness with other in state programs it would happen maybe once every 25 years

No.


The negatives are that we can play the Western Carolinas, or whomever, and they'll never want a home and home. UAB would. Horrible idea. Or they'd want an even split of the money instead of a check for a $1million or whatever. Again, horrible idea. And Western Carolina will never fill the local airwaves with how horribly Big Bad Bama (or Auburn) treats them.


In the end, congrats, you all here care much more for UAB football than the average UAB alum or student. Go Blazers, guys!


[img2]http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9C1YFT6Ao3U/0.jpg[/img2]

Play them at home every other year then. Alabama still will make a hefty financial profit and have an easy scrimmage.

"If UAB students and alums won't support it, it should die."

What if nobody in here supports you? Do you see where I'm going with this?