Skip to content

Big 12, SEC form postseason agreement

Tyler Wilson, Alvin Bailey, Jordan Voelker AP

Given the consolidation of power in college football over the past couple of years, highlighted by realignment moves and TV deals, I suppose the following bit of news shouldn’t come as much of a surprise.

That said, it’s an interesting move nonetheless.

First reported by Tony Barnhart, the Big 12 and SEC have agreed to a five-year postseason alliance beginning following the 2014 season that will pair the champion of each conference in a to-be-determined bowl game separate from the four-team playoff that is inevitably coming. In the (likely) event that one or both of the conference champions from each league is in the playoff, “another deserving team” will be selected.

“A new January bowl tradition is born,” said SEC Commissioner Mike Slive. “This new game will provide a great matchup between the two most successful conferences in the BCS era and will complement the exciting postseason atmosphere created by the new four-team model. Most importantly, it will provide our student-athletes, coaches and fans with an outstanding bowl experience.”

“Our goal is to provide the fans across the country with a New Year’s Day prime-time tradition,” said acting Big 12 Conference Commissioner Chuck Neinas. “This is a landmark agreement between two of the most successful football conferences during the BCS era to stage a postseason event. The creation of this game featuring the champions of the Big 12 and SEC will have tremendous resonance in college football.”

Two sites that have already been connected to the agreement are the Dallas Cowboys stadium and the Sugar Bowl, with the latter being named specifically by CBSSports. In related news, the Fiesta Bowl, which has hosted the Big 12 champion vs. an at-large, is sweating.

According to the Sporting News, the goal of new bowl is to be a stand-alone game with its own TV contract and “unthinkable” revenue potential.

The easiest comparison to the alliance is the Rose Bowl, which has conference tie-ins to the Big Ten and Pac-12. But, unlike the Rose Bowl, the agreement for a postseason game between the Big 12 and SEC champs has no precedence. History shows in the last 10 years, at least one of the champions of the Big 12 or SEC finished in the top four of the final regular-season BCS rankings, and consequently, would’ve been involved in a playoff semifinal had major college football supported that format.

Go back further and the same results apply all the way to the formation of the Big 12 in 1996.

The point is this is nothing more than a security blanket for each conference to ensure the best possible matchup in the extremely unlikely event that the champion from at least one of the leagues is left out of a four-team playoff. Should a playoff consist of only four conference champs, those odds decrease even more.

If anything, the agreement is a symbol of what college football has become: a separation of four powerful conferences from everybody else.

The ramifications of such are widespread. The Big East? Out, of course. The ACC? Also on shaky ground. The Florida State-to-Big 12 rumors have flared and cooled over the past week or so, but this latest news surely reignites the speculation in a way that wasn’t there before.

How about independent Notre Dame? To be determined.

We don’t think it has significant near-term consequences for Notre Dame,” AD Jack Swarbrick said.

But long-term? That’s not as clear.

And to think some of us [/raises hand] naively thought the realignment mess was dormant.

This video is no longer available. Click here to watch more NBC Sports videos!
Permalink 58 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Atlantic Coast Conference, Big 12 Conference, Independents, Notre Dame Fighting Irish, Rumor Mill, Southeastern Conference, Top Posts
58 Responses to “Big 12, SEC form postseason agreement”
  1. joshuavkidd says: May 18, 2012 12:20 PM

    bowl (a.k.a $$$) = the source of all the problems in NCAA football’s version of a post-season.

  2. drummerhoff says: May 18, 2012 12:48 PM

    The Orange, Fiesta, Cotton & Rose Bowls … for various reasons … can’t be happy.

    Orange & Fiesta loses access to a pool of higher quality opponent.
    Cotton loses #2s from the SEC & Big 12 (i think).
    Rose Bowl now has on & off field competition for direct marketing comparison & bargaining among the conferences heads.

    BK, Like Frankenstein’s monster, realignment is ‘Alive”!

  3. seanmmartin says: May 18, 2012 12:57 PM

    Just because you can, does not mean you should.

  4. Deb says: May 18, 2012 1:03 PM

    I’m so confused. Why are they doing this now when everyone’s supposed to be working on a playoff scenario? So does this mean the winners of the Big 12 and SEC are going to meet in a New Year’s bowl before the playoffs? If I were a coach, I wouldn’t want my team meeting in a meaningless bowl game before the playoffs and risking injuries to key players that could cost the team a championship.

    My ultimate goal is an 8- or 12-game playoff featuring the top-ranked teams based on the most objective computer-ranking model possible. Every day it seems we move further from that ideal.

  5. overratedgators says: May 18, 2012 1:23 PM


    I think Ben addressed that scenario:

    “In the (likely) event that one or both of the conference champions from each league is in the playoff, ‘another deserving team’ will be selected.”

  6. seanmmartin says: May 18, 2012 1:25 PM

    It’s like they’re creating their own national championship. This is so ignorant. Ignant.

  7. Deb says: May 18, 2012 1:28 PM

    @overratedgators …

    Oops … sorry, I missed that line. Thanks for correcting my oversight. That makes me feel a little better. But the whole thing still seems goofy in light of what we’re (supposed to be) trying to achieve with playoffs. Guess they’re trying to have playoffs while keeping the bowl traditions alive. But it still feels as though we’re moving away from playoffs as I’d envisioned them in the future.

  8. rcbn says: May 18, 2012 1:43 PM

    Check out this tweet Matt Hayes ‏ _;Big12 goes from deathbed, to reaching 12 (FSU and Notre Dame) or 14 (VaTech and Miami) and becoming clear No.1.

    I think it will be great if they could get these 4 to join and become the Big 14 and SEC!!

  9. alligatorsnapper says: May 18, 2012 1:45 PM

    Ben: “And to think some of us [/raises hand] naively thought the realignment mess was dormant.” Best line in a somewhat shocking story. What? What a shame.

    Thought we had playoffs but the top two conferences in terms of conference schedules, power rankings, post-season records, etc. have to have an agreement to make sure one of their top teams would not be left out of a playoff scenario? That demonstrates some concern or fear on the part of the SEC and Big 12 that a potential to be left out is there. If the rankings are determined by coaches poll or some other silly nonsense and not computer rankings, taking into consideration a strength of schedule, they should be concerned. This just adds to the confusion and I thought I understood what was going to happen…here we go again.

  10. drummerhoff says: May 18, 2012 1:50 PM

    The point of this is the new divid between the haves and have nots.

    The 4 conferences are joined and taking the best bowls and biggest cut of money.

    With this news, ACC members are on the phone as we breathe.

  11. mountaineer50415 says: May 18, 2012 1:51 PM

    The only thing anyone knows for sure is that no one likes the way things are at this time.
    I have read many suggestions, which have merrit. I have also read many which I consider as stupid. Not sure what would be the best idea.
    With this one, it is simply for five years. With the top four, it is unsure the length of time once approved.
    I am for change. Maybe it will not be setteled in my life time. Hopefully it will.
    Maybe trying new things for a few years will help everyone know which of the trials is the best.
    If honest, no one knows for sure what is the best way to go. In every situation, it will be decided by a vote. However, what ever happens with the SEC and the Big 12 should be up to those two conferences. If other conferences want to do the same, more power to you.

  12. beefalo23 says: May 18, 2012 1:54 PM

    Money, money, money, money, money…blah blah blah

  13. urfinished says: May 18, 2012 1:56 PM

    If Matt Hayes is right, good night ACC.
    WVU very lucky to get in when they did.
    The Big12 would take Clemson, VT, Miami, FSU, and maybe even NCSU over them if given a choice. Crazy change of events and good for them to get in early.

  14. fitz66 says: May 18, 2012 2:00 PM

    Shame on them for trying to increase their profits. They should spread the wealth to the Big East and ACC! 😛

  15. dickroy says: May 18, 2012 2:04 PM

    Howdy Deb!
    Nice to hear from you again.

    I have been with you on wanting playoffs for a long time.
    I would like to see an eight team playoff.

    How about our Steelers finally addressing the Offensive line?

  16. weavergm says: May 18, 2012 2:18 PM

    I think the Rose Bowl and the Sugar Bowl are quietly moving themselves to the top of the pyramid at the expense of the Orange, Fiesta etc. If you read this in light of earlier reports that the bowls with conference tie-ins to the #1 and #2 ranked teams might host the semifinals (with the championship game bid out), rather than a fixed rotation, it’s easy to see the Rose and Sugar hosting the semifinals almost every year. That will be especially true if these four power conferences continue to consolidate the best programs (like Florida State).

  17. deadeye says: May 18, 2012 2:19 PM

    “And to think some of us [/raises hand] naively thought the realignment mess was dormant.”


    Yes it was naive. Realignment will not die until several mega conferences emerge and a legit playoff system evolves into existence. For half a century college football has been leaving money on the table during the month of December. And the NFL has capitalized.

    But those days are over, college football is going to start collecting the revenue it should have been generating all along.

    And yes it is a big business. It always has been.

  18. Deb says: May 18, 2012 2:23 PM

    @dickroy …

    Hi!! I’m with you on the eight-team playoff. From the comments, it seems most people posting here would have preferred something like that. And many of us want the playoff teams to come from a straight 1-8 (or 1-4) ranking based on the most impartial computer model possible. But it seems the powers of college football are determined to create the most convoluted mess imaginable.

    By contrast, this is the best off-season we’ve had on the pro side in several years. Not only have we finally gotten rid of Arians and hired a real OC, but we actually addressed our greatest area of weakness in splendid fashion. Now if we can just get through camp without Willie Colon tearing something 😉

  19. Deb says: May 18, 2012 2:25 PM

    @dickroy …

    You knew we’d moved Colon from tackle to guard, right? Hallelujah!!!

  20. dickroy says: May 18, 2012 2:36 PM

    @ Deb
    Yes I knew that. I also agree with mess the powers that be in college football are determined to create.
    I don’t understand this Big ten Pinstripe
    Bowl tie in thing I read something about at Yankee Stadium.

    Also I was reading your post this morning from last night defending the majority of Alabama fans, from some idiot. You won!!
    Love reading your post.

  21. derekjetersmansion says: May 18, 2012 2:57 PM

    Here’s the solution:

    If it’s BCS conference winners, then give the 2 highest ranked conference winners a bye.

    Then, 3 v. 6 and 4 v. 5 play the week before Christmas.

    Semis are played Christmas Eve. Lowest seed to win play the 1 seed.

    Winners of semis play in National Championship New Year’s Day.

    The brilliant part is that then the 5 BCS bowls rotate around sponsoring the playoff games. For example, Rose could be sponsoring the NC one year, one of the first round games the next 2 years, then the semis the next 2 years.

    That took about 5 minutes to figure out.

  22. seanmmartin says: May 18, 2012 3:09 PM

    “First reported by Tony Barnhart, the Big 12 and SEC have agreed to a five-year postseason alliance beginning following the 2014 season that will pair the champion of each conference in a to-be-determined bowl game separate from the four-team playoff that is inevitably coming. In the (likely) event that one or both of the conference champions from each league is in the playoff, “another deserving team” will be selected.”

    You should specify that the “other deserving teams” would be selected to play in the SEC v BIGXII matchup and not the four-team playoff. Confused me for an hour.

  23. drummerhoff says: May 18, 2012 3:15 PM


    ‘spreading the wealth*’ is what saved the Big 12 and put them in position to be the #1 conference in the land.

    * equal revenue sharing.

  24. normtide says: May 18, 2012 4:12 PM

    Meanwhile, the B1G slides further into oblivion…

  25. burntorangehorn says: May 18, 2012 4:16 PM

    I’m a big fan of bowls, and am glad to see a solid matchup of conference champions for seasons in which neither is in the playoff scenario. Granted, most years we’ll see the SEC and/or Big 12 champ in the four-team playoff. I have to wonder if they’ll take the runners-up from these two conferences when the champs are in the playoffs, or if they’ll go through the traditional at-large process. I generally prefer an at-large process, and the bowls generally tend to try to take such runners-up from their affiliated conferences if they’re in the picture.

    I dislike Jerryworld (mostly because of Jerry), but think it would be a great place for a BCS-tier bowl. I also think it would make a whole lot more sense than Glendale for the Big 12 #1 tie-in destination, and it also makes sense with the SEC’s new presence in Texas. The Sugar Bowl would be a decent tie-in as well, and the locale obviously makes for a great place for bowl-goers to party, but it’s not a particularly big venue (73-76K). That might be moot, as they only sold 64K tickets this past January, but that might also have had to do with the teams involved.

    The Fiesta Bowl somehow established itself as a major bowl in the 1970s, but I really don’t know how they attracted those top-tier matchups. Maybe it was their payouts and good participation packages for teams (payout, accommodations, practice facilities, etc.). But what’s it offer, other than the great golf scene and weather in early January (65 degree avg. high)? Someone please correct me if there’s another big draw, other than perhaps the usual big shopping centers. With the Pac 12’s inexorable Rose Bowl tie, a Jerryworld BCS-tier status would mean that no BCS-AQ-level conference that has a regional interest in Glendale. Consolidate the best teams of the WAC, MWC, Sun Belt, CUSA, and BYU, and proceed with the elimination of BCS-AQ status (as seems to be imminent), and I think that’d be the only sensible conference champion tie-in for the Fiesta in the future. Barring that, the Fiesta should essentially swap places with the Cotton to end up in the second tier, which would likely also include the Capital One, Gator, Outback, Sun, Insight, Alamo, and Champs Sports Bowls, based on highest recent payouts.

  26. Deb says: May 18, 2012 4:33 PM

    @dickroy …

    Thank you. :)

  27. bradentonbuc says: May 18, 2012 5:26 PM

    This will wind up being the 2nd vs the 1st or 2nd in most years. Still will make a heck of a matchup.

  28. jimw81 says: May 18, 2012 6:18 PM

    Notre dame is better off joining the big ten at this point if they want to complete and get a bowl bid.

  29. halbert53 says: May 18, 2012 7:41 PM

    Love the proposed bowl, even if most years either the Big 12 and/or SEC runner-up would represent their conference. The same thing happens to other BCS bowls with conference tie-ins when conference members play in national title game.

    At one time the major bowls were good. Then the quality got diluted because so many big bowls had a conference tie-in and (other than the Rose Bowl) major conference champions weren’t playing head to head. Bowl games are fine as long as they are not used to determine national champion like at present. But the rationale for selecting the matchups and leaving some deserving teams out of major bowls has perverted what should be a good thing. What I also dislike about the major bowls is the bowl games charging for the bands, etc to attend. Essentially the SEC and Big 12 are cutting out the middle man, much like PAC 10 and Big 10 with the Rose Bowl. As an SEC fan who lived in Big 12 states several years, I would much rather have seen Alabama and LSU playing other conference champions than each other.

  30. cornedbeefhashinacan says: May 18, 2012 8:47 PM

    There should be a six team playoff using the four power conference champs plus two at large bids with first round byes to the top two seeds and seeds determined by BCS ranking system

  31. poison66 says: May 18, 2012 10:22 PM

    I would love to see an Oklahoma State light up the SEC and those dreadful SEC offenses, this rocks for the Big 12!!!!

  32. normtide says: May 18, 2012 11:57 PM

    I would love to see mars up close, I got about the same odds as okst lighting up a good SEC defense. The SEC has bad offenses is a myth. Bama and LSU put up loads off points, vs SEC defenses, vs a B1G team, PAC team, BE team. In fact, only Bama and LSU could stop the other. SEC offenses impose their wills. They don’t have to throw very often, they can bulldoze your d-line. OKST could score, but vs Bama, LSU, ARK, they may get 17. Ball control would keep their O off the field. Freak pass rushers would eat the QB’s lunch. And, if offense really sold tickets, what happenend to the arena league?

  33. Deb says: May 19, 2012 3:09 AM

    @normtide …

    Your pretty bright. I like that in a football commenter. Pity it’s so rare 😉

  34. mountaineer50415 says: May 19, 2012 8:47 AM

    I see no reason for the SEC or the Big 12 to verbally abuse each other. I for one am looking forward to playing Alabama. That will be the best game in college football, as far as I am concerned. I do hope that WV wins the game. However, there is no way I can predict a one sided game. If I thought it would be like it was with Clemson, I would not be looking forward to it.
    Go Mountaineers no matter who you play. Always play every down.
    Until the big game, Roll Tide

  35. 35longmiles says: May 19, 2012 9:05 AM

    What’s that….what’s that in the rear view mirror? Is it a badly eroded football program with a very murky future? Oh, my bad, it’s just Miami. In the chess match that is college football realignment, UM is nothing more than a forgotten pawn that sits across the board from where the real strategy is taking place. Warms my heart. Suck it UM!

  36. poison66 says: May 19, 2012 12:47 PM

    Lmao @ Normtide, Cowboys could put up 30+ points against those teams. They can pass AND run equally well, and call the plays at the line. SEC defenses would be wore out, as they wouldn’t be able to substsitute. The SEC offenses are so vanilla they wouldn’t score much….

  37. bullneck11 says: May 19, 2012 12:50 PM


    The SEC , Big 12, Big 10, and Pac 12 are the four biggest and most powerful conferences. The BCS Championship Game has basically consisted of these Four (4) conferences since it came into existence.

    The ACC has been left out of the BCS Title Game, and so has the Big East. Notre Dame has become irrelevant in recent years , so the Champion of the Rose and the New (SEC/Big12) will basically be the semi and finalist for the Championship game.

    The only thing left to do if you want to include every single major team is to play the ACC and Big East against each other to have the 3rd player in the Championship. You could have one of the three champions get a bye to the Championship game with a flip of the coin.

    As far as Notre Dame, who really cares, but if they want to be considered, then they need to get off of the fence and join a conference like everyone else. I for one am rather sick of Notre Dame getting special treatment like the are the Prime-donas of College Football.

  38. bertenheim says: May 19, 2012 12:52 PM

    The SEC and Big 12 are saying to the Big Ten and Pac 12, “We’ll release our champions from their bowl obligation for a playoff. Will you do the same with respect to the Rose Bowl?”

  39. Deb says: May 19, 2012 2:34 PM

    @bullneck11 …

    What you posted would work. I don’t think much of the Big East, but Pittsburgh was once a relevant football school. Several ACC schools have significant football histories. I’d say they’re the fifth conference after the big four.

    Completely agree with you on Notre Dame football–and BYU as well. However, I’d still like to see the playoff participants taken straight from the rankings 1-4 (since we can only have four). I know the conferences will never let that happen, but that’s always going to be my preference.

  40. normtide says: May 19, 2012 2:40 PM

    Okst couldn’t stop ISU, they want no part of Bama or LSU. Okst has a good team, much like Texas did, or Oregon, or OSU, and OU. None of them did much vs the top SEC team they played. That fact you mentioned their run game and defense proves your foolish delusions. Heres to you seeking help

  41. Deb says: May 19, 2012 3:10 PM

    @normtide …

    Apparently poison66 has never watched an Alabama or LSU game. I’m wondering whether he’s ever watched a Cowboys game.

  42. normtide says: May 19, 2012 3:31 PM

    I have said all along, the 12 is easily tyre second best league, and I have respect for them. But, saying any 12 team plays better defense or has a better running game than SEC teams is laughable. I love this new deal, it makes the PAC-B1G rose bowl deal second tier.

  43. Deb says: May 19, 2012 3:34 PM

    @normtide …

    Yes, I respect the Big 12, too. But those comments about defense and running games fly in the face of what their teams do. Weird.

  44. 35longmiles says: May 19, 2012 4:00 PM

    Just swap phone numbers already.

  45. Deb says: May 19, 2012 5:04 PM

    @35longmiles …

    Right … because admitting a common respect for the Big 12 and SEC defenses is–woo-hoo–such a sexually charged conversation :roll:

  46. florida727 says: May 19, 2012 9:02 PM

    Deb says:
    May 18, 2012 1:03 PM
    My ultimate goal is an 8- or 12-game playoff featuring the top-ranked teams based on the most objective computer-ranking model possible.


    While YOU are working on YOUR ultimate goal, consider this, which makes far more sense, and utilizes the existing major bowls. Unfortunately, I can’t claim credit for it. I just thought it was the best idea floated out there.

    SIX teams in a playoff. Why six? Simple. Team 3 plays Team 6, and Team 4 plays Team 5, in TWO of the four existing major bowls. The winners advance to face #1 and #2 in the remaining two existing major bowls. Winners of those semi-finals play in the existing BCS National Championship game.

    Made the most sense from the perspective of not adding any more bowl games to the mix (there’s obviously enough of them), not adversely affecting the existing major/BCS bowl games since the “quarterfinals” and “semifinals” would rotate, and, having the BCS NC game maintains its place as the spectacle the NCAA wants it to be.

  47. Deb says: May 20, 2012 2:07 PM

    @florida727 …

    You couldn’t have just suggested that without throwing in the completely unnecessary nastiness about “while YOU are working on YOUR ultimate goal”? Geez, someone call me when they figure out how to remove the stick from the behind of the average CFT commenter.

  48. suprmous says: May 20, 2012 8:57 PM

    Deb, for argument’s sake please explain some things to me: why if you don’t want to be accused constantly criticizing others do you constantly put up the icon of rolling your eyes, find it necessary to act as if your opinion is the only one that holds any type of validity and some of us aren’t anything but peons, if some of us are genuinely nice to your friends you jump on your friends for bein nice to us, and if ever you don’t agree with anybody do you have come off soundin as if we’re all a bunch of losers. I’ve not only wondered this but had the brothers to ask if I’ve caused that much of a problem. You know it gets kinda sorta hard to explain to 3 who weigh over 275 that I’m just voicin my opinion guys and she’s voicin her’s.

  49. Deb says: May 21, 2012 12:43 AM


    Sorry I don’t have time to review my entire history on both sites, but here’s the result of a quick search:

    dickroy says: (Tennessee fan)
    Jan 15, 2012 1:57 PM
    I will say one thing Deb. As educated as you are and also very good with you’re way with words, and structuring sentences, you never place your self above others, even this old Tennessee boy. Thats one of the qualities I love about you. Love reading the post that you submit. I will remain a fan of you always, except for the 3rd weekend in October! Okay?

    thecrazyasianinseccountry says: (LSU fan)
    Jan 10, 2012 8:06 AM
    Deb will be the first to give her congratulating .., and she has no problem that out, or pointing out the fact that she support us for whatever reason. Deb will no doubt praised LSU for their successful season.

    mswravens says: (Ravens fan–to Pittsburgh as Auburn is to Alabama)
    Apr 28, 2012 4:34 PM
    @Deb – all class as usual! That was a cheap shot on my part. Thanks for not responding in kind!

    cometkazie says: (LSU fan)
    Jan 10, 2012 2:20 PM
    Deb says @cometkazie …
    You are a man among bottomfeeders, my friend!!!!
    The feeling is mutual. It says something about the bottomfeeders when a congratulatory message gets thumbs down. We know who the real fans are.

    ppdoc13 says: (Ravens fan)
    May 11, 2012 12:44 AM
    @deb – you know Deb – it is kind of sad to say, but you are one of the only Steeler fans that post on this board that has any class or dignity.

    drwhd says: (Liberty fan)
    May 16, 2012 4:18 PM
    I appreciate the courage of your clarification. It shows great character.
    May 18, 2012 2:24 PM
    In regard to the matter of sportsmanship, I am in full agreement with you re: your bozo response. You Go Girl.

    ahostiletakeover says: (Ravens fan)
    Nov 7, 2011 11:54 AM
    As for the actual Steelers and their few classy fans like Deb, great game one of the best of the year.

    CKL says: (Patriots fan)
    May 8, 2012 11:32 AM
    I’d much rather respect an intelligent fan like Deb than someone like you though so there’s that.

    northsidesteel says: (Steelers fan)
    Feb 13, 2012 8:15 PM
    Deb, I have to tell you how much I appreciate your comments on the whole, not to mention the way you handle the Steeler haters. I am sure that you have noticed as I have that many of our Steeler compatriots are not as lucid and even handed as you have shown to be.

    bunkmcnulty says: (Ravens fan)
    Jan 12, 2012 10:22 AM
    You’re reading Deb wrong. As a Ravens fan, I feel she’s the most fair minded Steelers fan I have seen on PFT. … Believe me, I am not quick to protect Steeler fans. But Deb is fair.

    papabush88 says: (USC fan)
    May 19, 2012 11:07 PM
    I side with Deb. For two reasons: 1.) She is pretty fair most of the time. 2.) I have 1,000 times more respect for Alabama than I do for auburn or LSU.

    edgarpoe2 says: (Ravens fan)
    Jan 13, 2012 5:35 AM
    You are still a homer and there is nothing wrong with that. You support your team well. I admire that about you. You also are often able to admit when you are wrong – example: The comments you made in this article, after you realized you were duped.

    huddyk says:
    Aug 16, 2011 11:51 AM
    Hey Deb. I really like your post and your willingness to call it for what it is. Last year we debated Colt if you remember and the “intangibles” I felt he had vs. your thoughts on him being soft and “not going to make it”. I applaud you for seeing things as they are rather than as you want them to be. Good debate then and I for one appreciate your commentary even when I disagree with it.

    thegamecocker says: (South Carolina fan)
    Apr 20, 2012 5:23 PM
    Deb – you’re a good sport and I respect and enjoy reading your posts.

    luvyablue says: (Texas fan)
    Aug 16, 2011 2:01 PM
    @ Deb
    i’m with Huddyk in saying that it’s nice to see someone on the boards who can accept reality even when it means the Steelers need to keep a’look over their shoulder. i always enjoy reading your comments- even if i don’t always agree. keep on keepin’ on, Deb!

    Kave Krew says:
    Apr 19, 2011 8:31 AM
    Nice job Deb….
    And i vote for spinoff

    So sorry these positive opinions–not one of which came from the same commenter–don’t gel with the extremely objective opinions of your … three brothers.

    Now …

  50. seanmmartin says: May 21, 2012 12:46 AM


  51. Deb says: May 21, 2012 12:49 AM

    This is the thread that started this entire horror show–one that you’ve misrepresented repeatedly.

    We were all having a perfectly pleasant conversation when ladyhuckleberry–apparently a personal friend of yours–jumped into the conversation out of nowhere and made a bonkers comment about “you all” chasing people off again. She was not—as you so often claim—defending you, nor was she addressing herself to me. She was doing what she did all the time … throwing hissy fits at nameless people she thought were picking on her.

    ladyhuckleberry certainly had no problem slamming people in her posts but went ballistic when she received a thumbs down. So when she again came out of nowhere ranting that some nameless people had chased away other nameless people, I said, “I don’t know what you’re talking about, but no one here has the power to run off other people. It’s a football blog and people get into heated debates. It’s not the right outlet for everyone. If you don’t like the way the ‘children’ play, you can go elsewhere.” That was IT.

    She started screaming at me, at Alabama, at the Steelers, making deeply personal attacks, and acting like the shrew she is. And you bet I gave it right back to her. I didn’t know she was 65 because I don’t have the magic telepathy you think I’m supposed to have. But I don’t care. Sixty-five is not ancient. Many commenters here are 65. She acted like an alley cat and I defended myself. Then you came onto the thread after it was all over and demanded “Deb have you lost your last ounze or what? Never have I heard anybody talk so bad to anybody that’s a human being like that in all of my life.”

    You completely ignored the fact that she launched that attack with no provocation, acted as though the entire conversation had been one-sided nasty ol’ me, then launched an attack of your own. And my LSU friends, that I’d supported so faithfully—who didn’t know you two from Adam—just piled on. Now I take full responsibility for getting into a bunch of cat fights because you are absolutely right—I am too smart for that room. But, Missy, you created a situation that has destroyed friendships and caused a lot of hurt and heartache—one that you continue to lie through your teeth about. It is all right there in black and white if you just click on the link.
    Now I have answered your question.

    As for me being so provocative and you being so angelic … well, this was a really angelic thing to say after Alabama laid out LSU 21-0:

    suprmous says:
    Jan 10, 2012 12:06 AM
    Should the BcS give Bama #1 status I think I’m goin to be sick to my stomach. And why in the Sam Hill is it that those who voted for LSU to be #1 earlier are now sayin they can’t do it again with a clean conscience? It leads me to believe somewhere there’s some $$ involved.

    Right, you’re just voicin’ your innocent lil opinion while I try to cause trouble … the way I fully congratulated LSU after the November win, as thecrazyasian–and objective LSU fan said.

    You people Blow. My. Mind.

    But from now on, suprmous … do it without addressing me directly. Life is tough enough without dealing with your kind of crazy.

  52. Deb says: May 21, 2012 12:50 AM

    @seanmartin …

    Hi, hon. Go to hell.

    And have a nice day there 😀

  53. Deb says: May 21, 2012 2:21 AM

    @seanmartin …

    Sorry. Didn’t really mean that. Even though you were being a jerk. Yes, I’ll admit that was pretty pathetic. But when you’ve had a delusional harpy slobbering the same endless nonsense at you for months (“you do this, you do that, you’re evil to everyone, everyone hates it, my totally unbiased brothers hate it, too”) … sigh … you do rise to the bait now and then. Maybe it’s the estrogen.

    If I really wanted you to go to hell, I’d wish you life with the harpy.

    I remember the good ol’ days when it was just me and a bunch of vulgar men on the football blogs.

  54. suprmous says: May 21, 2012 3:36 AM

    Ask for something so simple and you get a tiraid. As for ladyhuckleberry bein a personal friend, yeah you right she is. As for your friends comin to take up for me, I didn’t request em to. Ever think maybe they did it out of the goodness of their hearts? But back to ladyhuckleberry takin up for those she was talkin bout you’d run off. Did you ever have it cross your mind that maybe just maybe she’d been seein posters come on here quite regularlly and when they didn’t come back on and kept seein you post that she thought maybe you had chased em off? C’mon @65 the mind isn’t as sharp as it was @45. I’ll admit I’m no angel but Broad you ain’t no lady either. So to post all of the positive jibberish you did doesn’t mean a hill of beans. And that comment I made re those who couldn’t vote LSU #1 the 2nd go round came about due to an article I read in one of the brother’s traded magazines he gets. It had somethin to the effect that many of those who’d voted for LSU the first time said their vote would be questionable if they voted the same the 2nd time IF Bama were to beat em for the NC. So once again you jump me for voicin my opinion. Geesh don’t you ever get tired of bein crude, rude, and socially irate? Oh and I forgot apologetic to those who you wanna suck up to.

  55. mountaineer50415 says: May 21, 2012 9:15 AM

    Hey supreme mouse or 65, if you are not as sharp anymore please don’t comment. I am 67, my father is 92 and we have meaningful conversations. Maybe you should go to a Dr to see if senility can be warded off for a few more years. Sixty five is too young to have so many problems differentiating between right and wrong. Even if you are having problems it is not Deb’s fault, or anyone elses.

  56. Deb says: May 21, 2012 11:43 AM

    @suprmous …

    If you’d read the thread, you’d see I hadn’t had any altercation with anyone and she didn’t rant that at me. Since she ranted constantly about imaginary people being mean to her and carried on about imaginary people running off other imaginary people, I just suggested a football blog might not be the place for her. And she went nuts. Ironically, she regularly talked to everyone in much harsher tones than I ever use–though clearly you didn’t notice. I just give as good as I get from the boys–something southernpatriots used to praise me for. And like mountaineer50415, I know many people older than 65 who lead wonderfully full lives. Sixty-five is the new 40.

    I feel like a bloody fool for letting the same silly twit bait me yet again last night. If you don’t like my posts skip them. Since I’ve finally tired of feeling foolish, that’s what I’ll be doing with yours.

    Now … I’m off to spend the afternoon with Southern women who are much older than 65, and have been through all manner of trial in life but are still full of joy and spitfire. And they don’t speak in that irritating affected dialect you use in your posts. Should be a glorious day! 😀

  57. suprmous says: May 22, 2012 5:02 AM

    mountaineer, I’m speaking from the medical standpoint that most us have our minds decline as we age. I’m glad that your dad’s able to carry on conversations as he does. Hopefully he’ll continue for sometime as my grandmother did: she was able to carry on adult conversation until she was 103 and then she succumbed to havin medical problems that left her in a child’s world and eventually she passed at the age of 108.

  58. suprmous says: May 22, 2012 5:18 AM

    Deb, I don’t believe that you’re imaginary and you’re definitly the one who ladyhuckleberry felt had run me off and I definitly am not imaginary. So you don’t have an argument there. Those others she was talkin about I haven’t a clue about but for argument sakes is it so hard for you to understand that she may’ve seen others on here before that don’t come on here anymore and by seein you in your finest attack mode could’ve said somethin to em at all?

    Everyday that I wake up and am able to face another day’s glorious but then again I’m thankful that I’ve been given the chance, guess you just feel differently. As for speakin in an irritatin affected dialect I’m just me, and there you go provin that you do judge others when you say you don’t. Ironically, it seems you’re one who talks out both sides of your mouth and doesn’t want to admit to it. As vindictive as you are your friends over here still are your friends but you keep criticizin others they may decide differently. And from where I’m sittin they’ve tried to get you to see that you’ve done a lot of judgin where you shouldn’t have.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!