At least someone here just gets it
Using the only exceptions to validate a faulty argument probably isn't the way to go. And by exception I mean the ONLY two programs in the SEC that couldn't care less about their football program.
So now it's not an "SEC thing"? It's a decent football team in the SEC thing? By the way, both Kentucky and Vandy care about football. They're just not very good at it. They both have upped the ante of what they pay coaches and facilities.
Not at all. It's a priority thing. It is inarguable that Vandy's main priority is academics and UK's is basketball. Everyone else's is football.
I'm having difficulty following the argument because it's floating all over the place.
First, it was "UM can't compete because we haven't won anything."
Then, when I mentioned that UT hasn't won anything either, the argument switched to "Yeah, but it's an SEC thing."
Then, when I mentioned that there are teams in the SEC that aren't very good and don't recruit at our level (you can even add Arkansas, Miss State, South Carolina, and Mizzou to Kentucky and Vandy), it became "Yeah, but i'm only talking about SEC teams that want to win" even though every team in the SEC pays richly for coaches and spends a ton on football facilities.