Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,979
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 182
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #1
Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
What are everyone's thoughts on these? Big push at the meetings this week on the part of LSU to get rid of permanents and a 9 game schedule is being seriously considered.

I think the 9 game schedule is great. Paired with Clemson it would give South Carolina ten games a year against P5 competition. Not to mention the wonders it would do for the network and the ways it could potentially help the SOS argument in the selection committee.

As far a permanent rivals, I'd like to see them gone. Obviously UT/Bama, Aub/UGA, and Vandy/Ole Miss are big rivals and want to preserve them. Perhaps those three games could be protected like the Big Ten is trying to do, but I'd like to see everyone else rotate yearly to add more variety to schedules.
05-08-2013 12:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #2
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-08-2013 12:00 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  What are everyone's thoughts on these? Big push at the meetings this week on the part of LSU to get rid of permanents and a 9 game schedule is being seriously considered.

I think the 9 game schedule is great. Paired with Clemson it would give South Carolina ten games a year against P5 competition. Not to mention the wonders it would do for the network and the ways it could potentially help the SOS argument in the selection committee.

As far a permanent rivals, I'd like to see them gone. Obviously UT/Bama, Aub/UGA, and Vandy/Ole Miss are big rivals and want to preserve them. Perhaps those three games could be protected like the Big Ten is trying to do, but I'd like to see everyone else rotate yearly to add more variety to schedules.
Yep. We are gonna have to go to nine games, or we won't see some schools for years, and that hurts conference continuity. I don't think it's fair to just let two or three schools have rivalry games, but the divisions could be changed to allow Alabama to play both the Vols and Auburn, as well as the others you mentioned, etc. I wonder if divisions will be discussed along with the nine game thing?
(This post was last modified: 05-08-2013 12:38 AM by USAFMEDIC.)
05-08-2013 12:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,979
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 182
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-08-2013 12:36 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 12:00 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  What are everyone's thoughts on these? Big push at the meetings this week on the part of LSU to get rid of permanents and a 9 game schedule is being seriously considered.

I think the 9 game schedule is great. Paired with Clemson it would give South Carolina ten games a year against P5 competition. Not to mention the wonders it would do for the network and the ways it could potentially help the SOS argument in the selection committee.

As far a permanent rivals, I'd like to see them gone. Obviously UT/Bama, Aub/UGA, and Vandy/Ole Miss are big rivals and want to preserve them. Perhaps those three games could be protected like the Big Ten is trying to do, but I'd like to see everyone else rotate yearly to add more variety to schedules.
Yep. We are gonna have to go to nine games, or we won't see some schools for years, and that hurts conference continuity. I don't think it's fair to just let two or three schools have rivalry games, but the divisions could be changed to allow Alabama to play both the Vols and Auburn, as well as the others you mentioned, etc. I wonder if divisions will be discussed along with the nine game thing?


One proposal I heard was moving Bama and Auburn to the East and Missouri and Vandy to the West....that ain't happening.
05-08-2013 01:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #4
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
The SEC will have to move to 9 games eventually. The SEC has a bigger rivalry problem than the Big Ten did. Some of your rivalries though don't make sense to anyone else other than the fans and alumni of the schools that hold on to them, such as Alabama and Tennessee. There really is no reason for those two programs to be holding onto a rivalry in a way that holds back progress for the conference as a whole.

The concept I would like to see being looked at is protected every other year rivals. The way that would work out is that with a 9 game conference schedule you have 6 in division games with 14 teams. That leaves 3 a year against the opposing division of 7 teams. That means you play 6 of 7 teams in a two year period if you dont have protected rivals. If you have protected every other year rivals that would be much easier to do because you could do that and it would act basically the same as an unprotected rival status. You are just making sure that your favorite rival from the other side never becomes that 7th team that you don't face until the third year of the rotation.
05-08-2013 06:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
Ive proposed this before but will re-post it here:

If 10th were King, this is what how each teams 9 game schedule would work:

-6 divisional games in traditional, home and away format
-1 permanent cross division rival tradiitonal home and away format
-2 rotating cross divisional opponents "Indian Run" format

"Indian Run" is a group run exercise where the group moves forward at a jog in a single file but the last man sprints forward to the front of the line and then the next last man and so on.

What I mean using that as a rotation is that instead of doing the traditional home and away with your non permanent rival cross divisional opponents before swapping for a new pair, you run all the way through them before switching sites.

So, for example, lets say A&M is partnered with SC (Battle of the Spurs!) and we start with UGA and Vanderbilt as CDOs:

Year 1

vs Alabama
@ Ole Miss
vs MSU
@ LSU
vs Auburn
@ Arkansas

@SC

vs Vandy
@ UGA


Year 2

@ Alabama
vs Ole Miss
@ MSU
vs LSU
@ Auburn
vs Arkansas

vs SC

@ Kentucky
vs Florida

Year 3

vs Alabama
@ Ole Miss
vs MSU
@ LSU
vs Auburn
@ Arkansas

@SC

vs Missouri
@ Tennessee

Year 4

@ Alabama
vs Ole Miss
@ MSU
vs LSU
@ Auburn
vs Arkansas

vs SC

@Vandy
vs UGA


In 3 years, you have played 14 of 14 teams and the players and students have an opportunity to experience a game vs every SEC opponent.

Under the traditional method, in 4 years players and students would only get to experience games against 10 of 14 teams.

What do y'all think of this?
05-08-2013 08:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bigblueblindness Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,073
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 53
I Root For: UK, Lipscomb
Location: Kentucky
Post: #6
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
Not a bad idea, 10th. That is about the best solution I've seen for 14 teams. Having 16 teams split into 4 pods would have been great, but that is a topic for another decade.

A 10 game conference schedule would be an even better format for your idea (6 division games, 1 cross rival, 3 alternating year), which would allow everyone to play a home/home every four years. Out of conference rivalry games would be retained, and it still leaves room for one patsy a year. Until the bowls cease to require the 6 game minimum win and the selection committee proves to be more about strength of schedule results than just being undefeated or one good loss, 10 will be justifiably laughed at. It sure solves a lot of problems, though.
05-08-2013 09:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,979
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 182
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-08-2013 08:44 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Ive proposed this before but will re-post it here:

If 10th were King, this is what how each teams 9 game schedule would work:

-6 divisional games in traditional, home and away format
-1 permanent cross division rival tradiitonal home and away format
-2 rotating cross divisional opponents "Indian Run" format

"Indian Run" is a group run exercise where the group moves forward at a jog in a single file but the last man sprints forward to the front of the line and then the next last man and so on.

What I mean using that as a rotation is that instead of doing the traditional home and away with your non permanent rival cross divisional opponents before swapping for a new pair, you run all the way through them before switching sites.

So, for example, lets say A&M is partnered with SC (Battle of the Spurs!) and we start with UGA and Vanderbilt as CDOs:

Year 1

vs Alabama
@ Ole Miss
vs MSU
@ LSU
vs Auburn
@ Arkansas

@SC

vs Vandy
@ UGA


Year 2

@ Alabama
vs Ole Miss
@ MSU
vs LSU
@ Auburn
vs Arkansas

vs SC

@ Kentucky
vs Florida

Year 3

vs Alabama
@ Ole Miss
vs MSU
@ LSU
vs Auburn
@ Arkansas

@SC

vs Missouri
@ Tennessee

Year 4

@ Alabama
vs Ole Miss
@ MSU
vs LSU
@ Auburn
vs Arkansas

vs SC

@Vandy
vs UGA


In 3 years, you have played 14 of 14 teams and the players and students have an opportunity to experience a game vs every SEC opponent.

Under the traditional method, in 4 years players and students would only get to experience games against 10 of 14 teams.

What do y'all think of this?


That idea seems the most likely. Honestly, anything is better than the 6-1-1 that limits us to playing some teams once every 6 years.
05-08-2013 09:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,979
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 182
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-08-2013 09:46 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Not a bad idea, 10th. That is about the best solution I've seen for 14 teams. Having 16 teams split into 4 pods would have been great, but that is a topic for another decade.

A 10 game conference schedule would be an even better format for your idea (6 division games, 1 cross rival, 3 alternating year), which would allow everyone to play a home/home every four years. Out of conference rivalry games would be retained, and it still leaves room for one patsy a year. Until the bowls cease to require the 6 game minimum win and the selection committee proves to be more about strength of schedule results than just being undefeated or one good loss, 10 will be justifiably laughed at. It sure solves a lot of problems, though.


Woah. Baby steps man.

We'd probably need 13 games before 10 conference games would even be considered.

5 home conference, 5 away. 1 home and home with OOC rival. 1 patsy. That means only 6 home games every other year. Most schools need the 7th game for revenue.
05-08-2013 09:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bigblueblindness Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,073
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 53
I Root For: UK, Lipscomb
Location: Kentucky
Post: #9
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-08-2013 09:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 09:46 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Not a bad idea, 10th. That is about the best solution I've seen for 14 teams. Having 16 teams split into 4 pods would have been great, but that is a topic for another decade.

A 10 game conference schedule would be an even better format for your idea (6 division games, 1 cross rival, 3 alternating year), which would allow everyone to play a home/home every four years. Out of conference rivalry games would be retained, and it still leaves room for one patsy a year. Until the bowls cease to require the 6 game minimum win and the selection committee proves to be more about strength of schedule results than just being undefeated or one good loss, 10 will be justifiably laughed at. It sure solves a lot of problems, though.


Woah. Baby steps man.

We'd probably need 13 games before 10 conference games would even be considered.

5 home conference, 5 away. 1 home and home with OOC rival. 1 patsy. That means only 6 home games every other year. Most schools need the 7th game for revenue.

Right, I mentioned 10 games would require a lot of things to happen, which is a long way off. I just brought it up because it does solve a lot of problems for a 14 team league.

About the revenue for the 7th game... do you not think that adding all that additional inventory (14 more conference games per year) would kick in a look-in on the Network contract and add a ton a value and possibly enough to exceed the net revenue from the 7th home game? If the community is worried about the local impact, could you not have a "classic" game before the season to serve as an exhibition game rather than an official 13th regular season game? What about local match-ups like Mizzou-Missouri State or UT - TN Tech? Make tickets very cheap, and I guarantee SEC people will still come out for the experience (just look at numbers for the Spring games), especially those that do not get a chance to go to regular season games. Worried about a handful of skill players getting injured? No problem, sit them. I am certainly not proposing this in any form or fashion for the foreseeable future, but I think there are creative ways to get what everyone wants, which is as many interactions between SEC schools as possible.
05-08-2013 10:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #10
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-08-2013 10:16 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 09:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 09:46 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Not a bad idea, 10th. That is about the best solution I've seen for 14 teams. Having 16 teams split into 4 pods would have been great, but that is a topic for another decade.

A 10 game conference schedule would be an even better format for your idea (6 division games, 1 cross rival, 3 alternating year), which would allow everyone to play a home/home every four years. Out of conference rivalry games would be retained, and it still leaves room for one patsy a year. Until the bowls cease to require the 6 game minimum win and the selection committee proves to be more about strength of schedule results than just being undefeated or one good loss, 10 will be justifiably laughed at. It sure solves a lot of problems, though.


Woah. Baby steps man.

We'd probably need 13 games before 10 conference games would even be considered.

5 home conference, 5 away. 1 home and home with OOC rival. 1 patsy. That means only 6 home games every other year. Most schools need the 7th game for revenue.

Right, I mentioned 10 games would require a lot of things to happen, which is a long way off. I just brought it up because it does solve a lot of problems for a 14 team league.

About the revenue for the 7th game... do you not think that adding all that additional inventory (14 more conference games per year) would kick in a look-in on the Network contract and add a ton a value and possibly enough to exceed the net revenue from the 7th home game? If the community is worried about the local impact, could you not have a "classic" game before the season to serve as an exhibition game rather than an official 13th regular season game? What about local match-ups like Mizzou-Missouri State or UT - TN Tech? Make tickets very cheap, and I guarantee SEC people will still come out for the experience (just look at numbers for the Spring games), especially those that do not get a chance to go to regular season games. Worried about a handful of skill players getting injured? No problem, sit them. I am certainly not proposing this in any form or fashion for the foreseeable future, but I think there are creative ways to get what everyone wants, which is as many interactions between SEC schools as possible.
Any plan to prevent us from seeing a school every six years is fine with me.
05-08-2013 10:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
hawghiggs Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,792
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-08-2013 01:20 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 12:36 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 12:00 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  What are everyone's thoughts on these? Big push at the meetings this week on the part of LSU to get rid of permanents and a 9 game schedule is being seriously considered.

I think the 9 game schedule is great. Paired with Clemson it would give South Carolina ten games a year against P5 competition. Not to mention the wonders it would do for the network and the ways it could potentially help the SOS argument in the selection committee.

As far a permanent rivals, I'd like to see them gone. Obviously UT/Bama, Aub/UGA, and Vandy/Ole Miss are big rivals and want to preserve them. Perhaps those three games could be protected like the Big Ten is trying to do, but I'd like to see everyone else rotate yearly to add more variety to schedules.
Yep. We are gonna have to go to nine games, or we won't see some schools for years, and that hurts conference continuity. I don't think it's fair to just let two or three schools have rivalry games, but the divisions could be changed to allow Alabama to play both the Vols and Auburn, as well as the others you mentioned, etc. I wonder if divisions will be discussed along with the nine game thing?


One proposal I heard was moving Bama and Auburn to the East and Missouri and Vandy to the West....that ain't happening.
That is actaully the only real solution to the problem. Anything else is just patch work.
05-09-2013 06:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,979
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 182
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-09-2013 06:34 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 01:20 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 12:36 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 12:00 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  What are everyone's thoughts on these? Big push at the meetings this week on the part of LSU to get rid of permanents and a 9 game schedule is being seriously considered.

I think the 9 game schedule is great. Paired with Clemson it would give South Carolina ten games a year against P5 competition. Not to mention the wonders it would do for the network and the ways it could potentially help the SOS argument in the selection committee.

As far a permanent rivals, I'd like to see them gone. Obviously UT/Bama, Aub/UGA, and Vandy/Ole Miss are big rivals and want to preserve them. Perhaps those three games could be protected like the Big Ten is trying to do, but I'd like to see everyone else rotate yearly to add more variety to schedules.
Yep. We are gonna have to go to nine games, or we won't see some schools for years, and that hurts conference continuity. I don't think it's fair to just let two or three schools have rivalry games, but the divisions could be changed to allow Alabama to play both the Vols and Auburn, as well as the others you mentioned, etc. I wonder if divisions will be discussed along with the nine game thing?


One proposal I heard was moving Bama and Auburn to the East and Missouri and Vandy to the West....that ain't happening.
That is actaully the only real solution to the problem. Anything else is just patch work.

I'm not sure how the math works out with the Big Ten only protecting only one rivalry, but I'd like to see the SEC doing something like that.

Having permanent opponents is putting a square peg into a round hole. You end up with "rivalries" like South Carolina/Arkansas which, with all due respect, aren't really that interesting to people in either state. Now they have us playing A&M which, once again, is a school we have almost nothing in common with.

I'd rather get a rotation of West schools and more variery
05-09-2013 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
Lets face it, the permanent rivals thing is for the schools on the East/West border. Those of us further on the periphery don't need them but its awkward to have half your teams with a permanent and half without so I'm willing to put up with it.

Besides, we may have nothing in common with SC but if both our programs continue to improve, this could turn into a hell of a game just from the rankings standpoint.
05-09-2013 04:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
I would favor the Missouri / Vandy swap but its Alabama that won't go for it. Just like Auburn once recruited 45% of its scholarships from Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida, Alabama recruits Mississippi and Louisiana heavily. They won't give that up to become the Western most member of the East division. That's why the only real solution will come with 16 teams and 4 half divisions. Until then we are stuck with something that will not solve everyone's problems.

I totally agree we need to play all of our teams at least every four years and every three would be far more preferable.

You guys might want to shoot me but as an Auburn fan I'm glad #15 & #16 were not North Carolina and Virginia Tech. Of course I would have been okay with them, but if Auburn is ever going to move back to playing its traditional games we need two more additions from the West, or at least one more.

Let's say that one day we pick up an Oklahoma school and West Virginia then Auburn and West Virginia could move to the East and Oklahoma and Missouri could be added to the West. With 4 four team divisions and 9 conference games you could play every team in your division, one permanent rival from each of the other three divisions, and the remaining three of 1 of the other three divisions every year with the divisions rotating every three years. With 9 conference games all rivalries would be protected and every team would be played every three years.

There are some who argue for a 4 divisional set up with 14 teams. I find the formula tedious and darn near inexplicable to the average fan, but it can be done.

Otherwise I would be okay with 6 divisional games, 1 permanent rival, and 2 rotational games not scheduled home and home as 10th points out so that we can play everyone every three years.
05-09-2013 06:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #15
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-09-2013 10:45 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-09-2013 06:34 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 01:20 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 12:36 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(05-08-2013 12:00 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  What are everyone's thoughts on these? Big push at the meetings this week on the part of LSU to get rid of permanents and a 9 game schedule is being seriously considered.

I think the 9 game schedule is great. Paired with Clemson it would give South Carolina ten games a year against P5 competition. Not to mention the wonders it would do for the network and the ways it could potentially help the SOS argument in the selection committee.

As far a permanent rivals, I'd like to see them gone. Obviously UT/Bama, Aub/UGA, and Vandy/Ole Miss are big rivals and want to preserve them. Perhaps those three games could be protected like the Big Ten is trying to do, but I'd like to see everyone else rotate yearly to add more variety to schedules.
Yep. We are gonna have to go to nine games, or we won't see some schools for years, and that hurts conference continuity. I don't think it's fair to just let two or three schools have rivalry games, but the divisions could be changed to allow Alabama to play both the Vols and Auburn, as well as the others you mentioned, etc. I wonder if divisions will be discussed along with the nine game thing?


One proposal I heard was moving Bama and Auburn to the East and Missouri and Vandy to the West....that ain't happening.
That is actaully the only real solution to the problem. Anything else is just patch work.

I'm not sure how the math works out with the Big Ten only protecting only one rivalry, but I'd like to see the SEC doing something like that.

Having permanent opponents is putting a square peg into a round hole. You end up with "rivalries" like South Carolina/Arkansas which, with all due respect, aren't really that interesting to people in either state. Now they have us playing A&M which, once again, is a school we have almost nothing in common with.

I'd rather get a rotation of West schools and more variery
I am a little shocked that they did not make A&M Missouri's permanent cross-over... but there is a great case for Arky I guess.
05-09-2013 11:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
Im not shocked

We may have played each other more frequently in the B12 but lets be honest, neither one of us ever circled that game as a big important one we were super stoked about playing.

Besides, Mizzou/Arky is a future border war game and you two are the closest schools to both campuses.
(This post was last modified: 05-10-2013 09:11 AM by 10thMountain.)
05-10-2013 09:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #17
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-10-2013 09:09 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Im not shocked

We may have played each other more frequently in the B12 but lets be honest, neither one of us ever circled that game as a big important one we were super stoked about playing.

Besides, Mizzou/Arky is a future border war game and you two are the closest schools to both campuses.

My thoughts were that they would follow the same model they did when Arky and USC came into the SEC. That's what I meant here. A&M was one of the other schools in the Big XII I actually liked though...
05-10-2013 11:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
I always enjoyed basketball vs Mizzou but playing the Big 8 schools (which includes OU and OSU) in football never took much root in College Station because if you look at our history we almost never played any of the Big 8 schools (again, including the Okie schools) prior to the B12 formation, instead opting to play the SEC and Southern ACC schools instead. That's why there was such a feeling of "Why are we doing this?" when it was announced we were stopping our SEC application and joining the Big 8 instead. Most if us had no idea about the political blackmail that forced us to join in order to buy Baylor and Tech safe passage out of the doomed SWC conference.
05-10-2013 06:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #19
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-10-2013 06:51 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I always enjoyed basketball vs Mizzou but playing the Big 8 schools (which includes OU and OSU) in football never took much root in College Station because if you look at our history we almost never played any of the Big 8 schools (again, including the Okie schools) prior to the B12 formation, instead opting to play the SEC and Southern ACC schools instead. That's why there was such a feeling of "Why are we doing this?" when it was announced we were stopping our SEC application and joining the Big 8 instead. Most if us had no idea about the political blackmail that forced us to join in order to buy Baylor and Tech safe passage out of the doomed SWC conference.
Wow. I did not know A&M considered the SEC way back then...
05-10-2013 09:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,979
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 182
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Permanent Rivals and 9 game schedule
(05-09-2013 04:49 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Lets face it, the permanent rivals thing is for the schools on the East/West border. Those of us further on the periphery don't need them but its awkward to have half your teams with a permanent and half without so I'm willing to put up with it.

Besides, we may have nothing in common with SC but if both our programs continue to improve, this could turn into a hell of a game just from the rankings standpoint.

Yeah. It'll be a fun game. I got a feeling y'all are going to be good for a while with your recruiting right now.

This setup guarantees we will be playing A&M, UGA, UF, and UT every year, pretty stiff competition.
05-10-2013 11:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.