(05-15-2013 11:45 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Alabama will play both Auburn and Alabama.

JOOC, how does Alabama play Alabama?

(05-16-2013 09:32 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-15-2013 11:45 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Alabama will play both Auburn and Alabama.

JOOC, how does Alabama play Alabama?

One of two ways the first one I'll mention, in the Spring.

(05-16-2013 09:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-16-2013 09:32 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-15-2013 11:45 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Alabama will play both Auburn and Alabama.

JOOC, how does Alabama play Alabama?

One of two ways the first one I'll mention, in the Spring.

The other is because Alabama's B Squads are better than half of the A squads in the SEC.

(05-16-2013 09:32 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-15-2013 11:45 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Alabama will play both Auburn and Alabama.

JOOC, how does Alabama play Alabama?

I was hoping you all missed that tiny clerical error. I meant Tennessee and have corrected it.

(05-15-2013 07:48 AM)MarshallHerdFanz Wrote:  They need to chang it to North/South

North:
Mizzou/Ark
Miss./MissSt.
Vandy/Tenn/UK

South:
TXA&M/LSU
Bama/Auburn
Ga./UF/SC

Makes the rivarlies much better.

Every team in the proposed South has finished in the top 8 at least once since 2010....no thanks.

Only Tennessee fans would support this.

The current setup is fine IMO. Only change that would make sense is a Auburn/Missouri swap, but the current setup is fairly geographic and balanced

(05-19-2013 12:42 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  The current setup is fine IMO. Only change that would make sense is a Auburn/Missouri swap, but the current setup is fairly geographic and balanced

I do think that culturally Mizzou is good SEC East fit. Geographically, maybe not. I do not see Alabama ever letting Auburn go to the east division without a nasty fight.

(05-19-2013 12:59 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-19-2013 12:42 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  The current setup is fine IMO. Only change that would make sense is a Auburn/Missouri swap, but the current setup is fairly geographic and balanced

I do think that culturally Mizzou is good SEC East fit. Geographically, maybe not. I do not see Alabama ever letting Auburn go to the east division without a nasty fight.

Yeah I agree with you. Missouri is pretty close to UT, Vandy, and UK. Yes UGA, SC, and UF are far away, but so are TAMU and LSU.

Selfishly I like the current setup because it allows South Carolina to recruit NC as the closest SEC school

(05-19-2013 06:49 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(05-19-2013 12:59 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-19-2013 12:42 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  The current setup is fine IMO. Only change that would make sense is a Auburn/Missouri swap, but the current setup is fairly geographic and balanced

I do think that culturally Mizzou is good SEC East fit. Geographically, maybe not. I do not see Alabama ever letting Auburn go to the east division without a nasty fight.

Yeah I agree with you. Missouri is pretty close to UT, Vandy, and UK. Yes UGA, SC, and UF are far away, but so are TAMU and LSU.

Selfishly I like the current setup because it allows South Carolina to recruit NC as the closest SEC school

True dat. Southern Missouri is culturally like Georgia too. Hills and hill billies. I love the Georgia, Florida, and SC games. Mizzou just goes to Disney World when we play in the swamp... lol

An Auburn fan can certainly speak up, but AU-Florida and AU-UT were also pretty big for some time. In the west, I can't think of any team that considers Auburn as a bigger rival compared to Bama. In the east, I think both UGA and UF would consider Auburn a more historic rival than Bama. The only negative consequence of that switch is losing the UT-Bama crossover, but if UT picked Auburn back up every year, I don't think they can complain too much. Strength of schedule aside, UT has had the best of both worlds for quite a while now in terms of continuing to play all of their most important rivals.
[/quote]

...I believe this scenario is what nixed moving AU to the east...Bama gets to keep AU and Tenn as rivals... someone even suggested that on years that one of these games (UA/AU or UA/UT) were not 'regularly scheduled', the two teams in question could just schedule to play anyway as a non-conference game...sounds weird, but it's feasible... make it a homecoming game, even...

I guess if the SEC ever goes to 16 schools it will all change. No way we can play an 8 or even a nine game conference schedule with two divisions. Four pods, as many have suggested, would allow us to see all the schools more often. Three pod games with your pod and play six other games with the other three pods. We would play all the other pod schools every two years.

Home Pod - 3 yearly games
Other Pods - play two of the four schools in each pod, and alternate.

(05-24-2013 03:01 PM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  An Auburn fan can certainly speak up, but AU-Florida and AU-UT were also pretty big for some time. In the west, I can't think of any team that considers Auburn as a bigger rival compared to Bama. In the east, I think both UGA and UF would consider Auburn a more historic rival than Bama. The only negative consequence of that switch is losing the UT-Bama crossover, but if UT picked Auburn back up every year, I don't think they can complain too much. Strength of schedule aside, UT has had the best of both worlds for quite a while now in terms of continuing to play all of their most important rivals.

...I believe this scenario is what nixed moving AU to the east...Bama gets to keep AU and Tenn as rivals... someone even suggested that on years that one of these games (UA/AU or UA/UT) were not 'regularly scheduled', the two teams in question could just schedule to play anyway as a non-conference game...sounds weird, but it's feasible... make it a homecoming game, even...
[/quote]

For me, personally, I don't see how the continuance of the Alabama and Tennessee rivalry is anything more than a sham at the conference planning level. Sure, many fans would disagree because of the history of these two programs playing each other but as an actual Rivalry, it just isn't anymore. In fact in actuality it just maintains a yearly game for Alabama that they cruise through.

If the SEC ever expands to 16 and has to revamp scheduling and perhaps even divisions then the Alabama/Tennessee rivalry should be one that needs to be looked at in terms of possible rivalries that may not remain a yearly match up.[/i]

(05-25-2013 07:21 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-24-2013 03:01 PM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  An Auburn fan can certainly speak up, but AU-Florida and AU-UT were also pretty big for some time. In the west, I can't think of any team that considers Auburn as a bigger rival compared to Bama. In the east, I think both UGA and UF would consider Auburn a more historic rival than Bama. The only negative consequence of that switch is losing the UT-Bama crossover, but if UT picked Auburn back up every year, I don't think they can complain too much. Strength of schedule aside, UT has had the best of both worlds for quite a while now in terms of continuing to play all of their most important rivals.

...I believe this scenario is what nixed moving AU to the east...Bama gets to keep AU and Tenn as rivals... someone even suggested that on years that one of these games (UA/AU or UA/UT) were not 'regularly scheduled', the two teams in question could just schedule to play anyway as a non-conference game...sounds weird, but it's feasible... make it a homecoming game, even...

For me, personally, I don't see how the continuance of the Alabama and Tennessee rivalry is anything more than a sham at the conference planning level. Sure, many fans would disagree because of the history of these two programs playing each other but as an actual Rivalry, it just isn't anymore. In fact in actuality it just maintains a yearly game for Alabama that they cruise through.

If the SEC ever expands to 16 and has to revamp scheduling and perhaps even divisions then the Alabama/Tennessee rivalry should be one that needs to be looked at in terms of possible rivalries that may not remain a yearly match up.[/i]
[/quote]
When Mizzou was invited, Auburn offered to move to the east, but Alabama would have no part of it, so Mizzou took the east spot. I think a lot of it is about Auburn recruiting in the east... Jr probably knows more about the details than I do...

Auburn should be in the East IMO.

Missouri sounds weird in the east, but when you accept that division is really a north and east division (with the west being a south and west division), then it makes sense. Really I don't think there is a better set-up for a 14 team SEC as far as divisions go. The bigger questions go into scheduling.

Nine game conference schedule, I think would help a lot. As long as the fans very much want Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia to continue, they should be left alone. That said, there's no reason you have to every other team with a locked rival. I'd lock Missouri-Arkansas (boarder state and makes season ending games easier) with those two and let the rest rotate. That'd let you have the following end of season games:

Alabama-Auburn
LSU-Texas A&M
Missouri-Arkansas
Ole Miss-Mississippi State
Kentucky-Tennessee
Vanderbilt-Wake Forest
Florida-Florida State
Georgia-George Tech
South Carolina-Clemson

(05-25-2013 10:23 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Missouri sounds weird in the east, but when you accept that division is really a north and east division (with the west being a south and west division), then it makes sense. Really I don't think there is a better set-up for a 14 team SEC as far as divisions go. The bigger questions go into scheduling.

Nine game conference schedule, I think would help a lot. As long as the fans very much want Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia to continue, they should be left alone. That said, there's no reason you have to every other team with a locked rival. I'd lock Missouri-Arkansas (boarder state and makes season ending games easier) with those two and let the rest rotate. That'd let you have the following end of season games:

Alabama-Auburn
LSU-Texas A&M
Missouri-Arkansas
Ole Miss-Mississippi State
Kentucky-Tennessee
Vanderbilt-Wake Forest
Florida-Florida State
Georgia-George Tech
South Carolina-Clemson

And I think you are 100% correct.