(06-01-2017 01:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:04 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:36 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Why even bother with divisions? At 14, they can do either 3 permanent rivals and the other 10 rotate 5 every other year OR 5 permanent rivals and the other 8 rotate 4 every other year OR 7 permanent rivals and other 6 rotate 3 every other year. I bet most would prefer the first option as it opens up for 4 OOC games. At 16 or 18, I would prefer a 10-game conference schedule.

The could do that if they had voted with the ACC last year, but they decided to follow the B1G like sheep so they deserve whatever heartache this brings.

Kaplony, the whole issue of conference design should fall under autonomy. The reason it didn't last year was because as long as we are in a P5 there is too much paranoia that the other conference is gaming the system to exploit an advantage whether that is grouping conference schedules to maximize the number of schools that might contend for that CFP slot, or boosting a school's RPI to build a resume.

As soon as we move to a P4 with a champs only CFP this whole issue regarding structure becomes moot. As long as each conference just gets one slot which goes to their champion the whole focus will shift and what one conference does or doesn't do with regard to structure becomes a non issue because no advantage is gained regardless of the structure.

NCAA is a bit like the court system. They only address the matter before them at the time. The only matter before them was taking care of the Big XII's desire to have a title game so they addressed that issue and not any others.

In any given season, not being tied to divisions in selecting title game participants is to the advantage of one or two conferences.

The drawback is you don't want to be commissioner of the Pac-12 when the new system pits USC-UCLA for the title or in that spot when Michigan and Ohio State rematch for the title or the SEC when Bama and LSU rematch or ACC when Clemson and Florida State rematch. Confirms the fear of everyone else that it's rigged.

FWIW

Robert Allen long time sports reporter 4 Okie Dokie St
Has repeatly said over the years that both
The gooners & cowboys have a standing offer
From SEC to where they join the West and
Both bama and auburn go east and mizzu
Also goes west

(06-01-2017 01:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:04 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:36 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Why even bother with divisions? At 14, they can do either 3 permanent rivals and the other 10 rotate 5 every other year OR 5 permanent rivals and the other 8 rotate 4 every other year OR 7 permanent rivals and other 6 rotate 3 every other year. I bet most would prefer the first option as it opens up for 4 OOC games. At 16 or 18, I would prefer a 10-game conference schedule.

The could do that if they had voted with the ACC last year, but they decided to follow the B1G like sheep so they deserve whatever heartache this brings.

Kaplony, the whole issue of conference design should fall under autonomy. The reason it didn't last year was because as long as we are in a P5 there is too much paranoia that the other conference is gaming the system to exploit an advantage whether that is grouping conference schedules to maximize the number of schools that might contend for that CFP slot, or boosting a school's RPI to build a resume.

As soon as we move to a P4 with a champs only CFP this whole issue regarding structure becomes moot. As long as each conference just gets one slot which goes to their champion the whole focus will shift and what one conference does or doesn't do with regard to structure becomes a non issue because no advantage is gained regardless of the structure.

Well your paranoia has your school in a divisional alignment it doesn't want.

(06-01-2017 02:04 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:05 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:21 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:20 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:15 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  This!

As much as others may not want to admit it this is important financially for the conference.

The UT/Bama game isn't very big anymore and plenty of rivalry games have been lost before. Auburn for example had to give up most of it's rivalries when the divisions were formed. I don't think the SEC would suffer at all financially if Alabama had to play Georgia or Florida instead

Do you mean competitive? It remains absolutely huge.

It's big to Alabama and Tennessee fans, but not to anyone else. I don't think it gets any buzz nationally or even regionally anymore.

Not true...

Just last year it was the biggest game in terms of viewers nationwide the week it took place.

That's not "nobody."

I have no idea, but I wonder how those rating compare to Alabama/A&M or Alabama/LSU. What about Alabama/UGA in 2015?

Sure it's going to get big ratings, it's a game between two powerhouses. My argument is that Tennessee is pretty interchangeable with any other big time SEC school and this game is only being held onto because of some of the old timers at those two schools.

EDIT: did some quick research. Alabama/Tennessee got 6.582 million viewers.

2016 Alabama/Texas A&M - 8.455 million
2016 Alabama/LSU - 10.385 million
Couldn't find numbers for UGA/Bama

Reinforces my point. Of course it gets ratings - It's Alabama and Tennessee and both have a ton of fans. But it is interchangeable with other big time matchups and should be given up for the good of the conference.

(06-01-2017 03:30 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:04 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:36 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Why even bother with divisions? At 14, they can do either 3 permanent rivals and the other 10 rotate 5 every other year OR 5 permanent rivals and the other 8 rotate 4 every other year OR 7 permanent rivals and other 6 rotate 3 every other year. I bet most would prefer the first option as it opens up for 4 OOC games. At 16 or 18, I would prefer a 10-game conference schedule.

The could do that if they had voted with the ACC last year, but they decided to follow the B1G like sheep so they deserve whatever heartache this brings.

Kaplony, the whole issue of conference design should fall under autonomy. The reason it didn't last year was because as long as we are in a P5 there is too much paranoia that the other conference is gaming the system to exploit an advantage whether that is grouping conference schedules to maximize the number of schools that might contend for that CFP slot, or boosting a school's RPI to build a resume.

As soon as we move to a P4 with a champs only CFP this whole issue regarding structure becomes moot. As long as each conference just gets one slot which goes to their champion the whole focus will shift and what one conference does or doesn't do with regard to structure becomes a non issue because no advantage is gained regardless of the structure.

Well your paranoia has your school in a divisional alignment it doesn't want.

Not exactly. In '91 we were promised that the move West would be temporary. When we added in 2012 and didn't move back East that's when the irritation really kicked in. Now Auburn fans look back to '91 and simply say, "They lied!"

Auburn and Alabama to the east. Mizzou and Vandy to the west. The only rivalry that would need to be worried about is the Tenn. vs Vandy.

(06-01-2017 03:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 03:30 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:04 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:36 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Why even bother with divisions? At 14, they can do either 3 permanent rivals and the other 10 rotate 5 every other year OR 5 permanent rivals and the other 8 rotate 4 every other year OR 7 permanent rivals and other 6 rotate 3 every other year. I bet most would prefer the first option as it opens up for 4 OOC games. At 16 or 18, I would prefer a 10-game conference schedule.

The could do that if they had voted with the ACC last year, but they decided to follow the B1G like sheep so they deserve whatever heartache this brings.

Kaplony, the whole issue of conference design should fall under autonomy. The reason it didn't last year was because as long as we are in a P5 there is too much paranoia that the other conference is gaming the system to exploit an advantage whether that is grouping conference schedules to maximize the number of schools that might contend for that CFP slot, or boosting a school's RPI to build a resume.

As soon as we move to a P4 with a champs only CFP this whole issue regarding structure becomes moot. As long as each conference just gets one slot which goes to their champion the whole focus will shift and what one conference does or doesn't do with regard to structure becomes a non issue because no advantage is gained regardless of the structure.

Well your paranoia has your school in a divisional alignment it doesn't want.

Not exactly. In '91 we were promised that the move West would be temporary. When we added in 2012 and didn't move back East that's when the irritation really kicked in. Now Auburn fans look back to '91 and simply say, "They lied!"

Begin the Auburn to the Big XII thread in 5... 4... 3... 2.........

(06-01-2017 03:56 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 02:04 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:05 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:21 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:20 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  The UT/Bama game isn't very big anymore and plenty of rivalry games have been lost before. Auburn for example had to give up most of it's rivalries when the divisions were formed. I don't think the SEC would suffer at all financially if Alabama had to play Georgia or Florida instead

Do you mean competitive? It remains absolutely huge.

It's big to Alabama and Tennessee fans, but not to anyone else. I don't think it gets any buzz nationally or even regionally anymore.

Not true...

Just last year it was the biggest game in terms of viewers nationwide the week it took place.

That's not "nobody."

I have no idea, but I wonder how those rating compare to Alabama/A&M or Alabama/LSU. What about Alabama/UGA in 2015?

Sure it's going to get big ratings, it's a game between two powerhouses. My argument is that Tennessee is pretty interchangeable with any other big time SEC school and this game is only being held onto because of some of the old timers at those two schools.

EDIT: did some quick research. Alabama/Tennessee got 6.582 million viewers.

2016 Alabama/Texas A&M - 8.455 million
2016 Alabama/LSU - 10.385 million
Couldn't find numbers for UGA/Bama

Reinforces my point. Of course it gets ratings - It's Alabama and Tennessee and both have a ton of fans. But it is interchangeable with other big time matchups and should be given up for the good of the conference.

Reinforces your point that 'nobody else cares' huh?

(06-01-2017 09:28 AM)Chappy Wrote:  Alabama
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

Arkansas
Kansas
LSU
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
Missouri
Oklahoma
Texas A&M

All fixed.

True dat.

(06-01-2017 08:34 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  Begin the Auburn to the Big XII thread in 5... 4... 3... 2.........

That would be worse for Auburn. Auburn would be better off moving to the ACC. Missouri replaces Auburn in the West and either West Virginia or North Carolina State replaces Missouri in the East if the GOR can be broken, or if it is up. An Auburn/NC State swap might be palatable to both conferences to release NC State from the GOR.

(06-01-2017 03:56 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 02:04 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:05 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:21 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:20 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  The UT/Bama game isn't very big anymore and plenty of rivalry games have been lost before. Auburn for example had to give up most of it's rivalries when the divisions were formed. I don't think the SEC would suffer at all financially if Alabama had to play Georgia or Florida instead

Do you mean competitive? It remains absolutely huge.

It's big to Alabama and Tennessee fans, but not to anyone else. I don't think it gets any buzz nationally or even regionally anymore.

Not true...

Just last year it was the biggest game in terms of viewers nationwide the week it took place.

That's not "nobody."

I have no idea, but I wonder how those rating compare to Alabama/A&M or Alabama/LSU. What about Alabama/UGA in 2015?

Sure it's going to get big ratings, it's a game between two powerhouses. My argument is that Tennessee is pretty interchangeable with any other big time SEC school and this game is only being held onto because of some of the old timers at those two schools.

EDIT: did some quick research. Alabama/Tennessee got 6.582 million viewers.

2016 Alabama/Texas A&M - 8.455 million
2016 Alabama/LSU - 10.385 million
Couldn't find numbers for UGA/Bama

Reinforces my point. Of course it gets ratings - It's Alabama and Tennessee and both have a ton of fans. But it is interchangeable with other big time matchups and should be given up for the good of the conference.

I don't normally chime in on SEC conversations, but this is worth a mention. UT/Bama is one of the great Southern football rivalries and it's not just an interchangeable game. This is one of those games that the league needs to find a way to protect.

(06-01-2017 10:07 PM)ArmyBlazer Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 03:56 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 02:04 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:05 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:21 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Do you mean competitive? It remains absolutely huge.

It's big to Alabama and Tennessee fans, but not to anyone else. I don't think it gets any buzz nationally or even regionally anymore.

Not true...

Just last year it was the biggest game in terms of viewers nationwide the week it took place.

That's not "nobody."

I have no idea, but I wonder how those rating compare to Alabama/A&M or Alabama/LSU. What about Alabama/UGA in 2015?

Sure it's going to get big ratings, it's a game between two powerhouses. My argument is that Tennessee is pretty interchangeable with any other big time SEC school and this game is only being held onto because of some of the old timers at those two schools.

EDIT: did some quick research. Alabama/Tennessee got 6.582 million viewers.

2016 Alabama/Texas A&M - 8.455 million
2016 Alabama/LSU - 10.385 million
Couldn't find numbers for UGA/Bama

Reinforces my point. Of course it gets ratings - It's Alabama and Tennessee and both have a ton of fans. But it is interchangeable with other big time matchups and should be given up for the good of the conference.

I don't normally chime in on SEC conversations, but this is worth a mention. UT/Bama is one of the great Southern football rivalries and it's not just an interchangeable game. This is one of those games that the league needs to find a way to protect.

The league needs to find a way to protect the Iron Bowl too, and I think I know how to do it: completely re-do the divisions, and even rename them:

Kramer Division
Alabama
Tennessee
Vandy
Kentucky
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
Arkansas

Slive Division
Georgia
Florida
Auburn
LSU
Texas A&M
South Carolina
Missouri

Make Alabama-Auburn a permanent game, Arkansas-Texas A&M, LSU-Ole Miss, permanent games also, and everybody else draws some, weird random opponent they don't really want.

Put Missouri, Oklahoma and Oklahoma state in the west and Alabama and auburn in the east

(06-02-2017 08:57 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Put Missouri, Oklahoma and Oklahoma state in the west and Alabama and auburn in the east

Sounds great. Except OU and OSU aren't in the SEC.

(06-01-2017 08:40 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 03:56 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 02:04 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 01:05 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:21 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Do you mean competitive? It remains absolutely huge.

It's big to Alabama and Tennessee fans, but not to anyone else. I don't think it gets any buzz nationally or even regionally anymore.

Not true...

Just last year it was the biggest game in terms of viewers nationwide the week it took place.

That's not "nobody."

I have no idea, but I wonder how those rating compare to Alabama/A&M or Alabama/LSU. What about Alabama/UGA in 2015?

Sure it's going to get big ratings, it's a game between two powerhouses. My argument is that Tennessee is pretty interchangeable with any other big time SEC school and this game is only being held onto because of some of the old timers at those two schools.

EDIT: did some quick research. Alabama/Tennessee got 6.582 million viewers.

2016 Alabama/Texas A&M - 8.455 million
2016 Alabama/LSU - 10.385 million
Couldn't find numbers for UGA/Bama

Reinforces my point. Of course it gets ratings - It's Alabama and Tennessee and both have a ton of fans. But it is interchangeable with other big time matchups and should be given up for the good of the conference.

Reinforces your point that 'nobody else cares' huh?

How is Alabama/UT more of a TV draw as opposed to Alabama and any of 7 or 8 other SEC schools? That's my point. You can't just say "a ton of people watched it" because a ton of people watch every Alabama game.

Alabama/UT just isn't that special of a game anymore

(06-01-2017 10:07 PM)ArmyBlazer Wrote:  I don't normally chime in on SEC conversations, but this is worth a mention. UT/Bama is one of the great Southern football rivalries and it's not just an interchangeable game. This is one of those games that the league needs to find a way to protect.

I'm not hating on it. It's a great game. But so are games like UF/Auburn and UGA/Bama that we almost never get to see anymore because games like UT/Bama get special protection.

The rest of the league doesn't want these arranged rivalries and wants to play teams from the other division more often. To give you an example, South Carolina is going 17 years (2008 to 2025) between hosting LSU in Columbia. It's the same story at just about every other school. Unless you want to go to 9 or 10 games (I personally would) there has to be something done and Auburn to the East is as good an idea as I've seen.

(06-01-2017 09:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 09:18 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...t-to-west/

Jay Jacobs pushing for Auburn move to the SEC East. Missouri would make the most sense to move to the SEC West (which would also get them playing Texas A&M regularly again).

It's a sensible move, but fraught with internecine politics, and when has common sense ever trumped politics, LOL?

Props for using "internecine" in a sentence.

(06-01-2017 09:43 AM)goofus Wrote:  There are some important issues that could prevent this.

Bama needs to play both Tenn and Auburn every season.

The SEC only plays an 8 game conference schedule.

That means both Bama and Auburn would have to move together to the SEC east. Best Teams that could move west geographicly would be Mizzou and Kentucky. But that could create some imbalanced divisions.

Agree. I live right outside Auburn. I don't think this will happen for the scheduling reasons you mentioned.

(06-02-2017 09:40 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-01-2017 10:07 PM)ArmyBlazer Wrote:  I don't normally chime in on SEC conversations, but this is worth a mention. UT/Bama is one of the great Southern football rivalries and it's not just an interchangeable game. This is one of those games that the league needs to find a way to protect.

I'm not hating on it. It's a great game. But so are games like UF/Auburn and UGA/Bama that we almost never get to see anymore because games like UT/Bama get special protection.

The rest of the league doesn't want these arranged rivalries and wants to play teams from the other division more often. To give you an example, South Carolina is going 17 years (2008 to 2025) between hosting LSU in Columbia. It's the same story at just about every other school. Unless you want to go to 9 or 10 games (I personally would) there has to be something done and Auburn to the East is as good an idea as I've seen.

The UT/Bama game is protected at this time just like the GA/Auburn game is protected. In the state of Alabama when someone says the 3rd Saturday in Oct everyone knows what they are talking about. Growing up an Auburn fan I would like to see Auburn in the East just due to the fact that I grew up seeing Auburn play Florida and Tennessee each year instead of only every blue moon.

why even have permanent divisions? everybody gets 3 permanent rivals but the divisions change every year and would be random. permanent rivals would be

Ark - Mizzou, A&M, LSU
auburn - Ga, Bama, FL
Bama - Tenn, Auburn, Ole Miss
Florida - Ga, SCar, Auburn
Ga - FL, Auburn, SCar
ky - Mizzou, MSU, Tenn
LSU - A&M, Ole Miss, Ark
Ole Miss, MSU, LSU, Bama
MSU - Ole Miss, Ky, Vandy
mizzou - Ark, Ky, A&M
SCar - FL, Vandy, Ga
Tenn - Vandy, Bama, Ky
Texas A&M - LSU, Ark, Mizzou
Vandy - Tenn, SCar, MSU