And if they wouldn't, who could they get to move?

I believe the SEC would accept Oklahoma, though I think the B1G would be OU's first choice. I think OU would be acceptable to the B1G, but I don't see them moving back to an 8 game schedule. I also don't see the B1G accepting Oklahoma State. If Texas wouldn't agree to come to the B1G along with OU, the Sooners would have a difficult choice.

With a 9 game league schedule, I think OU would have to choose between keeping Bedlam or the Red River Rivalry with Texas. The alternative would be giving up a seventh home game. I think they would be more inclined to stay put than do that. That leaves them with the SEC, which I believe would be acceptable to OU. But I would qualify that by saying that I think they would only move if either Texas or Oklahoma State came with them, OR the SEC agreed to keep its 8 game schedule.

The SEC could do that. With Alabama and Auburn shifted to the SEC East and Missouri to the West, there would be no need for any protected crossovers. So they could just rotate cross division opponents every 8 years. But they, and potential media partners, might not be OK with that at a price that would be attractive to the SEC. Of course, if Texas came along, OU could keep both Bedlam and seven home games.

I have a hard time seeing Texas agreeing to a move in which they aren't one of the alpha dogs in their new conference. And I have just as hard a time seeing current SEC members going along with that pecking order. I also don't see Texas moving to the B1G with no other Texas schools coming with them.

So are we at a stalemate, in which everybody stays right where they are?

IMO the SEC should have gone to 9 with the move to 14 teams. All the West schools plus Vandy/UT/Missouri need to get on board with playing a 10th power team as well.

The current setup is too unwieldy as it is.

If Alabama and Auburn did move to the east, both schools have rivalries with LSU and Miss State.

At 14 schools, 10 games get you to play everyone every 2 years with a permanent crossover. But that’s far too much. At 16, 9 games works out smoothly.

Maybe the SEC could scrap its divisions and just have the 2 best teams go to the CCG, like other P5 cobferences are talking about possibly doing.

Then the SEC could expand to 16 teams, keep 8 conference games, and go with a schedule with 1 permanent rival and then play the other 14 teams 50% of the time.

Or maybe 3 permanent rivals and play the other 12 teams at least 33% of the time.

(03-08-2019 10:03 AM)goofus Wrote:  Maybe the SEC could scrap its divisions and just have the 2 best teams go to the CCG, like other P5 cobferences are talking about possibly doing.

Then the SEC could expand to 16 teams, keep 8 conference games, and go with a schedule with 1 permanent rival and then play the other 14 teams 50% of the time.

Or maybe 3 permanent rivals and play the other 12 teams at least 33% of the time.

I agree that divisionless is the future. It opens up the schedule for larger conferences to play everyone AND it allows conferences to have the two best schools meet in the championship rather than division champions where one may be a slouch.

Not going below 8 conference games or above 10 conference games:

At 16...
8 games: 1 permanent, 7 / 7 every other year
9 games: 3 permanent, 6 / 6 every other year
9 games: 7 permanent, 2 / 2 / 2 / 2 every four years
10 games: 5 permanent, 5 / 5 every other year

At 18...
8 games: 5 permanent, 3 / 3 / 3 / 3 every four years
9 games: 1 permanent, 8 / 8 every other year
10 games: 3 permanent, 7 / 7 every other year

At 20...
10 games: 1 permanent, 9 / 9 every other year
10 games: 7 permanent, 3 / 3 / 3 / 3 every other year

There may be other combinations.

---

I think 8 conferences games, especially with a permanent crossover, is not enough. That being said, I like that they have an even number of conference games so everyone has the same theoretical amount of home and away games. I also don't care for 10 out of 12 games being conference games unless the conferences get up to 16+. At that point, its less of a traditional conference and more of an association of similar institutions.

(03-08-2019 07:35 AM)ken d Wrote:  And if they wouldn't, who could they get to move?

I believe the SEC would accept Oklahoma, though I think the B1G would be OU's first choice. I think OU would be acceptable to the B1G, but I don't see them moving back to an 8 game schedule. I also don't see the B1G accepting Oklahoma State. If Texas wouldn't agree to come to the B1G along with OU, the Sooners would have a difficult choice.

With a 9 game league schedule, I think OU would have to choose between keeping Bedlam or the Red River Rivalry with Texas. The alternative would be giving up a seventh home game. I think they would be more inclined to stay put than do that. That leaves them with the SEC, which I believe would be acceptable to OU. But I would qualify that by saying that I think they would only move if either Texas or Oklahoma State came with them, OR the SEC agreed to keep its 8 game schedule.

The SEC could do that. With Alabama and Auburn shifted to the SEC East and Missouri to the West, there would be no need for any protected crossovers. So they could just rotate cross division opponents every 8 years. But they, and potential media partners, might not be OK with that at a price that would be attractive to the SEC. Of course, if Texas came along, OU could keep both Bedlam and seven home games.

I have a hard time seeing Texas agreeing to a move in which they aren't one of the alpha dogs in their new conference. And I have just as hard a time seeing current SEC members going along with that pecking order. I also don't see Texas moving to the B1G with no other Texas schools coming with them.

So are we at a stalemate, in which everybody stays right where they are?

1. The issue won't be decided vox populi.
2. We eventually move to all 12 P games anyway. Dabo has already suggested that eventually the Spring Game may well become the 7th home game in the ticket book if it is moved to mid to late August and played as a pre-season game against a lower tier school. I think even the networks would go for this since it would give them another event in the midst of a slow time.
3. The matter will be settled one way or the other within the next 4 or 5 years. We'll have our answer as to whether there is or isn't defection from the Big 12, and if so where Oklahoma, Kansas or Texas head. And then we will know why they moved, or stayed. We will know if the revenue gap between the SEC/B1G and the other P3 grows or remains relatively the same, or if the PAC can play catch up. Since the Big 12 requires 2 years advanced notice on a move 2022-3 would be the window unless Alston forces changes for us all.

(03-08-2019 11:43 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-08-2019 07:35 AM)ken d Wrote:  And if they wouldn't, who could they get to move?

I believe the SEC would accept Oklahoma, though I think the B1G would be OU's first choice. I think OU would be acceptable to the B1G, but I don't see them moving back to an 8 game schedule. I also don't see the B1G accepting Oklahoma State. If Texas wouldn't agree to come to the B1G along with OU, the Sooners would have a difficult choice.

With a 9 game league schedule, I think OU would have to choose between keeping Bedlam or the Red River Rivalry with Texas. The alternative would be giving up a seventh home game. I think they would be more inclined to stay put than do that. That leaves them with the SEC, which I believe would be acceptable to OU. But I would qualify that by saying that I think they would only move if either Texas or Oklahoma State came with them, OR the SEC agreed to keep its 8 game schedule.

The SEC could do that. With Alabama and Auburn shifted to the SEC East and Missouri to the West, there would be no need for any protected crossovers. So they could just rotate cross division opponents every 8 years. But they, and potential media partners, might not be OK with that at a price that would be attractive to the SEC. Of course, if Texas came along, OU could keep both Bedlam and seven home games.

I have a hard time seeing Texas agreeing to a move in which they aren't one of the alpha dogs in their new conference. And I have just as hard a time seeing current SEC members going along with that pecking order. I also don't see Texas moving to the B1G with no other Texas schools coming with them.

So are we at a stalemate, in which everybody stays right where they are?

1. The issue won't be decided vox populi.
2. We eventually move to all 12 P games anyway. Dabo has already suggested that eventually the Spring Game may well become the 7th home game in the ticket book if it is moved to mid to late August and played as a pre-season game against a lower tier school. I think even the networks would go for this since it would give them another event in the midst of a slow time.
3. The matter will be settled one way or the other within the next 4 or 5 years. We'll have our answer as to whether there is or isn't defection from the Big 12, and if so where Oklahoma, Kansas or Texas head. And then we will know why they moved, or stayed. We will know if the revenue gap between the SEC/B1G and the other P3 grows or remains relatively the same, or if the PAC can play catch up. Since the Big 12 requires 2 years advanced notice on a move 2022-3 would be the window unless Alston forces changes for us all.

Not being an insider, I can't speak to what any conference will choose to do. But I can guess, like anyone else. Elsewhere, you have said the most likely outcome for the SEC is to add Texas and Tech. I agree completely with the cogent arguments you make as to why that's likely. Especially with the added likelihood that the A&M game will be mandated anyway - so it might as well be played as a conference game.

That puts the ball squarely in Oklahoma's court. My guess there is they would turn down the B1G - not because their hands are tied politically with respect to OK State (if they actually are), but because they genuinely want to play both UT and OK State every year. By passing on the B1G, they get some credit for doing something they want to do anyhow.

IMO, that's bad news for Kansas, as I don't think they get a B1G invite except as a companion to Oklahoma. Nevertheless, the Big XII is now actively shopping for replacements for the two defectors. I say two because I don't think West Virginia finds a different home. I would have thought, not being a Big East guy, that they were a logical add for the ACC in an event like this. But I accept that I just underestimated the animus toward the Mountaineers by their former conference mates.

With the Horns no longer in the picture, I have no idea how that changes the calculus for potential B12 hopefuls. The Big XII would still be P5, but clearly diminished (once again). Not sure how many more blows they can take before giving up the ghost.

(03-08-2019 11:43 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-08-2019 07:35 AM)ken d Wrote:  And if they wouldn't, who could they get to move?

I believe the SEC would accept Oklahoma, though I think the B1G would be OU's first choice. I think OU would be acceptable to the B1G, but I don't see them moving back to an 8 game schedule. I also don't see the B1G accepting Oklahoma State. If Texas wouldn't agree to come to the B1G along with OU, the Sooners would have a difficult choice.

With a 9 game league schedule, I think OU would have to choose between keeping Bedlam or the Red River Rivalry with Texas. The alternative would be giving up a seventh home game. I think they would be more inclined to stay put than do that. That leaves them with the SEC, which I believe would be acceptable to OU. But I would qualify that by saying that I think they would only move if either Texas or Oklahoma State came with them, OR the SEC agreed to keep its 8 game schedule.

The SEC could do that. With Alabama and Auburn shifted to the SEC East and Missouri to the West, there would be no need for any protected crossovers. So they could just rotate cross division opponents every 8 years. But they, and potential media partners, might not be OK with that at a price that would be attractive to the SEC. Of course, if Texas came along, OU could keep both Bedlam and seven home games.

I have a hard time seeing Texas agreeing to a move in which they aren't one of the alpha dogs in their new conference. And I have just as hard a time seeing current SEC members going along with that pecking order. I also don't see Texas moving to the B1G with no other Texas schools coming with them.

So are we at a stalemate, in which everybody stays right where they are?

1. The issue won't be decided vox populi.
2. We eventually move to all 12 P games anyway. Dabo has already suggested that eventually the Spring Game may well become the 7th home game in the ticket book if it is moved to mid to late August and played as a pre-season game against a lower tier school. I think even the networks would go for this since it would give them another event in the midst of a slow time.
3. The matter will be settled one way or the other within the next 4 or 5 years. We'll have our answer as to whether there is or isn't defection from the Big 12, and if so where Oklahoma, Kansas or Texas head. And then we will know why they moved, or stayed. We will know if the revenue gap between the SEC/B1G and the other P3 grows or remains relatively the same, or if the PAC can play catch up. Since the Big 12 requires 2 years advanced notice on a move 2022-3 would be the window unless Alston forces changes for us all.

Won't be a popular vote but boosers/ticket holders do have a say.

I can't really imagine a scenario where we go to 12 P5 games in the next 4-5 years. The SEC can't even decide on whether or not they'll go to 9 games or allow beer sales, there's no way they make that big of a change that quickly. Maybe it'll happen, but it'll be in 50 years.

(03-08-2019 08:59 AM)kevinwmsn Wrote:  If Alabama and Auburn did move to the east, both schools have rivalries with LSU and Miss State.

There's just no way to do an East/West split and have Alabama be completely happy. Either the commissioners office has to tell them to suck it up or retain some form of the status quo.

(03-08-2019 12:07 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-08-2019 11:43 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-08-2019 07:35 AM)ken d Wrote:  And if they wouldn't, who could they get to move?

I believe the SEC would accept Oklahoma, though I think the B1G would be OU's first choice. I think OU would be acceptable to the B1G, but I don't see them moving back to an 8 game schedule. I also don't see the B1G accepting Oklahoma State. If Texas wouldn't agree to come to the B1G along with OU, the Sooners would have a difficult choice.

With a 9 game league schedule, I think OU would have to choose between keeping Bedlam or the Red River Rivalry with Texas. The alternative would be giving up a seventh home game. I think they would be more inclined to stay put than do that. That leaves them with the SEC, which I believe would be acceptable to OU. But I would qualify that by saying that I think they would only move if either Texas or Oklahoma State came with them, OR the SEC agreed to keep its 8 game schedule.

The SEC could do that. With Alabama and Auburn shifted to the SEC East and Missouri to the West, there would be no need for any protected crossovers. So they could just rotate cross division opponents every 8 years. But they, and potential media partners, might not be OK with that at a price that would be attractive to the SEC. Of course, if Texas came along, OU could keep both Bedlam and seven home games.

I have a hard time seeing Texas agreeing to a move in which they aren't one of the alpha dogs in their new conference. And I have just as hard a time seeing current SEC members going along with that pecking order. I also don't see Texas moving to the B1G with no other Texas schools coming with them.

So are we at a stalemate, in which everybody stays right where they are?

1. The issue won't be decided vox populi.
2. We eventually move to all 12 P games anyway. Dabo has already suggested that eventually the Spring Game may well become the 7th home game in the ticket book if it is moved to mid to late August and played as a pre-season game against a lower tier school. I think even the networks would go for this since it would give them another event in the midst of a slow time.
3. The matter will be settled one way or the other within the next 4 or 5 years. We'll have our answer as to whether there is or isn't defection from the Big 12, and if so where Oklahoma, Kansas or Texas head. And then we will know why they moved, or stayed. We will know if the revenue gap between the SEC/B1G and the other P3 grows or remains relatively the same, or if the PAC can play catch up. Since the Big 12 requires 2 years advanced notice on a move 2022-3 would be the window unless Alston forces changes for us all.

Not being an insider, I can't speak to what any conference will choose to do. But I can guess, like anyone else. Elsewhere, you have said the most likely outcome for the SEC is to add Texas and Tech. I agree completely with the cogent arguments you make as to why that's likely. Especially with the added likelihood that the A&M game will be mandated anyway - so it might as well be played as a conference game.

That puts the ball squarely in Oklahoma's court. My guess there is they would turn down the B1G - not because their hands are tied politically with respect to OK State (if they actually are), but because they genuinely want to play both UT and OK State every year. By passing on the B1G, they get some credit for doing something they want to do anyhow.

IMO, that's bad news for Kansas, as I don't think they get a B1G invite except as a companion to Oklahoma. Nevertheless, the Big XII is now actively shopping for replacements for the two defectors. I say two because I don't think West Virginia finds a different home. I would have thought, not being a Big East guy, that they were a logical add for the ACC in an event like this. But I accept that I just underestimated the animus toward the Mountaineers by their former conference mates.

With the Horns no longer in the picture, I have no idea how that changes the calculus for potential B12 hopefuls. The Big XII would still be P5, but clearly diminished (once again). Not sure how many more blows they can take before giving up the ghost.

Ken, I think in that case a scenario of Oklahoma/OSU/Kansas/KSU to the PAC starts to make some sense. The PAC adds 4 CTZ slots but two brands, but one in each money sport. Both Colorado are easily accessed through Colorado. There aren't many PAC expansion scenarios that are practical, and this one's not either unless things break exactly as you described. But if it does break as you described then this becomes the only way where OU can remain with OSU and may be the only scenario where Kansas State finds an in.

(03-08-2019 01:34 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(03-08-2019 08:59 AM)kevinwmsn Wrote:  If Alabama and Auburn did move to the east, both schools have rivalries with LSU and Miss State.

There's just no way to do an East/West split and have Alabama be completely happy. Either the commissioners office has to tell them to suck it up or retain some form of the status quo.

It's far more likely that we would move to the rotating half division system (pods) if we don't wind up with a division-less format agreed upon by the remaining P4.

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina

Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri

Arkansas, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

You have 7 games (3 in half division & 4 more in rotating half division). You could leave things there, and add 1 permanent rival for your 8th game. This way you play everyone every three years. It's not perfect but it covers most key games. Nothing is ever going to be perfect when you graft in new schools. But the truth is for you young folks it was never perfect in the past either. There were always scheduling inequities.

When the SEC only played 7 conference games for most schools 5 of those were annuals. Two rotated, and infrequently at that. The Big 12 nine game round robin is probably the best model out there currently, but it is their lack of scope that has them vulnerable in today's marketplace (5 states 4 of which are small). The new marketplace indicates further expansion for the sake of leverage and reach. We will lose some annuals to accommodate it, but if a frequent enough rotation through all conference teams becomes possible that's probably the best we can do.

I'm also inclined to think they would go with some sort of pods/permanent rival plan.

JRs proposed pods would require the following protected crossovers:

UK-Tenn
Auburn-UGA
Alabama-Miss St
Arkansas-Missouri (kind of contrived but Mizzou needs some drivable games)

(03-08-2019 02:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-08-2019 01:34 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(03-08-2019 08:59 AM)kevinwmsn Wrote:  If Alabama and Auburn did move to the east, both schools have rivalries with LSU and Miss State.

There's just no way to do an East/West split and have Alabama be completely happy. Either the commissioners office has to tell them to suck it up or retain some form of the status quo.

It's far more likely that we would move to the rotating half division system (pods) if we don't wind up with a division-less format agreed upon by the remaining P4.

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina

Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri

Arkansas, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

You have 7 games (3 in half division & 4 more in rotating half division). You could leave things there, and add 1 permanent rival for your 8th game. This way you play everyone every three years. It's not perfect but it covers most key games. Nothing is ever going to be perfect when you graft in new schools. But the truth is for you young folks it was never perfect in the past either. There were always scheduling inequities.

When the SEC only played 7 conference games for most schools 5 of those were annuals. Two rotated, and infrequently at that. The Big 12 nine game round robin is probably the best model out there currently, but it is their lack of scope that has them vulnerable in today's marketplace (5 states 4 of which are small). The new marketplace indicates further expansion for the sake of leverage and reach. We will lose some annuals to accommodate it, but if a frequent enough rotation through all conference teams becomes possible that's probably the best we can do.

I'm a big fan of the pod system.

As an SC fan, the UGA game is the only one that it's critical remains an annual matchup. I'd love to have some combination of UF, UT, and Vandy as well but I can live without one or more of them. Missouri and UK are fine but I'm ambivalent.

SB Nation came up with a plan 2-3 years ago that was more or less perfect. 3 protected opponents for everyone, 5 rotating. Play everyone in a two year span and everyone at home at least once in a 4 year span. All major and almost all minor rivalries were protected.

(03-08-2019 10:03 AM)goofus Wrote:  Maybe the SEC could scrap its divisions and just have the 2 best teams go to the CCG, like other P5 cobferences are talking about possibly doing.

Then the SEC could expand to 16 teams, keep 8 conference games, and go with a schedule with 1 permanent rival and then play the other 14 teams 50% of the time.

Or maybe 3 permanent rivals and play the other 12 teams at least 33% of the time.

But that's what every conference should do. If contingent autobids are implemented then you will see the SEC go to 9 games.

(03-08-2019 03:34 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm also inclined to think they would go with some sort of pods/permanent rival plan.

JRs proposed pods would require the following protected crossovers:

UK-Tenn
Auburn-UGA
Alabama-Miss St
Arkansas-Missouri (kind of contrived but Mizzou needs some drivable games)

Ya, you can do 4 permanent rivals (3 of whom are in your pod) and a 5th team you play 2/3 of the time; all while keeping only 8 conference games.

The SEC would probably market it as a "4-division" setup, but they'd keep the rotation behind the scenes until the divisionless thing plays out.

To the OP, I agree that Oklahoma would balk at 9 games and neither Texas nor OK State.

While totally devolving from the OP, I'm all for everyone playing a late August "preseason" FCS game and then a regular season that contains 12 games, at least 10 being P5s.

An 8-game schedule is certainly possible with a 16-team SEC. The use of rotating pods would permit a full conference playthrough in 3 years, and a full home-and-away playthrough in 6 (vs. an appalling 12 years with the current 14-team SEC). The overall structure I came up with for the divisions and schedule is nearly the same as JR's above, but it also specifies an alternate crossover, which is required for years in which a team shares a division with its protected crossover.


Here's a scenario for 2025ish, wherein the Oklahomas join the SEC.

School: Protected crossover (play annually), Alternate crossover (play 2 years out of 3)

East Pod
Florida: Oklahoma State, LSU
Georgia: Auburn, Texas A&M
Kentucky: Tennessee, Mississippi State
South Carolina: Missouri, Ole Miss

North Pod
Arkansas: Mississippi State, Tennessee
Missouri: South Carolina, Vanderbilt
Oklahoma: Texas A&M, Auburn
Oklahoma State: Florida, Alabama

South Pod
Alabama: LSU, Oklahoma State
Auburn: Georgia, Oklahoma
Tennessee: Kentucky, Arkansas
Vanderbilt: Ole Miss, Missouri

West Pod
LSU: Alabama, Florida
Mississippi State: Arkansas, Kentucky
Ole Miss: Vanderbilt, South Carolina
Texas A&M: Oklahoma, Georgia


And here's one wherein the SEC does not expand until the 2030s, around the time the ACC GoR is running out.

School: Protected crossover (play annually), Alternate crossover (play 2 years out of 3)

East Pod
Florida: LSU, Tennessee
Georgia: Auburn, Texas A&M
NC State: Mississippi State, Missouri
South Carolina: Arkansas, Vanderbilt

North Pod
Kentucky: Missouri, Mississippi State
Tennessee: Alabama, Florida
Vanderbilt: Ole Miss, South Carolina
Virginia Tech: Texas A&M, Auburn

South Pod
Alabama: Tennessee, LSU
Auburn: Georgia, Virginia Tech
Mississippi State: NC State, Kentucky
Ole Miss: Vanderbilt, Arkansas

West Pod
Arkansas: South Carolina, Ole Miss
LSU: Florida, Alabama
Missouri: Kentucky, NC State
Texas A&M: Virginia Tech, Georgia


As for the division names, how about Dixie and Gulf? Dixie and Southern? Dixie and Trixie? Better than Legends and Leaders, anyway.

yes they keep 8 conf games
you better chance to see everybody in Sun Belt

The SEC is in the same boat as The ACC. Clemson, Georgia Tech, Louisville and Florida State all have a 9th game already scheduled every season with their opposite number SEC program. If The SEC adds a 9th conference that means South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky and Florida would have 10 games scheduled every season. That leaves two games for marquee out of conference matchups on the schedule. One would think it would also eliminate The SEC’s annual “get well” game that lets SEC rest their starters during the regular season.

Before The SEC or The ACC adds a 9th conference game the season will be stretched to 13 regular season games. Media partners are going to demand it.