You’re right about Missouri, but everything about them in the SEC is forced.

Go to a 4 x 4 and It solves 99.9% of the issues.

Alabama: Auburn, L.S.U. Tennessee, Miss State
Arkansas: Missouri, L.S.U., Texas A&M, Miss State
Auburn: Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee
Florida: Georgia, Auburn, South Carolina, Kentucky
Georgia: Florida, Auburn, South Carolina, Mississippi
Kentucky: Florida, Tennessee, Missouri, Vanderbilt
L.S.U.: Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Mississippi: L.S.U., Miss State, Vanderbilt, Georgia
Miss State: Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Missouri: Arkansas, Kentucky, South Carolina, Texas A&M
South Carolina: Florida, Georgia, Missouri, Vanderbilt
Tennessee: Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Vanderbilt.
Texas A&M: Arkansas, L.S.U., Mississippi St., Missouri
Vanderbilt: Tennessee, South Carolina, Mississippi, Kentucky

Now rotate 4 conference games for 8 conference games total. This format will even accommodate 16. It'll take 3 years to rotate through if you wait to alternate the home and home until the cycle is completed. The rotation gets bumped up 1 slot every three years for 16, and 3 slots every three years for 14

I like the 4x4 concept

Like you said it covers all the important match ups and in a 9 game schedule would still let you rotate through everyone else home and away at least once in a typical 4 year career

Yeah, the 4-4 works well. That's what I push for the ACC, but people push back against it for 3-5 instead. The 4-4 allows all the Tobacco Road rivalries to be played every year.

UNC: Duke, State, Wake, UVa
Duke: UNC, State, Wake, GaTech
State: UNC, Duke, Wake, Clemson
Wake: UNC, Duke, State, VaTech

Miami: FSU, GaTech, BC, Pitt
FSU: Miami, GaTech, Clemson, VaTech
GaTech: Duke, Clemson, FSU, Miami
Clemson: State, GaTech, FSU, Louisville

UVa: VaTech, UNC, Syracuse, BC
VaTech: UVa, Wake, FSU, Louisville
Louisville: Clemson, VaTech, Pitt, Syracuse

Pitt: Miami, Syracuse, Louisville, Pitt
Syracuse: BC, Pitt, UVa, Louisville
BC: Syracuse, Miami, UVa, Pitt

4-4 doesn't work. There are 13 other schools. So you have 9 you have to host, but only 2 home games a year (the other 2 tied up with 2 of your traditional foes), or only 8 over 4 years. So you would not host one school in a four year stretch.

3-5 works because you have 10 home games for not protected. This is why 3-5 was the SEC discussion.

It basically comes down to each school picking 3 games. It'd probably work where each school would list their top 5 in order, and then every time schools matched a top 3 it would be in. Some would get left out, forcing schools to go to their 4th choice. And one or two might be shot gun marriages because they were schools left without a 3rd protected game.

The politics and horse trading would be fascinating. Tennessee, LSU and Alabama have too many rivals, maybe Georgia as well. So some games will get left off. Certainly some schools will lobby to be in place of one of those schools 3rd game.

I can alaso see coaches opting to not play certain rivals every year because they don't want too hard a schedule. LSU-Alabama and LSU-Florida are two candidates to not be protected.

Right now one game is protected cross division (Alabama-Tennessee, Auburn-Georgia, Texas A&M-South Carolina*, Florida-LSU, Ole Miss-Vandy, Miss State-Kentucky, Missouri-Arkansas). South Carolina vs Texas A&M is forced. They used to play Arkansas in the 12 format as their protected, since they were the last ones added, and that was forced.

I would assume those protected cross-rival games stay, plus the most traditional closing games (Ole Miss-Miss State, Alabama-Auburn, LSU-Arkansas, , Tennessee-Vandy). That leaves Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina and Texas A&M without big rival game. Of course Georgia (Georgia Tech), Florida (FSU), South Carolina (Clemson) and Kentucky (Louisville) play in state ACC rivals as their closer, which really only leaves Texas A&M and Missouri. Georgia and Florida also play each other in a huge traditional game earlier, which is their 2nd game. So you are left with Kentucky, South Carolina, Missouri and Texas A&M.

So for 3rd games (and one 2nd) I'd go with the named ones first

Florida - Georgia
Ole Miss - LSU
Mississippi State - Alabama
Georgia - South Carolina (2nd game)
Florida - Tennessee
Vandy - Kentucky (2nd game)

That finishes off 8 schools. What is left:

Missouri (1), Texas A&M (1), Kentucky (2), South Carolina (2), Auburn (2), Arkansas (2)

So you need to come up with 4 games for these 6 schools.

The easy one is Texas A&M vs Missouri, which probably surprises some people is not a regularly scheduled game. It's no shock really as A&M is a Southwest Conference School and Missouri is a Big 8 school and their game was of no importance in the Big 12 (MU-KU and UT-A&M were the big games). So maybe you don't automatically go there. Culturally Texas A&M fits better with Arkansas and Auburn of the Deep South, while Missouri fits better with fellow border state Kentucky.

As I look it over the only near lock would be Texas A&M - Arkansas.

Missouri could play A&M and Kentucky, and Auburn could play South Carolina. Or A&M could play Auburn and Missouri play the Kentucky and South Carolina.

It seems A&M vs Arkansas forces Missouri vs Kentucky.

Interesting how that exercise played out.

(11-27-2019 11:40 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  4-4 doesn't work. There are 13 other schools. So you have 9 you have to host, but only 2 home games a year (the other 2 tied up with 2 of your traditional foes), or only 8 over 4 years. So you would not host one school in a four year stretch.

3-5 works because you have 10 home games for not protected. This is why 3-5 was the SEC discussion.

It basically comes down to each school picking 3 games. It'd probably work where each school would list their top 5 in order, and then every time schools matched a top 3 it would be in. Some would get left out, forcing schools to go to their 4th choice. And one or two might be shot gun marriages because they were schools left without a 3rd protected game.

The politics and horse trading would be fascinating. Tennessee, LSU and Alabama have too many rivals, maybe Georgia as well. So some games will get left off. Certainly some schools will lobby to be in place of one of those schools 3rd game.

I can alaso see coaches opting to not play certain rivals every year because they don't want too hard a schedule. LSU-Alabama and LSU-Florida are two candidates to not be protected.

Right now one game is protected cross division (Alabama-Tennessee, Auburn-Georgia, Texas A&M-South Carolina*, Florida-LSU, Ole Miss-Vandy, Miss State-Kentucky, Missouri-Arkansas). South Carolina vs Texas A&M is forced. They used to play Arkansas in the 12 format as their protected, since they were the last ones added, and that was forced.

I would assume those protected cross-rival games stay, plus the most traditional closing games (Ole Miss-Miss State, Alabama-Auburn, LSU-Arkansas, , Tennessee-Vandy). That leaves Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina and Texas A&M without big rival game. Of course Georgia (Georgia Tech), Florida (FSU), South Carolina (Clemson) and Kentucky (Louisville) play in state ACC rivals as their closer, which really only leaves Texas A&M and Missouri. Georgia and Florida also play each other in a huge traditional game earlier, which is their 2nd game. So you are left with Kentucky, South Carolina, Missouri and Texas A&M.

So for 3rd games (and one 2nd) I'd go with the named ones first

Florida - Georgia
Ole Miss - LSU
Mississippi State - Alabama
Georgia - South Carolina (2nd game)
Florida - Tennessee
Vandy - Kentucky (2nd game)

That finishes off 8 schools. What is left:

Missouri (1), Texas A&M (1), Kentucky (2), South Carolina (2), Auburn (2), Arkansas (2)

So you need to come up with 4 games for these 6 schools.

The easy one is Texas A&M vs Missouri, which probably surprises some people is not a regularly scheduled game. It's no shock really as A&M is a Southwest Conference School and Missouri is a Big 8 school and their game was of no importance in the Big 12 (MU-KU and UT-A&M were the big games). So maybe you don't automatically go there. Culturally Texas A&M fits better with Arkansas and Auburn of the Deep South, while Missouri fits better with fellow border state Kentucky.

As I look it over the only near lock would be Texas A&M - Arkansas.

Missouri could play A&M and Kentucky, and Auburn could play South Carolina. Or A&M could play Auburn and Missouri play the Kentucky and South Carolina.

It seems A&M vs Arkansas forces Missouri vs Kentucky.

Interesting how that exercise played out.

Definitely agree with you on 3-5 working out better than 4-4. Even if a team is not a protected opponent, at least with 3-5 you're guaranteed to play them twice every 4 years.

I don't think Arkansas/LSU is critical to retain as protected. The rivalry week matchups have been Arkansas/Missouri and LSU/Texas A&M since 2014.

Not hosting one school in a five year stretch is not good enough of a reason to ignore all the positives of a 4-4. It’s way better than what’s going on currently.

(11-27-2019 08:27 PM)esayem Wrote:  Having to keep Alabama-LSU for SOS isn’t taking into account the fact those teams will see Georgia, and in Alabama’s case, Florida more often.

I know next to nothing about the Mississippi schools so I’m not sure which one would prefer Alabama or LSU. Miss State might end up with Auburn too.

Florida: Georgia, Auburn (this game has happened more than the Iron Bowl), S. Carolina
Tennessee: Alabama, Vandy, Kentucky
Vandy: Tennessee, Kentucky, Ole Miss
S. Carolina: Georgia, Florida, ?
Kentucky: Tennessee, Vandy, Mizzou
Georgia: Florida, S. Carolina, Auburn

Ole Miss: Miss St., LSU, Vandy
Miss State: Ole Miss, Alabama, ?
LSU: TAMU, Arkansas, Ole Miss
TAMU: LSU, Arkansas, Missouri
Arkansas: LSU, Mizzou, TAMU
Auburn: Alabama, Florida, Georgia
Alabama: Auburn, Miss State, Tennessee
Mizzou: TAMU, Arkansas, Kentucky

South Carolina-Miss State sort of becomes the only forced “rivalry”.

SC/Miss St was actually a protected rivalry from 92 until 2003 or so when the SEC gave each team two permanent cross division rivals. Talent would be similar most years. I don’t think there would be any complaints

(11-27-2019 10:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Go to a 4 x 4 and It solves 99.9% of the issues.

Alabama: Auburn, L.S.U. Tennessee, Miss State
Arkansas: Missouri, L.S.U., Texas A&M, Miss State
Auburn: Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee
Florida: Georgia, Auburn, South Carolina, Kentucky
Georgia: Florida, Auburn, South Carolina, Mississippi
Kentucky: Florida, Tennessee, Missouri, Vanderbilt
L.S.U.: Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Mississippi: L.S.U., Miss State, Vanderbilt, Georgia
Miss State: Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Missouri: Arkansas, Kentucky, South Carolina, Texas A&M
South Carolina: Florida, Georgia, Missouri, Vanderbilt
Tennessee: Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Vanderbilt.
Texas A&M: Arkansas, L.S.U., Mississippi St., Missouri
Vanderbilt: Tennessee, South Carolina, Mississippi, Kentucky

Now rotate 4 conference games for 8 conference games total. This format will even accommodate 16. It'll take 3 years to rotate through if you wait to alternate the home and home until the cycle is completed. The rotation gets bumped up 1 slot every three years for 16, and 3 slots every three years for 14

4x4 only really makes sense if we got to 16.

Otherwise one opponent is getting left out every two years and the cycle becomes unbalanced. 3x5 is much better. Or if you want to go to 9 games then 5x4.

Stu is right. A 14 team conference needs to either play a 3-5/5 schedule or a 5-4/4 schedule in order to see every conference mate at least twice in a 4 year cycle. I think playing every conference mate twice in a 4 year cycle needs to be a requirement for going divisionless

(11-28-2019 10:47 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Stu is right. A 14 team conference needs to either play a 3-5/5 schedule or a 5-4/4 schedule in order to see every conference mate at least twice in a 4 year cycle. I think playing every conference mate twice in a 4 year cycle needs to be a requirement for going divisionless

Why? That’s a nonsensical idea for people that have to fit this concept into a tidy four year box. 4-4 maximizes the important games. Who cares if Texas A&M plays Kentucky after a four year break? Nonsensical.

(11-28-2019 10:35 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  SC/Miss St was actually a protected rivalry from 92 until 2003 or so when the SEC gave each team two permanent cross division rivals. Talent would be similar most years. I don’t think there would be any complaints

I actually read about that.

Secondary rivals were:

SC-Miss State
UK-LSU
UT-Arkansas
UGa-Ole Miss
UF-Auburn
Vandy-Alabama (nice draw, Vandy)

I have a hunch that 2022 will be the year that the Big Ten scraps its divisions and changes the rules so that the 2 "best" teams always go to the CCG.

In 2021 the Big Ten will be completing a 6 year cycle where everybody played everybody at least twice, once at home, once away. 2022 is the beginning of a new cycle so that seems to be the logical time to scrap the divisions.

Then they could go to a new schedule where teams have 5 permanent opponents and play the other 8 teams 50% of the time.

If I had to guess the 5 permanent opponents will be

Rut- MD, PSU, OSU, Mich, Pur
MD - Rut, PSU, OSU, MSU, Indy
PSU - Rut, MD, OSU, MSU, Neb
OSU - Rut, MD, PSU, Mich, ILL
Mich - Rut, OSU, MSU, Pur, Minn
MSU - MD, PSU, Mich, Indy, Wisc
Indy - MD, MSU, Pur, ILL, Minn
Pur - Rut, Mich, Indy, NW, ILL
ILL - OSU, Indy, Pur, NW, Iowa
NW - Pur, ILL, Iowa, Wisc, Neb
Wisc - NW, Minn, Iowa, Neb, MSU
Minn - Mich, Wisc, Iowa, Neb, Indy
Iowa - ILL, NW, Wisc, Minn, Neb
Neb - PSU, Wisc, Iowa, Minn, NW

Here's a chart of the SEC's protected conference opponents in football since 1971. That was the first year that the pre-division SEC had a consistent set of 5 protected opponents per team. The 1992 expansion resulted in 5 "protected opponents" per team as in-division matchups and 2 as interdivision crossovers. In 2003, the number of protected crossovers was reduced to one. The 2012 expansion of course increased the number of in-division opponents to 6, while retaining the one protected crossover. And in 2014, Arkansas/South Carolina and Missouri/Texas A&M traded crossovers.

The shaded boxes indicate the 3 protected matchups per team that would be retained in my proposed divisionless setup.

(11-28-2019 06:51 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Definitely agree with you on 3-5 working out better than 4-4. Even if a team is not a protected opponent, at least with 3-5 you're guaranteed to play them twice every 4 years.

I don't think Arkansas/LSU is critical to retain as protected. The rivalry week matchups have been Arkansas/Missouri and LSU/Texas A&M since 2014.

Alabama and LSU will not want to protect each other. It's known simply as the Saban Bowl. Meaning it's like Ohio State and Penn State, important because the teams are good. You want that hard match up for Alabama and LSU. But the truth is both would happily miss each other every couple years.

LSU vs Arkansas is too important to Arkansas, so it will be protected instead. Alabama has an easier and just as strong tradition of the 90 mile drive where fans of both schools travel. The return to rivalries is what this is about. LSU also has an important rivalry with Florida, and that is more critical for recruiting by both schools (Louisiana and Florida being huge recruiting grounds).

Your view is skewed by fans desire, and not how the schools themselves would choose.

(11-28-2019 12:59 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(11-28-2019 06:51 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Definitely agree with you on 3-5 working out better than 4-4. Even if a team is not a protected opponent, at least with 3-5 you're guaranteed to play them twice every 4 years.

I don't think Arkansas/LSU is critical to retain as protected. The rivalry week matchups have been Arkansas/Missouri and LSU/Texas A&M since 2014.

Alabama and LSU will not want to protect each other. It's known simply as the Saban Bowl. Meaning it's like Ohio State and Penn State, important because the teams are good. You want that hard match up for Alabama and LSU. But the truth is both would happily miss each other every couple years.

LSU vs Arkansas is too important to Arkansas, so it will be protected instead. Alabama has an easier and just as strong tradition of the 90 mile drive where fans of both schools travel. The return to rivalries is what this is about. LSU also has an important rivalry with Florida, and that is more critical for recruiting by both schools (Louisiana and Florida being huge recruiting grounds).

Your view is skewed by fans desire, and not how the schools themselves would choose.

OK, but then you may have a scenario wherein Auburn is playing Alabama, Florida, and Georgia annually, while Alabama and LSU have only one tough annual opponent each, Auburn and (arguably) Texas A&M, respectively.

So maybe break up Auburn/Florida. But then what? Trade it for the admittedly forced Kentucky/South Carolina and instead have two forced matchups in Auburn/South Carolina and Florida/Kentucky?

B1G would definitely keep the 9 game schedule. There was even a look into whether they could go to 10.

So a 3-6 would create a 10 year cycle where you'd host schools 3 times. It's only slightly more than 2 times in 8 years the 3-5 model makes in the SEC or ACC. 4-5 also creates funky math. What actually works is 5-4.

Here is the irony, 4-5 works well for a 15 school conference (cough, Oklahoma) ... hum. Regardless I need to think about the B1G, especially a 5-4 model (most likely). As a Buckeye fan, Michigan has to be on the schedule. But after that everyone is a sort of rival except perhaps Minnesota, Northwestern, Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers. So who would be the Buckeyes five?

Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State ... and probably Maryland would be forced on the Buckeyes (6 schools besides Penn State will have to play Rutgers or Maryland every year to make 5-4 work, so I am working under the assumption the Buckeyes will get one of those, and of the two Maryland makes more sense, while Indiana and Northwestern with their New Jersey recruiting focus it's Rutgers that makes more sense).

The 5th one? That's a tough call. Illinois and Wisconsin are probably the top picks. Frankly I'd lean Illinois, as I had a girlfriend who went to UIUC and the first game I attended at the horseshoe was against Illinois. But that is sentimental and nothing else.

(11-28-2019 11:11 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(11-28-2019 10:35 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  SC/Miss St was actually a protected rivalry from 92 until 2003 or so when the SEC gave each team two permanent cross division rivals. Talent would be similar most years. I don’t think there would be any complaints

I actually read about that.

Secondary rivals were:

SC-Miss State
UK-LSU
UT-Arkansas
UGa-Ole Miss
UF-Auburn
Vandy-Alabama (nice draw, Vandy)

Really the only one of those that made any sense Is UF/Auburn. I think Vandy/Alabama were old school rivals in the pre war era

How about this setup for the SEC with 3 protected opponents? It replaces:

Alabama/LSU, Arkansas/Mississippi State, Auburn/Florida, Kentucky/Vanderbilt

... with:

Alabama/Mississippi State, Arkansas/LSU, Auburn/Vanderbilt, Florida/Kentucky

I don't know that Florida/Kentucky is much of a rivalry in football, but they are already protected opponents in basketball, so there's some connection. Auburn/Vanderbilt is forced of course, as are a few other protected matchups (FL/SC, KY/SC, MSS/MO) retained from my previous setup. But for the most part, the pairings are either essential or at least somewhat natural/logical.

It's been an interesting conversation. Whatever happened to all of the people who were mocking Aresco for starting this conversation back up? It's suddenly not looking like such a joke any more...

USFFan