Started By
Message
re: How about this for an 8-game SEC schedule rotation?
Posted on 11/7/12 at 11:21 pm to bluestem75
Posted on 11/7/12 at 11:21 pm to bluestem75
quote:
I do, too, but I think it's no longer practical with a 14-team league. Giving them 6 out of every 8 years is a reasonable compromise. If they wanted to keep things the same in the league, they should have thought through the consequences of adding two new teams.
No. Ignorant argument is ignorant. No possible way we go multiple seasons without playing Ole Miss. Literally LSU and maybe Florida would be the only teams supporting ANYTHING remotely close to your proposal. These things need 75% approval to pass.
The only "fix" is to keep everything exactly the same and go to a 9 team conference schedule, which is coming in 2014 with the launch of the SEC network whether everyone likes it or not...
1
Posted on 11/8/12 at 5:28 am to engie
The order of teams, starting in the furthest East, is:
South Carolina
UF
UGA
UT
UK
AU
Vandy (Stop - we've reached 7 teams)
Then for the western division we'd have:
UA
MSU
OM
LSU
Mizzou
Arky
A&M
I don't think the state of Alabama would care for ending the UA/AU rivalry, and UA would prefer not to end the rivalry with Tennessee. From a historical standpoint, Tenn is the second team in the SEC based on total conference championships. The rivalry is long and storied.
That said, we can't go around altering the alignment based on which teams are good or not. If you aligned it on that perception in, say, 1992 - then Alabama was the #1 team. Does that hold true for 2000-2006? Alabama gets moved around for being weak, then suddenly in 2008 starts 12-0, wins the title the next year, etc.
When the divisions were established in 1992, there were two static foes, and one rotating one. Alabama had Tennessee (a force in the 1990s) and Vandy (weak).
To be honest, the original division was based almost entirely on time zone, with Vandy being the lone exception. That's obviously not the case anymore, thanks to Mizzou, but still applies to 12 of the 14 schools.
Basically, the original division would've forced AU into the East, with Alabama in the West. Alabama would then get Auburn, most likely, as their permanent rival, ending the "Third Saturday in October" - or, possibly, ending the "Iron Bowl".
LSU, on the other hand, counts its primary rival as Ole Miss, if memory serves, and in recent years Alabama. Nothing was up for being altered for LSU.
South Carolina
UF
UGA
UT
UK
AU
Vandy (Stop - we've reached 7 teams)
Then for the western division we'd have:
UA
MSU
OM
LSU
Mizzou
Arky
A&M
I don't think the state of Alabama would care for ending the UA/AU rivalry, and UA would prefer not to end the rivalry with Tennessee. From a historical standpoint, Tenn is the second team in the SEC based on total conference championships. The rivalry is long and storied.
That said, we can't go around altering the alignment based on which teams are good or not. If you aligned it on that perception in, say, 1992 - then Alabama was the #1 team. Does that hold true for 2000-2006? Alabama gets moved around for being weak, then suddenly in 2008 starts 12-0, wins the title the next year, etc.
When the divisions were established in 1992, there were two static foes, and one rotating one. Alabama had Tennessee (a force in the 1990s) and Vandy (weak).
To be honest, the original division was based almost entirely on time zone, with Vandy being the lone exception. That's obviously not the case anymore, thanks to Mizzou, but still applies to 12 of the 14 schools.
Basically, the original division would've forced AU into the East, with Alabama in the West. Alabama would then get Auburn, most likely, as their permanent rival, ending the "Third Saturday in October" - or, possibly, ending the "Iron Bowl".
LSU, on the other hand, counts its primary rival as Ole Miss, if memory serves, and in recent years Alabama. Nothing was up for being altered for LSU.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News