I'm not so sure that the push to put Missouri into the SEC Eastern Division should be entirely motivated by maintaining traditional rivalries. The SEC East is already leaning a bit on the weak side, as evidenced by the last 4 out of 5 teams listed on the all-time winning percentage chart below. The top 3 teams for each division listed below, however, seem to balance each other out pretty well...

quote:
.709 Alabama - SEC WEST
.688 Tennessee - SEC EAST
.646 Louisiana State - SEC WEST
.645 Georgia - SEC EAST
.634 Auburn - SEC WEST
.630 Florida - SEC EAST
.599 Texas A&M - SEC WEST
.594 Arkansas - SEC WEST
.561 Mississippi - SEC WEST
.544 Missouri - SEC EAST
.504 South Carolina - SEC EAST
.503 Kentucky - SEC EAST
.496 Vanderbilt - SEC EAST
.483 Mississippi State - SEC WEST

This post was edited on 11/12/11 at 8:02 am

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by alabamabuckeye

Member since Jun 2010

22206 posts

Posted on 11/10/11 at 10:48 pm to TheDude321

The Machine > REC > SEC offices

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by TheDude321

Member since Sep 2005

3154 posts

Posted on 11/12/11 at 8:20 am to alabamabuckeye

quote:
The Machine > REC > SEC offices

I disagree. The SEC can do the right thing (geographically-speaking, as well as for balance reasons) and put Missouri in the SEC West. If you line up the teams of each division side-by-side by their all-time winning percentage, the West teams are always stronger (see below), except that Vanderbilt has a better record than Mississippi State. Why should the SEC East add Missouri and become a cake-walk for Georgia to win every year while the SEC West teams have to beat themselves up from top to bottom every year?

SEC Western Division - SEC Eastern Division
#1 .709 Alabama > #1 .688 Tennessee
#2 .646 Louisiana State > #2 .645 Georgia
#3 .634 Auburn > #3 .630 Florida
#4 .599 Texas A&M > #4 .544 Missouri
#5 .594 Arkansas > #5 .504 South Carolina
#6 .561 Mississippi > #6 .503 Kentucky
#7 .483 Mississippi State < #7 .496 Vanderbilt

Page 1