Started By
Message
re: Chris Low of ESPN with some interesting reminders re: Auburn to the East
Posted on 5/18/17 at 9:59 am to Irons Puppet
Posted on 5/18/17 at 9:59 am to Irons Puppet
quote:Yet we don't see Mizzou fans, Coach, or AD begging to move West. Why?
It would allow Missouri a chance to establish some rivalries within the SEC. It has been very unfair to them at this point.
quote:How can the Big 10 just come into the SEC and pick up a team?
I think if they do not do it, Missouri is primed to be picked up by the Big 10. Then the SEC will have to scramble to find a replacement.
1
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:01 am to Irons Puppet
quote:
Missouri is primed to be picked up by the Big 10.
That isn't going to happen
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:02 am to Lonnie Utah
quote:That's the ticket! Just give LSU the West on a silver platter by loading 5 of the Big 6 in the East.
Move Alabama to the East too and it solves this problem.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:18 am to volfan30
Why has the proposal of eliminating divisions never gained traction?
-Top 2 overall play in SECCG
-3 permanent rivals, 5 rotating games each year
Benefits:
-Eliminates problem with unbalanced strength of divisions while still preserving major traditional rivalry games.
-4 year players will have opportunity to play every SEC team at least twice and play in every SEC stadium at least once.
-Puts the 2 best teams in the SECCG, making for a more interesting and more evenly matched title game. Avoids having a major mismatch in the title game when the East is weak and doesn't produce a quality division champion.
-Top 2 overall play in SECCG
-3 permanent rivals, 5 rotating games each year
Benefits:
-Eliminates problem with unbalanced strength of divisions while still preserving major traditional rivalry games.
-4 year players will have opportunity to play every SEC team at least twice and play in every SEC stadium at least once.
-Puts the 2 best teams in the SECCG, making for a more interesting and more evenly matched title game. Avoids having a major mismatch in the title game when the East is weak and doesn't produce a quality division champion.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:19 am to RT1941
quote:
Yet we don't see Mizzou fans, Coach, or AD begging to move West. Why?
Because their fanbase has become indifferent to their athletic program, in part due to playing in the East.
quote:
How can the Big 10 just come into the SEC and pick up a team?
Same way the SEC went into the Big 12. Money is the only thing keeping them in the SEC. If the Big 10 can just come close, they would leave in a flash.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:23 am to hawgsalot
quote:
I agree with this and the one getting mightly screwed is Missery. Who from the east is really going to travel there? In the west they might actually double their attendance.
Columbia isn't a particularly easy drive from any of the West schools, outside of Arkansas. The SEC East is a bit of a misnomer; it's really the SEC North & East, and Missouri fits with the northern schools in Tennessee and Kentucky.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:24 am to Tiger Prawn
quote:
Why has the proposal of eliminating divisions never gained traction?
if Im not mistaken you have to have divisions if you are over 12 teams and have a conference championship game, per NCAA
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:25 am to Irons Puppet
quote:
Missouri is primed to be picked up by the Big 10
Please let this be true.
quote:
Then the SEC will have to scramble to find a replacement.
Go after Louisville
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:30 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
if Im not mistaken you have to have divisions if you are over 12 teams and have a conference championship game, per NCAA
No. I think that if the conference WANTS to split into divisions and hold a championship game, a minimum of 12 teams is required by the NCAA. But I don't think the conference is required to split into divisions or hold a title game if they have 12+ schools. Although holding a title game is a no brainer because of the extra money they make from a title game.
Although I think they changed the rule (or granted a waiver to the Big 12) because the Big 12 is is having a championship game again starting this year despite only having 10 teams. They aren't splitting into divisions and still playing a 9 game round robin conference schedule in the regular season.
This post was edited on 5/18/17 at 10:32 am
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:37 am to nicholastiger
quote:
I like how Slive and Sankey bend to whatever the schools want. Manage the damn conference and forget about what any other schools want!
Do what's best for the conference and stop catering to a select few.
Yes cause the Commish can just tell the schools what to do in these situations.....Those issues are voted on by the schools.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:40 am to Tiger Prawn
quote:
No. I think that if the conference WANTS to split into divisions and hold a championship game
from the NCAA
quote:
FBS conferences must have at least 12 members, and championship games must be between the winners of two divisions within the conference. Each division must play a round-robin schedule during the regular season in order to hold a championship game.
Council members adopted a proposal that originated with the Division I Football Oversight Committee but also approved an amendment from the Big Ten Conference. The amendment, offered by the Big Ten late last week, allows conferences with fewer than 12 members to hold championship games in football, as long as they meet one of two additional conditions: Conferences that want to play championship games must either play their championship game between division winners after round-robin competition in each division or between the top two teams in the conference standings following full round-robin, regular-season competition between all members of the conference.
This post was edited on 5/18/17 at 10:43 am
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:43 am to twk
Columbia to:
Ole Miss-476 Miles
Ark-309m
MSU-547m
LSU-775m
AL-603m
A&M-760m
AU-731m
Vandy-431m
TN-607m
UK-459m
UGA-734m
USC-870m
UF-1020M
Ole Miss-476 Miles
Ark-309m
MSU-547m
LSU-775m
AL-603m
A&M-760m
AU-731m
Vandy-431m
TN-607m
UK-459m
UGA-734m
USC-870m
UF-1020M
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:45 am to Irons Puppet
nm
This post was edited on 5/18/17 at 10:47 am
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:49 am to Irons Puppet
To be fair, the further West you go, the more willing or accustomed (whatever) people are to hauling arse long distances.
Still a long ride though. But I'm not sure the Big 10 would be much better.
Hmmm if Missouri were in the Big 10, and things were arranged rationally:
Iowa
Nebraska
Illinois
are all reasonably close. Minnesota, Ohio State, places like that, really aren't any closer? Than the SEC schools?
Still a long ride though. But I'm not sure the Big 10 would be much better.
Hmmm if Missouri were in the Big 10, and things were arranged rationally:
Iowa
Nebraska
Illinois
are all reasonably close. Minnesota, Ohio State, places like that, really aren't any closer? Than the SEC schools?
Posted on 5/18/17 at 10:51 am to RT1941
quote:
nm
no, statue miles
Posted on 5/18/17 at 11:01 am to Tiger Prawn
quote:
Why has the proposal of eliminating divisions never gained traction?
-Top 2 overall play in SECCG
-3 permanent rivals, 5 rotating games each year
Benefits:
-Eliminates problem with unbalanced strength of divisions while still preserving major traditional rivalry games.
-4 year players will have opportunity to play every SEC team at least twice and play in every SEC stadium at least once.
-Puts the 2 best teams in the SECCG, making for a more interesting and more evenly matched title game. Avoids having a major mismatch in the title game when the East is weak and doesn't produce a quality division champion.
Geez. Finish what you started. Who are the permanent rivals in this scenario? My guess as to what the different schools push for:
Georgia:Auburn, Florida, Tennessee
Florida:Tennessee, Auburn, Georgia
Tennessee:Alabama, Georgia, Florida
Vanderbilt:?,?,?
Kentucky:?,?,?
Missouri:Arkansas,?,?
South Carolina:?,?,?
(We want Georgia, but they would want other schools as permanent opponents more I think)
Arkansas:Texas A&M,?,?
Texas A&M:LSU,?,?
LSU:Texas A&M,?,?
Mississippi:MSU,?,?
MSU:Mississippi,?,?
Alabama:Tennessee, Auburn, ?
Auburn:Alabama, Georgia, Florida
Yeah, I know it isn't exactly reciprocal. I kind of believe that certain schools are more interested in playing certain other schools, than the school in question is interested in playing them.
For example, I'm not real sure how interested A&M is in playing Arkansas. It really helps Arkanas recruiting I think to have a game with a Texas school every year. Arkansas doesn't mean squat to A&M recruiting I imagine.
Same with Georgia and South Carolina. Georgia is huge for us in recruiting. This would hurt bad. Not to mention Florida.
And to be honest, a lot of schools get shafted on Marquee games. There will be quite a few high rating games broadcast, and a lot more viewers really won't care about.
This sounds like it would be awesome for certain schools. And horrible for others.
This post was edited on 5/18/17 at 11:02 am
Posted on 5/18/17 at 11:12 am to NYCAuburn
I stand corrected 
Posted on 5/18/17 at 11:26 am to Sunbeam
quote:
Geez. Finish what you started. Who are the permanent rivals in this scenario? My guess as to what the different schools push for:
Ok, to add to yours then: (But I'm taking out your suggestions of Tenn-UGA and Auburn-Florida)
Georgia: Auburn, Florida, South Carolina
Florida: Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina
Tennessee: Alabama, Vandy, Florida
Vanderbilt: Tenneessee, Kentucky, Ole Miss
Kentucky: Vandy, Mizzou, Miss State
Missouri: Arkansas, Texas A&M, Kentucky
South Carolina: Georgia, Florida, Vandy
Arkansas: Texas A&M, LSU, Ole Miss
Texas A&M: LSU,Mizzou, Arkansas
LSU: Texas A&M, Alabama, Arkansas
Mississippi: MSU, Arkansas, Vandy
MSU: Mississippi, Auburn, Kentucky
Alabama: Tennessee, Auburn, LSU
Auburn: Alabama, Georgia, Miss State
Posted on 5/18/17 at 11:36 am to Tiger Prawn
Florida vs Kentucky would be pushed to remain. Florida has played UK more times in football then FSU.
Posted on 5/18/17 at 11:41 am to Tiger Prawn
That comes across as an impartial person trying to make up an attractive collection of rivalry games for the SEC Network.
But be realistic. If there were four rivalry games (though at that point you have pods or close to a division), Georgia would most likely very much want us as a permanent game. We've probably played them more than anyone but Tennessee, Auburn, Florida, and Tech? Plus it is a close commute.
Wow, as an aside I looked this up. We are number five on the list behind Auburn, Florida, Tech, and... Vanderbilt (played 77 times).
Strangely they have only played Tennessee 46 times.
Anyway, besides Georgia I can't think of too many teams that would be very interested in having us on the schedule permanently. If you only get to have 3 rivalry games. Not like we have cooties, but I think most of these schools would have 3 ahead of us for various reasons.
But be realistic. If there were four rivalry games (though at that point you have pods or close to a division), Georgia would most likely very much want us as a permanent game. We've probably played them more than anyone but Tennessee, Auburn, Florida, and Tech? Plus it is a close commute.
Wow, as an aside I looked this up. We are number five on the list behind Auburn, Florida, Tech, and... Vanderbilt (played 77 times).
Strangely they have only played Tennessee 46 times.
Anyway, besides Georgia I can't think of too many teams that would be very interested in having us on the schedule permanently. If you only get to have 3 rivalry games. Not like we have cooties, but I think most of these schools would have 3 ahead of us for various reasons.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News