Started By
Message

re: Division Realignment - A Common Sense Approach

Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:41 pm to
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:41 pm to
quote:

Look at that division and try to type with a straight face that UK doesn't go 0-8 every year.
I admit, Kentucky was not my focus. Not trying to do them in, just trying to see if there is a better way to geographically align the divisions and maintain football rivalry games. Considering the rise of Missouri and (I believe) the resurgence of Arkansas, the strength of the division was almost (almost) a push. Apparently the divisions are perfect the way they are.
Posted by Smalls
Southern California
Member since Jul 2009
10245 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:42 pm to
My suggestion from a previous thread. There really is no good counterpoint...

I've been in favor of annually realigning divisions based on the previous season's records. It makes sense. Leaving divisions as is without regard to performance is actually quite antiquated. True, you never know for sure how a team will perform the next season, but realigning the divisions makes just as much sense as leaving them the same, IMO.
With airplanes, travel isn't a big deal anymore. I'm working off of the assumption that divisions are made for balance and not simply geography.

Seed the teams based on records...

Division 1:
Team 1
Team 3
Team 5
Team 7
Team 10
Team 12
Team 14

Division 2:
Team 2
Team 4
Team 6
Team 8
Team 9
Team 11
Team 13

Done.

This post was edited on 1/2/15 at 8:45 pm
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:45 pm to
quote:

There really is no good counterpoint...
You definitely achieve a degree of spreading conference strength evenly, but how in the world would you schedule that when you have to accommodate the schedules of OOC schools? Several second and third order effects. That would be a nightmare.
Posted by Dr._Jimes_Tooper
Member since Jul 2013
2358 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:45 pm to
I'm just wasting time during commercials bro
Posted by Goose
Member since Jan 2005
22276 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:46 pm to
SEC East (Auto Tie Ins)
1. Auburn (Alabama, LSU)
2. Florida (LSU, Missouri)
3. Georgia (Texas A&M, Mississippi State)
4. Kentucky (Ole Miss, Texas A&M)
5. South Carolina (Arkansas, Mississipi State)
6. Tennessee (Alabama, Missouri)
7. Vanderbilt (Ole Miss, Arkansas)

SEC West (Auto Tie Ins)
1. Arkansas (Vanderbilt, South Carolina)
2. Louisiana State (Auburn, Florida)
3. Ole Miss (Vanderbilt, Kentucky)
4. Mississippi State (South Carolina, Georgia)
5. Missouri (Tennessee, Florida)
6. Alabama (Auburn, Tennessee)
7. Texas A&M (Georgia, Kentucky)
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:46 pm to
quote:

I'm just wasting time during commercials bro
Killing time too. At home on leave and the season is over.
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:48 pm to
quote:

Goose
Posted by Remote Controlled
Member since Apr 2013
6859 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:48 pm to
You guys are all missing the obvious, simple alignment.

Mizzou
USC
Tenner
aTm
Arky
Florida
Georgia

We'll call this division the Able to Win Their fricking Bowl Game Division

And...

Bama
LSU
Auburn
Kentucky
Vandy
OM
MSU

These teams will be the Buttslaved Bitches Who Either Can't Win A fricking Bowl Game or Suck Too Bad To Qualify Division.

Problem solved, see you in ATL BBWECWAFBGSTBTQ figs.
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:48 pm to
quote:

Remote Controlled
Posted by Smalls
Southern California
Member since Jul 2009
10245 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:50 pm to
quote:

how in the world would you schedule that when you have to accommodate the schedules of OOC schools? Several second and third order effects. That would be a nightmare.


What?
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:52 pm to
quote:

What?
What you are showing is (it seems) seeding similar to how the NFL does it in the playoffs. Are you tying that to schedules or not? If not, then what is the point? Because you have to incorporate OOC scheduling as well (they cannot change there schedules any more easier than we can). Also, does that still involve rivalry games? Do they have any sway over scheduling any more? Or is it solely seeding?
Posted by RockyMtnTigerWDE
War Damn Eagle Dad!
Member since Oct 2010
105399 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 8:58 pm to
quote:

SEC - West
Arkansas
LSU
Mississippi State
Missouri
Ole Miss
Vanderbilt
Texas A&M

SEC - East
Alabama
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee


quote:

A Common Sense Approach


Posted by Smalls
Southern California
Member since Jul 2009
10245 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:04 pm to
In my scenario, it's based off of the whole schedule (following SECCG participants). You could also go off of conference record.

Solely seeding. Permanent rivalries are eliminated. Welcome to the 21st century.
Posted by bayou2003
Mah-zur-ree (417)
Member since Oct 2003
17646 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:08 pm to
Mizzou to West Auburn to East.

No point of having 2 power Alabama teams in the same division.
Posted by LSUTigersVCURams
Member since Jul 2014
21940 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:08 pm to
I don't know how to fix it but it is an absurdity and an abomination to have Mizzou in the East. The SEC should be better than that/
Posted by AnonymousTiger
Franklin, TN
Member since Jan 2012
4863 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:11 pm to
Instead of East and West, why not North and South Divisions?

South:
LSU
aTm
MSU
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
South Carolina

North:
Missouri
Vandy
Tennessee
Kentucky
Ole Miss
ArKansas
Bama

I put Bama in the North instead of Georgia or USCe in order to preserve rivalries (i.e. Bama gets to play Tennessee and Auburn every year and the Auburn/Georgia and Florida/Georgia also remain). I think that this separation would keep all rivalries intact while keeping the current 1 permanent cross-division opponent scheduling that some fans love.
This post was edited on 1/2/15 at 9:14 pm
Posted by 3rddownonthe8
Atlanta, GA
Member since Aug 2011
5212 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:17 pm to
The ACC and Big 12 are pushing for deregulation. This would allow for a conference to not have divisions and place their top 2 teams by standings in a CCG.

So in the sec can a schedule of 2 permanent and 6-7 rotating would be possible. I think this would be work well.
Posted by Sancho Panza
La Habaña, Cuba
Member since Sep 2014
8161 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:19 pm to
Leave it alone; that's common sense...
Posted by AnonymousTiger
Franklin, TN
Member since Jan 2012
4863 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:20 pm to
quote:

So in the sec can a schedule of 2 permanent and 6-7 rotating would be possible


Don't get me wrong, I would much rather see a 9 game schedule with 2 permanent and 1 rotating. As a fan, it is a little ridiculous to think that you will have to wait 12 years in between return trips to cross division schools. But the coaches seem pretty opposed to this, so a compromise in the the meantime might be necessary.
Posted by HailFreezusOver
Oxford
Member since Sep 2014
6223 posts
Posted on 1/2/15 at 9:22 pm to


Then make the schedule 9 games no permanent cross division rivals.
Sliding cross divisional games, so teams get home and homes before not seeing a university for 4 years outside of champ game
This post was edited on 1/2/15 at 9:27 pm
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 9Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter