Started By
Message
re: If the SEC does expand, it appears it will be in the east...
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:00 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:00 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
This post was edited on 2/13/13 at 1:04 pm
2
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:01 pm to JDM1992
quote:
So, all other teams will rotate 2 games, while the 4 will only rotate 1 non-division game.
This has to be what they do. It works out for everybody.
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:02 pm to CBandits82
This post was edited on 2/13/13 at 1:04 pm
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:03 pm to JDM1992
quote:
Schools will agree with each other on whether to maintain cross-division rivals. Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia are the only ones I see holding. So, all other teams will rotate 2 games, while the 4 will only rotate 1 non-division game.
I think that is the best way a 9 game slate and 2 8-team divisions.
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:17 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
I think that is the best way a 9 game slate and 2 8-team divisions.
you can't easily do that with fixed rivalries between opposite divisions (bama/tenn, uga/auburn, lsu/florida)
Or if you did then it would take 14 years to rotate through playing home and aways with the other 7 teams in the opposite division.
If you had four team pods you could keep the schedule at 8 games, have three within division opponents, one fixed out of division opponent and rotate through the remaining 11 teams within 6 years (you'd still have four rotating games even with only 8 conference games).
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:19 pm to molsusports
This post was edited on 2/13/13 at 1:04 pm
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:20 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
The pods could just be for scheduling...still just take top 2 records for ATL.
That would lead to some terrible schedule inequalities every year.
The goal should be to come up with a feasible means of producing a conference champion that passes the smell test. The best two teams from the conference should almost always have to play each other every year at some point - with a larger number of teams and irregular scheduling plus no conference playoff you would not see this.
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:22 pm to JDM1992
quote:
The 4 team pods isn't a very realistic option, it's just some random fantasy Clay Travis has
he's hardly the first one to come up with it FWIW
and it is extremely feasible provided the NCAA signs off for conferences of at least 16 teams. Like the new 12 team model it would make a lot of money, produce a single conference champ through a predictable method, and result in more entertaining "must win" games at the end of the year.
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:22 pm to molsusports
quote:
Or if you did then it would take 14 years to rotate through playing home and aways with the other 7 teams in the opposite division.
True, but just for AU/UA/UGA/UT, the other teams playing 2 rotating inter-division games. As was intimated earlier, clubs have the option of one permanet rival, which I'm sure those four would exercise. One solution is for them to split home and aways so it's not such a long time before playing every inter-divion team.
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:27 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
True, but just for AU/UA/UGA/UT, the other teams playing 2 rotating inter-division games.
I don't think this is a good idea for a separate reason - it waters down the number of interesting opponents that rotate and makes the UA/AU/UGA/UT schedules disproportionately harder than the other teams which are not rotating those quality opponents as often.
On a side note I'd like LSU to keep playing Florida every year because those games are entertaining and have developed into an outstanding national event every year.
If you do the pods you can keep more of those must keep rivalries and balance schedule difficulty more fairly throughout the conference.
Posted on 1/22/13 at 1:32 pm to molsusports
Well, we'll see soon enough. I'm pretty sure Slive has his eye on a 16 team conference and the ACC looks like it might become fair game.
Posted on 1/22/13 at 2:01 pm to Patton
quote:
I want UNC and Va Tech
Unc doesn't happen without duke
Posted on 1/22/13 at 2:01 pm to molsusports
quote:
makes the UA/AU/UGA/UT schedules disproportionately harder than the other teams which are not rotating those quality opponents as often.
Well if this happened each team with the harder schedule would have agreed to that schedule so I would hope those teams wouldn't bitch about it
Posted on 1/22/13 at 2:29 pm to bigeztiger
quote:
Unc doesn't happen without duke
Then UNC may end up like Oklahoma, stuck in a poor conference.
Posted on 1/22/13 at 8:01 pm to davesdawgs
ND not joining BT not a head scatcher at all - same reason Bubby joined the ACC. BT is bad but not ACC bad.
Posted on 1/22/13 at 8:03 pm to bigeztiger
Says who? That is just not a deal breaker for either im any conference scenario.
Posted on 1/23/13 at 12:23 am to molsusports
quote:
If all the other teams are getting their single most important traditional rival every year then Ole Miss and LSU should as well:
How has nobody commented on this yet?
The Egg Bowl trumps the shite out of Ole Miss-LSU for Ole Miss. Frankly, it's ridiculous to suggest that LSU is a more important traditional rival to Ole Miss than Mississippi State.
Posted on 1/23/13 at 12:27 am to lsutothetop
quote:
The Egg Bowl trumps the shite out of Ole Miss-LSU for Ole Miss. Frankly, it's ridiculous to suggest that LSU is a more important traditional rival to Ole Miss than Mississippi State.
Isn't the premise that OM/MSU will always be in the same pod unless the conference does some uncharacteristically stupid legends/leaders shite.
Posted on 1/23/13 at 12:52 am to lsutothetop
quote:
The Egg Bowl trumps the shite out of Ole Miss-LSU for Ole Miss. Frankly, it's ridiculous to suggest that LSU is a more important traditional rival to Ole Miss than Mississippi State.
My impressions is strongly the opposite in talking to at least the older Ole Miss fans - for them the time in 50s and 60s when great LSU and Ole Miss programs played games with national championship implications are still enormously important history
Ole Miss generally seems to think they are too good of a program to have MSU as their primary rival. Just like LSU feels like they are too good for Ole Miss to be their primary rival (but there's no one else LSU can really point to)
And no one would entirely break up Ole Miss/MSU - just put them in different divisions and leave them as each other's fixed opponent. Matching up similar quality opponents as fixed out of division opponents is crucial for maintaining schedule balance anyway.
Posted on 1/23/13 at 1:14 am to molsusports
quote:
And no one would entirely break up Ole Miss/MSU - just put them in different divisions and leave them as each other's fixed opponent.
Why not do that for Ole Miss/LSU?
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News