Started By
Message
re: OU and realignment
Posted on 7/9/15 at 1:35 pm to tmc94
Posted on 7/9/15 at 1:35 pm to tmc94
Much obliged!
Truth be told, the only truly BAD realignment for us is UTx coming to the SEC. Even OU as a member doesn't hurt us that much, imo. And would probably hurt UTx substantially more. The interesting thing is if OU goes SEC, and UTx goes somewhere else... does that forever kill the A&M/UTx game? You'd have to think UTx would keep the OU game (unless they get pissed at OU and try to punish them). If they have the OU game locked in as a yearly OOC game, can they afford to have A&M as a yearly game, too?
Another thing to consider... if the SEC really does add OU/OSU, and Mizzou comes West while Bama/Auburn go East, that would leave us w/ this SEC West:
A&M
LSU
Arky
OU
OSU
Mizzou
Ole Miss
MSU
That's actually probably an easier division to win than the current one w/ Bama/Auburn. It wouldn't be quite as exciting, though.
Although, it WOULD probably get rid of the need for permanent opponents. Bama/UT and Auburn/UGA would be divisional games. We wouldn't play SCAR every year, but would rotate through the East w/ more regularity.
But does the SEC really want to move 5 of the original Big 6 to the East?
Truth be told, the only truly BAD realignment for us is UTx coming to the SEC. Even OU as a member doesn't hurt us that much, imo. And would probably hurt UTx substantially more. The interesting thing is if OU goes SEC, and UTx goes somewhere else... does that forever kill the A&M/UTx game? You'd have to think UTx would keep the OU game (unless they get pissed at OU and try to punish them). If they have the OU game locked in as a yearly OOC game, can they afford to have A&M as a yearly game, too?
Another thing to consider... if the SEC really does add OU/OSU, and Mizzou comes West while Bama/Auburn go East, that would leave us w/ this SEC West:
A&M
LSU
Arky
OU
OSU
Mizzou
Ole Miss
MSU
That's actually probably an easier division to win than the current one w/ Bama/Auburn. It wouldn't be quite as exciting, though.
Although, it WOULD probably get rid of the need for permanent opponents. Bama/UT and Auburn/UGA would be divisional games. We wouldn't play SCAR every year, but would rotate through the East w/ more regularity.
But does the SEC really want to move 5 of the original Big 6 to the East?
2
Posted on 7/9/15 at 2:03 pm to Mirthomatic
If OU left for the SEC, tu could cancel the game and try to restart the A&M one just to get back at them. Its how their shallow mind works.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 2:17 pm to Mirthomatic
quote:
A&M
LSU
Arky
OU
OSU
Mizzou
Ole Miss
MSU
A division proposal like this would be DOA. This would end LSU/OM/MSU playing the AL schools and replace them with OK schools and Mizzou?
There are so many problems to work through even beyond football and scheduling that I wouldn't expect there will be appetite for expansion for a few years. It's why I think this is more conversational than anything.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 2:44 pm to tmc94
I just think 8 team divisions are too big. If we go to 16 then I think pods are the way to go. Assume we take OU & OSU. Here is how I think it will look.
NW
OU
OSU
Ark
MU
SW
LSU
OM
MSU
A&M
NE
UA
AU
UT
Van
SE
UK
UGA
USC
UF
You ditch permanent rivalries.
You play 9 game schedules
You play your own pod yearly. (3 games)
You are permanently match up with another pod and play 1/2 of them yearly (2 games rotating between teams within the pod)
You then rotate the other 2 pods yearly (4 games)
So each team would play everyone home & away every 4 years.
A&M's schedule could look like this.
Year 1
LSU
OM
@MSU
OU
@OSU
UA
AU
@UT
@VAN
Year 2
@LSU
@OM
MSU
ARK
@MU
UK
UGA
@USC
@UF
Year 3
LSU
OM
@MSU
@OU
OSU
@UA
@AU
UT
VAN
Year 4
@LSU
@OM
MSU
@ARK
MU
@UK
@UGA
USC
UF
Then of course you play a 4 team tourney to decide the champion. They could be seeded by record or have a match up with your permanent matched up pod so SW vs NW & SE vs NE.
NW
OU
OSU
Ark
MU
SW
LSU
OM
MSU
A&M
NE
UA
AU
UT
Van
SE
UK
UGA
USC
UF
You ditch permanent rivalries.
You play 9 game schedules
You play your own pod yearly. (3 games)
You are permanently match up with another pod and play 1/2 of them yearly (2 games rotating between teams within the pod)
You then rotate the other 2 pods yearly (4 games)
So each team would play everyone home & away every 4 years.
A&M's schedule could look like this.
Year 1
LSU
OM
@MSU
OU
@OSU
UA
AU
@UT
@VAN
Year 2
@LSU
@OM
MSU
ARK
@MU
UK
UGA
@USC
@UF
Year 3
LSU
OM
@MSU
@OU
OSU
@UA
@AU
UT
VAN
Year 4
@LSU
@OM
MSU
@ARK
MU
@UK
@UGA
USC
UF
Then of course you play a 4 team tourney to decide the champion. They could be seeded by record or have a match up with your permanent matched up pod so SW vs NW & SE vs NE.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 3:04 pm to Farmer1906
If we go 16 I think that will be the way it goes. Then the pod and conference "playoffs" will be marketed as part of the new and improved playoff system. So you get an expanded playoff field without any major changes. But this would also necessitate a change to four 16 team conferences.
But I tend to agree with TMC that if this starts happening it will be a matter of perhaps decades in the making instead of a few years. I could be wrong though.
But I tend to agree with TMC that if this starts happening it will be a matter of perhaps decades in the making instead of a few years. I could be wrong though.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 3:07 pm to AgBQ00
quote:
But this would also necessitate a change to four 16 team conferences.
And if it doesn't, the SEC Champ should have a pass straight to the title game. Let Pac, Big 10, ACC, and Big 12 play a 4 team tourney to decide the other half.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 3:29 pm to Farmer1906
I don't think pods will ever work and I doubt 2 of the 14 current SEC schools would vote for a set up like that. There are way too many traditional games that can't be moved.
Too much of the fan fic ignores the history and importance of games to various schools in the SEC. But that's what makes the SEC the SEC. The next expansion is going to be very tricky because of this.
Too much of the fan fic ignores the history and importance of games to various schools in the SEC. But that's what makes the SEC the SEC. The next expansion is going to be very tricky because of this.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 3:37 pm to tmc94
quote:
I don't think pods will ever work and I doubt 2 of the 14 current SEC schools would vote for a set up like that. There are way too many traditional games that can't be moved.
Too much of the fan fic ignores the history and importance of games to various schools in the SEC. But that's what makes the SEC the SEC. The next expansion is going to be very tricky because of this.
There is no way to keep everyone happy. Teams make sacrifices. Like Ark gave up rivalry week for A&M to play LSU. Ark ditched USCe so they could play a bordering team.
My pods keep most of the biggest games. UT-UA, AU-UA, UF-UGA, USC-UGA, LSU-A&M, OM-MSU. We would lose LSU-BAMA every other year, but they'd likely see each other in conference title games.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 3:47 pm to tmc94
Which two schools would be against the Pod set up, do you know?
Just from a fan perspective, I REAAALLY don't want Bama/Auburn to move east and lose games against them. And I REAAAALLY don't want to be in a pod that doesn't have LSU.
Just from a fan perspective, I REAAALLY don't want Bama/Auburn to move east and lose games against them. And I REAAAALLY don't want to be in a pod that doesn't have LSU.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 4:02 pm to Farmer1906
quote:
There is no way to keep everyone happy
Likely true. But if they aren't happy they aren't going to support it which means it would never happen. No one is going to piss a bunch of schools off just to force expansion
quote:
My pods keep most of the biggest games
Most. And I'm not saying you did a bad job but the job is impossible. Arkansas loses their two biggest games. AU/UGA dies. As does LSU/Bama. The MS schools lose the AL schools. A&M's schedule is worse. Mizzou is pushed out of the SEC and back to the Big 8 essentially killing their recruiting base. 9 conference games are forced on UF, USC, UGA, and UK. Vandy has to deal with 2 more academic lightweights.
Everyone has to give up something. I guess my question is what do they get for that?
Btw, the most likely format for a 16+ team SEC is probably more like the hoops plan. You have 3 set rivals and rotate the other games with no divisions. But no one would want OSU as one of their 3 which is why I don't think they'd ever get voted in
Posted on 7/9/15 at 4:02 pm to Mirthomatic
quote:
Just from a fan perspective, I REAAALLY don't want Bama/Auburn to move east and lose games against them. And I REAAAALLY don't want to be in a pod that doesn't have LSU.
16 team pod means you play teams not in your pod 2x every 4 years. Its not like now where we won't play @ UGA for another 9 years or some BS like that.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 4:05 pm to Mirthomatic
quote:
Which two schools would be against the Pod set up, do you know?
that sentence probably wasn't clear. I doubt even 2 of the current 14 schools would vote FOR that pod set up. We'd be against it for sure. The Ark and LSU series will have to be preserved or we'll vote against.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 4:11 pm to tmc94
Ah, gotcha. Thanks.
Posted on 7/9/15 at 5:03 pm to Farmer1906
Look who they're playing in those examples. Big 12 Competition. Nobody cares about OU vs Kansas or OU versus Tceh. It's a Name program vs. the bottom of the barrel. It's not an intriguing matchup. THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH THE B12 IN A NUTSHELL AND WHY THEY WANT OUT. Sorry for shouting, it's just so obvious. Put put a name program like OU up against other name programs like Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee and it's a ratings bonanza. EVERYONE wants to see that. Ratings nationwide, on any network that's played on go up. I know the whole bit about households per state and in-state vs. out of state carriage fees - and it's MOSTLY true that that's the biggest consideration in expansion, but the exception is a true titan of a program that's just a matchup dream in terms of marketing Big Games all the time, and OU is that in the SEC. It's not now in the B12 becuase the opponents are inconsequential. Hell, even OU v Arky is better than EVERY other game on OU's current schedule other than UTw. Think about that. That's ALSO why I prefer they stay where they are because in terms of exposure they're totally wrecked right now and their recruiting and position in the national conciousness is reflecting it. They're in a bad way and it's getting worse every year they're mired there. I wouldn't be surprised if that exact fact is the reason they do something desparate. Hell, they just openly failed to raise money for a stadium expansion. They lose Stoops, can't make a home-run hire becuase the perception of the conference suck so bad, have a few losing years while still in that conference, holy hell. I think they evenutally realize that, if they don't already, and lash out from desparation. And I think that right now, pre-collapse of their brand, they're very much attractive enough to find a suitor.
This post was edited on 7/9/15 at 5:12 pm
Posted on 7/9/15 at 5:23 pm to Cooter Davenport
The other thing that bears mentioning is that we seem to be all having this conversation as if there are actually better options for eventual expansion than OU. For example - a Virginia and/or a North Carolina school. Now CLEARLY either or both would be vastly superior to picking up OU from a money standpoint, vastly, vastly. Even given the boost that OU gives to the matchups that, let's face it, you're selling, just becuase $1.30 or whatever a head in VA and/or NC is waaaaay more money than that same amoutn per head in OK, you'd be stupid to take OU over a NC and or a VA school.
BUT! Who says VA or NC schools are obtainable? With ND gradually all but joining the conference, and give that the Tobacco Road schools are pretty much married and even share BORs, I don't knwo that the ACC is that unstable in either of those two states. So if you are the SEC office, and you come to belive after studying it that you just aren't ever going to poach a NC or VA school, who's the next best obtainable? CLEARLY it's extremely dissatisfied, openly standing on the street corner, though nationally renowned and revered historical powerhouse OU.
BUT! Who says VA or NC schools are obtainable? With ND gradually all but joining the conference, and give that the Tobacco Road schools are pretty much married and even share BORs, I don't knwo that the ACC is that unstable in either of those two states. So if you are the SEC office, and you come to belive after studying it that you just aren't ever going to poach a NC or VA school, who's the next best obtainable? CLEARLY it's extremely dissatisfied, openly standing on the street corner, though nationally renowned and revered historical powerhouse OU.
This post was edited on 7/9/15 at 5:26 pm
Posted on 7/10/15 at 2:25 pm to Cooter Davenport
I really think it is all just sabre rattling right now. I think OU is trying to sweeten their deal somehow at the least and at most is actually trying to force the bdf into relevance in some manor through expansion.
Posted on 7/10/15 at 2:43 pm to tmc94
quote:
Btw, the most likely format for a 16+ team SEC is probably more like the hoops plan. You have 3 set rivals and rotate the other games with no divisions. But no one would want OSU as one of their 3 which is why I don't think they'd ever get voted in
If we did this, I wouldn't mind LSU/Arky/(Ole Miss or Mizzou).
Posted on 7/10/15 at 2:53 pm to tmc94
quote:
Everyone has to give up something. I guess my question is what do they get for that?
Everyone knows the only reason to expand is money. If done correctly (not saying OU/OSU is the way, just using it as the hypothetical since this thread is about OU) then SEC will keep getting even more stupid amounts of money.
These games don't die either. It will lesson some, but 2/4 years is pretty often. More possibly with a bigger championship tourney. But it also builds more "rivalries: too by not waiting to play teams every 5 years as it is now.
quote:
You have 3 set rivals and rotate the other games with no divisions.
So likely no championship game. I do not see that as a possibility at all.
This post was edited on 7/10/15 at 2:54 pm
Posted on 7/10/15 at 3:11 pm to Farmer1906
You don't need divisions to have a championship game. Deregulation is going to pass and the conferences will have free reign over how they pick a champion.
And expansion for the SEC was not as much about money as you think, or not in the way you suggest. I'll explain in detail later when I have a few
And expansion for the SEC was not as much about money as you think, or not in the way you suggest. I'll explain in detail later when I have a few
Posted on 7/10/15 at 3:16 pm to tmc94
quote:
Deregulation is going to pass and the conferences will have free reign over how they pick a champion.
its going to pass as in simply divisions are no longer needed or are they also going to allow the Big 12 to have a championship game w/only 10 teams?
I have a hard time believing the SEC, ACC, Pac12, and Big10 will be cool with the latter.
Page 2 of 3
Latest Texas A&M News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News