Started By
Message
From Al.com
Posted on 8/22/13 at 8:51 pm
Posted on 8/22/13 at 8:51 pm
The SEC intended to send a message by opening the SEC Network's football schedule in 2014 with Texas A&M and South Carolina, who are preseason top-10 football teams this year. Get used to that type of matchup on the ESPN- and SEC-branded channel.
"That's a very attractive game, and I think it sets the tone that the games that will appear on the SEC Network are quality SEC football games," SEC Executive Associate Commissioner Mark Womack said about today's release of the 2014 SEC schedule.
The idea is to build leverage with fans to convince cable and satellite operators to add the SEC Network at ESPN's asking price. Opening with a highly-attractive game is a different approach than other conferences/teams took upon launching a network.
The first football game on the Big Ten Network was Appalachian State's 34-32 victory over No. 5 Michigan in 2007, a monumental upset that most people didn't see coming (and some never saw because of the Big Ten's distribution problems.) The Longhorn Network's first game in 2011 saw Texas defeat Rice 34-9. The Pac-12 Networks debuted in 2012 with Utah's 41-0 victory over Northern Colorado.
CBS will still have the first pick in 2014 of games each week for SEC-controlled Saturday games, but no longer will have an exclusive window. CBS can air the same team a maximum of five times per regular season.
ESPN then picks where to place the remaining games on its platforms, with three going to the SEC Network each week. An eight-person content committee comprised of SEC and ESPN officials will decide where the games are placed. Womack said the committee members are not finalized.
Scheduling format decision looms
The looming question for the SEC is what to do with its scheduling format and whether to play nine conference games. The current 6-1-1 format of six divisional opponents, one permanent opponent and one cross-divisional opponent remains in place for 2014 and 2015 but is under review.
The 2014 schedule released today is not a bridge schedule like in 2012 and 2013. It's the first year of a 12-year cycle in which every rotating cross-divisional team is played over six years.
In other words, if this rotation is kept, Florida's game at Alabama in 2014 wouldn't be returned to Gainesville until 2021. Current Alabama star running back T.J. Yeldon will be 28 years old by that time.
SEC athletics directors are aware of who they play in the cycle through the years. The SEC isn't releasing the cycle because it's no given the 6-1-1 format will stay. The main options being considered over the next year:
* Keep the current 6-1-1 format.
* Eliminate permanent opponents (such as Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia) and play a 6-0-2 format.
* Play nine-game schedules with a permanent opponent (6-1-2 format) or without a permanent opponent (6-0-3).
What's the appetite among SEC schools? "I think that's what everybody is figuring out on their campuses," Womack said. "There's certainly going to be some healthy debate over the next year. We certainly want the format in place to implement the 2016 schedule."
"That's a very attractive game, and I think it sets the tone that the games that will appear on the SEC Network are quality SEC football games," SEC Executive Associate Commissioner Mark Womack said about today's release of the 2014 SEC schedule.
The idea is to build leverage with fans to convince cable and satellite operators to add the SEC Network at ESPN's asking price. Opening with a highly-attractive game is a different approach than other conferences/teams took upon launching a network.
The first football game on the Big Ten Network was Appalachian State's 34-32 victory over No. 5 Michigan in 2007, a monumental upset that most people didn't see coming (and some never saw because of the Big Ten's distribution problems.) The Longhorn Network's first game in 2011 saw Texas defeat Rice 34-9. The Pac-12 Networks debuted in 2012 with Utah's 41-0 victory over Northern Colorado.
CBS will still have the first pick in 2014 of games each week for SEC-controlled Saturday games, but no longer will have an exclusive window. CBS can air the same team a maximum of five times per regular season.
ESPN then picks where to place the remaining games on its platforms, with three going to the SEC Network each week. An eight-person content committee comprised of SEC and ESPN officials will decide where the games are placed. Womack said the committee members are not finalized.
Scheduling format decision looms
The looming question for the SEC is what to do with its scheduling format and whether to play nine conference games. The current 6-1-1 format of six divisional opponents, one permanent opponent and one cross-divisional opponent remains in place for 2014 and 2015 but is under review.
The 2014 schedule released today is not a bridge schedule like in 2012 and 2013. It's the first year of a 12-year cycle in which every rotating cross-divisional team is played over six years.
In other words, if this rotation is kept, Florida's game at Alabama in 2014 wouldn't be returned to Gainesville until 2021. Current Alabama star running back T.J. Yeldon will be 28 years old by that time.
SEC athletics directors are aware of who they play in the cycle through the years. The SEC isn't releasing the cycle because it's no given the 6-1-1 format will stay. The main options being considered over the next year:
* Keep the current 6-1-1 format.
* Eliminate permanent opponents (such as Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia) and play a 6-0-2 format.
* Play nine-game schedules with a permanent opponent (6-1-2 format) or without a permanent opponent (6-0-3).
What's the appetite among SEC schools? "I think that's what everybody is figuring out on their campuses," Womack said. "There's certainly going to be some healthy debate over the next year. We certainly want the format in place to implement the 2016 schedule."
4
Posted on 8/22/13 at 8:53 pm to ozland
What is not being stated here, is what happens if the SEC expands by two teams? Especially if those two teams are from the East of the Mississippi River?
Posted on 8/22/13 at 8:53 pm to ozland
tl;dr
Posted on 8/22/13 at 9:43 pm to ozland
quote:
What is not being stated here, is what happens if the SEC expands by two teams? Especially if those two teams are from the East of the Mississippi River?
Is there something I don't know? Lol what schools to the east of the Mississippi are rumored to be interested?
Posted on 8/22/13 at 9:56 pm to TrueSon2014
Sewanee and Georgia Tech.
shite, I ruined the big surprise.
shite, I ruined the big surprise.
Posted on 8/22/13 at 10:15 pm to Remote Controlled
If two schools are added to the East division, someone must move to the West Division.
The inexorable march in realignment is to eventually go to four or 5 Super conferences of 16 teams each.
The SEC has eyes for an eastern presence in its conference footprint.
The inexorable march in realignment is to eventually go to four or 5 Super conferences of 16 teams each.
The SEC has eyes for an eastern presence in its conference footprint.
Posted on 8/22/13 at 10:30 pm to ozland
I've said it a million times, but if the goal is for Mizzou to move to the west any time in the near future I've got some beef with the SEC.
Mizzou is reallocating a lot of resources to the southeast from Texas, and if the plan is to have the tigers in the west before 2020 it's going to really set us back in recruiting to have to move resources back to Texas or to add more Louisiana.
I think the better option is just to change the division names and leave it alone. Add new schools? Add one to each division.
To be brutally honest, I prefer the east schools anyways.
Mizzou is reallocating a lot of resources to the southeast from Texas, and if the plan is to have the tigers in the west before 2020 it's going to really set us back in recruiting to have to move resources back to Texas or to add more Louisiana.
I think the better option is just to change the division names and leave it alone. Add new schools? Add one to each division.
To be brutally honest, I prefer the east schools anyways.
Posted on 8/22/13 at 10:51 pm to ozland
Seems like this shoulda been posted on the rant.... but oh well, gotta play nice or I get put in timeout.
(I love the subtle attempt to have a conference expansion thread.. no thanks).
(I love the subtle attempt to have a conference expansion thread.. no thanks).
Posted on 8/22/13 at 11:09 pm to ozland
Two solutions, because Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia just aren't going to go away.
1. 9 game schedule. I think coaches would really get on board with this, especially now that the Big Ten is going to do it, and the Big 12 already does. Saban, I know, wants to play tougher OOC games, but he wants everyone else to do so as well. He doesn't want to have to play a 10/12 game schedule while everyone else plays 8/12 (legit games/total games).
2. Re-organize the divisions in a non-geographic alignment. Personally, I think this would be a great solution. What's a better way to make sure Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Auburn play each other than to put them in the same division.
Division A
Alabama
Auburn
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Division B
Arkansas
Florida
LSU
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
Missouri
Texas A&M
The only real issue I see with these is the fact that Florida and Georgia wouldn't play every year. But that could be worked out somehow, I think
1. 9 game schedule. I think coaches would really get on board with this, especially now that the Big Ten is going to do it, and the Big 12 already does. Saban, I know, wants to play tougher OOC games, but he wants everyone else to do so as well. He doesn't want to have to play a 10/12 game schedule while everyone else plays 8/12 (legit games/total games).
2. Re-organize the divisions in a non-geographic alignment. Personally, I think this would be a great solution. What's a better way to make sure Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Auburn play each other than to put them in the same division.
Division A
Alabama
Auburn
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Division B
Arkansas
Florida
LSU
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
Missouri
Texas A&M
The only real issue I see with these is the fact that Florida and Georgia wouldn't play every year. But that could be worked out somehow, I think
Posted on 8/22/13 at 11:27 pm to Bama Bird
I think the Big 12 plays 9 currently only because of their numbers. It's really the only thing that works with the conference being so small. Before A&M and Mizzou left, they played 8. Who knows what they'd do if they ever get to 14.
I don't see why it needs to be divided along geography either at this point. Yes, it would save on travel costs a bit but as far as Missouri is concerned, we're already traveling about as much as one school can.
I don't see why it needs to be divided along geography either at this point. Yes, it would save on travel costs a bit but as far as Missouri is concerned, we're already traveling about as much as one school can.
Posted on 8/23/13 at 12:30 am to Bama Bird
quote:
2. Re-organize the divisions in a non-geographic alignment. Personally, I think this would be a great solution. What's a better way to make sure Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Auburn play each other than to put them in the same division.
I actually like this idea a lot. And I've wondered why it has never been seriously considered. While I hate the "Legends & leaders" thing, I do like how the B1G set their divisions. I think it would be cool to have something similar.
Posted on 8/23/13 at 10:51 am to semotruman
quote:
I actually like this idea a lot. And I've wondered why it has never been seriously considered. While I hate the "Legends & leaders" thing, I do like how the B1G set their divisions. I think it would be cool to have something similar.
I seriously think just leaving the divisions as they are and changing the names would make everything make a lot more sense to most people.
The only real reason I've ever seen for Mizzou switching divisions is because being in the "east" doesn't make geographic sense.
Posted on 8/24/13 at 11:23 pm to Mizzeaux
quote:
The only real reason I've ever seen for Mizzou switching divisions is because being in the "east" doesn't make geographic sense.
And is there really a strong majority that actually cares? It seems no one really talks about it other than Auburn fans who want to go to the East, which isn't going to happen
How do most Missouri fans feel?
Posted on 8/24/13 at 11:56 pm to Bama Bird
I've made it obvious I don't care to ever be in the west. In my estimation, I'm guessing the east is where most Missouri people would like to be.
I'd much rather be associated with schools like Florida, Georgia, and Vanderbilt than the Mississippi schools, the Alabama schools and Arkansas in the west just on an overall quality basis, no offense intended.
I'd much rather be associated with schools like Florida, Georgia, and Vanderbilt than the Mississippi schools, the Alabama schools and Arkansas in the west just on an overall quality basis, no offense intended.
This post was edited on 8/24/13 at 11:58 pm
Posted on 8/24/13 at 11:58 pm to Mizzeaux
Alabama and Auburn have a very good academic reputation, fwiw. But I do understand what you're saying.
I also think Missouri is more similar to Kentucky than any other SEC school, and that should be a pretty good basketball (and maybe football considering UK's improvements lately) matchup.
I also think Missouri is more similar to Kentucky than any other SEC school, and that should be a pretty good basketball (and maybe football considering UK's improvements lately) matchup.
Posted on 8/25/13 at 12:03 am to semotruman
Semo, I also think one of the reasons the Big Ten non-geographic divisions failed (and they have, since they're moving to East/West next year) is because they have so many rivalries up there. We think our situation is complicated here with Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Auburn- their conference just isn't set up to not play everyone in the conference.
I think the ACC non-geographic divisions are hard to keep track of, but it would make more sense, being so spread out, for them to be in geographic divisions.
I just think the SEC makes perfect sense for non-geographic divisions. The schools are relatively concentrated, and there aren't so many rivalries that "have to be played"
I think the ACC non-geographic divisions are hard to keep track of, but it would make more sense, being so spread out, for them to be in geographic divisions.
I just think the SEC makes perfect sense for non-geographic divisions. The schools are relatively concentrated, and there aren't so many rivalries that "have to be played"
Posted on 8/25/13 at 12:06 am to Mizzeaux
quote:
I'd much rather be associated with schools like Florida, Georgia, and Vanderbilt than the Mississippi schools, the Alabama schools and Arkansas in the west just on an overall quality basis, no offense intended.
For me it's 6 of one, half dozen of another. A school is a school. There's hardly a difference between one or the other. You get out of it what you put into it no matter where you go, unless you're talking Ivy League.
Posted on 8/25/13 at 12:07 am to Bama Bird
I'll agree with that comparison. I'd like a couple of their championships to make it real though.
Mizzou has always been a football school, though. During the dark ages of the football program in the 80s and the 90s people gravitated towards basketball because that was the team that win, but Mizzou did support the hell out if football. The fact that Faurot is as big as it is attests to that.
Faurot isn't big by SEC standards, but under the scope of not having an expansion in forever and having two decades of shite football trying to fill and getting close speaks volumes.
ETA: phone posting. Ignore the dumb mistakes.
Mizzou has always been a football school, though. During the dark ages of the football program in the 80s and the 90s people gravitated towards basketball because that was the team that win, but Mizzou did support the hell out if football. The fact that Faurot is as big as it is attests to that.
Faurot isn't big by SEC standards, but under the scope of not having an expansion in forever and having two decades of shite football trying to fill and getting close speaks volumes.
ETA: phone posting. Ignore the dumb mistakes.
This post was edited on 8/25/13 at 12:10 am
Posted on 8/25/13 at 2:33 pm to TrueSon2014
quote:
Is there something I don't know? Lol what schools to the east of the Mississippi are rumored to be interested?
Thank you. Seems like a lot of fans believe all these schools are itching to join the SEC. Only 3 schools wanted to join....WVU, TAMU, and Mizzou. Doubt if VT, Virginia, NC, NC State, FSU, Clemson, etc or itching to join a tougher conference.
Posted on 8/25/13 at 3:18 pm to bayou2003
If the SEC is going to expand, it's going to be from the Big 12. That's just my prediction for how it's all going to happen. The Pac 12 isn't going to stand around, let other conferences get to 16, without expanding, and the Big 12 is the only real option they have.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News