re: Can anyone make a rational argument that Auburn should stay in the west?

quote:

---

You are going to have a tough time getting SEC East schools to agree to this one with ACC rivals locking up their schedules. It basically eliminates OOC options for those schools.

---

Here's what I think is happening... there are a lot of moving pieces, but they are all working together:

*It's already likely that the SEC is going to move to a 14-week schedule, allowing for 2 bye weeks.

*They aren't doing that just for the heck of it.... its going to come with a caveat that the SEC give up playing FCS schools. The rationale behind playing the FCS schools is that the players need rest and its a de facto bye week. Adding in a second bye week ends that excuse, so it allows for better OOC opponents.

*Auburn is using their desire to move to the East as a bargaining chip to support a 9-game SEC schedule. Auburn has firmly been against a 9-game SEC schedule, opposing the desires of Saban and a handful of others. Auburn will likely support adding a 9th conference game with the caveat that they get to move to the East.

*My guess is that when all this happens, the SEC will institute a new rule that all teams must play two OOC Power 5 opponents each season, allowing for one single "cupcake" opponent from a mid-major FBS conference. This will allow Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, and Kentucky to continue their major OOC in-state rivalries and still play one additional major OOC opponent, knowing all the others will also be playing two such opponents per season.

*I think the end-game to all this will be the following schedule format:
1) 9 SEC Games
2) 2 Power OOC opponents
3) 1 cupcake from the lower FBS confernces
4) 2 Bye Weeks

All of this combined would solve all the major issues. The television networks hate all the cream puff games, so this would remedy that problem. Every school would play 11 Power Conference opponents each season, which would guarantee great games for the networks every single week. Of course the only way to accomplish this would be to add a 2nd Bye Week to give the players some extra rest.

quote:

---

*I think the end-game to all this will be the following schedule format:
1) 9 SEC Games
2) 2 Power OOC opponents
3) 1 cupcake from the lower FBS conferences
4) 2 Bye Weeks

---

I'm all for Auburn leaving if we use it as a bargaining chip to get a 9 game schedule as noted above. But they can't leave without a 9 game schedule.

quote:

---

Good post and I agree with most of it. But how does 2 Power OOC benefit? I'd say 1 with it being at the beginning of the year like it is now.

---

Because UGA, UF, UK, and USCe won't agree to put themselves at a competitive disadvantage.

quote:

---

or dropped two of the four expansion teams...

---

Do you not like money?

quote:

---

Because UGA, UF, UK, and USCe won't agree to put themselves at a competitive disadvantage

---

There are tons of solid arguments for it

- SEC East teams with permanent rivals want a chance to do different P5 games knowing other SEC teams will also have 2
- Attendance is already waning and replacing Kent State with Oklahoma State helps
- Teams can more easily play a neutral site opener, which is easier to schedule, as well as a H&H
- The 2nd bye week can basically replace the 1AA games that a lot of SEC teams play late in the year (as basically a 2nd bye)

The downsides would be the league would now be at 9 conference games + 2 P5 games, so the chance for 2+ losses would go up significantly (with some teams). Schools on the fringe (Kentucky, State, Ole Miss, South Carolina, Vanderbilt) would probably never vote for it as it could crush their yearly bowl hopes.

As a fan, I'd love it. As a person with a brain, I realize there is no way 9 SEC games + 2 P5 OOC games will ever happen.

quote:

---

Good post and I agree with most of it. But how does 2 Power OOC benefit? I'd say 1 with it being at the beginning of the year like it is now.

---

Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, and Florida have annual in-state rivalries with ACC schools. That is the reason we are all against a 9-game conference schedule.

With the current format, if the SEC moves to 9 conference games, that brings the number of OOC games down from 4 to 3. It's already very rare for us four to play an additional OOC Power 5 opponent. Why put ourselves at such a disadvantage?

If the other 10 SEC schools are only playing one difficult OOC game per season, for any of us four to play a different OOC opponent beyond our in-state rivals (GT, Clemson, FSU, Louisville), it puts us at a disadvantage.

UGA, UF, SC, and KY fans want variety in our schedules too. But we aren't going to put ourselves at a disadvantage every single year.

quote:

---

But they can't leave without a 9 game schedule.

---

Their whole argument for the 9 game schedule was so everyone would play each other more. It would still leave us playing only 1 non-permanent opponent every year.

And allow bama to keep TSIO and the IB

Auburn fans tend to forget that LSU is about to surpass Tennessee in series History.

Mississippi State just recently surpassed Florida as Auburns 2nd most played SEC Opponent and will surpass Georgia Tech as Auburn most played opponent very soon.

And Alabama is starting to creep up.

Auburn fans want to move because they can't get past Alabama to get to the SEC Title Game. They just want an easier.path. I don't blame them. But it's not about this not playing everyone thing. Because Georgia Tech is no longer in the SEC.

It would be easier traveling for some teams, and bring more competition to the east, and to the SEC itself.