Started By
Message
re: SEC Divisions - Yes or No?
Posted on 9/11/24 at 5:45 pm to GoGators1995
Posted on 9/11/24 at 5:45 pm to GoGators1995
quote:
Go back to East and West, move Mizzou to West and Bama and Auburn to the East.
Of course. It’s so obvious its ridiculous. And this also gives even distribution of blue bloods
1
Posted on 9/11/24 at 7:37 pm to BuckI
quote:
I understand bragging about beating Ohio State and Michigan because they are above you all-time, the top 2 programs behind only Alabama, but gloating over defeating the lowly ACC and Big 12 is a riot.
It's laughable how you move goalposts when your asinine posts are rightfully mocked and ridiculed over and over again. You have never posted anything worthwhile. Even LimpWhiskeyDisk comes up with a cogent point every now and then, you just post nothing but shite.
Posted on 9/11/24 at 7:50 pm to Eldodroptop
Yes there is, Mizzou needs to be with their old Big 12 brethren. Arkansas is a better fit with Ole Miss, Miss State and LSU
Posted on 9/11/24 at 8:41 pm to N0T SURE
You have a point, but that $ also helps those smaller schools. Not to mention the experience playing a stronger opponent.
Not to mention the bragging rights if you do win.
Not to mention the bragging rights if you do win.
Posted on 9/11/24 at 8:47 pm to BuckI
quote:
Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Tennessee, Mississippi, Oklahoma, LSU, Vanderbilt
Mississippi State, Arkansas, Kentucky, South Carolina, Auburn, Florida, Missouri, Texas A&M
A - HOW did you decide on this grouping?
B - There are SEVERAL M.B.P. games between the groups. So your scheduling format for keeping those is going to be...? (hint: Ala. & UGA have 2 each. ;) )
Posted on 9/11/24 at 8:50 pm to BuckI
You'ld be surprised how many UGA fans WANT to play Alabama more often.
Posted on 9/11/24 at 9:44 pm to southernboisb
Seems like no directional schools would increase the value of TV contracts by a decent amount, and you'd get to play those rotational conference teams a little more often. As far as the smaller schools missing out on the money, they'll have to figure something out...they can't count on being subsidized by the big schools forever.
Posted on 9/11/24 at 9:44 pm to HTX Horn
If we go to 9 game conference schedule, we should have divisions. Otherwise there will be an unfair advantage.
Posted on 9/11/24 at 10:11 pm to MtVernon
quote:
Of course. It’s so obvious its ridiculous. And this also gives even distribution of blue bloods
The East would be more top heavy but the West would be better overall.
Posted on 9/11/24 at 11:30 pm to N0T SURE
True...You don't hear the B1G (or others) scheduling them.
Posted on 9/11/24 at 11:33 pm to GoGators1995
quote:
The East would be more top heavy but the West would be better overall.
Which is it: the past "East was too easy" & now "More top heavy"?
Posted on 9/11/24 at 11:38 pm to UKWildcats
quote:
I suppose I don't care either way. As long as we play Tennessee every year, that's all that matters to me.
Respect
Posted on 9/11/24 at 11:48 pm to HottyToddy7
Pods are fairly straightforward with either 8 or 9 conference games.
NW: Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas
SW: LSU, A&M, OM, MSU
NC: Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Vanderbilt
SE: Florida, Georgia, Auburn, South Carolina
You play one other pod home and away and rotate to the next pod. With 8 conference games you get one other similar quality team. If you have 9 conference games you keep two permanents every year.
The lower tier teams (eg Kentucky and Vanderbilt in the NE group) get lower tier opponents fixed out of group to compensate for tougher in group opponents. The SE group also gets one fewer upper tier opponent out of group to adjust for the extra big six opponent in group. Lastly I played around with the fixed opponents to spread around the games in bigger recruiting states like Texas, Florida, Georgia, Alabama and Louisiana.
That yielded opponents:
NW:
Oklahoma: LSU, Tennessee, Georgia
Texas: A&M, Alabama, Auburn
Arkansas: OM, Vanderbilt, Florida
Missouri: MSU, Kentucky, South Carolina
SW:
LSU: Oklahoma, Alabama, Florida
A&M: Texas, Tennessee, Georgia
OM: Arkansas, Vanderbilt, Auburn
MSU: Missouri, Kentucky, South Carolina
SE:
Florida: Tennessee, LSU, Arkansas
Georgia: Kentucky, A&M, Oklahoma
Auburn: Alabama, OM, Texas
South Carolina: Vanderbilt, MSU, Missouri
NE:
Alabama: Auburn, Texas, LSU
Tennessee: Florida, Oklahoma, A&M
Kentucky: Georgia, Missouri, MSU
Vanderbilt: South Carolina, Arkansas, OM
You could easily switch Auburn and Kentucky with similar effects. Either way Auburn is playing either Alabama or Georgia from the other group.
I lean towards Auburn in the SE group because it places Kentucky in a geographically logical group (playing their traditional interest in Tennessee) and Auburn has rivalry histories with both Georgia and Florida in the SE but only Alabama and not Tennessee in the north central group.
NW: Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas
SW: LSU, A&M, OM, MSU
NC: Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Vanderbilt
SE: Florida, Georgia, Auburn, South Carolina
You play one other pod home and away and rotate to the next pod. With 8 conference games you get one other similar quality team. If you have 9 conference games you keep two permanents every year.
The lower tier teams (eg Kentucky and Vanderbilt in the NE group) get lower tier opponents fixed out of group to compensate for tougher in group opponents. The SE group also gets one fewer upper tier opponent out of group to adjust for the extra big six opponent in group. Lastly I played around with the fixed opponents to spread around the games in bigger recruiting states like Texas, Florida, Georgia, Alabama and Louisiana.
That yielded opponents:
NW:
Oklahoma: LSU, Tennessee, Georgia
Texas: A&M, Alabama, Auburn
Arkansas: OM, Vanderbilt, Florida
Missouri: MSU, Kentucky, South Carolina
SW:
LSU: Oklahoma, Alabama, Florida
A&M: Texas, Tennessee, Georgia
OM: Arkansas, Vanderbilt, Auburn
MSU: Missouri, Kentucky, South Carolina
SE:
Florida: Tennessee, LSU, Arkansas
Georgia: Kentucky, A&M, Oklahoma
Auburn: Alabama, OM, Texas
South Carolina: Vanderbilt, MSU, Missouri
NE:
Alabama: Auburn, Texas, LSU
Tennessee: Florida, Oklahoma, A&M
Kentucky: Georgia, Missouri, MSU
Vanderbilt: South Carolina, Arkansas, OM
You could easily switch Auburn and Kentucky with similar effects. Either way Auburn is playing either Alabama or Georgia from the other group.
I lean towards Auburn in the SE group because it places Kentucky in a geographically logical group (playing their traditional interest in Tennessee) and Auburn has rivalry histories with both Georgia and Florida in the SE but only Alabama and not Tennessee in the north central group.
This post was edited on 9/11/24 at 11:49 pm
Posted on 9/12/24 at 12:38 am to HTX Horn
You know I liked having divisions but man some years it was horrible having
Bama
Ga
Fla
On your schedule plus the other rotation of teams especially when they are all playing well.
But teams change over time and coaches some get better some drop off like we did
Hopefully in a year or two we will be back
Heupel is doing a great job and if anyone thinks otherwise then you are not a football fan.
Bama
Ga
Fla
On your schedule plus the other rotation of teams especially when they are all playing well.
But teams change over time and coaches some get better some drop off like we did
Hopefully in a year or two we will be back
Heupel is doing a great job and if anyone thinks otherwise then you are not a football fan.
Posted on 9/12/24 at 8:51 am to jamespatterson
quote:100%
Doesn’t matter, but we need to dump the SECCG immediately
Posted on 9/12/24 at 9:23 am to southernboisb
Which is it: the past "East was too easy" & now "More top heavy"?
Any division that has vandy has a 7 game sec schedule. That’s a scheduling advantage anyway you slice it.
Any division that has vandy has a 7 game sec schedule. That’s a scheduling advantage anyway you slice it.
Posted on 9/12/24 at 9:28 am to southernboisb
quote:
This is what the SEC initially proposed. This format INSTANTLY KILLS DSOR. No thank you!
You would get it every other year. And 2nd off, the best system shouldn’t be held up for 1 non in state rivalry game.
Posted on 9/12/24 at 9:40 am to Clark14
quote:
I’ve had enough of being in the SECW
Spoken like a true Gen Z person who doesn't like competition
Posted on 9/12/24 at 9:48 am to GoGators1995
quote:
The East would be more top heavy but the West would be better overall.
In that East/West scenario, each side would have 4-1/2 traditional powers - the way I look at it.
It's a tough conference, no way around it. There is no way to divide it up where LSU and/or Georgia feel like they have a cake walk.
7 divisional games and 2 cross-division games each year.
Posted on 9/12/24 at 10:02 am to molsusports
Why wouldn't you put same-state schools together (Tx./TA&M & Ala./Aub.)?
Granted creating pods WHILE keeping annual rivalries makes this path interesting.
Granted creating pods WHILE keeping annual rivalries makes this path interesting.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News