Started By
Message
re: The SEC needs to go back to divisions, move to 9 games schedule, scrap importance of OOC
Posted on 12/8/24 at 4:44 pm to Oilfieldbiology
Posted on 12/8/24 at 4:44 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Playoff system is fine. Teams playing in conference championships should be penalized and drop below those that didn’t.
You have no issue with Boise St taking a #3 spot and getting a bye?
Really?
USC and Ole Miss both have more wins over ranked teams than Boise St, Indiana, SMU and Clemson combined.
Why should any of them be ranked ahead of those 2 teams?
If it was an honest system, the SEC would have had 6 teams in. Instead it was half that because of AQ and people ignoring SoS.
1
Posted on 12/8/24 at 4:45 pm to Hawgeye
I am fine with that and no rivalry permanent opponents.
Have Bama and Aubie move to East, and Mizzou to West.
Makes too much sense, but they won’t do it. 9 games with 2 cross divisional games.
Have Bama and Aubie move to East, and Mizzou to West.
Makes too much sense, but they won’t do it. 9 games with 2 cross divisional games.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 4:45 pm to Hawgeye
Put Oklahoma in the East with fellow Big 8 school Mizzou. Texas/OU x-division rivals. All big games preserved.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 4:48 pm to Mizz-SEC
Pod A- Oil Pod
Pod B- Tabasco Pod
Pod C- Tide Pod
Pod D- Sunkist Pod
Sign the sponsor contracts, and let's do it
Pod B- Tabasco Pod
Pod C- Tide Pod
Pod D- Sunkist Pod
Sign the sponsor contracts, and let's do it
Posted on 12/8/24 at 4:48 pm to NickPapageorgio
This is the way.
Play 8 to 9 home games with only 3 to 4 away games against conference foes. All OOC games to be played against weak directional schools.
Play 8 to 9 home games with only 3 to 4 away games against conference foes. All OOC games to be played against weak directional schools.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 4:51 pm to 3down10
quote:
Last night in the ACC championship game, neither of those teams had a single ranked win between them. 0.
USC and Ole Miss both have more wins over ranked teams than Clemson, SMU, Indiana and Boise St COMBI
And that right there is why a 12 or 16 or whatever isn't right for college football. There isn't any way to replicate SOS evenly throughout 130+ fbs teams.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:02 pm to 3down10
Each pod gets one guaranteed opponent outside the pod. Georgia vs. Auburn, Alabama vs. Tennessee, Florida vs. FSU, LSU vs. Arkansas, etc. Smart people can make it happen.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:05 pm to 3down10
quote:
You have no issue with Boise St taking a #3 spot and getting a bye?
Nope. Win your conference, you automatically get in and if you’re the highest 4 ranked conference winners you get a bye. Will it be less than equitable some times? Yes. But it’s a set rule that everyone knows and 100% non subjective.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:08 pm to Hawgeye
Here we go again. Our weekly, if not daily, “SEC should go to 9 games “ topic.
It’s really simple. If the network wants us to play 9 games then they need to pay us for 9 games. That is the only way it might happen
It’s really simple. If the network wants us to play 9 games then they need to pay us for 9 games. That is the only way it might happen
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:09 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Nope. Win your conference, you automatically get in and if you’re the highest 4 ranked conference winners you get a bye. Will it be less than equitable some times? Yes. But it’s a set rule that everyone knows and 100% non subjective.
Personally, I find people who dislike meritocracy distasteful and quite ignorant.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:12 pm to Buster83
We pay ourselves by going to a 9-game conference schedule.
Fans want to see Slugfest, not the Giants beating up on the runts.
Fans want to see Slugfest, not the Giants beating up on the runts.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:13 pm to 3down10
Meritocracy of fricking what? Of games you judged to be worthy of being called a good win? Alabama, Ole Miss, and South Carolina were listed as 4-6 in their own conference. Ole miss and bama had horrible losses. What exactly did they merit?
Don’t know why it was stopped at 25 in the AP initially? Because there were around 100 teams playing D1 football at the time. With the expansion of D1 football we should now rank all the way to 32-35 teams.
Don’t know why it was stopped at 25 in the AP initially? Because there were around 100 teams playing D1 football at the time. With the expansion of D1 football we should now rank all the way to 32-35 teams.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:15 pm to Hawgeye
Switch auburn and Alabama and I’m on board.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:17 pm to Hawgeye
No. Don’t go back to divisions. Go to 3 permanent opponents based on historical rivals and then rotate the remaining 12 every 2 years in a 9 game schedule.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:17 pm to Hawgeye
Nine is dumb dumb dumb.
Dumb.
Nothing but cannibalization
Dumb.
Nothing but cannibalization
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:17 pm to Hawgeye
Why 9? No need for that
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:19 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Meritocracy of fricking what? Of games you judged to be worthy of being called a good win? Alabama, Ole Miss, and South Carolina were listed as 4-6 in their own conference. Ole miss and bama had horrible losses. What exactly did they merit?
Don’t know why it was stopped at 25 in the AP initially? Because there were around 100 teams playing D1 football at the time. With the expansion of D1 football we should now rank all the way to 32-35 teams.
You do understand there are advanced stats that are opponent adjusted and power rank all teams right? They are run by computers to treat all teams equally.
Going into last night, SMU had a SoS ranked #84. An elite team is expected to have only 0.60 losses on their schedule.
The lowest SEC team was Texas with 1.07, right around #40. That is nearly twice the difficulty. Alabama's was like 1.56, nearly 3 times more difficult, USC was slightly higher than Alabama's and Ole Miss was between Texas and Alabama.
The only good team SMU played was BYU, they lost. Then Clemson, they lost again.
At any rate, there is a reason why not a single person has mentioned the teams SMU beat.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:20 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
9 game schedule.
Just more losses for the conference, bad idea.
2 or 3 permanent and no divisions is the best way. But I don't know why they aren't rotating half the teams for next years schedule.
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:21 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Why 9? No need for that
So that teams can play everyone and the schedules would be the most balanced. That way you avoid the likelihood of Texas’ schedule this year
Posted on 12/8/24 at 5:24 pm to 3down10
quote:
Just more losses for the conference, bad idea. 2 or 3 permanent and no divisions is the best way. But I don't know why they aren't rotating half the teams for next years schedule.
When it was first amine the sec going to 16 teams two formats were being hotly debated:
3 permanents and 6 rotating
1 permanent and 7 rotating
This gets the maximum distribution of teams playing each other and evens schedules as much as possible.
Certain fan bases were not ok with this because 2 or 3 of their historic rivals are good.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News