SEC Divisional Realignment

[ShotgunDawg]

Bo Bounds had a caller this morning that argued for divisions to be eliminated in SEC and Jon Solomon wrote a good article this morning on the topic of divisional realigment. I think it's a good discussion, so here are my thoughts on the topic.

1. I used to think the divisions were cyclical, but I'm more convinced than ever, that since MSU & Ole Miss have gotten their stuff together and caught up facilities wise, there is going to be no cycle and at this point the SEC needs to heavily consider realignment to protect the conferences chances of making the playoffs and to bring some balance to the league. At this point, the SEC East has 4 programs in, SC, Missouri, Vandy, And Kentucky, that's would all be considered the worst or bottom tier program in the West. That's isn't changing, as the coaching carasoul is confirming

2. With 14 teams and only 8 conference games, you must keep divisions or the SEC champion could consistently be decided by schedule anamolies. With only 8 games and 14 teams, each year, some team will have a ridiculously easy schedule. Divisions bring some credibility to the process of determining who goes to Atlanta.

3. Auburn needs to go the SEC East and Missouri to the West, but the Bama/Tennessee game is preventing this, which is absolutely absurd. Seriously, does Tennessee even want to play Bama annually? I have no clue why they'd want that. If Auburn moved the SEC East, it would offer SEC West teams a more manageable schedule and I'd also offer that Auburn's football mentality would better the East as well. It would force Georgia and Florida to operate on all cylinders instead of getting lazy. It would push them because Auburn pushes the envelope.

Anyway, I think this would greatly increase the stability and fairness of the SEC long term, and I find it absurdly ridiculous that the Alabama/ Tennessee game is preventing what's best the overall well being of the conference.

[Political Hack]

Mizzu is badly out of place. Not fair to them from a travel perspective. Due to that alone they need to realign them at some point. It may not be until more teams join though.

How would y'all realign it from a team breakdown?
UGA vs Auburn has to stay... Bama vs TN & Auburn has to stay. State vs OM. OM vs LSU. TN vs UGA. UGA vs Florida.

UGA, Florida, UT, Auburn, SC, Bama, UK/Vandy
A&M, Mizzu, Ark, LSU, OM, State, UK/Vandy

That's close to ideal to me. Permanents:
Bama vs LSU; Florida vs A&M; UGA vs Ark; UT vs OM; State vs Auburn; Mizzu vs SC; Vandy vs UK

I'd take that.

[scottycameron]

Bo Bounds had a caller this morning that argued for divisions to be eliminated in SEC and Jon Solomon wrote a good article this morning on the topic of divisional realigment. I think it's a good discussion, so here are my thoughts on the topic.

1. I used to think the divisions were cyclical, but I'm more convinced than ever, that since MSU & Ole Miss have gotten their stuff together and caught up facilities wise, there is going to be no cycle and at this point the SEC needs to heavily consider realignment to protect the conferences chances of making the playoffs and to bring some balance to the league. At this point, the SEC East has 4 programs in, SC, Missouri, Vandy, And Kentucky, that's would all be considered the worst or bottom tier program in the West. That's isn't changing, as the coaching carasoul is confirming

2. With 14 teams and only 8 conference games, you must keep divisions or the SEC champion could consistently be decided by schedule anamolies. With only 8 games and 14 teams, each year, some team will have a ridiculously easy schedule. Divisions bring some credibility to the process of determining who goes to Atlanta.

3. Auburn needs to go the SEC East and Missouri to the West, but the Bama/Tennessee game is preventing this, which is absolutely absurd. Seriously, does Tennessee even want to play Bama annually? I have no clue why they'd want that. If Auburn moved the SEC East, it would offer SEC West teams a more manageable schedule and I'd also offer that Auburn's football mentality would better the East as well. It would force Georgia and Florida to operate on all cylinders instead of getting lazy. It would push them because Auburn pushes the envelope.

Anyway, I think this would greatly increase the stability and fairness of the SEC long term, and I find it absurdly ridiculous that the Alabama/ Tennessee game is preventing what's best the overall well being of the conference.

Mizzou needs to move to the big 12 division, or big 10 , or any division besides an SEC division. Ditto for A&M.
Then swap auburn and Bama for Vandy and Kentucky.
That leaves us with OM, Ark,Lsu. Vandy, KY. Good division.

[bgover4]

Mizzu is badly out of place. Not fair to them from a travel perspective. Due to that alone they need to realign them at some point. It may not be until more teams join though.

How would y'all realign it from a team breakdown?
UGA vs Auburn has to stay... Bama vs TN & Auburn has to stay. State vs OM. OM vs LSU. TN vs UGA. UGA vs Florida.

UGA, Florida, UT, Auburn, SC, Bama, UK/Vandy
A&M, Mizzu, Ark, LSU, OM, State, UK/Vandy

That's close to ideal to me. Permanents:
Bama vs LSU; Florida vs A&M; UGA vs Ark; UT vs OM; State vs Auburn; Mizzu vs SC; Vandy vs UK

I'd take that.

We would have it a lot easier only playing bama every 6 years but i think i might be a bit disappointed not having a chance to knock them off every year. I guess we could see them in the championship.

[BrunswickDawg]

While everyone would complain about the tough schedule factor in some years - going to a 9 game league schedule would help all of those "permanent" rivalry issues. You could go to either 2 cross division permanent opponents and 1 rotating, or 1 perm and 2 rotating. Either way, you end up playing the whole league more often which I think is a good thing.

[Mjoelner34]

I'd take that.

In a heartbeat!

I've been thinking about this since last year. Remember how the east teams (UK and Fla in particular) used to bitch about MSU and Stans when it came to seeding the tournament? We'd win the west and would still arguably be the 5th best team in conference. Hell, back then the east was so dominant that winning the west wouldn't even guarantee you a trip to the big dance. In my mind, the same thing now applies to football. Mizzou would have probably finished 5th or 6th playing a west schedule in football last year. And this year, even though they beat them earlier in the season, does anybody seriously think Florida is better than the Bears? The Bears would beat them 50 if they played again. I realize that its all cyclical and 10 years from now the east may be dominant in football but as of now, their champion gets the benefit of playing Mizzou, Vandy, UK and a dumpster fire USCe every year. Yeah I know the Bears are probably going to go to the Sugar as the '2nd' best team in the conference and last year we got a New Year's 6 as part of being the '2nd' best team in the conference but it sucks that the '2nd' best team in the conference doesn't get to play for the title.

Unless we balance the strength in the two divisions by some kind of realignment, the only way I can think of to solve this is to do away with divisions, let every team keep a rivalry game (2 if possible) then make the schedule totally random. At the end of the year, rely on the college football playoff rankings to determine the two participants in the championship game.

[Big4Dawg]

While everyone would complain about the tough schedule factor in some years - going to a 9 game league schedule would help all of those "permanent" rivalry issues. You could go to either 2 cross division permanent opponents and 1 rotating, or 1 perm and 2 rotating. Either way, you end up playing the whole league more often which I think is a good thing.

Greg McElroy mentioned its a shame that every player won't get to play in every SEC stadium after 4 years and I agree. I'm not sure 9 will even let that happen though.
But if you go to 9, the years you have 4 SEC home games will suck (unless one of the away is Kentucky/Vandy)

[Liverpooldawg]

I remember 15 years or so ago when UT, Florida, and Georgia were on top and South Carolina was rising the mantra was that the SEC East would forever be on top because of the more urban nature of their schools and recruiting bases. This is just more of the same. I agree that something needs to be done about Missou but I'd argue that further expansion in the east would be the ideal solution. The SEC needs to be in the North Carolina and Virginia markets.

[Bama_Dawg]

The one thing that is preventing it is not the Bama/Tenn series, its the Bama/Auburn series. Many people have been enraged to think that the Iron Bowl could be played on 2 consecutive weeks, at the end of the year, then the SEC Championship game. If Bama wins the West and Auburn wins the East.

Auburn needs to move, yes, and to say that Auburn is Alabama's permanent opponent is fine, but you still have the Iron Bowl part deux issue.

How about we bring in Virginia and Virginia Tech in the East, move Missouri back to the West and call it a day?

[scottycameron]

While everyone would complain about the tough schedule factor in some years - going to a 9 game league schedule would help all of those "permanent" rivalry issues. You could go to either 2 cross division permanent opponents and 1 rotating, or 1 perm and 2 rotating. Either way, you end up playing the whole league more often which I think is a good thing.

kicking handsupdon'tshoot U and a&m out solves all the problems. We can call it a trial period. And it didn't work.

[scottycameron]

I remember 15 years or so ago when UT, Florida, and Georgia were on top and South Carolina was rising top the mantra was that the SEC East would forever be on top because of the more urban nature of thier schools and recruiting bases. This is just more of the same. I agree that something needs to be done about Missou but I'd argue that further expansion in the east would be the ideal solution. The SEC needs to be in the North Carolina and Virginia markets.

let me get this straight, einstein. Expansion screwed it all up, so the way out is more expansion? Pure genius.

[War Machine Dawg]

Mizzu is badly out of place. Not fair to them from a travel perspective. Due to that alone they need to realign them at some point. It may not be until more teams join though.

How would y'all realign it from a team breakdown?
UGA vs Auburn has to stay... Bama vs TN & Auburn has to stay. State vs OM. OM vs LSU. TN vs UGA. UGA vs Florida.

UGA, Florida, UT, Auburn, SC, Bama, UK/Vandy
A&M, Mizzu, Ark, LSU, OM, State, UK/Vandy

That's close to ideal to me. Permanents:
Bama vs LSU; Florida vs A&M; UGA vs Ark; UT vs OM; State vs Auburn; Mizzu vs SC; Vandy vs UK

I'd take that.

I think this is ultimately what the holdup is. We all know the SEC wants to go to 16 teams and wants one North Carolina school and one Virginia school. They just need to go ahead and make it happen now, since the divisions are so screwed up. When they expand, I see Mizzou coming to the West and the 2 new schools being added to the East.

Until then, I would love to realign by moving Auburn to the East. Hell, every Auburn fan I've talked to WANTS to go to the East. They know that side is easier. And I don't see how them moving screws up Bama-UT. Of course, I think the new scheduling rules are entirely ridiculous as a whole. Forcing everyone to play a P5 team every year lessened the SEC's bargaining power. I'd have rather gone to 9 SEC games, 3 of them cross-divisional with 2 rotating, than the stupid P5 rule.

[scottycameron]

I think this is ultimately what the holdup is. We all know the SEC wants to go to 16 teams and wants one North Carolina school and one Virginia school. They just need to go ahead and make it happen now, since the divisions are so screwed up. When they expand, I see Mizzou coming to the West and the 2 new schools being added to the East.

Until then, I would love to realign by moving Auburn to the East. Hell, every Auburn fan I've talked to WANTS to go to the East. They know that side is easier. And I don't see how them moving screws up Bama-UT. Of course, I think the new scheduling rules are entirely ridiculous as a whole. Forcing everyone to play a P5 team every year lessened the SEC's bargaining power. I'd have rather gone to 9 SEC games, 3 of them cross-divisional with 2 rotating, than the stupid P5 rule.

Do you just never want to go to atlanta again, or what? Enough.

[FISHDAWG]

if we expand we will have to go to 9 conf games ... adding another P-5 ooc game is going to just make it tougher unless like you said - just make it 3 ooc cupcakes ... I'm not a fan of anymore expansion and I'm looking forward to playing other P-5 teams that we don't get to play

[HSVDawg]

Geographically, It makes sense to swap Florida and Arkansas, and then rename the current divisions the SEC North and SEC South (East becomes North, West becomes South). In that scenario the only traditional annual rivalry that is lost is Florida-Georgia. That doesn't really deal with the issues of schedule imbalance but you can't just swap up the teams every few years based on who's good and who isn't.

I also think we should consider just moving to 9 conference games and doing away with the requirement for the Power 5 nonconference opponent every year.

[Quaoarsking]

Get rid of divisions.

Everybody plays 3 permanent opponents and rotates 5 of the other 10. That way you play everyone st least twice every 4 years.

Top 2 teams to SECCG, or if other conferences agree, no more CCGs.

[BossDawg]

I'm all for Bama to the East and Missouri or Vandy to the West. MO needs to be in the West regardless. As PH noted they are horribly out of place.

[bgover4]

How about we expand go to four divisions

Coastal: CLEM VT USC UK (descent strength, allows tradition matchups, gives the old ACC teams some hope)
Central: AU UA UGA UF (strong, keeps matchups)

North: UT MIZZ VANDY UM (descent strength if missouri gets it together, but vandy would drag any of them down)
West: LSU MSU A&M ARK (pretty tough)

Play everyone in your division (3 games),
2 permanent rival cross over:
MSU-UM, UA-UT, AU-CLEM, VT-LSU(death valley), Vandy-UK, A&M-UF, UGA-ARK, MIZZ-USC
MSU-UA, LSU-UM, UT-VT, ARK-MIZZ, UGA-USC, UF-CLEM, Vandy-A&M, UK-AU
1 other game from each out of division (would see every team every four years)

Not sure how this would fit into conference championship but maybe we could add a game and get a 4 team playoff. Division winners and instead of 1-4 four make the matchups rotate every year.

Probably can't do any of this but it would be interesting.

[Jack Lambert]

We would have it a lot easier only playing bama every 6 years but i think i might be a bit disappointed not having a chance to knock them off every year. I guess we could see them in the championship.

As soon as they did this it would be our luck Saban retired and they hired another Shula type.

[War Machine Dawg]

Do you just never want to go to atlanta again, or what? Enough.

What are you talking about? I said I'd rather have 9 SEC games than 4 OOC with one a mandated P5 matchup. It makes way more sense and gives you a chance to see the other teams more often. Does it make it harder? Depends on who you're two rotating East teams are, I'd say. But there will be years we get Vandy as one of our East opponents, so it's a wash.

I hate the P5 rule because it takes power away from the SEC in scheduling. Now that the other conferences KNOW we have to play an opponent, they can hold up the process for a king's ransom. It made playing games way more expensive. And there are only so many shitty P5 schools you can schedule. With that being the case, I think playing 9 SEC games makes more sense. Just a personal opinion and I know I'm probably in the minority on it.

[Maroon_and_white]

Get rid of divisions.

Everybody plays 3 permanent opponents and rotates 5 of the other 10. That way you play everyone st least twice every 4 years.

Top 2 teams to SECCG, or if other conferences agree, no more CCGs.

THIS.

8 or 9 game conference schedule, 3 or 4 permanent opponents, 1 P5 out of conference opponent.

[Big4Dawg]

http://www.secrant.com/rant/sec-football/sec-realignment-proposal/60100945/

This guy is on to something

[Liverpooldawg]

let me get this straight, einstein. Expansion screwed it all up, so the way out is more expansion? Pure genius.

What the heck are you talking about? I think we need to be in thise two states. You put say VPI and NC State in the east and put Mizzouri in the west where they belong. Then you get rid of the sacred cow games, essentially Auburn-UGA and UT-Bama. Problem solved and the SEC makes even more money per school than it does now.

[Todd4State]

I think this is ultimately what the holdup is. We all know the SEC wants to go to 16 teams and wants one North Carolina school and one Virginia school. They just need to go ahead and make it happen now, since the divisions are so screwed up. When they expand, I see Mizzou coming to the West and the 2 new schools being added to the East.

Until then, I would love to realign by moving Auburn to the East. Hell, every Auburn fan I've talked to WANTS to go to the East. They know that side is easier. And I don't see how them moving screws up Bama-UT. Of course, I think the new scheduling rules are entirely ridiculous as a whole. Forcing everyone to play a P5 team every year lessened the SEC's bargaining power. I'd have rather gone to 9 SEC games, 3 of them cross-divisional with 2 rotating, than the stupid P5 rule.

I agree with you. It's ridiculous that Missouri is in the SEC East- and actually in the SEC period. I would much, much prefer 9 SEC games to 8 with one P5 game.

The whole argument for the P5 is "for TV"- but what would you rather watch as a fan? MSU vs. Florida or MSU vs. Kansas State? The biggest thing I don't like about the P5 rule is I don't like the SEC telling us who to schedule OOC or how to. The schools themselves should choose.

[Todd4State]

http://www.secrant.com/rant/sec-football/sec-realignment-proposal/60100945/

This guy is on to something

I'm pretty sure that presentation was a LOT more impressive than whatever LT put together for his scheduling proposal to the SEC.

[Political Hack]

THIS.

8 or 9 game conference schedule, 3 or 4 permanent opponents, 1 P5 out of conference opponent.

Our permanents would be Ole Miss and who?

Bama: Auburn, UT, & LSU
OM: State, LSU, and ?
LSU: Bama, OM, and ?
Auburn: Bama, UGA, and ?
Florida: UT, UGA, and ?
UT: Florida, Bama, and Vandy
Vandy: UT, ?, and ?
UGA: Auburn, Florida, and ?
State: OM, ?, and ?
Mizzu: ?, ?, and ?
Ark: ?, ?, and ?
A&M: ?, ?, and ?
USC: ?, ?, ?
Kentucky: ?, ?, and ?

Choosing those 3 permanents would be difficult. I think they should just wait until there's another expansion because they'll have to figure it out all over again regardless. If they go after the east coast, Mizzu would shift easily. However, I hope they'd do a complete realignment. The east is so far behind the west right now it's going to take a major shake up to correct the balance on power.

[mic]

Lets just have the Bama football athletic program make the schedules out each year.. The basically do it now anyway..

[Jack Lambert]

Sounds like to me everyone is wanting to run away from Bama but someone is going to have to play them.

[Maroon_and_white]

Our permanents would be Ole Miss and who?


Choosing those 3 permanents would be difficult. I think they should just wait until there's another expansion because they'll have to figure it out all over again regardless. If they go after the east coast, Mizzu would shift easily. However, I hope they'd do a complete realignment. The east is so far behind the west right now it's going to take a major shake up to correct the balance on power.

I was really bored a while back and did a 5 perm opponent scenario. Below is a scenario that keeps the divisions in tact with current east permanent applied. I think below is all accurate

mississippi state bama ole miss kentucky auburn texas atm
ole miss miss state lsu vandy arkansas bama
alabama miss state auburn tennessee lsu ole miss
auburn bama miss state georgia florida texas atm
texas aTm miss state mizzou lsu arkansas auburn
arkansas lsu ole miss texas atm mizzou vandy
lsu bama arkansas ole miss texas atm florida

georgia florida auburn south carolina kentucky mizzou
florida georgia tennessee lsu south carolina auburn
kentucky vandy tennessee miss state georgia south carolina
vanderbilt ole miss kentucky tennessee mizzou arkansas
mizzou texas atm south carolina arkansas vandy georgia
tennessee kentucky florida bama vandy south carolina
south carolina georgia mizzou florida tennessee kentucky

[djaymsu5]

I wouldn't mind State and Auburn moving to the east and Ole Miss and Bama staying in the west. That way the egg bowl/iron bowl rivalry wouldn't hurt your eastern or western division standings and I think it would give state a better chance to Atlanta.

[Johnson85]

Mizzu is badly out of place. Not fair to them from a travel perspective. Due to that alone they need to realign them at some point. It may not be until more teams join though.

How would y'all realign it from a team breakdown?
UGA vs Auburn has to stay... Bama vs TN & Auburn has to stay. State vs OM. OM vs LSU. TN vs UGA. UGA vs Florida.

UGA, Florida, UT, Auburn, SC, Bama, UK/Vandy
A&M, Mizzu, Ark, LSU, OM, State, UK/Vandy

That's close to ideal to me. Permanents:
Bama vs LSU; Florida vs A&M; UGA vs Ark; UT vs OM; State vs Auburn; Mizzu vs SC; Vandy vs UK

I'd take that.

UGA, UF, UT, Auburn, and Bama in one division will be just as much as a murderous division as the West is right now. If you add Vandy to it, UK is just as out of place as Mizzou is now. If you add UK to it, it just makes the division that much more lopsided. A&M, Mizzou, Ark, LSU, UM, State, and Vandy might leave more disparity between the divisions than exists right now (obviously that'd be great for State, but not sure what the purpose of aligning is if you do that).

I think Auburn should move to the East and the UT/Bama game should be sacrificed. That would help with balance between the divisions and help with geographic alignment. I don't get why anybody would be upseet about Bama and UT no longer play each other every year.

[BrunswickDawg]

Our permanents would be Ole Miss and who?

Bama: Auburn, UT, & LSU
OM: State, LSU, and ?
LSU: Bama, OM, and ?
Auburn: Bama, UGA, and ?
Florida: UT, UGA, and ?
UT: Florida, Bama, and Vandy
Vandy: UT, ?, and ?
UGA: Auburn, Florida, and ?
State: OM, ?, and ?
Mizzu: ?, ?, and ?
Ark: ?, ?, and ?
A&M: ?, ?, and ?
USC: ?, ?, ?
Kentucky: ?, ?, and ?

Choosing those 3 permanents would be difficult. I think they should just wait until there's another expansion because they'll have to figure it out all over again regardless. If they go after the east coast, Mizzu would shift easily. However, I hope they'd do a complete realignment. The east is so far behind the west right now it's going to take a major shake up to correct the balance on power.

We should get some sort of scheduling consideration for all those years of our SEC schedule being UM, AU, UofA, and UF. Make our permanents OM, KY, and Vandy.

[scottycameron]

We should get some sort of scheduling consideration for all those years of our SEC schedule being UM, AU, UofA, and UF. Make our permanents OM, KY, and Vandy.

we'll get scheduling consideration alright. Exhibit 1 - we've had haplees kentucky as a permanent forever despite any historical, geographical, or traditional reason at all. Y'all need to leave this shit alone.

[Political Hack]

UGA, UF, UT, Auburn, and Bama in one division will be just as much as a murderous division as the West is right now. If you add Vandy to it, UK is just as out of place as Mizzou is now. If you add UK to it, it just makes the division that much more lopsided. A&M, Mizzou, Ark, LSU, UM, State, and Vandy might leave more disparity between the divisions than exists right now (obviously that'd be great for State, but not sure what the purpose of aligning is if you do that).

I think Auburn should move to the East and the UT/Bama game should be sacrificed. That would help with balance between the divisions and help with geographic alignment. I don't get why anybody would be upseet about Bama and UT no longer play each other every year.

Yeah, I did it how id like to see it... Not how I think they'd do it. It would be close feoraphically though to draw the line down the MS/AL border.

[Bubb Rubb]

kicking handsupdon'tshoot U and a&m out solves all the problems. We can call it a trial period. And it didn't work.

Expansion put the SEC network into the Houston and St. Louis television markets. I'd say it worked better than they even imagined...

[BulldogBacker]

In a heartbeat!

I've been thinking about this since last year. Remember how the east teams (UK and Fla in particular) used to bitch about MSU and Stans when it came to seeding the tournament? We'd win the west and would still arguably be the 5th best team in conference. Hell, back then the east was so dominant that winning the west wouldn't even guarantee you a trip to the big dance. In my mind, the same thing now applies to football. Mizzou would have probably finished 5th or 6th playing a west schedule in football last year. And this year, even though they beat them earlier in the season, does anybody seriously think Florida is better than the Bears? The Bears would beat them 50 if they played again. I realize that its all cyclical and 10 years from now the east may be dominant in football but as of now, their champion gets the benefit of playing Mizzou, Vandy, UK and a dumpster fire USCe every year. Yeah I know the Bears are probably going to go to the Sugar as the '2nd' best team in the conference and last year we got a New Year's 6 as part of being the '2nd' best team in the conference but it sucks that the '2nd' best team in the conference doesn't get to play for the title.

Unless we balance the strength in the two divisions by some kind of realignment, the only way I can think of to solve this is to do away with divisions, let every team keep a rivalry game (2 if possible) then make the schedule totally random. At the end of the year, rely on the college football playoff rankings to determine the two participants in the championship game.

I do not want to give up the Divisions, I like having a Championship Game between Divisions, but placing Missouri in the East made no sense at all. Missouri should be in the West. Each SEC West team has a traditional rival from the East. Missouri has always had competitive basketball and football teams, not great, but competitive. I think Missouri should be in the West, so the West would look like:

LSU
Texas A&M
Arkansas
Mississippi State
Mississippi
Vanderbilt
Missouri

The East would be:

Alabama
Auburn
Kentucky
Georgia
Florida
USCe
Tennessee

The Iron Bowl traditional rivalry could still be played, except being East rivals. MSU would keep Alabama as a traditional rival.

[AusTexDawg]

I'm intrigued by the idea of going to 16 and playing either in pods (always play 3 teams, rotate divisions by pairing 2 different pods up every year) or with 5-team permanent opponents.

If we stay at 14 and goto a 9 game SEC schedule and dropped the P5 requirement, why not swap Mizzou to the West and Auburn to the East. The solution to keeping the Iron Bowl and 3rd Saturday in October would be to give Bama 2 permanent Eastern crossover games (Auburn & Tennessee) with 1 other rotating team, give Auburn and Tennessee the permanent Bama game with 2 other rotating teams and rotate all 3 crossover games for everyone else. It would wind up that some teams play certain crossover teams more often than others. Besides the Auburn/Bama/Tennessee hate triangle, OM/Vandy is the only truly historic crossover matchup (over 80 games in series), followed by LSU/Florida and MSU/Kentucky. While I think college football would be worse off without LSU/Florida (which LSU has advocated getting rid of permanent games to avoid having to play Florida annually) and I think State's record would be worse off without the UK game, I could live without these games annually and wouldn't mind seeing State play a variety of eastern teams.

[1bigdawg]

kicking handsupdon'tshoot U and a&m out solves all the problems. We can call it a trial period. And it didn't work.

This would drop the populous states of Missouri and Texas from the higher paying tier of the SEC network and cost all of us a bundle. If I remember correctly, cable companies in the higher paying tier pay $5 per subscriber and those in the lower tier pay $0.50 per subscriber. The higher paying tier are those subscribers in media markets in SEC STATES. It adds up to a lot of money. That helps us get closer to parity, moneywise.

For example, Bama may go from a $115 million to $140 million, while we go from $75 million to $100 million. The same amount gives brings us up proportionately.

[ShotgunDawg]

http://www.secrant.com/rant/sec-football/sec-realignment-proposal/60100945/

This guy is on to something

This is great & something I've vouched for in the past.

There are some details that need to be worked out to determine the tiers, but, overall, if the SEC can add two teams to reach 16, this makes a ton of sense & would be fun.

Personally, I'd rank the tiers according to recruiting rankings over the past 5 years or so. By ranking tiers by recruiting rankings, you are leveling from the playing field, from a demographic & population standpoint, while also not punishing teams for having good coaching & culture.

I think most people view recruiting rankings as something that's very difficult to move up in, unless you are cheating, due to the population differences & geography of where schools are located. By ranking the tiers along the lines of recruiting ranking instead of records, you'd be offering "small market" schools that are well coached, a greater chance at being successful.

[TUSK]

Lets just have the Bama football athletic program make the schedules out each year.. The basically do it now anyway..

yeppers, that's why we catch so many teams coming off a bye week....

[scottycameron]

yeppers, that's why we catch so many teams coming off a bye week....

if we could get Bama to the east they would avoid Ole Piss every year. I bet they would go along with it if Auburn was going also.

[ShotgunDawg]

yeppers, that's why we catch so many teams coming off a bye week....

Ha ha, I agree.

I will say though, if the Alabama vs Tennessee game is in anyway preventing this league from making progress, from an alignment standpoint, then that's BS. We are a great conference, in which all teams are rivals to some extent. The only rivalries that should be protected are in-state rivalries Iron Bowl, Egg Bowl, Georgia vs Florida, since they don't have in conference, instate rival.

The Alabama vs Tennessee game hasn't been competitive for years, & shouldn't be holding back progress, if it is indeed preventing it.

[TUSK]

if we could get Bama to the east they would avoid Ole Piss every year. I bet they would go along with it if Auburn was going also.

Hell, no! After losing 2 straight to em, we're due to go on a 20 year win streak vs em...

[scottycameron]

Ha ha, I agree.

I will say though, if the Alabama vs Tennessee game is in anyway preventing this league from making progress, from an alignment standpoint, then that's BS. We are a great conference, in which all teams are rivals to some extent. The only rivalries that should be protected are in-state rivalries Iron Bowl, Egg Bowl, Georgia vs Florida, since they don't have in conference, instate rival.

The Alabama vs Tennessee game hasn't been competitive for years, & shouldn't be holding back progress, if it is indeed preventing it.

newflash, shotgun - this shit ain't "progress". You're sounding like obama.

[deltadawg99]

I wish it was like basketball and we didn't have divisions.

Each team could have 3 games to keep rivalries in place and rotate the other 5 games.

For example: Bama would keep LSU, Auburn & UT every year.

[ShotgunDawg]

newflash, shotgun - this shit ain't "progress". You're sounding like obama.

I don't understand. Please explain

[TUSK]

Ha ha, I agree.

I will say though, if the Alabama vs Tennessee game is in anyway preventing this league from making progress, from an alignment standpoint, then that's BS. We are a great conference, in which all teams are rivals to some extent. The only rivalries that should be protected are in-state rivalries Iron Bowl, Egg Bowl, Georgia vs Florida, since they don't have in conference, instate rival.

The Alabama vs Tennessee game hasn't been competitive for years, & shouldn't be holding back progress, if it is indeed preventing it.

that series has always been "streaky"... those ****ers pounded us 7 or 8 straight years preceding this streak...

the TSIO isn't going to be discontinued, it just has to much history...

Do you feel it "holds back progress" by hamstringing potential scheduling?

[scottycameron]

Hell, no! After losing 2 straight to em, we're due to go on a 20 year win streak vs em...

bet your ass saban would love to be free of them. winning in oxfart was one thing, winning easier in tuscaloser was another. Saban going to have a melt down next year with the press after another loss. He may outright quit. It wouldn't hurt anybody's feelings if yall decided to finally show up for that game one year.

[TUSK]

bet your ass saban would love to be free of them. winning in oxfart was one thing, winning easier in tuscaloser was another. Saban going to have a melt down next year with the press after another loss. He may outright quit. It wouldn't hurt anybody's feelings if yall decided to finally show up for that game one year.

LOL... that's awesome!

[ShotgunDawg]

that series has always been "streaky"... those ****ers pounded us 7 or 8 straight years preceding this streak...

the TSIO isn't going to be discontinued, it just has to much history...

Do you feel it "holds back progress" by hamstringing potential scheduling?

The series is the main contention in moving Auburn to the East & Mizzou to the West, which would help both the East & West.

When was that series last streaky?

[TUSK]

Alabama is on a 9 game winning streak...

Tennessee won 10 of 12 prior to that...

Alabama won 8 of 9 (one tie) before that....

Tennesse won 4 in a row...

Alabama won 11 in a row...

Tennessee won 4 in a row...

Alabama won five of six....

and so on....

[scottycameron]

Alabama is on a 9 game winning streak...

Tennessee won 10 of 12 prior to that...

Alabama won 8 of 9 (one tie) before that....

Tennesse won 4 in a row...

Alabama won 11 in a row...

Tennessee won 4 in a row...

Alabama won five of six....

and so on....

confederates on a 2-0 streak so far, how far will it go? what was streak before that?

[TUSK]

confederates on a 2-0 streak so far, how far will it go? what was streak before that?

I'd bet it ends next year...

Ole Miss winning streaks vs Alabama:
they won 2 of 3 in 2001 through 2003
they won 2 of 3 in 1968 through 1970

and they've had the occasional, isolated, fluke win here and there....

[ShotgunDawg]

Alabama is on a 9 game winning streak...

Tennessee won 10 of 12 prior to that...

Alabama won 8 of 9 (one tie) before that....

Tennesse won 4 in a row...

Alabama won 11 in a row...

Tennessee won 4 in a row...

Alabama won five of six....

and so on....

Over the course of the matchup, it is a streaky game, but the landscape of the SEC has changed in the past 9 years. Ole Miss used to own MSU as well back in the 60s and 70s, but in the last 25 years, the game has been a tossup. Alabama & Tennessee aren't rivals anymore from a competitive standpoint. I get that old time Bammer fans & Tennessee fans like to reminiscence about the old times when Bama & Tennessee were the only two SEC teams that were consistently on TV, but that's not the case anymore. The game has changed &, if that game is holding back the SEC from being able to make alignment changes that would make the conference more competitive, then it's ridiculous for that game to continue on an every year basis.

[TUSK]

Over the course of the matchup, it is a streaky game, but the landscape of the SEC has changed in the past 9 years. Ole Miss used to own MSU as well back in the 60s and 70s, but in the last 25 years, the game has been a tossup. Alabama & Tennessee aren't rivals anymore from a competitive standpoint. I get that old time Bammer fans & Tennessee fans like to reminiscence about the old times when Bama & Tennessee were the only two SEC teams that were consistently on TV, but that's not the case anymore. The game has changed &, if that game is holding back the SEC from being able to make alignment changes that would make the conference more competitive, then it's ridiculous for that game to continue on an every year basis.

That's a great point... I'd agree that the TSIO isn't what it used to be bc UT has sucked so bad and Bama has been pretty good...

I think they'll be "back" eventually, though... those ****ers just care too much about football to suck forever...

[ShotgunDawg]

That's a great point... I'd agree that the TSIO isn't what it used to be bc UT has sucked so bad and Bama has been pretty good...

I think they'll be "back" eventually, though... those ****ers just care too much about football to suck forever...

I get it, there is history & you guys want to play each other. I just don't see this matchup as a pillar of the SEC's success & believe it's a game that shouldn't be holding the SEC hostage, if that's the case.

Plus, it's not like you wouldn't play them anymore, you'd likely play them every three years &, if Tennessee comes back, then you'd have other chances to play them in the SEC title game.

[TUSK]

I get it, there is history & you guys want to play each other. I just don't see this matchup as a pillar of the SEC's success & believe it's a game that shouldn't be holding the SEC hostage, if that's the case.

Plus, it's not like you wouldn't play them anymore, you'd likely play them every three years &, if Tennessee comes back, then you'd have other chances to play them in the SEC title game.

yeah, I'm with ya there, buddy... I'm not very "progressive", I admit...

hell, I'd be ok with playin' em OOC to keep it alive... at the same time, if we lose the rivalry (annually), it wouldn't be the end of times, IMO... we got enough teams gunnin' fer us as it is....

[gravedigger]

Mizzu is badly out of place. Not fair to them from a travel perspective. Due to that alone they need to realign them at some point. It may not be until more teams join though.

How would y'all realign it from a team breakdown?
UGA vs Auburn has to stay... Bama vs TN & Auburn has to stay. State vs OM. OM vs LSU. TN vs UGA. UGA vs Florida.

UGA, Florida, UT, Auburn, SC, Bama, UK/Vandy
A&M, Mizzu, Ark, LSU, OM, State, UK/Vandy

That's close to ideal to me. Permanents:
Bama vs LSU; Florida vs A&M; UGA vs Ark; UT vs OM; State vs Auburn; Mizzu vs SC; Vandy vs UK

I'd take that.

Of course youd take thAt. You just made the east overloaded.

[Jack Lambert]

confederates on a 2-0 streak so far, how far will it go? what was streak before that?

Bama has had eight top five recruiting classes the past eight years. Ole Miss had one and all those guys are gone. Ole Miss will be average next season and Bama will still be Bama.

[BulldogBear]

I get it, there is history & you guys want to play each other. I just don't see this matchup as a pillar of the SEC's success & believe it's a game that shouldn't be holding the SEC hostage, if that's the case.

Plus, it's not like you wouldn't play them anymore, you'd likely play them every three years &, if Tennessee comes back, then you'd have other chances to play them in the SEC title game.


yeah, I'm with ya there, buddy... I'm not very "progressive", I admit...

hell, I'd be ok with playin' em OOC to keep it alive... at the same time, if we lose the rivalry (annually), it wouldn't be the end of times, IMO... we got enough teams gunnin' fer us as it is....
I like the divisions and think having none and just playing a champ game is having a champ game just to have one, which is lame. A someone said, having the division champs that playoff lends legitimacy to the conference championship when you have so many schools. Exploring the options, I think I can expose their flaws and give my solution, if rather simple, at the end. Keep in mind the point of this is to preserve having divisions and most of the important rivalries.

(1) There are problems with balance if you exchange Missouri and Vandy/UK/UT with Bama and Auburn. Mizzou and UK or Mizzou and Vandy just shifts the balance issue eastward. Mizzou and Tennessee, even if jinky a bit geographically, is only slightly better, and would in turn eliminate UK/UT and Vandy/UT in order for the Bama/UT annual game to stay in place. So, that doesn't work anyway.

(2) You could do a mass exchange of UMiss, MSU, Bama, and Auburn for UT, UK, Vandy, and Mizzou. There's no point in any realignment if UT-Bama goes away so it would mean LSU-Bama goes away and still just exacerbates the balance issue.

(3) The best way to keep the current scheduling "model" would be a rather hokey North/South realignment with the following cross-divisional matchups (Left for South and Right for North):

Georgia - Auburn
LSU - Alabama
Texas A&M - Arkansas
Florida - Tennessee
Mississippi State - Kentucky or Missouri
Ole Miss - Vanderbilt
South Carolina - Kentucky or Missouri

You can see I believe they would preserve LSU-Bama before MSU-Bama but it could change to LSU-Ark, TAMU-Mizzou, MSU-Bama, USCe-KY. But the truth is that in this model there is probably too much of a complete overhaul for everyone to agree on.

All of which brings me to the two best solutions:

(A) Exchange Auburn and Missouri. Cross-divisional matchups would look like this:

Alabama - Auburn
LSU - Florida
Arkansas - South Carolina
Ole Miss - Vanderbilt
Mississippi State - Kentucky
Missouri - Tennessee (maybe UGA)
Texas A&M - Georgia (maybe UT)

Might also consider MSU-USCe, Ark-UT, Mizzou-KY with TAMU-UGA. Then TSIO would have to follow the example of WF-UNC and play a non-conference game, although Bama-UT would be every year. Obviously they wouldn't have to do this in years where the rotation pitted them against each other as a conference game. SEC members have to play a P5 opponent so there it is for them! Bama could schedule them there neutral site games in years UT was an SEC game... or just do it anyway. If any school can handle 10 P5 games it ought to Bammer right?

(B) But really I think the best solution until expansion is simply to do something akin to what the Big Ten has done and not have a modular scheduling arrangement. Since UGA, Auburn, UT, and Bama want to preserve these rivalries I would say that not only do I get that, but I also support it. So, let those four schools be the only ones with permanent cross-divisional opponents and rotate in one other one each year, while everyone else rotates two. Sure, they'll play each other more than those four, but so be it. There are even ways to do that formula where they may still have one that they play every other year and stuff like that.