Auburn Trying to Get the SEC To Alter Their Schedule

[ShotgunDawg]

I can't wait to see how MSU would get screwed by this.

Can we also appeal to not have LSU and Bama on the road in the same year?

1097991285393235968

[msstate7]

Didn't we do the same thing with ark?

[Coursesuper]

17 them, play it like it laid out or get out.

[BuckyIsAB****]

I dont have a problem with it but if they do it then all schools should be able to move what they want within reason

[BrunswickDawg]

They will screw us by swapping our date with Auburn for UGAs. We end the season with 5 straight weeks of SEC West football.

[bulldawg28]

Bama did this years ago with teams having byes before playing them. Here is my 2 MSU requests for football scheduling that would make a major difference imo.

Swap Kentucky with Arkansas slot wise
Arkansas gets better as the year goes on. Kentucky is generally the same

Swap Bama and LSU on the schedule slot wise
Doesn't matter when we play Bama. However, if we played LSU after they played Bama games we'd pull some victories out. LSU also seems to trail off as the year progresses.

[Choctaw Dawg]

Auburn has been bitching about their schedule for years now. I think the SEC is getting tired of it and is about to give them their way as well as a way easier laid out schedule while screwing us or Arkansas.

[Todd4State]

They will screw us by swapping our date with Auburn for UGAs. We end the season with 5 straight weeks of SEC West football.

I don't see why they would do that. The easiest thing to do would be to just switch when Auburn and Georgia play their cross divisional opponent.

[Jack Lambert]

I am sick and tired of those two Alabama schools. Bunch of whining candy asses.

[Matty Dispatch]

I don't see the problem here. Pretty much everyone agrees that Georgia is on the cusp of being right there with Alabama and Clemson, and Auburn is the only school in the country that has to play 2 of those 3 powerhouses every year.....and they frequently schedule Clemson as well. Their schedule is pretty tough considering that every even numbered year they play both on the road, so they can essentially scratch that season off as having no chance at the West. At least Auburn isn't trying to get out of playing Georgia like LSU has been doing with Florida.

[TUSK]

I don't see the problem here. Pretty much everyone agrees that Georgia is on the cusp of being right there with Alabama and Clemson, and Auburn is the only school in the country that has to play 2 of those 3 powerhouses every year.....and they frequently schedule Clemson as well. Their schedule is pretty tough considering that every even numbered year they play both on the road, so they can essentially scratch that season off as having no chance at the West. At least Auburn isn't trying to get out of playing Georgia like LSU has been doing with Florida.

Yeah, when one's perma SECE opponent is UK or Vandy they shouldn't really be concerned with the current SEC schedule structure...

LSU has whined about Florida (it was THE big game, then) and Bammer (justifiably) whined about almost every SEC opponent having bye weeks prior one year, and now AU wants to move a game... if it can be done without much disruption, lettem do it... they play a MFer of a schedule...

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

I don't see the problem here. Pretty much everyone agrees that Georgia is on the cusp of being right there with Alabama and Clemson, and Auburn is the only school in the country that has to play 2 of those 3 powerhouses every year.....and they frequently schedule Clemson as well. Their schedule is pretty tough considering that every even numbered year they play both on the road, so they can essentially scratch that season off as having no chance at the West. At least Auburn isn't trying to get out of playing Georgia like LSU has been doing with Florida.

But the problem with a lot of the scheduling issues in the SEC right now revolves around preserving the old rivalries like Bama/Tenn and Aub/UGA. Funny how it's only a problem now that UGA has risen where it is.

[ShotgunDawg]

But the problem with a lot of the scheduling issues in the SEC right now revolves around preserving the old rivalries like Bama/Tenn and Aub/UGA. Funny how it's only a problem now that UGA has risen where it is.

This.

The issue is that SEC scheduling is held hostage by Bama/TN and Auburn/UGA and now Auburn complains about the schedule being hard. By caving to Auburn, the SEC is allowing those 2 games to hold the conference even more hostage in regards to putting together divisions and schedules that make sense and are fair for everyone else.

[Jack Lambert]

But the problem with a lot of the scheduling issues in the SEC right now revolves around preserving the old rivalries like Bama/Tenn and Aub/UGA. Funny how it's only a problem now that UGA has risen where it is.

I question do the Bama Gen X, Gen Y and now Gen Z fans really view the Bama vs Tenn a rivalry game?

[TUSK]

This.

The issue is that SEC scheduling is held hostage by Bama/TN and Auburn/UGA and now Auburn complains about the schedule being hard. By caving to Auburn, the SEC is allowing those 2 games to hold the conference even more hostage in regards to putting together divisions and schedules that make sense and are fair for everyone else.

I don't understand what is "unfair" about the current schedule? Would you want to trade UK for UGA or UT?

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

This.

The issue is that SEC scheduling is held hostage by Bama/TN and Auburn/UGA and now Auburn complains about the schedule being hard. By caving to Auburn, the SEC is allowing those 2 games to hold the conference even more hostage in regards to putting together divisions and schedules that make sense and are fair for everyone else.

I could be wrong, but I think that's also part of the reason the SEC hasn't gone to a 9 game conference schedule.

[Choctaw Dawg]

I could be wrong, but I think that's also part of the reason the SEC hasn't gone to a 9 game conference schedule.

That and the fact that the only coach that supports a nine game conference schedule is Nick Saban himself, it might happen one day but it wont be in the next 20 years

[Matty Dispatch]

But the problem with a lot of the scheduling issues in the SEC right now revolves around preserving the old rivalries like Bama/Tenn and Aub/UGA. Funny how it's only a problem now that UGA has risen where it is.

Would you be in favor of ditching permanent cross over opponents? That would mean no more Kentucky every year. It would mean playing Georgia and Florida more instead.

The truth is, pretty much everyone like the permanent games except LSU because they fit each other. Mizzou/ARk, A&M/USC, MSU/UK, OM/Vandy, then Bama/UT and Aub/UGA have old rivalries. If it were a real problem, it would be brought up and voted against, or even mentioned at all by the athletic directors.

[BrunswickDawg]

I question do the Bama Gen X, Gen Y and now Gen Z fans really view the Bama vs Tenn a rivalry game?

As Gen X I say nope - at least not to the level of being the driver of the SEC schedule. Bama is 31-14-1 against TN in my lifetime. That's only 7 more wins than MSU has. And large number of those wins for them (9) came when Bama had forgotten how to be Bama ('96-'07) - which is when we won 6 of our 7.

I don't even know that I consider UGA/AU sacred anymore. Most UGA fans I know would love not to play them every year. It's been that way since the year Auburn hosed the fans after UGA won.

I think the SEC having permanent opponents across the divisions is stupid. Set it up so that your teams rotate on a stagger. Something like this for MSU:
Year 1 - UK (home), UT (road).
Year 2 - UT (home), USC (road)
Year 3 - USC (home), UF (road)
Year 4 - UF (home), Vandy (road)
Year 5 - Vandy (home), UGA (road)
Year 6 - UGA (home), UK (road)

In a 5 year period you will play every team once, see all but 1 stadium in the SEC, and it is pretty equitable

ETA - I forgot Missouri! LoL! I'm not taking the time to add them back in because they are irrelevant

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

Would you be in favor of ditching permanent cross over opponents? That would mean no more Kentucky every year. It would mean playing Georgia and Florida more instead.

The truth is, pretty much everyone like the permanent games except LSU because they fit each other. Mizzou/ARk, A&M/USC, MSU/UK, OM/Vandy, then Bama/UT and Aub/UGA have old rivalries. If it were a real problem, it would be brought up and voted against, or even mentioned at all by the athletic directors.

While that would not be ideal, it would be nice to play Missouri once every couple of years instead of the way it is now. What are we on, a 20 year rotation?

[TUSK]

I question do the Bama Gen X, Gen Y and now Gen Z fans really view the Bama vs Tenn a rivalry game?

Yep. Maybe they don't know why, but they do.

[ShotgunDawg]

Yep. Maybe they don't know why, but they do.

Has very much an OM/LSU feel to it.

[TUSK]

Has very much an OM/LSU feel to it.

Not nationally (meaning TV ratings-wise), but your point is well taken.

And OM/LSU hasn't been consistently meaningful in 50-60 years...

[RocketDawg]

I question do the Bama Gen X, Gen Y and now Gen Z fans really view the Bama vs Tenn a rivalry game?

I don't think it's as big a deal as it was a few years ago. When Tennessee was consistently good, they pretty much got equal coverage to Alabama and Auburn in our local newspaper (when we had a local paper ....).

Local support tends to go with winners though ... it's about 95% Alabama now, perhaps leaning to Clemson a bit after the championship game. **

[dickiedawg]

Just for accuracy's sake, South Carolina plays Clemson and Georgia every year.

[Todd4State]

Would you be in favor of ditching permanent cross over opponents? That would mean no more Kentucky every year. It would mean playing Georgia and Florida more instead.

The truth is, pretty much everyone like the permanent games except LSU because they fit each other. Mizzou/ARk, A&M/USC, MSU/UK, OM/Vandy, then Bama/UT and Aub/UGA have old rivalries. If it were a real problem, it would be brought up and voted against, or even mentioned at all by the athletic directors.

You know what? I think I actually would be Ok playing Kentucky less and Florida and Georgia more. On the other hand it would also mean more Vanderbilt, Mizzou, and South Carolina as well. I'd be in favor of doing away with the divisions completely and playing a nine game schedule with only about 4-5 permanent opponents to preserve rivalries. We could play Ole Miss, Alabama, LSU, and Auburn or Tennessee every year or something like that and the rotate the rest. I think I would be Ok with an 8 game schedule and no divisions too. I don't like the mandatory P5 OOC game because it forces our hand and I would imagine it costs us more money to get those games scheduled because people like K-State know we HAVE TO play someone like them. I would rather us play and me watch another SEC team than Arizona or K-State personally.


And not that it's either here or there- but I think LSU and Florida seem to fit as cross divisional opponents as well.

[Matty Dispatch]

You know what? I think I actually would be Ok playing Kentucky less and Florida and Georgia more. On the other hand it would also mean more Vanderbilt, Mizzou, and South Carolina as well. I'd be in favor of doing away with the divisions completely and playing a nine game schedule with only about 4-5 permanent opponents to preserve rivalries. We could play Ole Miss, Alabama, LSU, and Auburn or Tennessee every year or something like that and the rotate the rest. I think I would be Ok with an 8 game schedule and no divisions too. I don't like the mandatory P5 OOC game because it forces our hand and I would imagine it costs us more money to get those games scheduled because people like K-State know we HAVE TO play someone like them. I would rather us play and me watch another SEC team than Arizona or K-State personally.


And not that it's either here or there- but I think LSU and Florida seem to fit as cross divisional opponents as well.

All MSU fans should be in favor of getting rid of divisions and conference championship games to make way for an expanded playoff. It's the only way we'll ever get a shot at the playoff (outside of the 1% chance some folks hold onto). But under the current structure, playing Kentucky every year is a good thing for State (despite losing 2 of 3 as of right now). That's not poor ole Mississippi State thinking, that's just the facts - thinking otherwise is denial.