SEC rumored to be going to pods for football

[Todd4State]

After Texas and Oklahoma join.

That's awesome news! Because Texas A&M doesn't want to be in the same pod as Texas here's what some think it may look like:

POD 1

MSU, Ole Miss, LSU, Texas A&M

POD 2

Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Mizzou

POD 3

Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

POD 4

Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

So the rumor is you play every team in your pod and then six other teams from the other pods. I'm not sure how they will actually rotate the other six but that basically means that we're going to be playing 9 SEC games, 1 P5 game, and then 2 G5 games. Educated guess that the SEC Championship will be between the top 2 teams in the league.

I really like the fact that we're going to be playing the other SEC schools more often plus I like the potential to not have to play Alabama every year. I think that could potentially open us up to some really good seasons. I like the fact that the SEC Championship Game won't be like 12-0 Alabama vs. 7-5 Mizzou or something like that.

This is all rumor but I like what the possibilities could be.

[parabrave]

Naw they will put Bama, Us Aubbie and UT. TAM ARKY UT, Burnt Orange and OK. Mizzou Vandy UK and OM.

[Maroonthirteen]

Yep, I am all for the the PODs and the elimination of Alabama on our schedule every year. Also, some other charter members will have to give up long standing rivalries. But that looks like a fair POD arrangement. You do keep a number of rivalries.

I don't know how you avoid a POD being the old SWC/Big12 but.....there are so many B12 teams in the SEC now.....it is unavoidable. You have to keep UT/OU rivalry game for TV and as long as you have UT/OU playing Bama/UGA/TN/UF/AU on the regular, that is great for TV ratings regardless of their POD assignments.

For baseball, I guess you can have the POD system. Play your 3 POD opponents, then rotate the other 7?

For basketball do you even have a POD system? JUst play all 15 teams and rotate the home and away year to year?

[msstate7]

The sec better make Texas and aTm play every year. I loved that game when I was young, and those 2 are building up some real hate

[Todd4State]

The sec better make Texas and aTm play every year. I loved that game when I was young, and those 2 are building up some real hate

I wonder if they'll make a couple of exceptions in the name of rivalry.

[FISHDAWG]

What's up with the cake walk for Vandy **

[Cooterpoot]

It's not just a rumor. It's going to happen. But I'm sure we'll get screwed with AL or OK along with LSU.

[RiverCityDawg]

I will die on the hill that pods are stupid. Instead, it should just be 3 permanent opponents. You get all the benefits of pods except with flexibility to preserve more of the annual matchups fans want. You can also more easily manage competitive balance if you aren't restricted by pods.

[FISHDAWG]

I will die on the hill that pods are stupid. Instead, it should just be 3 permanent opponents. You get all the benefits of pods except with flexibility to preserve more of the annual matchups fans want. You can also more easily manage competitive balance if you aren't restricted by pods.

wouldn't a pod of 4 teams give you 3 permanent teams ? The geographic footprint of the conference is getting so large that to me it makes sense. I doubt they would do it but would it make sense to have 2 Western division pods and 2 Eastern division pods ? There would definitely have to be some shuffling in order to keep some sense of parity though ..... It's interesting and I'm curious as to what they will do but would we HAVE to go to 9 conference games ? That won't be easy for us

[HoopsDawg]

I wonder if they'll make a couple of exceptions in the name of rivalry.

I would hope not. As stated, you would play 2 teams from each pod home and away. Then you would play the other 2 teams home and away. That would ensure that a freshman would play every team in the conference home and away before graduation. We don't have that now.

[Fader21]

The best pod system would be.

Pod 1: Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Ark

Pod 2: Missouri, LSU, MSU, Ole Miss

Pod 3: Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Tenn

Pod 4: Florida, UGA, USCe, and Vandy

It keeps most of the rivalries in tack. The only alternative I see is swapping Vandy and Tenn, but that takes away from the 3rd Sat. in Oct, plus it would just be Bama and Auburn beating up on KY and Vandy.

I know Texas A&M doesn't want to be in the same division as Texas but get over it, its a natural rivalry that needs to return.

[msstate7]

Texas and aTm
Us and OM
Bama and auburn
Georgia and Florida

These should be paired no matter what.

[Offshore Dawg]

Bama will insist on playing Tennessee, and Auburn plays Georgia.

[RiverCityDawg]

wouldn't a pod of 4 teams give you 3 permanent teams ? The geographic footprint of the conference is getting so large that to me it makes sense. I doubt they would do it but would it make sense to have 2 Western division pods and 2 Eastern division pods ? There would definitely have to be some shuffling in order to keep some sense of parity though ..... It's interesting and I'm curious as to what they will do but would we HAVE to go to 9 conference games ? That won't be easy for us

Yes, but with pods each team is limited to having the other teams in their pod as their permanents rather than just assigning three permanents to each team based on what makes the most sense.

The games listed below, among others, should be played every year, which can be accomplished with three permanents but not with pods:

State vs ole miss
Alabama vs Auburn
LSU vs Alabama
Ole miss vs LSU
Auburn vs Georgia
Alabama vs Tennessee
Georgia vs Florida

I would also add A&M vs LSU which has become a sneaky good series, LSU vs Florida and Florida vs Kentucky. I would also like to see Texas and Arkansas cook up a rivalry like in the old days along with A&M vs Texas and Texas vs Oklahoma.

We'll lose some of these classic (or just fun) matchups each year with pods, but not if you just assign each team three permanents. Everything else works the same as Todd outlined in the OP.

[Tater]

Here's how you keep every important traditional rivalry.

Alabama: Auburn, Tennessee, State
Auburn: Alabama, Georgia, Florida
Georgia: Auburn, Florida, SCar
Tennessee: Alabama, Vanderbilt, Kentucky
Florida: Georgia, SCar, Auburn
State: Ole Miss, Kentucky, Bama
Ole Miss: State, LSU, vandy
LSU: Ole Miss, A&M, OU
Texas: OU, A&M, Arkansas
OU: Texas, Mizzou, LSU
A&M: Texas, LSU, Arkansas
Mizzou: Arkansas, Kentucky, OU
Kentucky: Tennessee, Mizzou, State
Vandy: Tennessee, Ole Miss, SCar
SCar: Georgia, Florida, Vandy
Arkansas: Mizzou, A&M, Texas

Then rotate the other 6 games with H&Hs. You'll play everyone at their place and at home at least once in a 4 year span. Plus you don't lose your rivalry games.

There's wiggle room too. But i stuck with the most traditional rivals.

[Johnson85]

The best pod system would be.

Pod 1: Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Ark

Pod 2: Missouri, LSU, MSU, Ole Miss

Pod 3: Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Tenn

Pod 4: Florida, UGA, USCe, and Vandy

It keeps most of the rivalries in tack. The only alternative I see is swapping Vandy and Tenn, but that takes away from the 3rd Sat. in Oct, plus it would just be Bama and Auburn beating up on KY and Vandy.

I know Texas A&M doesn't want to be in the same division as Texas but get over it, its a natural rivalry that needs to return.

That would be fantastic for us. And I think you would hear a collective orgasm out of Louisiana if it happened. But there is just too much disparity between Pod 2 and the other three pods. Pod 1 has Arkansas. Pod 2 has Mizzou, MSU, and Ole Miss. Pod 3 has Uk and Tenn. Pod 4 has USCe and Vandy. If you are only going to have one have not in a pod, it has to be Vandy, don't think it can be Arkansas.

[RiverCityDawg]

Here's how you keep every important traditional rivalry.

Alabama: Auburn, Tennessee, State
Auburn: Alabama, Georgia, Florida
Georgia: Auburn, Florida, SCar
Tennessee: Alabama, Vanderbilt, Kentucky
Florida: Georgia, SCar, Auburn
State: Ole Miss, Kentucky, Bama
Ole Miss: State, LSU, vandy
LSU: Ole Miss, A&M, OU
Texas: OU, A&M, Arkansas
OU: Texas, Mizzou, LSU
A&M: Texas, LSU, Arkansas
Mizzou: Arkansas, Kentucky, OU
Kentucky: Tennessee, Mizzou, State
Vandy: Tennessee, Ole Miss, SCar
SCar: Georgia, Florida, Vandy
Arkansas: Mizzou, A&M, Texas

Then rotate the other 6 games with H&Hs. You'll play everyone at their place and at home at least once in a 4 year span. Plus you don't lose your rivalry games.

There's wiggle room too. But i stuck with the most traditional rivals.

Thank you. I would suggest a few tweaks, but the concept is spot on.

[Johnson85]

Here's how you keep every important traditional rivalry.

Alabama: Auburn, Tennessee, State
Auburn: Alabama, Georgia, Florida
Georgia: Auburn, Florida, SCar
Tennessee: Alabama, Vanderbilt, Kentucky
Florida: Georgia, SCar, Auburn
State: Ole Miss, Kentucky, Bama
Ole Miss: State, LSU, vandy
LSU: Ole Miss, A&M, OU
Texas: OU, A&M, Arkansas
OU: Texas, Mizzou, LSU
A&M: Texas, LSU, Arkansas
Mizzou: Arkansas, Kentucky, OU
Kentucky: Tennessee, Mizzou, State
Vandy: Tennessee, Ole Miss, SCar
SCar: Georgia, Florida, Vandy
Arkansas: Mizzou, A&M, Texas

Then rotate the other 6 games with H&Hs. You'll play everyone at their place and at home at least once in a 4 year span. Plus you don't lose your rivalry games.

There's wiggle room too. But i stuck with the most traditional rivals.

I think the problem with your approach is that it makes it almost impossible to maintain balanced schedules. You are going to have imbalanced schedules regardless, but the pods make it easier to balance them the best you can based on traditional strength.

But at the least, you can't preserve say, Ole Miss v. Vandy. Can't give them LSU, State, and Vandy each year without them having a pretty big advantage. Similarly, you probably can't preserve Bama, UGA, and Florida for Auburn. Just guarantees they are going to have a harder schedule on average.

[RiverCityDawg]

I think the problem with your approach is that it makes it almost impossible to maintain balanced schedules. You are going to have imbalanced schedules regardless, but the pods make it easier to balance them the best you can based on traditional strength.

But at the least, you can't preserve say, Ole Miss v. Vandy. Can't give them LSU, State, and Vandy each year without them having a pretty big advantage. Similarly, you probably can't preserve Bama, UGA, and Florida for Auburn. Just guarantees they are going to have a harder schedule on average.

You can tweak the matchups if you think more competitive balance is needed, but this approach is more flexible than pods so it actually allows for more competitive balance if you arrange it the right way.

[StarkVegasSteve]

Pod 1: State, OM, A&M, LSU

Pod 2: Texas, OU, Arky, Mizzou

Pod 3: Auburn, Bama, UT, Vandy

Pod 4: Florida, USCe, Georgia, UK


A&M will not let UT be in the same pod as them. I feel like this will be a concession the SEC will give them. I still think A&M and Texas will play I just think it will be every two years instead of every year.

Vandy is obviously the team that gets screwed in all of this, but it is either going to be them or UK that ends up in the pod with Bama, Auburn, and UT. And the other pod with Florida and UGA is not much better.

As others have stated I think you take the top two teams in football and that is your SEC championship. For baseball I think you will see the regular 30 game SEC conference weekend schedule with 3 two game midweek series thrown in for a 36 game conference schedule. Basketball you just play all the teams in your pod twice and then play everyone else one time.

[RiverCityDawg]

Pod 1: State, OM, A&M, LSU

Pod 2: Texas, OU, Arky, Mizzou

Pod 3: Auburn, Bama, UT, Vandy

Pod 4: Florida, USCe, Georgia, UK


A&M will not let UT be in the same pod as them. I feel like this will be a concession the SEC will give them. I still think A&M and Texas will play I just think it will be every two years instead of every year.

Vandy is obviously the team that gets screwed in all of this, but it is either going to be them or UK that ends up in the pod with Bama, Auburn, and UT. And the other pod with Florida and UGA is not much better.

As others have stated I think you take the top two teams in football and that is your SEC championship. For baseball I think you will see the regular 30 game SEC conference weekend schedule with 3 two game midweek series thrown in for a 36 game conference schedule. Basketball you just play all the teams in your pod twice and then play everyone else one time.

Why does A&M get a concession though? Their vote wasn't needed for this to happen and the SEC has done a lot more for them than they've done for the SEC. Texas and Texas A&M should play every year. Period. If either of them don't like it, too damn bad. Nut up and play.

[Johnson85]

Why does A&M get a concession though? Their vote wasn't needed for this to happen and the SEC has done a lot more for them than they've done for the SEC. Texas and Texas A&M should play every year. Period. If either of them don't like it, too damn bad. Nut up and play.

I don't think it's a concession for A&M but for OU and UT. OU and UT are going to want to keep their rivalry. If you put OU, UT, and A&M in a pod, that's by name and reputation (and money) the biggest pod. Obviously UT hasn't been good lately and it's questionable how OU would stack up against SEC competition, so it's won't necessarily be out of balance as far as actual competition, but OU and UT are going to be treated like Bama and UGA as far as protecting the brand.

I think OU, UT, Mizzou, and Arkansas is a reasonably likely pod. Have old Big 12/Southwest connections and it gives OU and UT as soft of a base to their schedule as you can reasonably have in the SEC.

[StarkVegasSteve]

Why does A&M get a concession though? Their vote wasn't needed for this to happen and the SEC has done a lot more for them than they've done for the SEC. Texas and Texas A&M should play every year. Period. If either of them don't like it, too damn bad. Nut up and play.

Why do they have to play every year? They have all this hate pent up, more on the A&M side than the Texas side. I think it would be great if they only played every two to three years. I think it makes the game more interesting. Kind of like how Bama/Florida was a big game back in the late 2000s. Oklahoma will always be Texas' real rival and that's the only team they have to absolutely play every year. I also think Arky/Texas is going to be a great rivalry once Texas joins. Arky fans HATE Texas way worse than A&M or Oklahoma does.

[Tater]

I think the problem with your approach is that it makes it almost impossible to maintain balanced schedules. You are going to have imbalanced schedules regardless, but the pods make it easier to balance them the best you can based on traditional strength.

But at the least, you can't preserve say, Ole Miss v. Vandy. Can't give them LSU, State, and Vandy each year without them having a pretty big advantage. Similarly, you probably can't preserve Bama, UGA, and Florida for Auburn. Just guarantees they are going to have a harder schedule on average.

The conference can't operate with that thought in mind. You have to treat each school equally. Schools will cycle even if it doesn't feel like it. 15 years ago you'd look at that and say State has the easiest 3. Because Bama was floundering, UK was a joke, and OM is meh.

I opted for games that should be played every year. There are some room for tweaks but I don't see any major game losses on here.

By team, their next pick:
Bama - LSU
Auburn - LSU
Georgia - Tennessee
Tennessee - Florida
Florida - Tennessee
State - LSU
OM - Bama
LSU - State or Bama
Texas - Mizzou
OU - A&M
A&M - OU
Mizzou - Texas
Kentucky - Vandy
Vandy - Kentucky
SCar - Kentucky
Ark - LSU

Not many games you lose with this one. LSU is the hardest to deal with because they are everyone's 4th / 5th rival.

[Jarius]

Texas A&M and Texas will 100 % be in the same POD. That's going to happen. We will be in a pod with Ole Miss, LSU and probably Arkansas (but maybe someone else). TV isn't going to allow traditional rivalries like state/om, bama/au, or A&M/Texas not happen, no matter what anyone wants or doesn't want.

[Jarius]

I don't think it's a concession for A&M but for OU and UT. OU and UT are going to want to keep their rivalry. If you put OU, UT, and A&M in a pod, that's by name and reputation (and money) the biggest pod. Obviously UT hasn't been good lately and it's questionable how OU would stack up against SEC competition, so it's won't necessarily be out of balance as far as actual competition, but OU and UT are going to be treated like Bama and UGA as far as protecting the brand.

I think OU, UT, Mizzou, and Arkansas is a reasonably likely pod. Have old Big 12/Southwest connections and it gives OU and UT as soft of a base to their schedule as you can reasonably have in the SEC.


I don't have a lot of money but I'd bet most of it OU, UT, and A&M are all 3 in a pod together.

[bulldawg28]

I'd rather play Texas than A&M. Texas sucks in football.

[Todd4State]

Pod 1: State, OM, A&M, LSU

Pod 2: Texas, OU, Arky, Mizzou

Pod 3: Auburn, Bama, UT, Vandy

Pod 4: Florida, USCe, Georgia, UK


A&M will not let UT be in the same pod as them. I feel like this will be a concession the SEC will give them. I still think A&M and Texas will play I just think it will be every two years instead of every year.

Vandy is obviously the team that gets screwed in all of this, but it is either going to be them or UK that ends up in the pod with Bama, Auburn, and UT. And the other pod with Florida and UGA is not much better.

As others have stated I think you take the top two teams in football and that is your SEC championship. For baseball I think you will see the regular 30 game SEC conference weekend schedule with 3 two game midweek series thrown in for a 36 game conference schedule. Basketball you just play all the teams in your pod twice and then play everyone else one time.

I would love for the SEC to have midweek conference games. Would be great for TV because you would have Tues/Weds series and then the Thurs/Fri/Sat series and then the Fri/Sat/Sun series. Monday would be the only day without a conference game.

I'd even be cool with a 40 game SEC schedule for baseball. 30 on the weekend and then 10 midweek series against the other five teams.

[Quaoarsking]

I would love for the SEC to have midweek conference games. Would be great for TV because you would have Tues/Weds series and then the Thurs/Fri/Sat series and then the Fri/Sat/Sun series. Monday would be the only day without a conference game.

I'd even be cool with a 40 game SEC schedule for baseball. 30 on the weekend and then 10 midweek series against the other five teams.

I support that too, but we need larger scholarship limits so that we can have 5 SEC quality starting pitchers

[Saltydog]

I'd rather play Texas than A&M. Texas sucks in football.

Not sure that trend will hold true for the long haul......

[BuckyIsAB****]

I would bet money it is

1: Texas-A&M-Arky-OU
2: State-OM-LSU-Bama
3:Auburn-UGA-UF-SC
4-UT-UK-VU-MZ

[Jarius]

I would bet money it is

1: Texas-A&M-Arky-OU
2: State-OM-LSU-Bama
3:Auburn-UGA-UF-SC
4-UT-UK-VU-MZ

Auburn and Alabama are going to be in the same
Pod.

[PGHBulldogBG]

That seems like a really easy Pod for UK as long as Stoops stays there. I think that would cause too big of a backlash.

[RiverCityDawg]

I don't think it's a concession for A&M but for OU and UT. OU and UT are going to want to keep their rivalry. If you put OU, UT, and A&M in a pod, that's by name and reputation (and money) the biggest pod. Obviously UT hasn't been good lately and it's questionable how OU would stack up against SEC competition, so it's won't necessarily be out of balance as far as actual competition, but OU and UT are going to be treated like Bama and UGA as far as protecting the brand.

I think OU, UT, Mizzou, and Arkansas is a reasonably likely pod. Have old Big 12/Southwest connections and it gives OU and UT as soft of a base to their schedule as you can reasonably have in the SEC.

First of all, Texas and OU came to us, they don't get concessions either.

But that aside, what you describe is just another reason why there shouldn't be pods. It would be very easy to have Texas play both OU and A&M AND maintain competitive balance if you just assign three permanent opponents instead of forcing this pod idea.

I've yet to see one credible argument for pods over three permanents. It's literally the same as pods except with flexibility to keep more traditional matchups and maintain more competitive balance.

[RiverCityDawg]

Why do they have to play every year? They have all this hate pent up, more on the A&M side than the Texas side. I think it would be great if they only played every two to three years. I think it makes the game more interesting. Kind of like how Bama/Florida was a big game back in the late 2000s. Oklahoma will always be Texas' real rival and that's the only team they have to absolutely play every year. I also think Arky/Texas is going to be a great rivalry once Texas joins. Arky fans HATE Texas way worse than A&M or Oklahoma does.

What? Playing annually does not reduce the hate or interest in the game, it increases it. That's why rivalry games are so highly anticipated each year. Those schools' fans want it, but more than that people across the country want it. They'll tune into Texas vs A&M long before they will Texas vs Missouri or A&M vs Arkansas. The rivalry games get big numbers and those teams should do their part in playing those games.

I agree with your thoughts on Texas and Arkansas. I'd like to see them play every year too.

[Dawgtini]

It's not just a rumor. It's going to happen. But I'm sure we'll get screwed with AL or OK along with LSU.

We should get ARK, LSU, and TSUN screw what Aggie wants. Arkansas been in SEC a lot longer and they don't want the big12/SWC pod stink either. Put OK, Tex, ATM, and MZ in a pod and make them like it.

[Johnson85]

First of all, Texas and OU came to us, they don't get concessions either.

But that aside, what you describe is just another reason why there shouldn't be pods. It would be very easy to have Texas play both OU and A&M AND maintain competitive balance if you just assign three permanent opponents instead of forcing this pod idea.

I've yet to see one credible argument for pods over three permanents. It's literally the same as pods except with flexibility to keep more traditional matchups and maintain more competitive balance.

You can do three permanents, but most people you see listing rivalries they want to maintain are big names. Nobody gives a shit who Vandy plays. And they really don't give that much of a shit who State or Ole Miss plays. So if you find permanent rivals for Vandy, Mizzou, UK, etc., and you try to make schedules reasonably balanced, you end up with something that will look a lot like the pods. There is some additional flexibility with the permanent opponents approach, I'm just not sure it's going to be as different from the pod approach as people imagine.

You're just not going to keep for example, Bama having Auburn, UT, and LSU as permanents. You're going to pick the two most important and then you're going to have to spread out the teams that don't have rivalries people care about so that everybody has three permanents.

I mean, I'd love it if the TV partners convinced the SEC that they would pay more if they would make Bama play UGA, Auburn, and LSU as permanents and let us have Ole Miss, UK, and Vandy as permanents, but I think the big name schools are going to resist loading up their schedule. But I could be wrong. They basically matched up strengths with the prior permanent opponents, with Ole getting Vandy, us getting UK, Ark getting USCe (prior to expansion). I'm just not sure they're going to want three blue blood matchups every year plus a reasonable chance of drawing a fourth or even fifth from the remaining teams.

[Coach34]

The SEC is going to do whats best for the money makers in the conference. Bama, Georgia, LSU, Fla, Tenn, A&M, Texas, and OU will get the biggest bennies

My prediction:

OU, Texas, Mizzou, UPig
Fla, Georgia, SC, Vandy
Bama, Auburn, Tenn, Kentucky
LSU, State, Mississippi, A&M

[RiverCityDawg]

You can do three permanents, but most people you see listing rivalries they want to maintain are big names. Nobody gives a shit who Vandy plays. And they really don't give that much of a shit who State or Ole Miss plays. So if you find permanent rivals for Vandy, Mizzou, UK, etc., and you try to make schedules reasonably balanced, you end up with something that will look a lot like the pods. There is some additional flexibility with the permanent opponents approach, I'm just not sure it's going to be as different from the pod approach as people imagine.

You're just not going to keep for example, Bama having Auburn, UT, and LSU as permanents. You're going to pick the two most important and then you're going to have to spread out the teams that don't have rivalries people care about so that everybody has three permanents.

I mean, I'd love it if the TV partners convinced the SEC that they would pay more if they would make Bama play UGA, Auburn, and LSU as permanents and let us have Ole Miss, UK, and Vandy as permanents, but I think the big name schools are going to resist loading up their schedule. But I could be wrong. They basically matched up strengths with the prior permanent opponents, with Ole getting Vandy, us getting UK, Ark getting USCe (prior to expansion). I'm just not sure they're going to want three blue blood matchups every year plus a reasonable chance of drawing a fourth or even fifth from the remaining teams.

Even if you only pick two rivalries for each team that most care about, the three permanent approach is still better than pods.

No system is going to make everyone happy, but the rigidity of pods is going to make fewer people happy than if you just assigned sensible permanent opponents.

If it ends up close to being pods fine, but giving up several classic matchups and having a little less competitive balance just for the sake of doing this media trendy thing called "pods" doesn't make any sense.

[CaptainObvious]

First, the closest thing to a rival for Vandy is Ole Miss, not Tennessee. And actually UT-Knox and UK aren?t a strong rivalry. Knoxville considers Bama and Flarda their rivals.

Second, with the Pod system, you cannot split Bama and Auburn, but no way with Oklahoma and Texas coming can you still have some sort of East-West thing having UMO in the East and both Bama and Auburn on the West side. Keep the East-West format, put Bama and Auburn in the East so they can play Flarda and Jawja every year, and have Okla, Tex, and Missouri in the West.

I am also concerned about the POD system but there are some historical matchups that just aren?t that important and don?t have to be played every year. Everybody should get a shot at Vandy every 2 years though.

[Pancho]

Will each pod champ then vie for the overall championship? I think they should do it like sec basketball and be done with it. What if u go 3-0 in the pod but go 0-5 vs the others.

[Todd4State]

I really hope the "pods" are each based on each teams rivalries. That makes the most sense to me.

[CaptainObvious]

I really hope the "pods" are each based on each teams rivalries. That makes the most sense to me.

Todd, that would be good in theory but can it be done? Florida, South Carolina, Kentucky, Georgia, all have in-state out of conference rivalries they will have to keep playing. Those also qualify as their P-5 non-con game. Haven?t we been playing Alabama and LSU longer than anyone else has or pretty close?

[Todd4State]

Todd, that would be good in theory but can it be done? Florida, South Carolina, Kentucky, Georgia, all have in-state out of conference rivalries they will have to keep playing. Those also qualify as their P-5 non-con game. Haven?t we been playing Alabama and LSU longer than anyone else has or pretty close?

Yes on both accounts. And it's ridiculous that we have had to play Bama and LSU that much.

If Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and Kentucky and etc. want to count that as their P5 game I'm good with that. With the way things rotate they may have a season where they play Vanderbilt, Mizzou, Kentucky, and etc. which will lighten their schedule up some.

[bulldawg28]

Not sure that trend will hold true for the long haul......

I would agree based on media and history. However, Texas hasn't won jack in over 20 years. They've had/have every tool to be successful and are mediocre in football. Joining the SEC isn't going to give them any other advantages.

[Jarius]

I would agree based on media and history. However, Texas hasn't won jack in over 20 years. They've had/have every tool to be successful and are mediocre in football. Joining the SEC isn't going to give them any other advantages.

A&M hasn’t won Jack ever.

[bulldawg28]

A&M hasn’t won Jack ever.

So your point?

[Jarius]

So your point?

One has at least had historical success and it ain't A&M. I've heard about how they are a sleeping giant for 30 years. They are literally Mississippi State on the field and have been for most of my life (outside our Croom years). Texas has proven that if they are run correctly they can be elite. A&M has not.

[Coach34]

Well they just brought in the highest rated recruiting class now that buying players is legal. With their money- they likely wont be outside the Top 5 for quite some time.

I'd expect them to be very good over the next decade

[Jarius]

Well they just brought in the highest rated recruiting class now that buying players is legal. With their money- they likely wont be outside the Top 5 for quite some time.

I'd expect them to be very good over the next decade

They had 3 top ten recruiting classes in a row (1 top 5 class) prior to this past class and have been very average. Texas (also very average) has accumulated 3 top 5 signing classes during that same time frame. Both of their issues isn't talent. Jimbo is not a great coach and I don't expect him to do anything special there until he decides to run an offense that doesn't require a quarterback to obtain a PHD in astrophysics to master.

[Coach34]

They finished Top 5 in 2020 and had they not lost their QB in the early season in 2021- likely finish top 10 at worst. Losing your starting QB is a big deal. They are no longer average.

[Johnson85]

They had 3 top ten recruiting classes in a row (1 top 5 class) prior to this past class and have been very average. Texas (also very average) has accumulated 3 top 5 signing classes during that same time frame. Both of their issues isn't talent. Jimbo is not a great coach and I don't expect him to do anything special there until he decides to run an offense that doesn't require a quarterback to obtain a PHD in astrophysics to master.

Jameis Winston was able to run that offense pretty well with just some extra, hands-on work studying marine biology, so not sure your comment on getting a phd in astrophysics is accurate.

[Jarius]

They finished Top 5 in 2020 and had they not lost their QB in the early season in 2021- likely finish top 10 at worst. Losing your starting QB is a big deal. They are no longer average.

The guy was named the starter the first week of the season and was average until getting hurt, just like his backup. Jimbo talked about how comparable the 2 were all the way up until week 1. He did nothing in the first game and a half to indicate he would have made that team a top 10 team. A&M has been average for a very long time and until they prove otherwise they will be thought of as such by most people.

[Jarius]

Jameis Winston was able to run that offense pretty well with just some extra, hands-on work studying marine biology, so not sure your comment on getting a phd in astrophysics is accurate.

Jimbo is famous for having an extremely large playbook and also famous for having a lot of average quarterback play in our conference. Winston was good and would have been good here like some other ones he’s coached but he has yet to have anyone against SEC competition be a real threat at quarterback.

[Coach34]

I'll remind you of all this after we play A&M

[Quaoarsking]

I'll remind you of all this after we play A&M

Looking forward to our head coach beating the Aggies for the 9th time in his career.

[Jarius]

I'll remind you of all this after we play A&M

And I'll remind you going into playing A&M that we are 5-3 in our last 8 games against them no matter what happens in that game. No one is scared of that school, least of all Mike Leach who has dropped his nuts on them more times than most.