Pods are Dead - Only two options left for New Scheduling

[ScoobaDawg]

https://www.si.com/college/2022/05/24/sec-football-schedule-future



A week before the league?s leaders gather in Destin for their annual spring meetings, the 35 has been cut to two: an eight-game format where teams play one permanent opponent and seven rotating opponents (1?7 model); and a nine-game format where teams play three permanent opponents and six rotating (3?6).

.

[Quaoarsking]

I am fine with either, but I suspect it will be the 3/6 chosen so the SEC doesn't lose annual games like Alabama/LSU or Auburn/Georgia.

I hope we get Kentucky along with Ole Miss as our permanent, and that our 3rd isn't Alabama. Ole Miss/Kentucky/Auburn would be a great realistic draw for us.

[TrapGame]

If I had to put money on it I'd go with the 3/6 format as the one chosen. We know our permanent opponent will be ole miss. The other two could be anybody but I think they will be SECW teams. Probably Arkansas and LSU. That's not too bad. It beats the hell out of playing Bama and Georgia every year.

[viverlibre]

You know we'll be screwed with the 3/6 arrangement. Ole Miss, Bama and LSU or TAMU or Texas or UGA or UF or Oklahomo.

I'd vote for the 1/7 model. How many real rivalries are left? Egg Bowl, Iron Bowl, Cocktail Party? I don't consider Bama/UT a rivalry any more. I'm sure the barn would love to get away from UGA. LSU and TAMU and/or Texas could evolve into a serious rivalry.

[Quaoarsking]

Alabama will definitely get Auburn, Tennessee, and LSU.

LSU could get us, but I doubt they give them both us and Ole Miss.

Arkansas and Texas A&M are possibilities, but I don't think we are anywhere their top 3 most likely.

I think Auburn is pretty likely, since they'll be getting Alabama and Georgia, so they'll probably get us or Ole Miss to balance out. But since LSU is getting Ole Miss for sure, I think Auburn gets us.

Texas and especially Oklahoma are going to have to get someone who isn't really a rival, so we could get one of them, but I think the SEC is going to set up as many marquee matchups as possible, leaving Ole Miss-Vanderbilt and Mississippi State-Kentucky in place. There's no incentive to load up on permanent prestigious vs. non-prestigious matchups.

In short, I'll be surprised if our 3 aren't Ole Miss, Kentucky, and Auburn, and I'll be happy with that set too.

[Quaoarsking]

Put another was, if you're the SEC decision maker, does it make more sense to have annual matchups of Kentucky-Florida and Mississippi State-Oklahoma? Or Florida-Oklahoma and Mississippi State-Kentucky?

[msstatelp1]

If it's 3 the SEC will stick us with Bama. They don't want to end that streak of "having played them the most".

[TrapGame]

Alabama will definitely get Auburn, Tennessee, and LSU.

LSU could get us, but I doubt they give them both us and Ole Miss.

Arkansas and Texas A&M are possibilities, but I don't think we are anywhere their top 3 most likely.

I think Auburn is pretty likely, since they'll be getting Alabama and Georgia, so they'll probably get us or Ole Miss to balance out. But since LSU is getting Ole Miss for sure, I think Auburn gets us.

Texas and especially Oklahoma are going to have to get someone who isn't really a rival, so we could get one of them, but I think the SEC is going to set up as many marquee matchups as possible, leaving Ole Miss-Vanderbilt and Mississippi State-Kentucky in place. There's no incentive to load up on permanent prestigious vs. non-prestigious matchups.

In short, I'll be surprised if our 3 aren't Ole Miss, Kentucky, and Auburn, and I'll be happy with that set too.

I could live with that too.

[MaroonFlounder]

Whatever happens, I anticipate our bowl streak to come to a screeching halt and it will be an even bigger hill to climb to become bowl eligible.

[RiverCityDawg]

Alabama will definitely get Auburn, Tennessee, and LSU.

LSU could get us, but I doubt they give them both us and Ole Miss.

Arkansas and Texas A&M are possibilities, but I don't think we are anywhere their top 3 most likely.

I think Auburn is pretty likely, since they'll be getting Alabama and Georgia, so they'll probably get us or Ole Miss to balance out. But since LSU is getting Ole Miss for sure, I think Auburn gets us.

Texas and especially Oklahoma are going to have to get someone who isn't really a rival, so we could get one of them, but I think the SEC is going to set up as many marquee matchups as possible, leaving Ole Miss-Vanderbilt and Mississippi State-Kentucky in place. There's no incentive to load up on permanent prestigious vs. non-prestigious matchups.

In short, I'll be surprised if our 3 aren't Ole Miss, Kentucky, and Auburn, and I'll be happy with that set too.

Agree. I think they'll keep the current permanent cross division opponents unless there's a reason not to, so we'll still get UK. Auburn makes sense as our third, but Ross Dellenger had a decent outline that would have us with A&M. I'd take either of those, but think Auburn makes the most sense.

I just glad it's not pods.... That never made sense to me, so I'm not surprised the conference agreed.

[Johnson85]

Put another was, if you're the SEC decision maker, does it make more sense to have annual matchups of Kentucky-Florida and Mississippi State-Oklahoma? Or Florida-Oklahoma and Mississippi State-Kentucky?

It's going to be interesting to see how it shakes out. For the TV partners, I think they want to ensure more marquee matchups. But the blue bloods generally aren't going to like having a harder schedule than the have nots just for TV.

I am guessing it's going to be somewhere in between. Bama will probably have two "haves" on permanent and one "have not" and we'll probably be the opposite, with one "have" permanent and two "have-nots".

[viverlibre]

It's going to be interesting to see how it shakes out. For the TV partners, I think they want to ensure more marquee matchups. But the blue bloods generally aren't going to like having a harder schedule than the have nots just for TV.

I am guessing it's going to be somewhere in between. Bama will probably have two "haves" on permanent and one "have not" and we'll probably be the opposite, with one "have" permanent and two "have-nots".

We are 10000000000000000000% percent getting Bama. Book it.

[Quaoarsking]

We are 10000000000000000000% percent getting Bama. Book it.

Quite unlikely. Alabama is a lock for Auburn and Tennessee, and if the third isn't LSU, they're going want to set up a different marquee matchup like A&M, Texas, or Oklahoma

[CaptainObvious]

It's going to be interesting to see how it shakes out. For the TV partners, I think they want to ensure more marquee matchups. But the blue bloods generally aren't going to like having a harder schedule than the have nots just for TV.

I am guessing it's going to be somewhere in between. Bama will probably have two "haves" on permanent and one "have not" and we'll probably be the opposite, with one "have" permanent and two "have-nots".

Who are these TV partners you speak of? ESPN will likely be broke before the current contract ends.

Disney is floundering as a network owner anyway.

If Disney backs out, ABC is toast. Viacom is pissed at the SEC for walking on the CBS deal. NBC is being drug down by MSNBC. We may end up back to having to buy a ticket to see a game by 2030 when gasoline costs $15.00 per gallon and electric cars cost $150,000.

We are about to see the CF from BFE!!!

[Coach34]

It almost has to be a 9 game schedule.

Also agree on Bama keeping Auburn, Tenn, and LSU as rival games. Bama/LSU is always one of the highest or the most viewed game on the schedule every year. That one is unlikely to go away.

We'll probably get Mississippi, Kentucky, and UPig or something like that. We may get on Oklahoma or something like that because they will need 2 new rivals.

[viverlibre]

Here's how the conversation will go down.

Slive - Mr. Saban, we are going to make your three perm opponents, Auburn and TN since these are your traditional rivals and LSU since that is always a big game.

Saban - Slive you stupid, #@%^&!@# Meffer! MSU is our traditional rival and only 90 miles away and it is the oldest rivalry in the SEC. Our perm opponents will be the Barn, Tenn and MSU.

Slive - Yes sir Mr Saban, I apologize for understanding that.

[viverlibre]

It almost has to be a 9 game schedule.

Also agree on Bama keeping Auburn, Tenn, and LSU as rival games. Bama/LSU is always one of the highest or the most viewed game on the schedule every year. That one is unlikely to go away.

We'll probably get Mississippi, Kentucky, and UPig or something like that. We may get on Oklahoma or something like that because they will need 2 new rivals.

I don't like the three perm opponents, that makes regular season matches like Bama/UGA even more rare. Plus most teams have one true rival. I'd rather have the chance of seeing a UF/Texas game once every few years than see a forced TAMU/USCe rivalry every year.

[HoopsDawg]

isn't 3/6 a pod?

[Tater]

People always propose what's gonna happen with one or two teams and never look at how that maps the picture for all 16.

You do it simply like this: each team chooses one rival.

Bama - Auburn
Auburn - Bama
Georgia - Florida
Florida - Georgia
Tennessee - Bama
Kentucky - Tennessee
Vanderbilt - Tennessee
A&M - Texsa
Texsa - OU
OU - Texsa
Mizzou - Arkansas
Arkansas - A&M
Ole Miss - State
State - Ole Miss
LSU - Ole Miss
SCar - Georgia

Tennessee is complete. Vandy, UK, Bama

Next teams with one rival get their second pick.

Auburn - Georgia
Florida - Auburn
Kentucky - Vandy
Vandy - Ole Miss
OU - Mizzou
Mizzou - OU
State - Bama
LSU - A&M
SCar - Florida

Bama has Auburn, Tenn, State
Auburn has Bama, Georgia, Florida
Ole Miss has State, LSU, Vandy
Florida has Georgia, SCar, Auburn
Georgia has Florida, Scar, Auburn
A&M has LSU, Texsa, Arkansas
Vandy has Tennessee, Kentucky, Ole Miss

Then you've got 4 games left to make between LSU, State, UK, SCar, Texsa, Arkansas, OU, Mizzou

Arkansas - OU
Mizzou - Texsa
LSU - State
UK - SCar

(there are other ways to do it)

Ark gets OU, A&M, Mizzou
LSU gets Ole Miss, A&M, State
State gets Ole Miss, Bama, LSU
SCar gets Mizzou, Georgia, Florida
Texsa gets OU, Mizzou, A&M
Mizzou gets Texsa, OU, Ark
UK gets Tennessee, Vandy, SCar
OU gets Texsa, Mizzou, Ark

Follow that formula and shake them up however you like. But that's the way the SEC will build this. Alabama will play 3 of Georgia, LSU, Florida, Texsa, Oklahoma, Tennessee every year regardless. The Bama - Texsa games will be even bigger TV draws.

[Quaoarsking]

Here's how the conversation will go down.

Slive - Mr. Saban, we are going to make your three perm opponents, Auburn and TN since these are your traditional rivals and LSU since that is always a big game.

Saban - Slive you stupid, #@%^&!@# Meffer! MSU is our traditional rival and only 90 miles away and it is the oldest rivalry in the SEC. Our perm opponents will be the Barn, Tenn and MSU.

Slive - Yes sir Mr Saban, I apologize for understanding that.

No, Alabama would rather play LSU every year for the increased attention than an "easy win" in us. They almost always beat everyone they play anyway.

I'm not saying we definitely get Ole Miss/Kentucky/Auburn - it could easily be Arkansas or Texas A&M in there, or less likely, LSU. But we aren't in Alabama's top 3, really not their top 7 most likely, and Alabama will get what they want.

[Quaoarsking]

isn't 3/6 a pod?

No, because everybody will have a different set of 3 permanents. It won't be, say, LSU, Texas A&M, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State all having each other as permanents like a pod would imply.

[Dawgfan77]

Here's how the conversation will go down.

Slive - Mr. Saban, we are going to make your three perm opponents, Auburn and TN since these are your traditional rivals and LSU since that is always a big game.

Saban - Slive you stupid, #@%^&!@# Meffer! MSU is our traditional rival and only 90 miles away and it is the oldest rivalry in the SEC. Our perm opponents will be the Barn, Tenn and MSU.

Slive - Yes sir Mr Saban, I apologize for understanding that.

I mean Saban is powerful but to demand something from someone who is dead like Slive is pretty remarkable

[Dawg496]

My proposal from last year

https://i.imgur.com/cLJRqau.png

[Johnson85]

My proposal from last year

https://i.imgur.com/cLJRqau.png

I appreciate the apparent hatred of A&M and to a lesser extent, Auburn. USCe fans will love it. Pretty good deal for UTenn also. Still have Bama (which their moron fans apparently want) but also get UK and Vandy.

Not sure how much more balanced it can be though.

[viverlibre]

I mean Saban is powerful but to demand something from someone who is dead like Slive is pretty remarkable

He's made a deal with the devil.

[NCDawg]

We'll probably have Alabama, Oklahoma, and Texas.

Ole Miss will probably have Vanderbilt, Kentucky, and Missouri.

[CaptainObvious]

Has there been a reason given for why the Pods are dead and why they may do away with Divisions as well? I would think Divisions would remain in some formula to cut down on travel and expenses.

Let?s say MSU?s rotation one year is Oklahoma, UT-Austin, Florida, South Carolina, Kentucky and A&M.

Or even more wild, UT-Austin has South Carolina, Florida and Tennessee on the Road and Auburn, Kentucky and Georgia at home. Sky miles will be way up there for the teams, but for the fans, travel will be abysmal.

Again. The current ESPN pay model is unsustainable 6-8-10 years from now.

The teams that are consistently going 3-6 or 2-7 in SEC play will eventually lose the average fan and be able to cut down to 40,000 seat stadiums, only catering to big spenders.


It just seems like it is going to be a TV only sport eventually and the new fan is not going to be as loyal as the old ones were to a average to mediocre program. We need spending CAPS to somewhat level the playing field or college football at the highest level will be toast for the States, Ole Misses, Vandys and Missouris.

[Quaoarsking]

Has there been a reason given for why the Pods are dead and why they may do away with Divisions as well? I would think Divisions would remain in some formula to cut down on travel and expenses.

Let?s say MSU?s rotation one year is Oklahoma, UT-Austin, Florida, South Carolina, Kentucky and A&M.

Or even more wild, UT-Austin has South Carolina, Florida and Tennessee on the Road and Auburn, Kentucky and Georgia at home. Sky miles will be way up there for the teams, but for the fans, travel will be abysmal.

Again. The current ESPN pay model is unsustainable 6-8-10 years from now.

The teams that are consistently going 3-6 or 2-7 in SEC play will eventually lose the average fan and be able to cut down to 40,000 seat stadiums, only catering to big spenders.


It just seems like it is going to be a TV only sport eventually and the new fan is not going to be as loyal as the old ones were to a average to mediocre program. We need spending CAPS to somewhat level the playing field or college football at the highest level will be toast for the States, Ole Misses, Vandys and Missouris.

Pods are just a special case of the 3/6 model where there are 4 groups of 4 teams who all have each other as their permanent 3. You could have a pod where Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Texas A&M, and LSU all have each other as their 3 permanent opponents and all rotate 6 of the other 12.

Or you could let Texas A&M have Texas, Arkansas, and Oklahoma. And LSU have Ole Miss, Arkansas, and Alabama. And Ole Miss have Mississippi State, LSU, and Vanderbilt. And Mississippi State have Ole Miss, Auburn, and Kentucky.

Neither system inherently has more travel than the other, although I agree that the SEC should ensure that the really long road trips are well-balanced so that no one school has to do a bunch in the same year.

[State82]

He's made a deal with the devil.

And took it to a whole new dimension.

[Jack Lambert]

Does A&M, Florida, Texas want to play 3-6 considering they have not been super good for a while or in A&M case never. I think there is a lot of assuming on their part.

[mparkerfd20]

Title is misleading. Maybe I'm an idiot but 3 permanent and then rotating IS effectively a POD system minus all 3 having the same permanents.

[RiverCityDawg]

Title is misleading. Maybe I'm an idiot but 3 permanent and then rotating IS effectively a POD system minus all 3 having the same permanents.

But the defining aspect of the pod idea was that all 4 teams within the pod have the same 3 permanents. Take that away and there are no pods.

You're not an idiot, there are a lot of people that didn't seem to understand that the pod idea and simply having 3 permanents were two different concepts being considered. The pod idea never made sense over 3 permanents.... It just had a catchy name.

[Johnson85]

Has there been a reason given for why the Pods are dead and why they may do away with Divisions as well? I would think Divisions would remain in some formula to cut down on travel and expenses.

Let?s say MSU?s rotation one year is Oklahoma, UT-Austin, Florida, South Carolina, Kentucky and A&M.

Or even more wild, UT-Austin has South Carolina, Florida and Tennessee on the Road and Auburn, Kentucky and Georgia at home. Sky miles will be way up there for the teams, but for the fans, travel will be abysmal.

Again. The current ESPN pay model is unsustainable 6-8-10 years from now.

The teams that are consistently going 3-6 or 2-7 in SEC play will eventually lose the average fan and be able to cut down to 40,000 seat stadiums, only catering to big spenders.


It just seems like it is going to be a TV only sport eventually and the new fan is not going to be as loyal as the old ones were to a average to mediocre program. We need spending CAPS to somewhat level the playing field or college football at the highest level will be toast for the States, Ole Misses, Vandys and Missouris.

For the schools, I'm not sure how much difference the travel makes to their budget. Certainly charter buses are cheaper than airplanes, but once you're in the plane, while it is certainly more expensive per mile, I'm not sure how much a dent it makes in the budget.

For the fans, I think the fans that travel are a pretty small portion of the fan base, even for games that are a 3 or 4 hours drive away.

I personally like the idea of regional'ish pods, and would be fine with OU, UTex, A&M, and MO in a pod, Arky, LSU, Ole Miss, and MSU in a pod, Bama, Auburn, Vandy, and UT in a pod, and UF, USCe, UK, UGA in a pod. I think that preserves the most rivals, and keeps at least 1.5 away games a year a driveable distance. Might have to switch A&M and Arkansas to keep A&M happy and also provide a little more balance to the pods (although OU, UT, MO, and Arky will be a relatively weak pod unless joining the SEC allows UTex and to a lesser extent OU to up their game).

But pretty clearly TV is going to be the driving factor, not fan experience, so I am just hoping TV pushes for more permanent blue blood matchups and tries to pair the have nots as permanents to give us less of a murderer's row schedule each year.

[Johnson85]

But the defining aspect of the pod idea was that all 4 teams within the pod have the same 3 permanents. Take that away and there are no pods.

You're not an idiot, there are a lot of people that didn't seem to understand that the pod idea and simply having 3 permanents were two different concepts being considered. The pod idea never made sense over 3 permanents.... It just had a catchy name.

The PODs idea allows for grouping of closer schools and development of stronger rivalries between geographically close schools and can make schedules somewhat more likely to be balanced from year to year. And it just makes scheduling easier.

The drawback to pods is the inability to preserve all the secondary rivals and also that if you make the schedule more balanced, that means you are not maximizing the number of blue blood v. blue blood big tv draws.

[RiverCityDawg]

The PODs idea allows for grouping of closer schools and development of stronger rivalries between geographically close schools and can make schedules somewhat more likely to be balanced from year to year. And it just makes scheduling easier.

The drawback to pods is the inability to preserve all the secondary rivals and also that if you make the schedule more balanced, that means you are not maximizing the number of blue blood v. blue blood big tv draws.

I think maintaining existing historical rivalries (most of which are geographically close) is more important than forcing teams into groups to try and develop rivalries. The three permanent approach handles rivalries way better than pods.

And I disagree that pods make scheduling easier or more balanced. It would be more restrictive. Three permanents gives more flexibility and therefore more control over competitive balance. The approach being discussed is the top teams in the league having 2 others top teams and 1 lower team as permanents, with the lower teams having 2 other lower teams and one team from the top half. That approach helps competitive balance and would not be possible with pods.

[Johnson85]

I think maintaining existing historical rivalries (most of which are geographically close) is more important than forcing teams into groups to try and develop rivalries. The three permanent approach handles rivalries way better than pods.

And I disagree that pods make scheduling easier or more balanced. It would be more restrictive. Three permanents gives more flexibility and therefore more control over competitive balance. The approach being discussed is the top teams in the league having 2 others top teams and 1 lower team as permanents, with the lower teams having 2 other lower teams and one team from the top half. That approach helps competitive balance and would not be possible with pods.

I meant balance between schedules. if they want more competitive games, then yes, the 3 permanents approach works better. And if they want more competitive games, that is better for MSU than trying to make balanced schedules.

[BrunswickDawg]

Has there been a reason given for why the Pods are dead and why they may do away with Divisions as well? I would think Divisions would remain in some formula to cut down on travel and expenses.

Let?s say MSU?s rotation one year is Oklahoma, UT-Austin, Florida, South Carolina, Kentucky and A&M.

Or even more wild, UT-Austin has South Carolina, Florida and Tennessee on the Road and Auburn, Kentucky and Georgia at home. Sky miles will be way up there for the teams, but for the fans, travel will be abysmal.

Again. The current ESPN pay model is unsustainable 6-8-10 years from now.

The teams that are consistently going 3-6 or 2-7 in SEC play will eventually lose the average fan and be able to cut down to 40,000 seat stadiums, only catering to big spenders.


It just seems like it is going to be a TV only sport eventually and the new fan is not going to be as loyal as the old ones were to a average to mediocre program. We need spending CAPS to somewhat level the playing field or college football at the highest level will be toast for the States, Ole Misses, Vandys and Missouris.

Except that it will be - ESPN will be going to direct subscription, will charge more than they charge cable companies currently, and will have a virtual lock on college sports programming. And we will pay it and not bat an eye about it because Americans love sports. ESPN+ already has 23 million+ subscribers at $7 a pop. When they go to $15 a month and let you stream all ESPN and ESPN+ content it's going to be a game changer and the final death to cable. They will easily get back to the cable peak of 100 million eyeballs at $15 a month, while continually cutting costs for broadcasts by keeping play by play guys at home. They will be rolling in it.

[TrapGame]

Except that it will be - ESPN will be going to direct subscription, will charge more than they charge cable companies currently, and will have a virtual lock on college sports programming. And we will pay it and not bat an eye about it because Americans love sports. ESPN+ already has 23 million+ subscribers at $7 a pop. When they go to $15 a month and let you stream all ESPN and ESPN+ content it's going to be a game changer and the final death to cable. They will easily get back to the cable peak of 100 million eyeballs at $15 a month, while continually cutting costs for broadcasts by keeping play by play guys at home. They will be rolling in it.

Yep, the ESPN/Hulu/Disney+ bundle will rule at that point.

[BrunswickDawg]

Yep, the ESPN/Hulu/Disney+ bundle will rule at that point.

If you gave me that at $25 a month (even with commercials on Hulu), I'd drop YouTubeTV in a heart beat. The only reason I have it is ESPN, I don't watch any live TV anymore.
Add Paramount, Peacock, and Discover+ and I'm still coming out less than YouTubeTV - which was already saving me 50% over my old DirecTv.
Now, if only BallySports can get their shit together so I can watch the Braves, I'd be set.

[Fader21]

People always propose what's gonna happen with one or two teams and never look at how that maps the picture for all 16.

You do it simply like this: each team chooses one rival.

Bama - Auburn
Auburn - Bama
Georgia - Florida
Florida - Georgia
Tennessee - Bama
Kentucky - Tennessee
Vanderbilt - Tennessee
A&M - Texsa
Texsa - OU
OU - Texsa
Mizzou - Arkansas
Arkansas - A&M
Ole Miss - State
State - Ole Miss
LSU - Ole Miss
SCar - Georgia

Tennessee is complete. Vandy, UK, Bama

Next teams with one rival get their second pick.

Auburn - Georgia
Florida - Auburn
Kentucky - Vandy
Vandy - Ole Miss
OU - Mizzou
Mizzou - OU
State - Bama
LSU - A&M
SCar - Florida

Bama has Auburn, Tenn, State
Auburn has Bama, Georgia, Florida
Ole Miss has State, LSU, Vandy
Florida has Georgia, SCar, Auburn
Georgia has Florida, Scar, Auburn
A&M has LSU, Texsa, Arkansas
Vandy has Tennessee, Kentucky, Ole Miss

Then you've got 4 games left to make between LSU, State, UK, SCar, Texsa, Arkansas, OU, Mizzou

Arkansas - OU
Mizzou - Texsa
LSU - State
UK - SCar

(there are other ways to do it)

Ark gets OU, A&M, Mizzou
LSU gets Ole Miss, A&M, State
State gets Ole Miss, Bama, LSU
SCar gets Mizzou, Georgia, Florida
Texsa gets OU, Mizzou, A&M
Mizzou gets Texsa, OU, Ark
UK gets Tennessee, Vandy, SCar
OU gets Texsa, Mizzou, Ark

Follow that formula and shake them up however you like. But that's the way the SEC will build this. Alabama will play 3 of Georgia, LSU, Florida, Texsa, Oklahoma, Tennessee every year regardless. The Bama - Texsa games will be even bigger TV draws.

We better say our rival is Vandy first*!*

[OhGee]

I like the idea with just a few permanent opponents and rotate the rest. The model of the SEC West being a dominant conference all by itself was never fun and always stale. So keep a few permanents and open the rest up for fresher experiences.

[CaptainObvious]

Some of y?all may not remember the year, and I can?t either, but I remember a season where State had an 12 game schedule, 7 at home, and the four away SEC games were Alabama, Ole Miss, LSU and Kentucky. So Kentucky was the only true ?travel? road game for us. I think our lone road non-con game was Memphis.

Baton Rouge was 4 hours for the Team Buses, Band and cheerleaders and Golden Triangle fans, but it is only 2.5 hours from Jackson, the largest fan base in the state.

Now, that was a friendly schedule.