(09-17-2018 05:05 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 04:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 01:25 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I guess what it all boils down to for a student is the particular program/degree you are interested in. Missouri has the #3 journalism program. NC Chapel Hill has the best medical school for primary care. My grandson is a gifted high school senior with a superior GPA. He is interested in chemical engineering. Any suggestions?

Suggestions he may explore:. MIT, Purdue, Georgia Tech, Cal Poly SLO, Rice, Carnegie-Mellon, Pittsburgh, Lehigh, Yale, Penn State, Michigan State, NC State, Texas A&M, etc. There are a bunch more.

Recommend he go where he can get a scholarship. My nephew is planning to pursue a doctoral program in Engineering though his Master's was in a mathematics specialty.

He lives in Biloxi and was looking at Mississippi State. They have a nice engineering program. Duke actually sent reps to his middle school and they have been tracking him for a while, but chemical engineering is his choice, so I will see.

Medic, as a resident of Mississippi, by all means he needs to take a good look at Mississippi State's CE program. It has a good reputation.

I have a terminal degree from Mississippi State in another field. I love the school.

Another University fairly close to Biloxi that has a CE major is Tulane in New Orleans.

(09-17-2018 06:41 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-17-2018 05:05 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 04:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 01:25 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I guess what it all boils down to for a student is the particular program/degree you are interested in. Missouri has the #3 journalism program. NC Chapel Hill has the best medical school for primary care. My grandson is a gifted high school senior with a superior GPA. He is interested in chemical engineering. Any suggestions?

Suggestions he may explore:. MIT, Purdue, Georgia Tech, Cal Poly SLO, Rice, Carnegie-Mellon, Pittsburgh, Lehigh, Yale, Penn State, Michigan State, NC State, Texas A&M, etc. There are a bunch more.

Recommend he go where he can get a scholarship. My nephew is planning to pursue a doctoral program in Engineering though his Master's was in a mathematics specialty.

He lives in Biloxi and was looking at Mississippi State. They have a nice engineering program. Duke actually sent reps to his middle school and they have been tracking him for a while, but chemical engineering is his choice, so I will see.

Medic, as a resident of Mississippi, by all means he needs to take a good look at Mississippi State's CE program. It has a good reputation.

I have a terminal degree from Mississippi State in another field. I love the school.

Another University fairly close to Biloxi that has a CE major is Tulane in New Orleans.

It's a lot more costly but Tulane does a fine job of taking care of their students and the class sizes allow for a lot more 1 on 1 time with the instructors when needed. I think however that living in New Orleans could be quite the distraction.

(09-17-2018 06:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-17-2018 06:41 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-17-2018 05:05 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 04:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 01:25 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I guess what it all boils down to for a student is the particular program/degree you are interested in. Missouri has the #3 journalism program. NC Chapel Hill has the best medical school for primary care. My grandson is a gifted high school senior with a superior GPA. He is interested in chemical engineering. Any suggestions?

Suggestions he may explore:. MIT, Purdue, Georgia Tech, Cal Poly SLO, Rice, Carnegie-Mellon, Pittsburgh, Lehigh, Yale, Penn State, Michigan State, NC State, Texas A&M, etc. There are a bunch more.

Recommend he go where he can get a scholarship. My nephew is planning to pursue a doctoral program in Engineering though his Master's was in a mathematics specialty.

He lives in Biloxi and was looking at Mississippi State. They have a nice engineering program. Duke actually sent reps to his middle school and they have been tracking him for a while, but chemical engineering is his choice, so I will see.

Medic, as a resident of Mississippi, by all means he needs to take a good look at Mississippi State's CE program. It has a good reputation.

I have a terminal degree from Mississippi State in another field. I love the school.

Another University fairly close to Biloxi that has a CE major is Tulane in New Orleans.

It's a lot more costly but Tulane does a fine job of taking care of their students and the class sizes allow for a lot more 1 on 1 time with the instructors when needed. I think however that living in New Orleans could be quite the distraction.

True dat. A genius level IQ does not equal common sense. lol South Alabama considers Mississippi as eligible for in-state tuition. I wonder if Tulane does as well?

(09-17-2018 05:05 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 04:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 01:25 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I guess what it all boils down to for a student is the particular program/degree you are interested in. Missouri has the #3 journalism program. NC Chapel Hill has the best medical school for primary care. My grandson is a gifted high school senior with a superior GPA. He is interested in chemical engineering. Any suggestions?

Suggestions he may explore:. MIT, Purdue, Georgia Tech, Cal Poly SLO, Rice, Carnegie-Mellon, Pittsburgh, Lehigh, Yale, Penn State, Michigan State, NC State, Texas A&M, etc. There are a bunch more.

Recommend he go where he can get a scholarship. My nephew is planning to pursue a doctoral program in Engineering though his Master's was in a mathematics specialty.

He lives in Biloxi and was looking at Mississippi State. They have a nice engineering program. Duke actually sent reps to his middle school and they have been tracking him for a while, but chemical engineering is his choice, so I will see.

Some advice from someone who just graduated from college this decade - tell him to follow the scholarship money. 95% of my friends have student loan debt, some of it crippling. Duke sounds great, but Mississippi State will give him just a good of a chance to get a great engineering job right out of college.

(09-19-2018 08:16 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-17-2018 05:05 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 04:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-16-2018 01:25 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I guess what it all boils down to for a student is the particular program/degree you are interested in. Missouri has the #3 journalism program. NC Chapel Hill has the best medical school for primary care. My grandson is a gifted high school senior with a superior GPA. He is interested in chemical engineering. Any suggestions?

Suggestions he may explore:. MIT, Purdue, Georgia Tech, Cal Poly SLO, Rice, Carnegie-Mellon, Pittsburgh, Lehigh, Yale, Penn State, Michigan State, NC State, Texas A&M, etc. There are a bunch more.

Recommend he go where he can get a scholarship. My nephew is planning to pursue a doctoral program in Engineering though his Master's was in a mathematics specialty.

He lives in Biloxi and was looking at Mississippi State. They have a nice engineering program. Duke actually sent reps to his middle school and they have been tracking him for a while, but chemical engineering is his choice, so I will see.

Some advice from someone who just graduated from college this decade - tell him to follow the scholarship money. 95% of my friends have student loan debt, some of it crippling. Duke sounds great, but Mississippi State will give him just a good of a chance to get a great engineering job right out of college.

Appreciate the advice everyone.

Headed over to Vanderbilt today actually. I’ll report back

If Vandy does bow out, I would rather see the SEC take Kansas (assuming the GOR could be renegotiated, or is expiring):

West - Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, TX A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. State
East - S. Car, Kentucky, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama

The western crossovers for South Carolina and Georgia are basically a coin flip. Alabama and Mississippi State are only about 80 miles apart, so they become each other’s new crossover.

Assuming the current competitive environment holds, Alabama or Georgia should be meeting Texas A&M or LSU most years in the conference championship in football.

Basketball would be insane as Kenucky and Kansas would duke it out for conference supremacy.

(09-26-2018 06:44 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If Vandy does bow out, I would rather see the SEC take Kansas (assuming the GOR could be renegotiated, or is expiring):

West - Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, TX A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. State
East - S. Car, Kentucky, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama

The western crossovers for South Carolina and Georgia are basically a coin flip. Alabama and Mississippi State are only about 80 miles apart, so they become each other’s new crossover.

Assuming the current competitive environment holds, Alabama or Georgia should be meeting Texas A&M or LSU most years in the conference championship in football.

Basketball would be insane as Kenucky and Kansas would duke it out for conference supremacy.

In the original cross-over for the SEC divisions, Mississippi State and South Carolina were matched. The other cross opponent for SC was Arkansas; and Kentucky for MSU, which is still the regular cross-over.

When expansion last happened, SC and TA&M became cross-division matched. Interestingly prior, they had never played each other in football.

I believe Vandy will stay in the SEC. They apparently maintain good support from their conference brethern.

(09-26-2018 09:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 06:44 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If Vandy does bow out, I would rather see the SEC take Kansas (assuming the GOR could be renegotiated, or is expiring):

West - Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, TX A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. State
East - S. Car, Kentucky, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama

The western crossovers for South Carolina and Georgia are basically a coin flip. Alabama and Mississippi State are only about 80 miles apart, so they become each other’s new crossover.

Assuming the current competitive environment holds, Alabama or Georgia should be meeting Texas A&M or LSU most years in the conference championship in football.

Basketball would be insane as Kenucky and Kansas would duke it out for conference supremacy.

In the original cross-over for the SEC divisions, Mississippi State and South Carolina were matched. The other cross opponent for SC was Arkansas; and Kentucky for MSU, which is still the regular cross-over.

When expansion last happened, SC and TA&M became cross-division matched. Interestingly prior, they had never played each other in football.

I believe Vandy will stay in the SEC. They apparently maintain good support from their conference brethern.

The money would have to be right for them to really even consider moving so I suspect you are correct.

(09-26-2018 09:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 06:44 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If Vandy does bow out, I would rather see the SEC take Kansas (assuming the GOR could be renegotiated, or is expiring):

West - Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, TX A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. State
East - S. Car, Kentucky, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama

The western crossovers for South Carolina and Georgia are basically a coin flip. Alabama and Mississippi State are only about 80 miles apart, so they become each other’s new crossover.

Assuming the current competitive environment holds, Alabama or Georgia should be meeting Texas A&M or LSU most years in the conference championship in football.

Basketball would be insane as Kenucky and Kansas would duke it out for conference supremacy.

In the original cross-over for the SEC divisions, Mississippi State and South Carolina were matched. The other cross opponent for SC was Arkansas; and Kentucky for MSU, which is still the regular cross-over.

When expansion last happened, SC and TA&M became cross-division matched. Interestingly prior, they had never played each other in football.

I believe Vandy will stay in the SEC. They apparently maintain good support from their conference brethern.

I have to believe South Carolina would love to drop the annual A&M serious. So would A&M

(09-27-2018 08:29 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 09:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 06:44 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If Vandy does bow out, I would rather see the SEC take Kansas (assuming the GOR could be renegotiated, or is expiring):

West - Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, TX A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. State
East - S. Car, Kentucky, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama

The western crossovers for South Carolina and Georgia are basically a coin flip. Alabama and Mississippi State are only about 80 miles apart, so they become each other’s new crossover.

Assuming the current competitive environment holds, Alabama or Georgia should be meeting Texas A&M or LSU most years in the conference championship in football.

Basketball would be insane as Kenucky and Kansas would duke it out for conference supremacy.

In the original cross-over for the SEC divisions, Mississippi State and South Carolina were matched. The other cross opponent for SC was Arkansas; and Kentucky for MSU, which is still the regular cross-over.

When expansion last happened, SC and TA&M became cross-division matched. Interestingly prior, they had never played each other in football.

I believe Vandy will stay in the SEC. They apparently maintain good support from their conference brethern.

I have to believe South Carolina would love to drop the annual A&M serious. So would A&M

You make a good point.

When the SEC was re-restructuring divisions, I recall LSU complaining about having to play Florida as a regular cross-over. They didn't want to change it, just gripe about it. They argued they had it harder at the time than those who got to play Vandy, Miss. State, Ole Miss, Kentucky, SC, Arkansas, etc. as cross-overs.

I believe athletic compatibility and reasonable geography should be among the top factors in establishing cross-overs. Unless all are playing each other, or rotation is largely enhanced, strengths of schedules are going to vary.

(09-27-2018 09:02 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 08:29 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 09:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 06:44 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If Vandy does bow out, I would rather see the SEC take Kansas (assuming the GOR could be renegotiated, or is expiring):

West - Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, TX A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. State
East - S. Car, Kentucky, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama

The western crossovers for South Carolina and Georgia are basically a coin flip. Alabama and Mississippi State are only about 80 miles apart, so they become each other’s new crossover.

Assuming the current competitive environment holds, Alabama or Georgia should be meeting Texas A&M or LSU most years in the conference championship in football.

Basketball would be insane as Kenucky and Kansas would duke it out for conference supremacy.

In the original cross-over for the SEC divisions, Mississippi State and South Carolina were matched. The other cross opponent for SC was Arkansas; and Kentucky for MSU, which is still the regular cross-over.

When expansion last happened, SC and TA&M became cross-division matched. Interestingly prior, they had never played each other in football.

I believe Vandy will stay in the SEC. They apparently maintain good support from their conference brethern.

I have to believe South Carolina would love to drop the annual A&M serious. So would A&M

You make a good point.

When the SEC was re-restructuring divisions, I recall LSU complaining about having to play Florida as a regular cross-over. They didn't want to change it, just gripe about it. They argued they had it harder at the time than those who got to play Vandy, Miss. State, Ole Miss, Kentucky, SC, Arkansas, etc. as cross-overs.

I believe athletic compatibility and reasonable geography should be among the top factors in establishing cross-overs. Unless all are playing each other, or rotation is largely enhanced, strengths of schedules are going to vary.

I agree. Which is why I've long been a proponent of the idea that if they're going to force the permanent opponent idea, they should at least bump up the schedule to 9 games to increase parity.

(09-27-2018 09:02 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 08:29 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 09:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 06:44 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If Vandy does bow out, I would rather see the SEC take Kansas (assuming the GOR could be renegotiated, or is expiring):

West - Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, TX A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. State
East - S. Car, Kentucky, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama

The western crossovers for South Carolina and Georgia are basically a coin flip. Alabama and Mississippi State are only about 80 miles apart, so they become each other’s new crossover.

Assuming the current competitive environment holds, Alabama or Georgia should be meeting Texas A&M or LSU most years in the conference championship in football.

Basketball would be insane as Kenucky and Kansas would duke it out for conference supremacy.

In the original cross-over for the SEC divisions, Mississippi State and South Carolina were matched. The other cross opponent for SC was Arkansas; and Kentucky for MSU, which is still the regular cross-over.

When expansion last happened, SC and TA&M became cross-division matched. Interestingly prior, they had never played each other in football.

I believe Vandy will stay in the SEC. They apparently maintain good support from their conference brethern.

I have to believe South Carolina would love to drop the annual A&M serious. So would A&M

You make a good point.

When the SEC was re-restructuring divisions, I recall LSU complaining about having to play Florida as a regular cross-over. They didn't want to change it, just gripe about it. They argued they had it harder at the time than those who got to play Vandy, Miss. State, Ole Miss, Kentucky, SC, Arkansas, etc. as cross-overs.

I believe athletic compatibility and reasonable geography should be among the top factors in establishing cross-overs. Unless all are playing each other, or rotation is largely enhanced, strengths of schedules are going to vary.

I guess this was done to accommodate the Arkansas-Mizzou permanent rivalry. As the newest member of the conference, I believe deference should have been given to existing member preferences. I am not sure it was. I guess my take on this is all due to my belief in seniority. I do not remember exactly how this change came about.

(10-01-2018 02:52 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 09:02 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 08:29 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 09:16 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(09-26-2018 06:44 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If Vandy does bow out, I would rather see the SEC take Kansas (assuming the GOR could be renegotiated, or is expiring):

West - Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, TX A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. State
East - S. Car, Kentucky, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama

The western crossovers for South Carolina and Georgia are basically a coin flip. Alabama and Mississippi State are only about 80 miles apart, so they become each other’s new crossover.

Assuming the current competitive environment holds, Alabama or Georgia should be meeting Texas A&M or LSU most years in the conference championship in football.

Basketball would be insane as Kenucky and Kansas would duke it out for conference supremacy.

In the original cross-over for the SEC divisions, Mississippi State and South Carolina were matched. The other cross opponent for SC was Arkansas; and Kentucky for MSU, which is still the regular cross-over.

When expansion last happened, SC and TA&M became cross-division matched. Interestingly prior, they had never played each other in football.

I believe Vandy will stay in the SEC. They apparently maintain good support from their conference brethern.

I have to believe South Carolina would love to drop the annual A&M serious. So would A&M

You make a good point.

When the SEC was re-restructuring divisions, I recall LSU complaining about having to play Florida as a regular cross-over. They didn't want to change it, just gripe about it. They argued they had it harder at the time than those who got to play Vandy, Miss. State, Ole Miss, Kentucky, SC, Arkansas, etc. as cross-overs.

I believe athletic compatibility and reasonable geography should be among the top factors in establishing cross-overs. Unless all are playing each other, or rotation is largely enhanced, strengths of schedules are going to vary.

I guess this was done to accommodate the Arkansas-Mizzou permanent rivalry. As the newest member of the conference, I believe deference should have been given to existing member preferences. I am not sure it was. I guess my take on this is all due to my belief in seniority. I do not remember exactly how this change came about.

The commissioner had a heavy hand in it. Which means it was worked through the presidents more than with the AD's.

BTW: L.S.U. is on record in requesting to opt out of the Florida game. I can't say that I blame them. Auburn's permanent in Georgia (a tough game annually), L.S.U.'s is with Florida (most years a tough game), Alabama's is with Tennessee which is easier than what Auburn and L.S.U. get.

Unless there’s a division alignment splitting teams like Alabama and Auburn or Mississippi and Mississippi St, then I don’t believe permanent cross-division rivalries should occur. Give cross-division rivalries to only those schools that truly want it. Texas A&M-South Carolina, Kentucky-Mississippi St, Mississippi-Vanderbilt are forced and neither school desires them.

(10-01-2018 04:21 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Unless there’s a division alignment splitting teams like Alabama and Auburn or Mississippi and Mississippi St, then I don’t believe permanent cross-division rivalries should occur. Give cross-division rivalries to only those schools that truly want it. Texas A&M-South Carolina, Kentucky-Mississippi St, Mississippi-Vanderbilt are forced and neither school desires them.

It seems like there are basically 2 crossover pairs that might be considered "required":
Alabama / Tennessee
Auburn / Georgia

Since those are 4 of the most influential teams in the conference, everyone else is forced to pair up too - even though honestly, are there ANY other "required" crossover pairs? I can't think of any. Maybe everyone else should simply rotate 2 games instead of just one...?

(10-01-2018 10:10 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-01-2018 04:21 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Unless there’s a division alignment splitting teams like Alabama and Auburn or Mississippi and Mississippi St, then I don’t believe permanent cross-division rivalries should occur. Give cross-division rivalries to only those schools that truly want it. Texas A&M-South Carolina, Kentucky-Mississippi St, Mississippi-Vanderbilt are forced and neither school desires them.

It seems like there are basically 2 crossover pairs that might be considered "required":
Alabama / Tennessee
Auburn / Georgia

Since those are 4 of the most influential teams in the conference, everyone else is forced to pair up too - even though honestly, are there ANY other "required" crossover pairs? I can't think of any. Maybe everyone else should simply rotate 2 games instead of just one...?

None of this will be necessary. Whether the SEC adds OU/OSU, UT/TTU, UT/KU, OU/KU, or OU/UT, Missouri will move to the West and Alabama and Auburn will move to the East and the requirement to keep a permanent rival will be at an end.

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M, New Team 1, New Team 2.

Kentucky-Mississippi State is not forced. That is a rivalry that both schools enjoy.

(10-01-2018 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-01-2018 10:10 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-01-2018 04:21 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Unless there’s a division alignment splitting teams like Alabama and Auburn or Mississippi and Mississippi St, then I don’t believe permanent cross-division rivalries should occur. Give cross-division rivalries to only those schools that truly want it. Texas A&M-South Carolina, Kentucky-Mississippi St, Mississippi-Vanderbilt are forced and neither school desires them.

It seems like there are basically 2 crossover pairs that might be considered "required":
Alabama / Tennessee
Auburn / Georgia

Since those are 4 of the most influential teams in the conference, everyone else is forced to pair up too - even though honestly, are there ANY other "required" crossover pairs? I can't think of any. Maybe everyone else should simply rotate 2 games instead of just one...?

None of this will be necessary. Whether the SEC adds OU/OSU, UT/TTU, UT/KU, OU/KU, or OU/UT, Missouri will move to the West and Alabama and Auburn will move to the East and the requirement to keep a permanent rival will be at an end.

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M, New Team 1, New Team 2.

I dunno, TN has played Ole Miss an awful lot. We might still need a cross-over game!

I say that tongue in cheek. I think many fanbases would be happy with this setup and a straight 7-2 system. It would still take 8 years to rotate through H-H, though.

However, I do think that 4-team divisions are the way to go: keep more teams interested in the season with a semi-final, equals more eyeballs equals more money . And those four team pods are hard to create. Maybe forget about crossovers there and do NFL style - play your pod (3 games), play one other pod (4 games) and play the teams from the other two pods who finished in the same rank (3rd vs. 3rd, for example). Or just go divisionless and have 5 permanent opponents and rotate the other 10 H-H every four years, with a 10 game schedule.

Would be much easier to go to 18 and have 3 divisions of 6, with the new division basically being the old SEC East and West plus a new Big 12 division. Then the crossovers get really weird. It would have to be something like 5 from your division, 2 permanents from other divisions, and then 1 and 1 rotating from the rest of the league. Or divisionless would be 5 permanents and rotate the other 6 H-H every four years, with an 11 game schedule.

If we expand to the east (UNC, Virginia Tech?), then it gets even more complicated because say Georgia and UNC are border teams, but Georgia also needs to be able to play Auburn, and TN is a border team with VT and UNC, but needs to play Georgia. But South Carolina needs to play UNC and Georgia, Auburn needs to play Alabama. It gets crazy. Let's just blow the whole thing up.

(10-02-2018 06:20 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  ...I do think that 4-team divisions are the way to go...

Divisions are evil. Divisions are the devil. Just say NO to divisions!!!

Instead, pick 3 annual "rivals", then rotate through the rest of the conference. Play 8 games with 14 total teams, or 9 games with 16 total teams.

More than 16 gets unwieldy pretty fast!