Yesss!! I have really wanted to see this for ages!!! I have been wanting to play Tennessee in November for years!!! I finally get my wish!! JR, welcome to a regular and fair football schedule for Auburn!!! The Amen Corner is gone!!!


https://www.dawgnation.com/football/team...irby-smart

Interesting.

UT has always had a really weird schedule (Insanely tough middle, easy finish) so maybe this will balance that out some.

(02-21-2019 01:34 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Interesting.

UT has always had a really weird schedule (Insanely tough middle, easy finish) so maybe this will balance that out some.

Tennessee ‘s schedule has been so front loaded that all their big games tend to occur before Mid October

(02-24-2019 12:04 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(02-21-2019 01:34 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Interesting.

UT has always had a really weird schedule (Insanely tough middle, easy finish) so maybe this will balance that out some.

Tennessee ‘s schedule has been so front loaded that all their big games tend to occur before Mid October

It works out well enough for us. But what it will mean is that we will likely play A&M in September, Georgia and then L.S.U. in October, and Bama in November.

Is there any way to get A&M in November???

I wonder if USC-Texas A&M will switch cross-division rivals? Frankly, I thought it was better for USC when they were playing Mississippi State and Arkansas as cross-division rivals. MSU has Kentucky, and Arkansas has Mizzou. I can't see Arkansas giving up Mizzou, nor Kentucky making their travel longer and getting perhaps often, a more challenging opponent.
Aren't there plans to change the rotation format? I expect some schools would object to eliminating the fixed crossover for each year.

(02-24-2019 04:39 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  I wonder if USC-Texas A&M will switch cross-division rivals? Frankly, I thought it was better for USC when they were playing Mississippi State and Arkansas as cross-division rivals. MSU has Kentucky, and Arkansas has Mizzou. I can't see Arkansas giving up Mizzou, nor Kentucky making their travel longer and getting perhaps often, a more challenging opponent.
Aren't there plans to change the rotation format? I expect some schools would object to eliminating the fixed crossover for each year.

The South Carolina/TAMU rivalry is one of the dumbest byproducts of the latest realignment.

UF/LSU are against playing each other annually, but I'm not sure there is support anywhere else. Missouri/Arkansas is natural and close in proximity and Vandy/Miss and UK/Miss St are longstanding rivalries that those schools want to maintain.

Yes, Gamecock, LSU had complained about playing UF each year. When LSU did this a few years ago, I got the impression they were posturing. LSU-UF is lucrative for both and highly featured for TV. LSU made a fuss, for examples, that MSU was matched with UK, and Ole Miss played Vandy each year. LSU had other agenda matters they were complaining about in conjunction with this.

USC playing LSU each year may be like jumping from the frying pan into the fire. That said, the rest would be a bit better for traveling fans and general interest. Now, if Texas A&M and Florida would want to do switches in favor of playing each other, that could work. I am not sure though, if LSU really wants to drop each year with UF.

Other than being the more newer additions to the SEC for the pecking order and doing the Missouri compromise for divisions, the rationale was to connect the geographic ends of the conference. Splitting Ala/Auburn for divisions was resisted Prior to Texas A&M joining the SEC, USC and Texas A&M never played each other in fb.

We know it’s not a rivalry. It’s just a permanent cross division game, which I think is the right term for pretty much all of them with the exception of UA/UT and AU/UGA. Though I will say Arky/Mizzou makes sense too because of geography

(03-01-2019 06:21 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  We know it’s not a rivalry. It’s just a permanent cross division game, which I think is the right term for pretty much all of them with the exception of UA/UT and AU/UGA. Though I will say Arky/Mizzou makes sense too because of geography

I’ll feel a bit better about it if we can start beating you every once in a while

(03-01-2019 06:21 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  We know it’s not a rivalry. It’s just a permanent cross division game, which I think is the right term for pretty much all of them with the exception of UA/UT and AU/UGA. Though I will say Arky/Mizzou makes sense too because of geography

Auburn and Alabama to the East, Missouri to the West, and adding two more schools in the West (preferably UT, OU, or KU) sure solves a lot of problems on paper. However, I can see that clean of a break causing the SEC to feel more like two separate conferences.

Auburn and Alabama fans, would this setup cause an amazing amount of angst in terms of competing against rivals? I know that Alabama and Mississippi State are historic rivals, but it especially seems that Auburn would be in their sweet spot with knowing that Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida are on the schedule every year. It never hurts to have some padding from Vandy and Kentucky most years in football.[/u]

(03-06-2019 09:39 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-01-2019 06:21 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  We know it’s not a rivalry. It’s just a permanent cross division game, which I think is the right term for pretty much all of them with the exception of UA/UT and AU/UGA. Though I will say Arky/Mizzou makes sense too because of geography

Auburn and Alabama to the East, Missouri to the West, and adding two more schools in the West (preferably UT, OU, or KU) sure solves a lot of problems on paper. However, I can see that clean of a break causing the SEC to feel more like to two separate conferences.

Auburn and Alabama fans, would this setup cause an amazing amount of angst in terms of competing against rivals? I know that Alabama and Mississippi State are historic rivals, but it especially seems that Auburn would be in their sweet spot with knowing that Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida are on the schedule every year. It never hurts to have some padding from Vandy and Kentucky most years in football.[/u]

Auburn would like such a move moreso than Alabama. Guessing a little

(03-06-2019 09:39 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-01-2019 06:21 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  We know it’s not a rivalry. It’s just a permanent cross division game, which I think is the right term for pretty much all of them with the exception of UA/UT and AU/UGA. Though I will say Arky/Mizzou makes sense too because of geography

Auburn and Alabama to the East, Missouri to the West, and adding two more schools in the West (preferably UT, OU, or KU) sure solves a lot of problems on paper. However, I can see that clean of a break causing the SEC to feel more like two separate conferences.

Auburn and Alabama fans, would this setup cause an amazing amount of angst in terms of competing against rivals? I know that Alabama and Mississippi State are historic rivals, but it especially seems that Auburn would be in their sweet spot with knowing that Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida are on the schedule every year. It never hurts to have some padding from Vandy and Kentucky most years in football.

Swapping Missouri and Auburn makes a ton of sense as well. Eliminate the Alabama/UT game and make Alabama/Auburn the only protected rivalry (Big Ten does this with Indiana/Purdue I think)

Maybe if Alabama beat UT another 10 times in a row UT will finally wise up.

(03-06-2019 09:39 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-01-2019 06:21 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  We know it’s not a rivalry. It’s just a permanent cross division game, which I think is the right term for pretty much all of them with the exception of UA/UT and AU/UGA. Though I will say Arky/Mizzou makes sense too because of geography

Auburn and Alabama to the East, Missouri to the West, and adding two more schools in the West (preferably UT, OU, or KU) sure solves a lot of problems on paper. However, I can see that clean of a break causing the SEC to feel more like two separate conferences.

Auburn and Alabama fans, would this setup cause an amazing amount of angst in terms of competing against rivals? I know that Alabama and Mississippi State are historic rivals, but it especially seems that Auburn would be in their sweet spot with knowing that Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida are on the schedule every year. It never hurts to have some padding from Vandy and Kentucky most years in football.[/u]

Alabama/LSU is a game that really should be played. I also enjoy playing Mississippi State because the two schools are so close to one another, but it's less significant.

Other than that, being in the East wouldn't be that big of a deal. We've played Georgia about as much as we've played Ole Miss and UGA hasn't been on the schedule that much since the 1992 expansion. Arkansas is new to the league so we had no real history with them until '92. Same with the recent addition of A&M.

This is one of the reasons I'm a fan of pods. If you divide everyone into 4 divisions then you have more flexibility to rotate match-ups. The bigger the divisions, the less freedom you have to rotate through the schools in the other division.

(03-07-2019 12:14 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(03-06-2019 09:39 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-01-2019 06:21 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  We know it’s not a rivalry. It’s just a permanent cross division game, which I think is the right term for pretty much all of them with the exception of UA/UT and AU/UGA. Though I will say Arky/Mizzou makes sense too because of geography

Auburn and Alabama to the East, Missouri to the West, and adding two more schools in the West (preferably UT, OU, or KU) sure solves a lot of problems on paper. However, I can see that clean of a break causing the SEC to feel more like two separate conferences.

Auburn and Alabama fans, would this setup cause an amazing amount of angst in terms of competing against rivals? I know that Alabama and Mississippi State are historic rivals, but it especially seems that Auburn would be in their sweet spot with knowing that Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida are on the schedule every year. It never hurts to have some padding from Vandy and Kentucky most years in football.

Swapping Missouri and Auburn makes a ton of sense as well. Eliminate the Alabama/UT game and make Alabama/Auburn the only protected rivalry (Big Ten does this with Indiana/Purdue I think)

Maybe if Alabama beat UT another 10 times in a row UT will finally wise up.

The old guard at Alabama will have to be good and dead before they stop caring about playing Tennessee. There are even many people in my generation who regard UT as an equally important game.

The Iron Bowl gets a lot more attention and generates more ticket sales, but part of that is the fact tons of people who grew up in the state who might not have attended either school circle that one on their calendars. Among alumni, however, UT is still very important.

I still don't get why Georgia agreed to this without compensation. Why help Auburn out in such a fashion?

(03-07-2019 05:15 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I still don't get why Georgia agreed to this without compensation. Why help Auburn out in such a fashion?

Because they are looking at how the schedules will need to be adjusted should 2 more come into the conference. Don't think so much about where Ga plays UT now and where Aub plays Ga now. Think more in terms of where the schedule needs to be flexible should AL and Aub become members of the East.

And what's going on right now? CBS is in discussions on renewing the CBS T1 contract. We are going to want 300 million plus for T1. CBS is going to want key games spread out a bit more so they have the opportunity to have better T1 product weekly throughout the season. It's not about helping Auburn. It's about how the SEC can schedule so that we all make more money off of the same product.

So I believe it not only opens up scheduling flexibility for future potential additions and the moves they would require, but it also is a valuable bargaining chip with regard to contracts, particularly T1 contracts.

(03-07-2019 02:00 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-07-2019 12:14 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(03-06-2019 09:39 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-01-2019 06:21 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  We know it’s not a rivalry. It’s just a permanent cross division game, which I think is the right term for pretty much all of them with the exception of UA/UT and AU/UGA. Though I will say Arky/Mizzou makes sense too because of geography

Auburn and Alabama to the East, Missouri to the West, and adding two more schools in the West (preferably UT, OU, or KU) sure solves a lot of problems on paper. However, I can see that clean of a break causing the SEC to feel more like two separate conferences.

Auburn and Alabama fans, would this setup cause an amazing amount of angst in terms of competing against rivals? I know that Alabama and Mississippi State are historic rivals, but it especially seems that Auburn would be in their sweet spot with knowing that Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida are on the schedule every year. It never hurts to have some padding from Vandy and Kentucky most years in football.

Swapping Missouri and Auburn makes a ton of sense as well. Eliminate the Alabama/UT game and make Alabama/Auburn the only protected rivalry (Big Ten does this with Indiana/Purdue I think)

Maybe if Alabama beat UT another 10 times in a row UT will finally wise up.

The old guard at Alabama will have to be good and dead before they stop caring about playing Tennessee. There are even many people in my generation who regard UT as an equally important game.

The Iron Bowl gets a lot more attention and generates more ticket sales, but part of that is the fact tons of people who grew up in the state who might not have attended either school circle that one on their calendars. Among alumni, however, UT is still very important.

But at what point is one game between two fanbases enough to keep the other 12 schools from going to a much more sensible schedule? Auburn for example had to abandon a ton of rivalries in 1992 and they have managed to do just fine. SC, TAMU, and others are forced to play games every year to protect certain rivalries.

Besides, if the conference goes to 9 games and abandons permanent opponents they will basically be playing every other year so it's not like the game will never happen again. People can still circle it on the calendar.

I still think divisionless is the best of all worlds

It acknowledges that everyone has those couple games a year they MUST play and everyone else is “it’s okay if we only see you most years”

So 4 permanent games to cover all major regional and rival games then 5 games that rotate home and way

You play everyone home and away at least once in a standard 4 year student career

(03-08-2019 11:17 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  I still think divisionless is the best of all worlds

It acknowledges that everyone has those couple games a year they MUST play and everyone else is “it’s okay if we only see you most years”

So 4 permanent games to cover all major regional and rival games then 5 games that rotate home and way

You play everyone home and away at least once in a standard 4 year student career

Just a thought on how this would look with 4 permanent games:

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

I'm not sure it is possible to get everyone matched with exactly four rivals, but I'm sure someone could do better that what I just did in 5 minutes. The natural 4th for both Florida and Georgia would be Tennessee, and I think Tennessee would be fine with adding those two as annual rivals for 6 total because they play basically everyone they historically played except Auburn.