(06-01-2019 05:32 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 03:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Those days are gone. It won't be long now before the only patsy you'll play is in conference or from another P conference. Heck that's the main reason I wouldn't mind if the SEC considered Kansas. Move to 18 and bring Kansas and Iowa State along with Texas and Oklahoma and you bring two new markets and a couple of record builders. But seriously if you look up SEC records the two Mississippi schools have historically been easy wins. There have been exceptions but look up their series records against Auburn and Alabama and L.S.U. and you'll see what I mean. They wouldn't be hurt by Texas and Oklahoma if they replaced Auburn and Alabama. It would merely be same song second verse.

That is of course sustainable over the short run. And can be so enormously profitable as to destabilize all the rest of the sport. But is it sustainable in the long run? I have my doubts. I think over time you'll bleed out the smaller programs as fans get tired of losing records and fighting against a stacked deck.

Marquee programs have all earned their place at the top of CFB. Winning earns that kind of respect. Maybe the little guys should invest a little cash into dressing up their facilities and making the campus and athletic facilities something a recruit to want to be a part of. Yes it takes money, but this is the SEC. Go big or stay home.

(06-01-2019 10:05 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-01-2019 02:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(05-28-2019 10:25 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Going division-less is probably a good idea no matter how expansion works out, I'll say that.

The ACC and Big 12 were the only conferences that supported removing the divisional restrictions on championship games. That's a hell of an about face. I don't think the the SEC office would agree with you.

I think it's like most things. There's no reason for the SEC or any league to really support any measures that don't help them.

The Big 12 and ACC got behind it because it would have made life better for them.

Put the SEC in a position where a division-less schedule is beneficial and they'll at least consider it.

To be fair, what the ACC proposed (and was shot down) wasn't divisionless scheduling, but total deregulation of scheduling. I think something a little more defined would probably pass (and I totally understand why the Big Ten was a little skiddish about total deregulation with Notre Dame just sitting there playing 5 games a year in the ACC...)

(06-02-2019 02:21 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Marquee programs have all earned their place at the top of CFB. Winning earns that kind of respect. Maybe the little guys should invest a little cash into dressing up their facilities and making the campus and athletic facilities something a recruit to want to be a part of. Yes it takes money, but this is the SEC. Go big or stay home.

IMO Missouri would be one of the programs "going home" in the long run if TX/OU go to the SEC.

(06-02-2019 10:57 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(06-02-2019 02:21 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Marquee programs have all earned their place at the top of CFB. Winning earns that kind of respect. Maybe the little guys should invest a little cash into dressing up their facilities and making the campus and athletic facilities something a recruit to want to be a part of. Yes it takes money, but this is the SEC. Go big or stay home.

IMO Missouri would be one of the programs "going home" in the long run if TX/OU go to the SEC.

I think it's the other way around actually.

The SEC would be sustainable. The problem is that a sport with regional conferences and different media deals would not be sustainable.

If I had to bet then I'd say sooner or later, all of the reasonably strong programs in college sports will be in the same league. Same governance, same player pool, same media deal, same everything...it's the only way you could ever get all parties to sign up for anything that would enhance parity.

Crossing threads a bit, but caps aren't coming if everyone is not in the same boat.

(06-02-2019 10:57 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(06-02-2019 02:21 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Marquee programs have all earned their place at the top of CFB. Winning earns that kind of respect. Maybe the little guys should invest a little cash into dressing up their facilities and making the campus and athletic facilities something a recruit to want to be a part of. Yes it takes money, but this is the SEC. Go big or stay home.

IMO Missouri would be one of the programs "going home" in the long run if TX/OU go to the SEC.

Could be. The problem to me is the idea that a school's only goal is the national championship and less than that is failure. Whatever happened to having a good season, maybe winning your conference, and going to a bowl game? If we pick up Texas and Oklahoma why not just move Alabama and Auburn to the east, move Mizzou to the west and work it from there? Now you have Georgia vs Auburn, Alabama vs Tennessee, and maintain the Iron Bowl. Makes for some old time rivalries in the west as well.

(06-02-2019 02:32 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-02-2019 10:57 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(06-02-2019 02:21 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Marquee programs have all earned their place at the top of CFB. Winning earns that kind of respect. Maybe the little guys should invest a little cash into dressing up their facilities and making the campus and athletic facilities something a recruit to want to be a part of. Yes it takes money, but this is the SEC. Go big or stay home.

IMO Missouri would be one of the programs "going home" in the long run if TX/OU go to the SEC.

Could be. The problem to me is the idea that a school's only goal is the national championship and less than that is failure. Whatever happened to having a good season, maybe winning your conference, and going to a bowl game? If we pick up Texas and Oklahoma why not just move Alabama and Auburn to the east, move Mizzou to the west and work it from there? Now you have Georgia vs Auburn, Alabama vs Tennessee, and maintain the Iron Bowl. Makes for some old time rivalries in the west as well.

That's all we need to do. Just look at the symmetry:

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

Rivals: Texas/OU, A&M/LSU, A&M/Texas, Ole Miss/MSU, UT/Ark
New potential rivals: LSU/OU, Ark/OU, Mizz/Ark, Mizz/OU

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Rivals: Aub/Ala, Aub/Ga, Aub/Fla, Aub/Tn, Ala/Ten, Ala/Ga, Fla/Ga, Fla/SC, Tn/Ky, Tn/Vandy, SC/Tn, Fla/Tn

You have two national rivalries in both divisions. UT/OU, UT/A&M in the West / Ala/Aub, Aub/Ga in the East.

You have strong regional rivalries in both divisions: L.S.U./A&M, UT/Ark in West / Ga/Fla, Fla/Tn

If the LHN is converted into a SEC West Channel and the Charlotte studio becomes the SEC East Channel then the SECN has two solid channels with the current 2nd overflow channel become simply the overflow channel.

The strength in both divisions would be relatively equal (at least more equal than now) and the CCG becomes an even bigger monster for national ratings.

Well I'm sure Auburn would be happy be back where they belong. In that alignment I say instead my condolences Gamecock. Alabama, Clemson, Georgia, Auburn, Tennessee. And you can still draw LSU/OU/TX in a crossover. Weirdly Tennessee would be happy about that in a schadenfreude sort of way.

(06-02-2019 08:51 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Well I'm sure Auburn would be happy be back where they belong. In that alignment I say instead my condolences Gamecock. Alabama, Clemson, Georgia, Auburn, Tennessee. And you can still draw LSU/OU/TX in a crossover. Weirdly Tennessee would be happy about that in a schadenfreude sort of way.

Well, when you can figure out what appeals to Tennessee Hill Folk let me know. I like 'em. They're fine people. But in my years of dealing with them you never really know what it is they want, or why they want it. So it is quite possible they would find schadenfreude in that arrangement.

(06-02-2019 10:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Well, when you can figure out what appeals to Tennessee Hill Folk let me know. I like 'em. They're fine people. But in my years of dealing with them you never really know what it is they want, or why they want it. So it is quite possible they would find schadenfreude in that arrangement.

Tennessee gets Bama every year while most of the rest of the SEC East escapes. Having Bama in the division helps spread those losses around evenly. It's not that TN doesn't want to play Bama ... they're rivals. But TN is athletically a bit dysfunctional right now. So they really don't have much of a shot. While it may not be what you want, having everybody else in the division suffer the same fate does weirdly elevate you compared to where you were previously.

It's similar to the situation GT is in with Clemson as a crossover. We want to play that game but there needs to be a lot of in house clean up or a Dabo depart for that game to have the competitiveness it has had historically.

(06-03-2019 12:01 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(06-02-2019 10:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Well, when you can figure out what appeals to Tennessee Hill Folk let me know. I like 'em. They're fine people. But in my years of dealing with them you never really know what it is they want, or why they want it. So it is quite possible they would find schadenfreude in that arrangement.

Tennessee gets Bama every year while most of the rest of the SEC East escapes. Having Bama in the division helps spread those losses around evenly. It's not that TN doesn't want to play Bama ... they're rivals. But TN is athletically a bit dysfunctional right now. So they really don't have much of a shot. While it may not be what you want, having everybody else in the division suffer the same fate does weirdly elevate you compared to where you were previously.

It's similar to the situation GT is in with Clemson as a crossover. We want to play that game but there needs to be a lot of in house clean up or a Dabo depart for that game to have the competitiveness it has had historically.

Oh, I fully understand how all of that works. I just was just making a quip about the hill folk. I did business with them. Loved them. But never fully understood what motivated them. An interesting breed.

College football used to be a regional sport for the most part. Your season was made by beating your rival. Everyone had one back in the day. Then if you got selected for a bowl game, well that was just the dessert, not the main course.

Ohio St.-Michigan, Alabama-Auburn, Indiana-Purdue, Harvard-Yale, USC-Clemson, Florida-Florida St., The egg bowl, UT-A&M... I could go on.

Those rivalry games WERE the season. Now, there are WV-Texas Tech games that... no one really cares about.

Lets just face it. The CFP has been a colossal flop for the collective good of college football. If you're not Alabama, Clemson or sometimes Ohio St., you have NO SHOT.

So when there's no shot for the little guy and rivalries are no longer valued, what do you expect?

(06-04-2019 12:05 PM)Topcat Wrote:  College football used to be a regional sport for the most part. Your season was made by beating your rival. Everyone had one back in the day. Then if you got selected for a bowl game, well that was just the dessert, not the main course.

Ohio St.-Michigan, Alabama-Auburn, Indiana-Purdue, Harvard-Yale, USC-Clemson, Florida-Florida St., The egg bowl, UT-A&M... I could go on.

Those rivalry games WERE the season. Now, there are WV-Texas Tech games that... no one really cares about.

Lets just face it. The CFP has been a colossal flop for the collective good of college football. If you're not Alabama, Clemson or sometimes Ohio St., you have NO SHOT.

So when there's no shot for the little guy and rivalries are no longer valued, what do you expect?

I agree, the top 4 format is bad and is only really serving to put a huge spotlight on the largest programs and it's beginning to compound.

They should either go back to a top 2 where it is nearly impossible for the same teams to make it every year or they should just embrace a 16 or 24 team playoff and make the postseason the focal point of the year like they do with basketball.

A 16 team playoff with conference champion autobids becomes the first *true* championship at the D1 FBS level. Just copy FCS. Start at 16. You can always go to 24 later. AND PLAY IT ON THE HOME FIELD OF THE HIGHER SEED. I'm fine with a neutral site title game, but keep everything else on home field of the higher seed (or the nearest NFL stadium if they wish to relocate for capacity reasons).

(06-03-2019 12:07 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-03-2019 12:01 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(06-02-2019 10:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Well, when you can figure out what appeals to Tennessee Hill Folk let me know. I like 'em. They're fine people. But in my years of dealing with them you never really know what it is they want, or why they want it. So it is quite possible they would find schadenfreude in that arrangement.

Tennessee gets Bama every year while most of the rest of the SEC East escapes. Having Bama in the division helps spread those losses around evenly. It's not that TN doesn't want to play Bama ... they're rivals. But TN is athletically a bit dysfunctional right now. So they really don't have much of a shot. While it may not be what you want, having everybody else in the division suffer the same fate does weirdly elevate you compared to where you were previously.

It's similar to the situation GT is in with Clemson as a crossover. We want to play that game but there needs to be a lot of in house clean up or a Dabo depart for that game to have the competitiveness it has had historically.

Oh, I fully understand how all of that works. I just was just making a quip about the hill folk. I did business with them. Loved them. But never fully understood what motivated them. An interesting breed.

Being left alone while simultaneously not being left out. Just your average contradiction that permeates most of Appalachia.