(04-15-2020 03:50 PM)Keswick_Crusaders_Forever51 Wrote: (04-14-2020 03:56 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote: A lot of conference realignment theories have to do with bringing rivalries back together. But what creates rivalries?
I'm thinking about both pro baseball and college football. In pro baseball my team is the Braves. And our biggest rival is generally another NL East team (currently the Nats, but previously the Phillies, sometimes the Marlins and certainly the Mets). But I would say we also have a strong disdain for the Cardinals just because of playoff losses.
So there are "conference rivals" and other rivals.
Thinking about the TN Vols, our top 5 most often played games are Vandy, KY, Alabama, Miss, and Auburn. But I currently don't think of Auburn or Miss as our rivals, though I do think of Florida as one.
We played FL 22 times between 1916-1991, but then when the SEC realigned, we played them each year for 27 more times.
On the other hand, GT we have played 44 times, but not since 2017 and I don't consider them a rival anymore.
So, does conference affiliation create rivalries or does it represent rivalries that existed already or both?
I think it's a combinatino of both. As you mentioned, your Vols & my Gators have had a serious rivalry built up due to the realignment that occurred, & yet we also have the rivalry with FSU that burns deeply from over the years.
I think conferences give teams a much better ability to create new ones due to increased visibility & need to beat one another on a regular basis for conference swagger, & if both teams heat up at the same time, you are left with games that you'll tell your kids about for ages.
However, there are some rivalries that were already natural due to state lines or old historic matchups that are not easily forgotten. Your coworker who went to the other major university in your state gives you a hard time about your team going flat while theirs is catching fire, & then suddenly the reverse is true & you can't wait to heckle them throughout the season. Even if you're in separate conferences, that doesn't just go away.
Ultimately, I think conferences ideally should aim to create new rivalries while trying to preserve rivalries where they can.
That leads to an interesting follow-up: What makes a good rivalry?
For instance, the "Civil Conflict" (UConn vs. UCF) is made fun of because the teams have only played a total of 7 times, not once before 2013, and they are from geographically disparate areas of the country though they are both "east coast."
If you are adding a school to a conference thinking about creating rivalries, what factors go into it? I would think "peer status" in terms of academics (Tennessee may like to play ETSU and it can be a fun in state matchup, but they are not peers and so the "rivalry" will never be that intense), geography, and similar ability (for instance, Alabama vs. Clemson right now), culture, etc.
Another way to look at it might to be ask: If conference X added school Y, what current conference school could become a natural new rival? The SEC added Missouri, but to the east, so a Missouri v. Arkansas matchup hasn't built up a rivalry like it could if they were in the west.
If the SEC adds OK, they have former conference mates in A&M and in Missouri, and share a border with Arkansas. But OK vs. Alabama might become a rivalry too, especially if Bama stays in the West, due to both being playoff caliber schools.
Adding OK St, however, would be more interesting. They would have Missouri and Texas A&M and Arkansas too, but perhaps a rivalry with TN could form over Gundy spurning us?
Just some stream of thought ideas here.