The 'four new SEC divisions'

[Ripamaru]

Idk about the whole 4 division thing. How does a SECCG work?

I'd just stick with 2 divisions. Go to 9 games. You play your 7 divisional opponents and 2 from the other division. Youd play every SEC team every 4 years.

East:
Kentucky
Tennessee
Vandy
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Alabama
Auburn

West:
Texas
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
LSU
Arkansas
Missouri
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

This makes the most sense to me. You'd have every team playing every other team more often than they do now (4 vs 6 years). Most of the biggest rivalries remain yearly. It's got solid balance (the east may be a bit stronger on paper). It's got a perfect geographic split.

Why make it any more complicated than necessary?

 

[JHB4UK]

Having divisions at all makes it complicated.

2 8 team divisions is NEVER happening. Play each team in the other division "once" every 4 yrs. So UK fans get to watch, at home, LSU and Texas and Oklahoma once every 8 yrs.

No. Thanks.

16 team conference, 3 permanent rivals, rotate 6 opponents, see everyone every 2 yrs, best 2 teams play for the SEC Championship. If it is Texas A&M & LSU, fine, if it is Georgia & Kentucky, also fine. Arbitrary geographic dividing up is stupid.

 

[P19978]

As an aside, I cant wait to see TaM plat Texas... they absolutely HATE them. I think they last played about a decade ago when Tex won on a last second FG IIRC.

Just another crazy fun SEC rivalry lol.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Idk about the whole 4 division thing. How does a SECCG work?

I'd just stick with 2 divisions. Go to 9 games. You play your 7 divisional opponents and 2 from the other division. Youd play every SEC team every 4 years.

East:
Kentucky
Tennessee
Vandy
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Alabama
Auburn

West:
Texas
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
LSU
Arkansas
Missouri
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

This makes the most sense to me. You'd have every team playing every other team more often than they do now (4 vs 6 years). Most of the biggest rivalries remain yearly. It's got solid balance (the east may be a bit stronger on paper). It's got a perfect geographic split.

Why make it any more complicated than necessary?

Me too, but it looks like we are not getting our wishes, The divisions are about as even as you will get them. But people want to visit all stadiums, which i don't understand, why does anyone want to go to MSST? or Vandy. ATM has nice facilities I guess, but i just as soon not see them in person.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Having divisions at all makes it complicated.

2 8 team divisions is NEVER happening. Play each team in the other division "once" every 4 yrs. So UK fans get to watch, at home, LSU and Texas and Oklahoma once every 8 yrs.

No. Thanks.

16 team conference, 3 permanent rivals, rotate 6 opponents, see everyone every 2 yrs, best 2 teams play for the SEC Championship. If it is Texas A&M & LSU, fine, if it is Georgia & Kentucky, also fine. Arbitrary geographic dividing up is stupid.

The only issue with that is the best 2 teams won't be determined on the field, say Bama, LSU, UK end up 11-1, who do you think is sitting home watching the SEC championship?

 

[Dddjdd]

Whatever scheduling format gets us to play the most teams and rotates the home and home most frequently sign me up for.

With 16 teams, if you go to 9 game SEC, have 3 permanent rivalries, you play 6 and 6, boom....you can guarantee every 4 yr player plays every school home snd away. You could do home and home with first 6, then home and home with 2nd 6. Or you could do the first 6 one year then next 6 next year then flip for yrs 3 and 4. You've got options.

But this current format is absurd.

I've made this point many times:

Texas A&M joined in 2012. They play their first game in Lexington in 2025.

If you were a first grader when A&M joined, you'd be in college when they played at Commonwealth for the first time.

That is unfettered horseshit.

Great post. I think we’ll likely get two 8 team divisions initially, but would much prefer this. I wonder who our three permanent opponents would be in this setup. Would love to keep Tennessee but ditch Miss St. Maybe UT, UF, SCAR?

 

[CB3UK]

Great post. I think we’ll likely get two 8 team divisions initially, but would much prefer this. I wonder who our three permanent opponents would be in this setup. Would love to keep Tennessee but ditch Miss St. Maybe UT, UF, SCAR?

My vote would go to Tennessee and South Carolina for sure. Would like to keep the Vanderbilt or Mississippi State series, would probably end up being Missouri or some such.

 

[UKWildcats1987]

The only issue with that is the best 2 teams won't be determined on the field, say Bama, LSU, UK end up 11-1, who do you think is sitting home watching the SEC championship?

I dint ever see 3 sec teams going 11 and 1.

I'm sure there would be tie breakers related to strength of schedule.

 

[JHB4UK]

Tie breakers are not that hard? We have them now, if 2 teams tie for best in the divisions!

1)head to head results
2)if not any, best win/loss record of opponents, whoever beat winning est sched goes
3)total points diff also frequently used as a tiebreaker

 

[truebluewildcat]

Inevitably I think conference expansion will lead to the regular season and post-season expansion.

Regular season expansion via the conference schedule because you have more teams. How can you have a regular-season conference champion whether it's based on record or an actual title game, if half the teams don't play one another?

Postseason expansion via the fact that an expanded conference schedule means another team or two are gonna have a claim. How are you going to keep a 2 loss SEC team out, especially if they've played an expanded/division-less schedule that consisted of Auburn, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, UGA, Bama, and on and on..?

 

[vhcat70]

Idk about the whole 4 division thing. How does a SECCG work?

I'd just stick with 2 divisions. Go to 9 games. You play your 7 divisional opponents and 2 from the other division. Youd play every SEC team every 4 years.

East:
Kentucky
Tennessee
Vandy
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Alabama
Auburn

West:
Texas
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
LSU
Arkansas
Missouri
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

This makes the most sense to me. You'd have every team playing every other team more often than they do now (4 vs 6 years). Most of the biggest rivalries remain yearly. It's got solid balance (the east may be a bit stronger on paper). It's got a perfect geographic split.

Why make it any more complicated than necessary?

Your plan is more complicated than necessary. The 3/6-6 plan is simpler & you play every team every other year vs. every 4 in your setup. Don't know why this is hard. Additionally, it assures the top two play for the championship vs. your system where the best two are in one of your divisions.

 

[vhcat70]

Great post. I think we’ll likely get two 8 team divisions initially, but would much prefer this. I wonder who our three permanent opponents would be in this setup. Would love to keep Tennessee but ditch Miss St. Maybe UT, UF, SCAR?

TN/V/MO. If one team's three permanent are weak, then it means the other six are strong. Net, maintain geographic rivalry.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I dint ever see 3 sec teams going 11 and 1.

I'm sure there would be tie breakers related to strength of schedule.

You never seen 4 pods either. You dang well know Bama is in. But one of the pods the OP suggested, at present, is weaker than the other 3, so would a 11-1 team from that pod be out?

Whatever scheduling format gets us to play the most teams and rotates the home and home most frequently sign me up for.

With 16 teams, if you go to 9 game SEC, have 3 permanent rivalries, you play 6 and 6, boom....you can guarantee every 4 yr player plays every school home snd away. You could do home and home with first 6, then home and home with 2nd 6. Or you could do the first 6 one year then next 6 next year then flip for yrs 3 and 4. You've got options.

But this current format is absurd.

I've made this point many times:

Texas A&M joined in 2012. They play their first game in Lexington in 2025.

If you were a first grader when A&M joined, you'd be in college when they played at Commonwealth for the first time.

That is unfettered horseshit.

Why does that matter? The current format has all SEC teams getting nearly 60m dollars in TV money? The SEC does not care how long it takes a team to rotate on your schedule. TV and the conference will decide which format will bring in the most revenue.

There are teams who want to keep rivalries. Pe r sonally I want UGA to stop playing in Jax. I would be for playing it there every other year and Atlanta the opposite year. But they want no part of that.

 

[CB3UK]

You never seen 4 pods either. You dang well know Bama is in. But one of the pods the OP suggested, at present, is weaker than the other 3, so would a 11-1 team from that pod be out?


Why does that matter? The current format has all SEC teams getting nearly 60m dollars in TV money? The SEC does not care how long it takes a team to rotate on your schedule. TV and the conference will decide which format will bring in the most revenue.

There are teams who want to keep rivalries. Pe r sonally I want UGA to stop playing in Jax. I would be for playing it there every other year and Atlanta the opposite year. But they want no part of that.

Why does that matter? U srs Clark? And my format keeps 3 rivalry games annually if you have a 4th or something it's literally every other year.

UGA would keep Auburn and Florida. I assume yall would probably want South Carolina for that 3rd game.

Kentucky would keep Tennessee and Vanderbilt. Opinions vary amongst BBN after that. I'd prefer it be South Carolina.

Alabama would get Tennessee Auburn and probably LSU...maybe Mississippi State?


The point is does anyone even have more than 3 REAL dedicated rivals in the SEC? I mean hard-core like WLOCP or the Beer Barrel?

The answer is no.

Why would I NOT want to see everyone in the SEC every two years?

Think about all the standouts in the West you don't get to see because they aren't on our East schedules.

Or is this is about UGA not wanting to have to play Alabama every other year in a de facto elimination game? 😉

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Why does that matter? U srs Clark? And my format keeps 3 rivalry games annually if you have a 4th or something it's literally every other year.

UGA would keep Auburn and Florida. I assume yall would probably want South Carolina for that 3rd game.

Kentucky would keep Tennessee and Vanderbilt. Opinions vary amongst BBN after that. I'd prefer it be South Carolina.

Alabama would get Tennessee Auburn and probably LSU...maybe Mississippi State?


The point is does anyone even have more than 3 REAL dedicated rivals in the SEC? I mean hard-core like WLOCP or the Beer Barrel?

The answer is no.

Why would I NOT want to see everyone in the SEC every two years?

Think about all the standouts in the West you don't get to see because they aren't on our East schedules.

Or is this is about UGA not wanting to have to play Alabama every other year in a de facto elimination game? 😉

I don't have any desire to see all the teams in the West. 99% of UGA fans don't consider S. Carolina a rival, about like Missouri.

As for not wanting to play Bama every year. It isn't me looking for a format to avoid that. I much prefer AU and Bame to the East and Missouri to the West when the new additions arrive. At some.point you have to beat them to win a championship

 

[vhcat70]

. Pe r sonally I want UGA to stop playing in Jax. I would be for playing it there every other year and Atlanta the opposite year. But they want no part of that.

Agree that there is no reason for Uga to kowtow to FL's desires. Other SEC rivalries stopped playing at "neutral" sites.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Agree that there is no reason for Uga to kowtow to FL's desires. Other SEC rivalries stopped playing at "neutral" sites.

The only reason we still do it is some of the bigger older boosters want a weekend at the beach. Kirby doesn't want to do it, neither of us can bring recruits in, but they can get to the game and make trip to UF after the game, none come to Athens after the game. I think we might be on the last contract. When it started UF wasn't a threat, that is no longer the case. Their fans just started an FIL fund that supposedly raised 5m in 1 day.

 

[vhcat70]

I don't have any desire to see all the teams in the West. 99% of UGA fans don't consider S. Carolina a rival, about like Missouri.

Strange Uga fans since GA is only SEC state SC borders.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Strange Uga fans since GA is only SEC state SC borders.

I guess, we played some over the years prior their coming to the SEC, but Clemson was the big rival during that time. Right now Carolina could go 0-8 in SEC but beat Clemson they would take it. I think they have dropped 7, maybe 6 in a row and all pretty much been blowout losses. I would like to trade the hamcocks for clemson.

 

[vhcat70]

^ So why no SEC interest from Klempsin?

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

^ So why no SEC interest from Klempsin?

With the fall of Miami and FSU, they are now the big fish in a small pond and like it that way. Not sure about FSU, but I think Miami is on the road to recovery. They are bringing some old "U" legends back to help with recruiting. They could probably win a NC with kids who are walking distance for the school.Then there is that big buyout to leave the ACC all members had to agree to. Not sure but think it's a round 50m exit penalty.

On another note, ATM is doing a 200m renovation to their stadium, with 170m already in the bank. This is after spending 500M 4-5 years ago on renovations.

 

[satcheluk]

Idk about the whole 4 division thing. How does a SECCG work?

I'd just stick with 2 divisions. Go to 9 games. You play your 7 divisional opponents and 2 from the other division. Youd play every SEC team every 4 years.

East:
Kentucky
Tennessee
Vandy
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Alabama
Auburn

West:
Texas
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
LSU
Arkansas
Missouri
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

This makes the most sense to me. You'd have every team playing every other team more often than they do now (4 vs 6 years). Most of the biggest rivalries remain yearly. It's got solid balance (the east may be a bit stronger on paper). It's got a perfect geographic split.

Why make it any more complicated than necessary?

No way in hell I'd want that schedule every year.

 

[satcheluk]

Tie breakers are not that hard? We have them now, if 2 teams tie for best in the divisions!

1)head to head results
2)if not any, best win/loss record of opponents, whoever beat winning est sched goes
3)total points diff also frequently used as a tiebreaker

I hate head to head because they don't account for home filed advantage. Home field in college is worth about a TD. If they used say a +5pt spread for the road team, then I'd like that better. For example, we go to LSU. LSU is favored by 8 pts, though Vegas spread is not relevant to tiebreaker, only 5 pt home field advantage). Tough game and they kick a FG to win by 2. UK wins the tie breaker because we are the road team. Also, at the end of the game, rather than playing for a FG, you'd have to try to get a TD or you'll win the game, but lose the tiebreaker.