Will the SEC abolish divisions when the conference expands? Why that'd be good and what it could mean
Dare I say, the ACC might be on to something.
Earlier in the week, Action Network’s Brett McMurphy reported that the conference was considering abolishing divisions and adopting a new scheduling model beginning in 2023. New Miami athletic director Dan Radakovich added that the ACC was “closer to the end than to the beginning” with eliminating the Coastal and Atlantic divisions. It would entail 3 annual opponents for each team and 5 games against other teams in the conference the next 2 years in a home-and-home format.
Under that “3-5-5” model, you’d allow everyone in the conference to play each other at least once in a 4-year career. McMurphy also reported that next month, “the NCAA Council is expected to approve a waiver allowing all leagues to play without divisions starting in 2023 but still hold conference championship games.”
If the ACC does this, does that mean the SEC will follow suit once Oklahoma and Texas join the conference?
It certainly seems possible considering that the SEC scheduling model will have to be tweaked anyway. Even if Oklahoma gets put in the East and Texas is put in the West to make 8-team divisions, you’d still need adjusting whether that’s no divisions, 4-team pods or 8-team divisions. The SEC could keep its current East and West divisions and adopt a 9-game conference schedule with 7 divisional matchups, 1 annual crossover and 1 rotating crossover. If the SEC stayed at an 8-game conference schedule with divisions, you’d essentially wipe away either the annual crossover OR the rotating crossover.
Neither of those situations would be ideal. To be fair, eliminating divisions wouldn’t be perfect, either. But would it be the best course of action for the SEC? Definitely. We shouldn’t be living in a world wherein Georgia and Texas A&M will have their second SEC matchup in the 2024 season (they’ve played once in 2019 since A&M joined the SEC in 2012 … and UGA’s first trip to College Station will be in 2024).
From a competitive standpoint, the West won 12 of the past 13 titles. It’s time for a shakeup.
Like the ACC, the SEC could adopt a model with permanent matchups and rotating home-and-homes. Old rivalries could be preserved and new rivalries could form. Let’s not forget the benefit of adding several new rivalries into the fold with Oklahoma and Texas coming into the conference. Seeing that and more schedule variance would be a more entertaining sell to fans and future TV partners.
Unlike the ACC, the SEC couldn’t adopt the exact same model because it’ll have 16 teams. Or if it did, it wouldn’t guarantee the same amount of rotating home-and-homes. Perhaps that model for an 8-game conference schedule would be:
- 1 permanent matchup
- 7 rotating home-and-homes
I know, I know. That would mean we’d see some incredible annual crossovers played less often. We wouldn’t have Auburn-Georgia, Florida-LSU or Alabama-Tennessee on an annual basis. It would also mean we would lose some of the best divisional rivals on an annual basis like Alabama-LSU and Florida-Tennessee. They’d still play, but there would sometimes be a 2-year absence of those matchups.
Yes, I realize that’d be a major bummer. That’d be the biggest gripe, and understandably so. Even if there was a greater buildup for those matchups with them not being played annually, it would feel a lot like the modified 2020 schedule when some of those traditional nonconference matchup staples were wiped off the board because of the pandemic. I’m not pretending that would be an easy adjustment.
In my opinion, though, that still beats the alternative. The alternative is doing as little tweaking as possible by virtue of putting Oklahoma and Texas in separate divisions. Then you’d go even longer between non-annual crossover matchups like Georgia-A&M or Florida-Alabama. If you’re going to have a super conference, that super conference should act as its own league and not become even more divided within it.
I don’t want a scenario in which Alabama and Oklahoma go 6 years between matchups. That’s basically a nonconference game at that point.
And let’s get back to the issue at hand, and why the ACC is heading in this direction. While there are schools like UNC and Wake Forest that were so desperate to play each other more often that they scheduled a nonconference game, this is still about competitive balance.
The SEC West dominating the conference title game year after year is evidence of that. Without divisions, the 2 best conference records play for a conference title, just like the Big 12 has been doing.
“But what about a potential rematch? Doesn’t that lessen the regular season?”
Um, so like 2017 Auburn-Georgia? Or 2010 Auburn-South Carolina? Maybe 2004 Auburn-Tennessee?
Just like with the current system, yeah, we’ll probably have a rematch every few years. That’s fine. What’s not fine is pretending like divisions are woven into the fabric of the SEC in some unchangeable way. We’ll still get the Iron Bowl. The World’s Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party ain’t going anywhere (except maybe to a college campus?). The Egg Bowl is still going to be the best Tryptophan combatant the world has ever known.
In fact, why don’t we run through what games would probably stay on the schedule in this division-less format:
- Alabama-Auburn
- Arkansas-Mizzou
- Florida-Georgia
- Kentucky-South Carolina
- LSU-Texas A&M
- MSU-Ole Miss
- Oklahoma-Texas
- Tennessee-Vanderbilt
Relax. You’re allowed to disagree with that. Yes, as much as I’d love to see A&M and Texas face off every year, I’d gladly settle for them at least having a potential home-and-home rotation so that they don’t go more than 2 consecutive seasons without facing one another.
And for everyone saying that it’s not fair that Tennessee gets to play Vandy every year, tell me this. Is it fair that Tennessee has to face Alabama every year now? No, but at least under a division-less model, you can’t avoid Alabama for 5 years like other SEC East teams do.
That’s the beauty of this. There would be more scheduling balance than ever. You need that. Say what you want about the current Big 12 and its inability to win a Playoff game. What you can’t say is that there’s unfair scheduling. Why? Everyone plays each other and the 2 best teams play for a conference title. What a simple concept that is.
Scheduling variance would be a welcome sight for the sport. It would be an adjustment, sure, but so will having Oklahoma and Texas in the conference. The SEC has always been about creating the best way to promote competition while making sure it isn’t sabotaging itself like the Big Ten did by unnecessarily switching to a 9-game conference schedule in 2016. That should continue to be the objective whether the Playoff expands or not.
It’s possible that the SEC decides on a 9-game conference schedule with 3 annual opponents and 6 rotating home-and-home matchups. In that scenario, I suppose you would technically have pods, but it would essentially be division-less because you’d still put the 2 teams with the best overall conference record in the SEC Championship.
The benefit of that would obviously be that you could keep some (not all) of those annual crossover rivalries intact. Here’s what a makeshift 4-team pod system could look like:
- Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Texas, Mizzou
- Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, South Carolina
- Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
- LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, MSU
The downside of that is that in addition to going to a 9-game conference slate and creating a tougher path to the Playoff, you’re still eliminating some of those annual crossover games and there’d be constant debate about which pod is toughest. We could see a scenario in which there becomes significant pod imbalance and we’d be back to having similar conversations like the ones we’re having with the unbalanced East and West.
That’s why we could see a future model with 1 rivalry game and having the 7 rotating home-and-homes. Perhaps that’s an unpopular opinion both among fans and among SEC athletic directors. I can’t imagine everyone would like to play 10 SEC games like Nick Saban suggested after the Oklahoma and Texas move was announced, but I do imagine that as Ole Miss athletic director Keith Carter outlined, there’s a sense of urgency to actually face everyone in the conference at least once in a 3-year stretch.
Time will tell what system is settled on. Whatever the case, change is coming soon.
The ACC might’ve just provided a blueprint of sorts to a division-less future for the SEC.
3 rivalries-6 rotating games.
Split the difference: 2 permanent rivalries and 7 rotating games. The only two teams I care about playing every year are Florida and Auburn. If we aren’t doing that then I say do away with all rivalries and have 9 rotating games every year.
I’ve seen a good graphic of three permanent rivals and 6 rotating games. It still allows playing in each stadium at least once every 4 years. Example: A&M would have LSU, Arky, and t.u., LSU would have A&M, Ole Miss, and Arky, etc.
Yeah what you just describe is the same or similar to the best solution I’ve seen as well. The “pod” system is kind of dumb imo, it’s like eliminating 2 divisions just to create 4. Makes no sense. You don’t need pods in order to play every team within 4 years.
Probably going to get USCjr as the 3rd for UGA. Personally, I would like LSU, but they already have UF. Maybe either of the new guys?
I think both UGA and LSU fans would look forward to that game to visit. From my experiences, Georgia fans are more similar to Auburn fans in that we get along with them better than other fans. Cant say the same about TAMU and Florida.
Oh go piss on yourself JTF
I get it. It’s not personal. Just looking to play LSU more. Nothing against the cocks. But can’t lose UF or AU.
There is a little math involved,too. 4 teams on a permanent schedule leaves twelve. Three annual opponents, six rotating home and homes. Don’t know why nobody mentions an alternating series of home and home games where, for example, a team would play one set of six opponents one year and the other the next instead of the same slate two years in a row
Yeah I think that would be the fairest. Id like it to look like for us:
3 annuals:
– TAMU
– Ole Miss
– Arkansas
1st rotation:
– Texas
– Mizzou
– Georgia
– Kentucky
– Auburn
– Tennessee
2nd rotation:
– Oklahoma
– South Carolina
– Alabama
– Florida
– Vanderbilt
– Mississippi State
Within the rotations, 3 are road and 3 are home games. The 10th game can be an out of conference matchup at a neutral site location and the remaining two be held for rotating instate teams (LaTech, ULL, Nichols, Southeastern, Northwestern State, Southern, Grambling, ULM, and McNeese) so that those smaller schools can continue getting the income they receive from playing SEC schools.
@ Eradicator
The math doesn’t work for 2 permanent and 7 rotating games.
How could the writer leave out the realignment division option based on actual geography? Move Auburn and Alabama and OLE MISS to the East. Move Missouri West and bring in TX and OK in the West. Egg Bowl remains as permanent cross division. This maintains the majority of the rivalry minus Alabama and LSU which could become the permanent cross rival. Plus TX, OK, A&M and LSU all play each other every year!
Either way we have to go to 9 conference games. I agree with the 3 permanent rivals since it’ll do a better job preserving the historic rivalries and you still see everyone every other year. There’ll be a lot of push back if you start chopping games like Auburn Georgia, LSU Ole Miss or Alabama Tennessee.
“There’ll be a lot of push back if you start chopping games like Auburn Georgia”
I’m all for that.
Move Alabama and Auburn over to the east and you don’t have to worry about chopping any traditional rivalries while eliminating the need for annual cross division games.
Never happen, because it makes too much sense.
Somehow I believe that Greg Sankey & staff will keep the traditional rivalries like Alabama vs. Auburn & Georgia vs. Florida intact. The SEC Rivalries are like no other in college football, as the hatred runs very deep. Playing everyone in the conference within a 3-4 year timeframe is good for the SEC…might produce some surprise results, which can add some spice to the league. Time will tell. Roll Tide !
Somehow I think Alabama will be okay no matter what format is settled on.
So will UGA!
I just dont see how they get rid of the LSU/Bama matchup. 16.6 million people watched that game in 2019 which was 5 million more than the Bama/Auburn game. Theyve done everything they can to bring back the TAMU/LSU rivalry and it’s just not something that can be forced like that.
If there are 3 games I dont want to see go away, it’d be our games against Bama, Florida, and Ole Miss. Im sure yall are similar in not wanting to get rid of LSU, Auburn, and Florida/Tennessee.
Its all about money to these people in charge, eventually it’ll all go out the window.
If we go to 9 conference games, would that change anybody’s mind about having a CG for the SEC?
We already beat each other up pretty good and the winner of the SECCG would have played 10 conference games while tOSU and Clemson waltz right into the CFP’s (2021 notwithstanding).
No, the SECCG brings in too much money to abandon it. IMO.
Wouldn’t getting two SEC teams into the CFP’s compensate for that?
After expansion, both would always get in.
What happens if Georgia and Bama are in the east and their only loss is to the other one…then they play another undefeated team from the west in the SEC championship. Let’s say it’s Oklahoma and Texas A&M only lost to them. After the game you would have an undefeated SEC champ and 3 1 loss SEC teams. The chaos that would come from that would be crazy. Now imagine no other undefeated teams that year. Lol
It is impossible for BAMA and jawja to be in the same division and only have a loss to the other.
“Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt”
I like that pod.
You’d think everyone would want Vandy as a permanent opponent…but it’s just the opposite. You can schedule non-con games with the Sun Belt for that purpose.
At this point, there us not much to grab hold of you with those teams. Vandy is Vandy, UT is trying to come back but they still have a year 2 coach, AU is down right now, though hopefully will be back quickly, and you have to wonder how long Saban is going to be at Bama and who takes his place.
*is not us.
Vandy as UT’s permanent opponent? No way. I’m old school, I want UT to play Alabama every year. To be the best you have to beat the best.
You will not be able to take the Alabama and Auburn rivalry away. That just will not not happen.
It’s happened before
The Tennessee-Alabama has been played more and many of their fans consider it more of a rivalry. That’s one of the reasons I think the pod thing is nonsense. Just move Bama and Auburn to the west and all the traditional rivalries survive and we get some of the old ones back such as Auburn-Tennessee, Auburn-Florida, Alabama-Florida, Alabama-Georgia. Remember those games use to be very big games(Bama’s fight song isn’t talking about Miss state).
If the divisions are kept in place, moving Alabama and Auburn just makes too much sense. That’s why it won’t happen.
Huh
I kind of like the LSU-Arkansas-Ole Miss-MSU pod. The other pods look good, too, except for Mizzou. Mizzou would get stuck playing old Big XII rivals, and losing to them.
Then Arkansas would need to join their former Southwest teams and Missouri join LSU’s pod.
That would be a weak pod, based on the last 50 years of success. Yes, Arkansas and Ole Miss seems to be on the rise, but a couple of seasons does not make a trend. This is not a shot at any of the schools, but just an example of how people can throw a wrench in any plan, so you just do not know how the decision makers are going to decide.
Arkansa, Ole Miss and Tennessee are in the same boat right now in regards to program strength.
I agree and you could add Miss State. They are right there, on the cusp. Will they step up to major competitor or stand pat.
If we want to know what it’s like to lose to our rivals, we’ll make sure to ask LSU.
Apologies. I just read that Mizzou has a .543 all time win pct. I didn’t think it was that good.
Fun fact, in the SEC, only 5 teams have winning records against Mizzou. LSU isn’t one of them.
You win the ‘net today for this burn!
Agreed. It may not last long, but it would be neat to have the story lines of all those newer coaches in the same pod for a little while. But all that could change by the time all this plays out
I love the old rivalries even though ours have been one sided for far too long. But everything is different so I am ready for a change. I think it is ridiculous to wait so long between some rematches. Everything else is changing so this may as well change too. Dont screw it up SEC.
The Alabama vs Tennessee rivalry has been one of the streakiest in football. Even going back to Neyland. UT could go on their on streak of success, at any time, going by the history of the rivalry.
The conference has become too big to still have the division model. Doing away with divisions is the only way to go forward.
Once t.u. and Okie are in, I say we tell the NCAA to F themselves.
The SEC should govern itself.
The NCAA or the Playoff Committee?
When was the last time the Tennessee and Bama game was relevant? Sorry, quick jab so lay it on me.
Seriously though, for once I agree with the writer, I like the “pod”, and it makes sense on the UF, UGA, UK, USC one since they all have ACC rivals they play every year. It should still allow for that, and you’ll lose the UGA/AU rivalry, but no way out of losing some.
Only thing I would question is the A&M, OU, Mizz, and Texas “pod”. Feels like the Big12, but I’m being picky.
2007. We did give them a game in 2009, 2015 and perhaps last year going into the 4th quarter.
I’m fine with a big 12 pod, there will be some rivalry and history there. I’m all for it.
Ditto. Plus a date saved for ku.
Which two teams own more conference titles?
Tell me again how many usc has…in any conference?
The unfortunate thing is some rivalries will be canned. Some will be every 3-5 years, and others will be yearly.
I like his thought on the yearly rivalries that need to be in place.
All P5 champs in the playoff.
All P5 conference get rid of divisions, keep 1 rivalry game in place (The Iron Bowl for example) play 10 conference games, 2 OOC games, top 2 play in the champ game.
The ‘goal’ of winning 6 games and going bowling; that’s the goal of midgets.
I don’t want any model that automatically give a conference champion a playoff spot. You do realize that the PAC12 Champion finished last season with 4 losses, right? How does that warrant an automatic bid? One season the PAC12 had a team with 6 losses play in their championship game. One upset and in your scenario a 6 loss team is in. No way, no how. There is a reason the PAC12 is irrelevant.
I don’t think you can have Conference champ auto qualifiers without a federal anti-trust exemption unless you give all 10 division 1 conference champs a spot in the CFP.
Sure you can. Create a separate FBS league of just P5 conferences. Then you’d have a P3 or P4. Or P1.
It’s what’s for dinner sooner than we might think.
The PAC-12 my friend is not irrelevant. Not long ago(I am 51) Stanford, Oregon and USC were teams in the hunt every year. If and when the playoffs expands a PAC-12 champion deserves a spot in a 12 team playoff. I think the top three teams in the PAC-12 last year would have beat Cincinnati.
The PAC12 is totally irrelevant. Last year the best record in the conference was 4 losses (2 teams), half of the conference, 6 teams, had 6 losses or more. They have produced just one qualifier for the CFPs since its inception. They would have few teams that could beat a good AAC team, and I seriously doubt they had a team that could have beaten Cincinatti last season.
How many PAC 12 schools have won a NC in this century? USC. Oregon got close twice and Stanford hasn’t truly competed for one. By the way, this is sports. You EARN a spot in the playoffs by winning more games than other teams. Just because you win a weak conference doesn’t mean you DESERVE anything. Thanks for bringing up Cincy. Most thought they DESERVED to be in also.
Thank you Sir. 2 of my best CFB experiences were hanging out with TN fans in Autzen and then doing the same in Knoxville. BTW, both games were won by the Ducks.
Check the schedules for the next decade. Many the SEC and Pac-12 series is upcoming. Including Bama vs Arizona.
BTW, in a recent H+H, CAL beat Ole Miss twice and 2 seasons ago UCLA defeated LSU.
1 reason the Pac-12 is Playoff irrelevant is due to a 9 game conference schedule. In 2019 had Oregon played Portland State at home in the penultimate game of the regular season Justin Herbert and the Pac-12 is in the final 4.
From a PO POV the Pac-12 is irrelevant but besides Ohio St in year 1 of the PO, a team that defeated Oregon in champ game, how many teams outside of the southeast have been relevant?
Last season’s NFL MVP played ball at CAL.
Is the Pac-12 close to the SEC? Heck no.
But I do think that Oregon ‘at’ Georgia on 9/3 and Utah at Florida on 9/3 will be decent games.
Cal beating one of the weakest teams in the SEC, in the last 50 years, that was decimated by probation is not an indicator. UCLA was a good win, but they still beat a team that ended the season with a losing 6-7 record, and they themselves had an 8-4 record. Nothing I said indicated that the PAC12 could not win a random game. They have just been poorly run by arrogant people that think the world is going to revolve around them. The 9 game schedule is irrelevant. The BIG10 plays one and they seem to make the playoffs annually. Alabama plays an 8 game conference schedule and usually ends the season among the top in SOS, the PAC12 is nowhere to be found. The only thing the schedule has to do with it is that so many of the PAC12 teams are, at best, average. They are out of the running for the playoffs before the season is half over, and the extra conference game can even be played. You do realize that the PAC12 has not won a bowl game in 2 years, right?
If Utah with 3Ls and and a conference championship was in a 2021 12 team field PO, as envisioned by Gene Sankey, Jack Swarbrick, Bob Bowlsby and Craig Thompson, and had bee seeded 12th, Utah would have played at No. 5 Notre Dame.
I think that the Utes team at seasons end could have defeated Notre Dame? Without re-seeding, Utah next would have played Cincinnati. Again, I think this is a game Utah could have won.
This would mean Utah being in the final 4.
Any conference without a chance to participate is by definition irrelevant.
Why should Utah if Gene Sankey’s playoff model was adopted not been worthy of a 12 seed?
Greg Sankey.
For the sake of fairness Vanderbilt needs to leave
We need that W on the schedule
Even though they won’t admit it, so does USCjr. There’s been times in recent memory, they needed to leave as much as Vandy.
When was that?
Na sc and candy have nattys in other sports recently plus vandys academics enhance the league overall academics
Let’s see ’20, ’15, ’02, ’03, ’95-’99. Be honest, outside of 2011-13, you’ve not done that much, and even with those “all time great SC teams” you still didn’t win the SECCG. Granted better than Vanderbilt but it’s not as though your roosters are putting up SEC championship wallpaper either. Vandy has no history of consistent success in football, but neither does USCjr.
Funny you say that considering we’re the only team in the east that hasn’t lost a Vanderbilt since 2008
Now that’s a good measuring stick for your program’s success, “we’re the only team in the east that hasn’t lost to Vanderbilt since 2008.” Just keep swimming, just keep swimming! Why yes, I’d beat the drum of besting Vanderbilt too if I was a in your shoes. In the grand and glorious history of USCjr football, what programs that you’ve played more than 5 times do you have a winning record against? Let’s see, Vandy might be the flagship there, oh but let’s talk about Coastal, The Citadel and the mighty blue hose of Presbyterian and marginal winning % over KY, MSU, Virginia and WF…thrown in Newberry, Wofford and Erskine and I see the makings of a powerhouse! You see where this is going, bangin’ the “we beat Vandy” drum or “Vandy needs to go” ain’t all that impressive with your stellar resume for the last, say 100yrs.
In recent Tennessee history it has not always been a Win.
That’ what non-con games with the Sun Belt is for. Or a sure win call on the weakest in CUSA. You don’t need Vandy. No one does.
It this happened then Vandy would instantly become a National Powerhouse!
lol
CUSA or MAC would be good for them. Competitive but not the best in the Sun Belt. Drop football and BB moves to the Big East. Of course, Vandy would never volunteer to do this. But it should happen.
I like the idea of no divisions regardless of how you do the schedule. In years past, the best two teams were in one division sometimes. EOD, let the two best teams in the conference play in early Dec.
The only natural MU rival available is Arkansas. MU its other two natural rivals are non-conference Kansas and Illinois.
Overall I like 2 permanent and 7 rotating.
Umm… roll that math around a moment
Missouri-Arkansas will become like the Ole Miss-MSU game. You guys need to keep it if you can.
Arkansas fans are bad losers so they can’t be permanent opponents to anyone. Too bad because otherwise they are great folk all around.
Right now we have two SEC conferences, admit it… so we have NO conference.
Rotate all members equally their has to be a game between all members every year or at least every other year.
You should really get to learn the conference if your going to be a part of it. Rivalries matter in the SEC and mean more than everyone getting a shot to play every team every other year. Mizzou fans are pretty sour themselves. Your archaic thinking is why we blew up the BCS.
For over sixty years, the game that I’ve most looked forward to every year is Ole Miss-LSU. I would hate to see it go by the wayside but I guess that it’s not all about me.
It is not much of a rivalry in terms of closeness, Ole Miss has won 15 games in the last 50 years. These are not the Johnny Vaught years.
There have been periods where Ole Miss has struggled and there have been periods where LSU has struggled in the series. None of that changes anything about the statement about it being the game that I look forward to most every year. Ole Miss has won just under 40% of the games which isn’t too different from Auburn’s win percentage in the Iron Bowl. Tennessee’s win percentage in the Alabama-Tennessee series is exactly the same as Ole Miss’s in the Ole Miss-LSU series and Tennessee has also won “15 games in the last 50 years”.
What have you done for me lately. In the case of Ole Miss vs LSU, Ole Miss has won only 30% of the games in the last 50 years. LSU is 35-15.
You still haven’t said anything that has anything that has anything to do with what I said, but if you want to play “what have you done for me lately “ Ole Miss is 1-0 in the series over the past year.
That’s completely idiotic. Wow. I mean, just dumb. When the SEC goes to 16, the 8-game schedule goes out the window. To not acknowledge that reality is shortsighted.
Everyone knows the best formula for the SEC when OU and TU join is 3-6, because it allows you to keep playing your true rivals for the teams that have more than one, and it allows every player in a four year career to play every other team at least twice.
3 permanent and 6 rotating. Here is what it should look like when taking into account traditional rivalries along with balance for tiers of teams:
Bama: Auburn, Tenn, LSU
Arkansas: Texas, LSU, Mizzou
Auburn: Bama, Georgia, TAMU
Floriduh: Georgia, Tenn, LSU
Georgia: Floriduh, Auburn, Sakerlina
Kentucky: Sakerlina, MSU, Mizzou
LSU: Bama, Arkansas, Floriduh
Ole Miss: MSU, Vandy, OU
MSU: Ole Miss, Kentucky, TAMU
Mizzou: Arkansas, OU, Kentucky
OU: Texas, Mizzou, Ole Miss
Sakerlina, Georgia, Kentucky, Vandy
Tenn: Bama, Floriduh, Vandy
Texas: OU, TAMU, Arkansas
TAMU: Texas, Auburn, MSU
Vandy: Tenn, Ole Miss, Sakerlina
No
Agreed. Many of these permanent rivals aren’t rivalries at all. I prefer none, but if teams want them, let them have them. The rest are just games, or contrived rivalries.
Always seems weird to me that LSU really doesn’t have any rivalries.
I feel like LSU/A&M is a pretty good grudge match but then again I remember those games before LSU pulled out of that annual match.
We’re high on a lot of peoples lists, but not first on any of them.
Yeah, you may not think of Arkansas as a rival, but Arkansas definitely thinks of y’all as a rival. It’s like Sakerlina and us.
You’re also Bama’s tertiary rival after Auburn and Tennessee, and if you’re honest with yourself, Bama is either your primary or secondary SEC rival.
So suck it up, buttercup.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make.
That is closer to reality than most efforts to figure this scheduling stuff out. But, in the end what happens is (1) what Bama wants because Sankey will see to that and (2) what the TV number crunchers finally figure out. The latter will be complicated as NIL and the foolish transfer portal rules will change all historical dynamics that number crunchers now factor in.
Regardless of your fee-fees, Texas will always be your No. 1 rival.
Since you’re new to the SEC, y’all don’t get to disrupt other rivalries in conference that have been there longer than y’all have.
So while Auburn and MSU are weird fits admittedly, it’s what y’all get, for balance purposes more than anything.
Yes yes yes please give us Vanderbilt
Interesting article. It is good to see one that has nothing to do with Saban playing and assistant, or Arch Manning. I have long been a proponent of doing away with divisions and having the 2 best teams in the SECCG. I, unlike others, think team ranking should play a part also. This is TOTALLY and example, but say AU loses 3 noncon games and then gets it going and is undefeated in the conference, Alabama is undefeated period, and AU pulls the upset and though Bama has the much better record, AU would go to the SECCG with no chance at the playoffs. Yeah, I know it is supposed to be about the conference, but it hasn’t been in a long time. It is about having 2 teams in a beauty pageant for the playoffs. I don’t know what other people deem the most important, but in this day and age I think the powers that be in the conference would say the CFP money. Your example would be as good as the pods, I king of favor the pods but don’t really care that much. At least with the pods you would not have silliness like Missouri and Oklahoma in the SEC east.
What ESPN wants, ESPN gets. They are running college footbball.
You don’t need to have pods to do a 3-6-6 system. Just because Bama needs to play Auburn and Tennessee every year doesn’t mean that Auburn and Tennessee ALSO have to play every year.
Prioritize the rivalries to keep and assign 3 permanent for each team, its pretty easily possible – its the same strategy SEC basketball scheduling has used for a decade.
Not to be disagreeable, but in your example Auburn was one of the annual match ups Tennessee had (along with Bama, Kentucky, and Vandy) prior to divisional separation in 1992.
I for one would be okay with reviving this rivalry from yesteryear.
This is tiring. The West has dominated the last decade, while the East dominated the decade before that. It was almost all Florida’s doing, just like currently it is almost all Alabama’s doing. That as a “big” reason to abolish East vs West is a poor pitch because this stuff is cyclical. Saban can’t be at Alabama forever just like Kirby can’t be at Georgia forever, Spurrier wasn’t at Florida forever, etc.
I’m just more baffled at what the rotating approach did when Missouri and A&M joined. The math just doesn’t make sense. Florida (a non permanent cross division of A&M) has played A&M 3 times since 2012. Missouri has played Alabama 4 times since 2012. How has Georgia played A&M only once in 10 years of A&M being a member?
The East hasn’t dominated since the 90’s, and even then, nothing ever like the West is experiencing now. The 2000’s were split evenly. The 2010’s were dominated by the West. The West is 2-0 so far this decade. UGA is certainly doing it’s part. The rest of the East is a work in progress.
I’m sorry but are you pretending like the nightmare that was Tim Tebow didn’t exist?
Tebow was there four years. LSU was 2-2 against him and won a NC during his time at UF. Good times for us.
A&M and Mizzou left the Big 12 for a reason. Now they get stuck in a mini-Big 12 pod? Talk about a bait-and-switch. If it happens, I will puke.
I mean you’d still have six other games against SEC opponents. As much as y’all don’t want to see it the rest of us want to see Texas A&M versus Oklahoma and Texas
Most A&M fans definitely want the A&M/tu game back and back on Thanksgiving. I hate that it seems we’ll lose the permanent cross division game against our most hated rivals USC though. Hopefully, we get to hang onto the Bonham Trophy
Y’all can have that thing you earned it hope we don’t have to meet up again for a couple of years lmfao
For kicks and grins, let’s see me groupings. For my part:
Oklahoma, Texas, aTm, Arkansas
LSU, ole miss, miss state, alabama
Auburn, uga, Florida, Kentucky
Missouri, tenn, vandy, South Carolina
Thanks for giving us the cakewalk pod. Maybe we’ll be actually able to win something for once.
Really.
What
We ain’t scared of you Vols that pod gives us the cakewalk!
How dare you
Put OU and Texas in the west, move Bammer and Barn to the East.
While realigning, move Mizzou to the west and bring one of the Magnolia State schools to the east.
Doesn’t solve the scheduling problem.
Nah we’re good. Yall can keep Mizzou
Yep, we’re good.
This would literally make the east so lopsided it would be stupid. Then all the west has is Texas A&M and LSU because I have refused to give the newbies any clout they stand no chance they have no idea what they’re in for
When Saban retires, Bammer will slip. Anytime a legend leaves any program slippage takes place.
Pfffft, you’re all wrong! At this point how about everyone in the SEC just play everyone each year? Makes the college football season longer, and I could always go for more SEC matchups. :P
Great idea! Then we could expand the playoff to 64 teams and we would have football from July – February. The national championship could be on Valentine’s day every year!
Perfect lead up to roll into March madness… I’m down! :)
I for one, am all for the 1 permanent opponent model :)
May not be a bad idea to introduce a 4 team playoff for the SECCG where the team with the most wins in their pod progresses to the playoffs. If there is a tie within the pod, the winning bid will account for strength of wins/losses and best overall record.
Where did the SEC even begin to think that Arkansas and Mizzou was a rivalry? The two teams have played each other a mere 13 times since 1906 and 8 of those games in the SEC. Arkansas- Texas A&M is more likely the rivalry with 78 meetings since 1903 or AR v LSU 67 games since 1901 and the biggest trophy in all of college football.
I like the 4 x pods mentioned here as AR, LSU, Ole Miss and Miss State make more sense. TX, TAMU, OK and Mizzou can relive their Big 12 days together and the other two pods make sense as well
No
Because they haven’t played much till the SEC, still seems like the best chance for both in a rivalry game. Gotta give it some time. Arkansas always sees Texas as a rivalry, Texas yes but not as much. I don’t think Texas hates Arkansas enough. Watching Missouri comments about Arkansas the past couple years, there is some real hate brewing there. Arkansas’ overall athletics is up, Missouri is down and they aren’t happy with that at all.
One game I could do without is the Arkansas game. That participation trophy that’s been collecting dust in our trophy room just takes up too much room.
That’s what bama thinks is LSU.
We don’t have the trophy now.
Thst ridiculous “Golden Boot” trophy is a huge disincentive to playing well. The person(s) that designed it had to be Texas ATM graduates.
No one is seeing LSU as their top rivalry game either. So a snarky comment to put down Arkansas is a waste of time.
To preserve annual rivalries you use a combo pod system/and one permanent rivalry game. 4 in a pod (but call the pods divisions — the NFL only has 4 teams in its division). That’s 4 set games that will be played every year. Then rotate the other four games. The way I envision the 4 team divisions to be set up is like so:
East – Georgia, Ky, S. Car., FL
West – Ou, Texas, Arky,Mizzou
South – Vandy, Miss St, LSU, TAMU
Central – Bama, Ole Miss, Auburn, Tenn
Per many rivalries:
Ga/Auburn
Ky/Mizzou
SCar/Arky
FL/OU
Texas/TAMU
Vandy/Tenn
MissSt/Ole Miss
LSU/Bama
Then the two teams with the best record play in the CCG.
I’m all for bringing back Ark vs SCar!
My son in Arkansas said something about that matchup being good. No sure why but I guess folks in those two states understood it.
Before we got the senseless cross divisional rivalry with Texas A&M we played Arkansas every year. The two schools have a lot of history together. We loved and hated playing one another that simply breeds good football. We also joined the SEC together . And if I remember correctly we both played in the old SoCon together . Either way it’s definitely a game I miss and I’m glad we get to restore it in week two in what I believe will be one of the best conference games of the year
Change Ole Miss for MSU for Bama and you would have their 3 “rivals”…
Bama has played MSU the most and it’s actually called the battle for
Highway 82….
I think the only rivalry so lopsided is bedlam, but I have been present at more than one victory against the tide. I’m fairly certain bama is the only fan base outside Ole miss to recognize “hate state” week (in reference to us). Some of them anyway, does Kentucky do that?
No
8 conference games in a 16 team conference That is absurd
It’s gonna have to go to 9 conference games.
Well if you went the 3 rivals route, Kentucky is TNs most played team/rival: about 70 more games with KY than with FL
So maybe Bama, Vandy, KY
Auburn’s would be Bama, UGA and FL (nasty!)
Just because you abolish the East & West isn’t going to change who is going to play for the Ship.
This ain’t that hard. Move Bama and Auburn to the east. Move Mizzou to the west. Play 9 conference games. 7-1-1. Only team it hurts is Mercer, or Western Carolina.
IMO that’s not going to happen. The biggest goal is to reduce the number of years between east/west teams meeting. As is often pointed out, UGA has yet to visit College Station.
I disagree here. The overall goal is not to reduce the number of years between east and west meeting. This would increase it. UGA and Bama don’t play many regular season games. Most want to change scenarios like that where they face them once every 5 years in the regular season. In the new scenario, UGA could get out to College station every 2 or 3 years or vice versa. Winning the SEC without divisions is a more fun and more unpredictable way for teams to compete for a title. Your not locked into saying, “we have to beat this or that team to get to Atlanta”. Someone else whom that does does not normally play could beat them, upset them. A&M beating Bama last season had that system been in place last year, it would not mean a few other teams were out of it. But it gets too predictable with the system now.
Completely agree. See my post below.
The mid-majors will suffer, but that’s the way it goes.
An East-West setup is vital.
Georgia’s two rivalry games(which GT is not) must be permanent: FL and AU. The SEC championship matchup must be permanent: AL and GA. LOL A game with VB the following year could be the prize for the 2nd worst team in the conference each year.
GT is definitely a rival. I hate losing to them more than anyone. Even though the implications are not as critical.
Of course, you do. They are rarely any good at all and to lose to them is highly embarrassing. GT has only won 12 times in the last 50 years against UGA, that is not much of a rivalry. This is not the GT of the 50s and before.
Notre Dame beat Navy for 40 years but is you asked both schools it was still a rivalry. The other big school in the state? Of course it’s a rivalry. When Tennessee is getting beat by State and Auburn is leaving everything on the field to get the W, don’t talk to me about tech?
Florida owned us in the 90s. You don’t think Spurrier relished it and thought it was a rivalry? Reverse that for the 80’s. Sometimes rivalries are 1 sides.
UGA would not have won nearly as many championships if they had to face Bama every year for the last umpteen and TN would have only had one losing season over the last 12 years.. lol. No avoiding that 4 win season even with a win or Bama..lol I say, spread it around. It’s ok to eventually play every team 1 every 2 or 3 years. It creates an excitement of a different kind to face a team only some of the team has ever faced..
What the heck are you even talking about.
Change is good. Year in and out the same teams avoid the best teams during the regular season and wow, you can win a natty that way with a weak enough schedule. lol. I like the idea. We focus to much on preserving rivalries from generations past but wouldn’t it be nice to crate some new rivalries in this conference for a change??? I’d still say this even if Bama was a bad team or if UGA could have beaten Bama every time they played since 08.
Change is good, but so is tradition. The idea of ditching an annual Auburn-GA game or the 3rd Saturday in October or LSU-Bama is unthinkable. Old traditional rivalries is what makes the SEC the SEC. It’s what makes the league special.
Bama/LSU is not a “old traditional rivalry “. I wouldn’t care if they played LSU every year or not…
There is a few other teams in conference I would hate to lose more.
I surely wouldn’t be upset if we didn’t play Bama every year.
I certainly hope so. I get the rivalries and loosing that Auburn game (not like they’ll never play though), but I’d really like to catch the rest of the teams.in the west currently on a more regular basis.
Sankey said it’s his major goal and was going to change even before the expansion. The pandemic slowed him down.
Divisions are history.
How about ditching the rivalries and divisions for the first few years. See how the games play out with random computer generated scheduling. No team is favored with a bye week before a big game. Half the teams have a bye one week, the other half get theirs the following week; all centered around mid-season. Top two teams after tie breakers play for the SECC.
After 3-4 years, when it becomes more obvious how UT and OU fit in competitively, then divide into pods or divisions or whatever; maybe even leave it as is. 8 conference games guarantee you play every team in two years, with 1 extra game, which could be rotated as desired.
If it’s split into pods, you need to set it up so texa$, awbarn, jawja, and lswho can win their pods every year so they can get their rings.
It’s not difficult, though I think this writer and a lot others want to make it so.
Put OU and Texas to the SEC West. Move Missouri there, too. Move Auburn and Alabama to the SEC East.
Eight teams in each division. Play nine conference games. Keep all cross-over rivalries.
Divisions based on geography are very important. Ask the Big Ten about that. Oh, and ask the ACC how many people who follow college football (I’m one) know who’s in their Coastal and Atlantic Divisions (I don’t).
Because it doesn’t solve the scheduling issue of East vs West.
As long as they name the pods:
Legends, Leaders, Coastal, and Atlantic — I’m good!
Both schools founding member of the SEC. 86 total meetings. The first in 1895. And that’s not an old traditional rivalry to you? Wow. Just wow.
No it’s not. It’s just not a rivalry to me. I mean Bama has played Vandy 82 times…. Is that supposed to be an Old traditional rivalry just because they played a lot of games?
Bama has 103 games against UT and 105 against MSU…
Rivalries are usually formed by geography. It has to do with alumni/fans living in the same area together. I live in BR and don’t know a single Arkansas grad or fan. The Ark “rivalry” was contrived by the SEC when they joined the conference. For some reason Ark fans think it is a big rivalry. The reason LSU is not another teams biggest rival is there are no in state schools or schools that are close. A&M is the most logical rival based on geography and fan bases living together.