Love watching the games and the business end of college sports. Live in SEC country, but not a fan of any particular team.
A history of past success in a power five conference doesn't guarantee future success. It should provide, however, much more tolerance for what most knowledgeable students of the sport recognize is a rebuilding of a decimated Arkansas squad. Some fans look at the Petrino era's last two top 10 seasons and see what should be a new normal. Gold and fools gold look very much the same but have very different values. The AD Jeff Long sees the situation for what it is (a long slow climb).
When looking at Bielema's Wisconsin success, you see a large number of players having great success even though they weren't highly recruited. His classes weren't number one in the B1G, but he won 3 conference titles in 7 years. The Badgers prolifically produced NFL players. Bielema was successful because his staffs consistently found underappreciated recruits and developed them well. If he is able to continue that process at Arkansas, the Razorbacks will be a competitive team in 2015 and will be making some serious noise in 2016.
9 months, 4 weeks ago on One Big Question: Arkansas Football 2014
Thanks for the updated numbers. It is hard to keep up on the fruits of all the schools recruiting efforts to date. A few schools seem to get most of the media's coverage while the rest of the schools mostly fly under the radar.
All three of your measures have merit. I still have skepticism for your final rankings, however. I would much rather be Vanderbilt at this point (with mostly a blank slate) than Mississippi State (which appears to have pretty well locked in a very mediocre recruiting class by SEC standards). Saddest of all is Florida. Muschamp has extraordinary assets at his disposal, but it appears that he doesn't know how to use them effectively. Any ideas on who will be the Gator's coach next year?
10 months ago on SEC Commitment Comparator – 6/19/14
@HoustonVol @the_voice Thanks, Vol. Interesting thoughts regarding UTEP. But I think El Paso is at the bottom edge of the USA in too many ways.
You're right about the B12 being a conference after the Koch brothers heart, Survival of the fittest. Greed is good. Greed works. Of course a conference with those core values would be based in Texas. (Ralph Kramden yells at his wife Alice, "I'm the king and you're nothing". Her reply, "That makes you the king of nothing".)
10 months, 1 week ago on If Division IV Comes, Which Schools Might Be Thrown A Lifeline?
@HoustonVol Hey Vol, you're in B12 country. Don't you think that any future B12 expansion discussion begins and ends with what the 'horns want? Since their athletic department makes more than even they can spend, am I right to assume that what they really want is the easiest path to the football final four without it appearing too easy? If so, why would they have an interest in either a B12 championship game or watering down their league (and payout)? What's the word you hear coming out of the Burnt Orange and the nine dwarfs conference?
Thanks for the ACC report's link. As a conference promotional piece, it's great. As an analytical tool assessing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to future ACC success; it's a great promotional piece.
The ACC has sold first, second, and third tier TV rights for all sports to ABC/ESPN. They infer that the possible creation of an ACC network would increase the pot of gold. The ACC has no rights left to sell, so there would logically be a reduction in the ACC's guaranteed money if they want to share in the profits of a conference network.. I'm sure ABC/ESPN would share in any additional value they aren't already buying, but without a passionate football fan base at a majority of schools, where would that additional value be created? With on-the-field football success being limited to a very few members, the value of their football TV rights are limited in the same fashion that the SEC's lack of on-the-court basketball success being limited to a very few members reduces the SEC's basketball TV rights. The difference is that football is 70% of the financial equation while basketball is 30%, which is not mentioned in the report (instead inferring both are relatively equal in value). They did spend some effort on describing the depth of their basketball strength, however.
Also interesting is the TV section. They mention how the ABC/ESPN payout is the largest in the industry, while failing to mention that the ACC's payout per team for TV pales in comparison to the other power 5 conferences.
Their section on the league's football competitiveness highlighted some strengths, while omitting the obvious fact that the performance of their teams in the last several years has generally been modest (did I say that nicely enough?). By the way, wasn't it interesting they laid claim to Indiana with the (partial) Notre Dame acquisition? I didn't notice how they treated the DC marketplace.
@tallaman87 @the_voice ACC members will be looking at B1G and SEC members with $40M payouts while ACC members will be south of $25M. How long do you suppose North Carolina, Florida State, or Virginia will think that's acceptable? Will the ACC exist? Sure. None of the conferences seem to just go away today (even the WAC continues on). Will it be the same ACC we see today? No way. It will be populated by some current members and some residing in non-power 5 conferences at some point in the not-too-distant future. EVERY conference is going somewhere. The one's with money will be expanding strategically. The one's with less money will be replacing the lost members. The ACC bled the Big East in this way for years. Maryland is the beginning of the process in reverse.
10 months, 1 week ago on If A “Division IV” Is Created, Get Ready For More Conference Realignment
@John at MrSEC Along the same lines, imagine the pressure on a coach to keep up with signees relative to his school's peer group. If by June 1st Alabama had 22 signees, Clemson had 17, Tennessee had 15, and South Carolina had 9, wouldn't there be enormous pressure on Spurrier's coaching staff? Insert Auburn, Texas, LSU, and Arkansas into that same scenario and Bielema's staff would be in the pressure cooker. Could you wait to fill your class or would you just be grabbing bodies to keep your job? One advantage of one day a year is avoiding this additional pressure. (Everybody's signing class is great, isn't it?) Honestly, it could be worse than the status quo, which is not to say the current process is anything close to ideal.
10 months, 1 week ago on More Coaches Say Cutting Out Signing Day “Would Cut All The Crap”
@John at MrSEC @the_voice Thanks. I'm all for no nonsense and keeping kids' egos in check. The sense of entitlement is outrageous. If I thought this would change with adopting Pelini's proposal, that would be reason enough to wholeheartedly support it. It won't, however. Don't we all remember the big men on our high school campuses? None of that has changed since then. ESPN, Rivals, etc. will continue inflating those egos change or no change.
Getting coaches to put a real offer on the table would be great, too. That, too, won't change. Yes, the date will change, but there won't be a substantive change. Kids will just be "committing" at younger and younger ages.
So when I see a proposal like Pelini's, I look for the unintended consequences. Thus, I still have lots of questions. I turned 17 in the fall of my senior year. Others in my class turned 17 a year earlier. Assuming I was an average D1 prospect, would there have been a spot for me at a major college if my classmates had been able to commit before me? Similarly, some schools are out in mid May and others go until mid June. Same question. If I'm a coach who wants to sign a certain number at a particular position, I'm probably not waiting. Will the most desirable schools fill their classes early and the other schools struggle to find high quality talent even more than today? It would certainly seem to help the big national powers more that their conference brethren. Do we want the rich getting richer? As it stands now, National Signing Day is the first day available to sign; not the only day. We see the pressure to sign the first day they can. Is it reasonable to assume that will be different?
The conferences with the highest payouts poach from those with smaller payouts. Watch out ACC. B1G first, then SEC, and finally the Big 12 will be trying to pick your bones. The Pac 12 has limited options due to geography and an aversion to religious schools so I would expect they would look first at the Big 12 (Texas/Texas Tech/Oklahoma/Oklahoma State).
Fox has the networks to offer the Pac 12 and B1G more money to go after "ESPN schools". ESPN will want to maintain leadership of the TV rights battle. There probably is room for a handful of Mountain West and AAC schools to move up, but not to the B1G or SEC (who will be able to pick and choose whomever they please in their own sweet time).
So the last day of a kid's junior year would be that kid's national signing day? How, exactly, would this "cut all the (crap) out of it"? I see this moving all the crap to a different date, Is it better for all concerned for a kid to sign before their senior year instead of later, in their senior year? If not, who would benefit and who would be harmed? I must be too dense to see what the benefits would be to this proposal, Please shed a little more light for this dim bulb.
@mowens75 Much the same could be said for the two Alabama schools (I know - blasphemy!), and how much value does Vanderbilt add (other than providing a veil of academic legitimacy to a conference that can use it)? John's right in that it will NEVER happen. Still, with today's membership decisions being driven by television, having more than one school in a state is an expensive luxury. If we knew then what we know now ...
10 months, 1 week ago on Dump Or Trade SEC Schools? Won’t Happen
@gregpomeroy1 @the_voice @Bobo2468 No argument here. The 65 don't want any of the other schools challenging their dominance. AAC and others are truly relegated to second class status. Not another division. but another world.
By the way, I certainly don't expect to see any teams in the playoff other that from that group of 65. Boise State won't get enough quality opponents since most of their schedule comes from the Mountain West. Same for the AAC, Sun Belt, MAC, and CUSA members. In theory independents BYU and Army could schedule enough of the 65, but it is highly unlikely we'll ever see a team in the four team playoff format from outside of those five "power" leagues. That means teams from the Mountain West, AAC, Sun Belt, MAC, and CUSA officially have no chance at a national championship in football; and will get weaker and weaker vis-a-vis the 65 over time. Game, set, and match for the big boys.
10 months, 3 weeks ago on Three Things The SEC Needs To Do At This Week’s SEC Meetings
@quad77 Which is why, of course, it will never happen. When you think about it, National Signing Day is a college version of the NFL Draft. Much hype and publicity over prospects that may help their teams in the future. Most businesses don't turn down free publicity.
10 months, 1 week ago on Another Coach Likes “No Signing Day” Plan
@dafreshness318 Another possibility would be letting the 3 annual ACC/SEC matchups continue on, have the SEC/ACC randomly schedule 6 more games annually, have the SEC/Big 12 randomly schedule 5 games annually, and have the ACC/Big 12 randomly schedule 5 games annually. With 11 SEC teams playing 11 ACC teams and 10 Big 12 teams, there are plenty of options available to keep fans excited for decades. Occasionally play Miami, Oklahoma, Virginia, Texas, Syracuse, and TCU. Doesn't sound too bad. (Alternatively, it also could allow for some of those real rivalry games lost due to realignment such as KU/MU, UT/TAM, and WVU/Pitt to resume once the hurt feelings have had time to heal.)
10 months, 1 week ago on An ACC/SEC Football Challenge Could Solve A Lot Of Problems… If
For the sake of variety and fan interest on the western side of the SEC, adding the Big 12 to the mix would be great. It would also serve to increase the isolation of the Pac 12 and BIG conferences. The last thing the SEC needs is for those two to bring the ACC or the Big 12 into their sphere of influence.
@SouthernBoiSB @the_voice Having grown up in Kansas City, the headquarters of the old Big 8, I can reasonably assure you that NOBODY felt that Missouri versus Iowa State (played 104 times), Colorado (69), Oklahoma State (70), or Kansas State (97) games meant anything other than another conference game. Nebraska and Oklahoma mattered because they were the two best teams in the league, not because of how many times the games had been played (104 and 95 times, respectively).
The Old South loves to live in the past; historically much more likely to be a trend follower than a trend setter. I won't try regional psychoanalysis as to why. It's just a fact. Many times this predisposition in a very good thing and sometimes not so much.
I'm a financial planner by trade. My job includes figuring out where people are in a comfort zone financially and where they really should be to achieve what they desire. Then I help nudge them in the right direction. The SEC indicates they want to be a national leader in collegiate sports. Despite their obvious on the field achievements, they are behind the Big 10 financially. I don't think they will achieve their goal as long as the league's scheduling of sports is designed to benefit a handful of their member schools, pandering to a handful of fan bases. I also believe that nonconference schedules need to be against better and more national competition. While the SEC gives us the same tired scheduling year after year, others are being more aggressive. The SEC has an opportunity to OWN college sports, or we can keep our current scheduling formats and slowly slide back to the pack of other conferences. (John is a great proponent of looking at very long term trends instead of shorter timeframes; arguing that aberrations of success or failure even out over time and we revert to what is longer term normal. The SEC hasn't ever dominated college athletic success before like they have over the last few years. If John is right, without changes we will see the SEC revert to being "just another conference" over time unless we are innovative, Being stagnant is a recipe for future conference mediocrity.)
10 months, 2 weeks ago on Three Things The SEC Needs To Do At This Week’s SEC Meetings
The 65 need the others so their average records are above .500 and so they can play more home games than road games. The others need the 65 because of money. The 65 want total control of football and would like to dominate the other sports as well. A deal will be made, but it is unclear what the details might be.
Something I don't see discussed is could a league like the Big East or the A10 keep up with the spending of the 65 in the sports they compete in (not football)? If so, might schools that play football, but are basketball schools, such as Memphis, choose to drop football or change football divisions and their current conference affiliations to keep up with the 65? Lots of possibilities looming without the details of a proposal being made public.
10 months, 2 weeks ago on Why We Fight: Money Is The Cause Of The Autonomy Battle & Money Will Eventually Settle The Issue
Hey John, since the games against anything other than the 6 BCS conferences were suppose to be buy a win games (with rare exception), it would be interesting to see how the SEC teams did against that level of competition over this same 7 year period. Most all of those games would have been at home for the SEC members. Who bought their wins most effectively? It probably would be too much work, but, still, it would be revealing. (As far as that goes, so would attendance figures for these home games when compared to real competition home games. Who has the most discerning fans?)
10 months, 2 weeks ago on Meet The SEC’s Favorite Cupcakes
@SouthernBoiSB To make my point a little clearer, Missouri has played football games against the following former Big 8 conference teams
Iowa State - 104 times
Nebraska - 104 times (Third oldest series played west of the Mississippi River.)
Colorado - 69 times
Oklahoma - 95 times
Oklahoma State - 70 times
Kansas State - 97 games
Kansas - 120 times
How many people have said one word about Missouri not playing Iowa State, Nebraska, Colorado, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, or Kansas State anymore? I haven't heard one. They aren't rivalry games just because they have been played many times over many years. The one everyone mentions is Kansas, which is Missouri's one and only real rival. (Think Missouri will quickly warm to developing a rivalry with Arkansas? I wouldn't bet upon it.) The SEC isn't the only place you'll see longstanding game series, but it is the only conference that obsesses about them. It is time to grow past that obsession and treat all 14 conference members as "must play as often as possible" matchups. That is what conferences are suppose to be about.
@SouthernBoiSB @the_voice Games aren't important because they've been played a large number of times. THAT is the problem. Let every school pick the one game they can't do without, with the understanding that all other bets are off the table. Alabama and Auburn would pick each other. They would each say goodbye Tennessee and Georgia, respectively. Mississippi State and Mississippi would pick each other. Goodbye Vanderbilt and Kentucky. You can have one REAL rivalry. Others are secondary (thus not as important). Many schools don't really have a rivalry even they've played the same teams for decades. Old is sometimes historic, and other times just junk.
Ask Alabama if they should hand back their national championship to LSU because the Tigers won the SEC Championship in 2011 As it stands now a team can go 12-0 and lose the SEC one game playoff called the Championship game. No difference I can discern.
@SouthernBoiSB Another possibility. Have two divisions and screw geography. With a league history of 4 of every 7 bowls having been attended by a current SEC member being from the current west division members there isn't competitive balance as it sits now anyhow. Put the Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi schools together with Georgia. That takes care of the big 2 "must have games". If you would rather have Florida and Georgia annually instead of Vanderbilt and Mississippi, substitute Florida and South Carolina for the Mississippi schools (I like this better). Then start playing a balanced, 9 game conference schedule. You'll get to keep the "must play" matchups AND can act like a league, too! (I know this is too simple. Someone's already screaming "BUT WHAT ABOUT . . .". Why is it the SEC is the only league that seems to have this problem?)
@SouthernBoiSB @the_voice Good thoughts. I think the SEC made a mistake when they expanded from 10 to 12 and then 14. The leadership and the fan base wasn't ready for change. With 10 teams, a round robin schedule would have been possible (just as the Big 12 does currently). Putting the toothpaste back in the tube isn't an option, however. This leaves the SEC two options. One is to hold near and dear to those annual "must have games", or to act more like a league (thinking in terms of what is best for the majority of league members and less about what is best for my team - and to hell with what is best for the league members as a whole). Having annual "must play games" leads inevitably to annual "manure" games such as Mississippi State and Kentucky or South Carolina and Texas A&M. Playing everyone in the league every other year (at minimum) would be a reasonable compromise for those that believe compromise isn't a dirty word.
Regarding the possibility of a 4 division SEC playoff with two semifinal games before the championship game. Conference semifinals are currently not authorized by NCAA rules. NCAA rules are changing in favor of the "power five" conferences. There would be more money for the "power five" conferences by doing this and keeping a four team national championship system than to have an eight team national playoff (more games, and all of them being played by "power five" conference members). I believe this is much more likely to happen than an eight team national playoff in the future. Time will tell, I guess. (By the time any of this happens I suspect we'll be down to a "power four" conference environment. Maybe 4 conferences of 16 teams or so.)
Kiffin's comments bring to mind the huge mistake some recruits make going to the big football factory while awaiting the NFL. Sometimes they don't get on the field. Sometimes that's predictable. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1519058-altee-tenpenny-challenges-4-star-rb-will-face-upon-joining-alabama
On another subject; what a great marketing idea someone had at Auburn with marking Davis' sojourn to the national championship game!
Lastly: Some folks sure are resistant to change. Not only do we have to play certain non-divisional league games annually, but some folks aren't even flexible about where those games fall on the schedule. That pretty well defines the word "anal".
10 months, 3 weeks ago on SEC Headlines 5/30/2014
@MikeTankersley @the_voice @SouthernBoiSB Same count as if there were an 8 team playoff. This would just guarantee more revenue for the SEC than an 8 team playoff.
@SouthernBoiSB @the_voice We're a few years from a good solution. A 16 team league with 4 divisions of 4 teams would solve many problems.
For football you could have 9 league games playing your 3 division every year and playing 2 of the 4 teams in the other 3 divisions. Everybody would play non divisional opponents every other year (a frequency which ought to be enough for the more rational proponents of non-divisional rivalry games). There would be 2 "regional" championship games before the SEC championship game (more revenue). A similar approach to the regular season could be used for baseball as well.
In basketball an 18 game schedule would have you playing your division opponents home and home while playing the rest of the league once.
So "all" we need is a 9 game conference football schedule, relaxing our fixation on historical non-divisional opponents, and two worthy additions to the league (NC State and Va Tech?). Having a vision of a logical future and achieving it are far from the same thing, unfortunately.
@DanHogan The wizard behind the curtain is named Slive. The great Oz, our "trustee of a sacred public trust" (in his own words), will protect us from the selfish administrators who would manipulate their schedules for their own evil purposes. There will be no winners or losers in this process, just as there aren't in the football scheduling. After all, the mighty Oz is great and powerful.
Wizard of Oz: [speaking in a booming voice into microphone] I am the great and powerful...
[then, realizing that it is useless to continue his masquerade, moves away from microphone, speaks in a normal voice]
Wizard of Oz: ... Wizard of Oz.
10 months, 3 weeks ago on SEC Adds Two More Permanent Rivals In Hoops (Just As We Suggested)
You don't have to ban games against FCS opponents. Just make scheduling an FCS school by a Power Conference team mean you're not bowl eligible. That should minimize this continuing silliness.
10 months, 3 weeks ago on SEC Not Barring Members From Playing FCS Foes, But It Should
By the way, get any complaints in now before the new permanent matchups are announced. After that time you'll be a whiner according to so many critics of those who have noted the inequities of the football scheduling format.
If SEC leaders want to schedule some teams much more than other teams on a regular basis, why not create two divisions picked based upon someone's perception of historical matchups? Heck, why not just break up the SEC? If it is all about history, why not get rid of TAM, Miz-zou, Spurrier, and the Hogs? Then the 10 remaining members could play a round robin schedule like the Big 12. Of course the SEC Network wouldn't be nearly as valuable without 1/3rd of its footprint's population, but we would preserve those historical matchups. (Speaking of history, where is the line of SEC members trying to schedule Sewanee, Tulane, and Georgia Tech regularly?)
Of course SEC leaders want their cake and eat it, too. They want the benefits of a larger footprint without the unity of purpose a balanced schedule provides. The SEC football and basketball schedules will now both be prisoners of history. Equity in scheduling? Not so much, Sorry, but you can't go forward by putting the transmission in reverse. That's called backward. Progress is moving forward.
@Bobo2468 The new definition of a quality opponent is a game against a power five conference team. Playing Kansas or Purdue is better than playing Cincinnati or Boise State by this new definition. Notre Dame is OK because of their membership in the ACC so there are 65 quality teams.
The goal of scheduling any sport within a conference should not be trying to stack the deck either in favor of or against any of the league's members. I'll acknowledge that with leagues becoming so large, it is impossible for most leagues to offer balanced schedules to their members if looked at over one season. I even understand sports that have a higher game count such as basketball using the permanent "rival' game concept, even though this certainly will tilt the schedule off balance. But don't we want to have a schedule that is reasonably balanced over the long haul? Are we really OK with giving some teams a long shot while giving other teams a much easier chance to excel on a continuous basis? You doom some teams to nearly permanent second class status within the league if you take this attitude. In a league everybody is suppose to both give and take. Some schools in the SEC want the others to give while they do all the taking. Enough greed! Kids, coaches, and fans deserve the opportunity to succeed or fail based upon merit, not scheduling. Want 3 permanent "rival" games. Get to 16 seams and go to divisions of four each.
Has JFF been overcompensating all this time?
11 months ago on SEC Headlines 5/23/2014
Georgia, maybe Florida. Growing a pair may be the order of the day in the SEC some day. Maybe even Alabama will have to put their money where Saban's mouth has been. (Florida Atlantic, Southern Mississippi, and Western Carolina all at home; with West Virginia in nearby Atlanta in 2014. Awesome!)
11 months ago on Muschamp Open To Adding Miami To Florida’s Schedule
@DanHogan It is possible to have an 8 game SEC schedule and have no divisional disparities over a 7 year period. With a 9 game schedule you could play each other divisional opponent 3 times in 7 years, or 3 home and home sets over 14 years. The disparities aren't required, but a different scheduling philosophy would be. John's analysis does help explain why east division teams don't want more games with the west, though.
11 months ago on SEC Strength Of Schedule: 2014-2025 Comparison
Interesting analysis, John. I hadn't looked at bowl games played by team before.
In a 12 year cycle your team will play 12 games with one cross division opponent and 2 games against every other team in the opposite division. Thus the difference over the 12 year period is which team you're paired up with:
Alabama 61 Tennessee 49
LSU 45 Florida 40
Arkansas 39 Missouri 30
Auburn 38 Georgia 49
Texas A&M 35 South Carolina 19
Mississippi 35 Vanderbilt 7
Mississippi State 17 Kentucky 15
WEST TOTAL 270 EAST TOTAL 209
1) Some of those pairings are major mismatches. These aren't exhibition games; they actually help determine championships. If these annual pairings are suppose to be the best playing the best and the weakest playing the weakest, LSU and Georgia ought to pair up, as should Arkansas and Florida, Auburn and Missouri, Mississippi and Kentucky, and Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Since there is no way any of that is going to happen we can safely lay to rest the argument that these games exist to help the league's competitive balance.
2) Western division teams have been in 4 out of 7 bowl games played by current SEC members. Let us never hear how loaded the east is in the future. When it happens it will be an aberration and we shall see a reversion to the mean soon thereafter.
3) The SEC can do a much better job of scheduling league games than they currently do if the goal is a more equal path for each team in each division over time. Several possibilities exist, but thus far that has not been the goal of SEC leaders. Let's hope there is a move in that direction soon.
@ClydeThomas SOS in football will be different than in basketball. Any game from the big 5 conferences will have a higher perceived value than any game from the 'lesser' conferences. Playing Kansas will be better than playing Boise State. Playing only 2 games from 'lesser' conferences will be better than playing 3. The folks from the Pac 12, BIG, ACC, and Big 12 see their conferences as equals to the SEC. The SEC's 8+1 model will be deemed by many as weaker than the models of the other conferences, with the exception of the ACC.
11 months, 1 week ago on SEC Owes ACC A Big Thanks On Schedule Front
SEC's best news of the day is the ACC staying with 8 league games. Given that the ACC is dramatically weaker than the SEC in football, this puts the bulls eye on the ACC as the biggest chicken conference when it comes to scheduling. It becomes much harder for the 3 other big 5 conferences to to target the SEC's 8 game conference scheduling.
11 months, 1 week ago on SEC Headlines 5/13/2014
Sorry, but the difference is a little more than I estimated. Ohio's income tax rate over $200,000 is 5.925%. Bortles will be paying 0.00% state income tax in Florida. 5.925% of $13.65M adds about $800,000. (That's a lot of autographs, Johnny.)
11 months, 2 weeks ago on SEC Headlines 5/9/2014
How much did it cost Johnny Football to be a self-centered, arrogant, little pipsqueak while at College Station? If you believe as I do that he was clearly the most talented QB in the draft this year, it's the difference between being drafted at #22 versus #3, where Blake Bortles was drafted. Over The Cap estimates that difference as $13.65M over 4 years. The NFL is a very corporate enterprise. Sure hope those "youthful indiscretions" were worth it, JFF.
Muschamp could play Auburn more three ways. Nine conference games, no permanent playing partners in the other division, or both. There is an obvious price to pay for the sake of those games. The permanent annual game with the other division damages other historic cross-division matchups by reducing their frequency.
11 months, 3 weeks ago on Florida’s Muschamp Wishes More Rivalries Could Be Protected, Not Les(s)
It took 2 SEC teams in the BCS final to get the other leagues to take action creating a 4 team playoff. It may take the SEC not being in that playoff or 2 teams from another conference making it for the SEC to finally make the inevitable move to a nine game league schedule. I guess if we want more meaningful games for our teams we should be hoping for that clarifying moment to occur as quickly as possible, but it sucks to have to wait for the SEC to get burned before they do the right thing. Change is hard, but it is also certain to occur. You won't remain dominant in football without accepting risk.
11 months, 3 weeks ago on Playoff Selection Details Revealed; So What About Strength Of Schedule?
@godawg @the_voice If the perception is that GT isn't competitive, call it one of the Dawgs' two automatic wins every year. Keep scheduling the Clemsons of the world and buy an opponent each year to come to Athens. That leaves room for 9 conference games, the Jax game, GT, your competitive out-of-conference game, and have 6 games at Athens. One less Charleston Southern a year probably wouldn't be considered a loss of tradition by very many fans.
11 months, 3 weeks ago on SEC Gambles On Status Quo When It Comes To Conference Schedules
@godawg First, the BIG, ACC, and Pac 12 championships will be the 10th games, respectively. The Big 12 is criticised for being too easy without a 10th championship game. LSU and Alabama were adjudged to be the top two teams in the country a couple of years ago when Alabama wasn't in the conference championship game. Under the new system they likely would have been both at least in the top 4.
Second, the SEC shouldn't exist for the pleasure of any one member. Any SEC AD that can't figure out how to schedule 6 home games needs to be fired immediately. (4 home and 4 away and one Jax SEC games, GT alternating plus 2 games of your choice with 1 home one and one away one year and 2 home the other).
Third, Les Miles is one of many SEC leadership types that is a whiny little girl who needs to grow a pair. At least 10/12 real games a year shouldn't make SEC leaders shrivel.
PS - Props to Georgia for already playing 10 real games. Replace Clemson with a SEC West team and you're there.
@SouthernBoiSB @the_voice Correct. It takes 9 conference games if you keep annual cross division pairings.
Without question Anderson can coach. It is fair to question if he can recruit D1 athletes, as he is mostly unknown outside Missouri. It's great to see him get a chance to prove himself at the D1 level at MU.
11 months, 3 weeks ago on Kim Anderson New Missouri Basketball Coach
@John at MrSEC Vandy/Old Miss is a longstanding game, no doubt. Some folks would argue that anything old is historic. Others would see some old things as worthy of disposing of. We save some buildings from the wrecking ball and others make space for something new. Where you draw that line is up to you. To my mind, saving all the "rivalry" games doesn't seem to have much merit (and I am no fan of LSU or Florida).
11 months, 3 weeks ago on SEC Headlines 4/28/2014
@quad77 A great compromise would have been a 9 game SEC schedule and letting Alabama/Tennessee and Auburn/Georgia continue to play annually (they're really the only two cross division rivalry games). I think you're right; LSU whines about the annual Florida game for the wrong reason. The real problem is that the other 5 "rivalry" games are boring to have to play/watch annually. Missouri/Arkansas will get interesting at about the same time the SEC expands eastward to 16 and moves Mizzou to the west where they belong. USC/TAM, Vandy/Old Miss, KY/MSU, and FL/LSU are snooze fests almost every year.
If we're to continue playing annual cross division "rivalry" games, it would be nice to play the other 6 teams in the "other" division more often than an average of every 6 years (actually hosting them every 12 years). What's the point of a league unless you get to play the other members with some regularity?
When you schedule 3/12 games against non BCS opponents, you deserve whatever you are given by the selection committee (maybe no team at all occasionally). What you're saying is you are afraid to play a more strenuous schedule; all to save some coach's job that just went 6-6 (3-6 in real games) but gets to go to the BBVA Compass Bowl. This decision is an insult to SEC fans and players. It's time to grow up and put your big boy pants on, SEC decision makers.
Wow. That's leadership. We get to keep the Georgia States of college football playing the SEC's best multiple times a year AND Kentucky playing Mississippi State annually, too. Our "trustee of a sacred public trust" kept the fans in the forefront of his mind with 8 conference games instead of 9 and historic cross division rivalry games such as South Carolina/Texas A&M and Missouri/Arkansas. That will certainly help those SEC Network ratings. Thanks, Mr. Slive.