SEC Releases Rotating Opponents for 2014-2025 Seasons

kyallie

FB Moderator
Staff member
Jan 17, 2010
201,286
8,243
237
78
Shakopee Minnesota, via Birmingham Alabama
Well, to be clear CNS does say otherwise. But, for very different reasons. There are two arguments for the 9th game and really they are based on completely different things. The first argument, the one that CNS puts out there, is the entertainment value/comradery angle. The idea that it helps the enthusiasm and what not if the SEC teams play each other more often. My main counter to that line of thought is that it doesn't help one bit if they play each other twice in one season, which an extra game makes more likely. Otherwise, I can't really argue with the notion that the SEC is more important than the other conferences, hence playing each other would result in better games.

The other argument is that it's needed for SoS, that it's easier on the SEC to not have a 9th conference game. That's utter rubbish and easily dismissed. I actually did a breakdown which showed that basically the SEC could play anyone else with that 9th game and still have the most difficult 9 game slate: http://www.tidefans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=222363

My actual response earlier should have been in blue though... I think doing something just because someone else does it has to be one of the poorest reasons imaginable to do anything.


I think there's a very different way of looking at it. One is the entire point of the rivalry game, this insures that everyone gets to play their rival, and the SECCG insures top teams have a chance of meeting. What we "miss out" on, are the middling games, for example Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Vanderbilt have never been to the SECCG.

On the flip side, Alabama has played Florida 7 times in the SECCG.
The way it is now simply stinks..I agree with the article.

Re: Latest Bama News 5/20/14

 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,287
30,912
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
I may have missed this when it was changed, but why did Arky-USCe and Mizzou-aTm trade their yearly cross-division "rivalry" game?
I think they did this because Arkansas/South Carolina was manufactured simply because they were the two new teams in 1992. There is no history between the two.

At least with Arkansas/Missouri, there is a shared border and I think there is some history there, albeit small. Texas A&M and South Carolina make no sense, but, neither does Mississippi State and Kentucky.
 

ALA2262

All-American
Aug 4, 2007
4,977
393
102
Cumming, GA
I may have missed this when it was changed, but why did Arky-USCe and Mizzou-aTm trade their yearly cross-division "rivalry" game?
Atm wanted to play LSU at the end of the season. That belonged to LSU-Ark. The easiest way to accomplish EOY atm-LSU was to make that change as well.
 

CrimsonNagus

Hall of Fame
Jun 6, 2007
8,488
6,212
212
45
Montgomery, Alabama, United States
I agree with the ESPN article, this schedule sucks! I'd rather drop the cross divisional rival then stick with this pathetic thing, better yet, just go to 9 games already.

It's ridiculous to think that Coach Saban will probably retire before we visit the Swamp again.

It's ridiculous to see that A&M will spend a decade in the league and not play UT once.

We've played VT more recently then we will teams in our own conference over then next 8 years.

I agree with ESPN, we're not really in a conference with some of these teams when we only play once or twice a decade.

Something's got to change because that is a sad looking schedule and I will not even try to defend it when other fans start bashing the SEC because of this. If this is how it has to be, can we at least put Bama, UGA, USC, UF, LSU, UT, A&M in the same division, AUB as a cross rival (if we must), and play MSU, MISS, ARK, MU, UK and VU once every 8 years.

Anyone that thinks this schedule is a good thing needs to take there SEC glasses of for just s few minutes.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Anyone that thinks this schedule is a good thing needs to take there SEC glasses of for just s few minutes.
I'm trying to understand your point here.

You emphasize the impact this will have within the SEC, then you say that. There is only the SEC in this discussion! That's all this is about, that's the only relevant aspect! Take OFF the SEC glasses? The fact is only the SEC has any real business poking their noses into this in the first place.
 

CrimsonNagus

Hall of Fame
Jun 6, 2007
8,488
6,212
212
45
Montgomery, Alabama, United States
Well, I guess it doesn't make much sense. I just think this is bad for the conference and, IMO, someone who is in love with this schedule is just blinded by there love for the SEC to not be able to see how negatively this reflects on the conference as a whole. This is not directed at anyone on this board because most here don't like the look of this schedule but, it has already had a few defenders on the radio today and I just don't think there is anyway to defend this mess.

This will probably force the conference into a 9 game schedule sooner than later now, whether you like or not. Maybe that was Slive's plan all along.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
to see how negatively this reflects on the conference as a whole.
How does it negatively reflect on the conference as a whole? What does is do that makes the conference look bad? I understand people within the SEC having their gripes, but how, from an outside perspective can anyone objectively have cause for complaint?
 

rgw

Suspended
Sep 15, 2003
20,852
1,351
232
Tuscaloosa
This rotating schedule is terrible. I look forward to seeing Georgia or Florida at home once every decade.
 

Bamalawdawg

3rd Team
Dec 28, 2011
210
0
0
I think they did this because Arkansas/South Carolina was manufactured simply because they were the two new teams in 1992. There is no history between the two.

At least with Arkansas/Missouri, there is a shared border and I think there is some history there, albeit small. Texas A&M and South Carolina make no sense, but, neither does Mississippi State and Kentucky.
Everyone but LSU understands that the SEC bigs play each other. It use to be the Big 6 - LSU, UF, UGA, AU, Bama, TN. In 92 they ensured that these elite teams would matchup permanently, while the other slobs played each other and Arky/Sc got thrown together. A permanent A&M v. SC matchup is inviting them to the big boys table. The SEC has an Elite 8 and it is good to see them all play each other. So shut up LSU, and be glad you didn't pick up A&M like SC agreed to
 

ALA2262

All-American
Aug 4, 2007
4,977
393
102
Cumming, GA
Everyone but LSU understands that the SEC bigs play each other. It use to be the Big 6 - LSU, UF, UGA, AU, Bama, TN. In 92 they ensured that these elite teams would matchup permanently, while the other slobs played each other and Arky/Sc got thrown together. A permanent A&M v. SC matchup is inviting them to the big boys table. The SEC has an Elite 8 and it is good to see them all play each other. So shut up LSU, and be glad you didn't pick up A&M like SC agreed to
They already have atm. Their acceptance of the atm request to play them at the end of the year, rather than to continue to play Ark at that time, is what led to the other changes.
 

ALA2262

All-American
Aug 4, 2007
4,977
393
102
Cumming, GA
One of the issues the schools balked at going to a 9-game schedule was the fact that every other year there would be an extra road conference game and the loss of a home game. In order to make it fair, would it be feasible to schedule the 9th conference game against the other division foe at a neutral (not necessarily neutral just away from the home team's home field) site and the 2 teams split the revenue for the game?

Ole Miss could go back to hosting games in Jackson, or Arkansas at Little Rock, Mizzou could move its game to KC or St. Louis, or KY moving a game to Cincinnati for example. While not ideal, it might make the 9th game a little more equitable from a revenue standpoint. Even better, To facilitate this, the SEC could set up them up sort of like a conference bowl games, let cities with suitable facilities bid on the 7-game pool individually or as a whole. I think something like this might be interesting to a destination town like Orlando, Washington DC, Chicago, etc. If done as a package of games, it would prevent a town from just cherry-picking the marquee matchups. But such a concept might actually expand the recruiting base for all schools playing as part of the rotation.

I would certainly solve the scheduling issue and may even be more profitable than just an ordinary home game.
That issue is more perceived than it is real. Like looking at a half of glass of water for two years. One year is is half full. The other year it is half empty. At the end of two years it is still a half of glass of water. At the end of two years all schools will have played nine conference games at home and nine conference games away.

The real issue is the fact that, in order for 14 schools to play seven additional conference games, 14 OOC games have to be eliminated. Now we are looking at 7 full glasses of water (read money) and 7 empty glasses instead of 14 full glasses of water (read money). Big difference.

The solution they have chosen ( playing OOC with the other major conferences) will work only if more than half of the 14 games are played at home. It will be interesting to analyze the 2016 and 2017 SEC schedules to see if at least 14 of the 28 games have been played at home or at a neutral site. If not, they will be better off to look at your solution to the perceived issue.
 

JDCrimson

Hall of Fame
Feb 12, 2006
5,347
4,420
187
51
That issue is more perceived than it is real. Like looking at a half of glass of water for two years. One year is is half full. The other year it is half empty. At the end of two years it is still a half of glass of water. At the end of two years all schools will have played nine conference games at home and nine conference games away.

The real issue is the fact that, in order for 14 schools to play seven additional conference games, 14 OOC games have to be eliminated. Now we are looking at 7 full glasses of water (read money) and 7 empty glasses instead of 14 full glasses of water (read money). Big difference.

The solution they have chosen ( playing OOC with the other major conferences) will work only if more than half of the 14 games are played at home. It will be interesting to analyze the 2016 and 2017 SEC schedules to see if at least 14 of the 28 games have been played at home or at a neutral site. If not, they will be better off to look at your solution to the perceived issue.
In addition to the bowl eligibility issue with the lower tier conference teams, I think the real reason the schools balked at the 5/4 9 game schedule is the schools who are in the first rotation of 5 conference home games would basically have a revenue advantage for 12 months over those that would have to go on the road in the first rotation. That sort of revenue advantage could be significant if the revenue were deployed in some sort of recruiting initiative. Heck, if UT had to go on the road that first rotation losing that home game it might actually bankrupt them. Some variation of my suggestion is the only way to work around the odd game schedule. Surely someone at the conference office has thought of this as a possible solution.

With scheduling as difficult as it already is I just dont see how the current plan is going to work. For every team to schedule an OOC team against a Big 5 conference, somebody unfortunately is going to have play a school they may very-well likely lose. So if that is the ultimate risk, which one would you rather have a conference loss or an OOC loss going into the new playoff format? Personally, I would prefer the conference loss because it can be chalked up to ultra-competitive parity within the conference. Playing and losing some OOC games for some of the lower-tier SEC schools could spoil the barrel for the top-tier schools when it comes playoff nomination time.

If done correctly, I think it could be an interesting play for the conference nationally. I dont think there is enough demand that another conference could do the same but I do think the SEC has enough cache to pull it off. As a general rule, SEC fans travel pretty well. Personally, I like the destination neutral site games that Bama plays just because its an excuse to go on a vacation with family that I might not otherwise do.
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.