auburn To The East?

LA4Bama · May 27, 2017

selmaborntidefan said:
I think the days of the Iron Bowl being a big thing have regressed from what they were. How many times has the game carried any NATIONAL significance? 2013 obviously but what other times was this true? It did have some secondary significance (e.g. the unbeaten or one-loss team HAD to win but it didn't really mean much nationally otherwise). The only other time that comes immediately to mind is 1971, when both teams were undefeated, but I was two years old and have no recollection of this. OK, and maybe 1981 because of Coach Bryant's becoming the winningest coach (though this turned out to be a fraud when later research showed Pop Warner actually had won 319 games and so Bryant actually broke the record against Penn State in 1982).

The history of how it moved was interesting - and money-driven on both sides - but there's not much of interest now more than any other game save for rare years like 2013.

I tend to look at this on the other side. By the strict definition of national significance you used, the last weekend of the season will almost never have a nationally significant game, no matter whom we play, just from the sheer probability of elimination as a season progresses. Maybe now with a four team playoff there will be a few more chances, but still it will never be common to have two contenders playing. I think the fact that all of the recent IB have had at least one team in contention is astounding and great, and has given the game more national significance than any other end of season game we can compare it to. The fact that the game is also an in-state game, and an emotional rivalry with bragging right, makes it stupendously intense for both sides and not only for the contender.

If we take just the last ten years and compare with other end of the season rivalry games, I think we have the most nationally significant rivalry by far. Of course, that is because we are the most significant team of the last decade. So I get it we can't give Auburn too much credit. But still I don't see how we can do better as far as a quality game goes. I sure don't want to play Vanderbilt the weekend after Thanksgiving. There are no teams in the west I'd prefer to play there than Auburn. I like LSU in November. And we can't schedule an east team for the last weekend, even if that is Auburn or UT, as any two teams who were really contenders would quite possibly play a rematch the very next week in Atlanta. That's a non-starter for scheduling. No non-conference team of any caliber is going to play us that weekend.

It seems to me it's either Auburn or we get a more meaningless and crappier game most years. I am not for that.

rgw · May 27, 2017

If Auburn wants to tuck tail and run to the East then let them. They need the Iron Bowl so much more than a supposedly easier route to the SECCG. And I doubt that it would work out to be any better for them in terms of the SECCG longterm because UT, UF, and UGA will bounce back eventually.

81usaf92 · May 27, 2017

KrAzY3 said:
Just keep in mind, all the risk in this equation is the gamble Auburn would be making. As I've said before, Alabama really doesn't need them, for anything. What this would be about is simple balance. The divisions are unbalanced, and while some people talk about cycles, they are merely talking about the teams on top. Yes, Florida and Tennessee will have better years, but Vanderbilt and Kentucky are still Vanderbilt and Kentucky! Having both those in one division weakens it, then when you add to it the fact that South Carolina and Missouri are not exactly elite football programs, and the division is just plain weaker, period. So, Auburn would benefit by having an easier time of it and the SEC would benefit by having more balanced divisions. It also makes geographical sense, Missouri makes little sense in the East and Auburn geographically belongs in the West.

Now, how does that play out long term? Well, the SEC East figures to suck a little less, Sagarin had them ranked below both ACC divisions, both Big 10 divisions and the Big 12. Missouri and Auburn should both be a bit happier since they'd be playing teams close to them and a bit more natural rivals. Other than that, the only thing of real value that's lost is the Iron Bowl, which as some have noted isn't really the Iron Bowl anymore anyway.

How does it hurt Alabama? It doesn't, not at all. I suspect this is part of the rational as well, but there's just no benefit to having a game that tough this late in the season. If Alabama or Auburn loses, they are almost certainly out of a playoff. Does it hurt recruiting? Nope, I can't think of a single player even coming to Alabama to play Auburn. It might hurt Auburn's recruiting though, because I can think of several guys that went to Auburn because Alabama didn't extend a scholarship. The bottom line though is this might not help Auburn, but it sure as heck won't hurt Alabama.

I don't think Auburn really benefits as much as you think. I really think UF and UGA are going to have to find new rivals. I think Auburn is going to get stuck with LSU, UGA will stuck with Arkansas, and Florida will be stuck with Mizzou. I think everyone seems to think that Auburn would automatically be stuck with us as a permanent rival, but the SEC made permanent cross rivals specifically for the Bama-Tenn game. I don't believe they are going away with it and replace it with a LSU-Tenn rivalry. More money is made from a LSU-AUB, UA-UT, UGA-ARK, and UF-Mizzou setup. Keep in mind UF has FSU. So I think the SEC will most likely look out for the SEC more than Auburn, and they make way more money keeping an LSU-AUB and a UT-UA rivalry than giving Auburn or LSU a weird rivalry just to accommodate the Iron Bowl.

I think the most likely scenario that will happen is if Auburn move is that Bama moves east with them. Vandy and Mizzou go west and your new permanent rivalries are:

Bama- LSU or Ark
AUB- LSU or Ark
UT- Vandy
UGA- Mizzou
UF- Ole Miss

Point is Auburn isn't getting this "great" deal by doing this. They are probably making the SEC more competitive because they would most likely force Bama to move with them and make LSU and aTm be the kings of the west.

81usaf92 · May 27, 2017

GP for Bama said:
My soapbox...
Do away with divisions.
Every team has three permanent opponents. Eight SEC games a year . Every SEC team would play every SEC team at least twice every four years.
The two top teams play for the championship.

The problem is that you run the risk of a 4 way tie.

Bamaro · May 27, 2017

ddsmit said:
This game is no longer the Iron Bowl, the Iron Bowl was played in Birmingham. The game now is the Alabama/Auburn game.

By that logic the Sugar, Orange and Cotton bowls no longer exist.

81usaf92 · May 27, 2017

Bamaro said:
By that logic the Sugar, Orange and Cotton bowls no longer exist.

Not really. The Sugar, Orange, Rose, and Cotton are every bit the same kinda of draw as they were, but perhaps a little bigger every other two years.

But I think many here just loved the neutral site aspect of the iron Bowl, and hate having to go to Auburn to see a game in which you are heckled constantly, and going to a game and losing is worse than it would be in Bham. But I think it needed to happen because Bham is just.....

TideMan09 · May 27, 2017

Bamaro said:
By that logic the Sugar, Orange and Cotton bowls no longer exist.

Don't forget the Bluebonnet Bowl..LOL

DzynKingRTR · May 27, 2017

Bazza said:
Some people actually get degrees in Agriculture, you know.....

Auburn does have a school of architecture. Those guys are pretty smart

B1GTide · May 27, 2017

I don't care how the divisions align in any conference so long as the great rivalries are preserved.

KrAzY3 · May 27, 2017

Crimson1967 said:
I think Missouri's annual rival is Arkansas. So if they did switch I guess the barn plays the pigs and Missouri gets UGA.

81usaf92 said:
I really think UF and UGA are going to have to find new rivals. I think Auburn is going to get stuck with LSU, UGA will stuck with Arkansas, and Florida will be stuck with Mizzou. I think everyone seems to think that Auburn would automatically be stuck with us as a permanent rival, but the SEC made permanent cross rivals specifically for the Bama-Tenn game.

For starters, we do know that Missouri and Arkansas in the West and Georgia and Auburn in the East would be looking for new rivals. I also think Alabama and Tenn would block anything that caused them to lose their game. But, I do think part of the negotiating tool to get this thing done would be perhaps letting another team/teams unhappy with their rivalry game get to pick another. Auburn is getting what they want, to naturally they'd kind of go to the back of the line in terms of ability to pick, and it would seem Georgia and Missouri would probably have the most say. The question is who else might want in on the action? I'd think perhaps the not too interesting pairing of South Carolina and Texas A&M could go up for grabs as well.

For instance, Georgia might ask to play Texas A&M, since this would bolster their recruiting and both teams might like the idea of two tradition rich/recruiting rich territories meeting. South Carolina and Missouri might like to play each other since they're at a more comparable level. That could leave Arkansas and Auburn playing each other, but Arkansas would have no real room left for complaint since either way they're playing Arkansas and Missouri.

Either way, this couldn't get done without a few parties being appeased. The argument that this makes geographical sense and that it balanced the division is only going to please so many programs.

ptw1961 · May 27, 2017

Pat Dye has not made a financial calculation since he was head coach and kept counting the money Bobby Lowder was providing him to buy players. He is just a has been that is looking for attention.

selmaborntidefan said:
I think this would be more earth shattering news if this was the pre-1989 Iron Bowl that was played in Birmingham every year. That was a thing of beauty in that you would have a near 50/50 crowd trying to outdo one another cheering wise. But once again let's be honest - this thing is about money as always (not that there's anything wrong with that). The part I will confess surprises me a tad is that Auburn is not proposing to move to the East AND trying to change things so that the Iron Bowl is still the locked-in game (e.g. Alabama no longer plays Tennessee every year but instead plays Eastern rival Auburn). I'm also assuming that Dye has made the financial calculation that replacing Alabama with annual games against both Tennessee and Florida will more than make up for any financial losses.

Who would Auburn keep as their Western annual rival? I'm guessing they'd prefer LSU if not Alabama merely because of the money.

College football has been going through constant evolution and if this happened it would just be the latest. I recall a time when Oklahoma-Nebraska was one of the biggest rivalries going, bigger even than the Red River Rivalry. But they weren't even annual rivals in the Big 12 much less nowadays. Same with Texas/ATM, and both of those games were always played right around Thanksgiving, sometimes back to back.

I think the days of the Iron Bowl being a big thing have regressed from what they were. How many times has the game carried any NATIONAL significance? 2013 obviously but what other times was this true? It did have some secondary significance (e.g. the unbeaten or one-loss team HAD to win but it didn't really mean much nationally otherwise). The only other time that comes immediately to mind is 1971, when both teams were undefeated, but I was two years old and have no recollection of this. OK, and maybe 1981 because of Coach Bryant's becoming the winningest coach (though this turned out to be a fraud when later research showed Pop Warner actually had won 319 games and so Bryant actually broke the record against Penn State in 1982).

At the state level? Well, I don't think some of the Tide fans have thought this one through. The game is a trap for Alabama - if we win we were supposed to but if we lose we listen to a year of "we beat you." Of course, this could also set up an Auburn national title run that bypasses Alabama merely by the luck of the draw, and don't think Tide fans wouldn't resort to "but you didn't beat us!!" Same in reverse.

I thought the rivalry could have used some cooling off back during the Ramsey and Jelks scandals as well as the twin occurrences of the Cam Newton scandal and the tree killer dude.

Years ago I would have said, "No, we need to keep this." Now? I honestly don't care one way or the other. I DO suspect part of it in Dye's case is looking over the East and realizing, "Ok, if we put together a good team we have four easy wins and if we can go 2-1 at worst against the Big Three and maybe draw Miss State and Arky in the same year, we can win the East - and in one game against hopefully not Alabama, we can win the SEC and maybe play in the playoff, and that's money."

On the flip side......strength goes in cycles. Florida or Tennessee won the East every single year for the first decade of the expanded SEC, and they won the conference title seven of those times. Since then, however, the Vols have yet to win the conference and Florida has only won it twice. Think about that: since 2001, Auburn has won the SEC more times than powerhouse Florida.

The history of how it moved was interesting - and money-driven on both sides - but there's not much of interest now more than any other game save for rare years like 2013.

81usaf92 · May 27, 2017

KrAzY3 said:
For starters, we do know that Missouri and Arkansas in the West and Georgia and Auburn in the East would be looking for new rivals. I also think Alabama and Tenn would block anything that caused them to lose their game. But, I do think part of the negotiating tool to get this thing done would be perhaps letting another team/teams unhappy with their rivalry game get to pick another. Auburn is getting what they want, to naturally they'd kind of go to the back of the line in terms of ability to pick, and it would seem Georgia and Missouri would probably have the most say. The question is who else might want in on the action? I'd think perhaps the not too interesting pairing of South Carolina and Texas A&M could go up for grabs as well.

For instance, Georgia might ask to play Texas A&M, since this would bolster their recruiting and both teams might like the idea of two tradition rich/recruiting rich territories meeting. South Carolina and Missouri might like to play each other since they're at a more comparable level. That could leave Arkansas and Auburn playing each other, but Arkansas would have no real room left for complaint since either way they're playing Arkansas and Missouri.

Either way, this couldn't get done without a few parties being appeased. The argument that this makes geographical sense and that it balanced the division is only going to please so many programs.

Like I said,

1) the SEC is all about money, and they know that Auburn is one of the bigger money makers. They aren't going to let Auburn play Mizzou Or Mississippi St for a permanent rival. They will force them to play either Bama, LSU, or aTm. Don't believe me? Then ask yourself why does LSU play UF? Bama and Tennessee will not give up the TSIO, so it's more of a given that Auburn would get LSU. UF and UGA can fight over who is playing who as a permanent rival after those two matchups are settled

2) I still think the most likely move, if there is one, is Auburn and Bama would go East and Mizzou and Vandy goes west. It practically solves itself

AUB- LSU
Bama-aTm
UT-Vandy
UGA- Ark
UF- Ole Miss
UK- Mizzou
USCe- MSU

But I still think it's a long shot that anyone moves anywhere because Mizzou hasn't been raising cane about it.

KrAzY3 · May 27, 2017

81usaf92 said:
2) I still think the most likely move, if there is one, is Auburn and Bama would go East and Mizzou and Vandy goes west. It practically solves itself

A: That will not happen
B: All that does it make the East way stronger than the West and solves nothing.

What this is about is if Auburn wants to try to grow up and try to establish an identity on their own.

81usaf92 · May 27, 2017

KrAzY3 said:
A: That will not happen
B: All that does it make the East way stronger than the West and solves nothing.

What this is about is if Auburn wants to try to grow up and try to establish an identity on their own.

The point is none of this will happen. The SEC is about money, and the Iron Bowl is a lot of money. They are not going to let Auburn move to the other side with out Bama, and it's mainly because Bama, UF, UGA, and Tennessee won't let it happen. Auburn can hang onto this fantasy that they can get away from us, but it won't happen.

As for your 2nd point... Actually it improves it. LSU and aTm should be the consistent West representative, and I think both of them are better than most of the current SECE teams all ready. It more or less makes the championship game a game.

KrAzY3 · May 28, 2017

The Iron Bowl is a lot of money compared to what? I seem to recall it not even being the CBS game multiple times lately. It's generally not one of the top rated SEC games from what I understand. It's not that much money, sure it's a big game because two SEC powers are playing each other, but make no mistake, it's just not Ohio St. and Michigan. Remember, the state of Alabama just isn't that big. Heck in terms of money it's probably not even FSU vs. Florida. Auburn and Alabama will still be playing just as many SEC games as before...

As to reiterate the notion of adding Alabama and Auburn to the west would improve nothing. Yes of course it's good for LSU and A&M because they'd be the top teams left. It throws things off. You have to balance them, you don't balance scales by taking all the weight on one end and just putting it on the other.

Here's what we have now (historical rankings):
Alabama 1
LSU 9
Auburn 13
Texas A&M 20 (by the way I should add once upon a time some posters here claimed they weren't enough of a football power for the SEC, now you are proposing they be the #2 team in the West)
Arkansas 23
Ole Miss 26
Miss St. 41
Total 133

Tennessee 10
Georgia 11
Florida 12
Missouri 35
Vanderbilt 42
Kentucky 46
South Carolina 61 (pretty lousy historical score but remember they basically only ever did anything under Spurrier)
Total 217

As you can see, that gap is huge. That's evened out some by cross division games, but it's a heck of a gap. The proposal of swapping Auburn and Missouri helps quite a bit though. It goes to 155 and 195. Still a big gap, but more balanced in terms of geography and the quality of the programs. Your proposal though, here's what it does. It goes 196 to 154, you've just flipped the imbalance (and no, the SEC East would not approve of that). Not only that, but you've now accumulated most of the top teams in one division! You now have 5 of the top 6 teams in one division! Why in the heck would anyone want that? The Auburn swap though, is relatively nice and neat because the weaker division has 4 of the top 7 teams so their being top heavy balances out the easier teams at the bottom, while the SEC West would have better parity.

I'm not saying this will happen. I'm saying the swap makes sense.

LA4Bama · May 28, 2017

KrAzY3 said:
The Iron Bowl is a lot of money compared to what? I seem to recall it not even being the CBS game multiple times lately. It's generally not one of the top rated SEC games from what I understand.

Actually in recent years, other than when the game is a blow out like 2012 and this past year, the IB has been very highly rated. For contractual reasons CBS couldn't show the 2014 game, and that turned out to be the highest rated college football game in ESPN history.

KrAzY3 · May 28, 2017

LA4Bama said:
For contractual reasons CBS couldn't show the 2014 game, and that turned out to be the highest rated college football game in ESPN history.

2014 is as good an example as any I suppose, and kind of proves an overall point. Yes, Alabama vs Auburn was the #1 rated (regular season at least) game that year. 13.5 million viewers tuned in.

However, Alabama vs. Missouri was #3 with 12.8 million viewers (that's ironic considering the swap we're debating). Alabama was also in the #4, #6, and #9 rated game! So, was the Auburn game that year a big deal (coming off the atrocity that the media loved to death the previous year, think about what was driving the ratings, the chance of Alabama losing)? Yes, it was a big deal, sure. But, people were tuning in to see Alabama! That's why Alabama had the 1, 3, 4, 6, and 9th highest rated football games that year! This is all about Alabama, that's why the had half of the top rated games that year, this isn't and never was about Auburn, and that is my point. The main interest in the game itself, in Auburn really is just the possibility of Alabama losing. And while yes, some revenue might be lost, it really won't be all that much because guess what? Alabama will still play an SEC game and people will still tune in.

Once again, not saying this will happen. I doubt it does because everyone has to get in line. But it still makes sense.

Edit: I will add that the Kick 6 no doubt revitalized the series. Up until the point interest was waning and to reiterate what drives the interest is the possibility of Alabama losing. Well, that Kick 6 darn sure made it more interesting to those people. That to will wane though. In 2016, for example, Alabama was in 3 of the top ten rated regular season games. Auburn was in 0.

Redwood Forrest · May 28, 2017

Think there is an imbalance now? Wait till you have Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia and Tennessee in the East and Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Missouri and Texas A&M in the West. Hahahaha. What a joke that would be. Only LSU is a present threat while only Texas A&M has the potential to be a threat. Alabama and Florida are present threats and Auburn, Georgia and Tennessee have potential. This would be very lopsided.

CullmanTide · May 28, 2017

I think a move swapping Auburn and Missouri makes perfect sense for everyone involved. At this point doing away with all permanent rivalries would be best. We don't need Tennessee any more than we need the barn. It's time we stop propping up other teams.

CrimsonProf · May 28, 2017

KrAzY3 said:
The Iron Bowl is a lot of money compared to what? I seem to recall it not even being the CBS game multiple times lately. It's generally not one of the top rated SEC games from what I understand. It's not that much money, sure it's a big game because two SEC powers are playing each other, but make no mistake, it's just not Ohio St. and Michigan. Remember, the state of Alabama just isn't that big. Heck in terms of money it's probably not even FSU vs. Florida. Auburn and Alabama will still be playing just as many SEC games as before...

As to reiterate the notion of adding Alabama and Auburn to the west would improve nothing. Yes of course it's good for LSU and A&M because they'd be the top teams left. It throws things off. You have to balance them, you don't balance scales by taking all the weight on one end and just putting it on the other.

Here's what we have now (historical rankings):
Alabama 1
LSU 9
Auburn 13
Texas A&M 20 (by the way I should add once upon a time some posters here claimed they weren't enough of a football power for the SEC, now you are proposing they be the #2 team in the West)
Arkansas 23
Ole Miss 26
Miss St. 41
Total 133

Tennessee 10
Georgia 11
Florida 12
Missouri 35
Vanderbilt 42
Kentucky 46
South Carolina 61 (pretty lousy historical score but remember they basically only ever did anything under Spurrier)
Total 217

As you can see, that gap is huge. That's evened out some by cross division games, but it's a heck of a gap. The proposal of swapping Auburn and Missouri helps quite a bit though. It goes to 155 and 195. Still a big gap, but more balanced in terms of geography and the quality of the programs. Your proposal though, here's what it does. It goes 196 to 154, you've just flipped the imbalance (and no, the SEC East would not approve of that). Not only that, but you've now accumulated most of the top teams in one division! You now have 5 of the top 6 teams in one division! Why in the heck would anyone want that? The Auburn swap though, is relatively nice and neat because the weaker division has 4 of the top 7 teams so their being top heavy balances out the easier teams at the bottom, while the SEC West would have better parity.

I'm not saying this will happen. I'm saying the swap makes sense.

Iron Bowl has been the CBS game in 01, 02, 04, 05, 06, 08-13, 15, 16.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

auburn To The East?

Auburn to the east, even at the loss of the Alabama game?

Yes

NO

All-SEC

Suspended

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

1st Team

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

All-SEC

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!