Toggle sidebar

Blog: Debating cross-divisional rivalries

kyallie

kyallie

FB Moderator
Staff member
Jan 17, 2010
205,833
9,008
437
80
Shakopee Minnesota, via Birmingham Alabama
www.tidefans.com
They're going t take up, next week in Destin Fl. I believe tradition must and should prevail. I've posted articles from CBS.com, Barnhart I think, and SI.com ,Andy Staples, to name a couple and they are clamoring for a departure from the traditional scheds. What say you? Here's Chris Lowes piece from SEC BLOG ESPN.



I know there there are other threads from the search function, but they're a year or more old and they are taking up the question next week. So......
 
For years, the Tennessee game was my favorite game. Nothing said fall and college football like "The Third Saturday in October." The crimson helmets clashing against the orange jerseys looked like the changing of the leaves that come with the changing of the seasons. I loved that game. But Phil Fulmer and his cronies destroyed it. The hatred and vitriol that resulted has tarnished the game forever for me.

The SEC has already taken the money over tradition route with the expansions in 1992 and last year. If I could be in charge of the decisions, I'd actually move Auburn to the East Division, and Missouri to the West and end the Iron Bowl. That game delivers little to me anymore as well, for similar reasons as the Tennessee game. I realize I'm in the minority, but I'm in favor of allowing the permanent crossover games to end. Unless they go to a 9 game schedule. Then the permanent crossover game can remain intact.
 
First and most importantly, I am definitely old school all the way and love the traditions associated with college football in general and the SEC in particular. Having said that, I find that now I am in favor of doing away with divisions and all cross-divisional rivalries. I am in favor of going to a 9 game conference rotating schedule. The two highest ranked teams at year end play for the SEC championship. In the event the divisions cannot be done away with, then by all means do away with the cross-divisional rivarly games. The world of college football as we have known it has changed and the SEC needs to get on board.
 
Solution--- Do away with divisions. Stay with eight game SEC schedule. Every SEC team will get three permanent SEC rivals. All others rotate. This would mean every SEC team would play every other SEC team at least twice every four years, all while protecting the most important rivalries. Then the two top teams(regardless of former divisions) play for the SEC Championship. Then require all SEC teams to play at least two meaningful non-conference opponents.
 
It is a matter of when, and not if, that the SEC goes to a nine conference game schedule. The 6-0-3 format for 7 team divisions is so stupid I fail to see how it can even be considered, much less implemented. That in itself is enough to warrant keeping the cross divisional rivalries. The 6-1-2 format is the only one that makes any sense.
 
GP for Bama said:
Solution--- Do away with divisions. Stay with eight game SEC schedule. Every SEC team will get three permanent SEC rivals. All others rotate. This would mean every SEC team would play every other SEC team at least twice every four years, all while protecting the most important rivalries. Then the two top teams(regardless of former divisions) play for the SEC Championship. Then require all SEC teams to play at least two meaningful non-conference opponents.
Click to expand...

This would work but for the NCAA regulation that says you must have a divisions in order to play a Championship Game. I am sure there is a lot that we want to do as a conference but NCAA is increasingly a model that does not fit modern day college athletics.

There are 2 issues here if they really want to fix things. Out of conference rivalries and cross-division rivalries. Both need to go.
 
GP for Bama said:
Solution--- Do away with divisions. Stay with eight game SEC schedule. Every SEC team will get three permanent SEC rivals. All others rotate. This would mean every SEC team would play every other SEC team at least twice every four years, all while protecting the most important rivalries. Then the two top teams(regardless of former divisions) play for the SEC Championship. Then require all SEC teams to play at least two meaningful non-conference opponents.
Click to expand...

The rule requires divisions, and the SEC has a snowballs chance of getting it changed. The rule was never intended for Division 1A, and the NCAA had a meltdown when the SEC used it to expand and institute a CG. No way that the NCAA ever does anything regarding the rule if the SEC is responsible for the requested change.
 
TideEngineer08 said:
For years, the Tennessee game was my favorite game. Nothing said fall and college football like "The Third Saturday in October." The crimson helmets clashing against the orange jerseys looked like the changing of the leaves that come with the changing of the seasons. I loved that game. But Phil Fulmer and his cronies destroyed it. The hatred and vitriol that resulted has tarnished the game forever for me.

The SEC has already taken the money over tradition route with the expansions in 1992 and last year. If I could be in charge of the decisions, I'd actually move Auburn to the East Division, and Missouri to the West and end the Iron Bowl. That game delivers little to me anymore as well, for similar reasons as the Tennessee game. I realize I'm in the minority, but I'm in favor of allowing the permanent crossover games to end. Unless they go to a 9 game schedule. Then the permanent crossover game can remain intact.
Click to expand...
Maybe down the road but while we are beating Tennessee and Auburn like a drum why mess up a good thing?;)
 
ALA2262 said:
The rule requires divisions, and the SEC has a snowballs chance of getting it changed. The rule was never intended for Division 1A, and the NCAA had a meltdown when the SEC used it to expand and institute a CG. No way that the NCAA ever does anything regarding the rule if the SEC is responsible for the requested change.
Click to expand...
I think there is a decent chance to change the rule about requiring divisions. The Big 12 has toyed with the idea of a conference championship game with only 10 members. They might be an ally.
 
Scarbo wrote about this in today's Birmingham Thrice Weekly News. He was in favor of it and I'm starting to agree. When only four schools have a non-divisional rival they really care about, it isn't fair to force the other ten to be inconvenienced. I hate to see the old rivalries end, but that's the price we have to pay for expansion. I'd also favor a nine game schedule. To not play a conference rival for ten years is idiotic.
 
Crimson1967 said:
Scarbo wrote about this in today's Birmingham Thrice Weekly News. He was in favor of it and I'm starting to agree. When only four schools have a non-divisional rival they really care about, it isn't fair to force the other ten to be inconvenienced. I hate to see the old rivalries end, but that's the price we have to pay for expansion. I'd also favor a nine game schedule. To not play a conference rival for ten years is idiotic.
Click to expand...

What is idiotic, and lends to that issue, is a 14 team conference playing the same number (56) of OOC games as it does conference games.
 
kyallie said:
I predict, they go with what they think generates the most money, in increments. Ultimately no more "traditional rivalries", 9 games, maybe more(CNS advocated to play "everybody'), so there will be change for the future....like it or not.
Click to expand...

It's easy to forget now, while Tennessee is down, but the Bama/UT Game isn't just a "traditional rivalry" it's also the number 1 all time team in the conference against the number 2 all time team in the conference. More years than not, it's going to be a marquee game on a national stage and generate lots of interest and viewership. That means it's going to make the other member institutions a lot of money. Does Bama vs Kentucky get your blood flowing? It isn't going to for a non SEC fan either.
 
Part of the reason the big 12 died is because they eliminated traditional rivalry games like OU-Nebraska. Tradition makes college football what it is. There are better solutions to a conference schedule than eliminating traditional rivalries just because some teams don't have one and want to complain because they are currently slated against a "power" team.
 
RammerJammer14 said:
Part of the reason the big 12 died is because they eliminated traditional rivalry games like OU-Nebraska. Tradition makes college football what it is. There are better solutions to a conference schedule than eliminating traditional rivalries just because some teams don't have one and want to complain because they are currently slated against a "power" team.
Click to expand...
Oklahoma-Nebraska, one of college footballs greatest rivalries is apparently gone forever. I would hate to see Alabama vs Tennessee suffer the same fate.
 
Say in 15 years when Florida falls on hard times with a new coach that completely fails and Tennessee finally uses the money they have to buy a top notch coach. Tennessee will be averaging 10 wins a year while Florida is a 6-7 win team every year. Will Les Miles still whine about this situation because it is unfair to us?
 
TideEngineer08 said:
For years, the Tennessee game was my favorite game. Nothing said fall and college football like "The Third Saturday in October." The crimson helmets clashing against the orange jerseys looked like the changing of the leaves that come with the changing of the seasons. I loved that game. But Phil Fulmer and his cronies destroyed it. The hatred and vitriol that resulted has tarnished the game forever for me.

The SEC has already taken the money over tradition route with the expansions in 1992 and last year. If I could be in charge of the decisions, I'd actually move Auburn to the East Division, and Missouri to the West and end the Iron Bowl. That game delivers little to me anymore as well, for similar reasons as the Tennessee game. I realize I'm in the minority, but I'm in favor of allowing the permanent crossover games to end. Unless they go to a 9 game schedule. Then the permanent crossover game can remain intact.
Click to expand...

Besides the pleasure of smacking the snot outta them the past 2 years, I could do w/out playing the barners every year. They have lil brother syndrome and need us a hell of a lot more than we need them. They need to do what aTm did and stand on their own, not try and be like big brother.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back