Blog: Debating cross-divisional rivalries
- Thread starter kyallie
- Start date
Where was the concerns when Alabama was playing anywhere from 4 to 6 teams with a bye week before they play them? The heck with them. Play football. Tenn. will be back.
Right now they don't. Rules can be changed. I'm leaning more and more to removing the divisions and going to a few permanent and a rotation for the rest.
I can see the 0-3-5 causing major debate especially if your 3 happen to be Vandy, Kentucky and MSU. That is why I see no need for any permanent rivals. IMO to be fair to all play 9 games on a rotating basis. I understand some years you will have 4 home conference games and 5 the next year. Since we all agree it is ultimately about money what difference does it make.
Last edited:
An issue related to the nine game schedule is the Florida-Georgia game. I imagine if they do go to nine games, they'd want to rig the schedule so the year they "host" that game, they would be scheduled to have five home conference games. Otherwise, they'd only have three true home conference games every other year. Their in state rival games would also be a factor.
Last year, Florida played Georgia as a road game and also had FSU on the road. Georgia hosted both Florida and Georgia Tech.
Last year, Florida played Georgia as a road game and also had FSU on the road. Georgia hosted both Florida and Georgia Tech.
ESPN or CBS would love it, but UGA already has GT OOC every year. Georgia wouldn't be able to play AU and GT OOC. They would have to drop API.
For UT to be newsworthy, another team must falter. That is the biggest factor. UT needs a school in a state with more talent to fail.
And as others mentioned, UT's athletic department has very little money to hire the big name coach to turn the program around without needing other teams to fail.
Without the permanent rivalry spot, I'm not sure any of those 4 teams would want to continue the rivalry as an OOC game.
As others have referenced, the rules do not allow for this. Some posters think the rule will be changed. Not sure what makes those posters believe that.
For those in favor of a 0-3-5, who does Bama make the 3 permanent opponents?
I feel the SEC is being guilted into doing something stupid.
First Tradition is what College Football is all about.
Playing 8 SEC games is harder than any other conference schedule period. Any team in the SEC can take the other down.
I hear what CNS says about playing everyone within 4 years & that could be done but I'm afraid CFB is going more & more after the NFL model of playoffs. Then the exciting news is that a team that barely gets in wins it all. This makes the season games lesser in meaning.
When everyone else is telling us what we should do then be very careful. Seems to me the SEC has done ok.
First Tradition is what College Football is all about.
Playing 8 SEC games is harder than any other conference schedule period. Any team in the SEC can take the other down.
I hear what CNS says about playing everyone within 4 years & that could be done but I'm afraid CFB is going more & more after the NFL model of playoffs. Then the exciting news is that a team that barely gets in wins it all. This makes the season games lesser in meaning.
When everyone else is telling us what we should do then be very careful. Seems to me the SEC has done ok.
Les Miles, apparently a Florida alumni, seems to think football has only existed for the past 10 years.
If you go back to 1990-2002, you will find two instances where Bama had to play FL, GA and UT (LSU never did that during that time period). You will also find that Bama had to play at least two of the three (FL, GA, UT) seven times while LSU had to do it eight. This does not count SEC Champ games, otherwise the number for Bama goes up. If you count the number of times that Bama as had to play against the "top" teams from the East (based on records for each year, which includes USC in '00 and '01), you will find that Bama has played against at least two of the top East teams in a season, nine times from 1990-2002, while LSU had to it 8 times.
But, obviously, football didn't count during those days because Les wasn't at LSU then . . .
Since '03, it's a little different; but not much. Bama has played at least 2 of the Big 3 (FL, GA, UT) in seven seasons, while LSU has done it 9 times. Against "top" teams from the East each season, Bama has had to face two of the "top" teams three times and LSU did it three times (although, technically, in '09 FL was the ONLY top team in the East; so LSU only played one top team that season).
The "toughness" of the rotating and permanent schedule (opponents) has really evened out since 92 if you take a close look at it (at least from Bama and LSU's perspective). Les is just being a whiner . . .
If you go back to 1990-2002, you will find two instances where Bama had to play FL, GA and UT (LSU never did that during that time period). You will also find that Bama had to play at least two of the three (FL, GA, UT) seven times while LSU had to do it eight. This does not count SEC Champ games, otherwise the number for Bama goes up. If you count the number of times that Bama as had to play against the "top" teams from the East (based on records for each year, which includes USC in '00 and '01), you will find that Bama has played against at least two of the top East teams in a season, nine times from 1990-2002, while LSU had to it 8 times.
But, obviously, football didn't count during those days because Les wasn't at LSU then . . .
Since '03, it's a little different; but not much. Bama has played at least 2 of the Big 3 (FL, GA, UT) in seven seasons, while LSU has done it 9 times. Against "top" teams from the East each season, Bama has had to face two of the "top" teams three times and LSU did it three times (although, technically, in '09 FL was the ONLY top team in the East; so LSU only played one top team that season).
The "toughness" of the rotating and permanent schedule (opponents) has really evened out since 92 if you take a close look at it (at least from Bama and LSU's perspective). Les is just being a whiner . . .
The rule was never intended for 1A conferences. The NCAA had a meltdown when the SEC did so. Therefore, the chances the SEC would get the rule changed for their benefit are slim and none. And slim just left.
That ain't happening. Danny Ford once said, "I ain't never not been a winner." UGA and API ain't never not played. They have played each other every year in which both have fielded a football team ever since both started playing football. They played before there ever was an SEC. They will play if the SEC stops scheduling them to play.
I don't think they should get rid of the cross-division rivalries. The Alabama-Tennessee and Georgia-Auburn along with other rivalries is what makes the SEC great. If the SEC starts to do away with traditions like these then I think that it will hurt the conference in the future. Unless I have missed it, I haven't heard Florida complaining about having to play LSU every year, so why is LSU complaining about having to play Florida? But, to satisfy LSU maybe they should switch them to someone else like South Carolina or Missouri. Arkansas plays South Carolina every year, so they can just switch them to LSU-South Carolina and Arkansas-Florida and keep everything else the same.
LSU fans have been whining about having to play UF every year since 1992. It is very rare that you see a UF fan complain about having to play LSU. What irritates me is the fact that LSU scheduled UF 36 of the 39 years prior to expansion in 1992. From 1953-1991, when schools made out their own schedules, LSU, with no SEC gun to their head, scheduled UF every year except 1968-70. I wonder why the heck the SEC thought they might be rivals?
http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/...&team2=Florida
Bama's three permanent (every year) rivals under this format would probably be Auburn, Tennessee, and Mississippi State. Bama has played those teams 77, 95, and 97 times respectively. All traditional rivalries could be saved under this format....including...Florida-Georgia, Auburn-Georgia, LSU-Ole Miss, Tennessee-Vandy, Tennessee-Kentucky, Ole-Miss-Mississippi State, and others. At the same time every SEC team would play every other SEC team twice every four years.
Under Les Miles, LSU has "had" to play Tulane and North Texas more than any other SEC team as well. Think they'll add that to their complaints????
I have been reading with interest some of the different proposals to fix the scheduling problem in the SEC. While the 0-3-5 format sounds good, I don't think the NCAA will ever change the rules to allow a championship game without there being 2 divisions with at least 6 teams.
Instead, why not rotate games with the cross-divisional and the inter-divisional teams. With an eight game schedule you could have 1 permanent team and rotate the other 5 teams within the division so you are playing them 3 out of 5 years. Then with the cross-divisional teams you could have 1 permanent team and rotate the other 6 teams so you are playing them 3 out of 6 years.
Sort of a (1-3)(1-3) SEC schedule. Of course with a 9 game schedule it becomes (1-3)(1-4) schedule. This way you would not go more than 2 years without playing a particular SEC team.
I am not saying this is better than some of the others mentioned here, only that I like it better. I want to see the games with AU and UT continue every year. I am not necessarily thrilled to have to play the LSU's of the world every single year.
Anyway, that is my 2 cents.
Instead, why not rotate games with the cross-divisional and the inter-divisional teams. With an eight game schedule you could have 1 permanent team and rotate the other 5 teams within the division so you are playing them 3 out of 5 years. Then with the cross-divisional teams you could have 1 permanent team and rotate the other 6 teams so you are playing them 3 out of 6 years.
Sort of a (1-3)(1-3) SEC schedule. Of course with a 9 game schedule it becomes (1-3)(1-4) schedule. This way you would not go more than 2 years without playing a particular SEC team.
I am not saying this is better than some of the others mentioned here, only that I like it better. I want to see the games with AU and UT continue every year. I am not necessarily thrilled to have to play the LSU's of the world every single year.
Anyway, that is my 2 cents.
Just playing devil's advocate, those complaining about UT being Alabama's permanent rival will really complain about those 3 permanents.
I think the cross-divisional games will be dead in three years.
Bama-UT and Georgia-Auburn are really the only ones anyone cares about and they have become so one sided in the last few years that there won't be enough to save them when everyone else wants the change.
Bama-UT and Georgia-Auburn are really the only ones anyone cares about and they have become so one sided in the last few years that there won't be enough to save them when everyone else wants the change.
Trending content
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thread 'Why has Bama been terrible on both sides of the line for 4 or 5 years?'- SMOKIESBAMAFAN
Replies: 47 -
Latest threads
-
ESPN: Pavia sorry for 'disrespectful' Heisman reaction- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
LA high school state championship lost partially due to late flag
- Started by Marg
- Replies: 1
-
ESPN: Wiggin, coach who lost on 'The Play,' dies at 91
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Tide's DeBoer: No interest in other job openings
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
