Nick Saban questions SEC's 3 permanent opponents proposed for Alabama football schedule for 2024

bamaclimber

3rd Team
Nov 28, 2016
200
470
87
I know the SEC's schedule has been discussed hypothetically, but I'm curious about a more focused conversation around any particular school's ability to say "yes" or "no" to whatever the SEC comes up with.

For example, could Alabama's athletic department say, "No, we aren't going to accept three historical top 10 programs as our permanents, while other schools get one, or maybe two, in their permanent three?" Could Vandy's AD push back? Everyone isn't going to be made happy. Does any one program have more pull though?

Also, is Saban referencing something the SEC has published, or is he referring to media speculation? Or is he referring to something the SEC has shared with ADs directly, maybe?

 
  • Like
Reactions: GP for Bama and Con

cjhadley

1st Team
Jan 1, 2007
604
599
112
41
Brewton, Alabama, United States
It has to be meadia speculation or discussions he has had with the AD and president of the University. I don't think the SEC has released anything on scheduling and from interviews tht Sankey gave a few weeks ago, a 9 game 3 permanent opponent schedule is the most likely, but it hasn't been settled on.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,619
4,545
187
44
kraizy.art
I just know the SEC is trying to screw over Alabama here, in a pretty bad way.

Remember under this new format there will be no divisions, so presumably just the two teams with the best records. Now, if your permanent opponents happen to be LSU, Auburn, and Tennessee, while another team might have Kentucky and Vanderbilt, who do we think stands a better chance of making the conference championship (with then can trigger an automatic bid into the playoff)?

This is absurd... they are trying to bake in imbalances between the SEC East and the SEC West without having the divisions, basically meaning two old SEC East teams will have a much better chance of making the conference championship game simply due to SEC East teams being their permanent rivals.
 

BamaMoon

Hall of Fame
Apr 1, 2004
21,427
17,174
282
Boone, NC
CNS doesn't say anything publicly without intent. I like how he's trying to "protect" Bama and get out in front of this possibility.

He has the biggest influence in college football and the SEC.

FWIW, I totally agree with him we shouldn't have 3 top SEC teams as permanents!

The longer this goes on I say forget the permanent rivals and just play a round-robin so everybody plays everybody ASAP.
 

Crimson1967

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2011
18,912
10,194
187
Personally, I have always loved Bama's long-standing rivalries with Vandy ("Bama' you're next!"), Kentucky (the Coach Bryant Bowl), and Mizzou (the "We Don't Share a Border Bowl").
I call this MO-SC game the “We needed a warm body to get to an even number” game.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,352
31,148
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
Realistically, we should always have Auburn and UT on the schedule. Our 3rd permanent should be Mississippi St. since they're the closest to us and if not our longest continuous opponent, at least close to it. LSU wasn't a blip on our radar until the 2000's.
Yep, MSU is our longest running opponent. UT is our 2nd longest. AU would be right there if the series had not been discontinued for 40 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GP for Bama

BamaMoon

Hall of Fame
Apr 1, 2004
21,427
17,174
282
Boone, NC
It's not that I mind AU/UT/LSU every year, it's that the list I've seen does not include another team with 3 historically strong programs as its permanents.

Gotta scrap this model entirely, IMO. I agree with a full rotation if this is the alternative. No permanents.
Correct...and for the record my complaint isn't that we'd play them every year (cause we do anyway) but it's that nobody else will have 3 perms of this historical caliber.

And it's also lost on every other fan base how Bama gets "everybody's best shot" every year anyway, but we know it.

Yep, MSU is our longest running opponent. UT is our 2nd longest. AU would be right there if the series had not been discontinued for 40 years.
And that's the other thing. If we are using "history" any at all, it ought to be MSU, UT and Auburn.

But since we apparently are going to play lose and fast with this model I'd say we drop Auburn and just add LSU!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TideEngineer08

Crimson1967

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2011
18,912
10,194
187
Here is a chart of all time SEC records. The schools are sorted in order of conference winning percentage but overall isn’t much different. It only includes time in the SEC, so pre-1933 isn’t included, nor are years prior to joining the SEC for the newcomers or anything for TX/OK.

52EAE78B-68D0-4EC0-92BD-79CE089460D8.jpeg
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,619
4,545
187
44
kraizy.art
Here is a chart of all time SEC records.
Absolutely insane.

Remove GT and they are seriously proposing Alabama play 3, 4 and 6 every single year. Not that I have any pity on them, but only Auburn has more to gripe about. They are most likely going to get to play #1 and #2 every single year.

This whole thing reeks.

I imagine LSU will end up raising a stink about this to though, as they won't want to have to play #1 and #5 every single year either. Swapped out with Miss. State this will stink less, but the whole idea of permanent rivals without divisions just reeks of inequity.
 
Last edited:

New Posts

Latest threads