if a&m joins who will join the east

#51
#51
Incipient said:
While this (or something like it) makes things much more complicated, it opens up a whole array of possible solutions, and is thus probably the best plan going forward.
Click to expand...

so what would you do? Play the 3 teams in your division then play 2 from each of the other divisions?
 
#52
#52
RxVol37055 said:
OU vs Oklahomas State will survive like UGa vs GT survived....or like FSU vs UF...or USC vs Clemson. OSU has plenty of oil money from T. Boone and OU can expand their revenue base by jumping. They don't need to hold OSU's hand.
Click to expand...

they either want to or have to; this isn't one dragging down the other or worrying they can't or would lose the game

it's them pretty much said to be saying "we won't"
 
#55
#55
DjCrenshaw said:
well we could take Ole piss. no one would miss them except msu. Work with me incipient... damn
Click to expand...

I just don't see a way to add a pair of West teams and make two remotely even 7-team divisions while preserving rivalries. Ole Miss has rivalries with MSU and LSU. I don't know what Mississippi State considers its biggest rivalries, but it's the most likely option. Otherwise, you've got to trade Bama and Auburn for Vandy and have a division stuffed with Bama/Auburn/Florida/Tennessee/Georgia. Which actually hurts us less than anybody, because our non-division game would be Vanderbilt, and that'd give us an edge on everybody. But I doubt it'll go through.
 
#58
#58
DjCrenshaw said:
so what would you do? Play the 3 teams in your division then play 2 from each of the other divisions?
Click to expand...

I'd like it to be the 3 teams in your division, one permanent rival from each other division, and then rotate one more from the other divisions every year.

Or maybe the old WAC system from the 90s, although I always found it sort of weird.
 
#59
#59
Incipient said:
I just don't see a way to add a pair of West teams and make two remotely even 7-team divisions while preserving rivalries. Ole Miss has rivalries with MSU and LSU. I don't know what Mississippi State considers its biggest rivalries, but it's the most likely option. Otherwise, you've got to trade Bama and Auburn for Vandy and have a division stuffed with Bama/Auburn/Florida/Tennessee/Georgia. Which actually hurts us less than anybody, because our non-division game would be Vanderbilt, and that'd give us an edge on everybody. But I doubt it'll go through.
Click to expand...

I really don't have an axe to grind. I'm just trying to wrap my mind around it. As long as we keep Bama, I don't really see what the big stink is. The shift of powers and alignments will make new powers within the conference.
 
#60
#60
DjCrenshaw said:
Both. Hey, so why do you hate the am so much? Is it just because of the tejas?
Click to expand...
I don't hate them. It's just that they are butt hurt because Texas is getting everything and they want to bail. Should the SEC be where all of the rejects find a home? Let's just bring in every school that doesn't like their situation and wants a cut of the SEC's revenue.
 
#61
#61
16 teams. 4 divisions. Division winners play SEC playoff for Championship. 2 games the first weekend of December and the championship game the week following. With a "super-conference" does the BCS go away? Would "beating up" on one another effect our conference champions chance at a title game?
 
#62
#62
Incipient said:
I just don't see a way to add a pair of West teams and make two remotely even 7-team divisions while preserving rivalries. Ole Miss has rivalries with MSU and LSU. I don't know what Mississippi State considers its biggest rivalries, but it's the most likely option. Otherwise, you've got to trade Bama and Auburn for Vandy and have a division stuffed with Bama/Auburn/Florida/Tennessee/Georgia. Which actually hurts us less than anybody, because our non-division game would be Vanderbilt, and that'd give us an edge on everybody. But I doubt it'll go through.
Click to expand...

why not trade Ole Miss & Miss St for vandy instead? (if bama+auburn is too much more for the east)
 
#63
#63
UTCVol said:
I'd like it to be the 3 teams in your division, one permanent rival from each other division, and then rotate one more from the other divisions every year.

Or maybe the old WAC system from the 90s, although I always found it sort of weird.
Click to expand...

So are we talking 9 conference games a year?
 
#64
#64
RxVol37055 said:
16 teams. 4 divisions. Division winners play SEC playoff for Championship. 2 games the first weekend of December and the championship game the week following. With a "super-conference" does the BCS go away? Would "beating up" on one another effect our conference champions chance at a title game?
Click to expand...

The big east would sure be rested....
 
#65
#65
Assuming you add two teams to the west, presumably A&M and Oklahoma. You then move Bama to the east and renew some old rivalries. That way the 3rd Saturday in October is a given and Bama can have Barn as an every year rival. I don't see anyone from east of the Mississippi other than maybe VT, FSU, or Miami that would help add TV revenue. If you don't get both of those good teams from either the ACC or the Big Whatever you stick with what is the best conference in college football. :wavey:
 
#66
#66
DjCrenshaw said:
so what would you do? Play the 3 teams in your division then play 2 from each of the other divisions?
Click to expand...

What I would do is having four pods that rotate yearly into two divisions. You play everybody from your pod every year, you play everyone from the other pod that you're with, and you play one permanent rival. Basically, you have four divisions, but each year the divisions pair off and play a round robin, with the best team out of either one going to the conference championship.

This is what the WAC did in the 90s, but they screwed it up by not allowing a free rotation. One pod was always tied to the East and one to the West, so the two in the middle never played each other (so BYU and Utah never played Colorado State, Wyoming, or Air Force).
 
#67
#67
TrueOrange said:
yeah, you really wouldn't, believe me

....then again, you're someone who'd rather scratch out his eyes than add A&M aren't you?
Click to expand...
Why do you think A&M is that important to me? Or the SEC for that matter. That's a ridiculous statement and makes me laugh. Thanks for the humor.
 
#69
#69
DjCrenshaw said:
I really don't have an axe to grind. I'm just trying to wrap my mind around it. As long as we keep Bama, I don't really see what the big stink is. The shift of powers and alignments will make new powers within the conference.
Click to expand...

I'm with you, I'd rather keep Bama and play in the (currently) tougher division. But for those who are screaming for competitive balance, I really don't see a way to do it and preserve rivalries.
 
#72
#72
Incipient said:
I'm with you, I'd rather keep Bama and play in the (currently) tougher division. But for those who are screaming for competitive balance, I really don't see a way to do it and preserve rivalries.
Click to expand...

It will be hard to keep rivalries without adding another conference game.
 
#73
#73
AtlantaVol85 said:
I've heard rumblings of Clemson and Louisville with Va Tech next in line and Miami/FSU/Ga Tech bringing up the rear.

You gotta think Clemson would be up there bc of the overall strength of their AD
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

i've heard nothing other than rumors people are throwing out starting today...before any actual meetings or discussions

USCe, UGA, & UF would throw fits over Clemson, Ga tech, & FSU....and likely Tech doesn't want to come back since they stormed out of the conference on their own (& their academic view is important to them)

Would be surprised to see VT leave; they honestly seem like they're in a situation where they'd laugh and say "you want us to give up THIS luxury?"


I really can't see Louisville being taken unless the conference runs out of options and just simply needs a body....that sounds like someone just went "Hey, they're in the southeast too!" honestly
 
#74
#74
TrueOrange said:
why not trade Ole Miss & Miss St for vandy instead? (if bama+auburn is too much more for the east)
Click to expand...

Then you lose Vandy/Tennessee.

IMO, this needs to be done in a way where every school gets to keep playing their arch-rival at least. Some schools really have two that they need to keep (for instance, Bama has to play UT and AU; Georgia has to play UF and AU).
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top