Texas And Oklahoma Addition

#5
#5
Seems we would play an 18-gm conference schedule, playing each team once, and perhaps three geographic rivals in an annual home-and-home series. I'd assume Tennessee's would Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and South Carolina.

Tennessee, Kentucky, Vandy, South Carolina

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia

Mississippi, Mississippi St., Arkansas, LSU

Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Missouri
 
  • Like
Reactions: beamerman, Volfan1000, BAKOVOLFAN and 1 other person
#6
#6
Chitlin&theDude said:
Basketball? Not good AT ALL for TN in football. We're that much further down the totem poll, and can't seem to get on our feet. Two more quality teams immediately way ahead of us. Not good.
Click to expand...
I think I disagree, but it takes a little bit of projection. Conference divisions will almost certainly be realigned, and I'd guess if the plan is to keep an East/West format, then Bama and Auburn get bumped to the east to accommodate Texas and Oklahoma in the west.

In that event, then everyone in the east now has to play Bama, and Bama has to play Georgia and Florida, too. Winning the East Division, and then the SEC becomes more difficult, but, positioning yourself for a playoff spot becomes easier in an expanded format, say 16 teams. You may finish 10-2 and 2nd place in the east to an 11-1 Bama, but that is well within the grasp of a playoff spot in a 16-tm format. It helps to weaken Bama, Florida, and Georgia even further without really hurting Tennessee because we play all three annually, already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beamerman, C/O, O.G.HomeGrownUTVOL and 4 others
#9
#9
IF they let in 2 more non southeastern school in then they might as well go ahead and change the name of the conference because it is not only schools from the south eastern part of the United States anymore. I felt the same way when Arkansas and Missouri were added.
 
#10
#10
Fatman Photos said:
IF they let in 2 more non southeastern school in then they might as well go ahead and change the name of the conference because it is not only schools from the south eastern part of the United States anymore. I felt the same way when Arkansas and Missouri were added.
Click to expand...

It is a brand. It would also still be the southeast relative to the northeast, Midwest, and far west.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Orange#1, Kngsport VFL, VOLnBama01 and 1 other person
#13
#13
Texas vs. Texas A&M and Texas vs. Arkansas used to be two fiercely competitive rivalries on par with anything in the country. It would be nice to bring those back with the addition of Texas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volfan1000 and Kdbnab1
#16
#16
cncchris33 said:
I think I disagree, but it takes a little bit of projection. Conference divisions will almost certainly be realigned, and I'd guess if the plan is to keep an East/West format, then Bama and Auburn get bumped to the east to accommodate Texas and Oklahoma in the west.

In that event, then everyone in the east now has to play Bama, and Bama has to play Georgia and Florida, too. Winning the East Division, and then the SEC becomes more difficult, but, positioning yourself for a playoff spot becomes easier in an expanded format, say 16 teams. You may finish 10-2 and 2nd place in the east to an 11-1 Bama, but that is well within the grasp of a playoff spot in a 16-tm format. It helps to weaken Bama, Florida, and Georgia even further without really hurting Tennessee because we play all three annually, already.
Click to expand...

I wish I had your optimism but while I think it's great for the SEC to get OU and Texas I don't think it's good at all for Tennessee football.
 
#23
#23
I personally don’t get why some people are so upset about the geographical location of potential new schools and the conference’s name.
Personally I don’t see adding these two teams having that drastic of an effect on Basketball. Football might be a different story though. The SEC has a reputation of being the best football conference and some talent from out west will go to a lesser school just to be in the SEC. It might hurt the weaker teams, which is Tennessee.
Basketball seems like it’s getting better, but it’s still not considered the elite conference for Basketball. Adding two more quality teams could help change that, but I don’t see it having that big of an effect on Tennessee and the other top teams in the conference.
 
#24
#24
Chitlin&theDude said:
Basketball? Not good AT ALL for TN in football. We're that much further down the totem poll, and can't seem to get on our feet. Two more quality teams immediately way ahead of us. Not good.
Click to expand...

Agreed. That said, that's why we hired Heupel. Embrace the challenge.
 
#25
#25
Chris4Vols22 said:
Honestly, I've never really understood the function of conference divisions. Aren't conference standings more accurate without them?
Click to expand...

The 10 team league used to play 18 games. Home and away with everybody. Then when USC and Arkansas were added the two divisions made for the fairest way to schedule. Home and away with 5 division opponents plus alternating home and away with the other 6 in opposite years for a total of 16. It wasn’t equal, but the division rankings determined SECT seedlings. Since adding Missouri and A&M I don’t think they’ve figured out yet how to schedule since some home and away rivalries needed to be retained. 16 teams might mean 14 division games but just play four of the other 8 annually? Play 7 teams twice and don’t play a quarter of the teams each year? Only host the other division teams once every 4 years?

Maybe football goes with two 8 team divisions while basketball experiments with 4x 4-team pods? 6 home and away in the pod plus play the other 12 once for 18 total games?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volfan1000 and golfballs
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top