Why wouldn't this SEC schedule work?

[UTFranklinVol]

This has probably been discussed before but with the addition of OU and TX it seems to me like the following would have balanced the SEC geographically and preserved nearly every "sacred" rivalry. .

East: UT, UK, Vandy, UF, UGA, USC, Bama, Barn
West: OU, TX, TAMU, LSU, Miss, MSU, Mizzou, Arky

That's not only perfectly balanced on a map but if the SEC went to a 9 game schedule you can play 7 teams in your division and keep rotating 2 from the other division every four years AND basically all of the "sacred" SEC rivalries can still be played every year.

 

[Vfl2407]

This has probably been discussed before but with the addition of OU and TX it seems to me like the following would have balanced the SEC geographically and preserved nearly every "sacred" rivalry. .

East: UT, UK, Vandy, UF, UGA, USC, Bama, Barn
West: OU, TX, TAMU, LSU, Miss, MSU, Mizzou, Arky

That's not only perfectly balanced on a map but if the SEC went to a 9 game schedule you can play 7 teams in your division and keep rotating 2 from the other division every four years AND basically all of the "sacred" SEC rivalries can still be played every year.

That makes too much sense to happen.

 

[EconVol92]

The true question about that set up is if it would be lopsided to the East or not.

OU & TX still need to prove if they are going to be able to complete.

Most likely they will, but then I thought the same thing about A&M and they have of this time have not really been a factor.

A&M has the potential along with OU & TX, but LSU is the only team that has proven their salt in the SEC at this time.

Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, Auburn & Alabama have all proven in the past that they can complete and compete at a high level.

To me that is the biggest reason that I don't think that set up is advisable at this time.

 

[pasadenavol]

This has probably been discussed before but with the addition of OU and TX it seems to me like the following would have balanced the SEC geographically and preserved nearly every "sacred" rivalry. .

East: UT, UK, Vandy, UF, UGA, USC, Bama, Barn
West: OU, TX, TAMU, LSU, Miss, MSU, Mizzou, Arky

That's not only perfectly balanced on a map but if the SEC went to a 9 game schedule you can play 7 teams in your division and keep rotating 2 from the other division every four years AND basically all of the "sacred" SEC rivalries can still be played every year.

Because the East would be as dominant as the West was a few years ago and it would stay that way as long as that split remains. UGA, UT, UA, UF > LSU, TEX, OU, TAM

 

[FBtime]

Because the time for divisions has passed.

 

[Firebirdparts]

That's the perfect arrangement and I'm sure they're not doing that.

 

[WillisWG]

The whine in Tuscaloosa and Athens would be ear splitting

 

[Brave Volunteer]

This has probably been discussed before but with the addition of OU and TX it seems to me like the following would have balanced the SEC geographically and preserved nearly every "sacred" rivalry. .

East: UT, UK, Vandy, UF, UGA, USC, Bama, Barn
West: OU, TX, TAMU, LSU, Miss, MSU, Mizzou, Arky

That's not only perfectly balanced on a map but if the SEC went to a 9 game schedule you can play 7 teams in your division and keep rotating 2 from the other division every four years AND basically all of the "sacred" SEC rivalries can still be played every year.

That is what I suggested months ago. It's the perfect setup. It puts all the historic rivalries in the correct divisions to play each other every year and geographically it makes the most sense. But for whatever reason the conference is hell bent doing away with divisions.

 

[Brave Volunteer]

Because the East would be as dominant as the West was a few years ago and it would stay that way as long as that split remains. UGA, UT, UA, UF > LSU, TEX, OU, TAM

That's being a tad short-sighted. I understand why it would appear that way for now. However long term theres no reason not to think the likes of Texas, Oklahoma, LSU, A&M, and even Ole Miss are capable of fielding teams that can compete with Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Auburn, and Florida, especially in the age of the transfer portal. I look at these two potential divisions and see a pretty even set.

 

[GreveHaller]

This has probably been discussed before but with the addition of OU and TX it seems to me like the following would have balanced the SEC geographically and preserved nearly every "sacred" rivalry. .

East: UT, UK, Vandy, UF, UGA, USC, Bama, Barn
West: OU, TX, TAMU, LSU, Miss, MSU, Mizzou, Arky

That's not only perfectly balanced on a map but if the SEC went to a 9 game schedule you can play 7 teams in your division and keep rotating 2 from the other division every four years AND basically all of the "sacred" SEC rivalries can still be played every year.

Because its not your conference

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

The SEC will be 20 or 24 teams soon enough. They don’t need to build up division rivalries of 2x 8 team groups since it will all get blown up in a few years anyway.

Most of the next expansion will probably be with teams farther east. So geographically Bama and Barn would shift back to the West.

The “divisions” will ultimately be the Big10 in one and the SEC in the other. The ACC, Big12, and PAC## will be merged and/or gutted. The Big10 and the SEC organizations are more powerful than the NCAA. They can govern their own affairs without the NCAA taking such a big piece of the revenue pie and bringing the inconsistent, obnoxious governance.

 

[Vfl2407]

The SEC will be 20 or 24 teams soon enough. They don’t need to build up division rivalries of 2x 8 team groups since it will all get blown up in a few years anyway.

Most of the next expansion will probably be with teams farther east. So geographically Bama and Barn would shift back to the West.

The “divisions” will ultimately be the Big10 in one and the SEC in the other. The ACC, Big12, and PAC## will be merged and/or gutted. The Big10 and the SEC organizations are more powerful than the NCAA. They can govern their own affairs without the NCAA taking such a big piece of the revenue pie and bringing the inconsistent, obnoxious governance.

that’s a lot of big prognostications.
if you’re right, we will all call you Miss Cleo and want the lottery numbers.

 

[VolPack22]

As it currently stands for 2024, there are 16 teams. They need to go with 10 conference games. 5 permanent rivals and 5 that rotate so you get to play every team in the conference home/away within a 4-year period but also keep the traditional rivalries intact (i.e. Tennessee would get Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt annually and rotate the remaining 10 teams). Still allows you to schedule a cupcake to start your season and also keep the SEC-ACC rivalry games intact.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

that’s a lot of big prognostications.
if you’re right, we will all call you Miss Cleo and want the lottery numbers.

Well, I’ll take back that the Big10 and SEC will be “divisions”. There will likely be a lot of crossover of teams once those 2 conferences ultimately take over the highest level of FB. I meant that those 2 will somehow combine and kick the NCAA to the curb. The ACC, Big12, and PAC## probably won’t be part of a super conference - although a 4 “division” super conference could preserve a couple in name only. However the ACC and Big12 do hold some leverage as basketball conferences.

Bottom line is that preserving traditional rivalries will be secondary to the finances. USCw, UCLA, Texas, and Oklahoma blew up their 2 conferences.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Because the time for divisions conferences has passed.

FIFY

College football needs to embrace relegation like European kickball.

 

[stevenrich2003]

OP, I have had this exact same thought since I heard UTjr, and OU were going to join the conference. I think everyone wins.

 

[aRmo]

If we played divisionless football last year we would have played in Atlanta. Just sayin.

 

[FBtime]

If we played divisionless football last year we would have played in Atlanta. Just sayin.

Exactly!