You'd have to move Alabama and Auburn, because your blithe suggestion of nuking the UA-UT rivalry is a non-starter. Tennessee may've been down for a few years, but history suggests they will come back. Alabama and Tennessee are THE top two programs in SEC history and they have played each other as the conference's top two programs many, many, many times. This is one of the top rivalries in the nation. If UT stays down another 10 years, then maybe you can start thinking of them having permanently been demoted from the top echelon. But for now, you can't realign in a way that destroys that rivalry.

They got any money they wanna get rid of?

Why is this "news?"

Complete hogwash. I'm 61 years old. Some 40 to 50 of the Iron Bowls during my lifetime had nothing to do with the national championship, yet every single one of them was a life and death affair. Remember the '67 Mud Bowl? Punt, Bama, Punt? Wrong-Way Bo? The Kick? Kitchens to Riddle? None of those games impacted the national championship in any way.

It's not a "loophole." There's a specific rule authorizing it. 14.2.1.6 Exception—Former Student Participating in Practice on an Occasional Basis. A former student at the certifying institution (e.g., former student-athlete) may participate in an organized practice session on an occasional basis, provided the institution does not publicize the participation of the former student at any time before the practice session.

I don't know about all the monster stuff, but that was some slobber-knockin' right there.

Arkansas has played TAMU and TCU. That's two formidable opponents. I have been astonished by what I have seen from Allen so far this year. It's still too early in the season to 100% trust it, but based on what I have seen, I tend to agree. He has been very NFL-looking.

We will definitely take down all those expensive jumbotrons once organized football is no more because we failed to address the safety issue. The real issue is whether you like football enough that you will still watch it with a few moderate, sensible changes or whether you want to just stay a purist and screw football altogether.

It's a no-brainer, if you ask me. 1. Player safety is the biggest issue facing the game. Do you like football? Do you want football to stay around? If the answer is yes, you MUST support addressing player safety. No more of these snide remarks about sissies blah blah blah wear dresses blah blah blah. Do you like football? Safety is an issue of the sport's survival. If you disagree, you're flat wrong. Once you get that, it's truly a no-brainer. 2) Kickoffs aren't real football, they're just a carry-over from ancient days when the game truly did begin as a game about kicking. Now they're just a one-off play that you interrupt the real action for (with the real action being trying to move the ball to get first downs and score against a defense from the line of scrimmage). Kickoffs usually have little effect on the game, and what effect they do have is largely random. Losing kickoffs is really not a big deal. 3) Why interrupt the real game to throw in some different, more dangerous twist? When safety is a survival issue?

Saban has to dole out some sort of discipline, but it need not be excessive. There is a lot of work and counseling they have already agreed to, and the main thing is . . . The DA said there is not enough evidence to convict. Got that? If not, I'll shout it; plug your ears if you are sensitive. THE DA SAID THERE IS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO CONVICT. Now does any poster in this thread know the facts better than the local DA?

Not really. And Alabama's roster has never set up as well under Saban, across the board, as it does this year. In fact, I would say it is not particularly close. Of course, "down" is the safe bet for a column like this after a national championship, so I'm not going to jump on the writer to hard, but . . . I expect this team to be better than last year's team. Injuries can bust up any team, of course, but if Bama stays healthy I'm looking for one of the all-time great teams, with no weakness on O or D.

There was zero reason to be high on Auburn pre-season last year, even if you (wrongfully) bought into a QB only because he had played very well as a sub in one game where the other team didn't prep for him. Auburn lost 4 of their last 5 games in 2014. The only win was against Samford, and it was not a blowout. Plus they had heavy graduation losses. It was a mass hallucination to rank them high pre-season. Tennessee is a different story. They were actually pretty close to a top team last year, with close losses to Alabama, Oklahoma and Florida between them and an excellent season. They finished on a run and they're bringing back a lot of starters. It makes perfect sense to pick them as the East favorite and a top 10 team.

I don't think it would be right or fair to make a retroactive rule prohibiting Michigan from doing it this year, but it should be a one-time thing. Athletes already work harder than other students, their spring breaks shouldn't be stolen from them.

Yes, Alabama fans have the highest expectations, but I have trouble seeing how the team that actually HAS won X (where X = some indefinite, but for sure quite large number) national championships could be classified as "delusional." I was born in 1955. During my lifetime, Alabama has 11 national championships either through BCS, playoff, or one or more of the established polls (AP or UPI) and since 1960 has probably been a serious contender for the title as many years as it has not been. There's nothing "delusional" about Bama fans expecting a coach to bring home natties.

The top 2 high school inside linebackers in the nation should ease the pain at linebacker a bit. Otherwise a pretty good write-up.

I can see giving him a tryout because of the combine numbers, but I wouldn't was a 7th-round draft pick on him. The NFL ain't a beginner league.

Will Muschamp: brings out-of-control insanity to the program. I mean seriously, South Carolina? Not only is this guy becoming increasingly unhinged, but he couldn't even succeed at FLORIDA: a MUCH easier place to win than South Carolina.

Alabama had 2 true freshman starters last year (Minkah Fitzpatrick and Calvin Ridley). Daron Payne and Ronnie Harrison were also true freshmen who played a lot on defense. Marlon Humphrey and Ross Pierschbacher were redshirt freshman starters. As for your nonsensical think about lucky to plays as seniors? News flash: Alabama has 22 of their 85 scholarshipped players start, just like everybody else. . . .

Seriously, if Alabama's not in your top 5? You need to rethink that index. This will be Bama's most loaded roster yet, and it's not particularly close.

I'm finding it REALLY difficult to believe that 3 SEC East teams have tougher schedules than Alabama, who plays the West, Tennessee and Southern Cal. True Alabama catches a small break by playing UK as the other East team next year, but still, please, most of the toughest schedules are NOT in the East! That's absurd.

I have a sneaking suspicion this article was drafted earlier and then you didn't update it when Jonathan Allen passed on the draft this year. He's a gold-plated first rounder for next year.

If you want to hype your school, Don, you'd do well to identify it. But still . . . "85% of their defensive tackles?" The lowest number of units that any whole number could constitute 85% of is 20. Your school has 20 DTs on the roster? WOW!

Alabama played 12 top 30 teams

Thank you. I believe that after 8 straight years of being a serious national championship contender well into November, it's about time for Alabama to start at or very near the top of the rankings EVERY year until there's some really good reason to believe the run is over. It sure doesn't look over now. In 2013, Saban recruited his highest-ranked class yet at Alabama (by Rivals star ratings). Then in 2014, Saban recruited a higher-ranked class than that. And in 2015, Saban recruited another class that was even higher-ranked than those. That's right, Saban's 3 highest-ranked recruiting classes were the last 3 years. Yet, Alabama should start out 4th? Behind a team that only returns about 6 starters?

Isn't it about time, after 8 straight years of being #1 at some point in the season and of being a serious national championship contender well into November, that Alabama got the benefit of the doubt in a preseason poll? You know Alabama's 2015 recruiting class was the highest-rated class Saban has pulled in? Did you know Alabama's 2014 recruiting class was the SECOND-highest-rated class Saban has pulled in? Did you know Alabama's 2013 recruiting class was the THIRD-highest-rated class Saban has pulled in? Yet this year the Tide is going to be middle-of-the-pack in its division? Riiiiight. . . . The reality, OF COURSE, is that Alabama is going to be IMPROVED next year with the most loaded roster it has had yet, as well as a real quarterback for once. I am confidently expecting Saban's best team. And Ole Miss? Really? After losing Tunsil, both Nkemdiches and Treadwell, the heart of their team?

I guess this is based on expectations? Look, Auburn lost 4 out of their last 5 games last year, and then had heavy graduation losses to boot. Just because a bunch of media idiots thought for some totally inexplicable reason that they were the SEC favorite doesn't mean that they should get an "F" for a season that was, realistically, no worse than a mild disappointment. Simply put, there was never ANY reason to think Auburn was going to be excellent this year.

I don't agree on Ole Miss. Their losses are too heavy. I think UT probably deserves a top 5 spot, though. I expect the East to power up a little bit next year, although they will still be behind the West.

#22 Northwestern #23 Tennessee Does it seem like some people didn't pay attention to the SEC's performance in bowls? For example, are there people who actually think that Iowa is 7 spots better than LSU? If LSU played Iowa next week on a neutral field, they would be 13-point favorites and the sharps would be laying the points. And Tennessee would flat-out slaughter about 10 teams that are ranked in front of them.

Oh, it's a "value judgment" as to whether a playoff game, or a game between two games that couldn't make the playoff, is more important. Puh-leez. (Insert Picard hand-over-eyes image here.)

No, I think it's all New Year's Eve. There is no indication whatsoever that college football is fading in popularity. Ratings during the season were just fine. Empty stadiums is a factor of numerous bowl games - if a game generates little national interest, features two teams from far away without wealthy, traveling fanbases (of which there are really only la few), there are going to be a lot of empty seats. That ain't a new thing. I do think it would be a good idea to spread the bowl games out more. Fill the weekends between conference championships and New Year's, like they used to do. More prime-time games, like they used to have. Why do all the bowls have to be jammed into one 10-day period when it means games are being played at noon on a work day?