kdsjr

Recent Comments
I have felt for some time that the best way to expand the playoff, was not to increase the number of playoff teams post conference titles but incorporate conference titles into the “playoff” bracket. With the example of a 16-team conference, 4 conference divisions, that each produce a champion, that then compete in a conference semi-final, and then conference championship. Those could be the first two rounds of the playoff, and the existing semi-final games, national championship game could be kept as is. The advantages would be that the max number of games a team could end up playing would only increase by 1, it keeps the conference championships important and meaningful, and it ensures that two teams in a conference won’t end up playing each other three times in a season.
Upset about the absence of this game most of all. Only border state in the conference for South Carolina, and the two have played each other pretty much every year since the late 50s. 6th most played opponent for UGA and 2nd most played opponent for SC.
Correction, Kentucky will be a road game in the Eastern Time zone.
South Carolina's schedule is a loser from my perspective as a fan. No Georgia, Florida, or Tennessee. Nearest away game is Alabama, over 400 miles away. South Carolina won't play a single conference road game in their time zone.
In the eyes of the SEC, yes it is. The two schools are both located in cities called Columbia, so when Mizzou joined they made it a trophied game "The Mayors Cup" and up until the past few years it's been very competitive. All that said it is not a natural rivalry, I call it one of our "artificial rivalries" a by product of Mizzou A&M addition. That is our other big "rival" "traditional rival" as far as the SEC is concerned looking at our 2024 schedule. I think they are under the impression that South Carolina is located west of the Mississippi.
It's from the long history of the former rivalry. UNC dominated up until the mid 60s, then it kinda flipped. 1903-1964 29-7-4 UNC, 1967-today 13-6 USC. They have only play each other 5 times this century, 4-1 USC.
They did have another option, they could have made Mizzou and A&M cross divisional opponents, like they had done South Carolina and Arkansas. They just didn't want to, they valued the Mizzou Arkansas game more that the South Carolina Arkansas game, which is fair. They could have switch teams though. Didn't make sense to force the two furthest schools from one another play every year. They may very well eventually rebuild the old ACC in the SEC.
I agree, hard to understand how SC didn't keep one of those opponents. Before yesterday, I would have thought if you were to ask the typical UGA fan to rank their SEC rivalries based on importance/interest, they would have said: 1. Florida 2. Auburn 3. Tennessee 4. South Carolina But from what I have heard on here and seen around last night and today Tennessee and South Carolina seem to be flipped for most. It is certainly the most significant conference rivalry for South Carolina. Bama is the closest you are correct. The travel distances are pretty ridiculous.
No. Florida v Georgia will become a home and home series before Georgia travels to College Station. I'm convinced.
I agree. That said, I think they did pretty good for most teams. Georgia keeps 3 of it's 4 main rivals, in my opinion. I think SC and Miss St. got the "worst" schedules in terms of oddity and tradition.
As an SC fan I am pretty disappointed to lose the UGA game. Even more disappointed to have not kept a single game of UGA, Florida, or Tenn. The A&M "rivalry" was kept, the most artificial "rivalry" in the conference, that means nothing historically and makes the least sense geographically. In fact the whole schedule feels that way, nearest opponent's campus is over 330 miles, straight line distance. In terms of schedule difficulty traded UGA, FLA, and Tenn. for LSU, Bama, and Oklahoma, so no help there. Can't say I am surprised. Our biggest rival is out of conference, as far as in conference rivals, we aren't in anyone's top 2, and the SEC has never shown any kind of respect for us in terms of scheduling (ex: broke a 111 year continuous annual rivalry game with Clemson in 2020; made Carolina (and Arky) the team that had to play then additions Mizzou and A&M annually, which makes no sense geographically). Just sucks looking at the 2024 conference opponents and feeling apathetic about it, not caring or feeling any kind of emotional connection to it. I really hope this is, one, not a sign of what is to come, and two, harmful to what Beamer has been developing in Columbia.
I foresee 64; Hell, they could establish 2 team minor league teams for each team in the NFL LOL!
Having to play ClemPson every year does ensure a heightened level of challenge. But I rather that be the case then not playing them. I will never forgive the SEC for going conference only in 2020. All about tradition my tuchus! Enforcing Conference only knowing it would break a 111 year consecutive annual rivalry game was disrespectful. Especially for the BS reason given, when they proceeded to allow non-conference games in the post season.
The 3 - 6 arrangement is one where no care for every team's history rivalries, modern rivalries, and geographic location matter. In my mind, GA must play AU, FU, TN, and SC every year. There is some variation of that for every team. It is impossible to do that if every team has only 3 permanent opponents.
Also my request for specific detailing of how it makes ZERO sense, has not yet been satisfied.
Sure I guess it is "easy" if by that you mean more simplistic, although every single team having it's own individual matchups isn't exactly "simple". I do not think it is better. Ultimately that is a qualitative assessment, but I would say the traditions, history, and geography are part of what make SEC, and college football in general, enjoyable. Teams having only 3 permanent opponents does not accomplish that; Traditional annual rivalry games will be lost. Shared opponents and the fair competition therein, will be lost. The chance for "unfair" scheduling will increase. None of that seems better. For me the SEC not having regional opponents that are share similar schedules is worse, not better. The only two issues with the current divisions is that they are not logically aligned, and it takes way to long for teams to play each other. The only advantage I see in the 3-6 model is that in a 4 year period every team will have played every other, at each respective campus. in the 3-3-3 model that is a 6 year period.
For the 8 game suggestion, I would just switch USC and Tenn: UK vs USC TENN vs Vandy I have a different take on the pods, that is pretty close to yours, but I don't feel like typing it again.
I kindly reject the offer. Pods. Although I would prefer the name "divisions", just 4 of them instead of 2.
Please elaborate on all the points I made, and how they are non-sensical, if pods make, ZERO sense. It is possible that pods do not make the MOST sense, however I have yet to see a suggestion that would be more preservationist of rivalries, geographically designed, and equalizing of schedules. Attached to this is my description of a 3-3-3 scheduling format.
Speaking as a Carolina fan, the only SEC team I have strong feeling we must play against every year is UGA. The proximity, the recruiting, and the almost annual game since the late 50s. Next would be Florida for similar reasons but also the coaching history, and then Missouri, "The Mayors Cup".
A potential solution to that would be that every team schedule a Power 5 non-conference game each year. Some teams are already doing this with a home and home series.
I have never like the 3 & 6 schedule idea, to many rivalries (new and historic) are lost, the lack of teams with shared opponents seems like a loss of "fair competition" (The NFL has divisions), and some of these "groupings" make little geographic sense. If there are going to be 9 conference games I think what would make more sense is the "pods". 4 teams in a pod, totaling 4 pods. 3 games with permanent opponents from a pod, a permanent opponent from the other 3 pods, and then 3 games of rotating opponents, one from each of the other 3 pods. Division: - Permanent cross-division opponents East: Auburn - Texas, Vanderbilt, Alabama Georgia - Oklahoma, Tennessee, Miss State Florida - Texas A&M, Kentucky, LSU South Carolina - Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss West: Arkansas - South Carolina, Tennessee, LSU Oklahoma - Georgia, Vanderbilt, Ole Miss Texas - Auburn, Kentucky, Miss State Texas A&M - Florida, Missouri, Alabama North: Kentucky - Florida, Texas, Miss State Missouri - South Carolina, Texas A&M, LSU Tennessee - Georgia, Arkansas, Alabama Vanderbilt - Auburn, Oklahoma, Ole Miss South: Alabama - Auburn, Texas A&M, Tennessee LSU - Florida, Arkansas, Missouri Miss State - Georgia, Texas, Kentucky Ole Miss - South Carolina, Oklahoma, Vanderbilt Missouri v. Arkansas and Florida v. Tennessee are the biggest annual game loses that I can identify in this structure. Every team will have played every other team at least once in a three year cycle instead of 2, which I would happily trade to keep annual games like LSU v. Florida, Georgia v. Tennessee, Alabama v. both Mississippi schools. at the end of the regular season there would be 4 pod leaders. In a world where CFP was still 4 teams I would have the 4 pod leaders seeded, and have a conference championship playoff. If CFP is expanding I do not know what one does exactly. There are options.
The SEC has a whole document that breaks down how ties are resolved for a Divisional Title. In the case of a three-way tie the following procedure is used to eliminate the "third" team;(Note: If one of the procedures results in one team being eliminated and two remaining, the two-team tiebreaker procedure will be used): A. Combined head to head record among the tied teams; B. Record of the tied teams within the division; C. Head to head competition against the team within the division with the best overall Conference record (divisional and non divisional) and proceeding through the division (multiple ties within the division will be broken from first to last and a tie for first place will be broken before a tie for fourth place); D. Overall Conference record against non divisional teams; E. Combined record against all common non divisional teams; F. Record against the common non divisional team with the best overall Conference record (divisional and non divisional) and proceeding through other common non divisional teams based on their order of finish within their division; and G. Best cumulative Conference winning percentage of non-divisional opponents (Note: If two teams' non-divisional opponents have the same cumulative record, then the two-team tiebreaker procedures apply. If four teams are tied, and three teams' non-divisional opponents have the same cumulative record, the three-team tiebreaker procedures will be used beginning with 2.A.);
UNC is the last team that would leave the ACC. These expansions are all about adding TV markets. Clemson, FSU, and Miami less so, do not add significantly to the SEC as they are already tapped into the largest TV markets in those states.
Maybe I didn't make my chart clear. The four pods are listed vertically, and next to each team is their permanent cross pod rivals, 1 from each pod. Every year; 1 game against the 3 other teams in your pod, 1 game against your 3 cross-pod rivals, and 3 games against one team from each pod, which would rotates each year.
No, Georgia would be in the same pod as both Florida and Auburn. They would play every year.