Scenario Villiage SEC Schedule Style

[Wild Turkey]

Under the new plan, we would still be seeing Florida, Georgia, etc. probably every 2 years.

They are not cancelling Tennessee-Vandy, that is an in-state rivalry and a game that has been played over 108 times and is one of the longest running series in College Football. Maybe if Vandy left the SEC, they might cancel the series but you are not going to have two teams from the same state in a conference that are NOT playing each other annually.

For example, if FSU joined the SEC, do you really think the SEC wouldn't move a game off Florida's 3 to add FSU?

Then it will come down to hard your admin fights for it and is willing to give up KY.

I don’t see the game having any chance of survival if we go to an 8 game conference schedule with one permanent opponent. They are not going to let Tenn have Vandy when Georgia is playing Florida, Auburn vs AL, OU vs UT, LSU vs aTm etc. The Auburn Georgia game doesn’t survive at that point and it’s the oldest and most played game in the SEC.

There is going to be pain involved.

 

[Wild Turkey]

What we are saying is that you are posting as if the UTjr v. Vandy rivalry isn't one that will be kept as much as they will keep UF/UGA, AU/UA, OU/TX, etc. It is. I get that it means nothing to you. But neither does OM/MSU but you know they will keep that one. In state rivalries, even where one of the teams stinks like Vandy is still important in business and offices around that state where you alumni from both schools.

As for UTjr getting UA, VU and UK, I can see that. Truth be told, UK is basically on the same level as UTjr is right now and perhaps even considered better based on recent results. The way this is going to have to work is that the bottom SEC teams are going to get easier schedules than the top teams. They want that for the change of going to a bowl game, and TV will want it for eyeballs. And UTjr is in the bottom right now so they may get two easier games. I could also see UTjr getting UF if they don't have UF/LSU or UF/AU. For UF, UGA is a must but they then have UTjr, AU and LSU as 3 important rivals. They will get at least one of those.

What I’m saying is don’t be shocked when it doesn’t happen.

Also, you would be surprised how many people watch the egg bowl being a Thanksgiving Day game. They pulled over two million viewers.

Here is the only article I can find on UT vs Vandy ratings:

Tennessee vs. Vanderbilt football game TV ratings plummet

Ratings for the annual Tennessee-Vanderbilt game dropped by 12 points and more than 111,000 households.

eu.tennessean.com

They lost 110k viewers in the Nashville market alone last year. The game doesn’t even have reportable national ratings probably because it was under 300k viewers and half of those would be sports bars that just have the game on. UT vs KY drew 1.5 million Viewers.

I’m just saying anything that doesn’t pull ratings is in danger of taking a second position.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

What I’m saying is don’t be shocked when it doesn’t happen.

Also, you would be surprised how many people watch the egg bowl being a Thanksgiving Day game. They pulled over two million viewers.

Here is the only article I can find on UT vs Vandy ratings:

Tennessee vs. Vanderbilt football game TV ratings plummet

Ratings for the annual Tennessee-Vanderbilt game dropped by 12 points and more than 111,000 households.

eu.tennessean.com

They lost 110k viewers in the Nashville market alone last year. The game doesn’t even have reportable national ratings probably because it was under 300k viewers and half of those would be sports bars that just have the game on. UT vs KY drew 1.5 million Viewers.

I’m just saying anything that doesn’t pull ratings is in danger of taking a second position.

Goodness, you’re obtuse. It’s a main SEC rivalry that isn’t going anywhere. SMH. If everything was money, Vandy would be out of the SEC. As long as you have lower teams there will be some rivalries that don’t have the dollar value of others but still are tradition so they will be preserved.

 

[Volbound1700]

Then it will come down to hard your admin fights for it and is willing to give up KY.

I don’t see the game having any chance of survival if we go to an 8 game conference schedule with one permanent opponent. They are not going to let Tenn have Vandy when Georgia is playing Florida, Auburn vs AL, OU vs UT, LSU vs aTm etc. The Auburn Georgia game doesn’t survive at that point and it’s the oldest and most played game in the SEC.

There is going to be pain involved.

We won't be doing that and not just for Tennessee's perspective. That would mess up a lot of rivalries across the conference. I think they keep at least 3 permanent opponents for each team. That seems to be the magic number.

 

[Deep Creek]

You guys are making me think about "must keep" games in and among other conferences.

 

[Wild Turkey]

We won't be doing that and not just for Tennessee's perspective. That would mess up a lot of rivalries across the conference. I think they keep at least 3 permanent opponents for each team. That seems to be the magic number.

It’s 50/50 right now. You are underestimating half the league believing they need that extra cupcake for bowl eligibility. The other P5 fans aren’t wrong when they accuse us of that. Winning in the SEC will get harder for most schools in the East and a little lighter for those in the West. My perspective is Auburn’s schedule can’t get harder so whatever they do is great for us.

Vandy, Mizzou, SC and KY not so much.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

It’s 50/50 right now. You are underestimating half the league believing they need that extra cupcake for bowl eligibility. The other P5 fans aren’t wrong when they accuse us of that. Winning in the SEC will get harder for most schools in the East and a little lighter for those in the West. My perspective is Auburn’s schedule can’t get harder so whatever they do is great for us.

Vandy, Mizzou, SC and KY not so much.

You are underestimating that 1-7 obliterates dozens of some of the best and longest-held rivalries. Based on your UTjr v. Vandy posts I don't think you truly understand the importance of tradition and rivalries in the SEC.

 

[Volbound1700]

It’s 50/50 right now. You are underestimating half the league believing they need that extra cupcake for bowl eligibility. The other P5 fans aren’t wrong when they accuse us of that. Winning in the SEC will get harder for most schools in the East and a little lighter for those in the West. My perspective is Auburn’s schedule can’t get harder so whatever they do is great for us.

Vandy, Mizzou, SC and KY not so much.

I definitely think right now that Auburn has the toughest SEC Schedule in the league. However, Tennessee is pretty close and years past Tennessee might have had the toughest schedule. Auburn's schedule is tougher now mostly due to the fact the Mississippi Schools are up and Florida is significantly down. Also Tennessee got a blessing with Missouri coming to the East while you guys got A&M. The first 5 years of the expansion, Missouri was a tough opponent but lately they haven't been as strong.

Kind of a good lineup of the schedules

Same Opponents: Alabama, Georgia (we both have these titans on our schedule every year)

Different Opponents lineup (Auburn left, Tennessee right)

LSU - Florida (right now this favors Auburn because LSU is stronger than Florida)
Texas A&M - Missouri (this might be the most lopsided annual opponent in favor of Auburn's schedule being harder)
Miss State - Kentucky (Kentucky might win this one)
Ole Miss - South Carolina
Arkansas - Vanderbilt (another lopsided series)

Presently, your schedule kills Tennessee on difficulty but if you were to go back say to 2009 timeframe, Tennessee's lineup would be harder because you had Franklin at Vandy, Kentucky was up, South Carolina had Spurrier and was ranked, Missouri was up, and Florida had Urban Meyer and was in the Title Hunt).

Part of the reason both of our schedules are tough is because we both have Alabama and Georgia. If you go all-time, historically the SEC East was pretty on par with SEC West in difficulty. The bottom of the SEC East has always been weaker but the top was historically at the same level or even tougher than the West (especially in the 1990s-early 2000s with Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee often being the highest ranked SEC teams). East was always dragged down by UK and Vandy though (especially Vandy).

Giving the East Missouri and the West A&M really made the divisions even more uneven.

As an Auburn fan, I can see why you want to change the arrangement. Definitely, I think you guys have it tough.

 

[Wild Turkey]

You are underestimating that 1-7 obliterates dozens of some of the best and longest-held rivalries. Based on your UTjr v. Vandy posts I don't think you truly understand the importance of tradition and rivalries in the SEC.

I’m not over or underestimating anything I’m just stating what has been said.

1. Commissioner has said many models were looked at and two are under consideration.
A. 9 team schedule and 3 permanent conference opponents
B. 8 team schedule with 1

2. The SEC has voted twice on going to a 9 game schedule and only 2 schools voted for it (Auburn & Alabama).

If you use logic instead of emotion then you will see there will be push back from at least a group of the 12 who voted a 9 team schedule down. This is exactly why there hasn’t been an announcement yet because the conference office wants a 9 and trying to build consensus behind he scenes. If there was consensus then an announcement would be made one would think so teams could put plans in place and scheduling issues resolved (sooner the better).

Tell me where I’m wrong.

 

[outofyourmind]

If you use logic instead of emotion then you will see there will be push back from at least a group of the 12 who voted a 9 team schedule down. This is exactly why there hasn’t been an announcement yet because the conference office wants a 9 and trying to build consensus behind he scenes. If there was consensus then an announcement would be made one would think so teams could put plans in place and scheduling issues resolved (sooner the better).

Tell me where I’m wrong.

So which side do you think wins

 

[Wild Turkey]

So which side do you think wins

I tend to take emotion out of it and follow the money. Money = ratings and big rivalries create ratings so the smart money would be that priority is going to be given to a system that produces the most consistent big games and builds ratings.

That would 9 & 3 but it is going to mean games that create ratings are at risk like Tenn vs Vandy.

I’m not saying that to be inconsistent but just following the money. Do you think the conference wants to see UT vs Vandy every year or UT vs Florida? It may be that it makes sense to do a UK & Vandy rather than move other teams around but that would be to Tennessee detriment. Nobody is going to be watching UT vs Vandy so that’s a game you lose recruiting eyeballs. What games do big time recruits want to visit UT to see? Georgia, Florida and Alabama. Well two of those are gone.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I’m not over or underestimating anything I’m just stating what has been said.

1. Commissioner has said many models were looked at and two are under consideration.
A. 9 team schedule and 3 permanent conference opponents
B. 8 team schedule with 1

2. The SEC has voted twice on going to a 9 game schedule and only 2 schools voted for it (Auburn & Alabama).

If you use logic instead of emotion then you will see there will be push back from at least a group of the 12 who voted a 9 team schedule down. This is exactly why there hasn’t been an announcement yet because the conference office wants a 9 and trying to build consensus behind he scenes. If there was consensus then an announcement would be made one would think so teams could put plans in place and scheduling issues resolved (sooner the better).

Tell me where I’m wrong.

You are wrong that I am looking at this emotionally ... LOL, it's a sports board.

Otherwise, you have stated obvious facts ... it's between 3-6 and 1-7, and there is a split. They are trying to come to a consensus. Everyone knows that.

Where I believe you are wrong is your insistence in this thread that tradition and rivalries don't matter. I believe that 1-7 is out because it would trash a half dozen or more rivalries, some of which have gone on for a century. That matters. I believe that at the end of the day they will do a 3-6 with the top teams playing 2 tops, and the bottom teams playing two bottoms. Then I think the SEC lobbies the NCAA to get rid of the 6 game win rule with bowls, and the bottoms schedule 3 relatively easy OOC games if going bowling really matters that much to them.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

So which side do you think wins

3-6 with traditional rivalries preserved. The top teams will play 2 tops, and the bottom teams will play two bottoms. As the video I posted yesterday laid out the first decision will be to maintain rivalries. They will then do geographically located games - in state and border wars. The final few matchups will look for the most interesting games, if possible.

The problem with @Wild Turkey 's argument is two-fold. First, he underestimates the value of tradition and long-term rivalries, and he doesn't understand the ESPN contract. The ESPN contract was signed in 2020-ish. It's a done deal. Even the addition of OU and TX doesn't guarantee that ESPN has to renegotiate. This is actually something I just learned recently. The same is true with the scheduling ... it doesn't matter money-wise unless ESPN decides they should re-negotiate. I can see them renegotiating with the addition of OU and TX, and scheduling may come into play - in other words they will want the best games. But the rescheduling alone isn't a money play from a TV perspective. It is from a "butts in seats" perspective.

So, at the end of the day, they will move away from divisions to divsionless scheduling that puts everyone playing each either every other year and with 3 permanent rivals. The 3 rivals will be designed to maintain rivalries and with a few exceptions (most involving UF for some odd reason) will maintain all traditional rivalries.

 

[Wild Turkey]

You are wrong that I am looking at this emotionally ... LOL, it's a sports board.

Otherwise, you have stated obvious facts ... it's between 3-6 and 1-7, and there is a split. They are trying to come to a consensus. Everyone knows that.

Where I believe you are wrong is your insistence in this thread that tradition and rivalries don't matter. I believe that 1-7 is out because it would trash a half dozen or more rivalries, some of which have gone on for a century. That matters. I believe that at the end of the day they will do a 3-6 with the top teams playing 2 tops, and the bottom teams playing two bottoms. Then I think the SEC lobbies the NCAA to get rid of the 6 game win rule with bowls, and the bottoms schedule 3 relatively easy OOC games if going bowling really matters that much to them.

Didn’t say necessarily say rivalries don’t matter only ratings move the needle. I’m an accountant and I follow the money and honestly that forms my opinions more than anything. I’ve found betting on the money makes you right most of the time.

 

[Volbound1700]

3-6 with traditional rivalries preserved. The top teams will play 2 tops, and the bottom teams will play two bottoms. As the video I posted yesterday laid out the first decision will be to maintain rivalries. They will then do geographically located games - in state and border wars. The final few matchups will look for the most interesting games, if possible.

The problem with @Wild Turkey 's argument is two-fold. First, he underestimates the value of tradition and long-term rivalries, and he doesn't understand the ESPN contract. The ESPN contract was signed in 2020-ish. It's a done deal. Even the addition of OU and TX doesn't guarantee that ESPN has to renegotiate. This is actually something I just learned recently. The same is true with the scheduling ... it doesn't matter money-wise unless ESPN decides they should re-negotiate. I can see them renegotiating with the addition of OU and TX, and scheduling may come into play - in other words they will want the best games. But the rescheduling alone isn't a money play from a TV perspective. It is from a "butts in seats" perspective.

So, at the end of the day, they will move away from divisions to divsionless scheduling that puts everyone playing each either every other year and with 3 permanent rivals. The 3 rivals will be designed to maintain rivalries and with a few exceptions (most involving UF for some odd reason) will maintain all traditional rivalries.

Agree with everything except the contract comments (and even that is debatable). There could be provisions to open the contract back up for negotiation of value with a major seismic change in the value/cost with either party (team leaving or added to SEC). Oklahoma and Texas would be a seismic change to the SEC contract and likely can open it up for discussions.

Agree with the rest of your comments.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Agree with everything except the contract comments (and even that is debatable). There could be provisions to open the contract back up for negotiation of value with a major seismic change in the value/cost with either party (team leaving or added to SEC). Oklahoma and Texas would be a seismic change to the SEC contract and likely can open it up for discussions.

Agree with the rest of your comments.

I've read enough about it to be confident in the following:
- The contract does not allow renegotiation for changing the schedule, or even adding new teams.
- The SEC isn't the ACC, so they aren't stupid. There may be some wiggle room in the contract that enables renegotiation, and adding OU and TX would seem to be the type of thing that would trigger that - your seismic shift reference is apt. I don't think the rescheduling on its own would fit that.
- Even if there isn't any specific in it, ESPN wouldn't be stupid and not renegotiate. That's what CBS did to the SEC and that is why the SEC told them to pound sand and they lost an incredible asset. ESPN is too smart to play hardball knowing the SEC could go to multiple partners when the contract is up.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

Didn’t say necessarily say rivalries don’t matter only ratings move the needle. I’m an accountant and I follow the money and honestly that forms my opinions more than anything. I’ve found betting on the money makes you right most of the time.

In my posts I often say that rule no. 1 in any of this is: 1. Money. and the rules 2-5 are also, Money. So we agree on that. What I don't agree with is the idea that keeping rivalries, even one that doesn't draw as many eyeballs as others, somehow doesn't mean Money. You are looking and trying to evaluate individual matchups ... and that's easy to do with LSU/Bama, UF/UGA, etc. But that doesn't mean you don't keep rivalries like Arky/Mizzou, or UTjr/Ky, or UTjr/Vandy that contribute to the entirety of the package. It's why they will go 3-6, and it's what UT/Vandy will survive the scheduling.

 

[Wild Turkey]

In my posts I often say that rule no. 1 in any of this is: 1. Money. and the rules 2-5 are also, Money. So we agree on that. What I don't agree with is the idea that keeping rivalries, even one that doesn't draw as many eyeballs as others, somehow doesn't mean Money. You are looking and trying to evaluate individual matchups ... and that's easy to do with LSU/Bama, UF/UGA, etc. But that doesn't mean you don't keep rivalries like Arky/Mizzou, or UTjr/Ky, or UTjr/Vandy that contribute to the entirety of the package. It's why they will go 3-6, and it's what UT/Vandy will survive the scheduling.

I feel like we are saying the same thing I’m just being way more pragmatic about it and you feel that nostalgia will factor in heavily. I think it factors but it doesn’t rank like ratings.

I’m honestly not predicting as much as preparing because the tea leaves point to the loss of meaningful games. I just think if push comes to shove then Vandy is going to get axed because they will want KY.

I’ll be surprised if UT walks away with just Bama, Vandy and KY and they concede the loss of Florida and Georgia.

Tennessee will regret that because they will appear a lot less in prime time.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I feel like we are saying the same thing I’m just being way more pragmatic about it and you feel that nostalgia will factor in heavily. I think it factors but it doesn’t rank like ratings.

I’m honestly not predicting as much as preparing because the tea leaves point to the loss of meaningful games. I just think if push comes to shove then Vandy is going to get axed because they will want KY.

I’ll be surprised if UT walks away with just Bama, Vandy and KY and they concede the loss of Florida and Georgia.

Tennessee will regret that because they will appear a lot less in prime time.

I've never seen a scenario that has UGA UTjr. For many decades we didn't play them. As much as we hate them because of the 90s, they aren't really a natural rival. UGA is set with UA, UF and USCjr, the USCjr because we need a bottom team, and they see it as a rivalry, even if we don't.

As for UTjr, it will depend on if they are seen as a top or bottom team. As a bottom team, Bama, VU and UK make sense. If it is a top team then the most likely would be UF. The problem there, as I alluded to, is that UF has the most compelling list of rivals. UF and UGA is sacrosanct, and they will get USCjr only because USCjr thinks they are rivals. The problem with UF is you then have UA - a really good old rivalry, then UTjr that was really good because they were both so good in the 90s, and then LSU because it's been really good since 2000. But, if you lock in UGA and USCjr (they have to have a bottom and it's most logical), who do you choose out of LSU, UTjr and AU for their 3rd game? UTjr is the most plausible because LSU should get Bama and ATM. AU already has Bama and UGA so you can't give them AU. And as much as I would love to see UF get LSU, UGA and UA, they aren't going to give them 3 top teams.

 

[ELTEXAN]

Let’s get down to it: Do any Ags or Coonasses think of the TAMU LSU game as an essential rivalry?