UT and OU to SEC in 2024

Yeah Auburn is one of those teams you just don't fuck with... they could be 3-9 or 11-1, you never know. You could beat them 56-7 or they could beat you 24-10. There was an SEC Shorts about the roller coaster ride of being an Auburn fan.
 
SoonerC said:
I’m all for rivalries, OU Texas is not a crossover game. I thought it was being said there might be 3 cross division permanent games per team, which really isn’t even possible I guess. If the number is 3 though there are games that make more sense for OU than Florida, Arkansas for one.
Click to expand...
No cross over games, as there won't be divisions. You get 3 permanent rivals, and then rotate through the other 12 teams, 6 per year. Play every team ever other year, play all teams home and away in a 4 year period.
 
Volbound1700 said:
Yeah Auburn is one of those teams you just don't fuck with... they could be 3-9 or 11-1, you never know. You could beat them 56-7 or they could beat you 24-10. There was an SEC Shorts about the roller coaster ride of being an Auburn fan.
Click to expand...
No lies here ^^^^^ ... Jeckle and Hyde, for sure. Although we are in one of those "we're your daddy" phases with Auburn.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
No lies here ^^^^^ ... Jeckle and Hyde, for sure. Although we are in one of those "we're your daddy" phases with Auburn.
Click to expand...

Until Georgia got stronger under Richt and then Kirby Smart, there was this streak in the rivalry were the road team won almost every time. It was kind of odd because it is typically the opposite.

In the later era, Georgia has kind of ran off and left Auburn (along with most of the SEC).
 
Volbound1700 said:
Until Georgia got stronger under Richt and then Kirby Smart, there was this streak in the rivalry were the road team won almost every time. It was kind of odd because it is typically the opposite.

In the later era, Georgia has kind of ran off and left Auburn (along with most of the SEC).
Click to expand...
It was the 90s where that happened ... the away team won almost all the games except once.

Since Richt got there we are 17-5. That is pretty much how UF dominated us when Spurrier got to UF. So, I've been on the receiving end of that type of ownership. It sucks. Most recently, we are 15-3 in the last 18 games.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
No cross over games, as there won't be divisions. You get 3 permanent rivals, and then rotate through the other 12 teams, 6 per year. Play every team ever other year, play all teams home and away in a 4 year period.
Click to expand...
It’s going to be so lopsided. I saw the Atlantic projections. Auburn gets Georgia, Florida, and Bama. That is rough. Kentucky gets Vandy, Tenn, and South Carolina. Balancing out the SOS is going to be impossible
 
Codaxx said:
It’s going to be so lopsided. I saw the Atlantic projections. Auburn gets Georgia, Florida, and Bama. That is rough. Kentucky gets Vandy, Tenn, and South Carolina. Balancing out the SOS is going to be impossible
Click to expand...
Auburn is not getting Bama, UGA and Florida.

I see Bama and UGA but they will throw us a bone in the 3rd.

SOS was never balanced for us so it ain’t a thing. Make it where we don’t have LSU, Bama, UGA and aTm every year and we come out ahead.
 
Wishbone said:
It won't take texas long to move up here.

Click to expand...


It really depends on who is winning. Notice the bottom... UK would be further down as well if not for Basketball.
 
Codaxx said:
It’s going to be so lopsided. I saw the Atlantic projections. Auburn gets Georgia, Florida, and Bama. That is rough. Kentucky gets Vandy, Tenn, and South Carolina. Balancing out the SOS is going to be impossible
Click to expand...
I am actually in the middle of writing something about this. In actuality it doesn't make that much difference for three reasons.

(1) If someone gets more top level games in their 3, it means they have more lower level games in their rotation. You'd be surprised how little difference it makes.

(2) we already had very unbalanced schedules. The west has had to play Bama every year for 15 years. The east has been down for the past 15 years. UGA has risen to the top because they brought in Smart, but UF, UTjr and AU being sucky hasn't hurt. So the balance hasn't really been there anyway with divisions.

(3) The main reason is that it is really hard to categorize who the top teams are. I don't mean this to troll, but is anyone really calling UF a top team? ATM? UTjr had one good year. OU sucked last year, and UT lost what, 5 games in the B12. So, let's say they give Bama - AU, LSU and UTjr. Is that really all that bad?

Right now there are two top teams that are consistently top: UGA and Bama. You then have OU and LSU that are mostly top, but both have had trash seasons, too. The only team that is consistently bottom is Vandy, with Mizzou mostly trash. Other than that is there really that much of a difference between Arky, Auburn, Ky, UF, USCjr? From year to year, probably not.

Now, UGA and Bama could cycle off, but Vandy is never going to not suck. And schools like UT, UTjr, LSU, UF AU are more likely to cycle to the top than say Ky, USCjr, MSU. But the point is that year to year who knows who a top team is.

I'll post my rough thoughts on this in another post. Would love for someone to tell me I am crazy - for this line of thought, I get that I am crazy in general!
 
Give me your feedback. Don't TLDR - if you can't focus for more than a minute, this post isn't for you.

In thinking about people getting an "unfair" permanent 3, it inherently felt to me that it wouldn't make that much of a difference. I'm a math/numbers guy, and inherently it felt like to me it wouldn't matter that much. I ran the math and I don't think it does for a couple reasons.

If you play several really good teams permanently, that means you have less good teams in the rotating 6 games. Likewise, someone who plays a lot of lower teams permanently will have to play more top teams in the rotation so it sort of evens out. Also, because of the cyclical nature of CFB, who really is a top team? In my analysis below where I divide the SEC into 8 top teams, and 8 bottom teams, you might laugh to see that I have UF, AU, UT and UTjr as top teams. None have performed well over the last decade, but historically they have. So, when you look at these teams as top 8, UGA gets two of them and we aren't complaining. We own UF and AU right now. Many people looking at that list today might argue we aren't really getting two top teams. Same with Bama getting AU, UTjr, and LSU. AU always plays them tough, but Bama has won 11 of the last 15. Against UTjr they had won 15 straight until last year. Even with LSU, they have also won 12 of the last 16. UTjr and AU haven't really been overly competitive the last decade, and LSU won in 2019 but has been pretty bad since. So even trying to establish top teams and bottom teams and then complaining about it is an overreaction since it just doesn't make that much difference. Let's take a look.

The big question is who are the tops and bottoms, looking historically and recently.

Top 8 for sures
UGA
Bama
LSU
OU

Bottom 8 for sures
Vandy
UK
USCjr
Arky
Ole Miss
MSU
Mizzou

Tricky ones:
Auburn
UF
ATM
UTjr
UT

We have 7 for sure bottoms, which means we can only pick 1 from the tricky category.
- Auburn and UF move to the top as they have won NCs in this century.
- So has UT, so I am going to move them to the top, especially because they have potential and a lot of $$$
- That leaves ATM and UTjr - UTjr has a more recent NC, and ATM is kind of the step child of the old B12 and SWC. I am going to call them a bottom, just to piss them off. Plus I'd love to make life harder on UTjr.

For the most part, Top teams are supposed to get 2 tops, and 1 bottom. Bottom teams area supposed to get 2 bottoms and 1 top. so, lets look at some scenarios:

Top team with 2 tops, 1 bottom - that takes 3 tops (2 plus the team itself) and 1 bottom out of the 16 SEC teams, leaving 5 tops and 7 bottoms - 12 total teams for two 6 game rotations over a two year period. Let's say in year 1 they play 3 tops, and 3 bottoms, and in the next year 2 they play 2 tops and 4 bottoms. That means every two years they will have played 5 tops, 4 bottoms, and in the second year 4 tops, 5 bottoms. 18 total games, 9 tops, 9 bottoms.

Bottom teams with 1 top, 2 bottoms - that takes 1 top, and 3 bottoms (2 plus the team itself) out of the 16 SEC teams, leaving 7 tops and 5 bottoms - 12 total teams for two 6 game rotations over a two year period. Let's say in year 1 they play 3 tops and 3 bottoms, and in the next year 2 bottoms and 4 tops. That means every two years they have played 4 tops, 5 bottoms, and in the second year 4 bottoms and 5 tops. 18 total games, 9 tops, 9 bottoms.

As you can see the main difference is that they will have played their permanent rivals twice, so if those are crapier bottoms (Vandy), or better tops (UGA and Bama), that will be what makes the difference. But as I discussed above, who is really a top or bottom, outside of the extremes - Bama and UGA at the top (for now), and Vandy at the bottom - the others kind of cycle - UF could be good again in 3 or 4 years, maybe Kiffin gets OM good, AU gets better under a new coach, or UTjr is really back on track. Who knows? But the cyclical nature of it is such that people should chill out. Let's not forget that both Auburn and LSU were 7-1 against Bama from 2000-2007, and UTjr was 11-2 against Bama from 1993-2006. If CFB is one thing, it's always been cyclical.

Also, let's look at the teams that either get screwed or get a great pick.

Bama might get 3 tops - that takes 4 tops and no bottoms out of the 16 SEC teams, leaving 4 tops and 8 bottoms - 12 total teams for two 6 game rotations over a two year period. Let's say in year 1 they play 2 tops and 4 bottoms, and in the next year play 2 tops and 4 bottoms. That means every two years they will have played 5 tops and 4 bottoms. 18 total games, 10 tops, 8 bottoms. Compared to a normal top team that plays 9 and 9. So, they are at a disadvantage, but I don't think it is as big as it seems. And again, do we really want to call AU and UTjr top teams? Even LSU is up and down.

At the end of the day I think the most important thing is to get the rivalries right for fans and TV inventory, and realize that CFB's cyclical nature will take care of the rest. If you ever have a situation where UGA, UTjr, UF, AU, UT, OU, UA, LSU, and ATM are all really good at the same time, then it SOS will have to come into play. But I don't think historically we have ever seen that.

Finally, let's keep in mind that for well over a decade, the east and west have been vastly different. The west has generally been more competitive, while the east has had periods of dominance by UF / UTjr / UF / UGA since the late 80s. So there hasn't been scheduling parity anyway. This level of scheduling, even with some unbalanced here and there, will result in more balance, and many more enjoyable games.

Another final thought - anyone who gets UGA and Bama right now is at a big disadvantage - you are welcome Auburn. And anyone getting Vandy should be happy. It really is any getting the very top more than once. But I do think that will cycle over time. Saban will be gone at some point, and how long can Smart coach, or want to coach as intensively as he does?
 
Last edited:
WhosYourDawggy said:
I am actually in the middle of writing something about this. In actuality it doesn't make that much difference for three reasons.

(1) If someone gets more top level games in their 3, it means they have more lower level games in their rotation. You'd be surprised how little difference it makes.

(2) we already had very unbalanced schedules. The west has had to play Bama every year for 15 years. The east has been down for the past 15 years. UGA has risen to the top because they brought in Smart, but UF, UTjr and AU being sucky hasn't hurt. So the balance hasn't really been there anyway with divisions.

(3) The main reason is that it is really hard to categorize who the top teams are. I don't mean this to troll, but is anyone really calling UF a top team? ATM? UTjr had one good year. OU sucked last year, and UT lost what, 5 games in the B12. So, let's say they give Bama - AU, LSU and UTjr. Is that really all that bad?

Right now there are two top teams that are consistently top: UGA and Bama. You then have OU and LSU that are mostly top, but both have had trash seasons, too. The only team that is consistently bottom is Vandy, with Mizzou mostly trash. Other than that is there really that much of a difference between Arky, Auburn, Ky, UF, USCjr? From year to year, probably not.

Now, UGA and Bama could cycle off, but Vandy is never going to not suck. And schools like UT, UTjr, LSU, UF AU are more likely to cycle to the top than say Ky, USCjr, MSU. But the point is that year to year who knows who a top team is.

I'll post my rough thoughts on this in another post. Would love for someone to tell me I am crazy - for this line of thought, I get that I am crazy in general!
Click to expand...

Agree with this comment.

Also teams are lobbying for more of the "top" teams versus the "bottom" teams actually from what I am reading. They want the bigger TV matchups for $$$.

So the teams that are getting the perceived "hard" 3 teams are actually happy in most instances.

I am not sure we have seen a full 3-6-6 breakdown that is finalized on who really are the 3 permanent matchups for everyone. Everything so far has really just been experts posting their best guesses.
 
We won't for sure know til the games start being played. I feel UGA will be the top school for sure.. after that I think it's a mixed bag. I'm not buying Alabama.. TN and LSU have to show that last year wasn't a fluke (TN) or continue to improve (LSU). What this new schedule will do is bring more familiarity to the matchups since you play everyone twice within 4 years.
 
Thiefery said:
it's the logo and all that comes with
Click to expand...
So close.

It’s actually all the asshole fans wearing that logo.

Celebrate In Love GIF by HBO Max
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I am actually in the middle of writing something about this. In actuality it doesn't make that much difference for three reasons.

(1) If someone gets more top level games in their 3, it means they have more lower level games in their rotation. You'd be surprised how little difference it makes.

(2) we already had very unbalanced schedules. The west has had to play Bama every year for 15 years. The east has been down for the past 15 years. UGA has risen to the top because they brought in Smart, but UF, UTjr and AU being sucky hasn't hurt. So the balance hasn't really been there anyway with divisions.

(3) The main reason is that it is really hard to categorize who the top teams are. I don't mean this to troll, but is anyone really calling UF a top team? ATM? UTjr had one good year. OU sucked last year, and UT lost what, 5 games in the B12. So, let's say they give Bama - AU, LSU and UTjr. Is that really all that bad?

Right now there are two top teams that are consistently top: UGA and Bama. You then have OU and LSU that are mostly top, but both have had trash seasons, too. The only team that is consistently bottom is Vandy, with Mizzou mostly trash. Other than that is there really that much of a difference between Arky, Auburn, Ky, UF, USCjr? From year to year, probably not.

Now, UGA and Bama could cycle off, but Vandy is never going to not suck. And schools like UT, UTjr, LSU, UF AU are more likely to cycle to the top than say Ky, USCjr, MSU. But the point is that year to year who knows who a top team is.

I'll post my rough thoughts on this in another post. Would love for someone to tell me I am crazy - for this line of thought, I get that I am crazy in general!
Click to expand...
It’s is the downside of large conferences. There is no eloquent way to solve for SOS. I will miss the round robin format of the Big 12.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top