[...]Alabama | MrSEC.com[...]…

I would be shocked if a rivalry that was once the SEC's biggest was knocked from the schedule. Anything can happen, but I think the SEC realizes — better than other leagues — that its oldest rivalries are part of what makes the league special.

I don't THINK the SEC would nuke an Alabama-Tennessee or Auburn-Georgia, for example, as the Big 12 once blew up Oklahoma-Nebraska. (Personally I think the bad karma from that move has played a role in the Big 12's turmoil ever since!)

John

It was Colorado vs California and that game was deemed a non-conference game.

To be honest, I don't know what the SEC is going to do schedule-wise. From the folks I've talked to… they don't know exactly what they want to do at this point.

John

I'll wait till summer for your new list ranking possibilities. I really think there is a semi gentleman agreement. I do not think Florida, Georgia or South Carolina would not absolutely rule out GT, Clemson, FSU, but I bet there are number of schools that could be better or slightly less attractive that Florida, Georgia and South Carolina would like to see given time and opportunity and still not come to the SEC before they would be willing to take GT, Clemson and FSU. Everyone like your list.

gatormoss

————

So glad to hear you say that. As I'm sure many of you noticed, I've been one of the guys literally pulling my hair out at the possibility of this. Hopefully now, I can get a little more sleep tonight. I always assumed they would take care of the important rivalries, but the more rumors and bs you read, the more you realize just about ANYTHING is possible

but I remember either Utah or Colorado, playing a game against a Pac 12 opponent (maybe arizona or ucla or something)

and because it was a previously scheduled out of conference game, that it wasn't counted as a Pac 12 conference game and has no bearing on their conference record

pretty weird… 2 conferences teams playing an Out Of Conference game. But unless I had just had way too much to drink that night (entirely possible) It happened

Regarding the ARKANSAS v A&M game next year:

I could be mistaken, but I swear I remember two weeks ago either Colorado or Utah playing one of the Arizonas or UCLA or someone… (sorry I can't remember the details any better than this)

But anyway, they game was a previously schedule OOC game, and even though both teams were now in the Pac 12 Conference, that game was not counted as a conference game

So they played an Out of Conference game… between 2 Pac 12 members

My question is am I correct on this? and if so do you think the SEC would take a similar approach to the Arkansas/A&M game. The only difference may be that the 2 Pac 12 schools may have been in different divisions, and I think all division teams have to play a round robin with all other teams

No matter how you slice it there will be issues.

Second, we'll go by what Roy Kramer has stated publicly, the SEC called the NCAA about a title game — based on the rule in question — and the NCAA supposedly responded that that rule — for smaller sports and smaller schools — was not written for big leagues to create football title games.

If you disagree with that, great. We get it. The MAC title game is the scourge of our time and you demand answers as to why they're not being forced to play a true round-robin schedule. More power to ya. We invite you to raise a ruckus and stamp it and the SEC title game out because they violate the letter of the NCAA's rule. Heck, call Kenneth Starr and file suit against the NCAA.

But we're moving on to other things.
John

That rule was set up for smaller sports and had never been connected to football until someone in the SEC office noticed it. I continue to say this isn't worth losing sleep over, but that's just me.

Best of luck in your quest.

And thanks for reading,
John

I think it's clear the SEC isn't ready to settle. Missouri makes business sense so if the Tigers join — while it might not make a big splash — it can't be called settling.

If the SEC is still at 13 next summer and no one is knocking on the league's door, then you have to wonder if WVU gets accepted. But we'll have to see what the Big East does to survive first.

John

What disturbs me is that a rule which is plain on its face is not being scrupulously adhered to and we don't have a solid explanation for why. What next? A waiver for the 12-game limit? If the NCAA wants to drop the "round-robin schedule" part of the rule, that's fine, because that would be through the actual legislative process, as opposed to modifying the rule in a totally sub rosa way without any legislative oversight. If the schools want to overtly modify the rule, that's their prerogative, but I find it very troubling that it can be modified without legislative oversight and nobody explains who made that decision. A bureaucrat in Indianapolis? (If so, who? From where do they derive their authority? Did anybody vote on this?)

That's hardly an important rule. It's been on the books for years and the SEC discovered it while expanding in 1992. According to ex-commissioner Roy Kramer, the NCAA was't thrilled that the SEC was planning to take advantage of the rule to create a football title game.

If I were you, I'd take the Sheriff Taylor view and drop the Deputy Fife view. In the grand scheme of things, that rule is hardly worth getting "very disturbed." There are no victims here.

If anything, the NCAA should just drop the "round-robin schedule" part of the rule and replace it with a "must play eight conference games" clause.

Thanks for reading,
John

I am also for Texas A&M playing all 12 teams next year…. If they have enough bodies at the end of the year they can play in the SEC championship game… Welcome to the SEC Baby!

Another idea… If you get to a 16 team league are you allowed to have four divisions with a four team tournament for the SEC championship?

They were given clearance by the NCAA and the SEC anticipates getting the same clearance.

John

You are correct. Thanks for catching that. Rather than spend more time breaking down when those games were counted and when they weren't, we've simply removed that paragraph.

Again, thanks for the catch,
John

Hopefully, the Ags will keep t.u. on the schedule going forward, maintaining both our historic rivalry AND A&M's tradition of cream-puff OOC games.

Obviously, A&M will not play 8 road conference games

The four conference teams who go to College Station would have to forego the home game revenue and pay off the OOC team they are ditching at the last moment. This is going to get expensive in the short term. For scheduling purposes, the Ark./A&M game should be considered a home game for A&M. The other 3 A&M homegames will be very problematic for the conference scheduling gurus

Why not temporarily leave the divisions as they are, and have Texas A&M play four SEC West teams and four SEC East teams out of conference for those eight teams, but they would count as in conference games for A&M–and if A&M finishes with a better record than the either division champion, they will replace that team in the championship game? Seems like the best scenario temporarily.

Assuming we do not get an aggreable and best fit addition like VT or NC this year how long do you think the SEC should wait before it settles?

One would think that the WV pause may indicate the SEC is willing to wait, but some consider flirting with Missouri an indication we are ready to settle.

Thanks

Gatormoss

No one's against patience. We're just pointing out that a 13-team schedule is not ideal. And that fact is supported by the words of a high-ranking official in a conference that's been using a 13-team schedule.

Thanks for reading,
John

I think the SEC wanted to avoid raiding leagues. It's been suggested to me by SEC sources that they threw open their doors expecting ACC schools to beg in — as A&M did from the Big 12 — but that did not occur. In fact, the ACC went out and added teams. That's what I've been told.

And I can promise you that sticking at #13 was not the goal… regardless of what Mike Slive says. The league will have to add a team at some point. If no one comes forward next summer, then what?

Is that overplaying his hand? I don't think so because he just added about 8 million cable households to the SEC footprint with A&M. But the whole thing is clunky right now.

If Missouri turns out to be #14, that's a solid get. But you can be sure it's not the splashy "get" that the SEC initially had hoped for.

Thanks for reading,
John