Permanent West Opponent?

[CB3UK]

Who would you prefer? Just a fun offseason thread. My vote goes to Arkansas. I have no ill will towards State other than their cowbells. We play Arkansas well and both fan bases dislike each other so it seems like a more natural permanent opponent to me.

 

[John Henry]

This is a tough one because there are no cupcakes in the West. I will go with Arkansas but victories will be rare.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Who would you prefer? Just a fun offseason thread. My vote goes to Arkansas. I have no ill will towards State other than their cowbells. We play Arkansas well and both fan bases dislike each other so it seems like a more natural permanent opponent to me.

Arkansas would be a tough trade off I think, I think BB is a better coach than Mullen. Mullen hasn't done much without Dak, if he has State going 8-4 without him I might change my mind about that. Missouri being in the East almost makes them and Arkansas a natural rival, much more than anyone in the East does anyway. Given my choice, wanting a win, I wouldn't want to swap State for Arkansas because they are going to be big and physical and run the ball downhill, State not so much.

 

[KY Hog Man]

Who would you prefer? Just a fun offseason thread. My vote goes to Arkansas. I have no ill will towards State other than their cowbells. We play Arkansas well and both fan bases dislike each other so it seems like a more natural permanent opponent to me.

Missouri is already Arkansas's rival. They were thrust upon us by the SEC when they paired LSU against TAMU on Thanksgiving day. They even built an ugly trophy for the matchup.

 

[Dakota25]

Probably ole miss. If Mississippi state goes back to being bad again then i would like to keep them. Idk though I don't see UK beating anyone in the west more than three times a decade if they played on a yearly basis.

 

[Saguaro Cat]

If they move Missouri to the West, it should be Missouri.
Tennessee plays Arkansas.
Alabama- auburn.
Georgia Mississippi state.
Vandy ole miss.
Florida lsu.
South Carolina, Texas am

Really, they should get rid of it. If Tennessee wants to pay bama every year, fine. Everyone else still rotate. That's not any less fair than now. there's no need to make seven permanent games for the sake of one.

 

[CB3UK]

True enough. Tired of this third Saturday in October crap holding up the rest of the conference from rotating.

 

[WildCard]

From a what's-best-for-UK standpoint, despite their recent dominance, MSU was a perfect "competitive match" for UK. Until Mullen's current win streak, UK actually lead that series. UK is 4-3 against AR since first playing them in 1998 so that might be a competitive partner as well. However, for the outright game day experience, aTm is the very best I have experienced. It would be nice to have that away game opportunity more often than every 16 years or whatever.

Peace

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

If they move Missouri to the West, it should be Missouri.
Tennessee plays Arkansas.
Alabama- auburn.
Georgia Mississippi state.
Vandy ole miss.
Florida lsu.
South Carolina, Texas am

Really, they should get rid of it. If Tennessee wants to pay bama every year, fine. Everyone else still rotate. That's not any less fair than now. there's no need to make seven permanent games for the sake of one.

I assume you are talking about moving AU to the East and Missouri to the West with this. This isn't going to happen, Bama and AU may both come to the east and Vandy and Missouri both go to the West, but Bama/UT and Bama/AU isn't going to stop, why do you think Missouri was put in the East to begin with? UGA won't vote this either, we don't want to go to Starkville every other year either, neither will State nor Arkansas, thats enough to vote it down if it ever got brought to a vote.

 

[vhcat70]

UK & SC have no natural West rival. Neither do MSU & A&M with the East. Net, rather than just play one or other, I'd rather we trade them off every two years.

 

[RMP82]

How about the SEC go ahead and add Virginia Tech and NC State and make it a 9 game schedule. Divide the SEC up into 4 pods.

UK, UT, Vandy, VT
NCS, SC, UGA, UF
Bama, AU, Ole Miss, MSU
Ark, Mizzou, LSU, TAMU

You play all 3 teams from your 4 team pod and play 2 teams from each of the other 3.

or....

You could do the East/West thing but have it in 2 pods.

For example, we would play UT, Vandy, and VT every year and 2 teams from the NC State, UGA, SC, UF pod with 1 rotating game from the 2 west pods and a permanent west division opponent to make 8 games.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

How about the SEC go ahead and add Virginia Tech and NC State and make it a 9 game schedule. Divide the SEC up into 4 pods.

UK, UT, Vandy, VT
NCS, SC, UGA, UF
Bama, AU, Ole Miss, MSU
Ark, Mizzou, LSU, TAMU

You play all 3 teams from your 4 team pod and play 2 teams from each of the other 3.

or....

You could do the East/West thing but have it in 2 pods.

For example, we would play UT, Vandy, and VT every year and 2 teams from the NC State, UGA, SC, UF pod with 1 rotating game from the 2 west pods and a permanent west division opponent to make 8 games.

 

[ZakkW]

How about the SEC go ahead and add Virginia Tech and NC State and make it a 9 game schedule. Divide the SEC up into 4 pods.

UK, UT, Vandy, VT
NCS, SC, UGA, UF
Bama, AU, Ole Miss, MSU
Ark, Mizzou, LSU, TAMU

You play all 3 teams from your 4 team pod and play 2 teams from each of the other 3.

or....

You could do the East/West thing but have it in 2 pods.

For example, we would play UT, Vandy, and VT every year and 2 teams from the NC State, UGA, SC, UF pod with 1 rotating game from the 2 west pods and a permanent west division opponent to make 8 games.

Not a bad idea, but seriously doubt that UK and Vandy would be put in the same 4-team division. IMO.

 

[CB3UK]

Sure they would. That's actually a relatively even distribution of teams. By order of typical strength:

North
Tennessee
Virginia Tech
Kentucky
Vanderbilt

East
Florida
Georgia
NC State
South Carolina

South
Alabama
Auburn
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

West
LSU
Texas A&M
Arkansas
Missouri

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Sure they would. That's actually a relatively even distribution of teams. By order of typical strength:

North
Tennessee
Virginia Tech
Kentucky
Vanderbilt

East
Florida
Georgia
NC State
South Carolina

South
Alabama
Auburn
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

West
LSU
Texas A&M
Arkansas
Missouri

Conferences are too uneven, in recent seasons, the biggest winner in the North is UT with 9 counting a bowl win, a team that barely qualified for a bowl and 2 that didn't the last 2 seasons. UT would love this breakdown, if this were the division in their down years under Dooley they would have won this division 1 or 2 times. But regardless, this can't happen unless the state of Virginia approves of this, they passed a law that both Virginia and VT had to play in the same conference when the ACC expanded and wasn't going to include brining VT in. So if one comes they both come and no NCST.

The best chance of expansion is one of the North Carolina teams and another Texas team, maybe Houston before the Big12 wraps them up. But none of the conference AD/presidents will agree to these divisions. One team loaded for bear, the South, with every team having won 10+games in the last 3 years and other divisions not having a single team near that. SEC has already proven geography plays very little into determining divisions.

 

[Anon1660081258]

LSU. Crazy? Yep. but I like playing LSU, and of all the West schools, I actually like LSU the most, at least as far as the football program is concerned. They are a fun opponent.

 

[CB3UK]

Conferences are too uneven, in recent seasons, the biggest winner in the North is UT with 9 counting a bowl win, a team that barely qualified for a bowl and 2 that didn't the last 2 seasons. UT would love this breakdown, if this were the division in their down years under Dooley they would have won this division 1 or 2 times. But regardless, this can't happen unless the state of Virginia approves of this, they passed a law that both Virginia and VT had to play in the same conference when the ACC expanded and wasn't going to include brining VT in. So if one comes they both come and no NCST.

The best chance of expansion is one of the North Carolina teams and another Texas team, maybe Houston before the Big12 wraps them up. But none of the conference AD/presidents will agree to these divisions. One team loaded for bear, the South, with every team having won 10+games in the last 3 years and other divisions not having a single team near that. SEC has already proven geography plays very little into determining divisions.

How is that any different than what Mizzou and South Carolina did winning the east? The East is down, that's no secret, and yet we still send someone to Atlanta to get creamed every year. The bottom line is the teams all have to go somewhere. Frankly, Virginia Tech would arguably be the winner there, looking at the last decade. Deciding divisions based on current program strength would have us realigning in another 10 years. If it were the 90's we'd be griping that the other divisions were lopsided.

 

[NamelessOne]

mizz moves to the west and picks UK up as rival.

 

[T75]

Doesn't much matter who our permanent West opponent is. We are losers and will lose regularly until we get a whole lot better. So far the improved recruiting under Stoops hasn't paid off as measured in wins. If The Cats can't win 7 or 8 games this season, I see little hope of becoming a factor in the SE under Stoops. Sadly, I think we'll be lucky to win 6 games. Our team needs to settle in with a staff, learn how that staff wants them to play. And work with that system until it bcomes natural to them. We should be there already if Stoops had picked the staff he needed to begin with. But since he didn't, we are now dependent on a Cincy offensive staff to start all over and make us a winner in the SEC ( totally better league than Cincy has played in) in the first year? Pipe dream!
By year 4 we should have talented depth, yet we're young and thin up front on both sides of the ball.

Yeah, I'm discouraged. As I have been most of the 70 years since I became a teen (13) fan. So I'll follow and pull for my team again this season---and hope it'll be one of those rare pleasant surprises.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

How is that any different than what Mizzou and South Carolina did winning the east? The East is down, that's no secret, and yet we still send someone to Atlanta to get creamed every year. The bottom line is the teams all have to go somewhere. Frankly, Virginia Tech would arguably be the winner there, looking at the last decade. Deciding divisions based on current program strength would have us realigning in another 10 years. If it were the 90's we'd be griping that the other divisions were lopsided.

So you are going to put 2 teams who have won 3 of the last 5 NC's, a team that has beaten both those teams and a team with a recent 10 win season in one division ? Meanwhile you have another division with 2 teams bowl eligible last 4 years? But like I said, that can't happen because VT can't come without Virginia, same with OU and Oklahoma ST. state legislature have tied them together in the same conferences.

I could see a 4 division conference of UF, UGA, NCST and SC. UK, UT, AU, Bama, Vandy, MSST, OM and Arky. Missour, LSU A&M and Houston.

That would put 2 teams with relatively strong teams the last 2 years and 2 rebuilding teams in every division at this point, who knows what it will look like in 10 years.

 

[CB3UK]

So you are going to put 2 teams who have won 3 of the last 5 NC's, a team that has beaten both those teams and a team with a recent 10 win season in one division ? Meanwhile you have another division with 2 teams bowl eligible last 4 years? But like I said, that can't happen because VT can't come without Virginia, same with OU and Oklahoma ST. state legislature have tied them together in the same conferences.

I could see a 4 division conference of UF, UGA, NCST and SC. UK, UT, AU, Bama, Vandy, MSST, OM and Arky. Missour, LSU A&M and Houston.

That would put 2 teams with relatively strong teams the last 2 years and 2 rebuilding teams in every division at this point, who knows what it will look like in 10 years.

Where did Houston come in to this?

My point was in the 90's Tennessee and Florida would be ahead of the rest and the trams otherwise would have been more even. 10 years from now who knows where we'll be. You can't argue about fairness of divisions looking at so short sightedly. Dividing them any way other than geography makes no sense. Those are where the rivalries lie, and having a four team SEC playoff to boot would be awesome.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Where did Houston come in to this?

My point was in the 90's Tennessee and Florida would be ahead of the rest and the trams otherwise would have been more even. 10 years from now who knows where we'll be. You can't argue about fairness of divisions looking at so short sightedly. Dividing them any way other than geography makes no sense. Those are where the rivalries lie, and having a four team SEC playoff to boot would be awesome.

Houston is just random school that is playing at a P5 level right now and a much better option than VT because of Virginia laws to add to the conference with a North Carolina team. They would give us a bigger footprint in the most talent rich state in the country. Why would the SEC not want to add them if they showed any interest?

Yes UT and UF were the 2 best teams in the 90's, so if you go by what happened in the 90's and you put them in different divisions. But if you separate the 2 best teams from the 90's, While its true no one knows who will be on top in 20 years, you have to use some criteria to make divisions, putting the current 2 best programs in the same division makes zero sense for the conference, why automatically eliminate 1 from the playoffs before the season starts? You have to create them with some type of balance. Right now, UT is the only team in the East with a winning record with 9 wins, yet you put a 14, 12 and 9 game winner in the same division? That is 4 automatic votes against that realignment, enough to keep it from passing

 

[RACdad]

If the rumor of Auburn and Mizzou trading sides in the SEC is true then I say Mizzou. I think a good rivalry could be born

 

[EliteBlue]

Conferences are too uneven, in recent seasons, the biggest winner in the North is UT with 9 counting a bowl win, a team that barely qualified for a bowl and 2 that didn't the last 2 seasons. UT would love this breakdown, if this were the division in their down years under Dooley they would have won this division 1 or 2 times. But regardless, this can't happen unless the state of Virginia approves of this, they passed a law that both Virginia and VT had to play in the same conference when the ACC expanded and wasn't going to include brining VT in. So if one comes they both come and no NCST.

The best chance of expansion is one of the North Carolina teams and another Texas team, maybe Houston before the Big12 wraps them up. But none of the conference AD/presidents will agree to these divisions. One team loaded for bear, the South, with every team having won 10+games in the last 3 years and other divisions not having a single team near that. SEC has already proven geography plays very little into determining divisions.

I'd rather attempt to keep it regionally significant than to continue expanding west is OK or TX. But you're probably right in that we he a NC team and one from the west.

 

[CB3UK]

Houston is just random school that is playing at a P5 level right now and a much better option than VT because of Virginia laws to add to the conference with a North Carolina team. They would give us a bigger footprint in the most talent rich state in the country. Why would the SEC not want to add them if they showed any interest?

Yes UT and UF were the 2 best teams in the 90's, so if you go by what happened in the 90's and you put them in different divisions. But if you separate the 2 best teams from the 90's, While its true no one knows who will be on top in 20 years, you have to use some criteria to make divisions, putting the current 2 best programs in the same division makes zero sense for the conference, why automatically eliminate 1 from the playoffs before the season starts? You have to create them with some type of balance. Right now, UT is the only team in the East with a winning record with 9 wins, yet you put a 14, 12 and 9 game winner in the same division? That is 4 automatic votes against that realignment, enough to keep it from passing

Just win baby

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I'd rather attempt to keep it regionally significant than to continue expanding west is OK or TX. But you're probably right in that we he a NC team and one from the west.

I don't disagree with you, keeping every team in the SEC a team that is actually in the southeast is what I would like too. But with cable and satalite, conference networks its all about the footprint, which goes against that concept. As we all know college sports, especially football, has become all about the money.

 

[BWCatsFan22]

I wish we had added Pitt! Think they would have been a nice fit from both a FB and BB perspective and would get us into the Pittsburgh media market. I like VA Tech too and Clemson. THTB