Since rumors are encouraged....

[gtowndawg]

was told today from someone that would know (trust me on this one, they know) two interesting SEC rumors.

1. The SEC is considering north/south divisions with the addition of A&M and Missouri. The south division would be:

Texas A&M
LSU
Alabama
Auburn
State
Ole Miss
Florida

Otherwise known as the SEC west on steroids. Missouri playing in the east is also being considered. I was told "the SEC will never split up Auburn and Alabama" so Auburn to the east seems unlikely. Again, the north/south idea is only being discussed right now but don't forget one Larry Templeton has some sort of say so in all of this, so you never know. IF it happened and I think that's a big IF, we would struggle to win 6 games a year.

2. Virginia Tech was offered, the SEC wanted them, they said no. I don't don't know why. Thus Missouri.

 

[gtowndawg]

was told today from someone that would know (trust me on this one, they know) two interesting SEC rumors.

1. The SEC is considering north/south divisions with the addition of A&M and Missouri. The south division would be:

Texas A&M
LSU
Alabama
Auburn
State
Ole Miss
Florida

Otherwise known as the SEC west on steroids. Missouri playing in the east is also being considered. I was told "the SEC will never split up Auburn and Alabama" so Auburn to the east seems unlikely. Again, the north/south idea is only being discussed right now but don't forget one Larry Templeton has some sort of say so in all of this, so you never know. IF it happened and I think that's a big IF, we would struggle to win 6 games a year.

2. Virginia Tech was offered, the SEC wanted them, they said no. I don't don't know why. Thus Missouri.

 

[gtowndawg]

was told today from someone that would know (trust me on this one, they know) two interesting SEC rumors.

1. The SEC is considering north/south divisions with the addition of A&M and Missouri. The south division would be:

Texas A&M
LSU
Alabama
Auburn
State
Ole Miss
Florida

Otherwise known as the SEC west on steroids. Missouri playing in the east is also being considered. I was told "the SEC will never split up Auburn and Alabama" so Auburn to the east seems unlikely. Again, the north/south idea is only being discussed right now but don't forget one Larry Templeton has some sort of say so in all of this, so you never know. IF it happened and I think that's a big IF, we would struggle to win 6 games a year.

2. Virginia Tech was offered, the SEC wanted them, they said no. I don't don't know why. Thus Missouri.

 

[AssEndDawg]

Auburn actually wants to move to the East but the problem is that the Auburn/Bama match up would have to be permanent, which means you kill off the Alabama/Tennessee rivalry which they certainly don't want to do.The SEC really doesn't want the chance of an Iron Bowl rematch in the SECCG either (or really any one state game). Gonna be interesting.

 

[Negative Waves]

That would be absolutely horrible for us. That division includes the last 4 national champions! LT's gonna screw us again.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

Little Nicky would pitch a fit if Auburn moved to the East, thereby increasing their presence in Florida and Georgia, two of the hotbed states in the South for primo affletes.

 

[ChroamOneHundred]

The so-called School Up North obviously belongs in the North division, and an all-Mississippi SECCG is clearly impossible.

 

[00Dawg]

You'd have to give up either the World's Largest Cocktail Party, or the oldest rivalry in the conference. UGA can only have one permanent opponent.

 

[dawgatUSM]

just curious.

 

[Rebels7]

No way they split up Alabama-Auburn, and no way the split up UGa-UF. The North /South split doesn't make one bit of sense.

 

[Cousin Jeffrey]

With that as a South division, and if you made the permanent rivals like this...<div>
<div><div>Texas A&M -Mizzou</div><div>LSU<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-spacere"> </span>-Arkansas</div><div>Alabama -Tennessee</div><div>Auburn -Georgia</div><div>MSU -Kentucky</div><div>Ole Miss -Vanderbilt</div><div>Florida -South Carolina</div></div></div><div>
</div><div>...it preserves most of the current cross-divisional and other major rivalry games, with the obvious exceptions of Florida-Georgia and Florida-Tennessee. If you rearrange to maintain one of those, another big rivalry is lost.</div>

 

[Cousin Jeffrey]

However it's done, though, it's going to be impossible to split divisions so that...<div>1. it makes sense geographically,</div><div>2. there is competitive balance, AND</div><div>3. all current rivalries are preserved.</div>

 

[megadawgmaniac]

The maroon-ish line is mine. All rivalries are preserved. The worst part of this is it makes sense.

Option #2: alphabetical.

Alabama
Arkansas
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
LSU

Mississippi
Miss. State
Missouri
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas A&M
Vanderbilt

Again, rivalries preserved.

AA - paycheck, please

 

[DawgatAuburn]

There's no way that Bama, Auburn, UGA, UT and UF will ever agree to be in the same division, leaving LSU to compete with Arkansas and A&M for the West.

 

[Incognegro]

I really hope they don't go with it... I honestly do not like it one bit.

 

[Rebels7]

I just think trying to North/South makes the least amount of sense. And the "competitive balance" thing is so short term and should never be considered. That has what made the ACC ******. They thought they knew who would always be good, and it just doesn't work that way. It wasn't long ago Mike Shula coached a ****** Alabama team, Gerry Dinardo coached a ****** LSU team, and Spurrier coached a good Florida team. Dividing a conference up based on who is good now is so short-sighted.

 

[Negative Waves]

They ought to just toss out the whole division format. Every team gets 5 permanents and 4 rotating. Top two teams play in the championship game. All rivalry games would then be preserved.

 

[bobthecavemonkey]

But that will prolly never happen. It makes too much sense and takes away east and west champions.

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

<span style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;">Have Much</span>:

Alabama
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
LSU
South Carolina
Texas A& M

<span style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;">Have Less</span>:

Arkansas
Kentucky
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Missouri
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

Now that is an alignment I could go for***

 

[Incognegro]

I can't consider USCe a have much historically

 

[patdog]

Missouri to the East. It obviously preserves competitive balance and keeps rivalries intact. But if you really look at it, it makes about as much sense geographically as putting them in the West. What people overlook is that Missouri is more north than they are west compared to the rest of the SEC (they're the mostnorthern school in the SEC but only the 3rd most western school). And the SEC East is more north than the SEC West is. If you put Missouri in the East and give them Arkansas as their permanent opponent, there's very little difference in the distance they would travel for their permanent opponents than if you put them in the West. I'd give 95% odds this is what the SEC will do. It just makes so much more sense than any other option.

 

[Sutterkane]

where do we sign up for that???

Either do this or move us to the east. Anything that keeps us from playing either LSU or Bama every year is a godsend.

 

[PBRME]

Missouri to the East. It obviously preserves competitive balance and keeps rivalries intact. But if you really look at it, it makes about as much sense geographically as putting them in the West. What people overlook is that Missouri is more north than they are west compared to the rest of the SEC (they're the mostnorthern school in the SEC but only the 3rd most western school). And the SEC East is more north than the SEC West is. If you put Missouri in the East and give them Arkansas as their permanent opponent, there's very little difference in the distance they would travel for their permanent opponents than if you put them in the West. I'd give 95% odds this is what the SEC will do. It just makes so much more sense than any other option.

West East
Hogs 285 Vandy 446
OM 476KY 469
MSU 574UT 623
Bama 635GA 751
AU 785 USC 889
LSU 786 FL 1035
A&M 787

That's an average distance of 618 miles for West teams and 702 for East teams.

Move Auburn to the East and you get 590 miles average to West teams and 714 miles to East teams.

You swap Bama and Auburn for Vandy and you get 559 miles for West teams, and 741 miles for East teams.

I know swapping Bama and Auburn for Vandy will never happen, but it at least makes sense to move Auburn East and put MO in the West.

http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com/reply/536736/My-sources-are-saying-Mizzou-confirmed-to-be-in-SEC-East#reply-536736

 

[patdog]

is that no matter which division Missouri is in, they will have a permanent opponent in the other division. So if you put them in the West, you've got to also add either Auburn (785 mi)or Georgia (751 mi). If you put them in the East, you've got to add Arkansas (285 mi). That closes the gap between the West and East from an average of 125 mi to an average of about 50 mi.

 

[Predestined]

The South and The Deep South

 

[GloryDawg]

Break out the KY Jelly. "We are Miss State."

 

[NashvilleBulldawg]

That's just wrong!

 

[fishwater99]

Otherwise they will not get the votes to come into the SEC....

 

[Jacknut1]

then let Missouri have A&M as permanent (at least until more teams are added)

What's the status on going to 9 league games?

 

[dawgs.sixpack]

it definitely makes sense if lsu fans wanna go ahead and invest in a condo in downtown atlanta.

 

[patdog]

They weren't in the same division in the Big 12 and until then they'd only played a couple of times back in the 50s. There's no real reason they should be permanent opponents and A&M to Missouri is one of the longest drives in the whole conference. I predict the permanent opponents will be Missouri-Arkansas and A&M-USC, with all others staying the same. I know at least one poster says that Ark-USC is a rivalry game, but it's not any more a rivalry than MSU-Kentucky is. We play every year but it's really just because we have to play someone in that division every year because of rivalries like UT-Bama & UGA-Auburn.</p>

 

[dawgs.sixpack]

is that no matter which division Missouri is in, they will have a permanent opponent in the other division. So if you put them in the West, you've got to also add either Auburn (785 mi)or Georgia (751 mi). If you put them in the East, you've got to add Arkansas (285 mi). That closes the gap between the West and East from an average of 125 mi to an average of about 50 mi.

yep. excellent point. and i agree mizzou to the east at least for the time being makes by far the most sense for rivalries and competitive balance.

 

[MeridianDog]

I do not have it.

However, I predict no one school will be absoultely happy when the dust settles. The best shift would be to upset everyone, but the big schools will likely have much more say in the final decisionthan the small schools. Giving the west A&M and the east Missouri makes the most sense to me, so I am certain that will not be the final call.

Looking at all the matchups, someone loses their favorite opponent, regardless of the split. Obviously, politics will play a large part in the final decision.

I have wanted to say this for a while and I will bury my opinionin this thread.

Missouri was chosen to keep all of the SEC states touching each other (thus no Virginia) and to avoid having another case of two schools from the same state, wich apparantly is not a popular move - not enough impact on TV to just add Memphis, UA-Jonesboro, Tulane, Miami, Rice, Tulane, etc. I think to add Virginia or WV, they owuld have first added some North Carolina School. Ifyou notice, they added Texas and Missouri, both states touch a current SEC state.

 

[dawgs.sixpack]

Missouri was chosen to keep all of the SEC states touching each other (thus no Virginia) and to avoid having another case of two schools from the same state, wich apparantly is not a popular move - not enough impact on TV to just add Memphis, UA-Jonesboro, Tulane, Miami, Rice, Tulane, etc. I think to add Virginia or WV, they owuld have first added some North Carolina School. Ifyou notice, they added Texas and Missouri, both states touch a current SEC state.

you might wanna check a map.<div>
</div><div>and memphis, ua-jonesboro, tulane, rice, tulane, etc were not considered for hundreds of reasons. the least of which is that they share a tv market with a/several current sec programs (though that comment could be sarcasm that i didn't catch over the interwebz considering the ua-jonesboro inclusion)
</div>

 

[PBRME]

They weren't in the same division in the Big 12 and until then they'd only played a couple of times back in the 50s. There's no real reason they should be permanent opponents and A&M to Missouri is one of the longest drives in the whole conference. I predict the permanent opponents will be Missouri-Arkansas and A&M-USC, with all others staying the same. I know at least one poster says that Ark-USC is a rivalry game, but it's not any more a rivalry than MSU-Kentucky is. We play every year but it's really just because we have to play someone in that division every year because of rivalries like UT-Bama & UGA-Auburn.</p>

If MO to the east is what happens, then it makes no sense to pair A&M with thefurthest possible matchup they could have. It's over 1100 miles from College Station, TX to Columbia, SC. The best solution there is to pair MO with A&M. It's 400 miles closer for the fans to travel, and there's no adjusting anyone else's permanent opponents.

If they move to the west then the pemanents could be MO-Bama, A&M-AU, MSU-KY, UM-GA, LSU-FL, AR-USC, VU-UT. Like I've stated before, that scenario will never happen just because it would benefit MSU too much.

 

[Jacknut1]

as long as they don't take Kentucky away from us. I'm tired of hearing about driving distance though. How many Hog fans go to Gainesville? How many Gamecock fans drive to Baton Rouge?How many Auburn fans drive up to Fayetteville? The diehards that like to travel are gonna go no matter what. The distance when determining opponents is irrelevant.

</p>

 

[MeridianDog]

Virgina and wets virginia have NC between them ad SC - dang they touch KY?

Oh well - yes the schools listed in the no two schools from the same state were sarcasm. I am told by Alabama and LSU fans all the time that they would happily throw out MSU and UM. My thought is that would be dumb since thay in teh next sentence say we are easy games for them and in the case of those tow schools, losing a game means falling out of the BCS race.

Sorry for the dumb map reference. SOunded good as long as I thought K was isolated and touched no other state.

 

[Eureka Dog]

and it wasn't so hokey, we could channel the Big 10/11/12 and form:

The Heart of Dixie division :
Alabama,
Auburn
Georgia
LSU,
Mississippi
Mississippi State
South Carolina

and ThePride of the Southdivision:

Arkansas
Florida
Kentucky
Missouri (I really hope the SEC doesn't invite Mizzou)
Tennessee
Texas A&M
Vanderbilt

 

[dawgs.sixpack]

disregarding the PC issues, that's about as smart as calling the divisions "leaders" and "legends". or "coastal" and "atlantic".

 

[dawgs.sixpack]

They weren't in the same division in the Big 12 and until then they'd only played a couple of times back in the 50s. There's no real reason they should be permanent opponents and A&M to Missouri is one of the longest drives in the whole conference. I predict the permanent opponents will be Missouri-Arkansas and A&M-USC, with all others staying the same. I know at least one poster says that Ark-USC is a rivalry game, but it's not any more a rivalry than MSU-Kentucky is. We play every year but it's really just because we have to play someone in that division every year because of rivalries like UT-Bama & UGA-Auburn.</p>

If MO to the east is what happens, then it makes no sense to pair A&M with thefurthest possible matchup they could have. It's over 1100 miles from College Station, TX to Columbia, SC. The best solution there is to pair MO with A&M. It's 400 miles closer for the fans to travel, and there's no adjusting anyone else's permanent opponents.

If they move to the west then the pemanents could be MO-Bama, A&M-AU, MSU-KY, UM-GA, LSU-FL, AR-USC, VU-UT. Like I've stated before, that scenario will never happen just because it would benefit MSU too much.

mizzou and arkansas will likely wanna be each other's cross-divisional rival. i doubt south carolina and a&m would put up too much of a fight over it as was previously stated, mizzou and a&m don't have much history, and south carolina and arkansas might be current cross division "rivals", but the game isn't a marquee game for either program. it'd be like msu trying to argue kentucky is a "rival".<div>
</div>