I don’t remember Andy Staples stating it so clearly in his earlier post on the topic, but today he says there is a significant amount of support among SEC schools to ditch divisions and go to a pod system ($$).
… The SEC office has been getting pushed by several schools in the past year to consider adopting a pod system that would set three fixed rivals for each school and then use a rotating schedule for the rest. The two best teams would play in the conference title game, and every team would play every other team at least twice every four years. A player who spent four seasons at a school would play in every stadium in the conference.
When I wrote about this subject in October, I asked around to get a sense of who would support such a plan and who would oppose it. Essentially, the schools in the West division and Florida would be in support.
There would have to be a lot of moving parts addressed to make this proposal a reality. And I’m not sure it really gives the conference’s weaker schools the bowl eligibility protection they want, as there will be plenty of years when the rotating schedules won’t be so kind. But Staples says they’ll be talking about it at the SEC spring meetings. Interesting.
(You can insert your snarky comment about what McGarity will offer to give up at the meetings now.)
Get The Picture 
I love Andy and Seth, but hate this idea. American sports is about divisions, usually based on geography. It’s the way we’ve always been (except for those times the Atlanta pro sports teams were in their respective Western divisions).
Two divisions. Two division winners play in the league championship game. That is American.
This pod idea is a bunch of nonsense. Who are we? A bunch of soccer-playing Europeans?
LikeLiked by 3 people
The SEC existed without divisions much longer than with them. But before divisions it wasn’t any better. We went years without playing LSU for example. I remember when they came to Athens in ’79. It was a big deal because I believe it had been 20 years or so since they’d been there. We didn’t play Bama regularly either. The SEC doesn’t have a history of every team playing each other, for some reason. I think the pods would fix this. If we’re going to be in a conference, we might as well all play each other in a reasonable timeframe.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Going to nine games is the far better, and far more logical, choice than some cockamamie pod system. And thus, because this is the SEC, it’ll never happen.
LikeLike
Why is it far more logical?
LikeLike
Because in a pod system you almost always will have to use tie-breakers to choose which two teams makes the SEC Title Game, unless you turn the SEC Title Game into an SEC Playoff, where the winner of each pod is represented.
Going to a 9-game Schedule would allow you to do exactly what we did for 22 years before Mizzou and TAMU came on board: Play your division (6 games) and then 3 games against the West (one rival, two rotating). Having the two rotating means, just as it was for those 22 years, that every team will play every team at least once (most will play twice) during a 4 year period.
Then you send the division winners to the Title Game. Far simpler. Far more logical. Far more American.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Since it’s more american does the SEC schedule get printed on the American Flag?
But, pretty good argument otherwise
LikeLike
Hah! I just mean, as stated before, divisions are a uniquely American concept in sports. They make sense. They create order out of chaos. Pods are chaos. I hate chaos.
LikeLike
No. Your math is wrong (logically speaking). In a 9 game schedule with two divisions, you’ll play everyone in the other division at least once every 5 years, but two schools will only be played once during that span. During every four year stretch, there is one school you don’t play at all, two you play only once, and you go home and home with three other schools (once) plus your traditional rival (twice).
Pods is a four year cycle to do a home and home with every single school; The 9 game schedule with divisions can be done two at a time or staggered; either way it is a 6 year home and home cycle. You DO NOT play everyone once during a four year span.
The 9 game schedule is an improvement over the current system (cuts the current cycle from 12 years to 6), unless you are a school with an annual rival outside of the conference, or a school that pins bowl eligibility on playing less competitive non conference games. Or any other coach (all of them) who doesn’t want an extra conference game. Or a student who’d like to host and visit each team during your 4 years of college. You know, logical considerations.
Again, I’m for a nine game schedule over the current farcical arrangement, but pods are more realistic to actually happen because of the multitude of logical reasons so many different stakeholders don’t want an extra conference game. Every single school has a self interested reason not to add a conference game. They don’t all have a self interested reason not to switch to pods.
No, tie breakers isn’t a “logical” consideration, because it decides at least one division winner most years. It is an aesthetic consideration that is already a problem. Even a round robin can result in a tie breaker being needed.
LikeLike
We were involved in a tie-breaker system in order to win the SEC East and play in the SEC CG in 2003, if you recall. We beat UT, UT beat UF and UF beat us, and we each had a 6-2 conference record, and all had a 4-1 division record. The next tie-breaker was that the team with the highest rank in the BCS poll would be declared as the SEC East representative. On the last day of the season we beat Tech and Florida State beat Florida to put us over the top. Oddly, noncoverence games ultimately broke the tie.
So, no, the division set up does not always provide 2 clean SEC CG participants.
LikeLike
I never said tie-breakers have never been used. I said going to pods means tie-breakers will ALWAYS be used. Tie-breakers are there just in case. Divisions make it so they’ll rarely be used. Pods make it so they’ll always be used, and thus, be more important than on-field results. No thanks.
LikeLike
“Always” huh? Dating back to 2013 only once (in 2017) would a tiebreaker have been needed to determine who goes to Atlanta (between UGA and Bama oddly enough since Auburn beat us both). In 2014, 2015, 2016, 2018, and 2019 there were 2 teams with conference records clearly above the rest.
LikeLike
PODS… PODS… tie-breakers will always have to be used to decide which PODS winner gets to go to the SEC Title Game. WTF. Do you comprehend what you read?
LikeLike
Ohh. Gotcha. I can’t say what system they’ll talk about at spring meetings, but the only pod-based system I’ve seen doesn’t have any such thing as a “pod winner”. Each team has a “pod” of permanent opponents, but it’s not round-robin within that group. The “pods” are unique to each team. They’re like interlocking rings. Here’s a link to an article that describes what I’m talking about:
https://www.bannersociety.com/2019/8/15/20734585/college-football-divisions-pod-system
LikeLike
“a pod system that would set three fixed rivals for each school and then use a rotating schedule for the rest”
I don’t think I’m the one with the comprehension or arithmetic problem. Just how do you divide 14 teams into equal PODS of 4? Georgia’s 3 permanent rivals won’t be the same as Florida’s or Auburn’s or South Carolina’s if that’s who is in Georgia’s “POD”. WTF Damn boy homeehhwheyouumakit
Also…. “The two best teams would play in the conference title game” Doesn’t say anywhere that POD winners will be considered. “TWO BEST TEAMS” means the teams with the TWO BEST RECORDS. I mean wow, Corch.
LikeLike
I may be confused by what you’re considering a tiebreaker. Under a pod system, the two teams with the best conference record would go to the championship game. A tiebreaker would only be used if there were a tie for the second-best conference record, or a three- or four-way tie for the first best.
You may be right that tiebreakers would be used more frequently, though: the teams currently in the western division could probably be counted on to combine to yield two teams with no more than one conference loss, and the teams currently in the east could probably be counted on to give us one more. That’s a lot of years with three teams competing for two spots.
The counterargument is that the first tiebreaker used would likely be head-to-head outcomes, which is certainly an example of an on-field result. Since every team would play every other team at least once every two years, a head-to-head outcome would be sufficient to resolve at least half of all the two-way ties.
If the next tiebreaker used were overall record, then the odds of something other than wins and losses determining who got to go to Atlanta would appear to be pretty small, indeed. Am I missing something here?
LikeLike
You’ve got it right with how pods work. The fact that Corch couldn’t be more wrong and continues to call out other people’s comprehension skills is pretty funny though.
LikeLike
We didn’t play UT regularly either until division play started in 1992.
It was a 6 game SEC schedule. 5 permanents: UK, Vandy, UF, AU, and OM and the sixth was on a rotating basis home and home.
And we liked it!!
The advantage is that is that we played 5 decent teams with the rest of the schedule. For example, in 1980 we filled the schedule out with:
A&M
Clemson
South Carolina
TCU
Yech.
No directional sisters of the poor and disabled.
One could argue that most of the efforts to “improve” college football since that time have failed.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yeah, Clemson and South Kackalaky were both regulars on the schedule back then. I hated losing Clemson from the schedule.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have a solution, and it’s easy: just one pod- Arkansas, Texas A&M, South Carolina, and Missouri- they play each other how ever often their respective ADs wish to play, and no one else has to play them. They also get to remove the SEC stickers from their helmets.
The remaining ten schools compete in the Southeastern United States according to rivalries and tradition, and the nine schools that aren’t Georgia compete to take us on in the Dome in early December.
Howzat?
LikeLike
Also, as a severance package, we deed the Ark/A&M/SC/UM set the Dr. Pepper and Sonic tie-ins and the Hubert Owen crew.
LikeLike
If only we had pro/rel in CFB. We’d get so much better games and shit programs couldn’t ride the coat-tails of accidental association with blue bloods.
LikeLike
You have to have an actual conference for that logic to apply. Conference foes play home and homes more frequently than every 12 years. We are two separate conferences right now.
Also, I think the Georgia greats from before 1992 deserve better than to be called un-American communists by someone named for a coach of our most hated rival. Shame on you.
LikeLike
I guess we’d get UF, AU and USCe?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Personally, I’ve always considered Vanderbilt to be an enormous rival for UGA.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I like the way you think. And Columbia once every four years is more than enough.
LikeLike
You kid, but:
Auburn, 126 games (60-56-8)
Georgia Tech, 114 games (68-41-5)
Florida, 97 games (52-43-2)
Vanderbilt, 80 games (58-20-2)
Kentucky, 73 games (59-12-2)
South Carolina, 72 games(51-19-2)
LikeLiked by 1 person
The only reason Sackerlina is on there is we used to play them regularly when they were independent and ACC. But that’s a good look at who our traditional rivals have been. We’ve played Clemson 64 times over the years.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From SCe’s stand point UGA is their longest oldest SEC rival. UT or UF might has played them sooner but not more often. We may not care but the people making the schedules likely will.
LikeLike
Tennessee over USCe, I’d think. Maybe?
LikeLike
UT would get UF, Vandy and UA.
LikeLike
They’ve played Kentucky more than any other program.
LikeLike
Right. They get UK, Vandy, & UA, so we get USCe. OK. Could live with that as long as we have FU and the barn.
LikeLike
I recognize that, but with only three someone has to go. Which one do you think it would be?
LikeLike
The third spot is tough to fill out across the conference, but regardless of how it shakes out, every school will play each other at least two of four years; plenty for your third biggest rival to remain a rival.
LikeLike
It would be SCAR as the third, yes. While there are other opponents we care about more in the SEC, we are who Chickens care about most in conference. Any sort of change like this would have to take every team’s concerns into consideration, and if it comes down to giving us our #3 choice or giving a conference-mate their #1 choice, Birmingham would (and should) break in favor of giving that #1 choice.
LikeLike
I’m sure that our illustrious AD will bend over and take anything the SEC wants. Alabama, Auburn, LSU, and Florida are UGA’s permanent opponents and we open with all four on the road every year. We get UT at home once every three years at have to play at South Carolina on the hottest day of the year. I think that is a fair trade in exchange for us keeping the UK game in October so everyone can go to Keeneland before the game.
All kidding aside, I like the pod concept. Keep Auburn, UF, South Carolina, and Vandy/UK as four permanents and then rotate the other teams home/away every two years.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, I like the concept, but fear that McGarity would give in to road games at Auburn for three straight years to make the scheduling work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You beat me to it.
LikeLike
There would only be 3 permanents and the other 5 would rotate. That way you play all 13 teams every 2 years.
LikeLike
It would certainly make it easier to expand the division further, which may be the long term goal. There is no limit to the size of the conference. The SEC could pick off the top grossing ACC and Big 12 schools.
At some point, if a conference pulled in most of the top teams, you could see a four team conference playoff to crown a de facto national champion. Screw the NCAA.
I don’t particularly like it, but TV revenue is king. And there is so much money in the system that travel costs (for the school, not the fans) are negligible.
LikeLike
I fully understand that the conference championship game is a money grab.
That said, having the two best teams play a la Big XII seems really stupid to me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will give it a stab.
TEAM PERMANENT RIVALS
GEORGIA: FLORIDA, AUBURN, VANDY
USCe: TN, ARKANSAS, AUBURN
TN: ALABAMA, VANDY, KENTUCKY
VANDY: GEORGIA, TN, OLE MISS
FLORIDA: GEORGIA, LSU, KENTUCKY
MIZZOU: TAMU, ARKANSAS, KENTUCKY
KENTUCKY: TN, FLORIDA, MIZZOU
ALABAMA: AUBURN, UT, LSU
AUBURN: ALABAMA, GEORGIA, USCe
OLE MISS: MISS ST, LSU, VANDY
MISS ST: OLE MISS, TAMU, ARKANSAS
TAMU: MIZZOU, ARKANSAS, LSU
LSU: FLORIDA, ALABAMA, TAMU
ARKANSAS: TAMU, MISS ST, USEe
LikeLike
I’m not sure I understand…how can a team have a permanent rival that said rival doesn’t have in return? In others, if one team plays a game and the other doesn’t show up, does it still make a sound?
Wouldn’t be the first time I was out to lunch if I’m missing something.
LikeLike
Yeah maybe I should have spent more time, but it’s a start. I had to get some real work done this morning. LOL
LikeLike
Arkansas is going to be very upset to drop LSU, they were angry when A&M became LSU last game of the year.
LikeLike
I’m gonna go a little off the rails here and suggest our three fixed opponents in that system should be UF, AU, and Miss St. It keeps the 2 big traditional conference rivals and adds a Battle of the Bulldogs.
I’d also settle for a 9-game conference schedule instead of the pod system.
LikeLike
Pods solves a problem a nine game schedule doesn’t: more familiarity without the extra conference game that most coaches and all the less competitive schools would oppose.
Pods means UK and Vandy (Etc.) play more west schools than East, which generally is going to be more difficult. 9 games means everyone replaces a non-con game (either little sisters of the poor) with a much more difficult game. It also makes it more difficult for UF, UGA, and SC to keep their non-con rivals.
Look at it from an economics point of view: one of the two needs to happen because… well because it’d be awesome and we’d be one conference again not waiting 12 years between visits to West teams stadiums. Presuming all schools act in self interest, pods has a much more realistic chance to actually happen.
LikeLike
Try again.
LSU doesn’t play Ole Miss, but Ole Miss plays LSU??
South Carolina is getting UGA and/or UF.
LikeLike
Shit! This was supposed to be under dug lites schedule.
LikeLike
They won’t ask for my vote, but I vote for sticking with the Eastern and Western divisions and adding a ninth conference game if the idea of playing more teams is really that important to them (it isn’t).
I’m sick and tired of the stuff that makes our sport fun getting pushed aside for monetary purposes, and that’s all this is. Florida wants to have access to the SEC Championship Game despite losing to Georgia. That’s all it is. Same for the West, they all know they’re taking a loss to Alabama most years, but they want to be able to play their way to a rematch. You know what doing away with divisions does? It further devalues a regular season that already has been devalued too much in my opinion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am in this camp too, keep the Divisions as they are and add a 9th conference game. The major whiners are AU, LSU, and FU. but there is probably support from the weaker teams in the West as well. Idea needs to be squashed, man up guys. Tired of Auburn driving the conference bus because they get their ass beat so often by UGA and Bama.
LikeLike
I’m thinking on all of it, but this is a very good take. And it seems very plausible.
LikeLike
Good lord anyone here with money please go push McGarrity to get behind this. For the love of God man, make this happen.
Hosting and visiting every team in the conference every four years? An away game at a west school other than auburn no longer being a potential once in a lifetime experience? Do it now!
LikeLike
Jeff Danzler had a great plan last year – it made sense. Can’t remember specifics. Maybe someone could find a link.
LikeLike
So our 3 fixed would be?
Florida, Auburn and ???
Tennessee or SC?
LikeLike
Beating FU, Au and Tn every year makes my season. Not playing on that surface that gives a bad name to cow pastures at Kneeland is reason enough to choose USCum. I like things as they are.
LikeLike
I’m guessing South Carolina in this case because they really don’t have a true SEC rival.
LikeLike
You know, people don’t talk about this enough, and when they usually do it’s usually about how Mizzou doesn’t fit into the SEC even though they should be able to develop a rivalry with Arkansas or Tennessee, but really, more than any team who’s joined the SEC since 1992, Sakerlina is the worst fit.
The joined a league with absolutely zero rivals. Their fan base is desperate to see us as rivals, but we already have three, deep-seeded in hatred rivals in Florida, Auburn, and Tech.
Sakerlina should’ve joined the ACC with Clemson, or, even better, the SEC should’ve tapped Clemson to join the SEC. Roy Kramer messed-up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
They would say Georgia is their SEC rival even though they fall below the Big 3, Tennessee and Clemson for us. Yes, I said it. Clemson is a bigger rival to me than South Carolina.
Clemson probably would have been a better choice, but South Carolina was an easier choice in 1992 since the Gamecocks were an independent.
LikeLike
Yeah, Kramer was too much of a Southern Gentleman to raid another conference. The SWC was all but dead when Arkansas got the invite.
And I agree with you. Clemson is a historical rival. Sakerlina is a nothing. If you want to classify them as a “rival,” they’d be a geographic rival, like Tennessee.
LikeLike
Upthread it was pointed out that Tennessee’s most played rival is Kentucky. So the problem there is that Tennessee has Florida, UGA, Alabama, Vandy, AND Kentucky. The most obvious solution for UT, based on tradition at least, is Alabama, Vandy, and Kentucky.
That means we’d get AU, FU, and SCe, you’d think. And we’ve played SCe more than UT anyway.
LikeLike
I could go along with that.
LikeLike
The best compromise is to stick with faux “divisions” that are built in pod building blocks of 3s and 4s after two years on/off (after a home-home cycle). That way you don’t run into funky Big12 type title games.
That way you could please the never-change crowd in that every other cycle is identical to the current makeup we have now.
Georgia, Florida and Tennessee would have the usual UK, Vandy, SC and Mizz in years 1 and 2.
In years 3 and 4, they would go play LSU/AU/Bama while we get State, Ole Miss, A&M and Arkansas. The old “big 6” would keep basically want they want in 3 perms (we would have UF, UT and AU). The teams in the 4 pods would have the other 3 as their perms.
LikeLike
Years 1&2:
East:
uga, uf, ut, vandy, sc, uk, mizz (same as now)
West:
au, bama, lsu, ole miss, state, a&m, ark (same)
Years 3&4:
“East”:
uga, uf, ut, ole miss, state, a&m, ark
“West”:
au, bama, lsu, vandy, sc, uk, mizz
LikeLike
The Roommate Switch option. It’s the version I prefer.
https://theroommateswitch.wordpress.com/
LikeLike
Right. Except in his version he pairs UT with Auburn and Alabama. Not bad, considering UT and AU both historically swing to both sides of the conference with old rivals and, in fact, were a bit of rivals themselves. Certainly more than we were with Bama, at least after pist alleged fixing scandal of the early 60s.
Only problem with his proposed grouping is having LSU and A&M in one 4 pod with no comparable competition in the other.
LikeLike
“Pod” makes me think of poor SciFi. Sounds lame.
LikeLike
Spitballing…. Georgia would want to play Auburn and Florida every year for sure. But Auburn would not want to play Georgia and Florida every year. Auburn would also would not want to play Georgia Alabama and Florida every year, neither would we.
In order to balance stronger teams and weakee teams (current or historically)as well as balance the entire rotating schedule you would have to break all traditional all rivalries. I think. Furthermore who would want to have 2 top teams in their pod, vs them. My championship pod would be Vanderbilt Kentucky and Mississippi state. Put us in that pod we got a good chance of going Atlanta every year. Catch ole miss or South Carolina in rotation, schedule tech of course, and then nothing but nobody’s
Championship! Playoffs!
Maybe pods aren’t perfect? Or is my math all bad? Likely
LikeLike
Keep Divisions. End the Permanent crossover, go to 9.
problem solved.
LikeLike
End the Deep South’s Oldest Rivalry? No thanks.
LikeLike
Exactly. If you go to 9 games with divisions, there’s no reason to end permanent rivalries. Every school will play every school at least once in a 4-year period. In fact, they’ll play every school but one twice!
LikeLike
9 conference games could have UGA playing 3 in Sanford, 1 at Jax, and 5 on the road as much as every other year, I don’t like it.
Honestly, what about the current system is broken? Other than we play Mizzou every year?
LikeLike
The problem with the current system is that it takes 12 years to play a home and home with every team in the conference.
LikeLike
Florida, Auburn and Tennessee would have to be my 3 locked in and, yeah, we’ll play AT Auburn every year.
Seriously- I’m not really sure how I feel about this. I also find it “funny” that my 3 locked in are also my least favorite fan bases. Familiarity breeds contempt or however it goes.
LikeLike
And good luck getting programs to agree on their 3! I also feel like there will be some odd men out. SC would probably want us locked in but I’m not giving up one of my 3 for them. Who actually wants to play Mizzou or Arkansas every year??
LikeLike
How do pods impact the TV negotiations with Disney?
LikeLike
It should make the package even more valuable. Imagine being able to sell a network on UGA/LSU, Auburn/UF, Tennessee/Texas A&M, etc. twice every four years rather than the twice every 12 years setup we have now.
LikeLike
UGA: Florida, Auburn, USC
Florida: UGA, USC, Kentucky
USC: UGA, Vandy, Florida
Tennessee: Vandy, Kentucky, Bama
Kentucky: Tennessee, Vandy, Florida
Vandy: Tennessee, USC, Kentucky
Missouri: Arkansas, A&M, Ole Miss
Bama: Auburn, Tennessee, Miss State
Auburn: Bama, UGA, Ole Miss
Ole Miss: Miss State, Auburn, Missouri
Miss State: Ole Miss, Bama, LSU
LSU: A&M, Arkansas, Missouri
Arkansas: LSU, A&M, Missouri
A&M: LSU, Arkansas, Missouri
LikeLike
Oops, LSU’s 3rd game is Miss State, not Missouri.
LikeLike
I think Ole Miss/Vandy may want to be preserved. As I recall, it is the third most played inter-divisional series (~100 games) in the SEC, behind only Deep South and Alabama/Tennessee.
LikeLike
UGA gets hosed in scenario. LSU gets A&M, Arkansas, and Miss St. that is for the SEC a cup cake permanent schedule.
Florida gets UGA, UGA’s weakest pod member and a basketball school?
Hot garbage, and posters here complained about playing in Auburn 2 years in a row?
LikeLike
Agree on all points. I was just taking a shot on how it could work. Honestly the Tennessee/ Bama game would probably go away. Tennessee would likely get USC, Vandy and Kentucky if you’re going geographically and that would be garbage.
LikeLike
Wow! I’m impressed that the bigwigs are actually considering a smart choice that I am totally on board with. I love the pods idea. Let’s do it!
LikeLike
College football for me is entertainment, and I am all for seeing more entertaining games. I don’t find “the way it’s always been“ persuasive, but then I also enjoy watching the World & Euro Cup because they’re entertaining. If pods will get us more games against teams from the West, then I am all for it as long as it does not put us at a competitive disadvantage. The variety alone would have to be more entertaining than seeing Missouri, Vanderbilt and Kentucky year after year. If it means we have to give up playing Tennessee every year ( my guess), I can live with that as long as we keep Auburn and Florida. My real wish is that we and everyone else would stop playing two to three meaningless games every year.
LikeLike
I don’t like a nine game schedule because of the imbalanced SEC road games every other year. I like ten better if we go that route. Quit with the FCS teams, more TV $$, etc. We’d coincide the timing with the unavoidable playoff expansion so the likelihood of an extra loss is less impactful.
Is another option keeping it at eight conference games – rotating both cross-division opponents. Then, the cross-division rivals schedule each other as non-conference opponents if they just have to play??
LikeLike
I just had a brilliant idea about how to fix the 4/5 imbalance. I’ll write it in a new post.
LikeLike
I like it. Unless they come up with a CFB Czar who will mandate that P5 schools can only play other P5 schools and eliminate pointless cupcake spots on the schedule…
https://footballscoop.com/news/fix-secs-scheduling-problems/
LikeLike
How to fix the 4/5 home/away every-other-year imbalance inherent in any 9-game schedule:
Everyone in the SEC plays one divisional game as a neutral site game EVERY year, and like Jax and the WLOCP, the host city pays for the privilege.
While there may be some duds, can you imagine how this “made for TV” experience would play to Disney and the SEC Officials who get even more money every year?
So this way, everyone gets 4 SEC Home Games a Year, 4 SEC Away Games a Year, and 1 Divisional Neutral Site Game a Year.
This is the most fair and most equitable idea possible. One team from the West and one team from the East would need to be their every year neutral site rivals. That’s easy: Vandy and Ole Miss in Nashville Titan’s stadium.
SEC East:
Georgia-Florida – Jacksonville
Tennessee-South Carolina – Charlotte
Mizzou-Kentucky – St. Louis
Vandy-Ole Miss – Nashville
SEC West
LSU-Auburn – New Orleans
TAMU-Arkansas – Dallas
Bama-Missy State – Atlanta
LikeLike
The beauty of the WLOCP is it is unique with only Texas/OU being comparable. Army/Navy is a thing all its own. Majority of the SEC would not agree to a neutral site SEC game outside of the SECCG, which city would pay them as much as UGA and UF gets?
LikeLike
They don’t have to pay them as much, just pay them $3M a year, and that’s a benefit to the teams and the city.
Also, TAMU-Arkansas have already become a neutral site game anyway.
Also, this creates, for seven straight weeks, made-for-TV neutral site games where fanbases get to travel somewhere where they can have some fun (yeah, Vandy’s in Nashville, but Vandy don’t travel, so that’s more for the Ole Miss fans).
This takes some pretty crappy SEC divisional games like TAMU-Arky or Tennessee-Sakerlina or Mizzou-Kentucky, and makes them an event. How is that bad? This is good for the teams, good for the fans, good for schedule fairness, and then good for Disney/ABC/ESPN.
LikeLike
Playing a game in a NFL stadium on its own doesn’t make a game an event.
LikeLike
The event is the weekend, same as it is for the Georgia fans who like going to Jacksonville. It’s hanging out in a fun city. going to bars, playing golf, whatever, and then going to the game. While I don’t particularly care for Jacksonville or the barrier islands, I know many of y’all do. If you’re an Auburn fan, how much would getting to play every year in New Orleans be? If you’re an Ole Miss fan, going to Nashville’s gotta be fun, right? Tennessee and Sakerlina fans descending on Charlotte? TAMU and Arkansas fans in Dallas? Bama and Missy State fans in Atlanta? Or maybe replace Atlanta with Orlando? Disney World! Bring the whole family!
Added bonus, since the entire league plays one neutral site game a year, they can finally all recruit to that neutral site game.
LikeLike
The thing is, this idea is incredibly easy to sell to boosters, regular fans, AND the TV networks, which means the SEC Presidents, ADs, and Coaches have no choice but to get in line.
LikeLike
lol, The WLOCP is decades of rivalry. If your model worked so well Bowl Games wouldn’t have empty stadiums.
LikeLike
You’re talking about games before or right after the holidays when money is tight against teams the fans don’t care about in some cities like Shreveport or Detroit or Annapolis that no one cares to visit.
These are SEC divisional rivalry games against teams your team must beat to contend in the division in cities relatively close to where you live, during the football season. Will they all sell-out or be amazing at the start? No. But most of them will. LSU-Auburn in New Orleans will rival the WLOCP every year. Ole Miss fans in Nashville? I predict a sell-out there, too. Also Tenn-Sakerlina in Charlotte.
Your analogy to bowls holds no water.
LikeLike
….and it will be better when kids are in school?
LikeLike
BTW UNC vs SCe isn’t selling a NFL stadium.
LikeLike
You’re telling me, between the almost 190K fans that Tennessee and Sakerlina stuff into their stadiums every Saturday, there won’t be 75K fans between both schools who want to go to Charlotte for a fun weekend?
Okay, Otto.
LikeLike
Ark vs Tx AM isn’t selling out
LikeLike
If it becomes a true neutral site, every year game, you bet your ass it will. All those TAMU fans in Dallas. Jerry ginnin’ up the Arkansas fans.
The size of this stadium compared to any other stadium on the list is problematic, yes, but over time, it would sell-out.
LikeLike
You know that no AD is going to want to give up that home revenue one game of the year, and no coach is going to want to give up an automatic win against a patsy. So although your suggestion IS the most fair and equitable way possible, these people are not about fair and equitable. They’re about money and tilting the field in their own favor as much as they can. And given that they both can be fired at a moment’s notice if they fall behind in revenues or in wins, you can see why self-preservation is the number one objective.
LikeLike
Except that the main thrust of your issue is 100% wrong
They wouldn’t be missing ANY of their gate receipts. Why? Because there is no 9th game now. Right now, every team but Georgia and Florida, and sometimes TAMU and Arkansas, get 4 home games and 4 away games every year.
That doesn’t change. What does change is the 9th game becomes a neutral site game they’re paid to go to. For schools like Vandy or Kentucky or even Missy State, are you telling me they pull in more than $1.5M per game in gate receipts?
Trust me when I tell you, this is the best plan. This creates a conference full of FAN FRIENDLY, but also TV-friendly, neutral site games. This gives the SEC something completely unique in all of CFB. And best of all for Georgia and Florida fans, and sometimes TAMU and Arkansas fans, doesn’t create a problem where every other year they only have 3 SEC home games vs. 5 away games.
I’m telling you… THIS IS THE PLAN.
LikeLike
Dude.The “9th” game is currently a home game vs a non-conference foe. That’s the revenue and automatic win they don’t want to give up.
LikeLike
Again, you think any school brings in more than $1.5M in a game against Southwestern Tennessee State A&M? Do you think that game is something the fans give a flying eff about? That’s the game you lose for the 9th neutral site game.
LikeLike
Any amount it brings in is more than a neutral site game. And that’s my point entirely: “they” don’t care what the fans give a flying eff about. I’m not sure why, but you seem to think they do. If they did we’d already have a 9-game conference schedule, man.
LikeLike
I don’t like, I am fine with how often UGA plays the West teams. I don’t want 9 SEC games and am more excited with Clemson, FSU, Ohio St, and Oklahoma.
LikeLike
I would prefer a 9 game conference schedule. The pods system could certainly be better than what we have now. I am tired of too many home cupcakes and a system that rewards schools (UF) that feast on cupcakes My biggest fear there is McGoofy bent over taking whatever he is told. I have no faith in his ability to get us a fair deal.
LikeLike
I would prefer the 9 game sked but the pod system has a better chance to happen. Unless mandated by the NCAA the SEC is not going to a 9 conference game format, as the SEC rightly wants to protect it’s highly ranked teams. There are too many elite and good teams in the SEC vs. other conferences to risk a loss in a 9th conference game. This is not a huge concern or as big a concern in the ACC or B1G, B1G moreso than ACC but still not as much as the SEC. Imagine if this season in the last weekend of conference play the 9th games were UGA-LSU, Bama-FL, etc.. The SEC is not going to cannibalize itself when it comes to rankings and CFP and NC odds. As such, the pod system is favorable though the 9 game sked may be more logical IMHO.
LikeLike
Georgia Florida Auburn S Carolina
Florida Georgia LSU Mizzou
Tennessee Vandy Bama Kentucky
Vandy Tennessee Kentucky Ole Miss
Kentucky S Carolina Vandy Tennessee
S Carolina Kentucky Ole Miss Georgia
Mizzou Texas A&M Miss St. Florida
Bama Auburn Tennessee LSU
Auburn Bama Georgia Texas A&M
Ole Miss Miss St S Carolina Vandy
Miss St. Ole Miss Kentucky Arky
Arky LSU Texas A&M Miss St.
LSU Arky Florida Bama
Texas A&M Mizzou Arky Auburn
Best I can come up with.
LikeLike
Yeah.
Only suggestion otherwise I’d make is giving Missouri Arkansas instead of Texas A & M. Arkansas would in turn give up LSU for Missouri. Then Texas A & M would get LSU.
LikeLike
In a pod system, there wouldn’t be a 1 loss division runner up sitting at home while a 2 or 3 loss division champ gets murdered in the Dome.
That’s a feature. Not a bug. Our 3 permanent teams would be SC, UF and AU most likely.
So a typical year we would play 5 more obviously. It would depend. Did we have a year where we get 3 killers or 2 from the rest? It’s a little more lumpy than today. But more fun
I would strongly support it. Note: if the Vols gamed this out, they would support it. Vandy and UK would both demand to have the Vols every year. They would have it easy.
LikeLike