Curious about future SEC Scheduling

[Shaun1985]

With no more East / West divisions, will our future SEC schedules change? Sorry if it was already asked but I don't remember reading or hearing anything about it. I hope we always play home and aways with Vandy and UK because they are huge rivals but it sort of sucks to think about teams like Bama, who pretty much get that 4th bye in the tournament gift wrapped by still playing weak West teams while we battle UK/UF/Vandy for 6 games. Obviously, if we are heading in the right direction, it doesn't really matter. But I figured if the league was structured in helping the tournament, scheduling would be followed as well?

[GetEmVols]

They got rid of the East and West divisions? what did I miss

[Shaun1985]

Yes. The team that won the West went to the NIT while 5 out of 6 from the East went dancing. Starting this year, the top 4 teams in the conference as a whole will receive the first round byes in the SEC Tournament.

and I sort of found the answer to my own question but for anyone wondering....

The East home/away and play the West once stays the same this year but..

"Foley said a task force will be put together to consider the benefits of a 16 or 18-game schedule for 2013. That means after next season, Kentucky could play Alabama twice during the season instead of once or Florida could play Mississippi State two times rather than just once."

Fox, Kennedy, and Donavon all called for 18 game SEC schedules while Coach Cal called for 22 game SEC Schedules. That's like 1 tournament, a couple of OOC games and the rest SEC lol. 22 is WAY to much but I think I like adding two games at 18.

[Shaun1985]

ehh I didn't think about A&M or possible Mizzou. To keep the structure the same, you'd have to add those extra two games anyways and that defeats the purpose. I guess get use to losing those home/away's from our traditional East teams. Since there is no purpose of any team having home/away games now with other SEC schools since it's one, I hope we still keep the Kentucky and Vandy games as a home and away series every year.

[Incipient]

Originally Posted by Shaun1985

ehh I didn't think about A&M or possible Mizzou. To keep the structure the same, you'd have to add those extra two games anyways and that defeats the purpose. I guess get use to losing those home/away's from our traditional East teams. Since there is no purpose of any team having home/away games now with other SEC schools since it's one, I hope we still keep the Kentucky and Vandy games as a home and away series every year.

My personal opinion (assuming 14 teams):

*Two protected rivalries played twice a year (we obviously get Vandy and Kentucky)
*Three other matchups played twice in a year on a rotational basis
*Other eight teams played once a year.

That's an 18 game schedule, and we have a home and home with every team in the conference roughly once every four years. Problems?

[Velo Vol]

Originally Posted by Incipient

Problems?

Yes, they should just keep the divisions.

[CatsQueue]

Originally Posted by Shaun1985

Fox, Kennedy, and Donavon all called for 18 game SEC schedules while Coach Cal called for 22 game SEC Schedules. That's like 1 tournament, a couple of OOC games and the rest SEC lol. 22 is WAY to much but I think I like adding two games at 18.

I thought Cal's original 22 games schedule idea was based on the 16 team SEC expansion model. 14 divisional games (7 x 2) and 8 cross divisional.

[Incipient]

Originally Posted by Velo Vol

Yes, they should just keep the divisions.

Why? Nobody else has divisions in basketball, and they would make for a 19 game schedule. What's the downside to my proposal?

[Shaun1985]

No reason to keep East / West in basketball. It's sort of unfair to all the East teams and balances out the conference better. Unlike football, you play 3Xs as many games and at least play everybody once. I like the idea of keeping two rivalries though.

[Velo Vol]

Originally Posted by Incipient

Why?

Because I like the home-away series with our eastern division rivals and don't care much at all about playing the Alabama and Mississippi schools.

Yes, for the last few seasons the east has been stronger than the west, but who can say that that might not flip in just a couple seasons? It wasn't so long ago that the east was better than the west in football, and now it is clearly not.

[Shaun1985]

The last thing I can remember that the West did that was significant was LSU's final four run with Thomas and Davis. Not saying the conference power won't balance out but it's been lopsided for a minute now. I firmly believe Alabama will be one of the four teams receiving a bye and should be dancing this post season and if Grant doesn't run for greener pastures, Alabama has a great coach that will keep them competitive. In just a couple of years, I think Arkansas will be a national power again. There's no excuse for the Miss schools sucking it up. CAK and Stansbury both get talent at their schools but fall flat on their face. I don't think anyone sees Donovan, Stallings, or Cal leaving anytime soon so all three of those schools will more than likely continue to have success. Fox has Georgia going in new directions and the verdict is out on what Martin can do here. Horne is likely gone if he don't do something soon so the East is light years ahead of the West. I like it but I agree....I don't think I'd be too pumped up about trading a home/away with Florida for Ole Miss or Auburn but conference expansion and changes aint only in football. As long as we can keep our rivalries going, I'm good.