3 permanent rivals

#101
#101
Alabama: Vols can't back down just because they've been a powerhouse both recently and historically.
Kentucky: For the history, bring back the beer barrel. Not to mention the fact we've been a thorn in the side of their pride, basketball.
Vandy: History, in state and baseball.
 
#103
#103
Vol865 said:
Posted this before but I'll do it again and maybe it'll get traction lol

No Divisions
3 permanent and rotate 6 a year

UT: Bama, UF, UK
UF: UT, LSU, UGA
AUB: Bama, UGA, Miss St
Bama: UT, LSU, AUB
LSU: Bama, UF, Ole Miss
UGA: UF, AUB, SCar
UK: Vandy, UT, SCar
SCar: UGA, UK, Arkansas
Mizzou: Arkansas, A&M, OU
Vandy: Ole Miss, UK, Miss St
Ole Miss: Vandy, Miss St, LSU
Miss St: Ole Miss, Vandy, AUB
Arkansas: Mizzou, Texas, SCar
A&M: Texas, OU, Mizzou
Texas: OU, A&M, Arkansas
OU: Texas, Mizzou, A&M
Click to expand...


I’m sorry but championships are a joke if there is no “balance” at all the the schedules. If you think for a second Alabama is gonna sign off on Tenn, LSU & Aub, you’ve been asleep the last 50 yrs.
 
#104
#104
wmcovol said:
I’m sorry but championships are a joke if there is no “balance” at all the the schedules. If you think for a second Alabama is gonna sign off on Tenn, LSU & Aub, you’ve been asleep the last 50 yrs.
Click to expand...
You don't balance with 3 games. You balance with 9. Make the other 6 games make sense. This is for RIVALRIES. That's it. Besides it's fairly balanced between all teams.
 
#107
#107
Vol865 said:
You don't balance with 3 games. You balance with 9. Make the other 6 games make sense. This is for RIVALRIES. That's it. Besides it's fairly balanced between all teams.
Click to expand...

If you got 3 “average or below” permanent opponents, you’ll have an advantage over schools with 1 or 2 dominant teams. No need to look any further than Ky’s “resurgence “ to see the advantage of having Miss St. as the permanent opponent now. Imagine the advantage when it becomes 3 schools.
 
#108
#108
wmcovol said:
If you got 3 “average or below” permanent opponents, you’ll have an advantage over schools with 1 or 2 dominant teams. No need to look any further than Ky’s “resurgence “ to see the advantage of having Miss St. as the permanent opponent now. Imagine the advantage when it becomes 3 schools.
Click to expand...
That doesn't correlate at all. Matter of fact, 3 would make it average out better. And if there are no divisions, you have more freedom in who the other 6 teams will be every other year. We wouldn't be playing the same teams as UK except for Bama or Miss St. And to add onto that, the rivals competition level are mostly relative to the competition level of said team.

But for example the schedule might look like this:

Screenshot_20220726-124955_Samsung Notes.jpgScreenshot_20220726-125003_Samsung Notes.jpg
 
#109
#109
Vol865 said:
That doesn't correlate at all. Matter of fact, 3 would make it average out better. And if there are no divisions, you have more freedom in who the other 6 teams will be every other year. We wouldn't be playing the same teams as UK except for Bama or Miss St. And to add onto that, the rivals competition level are mostly relative to the competition level of said team.

But for example the schedule might look like this:

View attachment 475454View attachment 475455
Click to expand...
That year 1 schedule for us would be no joke. Which begs the question as to why some don’t want Vandy either on the schedule or in the Conference? Having Bama and Vandy as permanent kind of equals things out a little bit. Not only that, but Saban won’t be coaching Bama in 5-10 years. There will be a gradual drop off in their program. That betters our chances of not having a built in loss.
 
#110
#110
RDU VOL#14 said:
That year 1 schedule for us would be no joke. Which begs the question as to why some don’t want Vandy either on the schedule or in the Conference? Having Bama and Vandy as permanent kind of equals things out a little bit. Not only that, but Saban won’t be coaching Bama in 5-10 years. There will be a gradual drop off in their program. That betters our chances of not having a built in loss.
Click to expand...
Then flip AUB and SCar around. It was just an example. The point was the schedules are going to be tough for everyone. You could switch UK for Vandy but if you're trying to keep rivalries then UK would have Miss St or equivalent so they would have it even easier. I want to play Bama and UF every year. I don't care about difficulty but this was what I feel was a reasonable solution for everyone I came up with
 
  • Like
Reactions: RDU VOL#14
#111
#111
Vol865 said:
Then flip AUB and SCar around. It was just an example. The point was the schedules are going to be tough for everyone. You could switch UK for Vandy but if you're trying to keep rivalries then UK would have Miss St or equivalent so they would have it even easier. I want to play Bama and UF every year. I don't care about difficulty but this was what I feel was a reasonable solution for everyone I came up with
Click to expand...

I wasn’t being critical. I was just pointing out how difficult that could potentially be.
 
#112
#112
You don't get to pick your favorite rivalry games and dismiss the other teams rivalries. Florida and Georgia have historical significance almost exactly the same as South Carolina who joined the conference in 1992. Georgia and Florida rotated off the schedule for years and years and years before that. Vanderbilt is going to pick Tennessee as it's most important rival in football. So is Kentucky. UT should pick Alabama. Geographically, we're still with Vandy, UK and SC. I could see that as a pod. UGA, AU, FL and AL as a pod. Ole Miss, State, LSU and Ark as a pod. TX, A&M, Mizzou and OK as a pod. Some of this has to work for the minor sports too.

I think as long as the rotation allows for each conference team to play one another in a 4 year period, that's the best we can hope for.
 
Last edited:
#114
#114
Alright, so being an ex-business major, I just had to whip up an Excel file for this. All I did was, for the first column, filled in the one opponent every school must play above all. If there were any left over, I paired them with a school that wasn't taken. Repeat for column 2 with essential secondary rivalries, pair the rest with untaken schools. Repeat for column 3. This is what I came up with. See if you like it.

1658858354507.png
 
#115
#115
NeverWe'llSever said:
Alright, so being an ex-business major, I just had to whip up an Excel file for this. All I did was, for the first column, filled in the one opponent every school must play above all. If there were any left over, I paired them with a school that wasn't taken. Repeat for column 2 with essential secondary rivalries, pair the rest with untaken schools. Repeat for column 3. This is what I came up with. See if you like it.

View attachment 475464
Click to expand...
If Bama gets Auburn and us, we should get them and Florida IMO
 
#116
#116
livefaith said:
The less permanent annual games the better, IMO. There are dozens of intriguing collegiate matchups, yet we play Vandy, KY, USCjr etc every single year forever. Boring if you ask me.

How about Kansas, or Minnesota, or Duke, or Michigan State etc etc etc etc?
Click to expand...
Ohio State, Arizona State, Montana in Bozeman. Yokusika Seahawks in Tokyo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: livefaith
#117
#117
Vol865 said:
If Bama gets Auburn and us, we should get them and Florida IMO
Click to expand...

So, we are going to play Bama and Vandy, no matter what. Lock that in. The question is just if we play UF or UK. Historically (number of games played: 105 vs 51) and geographically, it makes sense to play UK. UF is actually the team we have played 6th most, behind Vandy, UK, Bama, Ole Miss and Auburn. Plus, like it or not, we are viewed as a bottom half team in the league, so it is acceptable to only play 1 top half team instead of 2. UK is no slouch right now either, even though we have dominated them and will continue to do so. And 1 more thing, we play every team in every venue every 4 years, so this isn't that big of a deal, honestly. We will still play UF bi-annually.
 
#120
#120
One more idea. Divide schools into 8 upper echelon / 8 lower echelon. Upper play 2 other upper and 1 lower, lower play 2 lower and 1 upper.

1658866652288.png
 
#121
#121
Vol865 said:
Then flip AUB and SCar around. It was just an example. The point was the schedules are going to be tough for everyone. You could switch UK for Vandy but if you're trying to keep rivalries then UK would have Miss St or equivalent so they would have it even easier. I want to play Bama and UF every year. I don't care about difficulty but this was what I feel was a reasonable solution for everyone I came up with
Click to expand...

There’s people NOW complaining about Ky “weak” SEC schedule with 1 permanent opponent (Miss st). Imagine the case with 3 (Miss st, Tennessee & Vandy).
 
#123
#123
SayNoToJorts said:
UF, Bama, UGA in that order
Click to expand...
What makes Georgia and Florida a bigger rival than Vandy and Kentucky or even Auburn? Like if the SEC was to do something like this why not make it more about what is relevant over the last 15 years rather than what was 20 years ago. Alabama is the only one on the list that you can look at and say hey they are a long standing rival the other 2 not so much just 30 years that is all.
 
#124
#124
Southeastern VFL said:
What makes Georgia and Florida a bigger rival than Vandy and Kentucky or even Auburn? Like if the SEC was to do something like this why not make it more about what is relevant over the last 15 years rather than what was 20 years ago. Alabama is the only one on the list that you can look at and say hey they are a long standing rival the other 2 not so much just 30 years that is all.
Click to expand...
Because I want to beat those teams the most and the OP said it was my decision
 
#125
#125
NeverWe'llSever said:
So, we are going to play Bama and Vandy, no matter what. Lock that in. The question is just if we play UF or UK. Historically (number of games played: 105 vs 51) and geographically, it makes sense to play UK. UF is actually the team we have played 6th most, behind Vandy, UK, Bama, Ole Miss and Auburn. Plus, like it or not, we are viewed as a bottom half team in the league, so it is acceptable to only play 1 top half team instead of 2. UK is no slouch right now either, even though we have dominated them and will continue to do so. And 1 more thing, we play every team in every venue every 4 years, so this isn't that big of a deal, honestly. We will still play UF bi-annually.
Click to expand...
I think we should play Bama and UF no matter what and pick from the other 2.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top