9 SEC games, starting in 2026

#252
#252
DuckInAPen said:
1) Yes, sir -- 1903-1908 is the only period during which we played Bama in Birmingham "every year."

2) Legion Field was a neutral(ish) site for the Iron Bowl; for the Third Saturday in October, Legion Field was Alabama's home field.
Click to expand...
I see what your saying and wasn't thinking about it that way since Bama did play a large majority of their home games at Legion Field during those years, not just TSIO.

My overall point was it would be cool if the SEC could figure out neutral sites for these traditional rivalries. Not sure where UT/Bama could be held though...seems like Protective and Ladd-Peebles would both be too small or too far south.
 
#253
#253
Rickyvol77 said:
the SEC and the Big Ten's next contract structures for TV is going to look a lot different.

there are only 5-6 brands that "move" those deals, but there are three other factors at play:

1) The SEC and Big Ten will be the only two power conferences and will have 98% of all the important program brands. The other conferences like the ACC and Big XII will basically become G5 conferences with what's left

2) The SEC and Big Ten have different goals in terms of expansion. The SEC wants to continue to make contiguous expansion which makes sense and they also want the new markets and to improve academics and other sports while grabbing the bigger brands left. The Big Ten simply wants a far flung conference with all brands from all corners of the country. They may stop at 20 but they definitely will not go past 24.

3) The SEC and Big Ten will begin to look at revenue sharing where teams will not get equal shares but payoffs based on how much $ they bring to the conference in all sports. Much like the ACC and Big XII have done recently.

As for expansion itself the Big Ten is only looking at the following schools that they have actually put the numbers to their networks and presidents:

Big Ten candidates
Notre Dame (everyone wants obviously)
North Carolina (they want but UNC wants SEC)
Virginia (tossup but leaning towards SEC)
Florida State (The only large Southern brand that Big Ten will likely get)
Clemson (longshot but Big Ten doesn't really want)
Georgia Tech (fallback Southern candidate at 24)
Duke (long shot)
Miami (fallback Southern candidate at 24)
Kansas (considered but not likely)
Utah (heavily looked at for Western division)
Colorado (Heavily looked at for Western division)
California (not likely at this point)
Stanford (likely number 19 expansion with FSU or ND)
Pittsburgh (long shot)
Syracuse (Long shot)

the SEC have only discussed the following schools:
North Carolina (SEC's #1 choice for new state and overall, will be in SEC by 2032)
Virginia (SEC #2 choice for new state and overall, will be in SEC by 2032)
Florida State (not likely at this point, the SEC feels like they don't need FSU, long shot if they went to 24)
Clemson (likely if the SEC goes to 20-24)
NC State (package deal if needed with UNC)
Virginia Tech (package deal if needed with UVA)
Duke (likely 24th team if other candidates are gone)
Kansas (possible 24th team depending on dynamics)
Georgia Tech (possible team in 24 team scenario)
Miami (no shot at SEC)
West Virginia (no shot at SEC unless 4-5 other teams are elsewhere)
Click to expand...
This is so crazy it’s hard to know where to start, but this exists in your head not sankey’s…you say what is going to happen but you never say why it will happen…going beyond 16 comes with tremendous downsides in terms of losing rivalry games. That’s the whole point of a conference…if you’re playing someone once a decade then you’re not really in the same conference so again, what’s the point?

Anyone who says the SEC would like to add Duke and Kansas is frankly not a serious or informed person

you didn’t say why adding these 2nd rate schools- relative to the OU and UTx additions- adds more money than it takes away by splitting the shares more ways…

You said I need to check my sources- what are yours?
 
#256
#256
IndianaVol said:
I see what your saying and wasn't thinking about it that way since Bama did play a large majority of their home games at Legion Field during those years, not just TSIO.

My overall point was it would be cool if the SEC could figure out neutral sites for these traditional rivalries. Not sure where UT/Bama could be held though...seems like Protective and Ladd-Peebles would both be too small or too far south.
Click to expand...
Nashville is about 3.5 hrs from Tuscaloosa and around 3 hrs from Knoxville. The only problem is that there isn't a stadium with enough seats. Nissan Stadium is just under 70k, and the new one they are building is even smaller.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IndianaVol and chuckiepoo
#257
#257
zjcvols said:
First off, football programs rise and fall all the time. Florida hasn't been doing hot either. If we really want to play the best, why not include Texas in there? Missouri has been better than Florida, we should include them instead.

Second off, Vanderbilt and Tennessee have played every year 1913 that didn't include the country in the middle of a World War. They are in-state rivals. It's a 3 hour drive. It's been played 118 times. Just because Vanderbilt suck doesn't mean we should eschew them and history. It already sucks we threw our rivalry away with Auburn because of divisions. Besides, they recently just beat us 5 times in 7 years. Lea just led them to a bowl game. It doesn't mean this will always be the case.

Third, other schools are going to have to agree with this. Georgia is going to have Auburn and Florida as their rivals. They've had a pretty good rivalry with Kentucky and South Carolina as well. Even if Danny wants to play the toughest competition, sacrifices are going to be made to get this to work.
Click to expand...

This is about historic rivals. The best of our historic rivals (especially in the last 30 years) is Alabama, Florida, and Georgia. I could care less about scrub teams we've been playing for 100 years.
 
#259
#259
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
Beating a team every time isn't a rivalry. If Vandy and Kentucky are our rivals then we can't claim to be a great program anymore. Ohio State isn't rivals with Indiana and Purdue regardless of how many times they've played.
Click to expand...
We can't claim to be a great program if our rivals are the same rivals we had when we were winning conference and national championships?

I neither know nor care who Ohio State's rivals are other than Michigan, and Michigan is no Alabama.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#261
#261
The Big 10 going to nine games forced the SEC to do it. But a 9 game schedule down here just means more clashes with a potential loss as a real possibility. If you're Texas, then a&m, LSU, Bama, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Florida, Ole Miss & Auburn could all be on your schedule and then you'd have to beat one of them again to win the league. Yoooo.

Overall, team records have the chance to take a hit. This seems like a win for the big 10, but not necessarily for us. Their schedule won't be nearly as tough. A conspiracy theorist might say they tricked us into doing it because they knew that we would follow suit and cause harm to our schools tryna keep up with them. I'll for sure be interested to see how it all plays out. Could be nothing, could be a disaster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#263
#263
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
Beating a team every time isn't a rivalry. If Vandy and Kentucky are our rivals then we can't claim to be a great program anymore. Ohio State isn't rivals with Indiana and Purdue regardless of how many times they've played.
Click to expand...
You have the emotional intelligence and logical assumption of a child.

So if Alabama and UGA and Florida beat us like they have the last 25 years than they aren't our rivals either, using that logic.

Ohio State has never been rivals with Purdue or Indiana. Michigan is their only main rivalry in the conference
 
  • Like
Reactions: jbeeman85
#265
#265
What is exciting about the 9 league games is if we can get it so the Vandy away game falls on a year that we play 5 league home games that would make essentially 6 conference games we play in a home environment. Just hold serve at home and find a way to win 1 out of those remaining 3 away games and we are playoff bound.

Doubt the sec goes for that but this is why we pay Danny White the big bucks.

Also as someone who has lived in northeast Tennessee on the Tenn/KY border anyone who says that Tennessee/KY is not a rivalry and hasn’t had to deal with those mouth breathers on a regular basis can go kick rocks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jbeeman85 and Rickyvol77
#266
#266
You can feel the financial stress on the entire system. I already know the amount of commercials I need to endure in order to watch a college football game will be increasing this season. I feel for those who attend all the games who are getting hit with increases on literally everything. Going to 9 games exposes their need for money because it will definitely hurt the SEC making playoff money because of the parity. The 3 or 4 top Big Ten teams will take all the cash while the SEC beats itself up.
 
#267
#267
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
Beating a team every time isn't a rivalry. If Vandy and Kentucky are our rivals then we can't claim to be a great program anymore. Ohio State isn't rivals with Indiana and Purdue regardless of how many times they've played.
Click to expand...
Let's add the Cincinnati Bengals to our list of permanent rivals, then we can truly claim to be the greatest program ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#268
#268
VOLtaism said:
You can feel the financial stress on the entire system. I already know the amount of commercials I need to endure in order to watch a college football game will be increasing this season. I feel for those who attend all the games who are getting hit with increases on literally everything. Going to 9 games exposes their need for money because it will definitely hurt the SEC making playoff money because of the parity. The 3 or 4 top Big Ten teams will take all the cash while the SEC beats itself up.
Click to expand...
in a 5-11 playoff format the SEC will get 5-7 teams yearly
 
  • Like
Reactions: zjcvols and norrislakevol
#269
#269
Volnanza said:
This is not logical thinking.
Click to expand...

Competitors aren't logical. Its about proving whose the best. You guys can try to hide behind history when in reality you just want an easier draw because you're afraid of competition. I want to play Florida and Georgia every year cause we owe them an annual butt whopping after what we've had to endure for the last 15 years.
 
#270
#270
Rickyvol77 said:
You have the emotional intelligence and logical assumption of a child.

So if Alabama and UGA and Florida beat us like they have the last 25 years than they aren't our rivals either, using that logic.

Ohio State has never been rivals with Purdue or Indiana. Michigan is their only main rivalry in the conference
Click to expand...

Answer me this. Let's say history stayed the same in terms of number of matchups. So in this hypothetical we only started playing Georgia and Florida annually in 1992. But instead of being elite programs they were instead on the level of Vanderbilt and Kentucky. And let's say Kentucky and Vanderbilt were the elite national championship caliber football programs. Would you be clamoring we play them as our permanent opponents in this alternate universe?

Or is the only reason you want us to get Vanderbilt and Kentucky because they are weak programs and more likely to be easy wins every year compared to Florida and Georgia?

You guys are using history to hide your true intentions which is fear of competition. Just say you want easy matchups and stop me with this historical rivals crap.
 
#271
#271
Volinnooga said:
I bet I’m older than you are. I’m not of the generation you think. Born in ‘78.and I believe what I said.
Click to expand...
You are wrong about being older. Born in 78, You were 11/12 when the 1990 season started and we lost Auburn annually and the SEC changed with expansion. I am just a few years older than you but speaking to my father and uncles growing up I learned a lot about the history. At best you had seen probably 5 seasons as a kid and doubt you had rivalry understanding. I know i didn't. That's neither here nor there and in 20 years, you will be the older crowd that is dying out. There are still a lot of fans that don't like the conference changes and a lot of that's human nature. I will never forget Bo Jackson and Auburn being shut down. I loved that game and still hate Auburn because i hate all things Alabama. We were supposed to get roasted that day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volinnooga
#272
#272
VolJarhead said:
You are wrong about being older. Born in 78, You were 11/12 when the 1990 season started and we lost Auburn annually and the SEC changed with expansion. I am just a few years older than you but speaking to my father and uncles growing up I learned a lot about the history. At best you had seen probably 5 seasons as a kid and doubt you had rivalry understanding. I know i didn't. That's neither here nor there and in 20 years, you will be the older crowd that is dying out. There are still a lot of fans that don't like the conference changes and a lot of that's human nature. I will never forget Bo Jackson and Auburn being shut down. I loved that game and still hate Auburn because i hate all things Alabama. We were supposed to get roasted that day.
Click to expand...
I recall TRob and the defense taking it to Auburn.

I guess where we part paths, and neither is absolutely wrong or absolutely right, is that even at our advanced age, I don't think "tradition" has to be defined solely as to what happened in the '60's, 70' or 80's. Tradition, at least as I see it may evolve over time and 1992-2025 adds to and supplements tradition.

And Alabama is our true rival and I hate'em.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAVol and chuckiepoo
#273
#273
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
Answer me this. Let's say history stayed the same in terms of number of matchups. So in this hypothetical we only started playing Georgia and Florida annually in 1992. But instead of being elite programs they were instead on the level of Vanderbilt and Kentucky. And let's say Kentucky and Vanderbilt were the elite national championship caliber football programs. Would you be clamoring we play them as our permanent opponents in this alternate universe?

Or is the only reason you want us to get Vanderbilt and Kentucky because they are weak programs and more likely to be easy wins every year compared to Florida and Georgia?

You guys are using history to hide your true intentions which is fear of competition. Just say you want easy matchups and stop me with this historical rivals crap.
Click to expand...

I'd still want to play an in-state rival 3 hours from us, whether they went on a Saban like run or they are worse than Kent State.

I wish we played Memphis every year.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top