Looks like in 2016 the B1G will join the PAC and the Big12 to 9 conf games/year. Is it true that the SEC is looking to go to 9 as well, or will they want to stay at 8 due to the large number of tie ins that both conferences have for in-state rivalries? Plus there is the ND 5 game agreement too - that puts a little over 33% of the conf on a 9 game conf schedule in any given year - except for those cases where FSU, Clemson, GT, etc play ND plus their SEC rival. Does anyone who knows people connected to SEC schools know if the SEC is looking to go to 9 conf games themselves? If not, is there talk amongst the SEC for potential agreements to play OOC games? Or are the rumblings of the Big12 and ACC looking to ink an "agreement" supposed to cover OOC game play schedule?

I for one hope so. Though I appear to be in the minority.

I think the TV money would have to out-weigh ticket revenue for the 7th home game. It could happen, I guess.

Discussions about it will be brought back up at the Spring meetings, only will happen if SEC does it as well. FSU,GT,UofL,Clem,USC,UF,UGA,UK are enough of a group to push it through or say no, its really up to them....As of now NONE want the 9 games, I think maybe Kentucky does.

A compromise would be for an ACC/SEC challenge and just make the UL/UK, UGA/GT, FSU/UF, and CU/USC games permanent parts of it. Then the effect is the same. Everyone gets their 9 quality games each year to rival the other three contract leagues.

Wondering, what would the rest of the ACC/SEC challenge match-ups look like?
Anybody care to stab at it?

VT-TA&M, could become a permanent thing. Military background of schools
Vandy-Wake
Tenn- NC State or UNC?

The rest could rotate around? I dont know if any other schools have history

VT fans love the TAMU game but I wouldn't make it permanent. Maybe just a preferred game or something. Tenn and VT should play some. Vandy could play Duke or BC etc as well. I would stay away from permanent games.

(04-28-2013 07:46 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  Discussions about it will be brought back up at the Spring meetings, only will happen if SEC does it as well. FSU,GT,UofL,Clem,USC,UF,UGA,UK are enough of a group to push it through or say no, its really up to them....As of now NONE want the 9 games, I think maybe Kentucky does.

SuCk would need cover from the SEC to dodge us! They want to drop us, no doubt, and are looking for an excuse. We are very close to owning the state.

Since we're suddenly talking about the ACC and the SEC, I think it should be noted here that Louisville had twice the number of wins over SEC teams this past season than Kentucky, Tennessee, and Auburn... combined.

On the surface, there are enough teams to go around. However, for those teams with permanent SEC rivals, would they want to play a 2nd SEC school as part of a scheduling agreement? Would schools like GT, FSU, VT, Clemson and UL prefer the southern exposure instead of playing ND? Would SEC schools have interest in playing schools like Pitt, Syracuse, and BC?

I think SEC schools would prefer to rotate through the northern ACC schools instead of have a permanent tie up.

So we are thinking that in state teams should be permanent games and all other should rotate with 2-3 school max.
like UNC/NCSU take on OLE MISS/MISS ST
then the next season UNC/NCSU vs. TENN/VANDY OR just Flip MISS ST./OLE MISS

If we get an ACC-SEC scheduling alliance, then the existing rivalries (FSU-UF, GT-UGa, Clemson-USC, Louisville-UK) should be permanent and the rest should be determined by team strength and tv value in each year.

That way we're maximizing the profit we make off this alliance.

I doubt it right now. Already a '9 game' every 3 yrs with ND and need flexibility for so many ooc rivalry games.

It seems inevitable to me that both conferences will eventually end up with 9 conference games. If not with 14 teams than certainly with 16. With a cross division tie in, there's 6 schools you only play twice every 12 years. That's not a conference that's an OOC team. With 4 4-team divisions and 9 conference games, you could play everyone in the league every other year if you wanted to schedule it that way. It would feel much more like a conference that way.

I don't think an ACC/SEC challenge will ever come about. Southern fans tend to be regionally centric and think every team up north sucks and is not worth playing. Add to that the fact that 4 of our most attractive schools are already tied up in annual series with SEC teams and the rest of the SEC schools deciding to play the rest of us becomes even more unlikely.

Existing:
Georgia Tech vs U(sic)GA
Florida State vs Florida
Clemson vs South Carolina
Louisville vs Kentucky
Wake Forest vs Vanderbilt (more of less existing)


New That Make Sense:
Virginia Tech vs Texas A&M
North Carolina vs Tennessee
NC State vs Auburn


Crap Outta Thin Air:
Duke vs Missouri
Miami vs Alabama
Virginia vs Ole Miss
Boston College vs Miss State
Syracuse vs LSU
Pittsburgh vs Arkansas


The crap category is all really unattractive.

An alliance wouldn't necessarily require full participation by every conference member every year.

Ideal ACC rivalry week:
UNC-Duke
WF-Vandy
GT-UGA
FSU-UF
BC-SU
CU-USC
NCSU-?
Pitt-PSU
UVA-VT
UL-UC
Miami-?

Funny that UK has played Cincinnati more than Louisville. Another thing, why isn't NCSU and WF annually the season ending game? Then you could just do Miami-Vandy.

We like having the WF and NC State rivalry game earlier in the season when the weather is ideal for football.

(04-28-2013 11:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  Ideal ACC rivalry week:
UNC-Duke
WF-Vandy
GT-UGA
FSU-UF
BC-SU
CU-USC
NCSU-?
Pitt-PSU
UVA-VT
UL-UC
Miami-?

Funny that UK has played Cincinnati more than Louisville. Another thing, why isn't NCSU and WF annually the season ending game? Then you could just do Miami-Vandy.

Miami-Candy? No thanks. If we had to settle for a team like that, I might be slightly less abhorred by the idea of Miami-USF... but even that is unappealing.