It will be interesting how this affects the ACC OOC moreso than the SEC per say, but it's not so obvious with the SEC either.

Bama-Auburn
Mizzou-Ark
UT-OU
A&M-LSU
Fla-UGa
FSU-Clemson
USC-UK
Ole Miss-MSU
Tenn-Vandy

Do I even have the above right? Or do they pull a page from Petitti and go unbalanced?

Let's say they keep it 8+1 though, does the SEC scrap their ongoing ACC series?

UK-UL and UGa-GaTech would still be there, or would they? Does it get replaced with a rotation with the SEC and ND?

I'd like to see a partnership with the Big 12.

Backyard Brawl
Keg of Nails
I4 rivalry (when USF joins the ACC)
SMU versus TCU
Stanford/Cal versus ASU/Utah

Hopefully ESPN and Fox sees value there, if annual P2 matchups cannot be procured.

I wish the Big 12 and ACC would work together to make Pitt-WVU, Cincy-L’ville, SMU-TCU, and USF-UCF all longstanding series for at least the next 10-12 years. It only helps the value of their tv contracts by having attractive match ups that fans are excited to see.

You forgot about Florida-FSU. That *has* to continue.

That’s part of why I don’t think there’s as much of an increase in high profile matchups for ESPN in an FSU/Clemson move to the SEC as a lot of people to think. Florida-FSU is already a guaranteed ESPN game regardless of FSU being in the SEC or ACC. If the SEC still insists upon only 1 protected rival, ESPN is actually *losing* high profile annual games like FSU-Clemson, UF-UGA, etc. on top of losing FSU-Miami entirely. It’s much different than the Texas/Oklahoma move to the SEC where there’s pure creation of net new high profile games because the Big 12 didn’t have any other marquee brand names or locked-in non-conference rivalries.

Now, of course, I think this exercise proves the point that the SEC has to move to 9 conference games and go to either 3 protected rivals each or a flex-protect model like the Big Ten whether the SEC adds FSU/Clemson or not. It’s still breaking my brain that they could add Texas to the league and *not* have Texas-Texas A&M be an annual game from the get go. I get the attempt to extract more money from ESPN, but Disney has made it clear that it doesn’t want to pay more money, so the SEC just has to suck it up here. (That’s another point of evidence that all of this talk about ESPN supposedly making moves to get FSU/Clemson into the SEC makes little sense outside of biased fan message board world when the network doesn’t even want to pay the SEC to have a 9th conference game *now*.) It’s bonkers to me that the SEC would just keep 8 conference games for the next decade until the ESPN contract runs out just because ESPN won’t pay an additional amount that it’s not obligated to pay in the first place - that’s such a penny wise pound foolish move if it comes to that.

I agree, Frank. It is terrible value for ESPN no matter what ACC combo you take, aside from UNC. I don't buy the KU to SEC talking heads either. UNC is probably the only purely accretive move you can make.

if I was FSU, Clemson
I look real hard at Okla sch
SEC gonna pound them into the ground
hope their fans like 5-7

3 pods of 6

Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, UGA, Clemson, S Carolina

Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss St, Florida, FSU

Texas, Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Missouri

5 pod games 1 permanent and 1 rotated from the other 2 pods for 9 total

Bama-Auburn
Mizzou-Ark
UT-OU
A&M-LSU
Fla-FSU
FSU-Clemson
USC-Clem
Ole Miss-MSU
Tenn-Vandy

Ga-Ken?

See that does not quite work. They should go with 2 fixed rivals. Then Ga could get both Florida and Auburn.

(04-12-2024 02:24 PM)goofus Wrote:  Bama-Auburn
Mizzou-Ark
UT-OU
A&M-LSU
Fla-FSU
FSU-Clemson
USC-Clem
Ole Miss-MSU
Tenn-Vandy

Ga-Ken?

See that does not quite work. They should go with 2 fixed rivals. Then Ga could get both Florida and Auburn.

I think they do flex protect, but if they want to play at least H&H in 5 years with 9 conference games, there needs to be 2 rivals max.

With 2 fixed rivals

Ga - Florida, S. Car
Florida - GA, FSU
FSU - Florida, Clem
Clem - FSU, S. Car
S. Car - Clem, Ga

LSU - A&M, Ark
A&M - LSU, Tex
Tex - A&M, Ok
Ok - Tex, Mizzou
Mizzou - OK, Ark
Ark - Mizzou, LSU

Bama-Auburn, Ole Miss
Auburn - Bama, MSU
MSU - Ole Miss, Auburn
Ole Miss - MSU, Bama

Ken - Tenn, Vandy
Tenn - Ken, Vandy
Vandy - Tenn, Ken

I think UGa Auburn could be killed in any protected setup. Good luck playing Bama and UGa every year Tigers.

(04-12-2024 07:30 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I wish the Big 12 and ACC would work together to make Pitt-WVU, Cincy-L’ville, SMU-TCU, and USF-UCF all longstanding series for at least the next 10-12 years. It only helps the value of their tv contracts by having attractive match ups that fans are excited to see.

100% agree!

Bama is going to insist on playing both Auburn and Tennessee every year.

There's an unbalanced number of rivals. Some only have one or two must-play rivals. Others have more. The SEC is going to have to go to a B1G-style unbalanced schedule.

(04-12-2024 07:38 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  You forgot about Florida-FSU. That *has* to continue.

That’s part of why I don’t think there’s as much of an increase in high profile matchups for ESPN in an FSU/Clemson move to the SEC as a lot of people to think. Florida-FSU is already a guaranteed ESPN game regardless of FSU being in the SEC or ACC. If the SEC still insists upon only 1 protected rival, ESPN is actually *losing* high profile annual games like FSU-Clemson, UF-UGA, etc. on top of losing FSU-Miami entirely. It’s much different than the Texas/Oklahoma move to the SEC where there’s pure creation of net new high profile games because the Big 12 didn’t have any other marquee brand names or locked-in non-conference rivalries.

Now, of course, I think this exercise proves the point that the SEC has to move to 9 conference games and go to either 3 protected rivals each or a flex-protect model like the Big Ten whether the SEC adds FSU/Clemson or not. It’s still breaking my brain that they could add Texas to the league and *not* have Texas-Texas A&M be an annual game from the get go. I get the attempt to extract more money from ESPN, but Disney has made it clear that it doesn’t want to pay more money, so the SEC just has to suck it up here. (That’s another point of evidence that all of this talk about ESPN supposedly making moves to get FSU/Clemson into the SEC makes little sense outside of biased fan message board world when the network doesn’t even want to pay the SEC to have a 9th conference game *now*.) It’s bonkers to me that the SEC would just keep 8 conference games for the next decade until the ESPN contract runs out just because ESPN won’t pay an additional amount that it’s not obligated to pay in the first place - that’s such a penny wise pound foolish move if it comes to that.

Why couldn't the SEC stay at 8 conference games with a flex-protect type of schedule? If it works for 9 games in the B1G then it would work for 8 in the SEC.

(04-12-2024 03:27 PM)GoBuckeyes1047 Wrote:  

(04-12-2024 02:24 PM)goofus Wrote:  Bama-Auburn
Mizzou-Ark
UT-OU
A&M-LSU
Fla-FSU
FSU-Clemson
USC-Clem
Ole Miss-MSU
Tenn-Vandy

Ga-Ken?

See that does not quite work. They should go with 2 fixed rivals. Then Ga could get both Florida and Auburn.

I think they do flex protect, but if they want to play at least H&H in 5 years with 9 conference games, there needs to be 2 rivals max.

Had a brain fart earlier, this works for 8 conference games.

(04-12-2024 07:34 PM)goofus Wrote:  With 2 fixed rivals

Ga - Florida, Auburn
Florida - GA, FSU
FSU - Florida, Clem
Clem - FSU, S. Car
S. Car - Clem, Ga

LSU - A&M, Ole Miss
A&M - LSU, Tex
Tex - A&M, Ok
Ok - Tex, Mizzou
Mizzou - OK, Ark
Ark - Mizzou, MSU

Bama-Auburn, Tenn
Auburn - Bama, UGA
MSU - Ole Miss, Arkansas
Ole Miss - MSU, LSU

Ken - ?, Vandy
Tenn - Vandy, Bama
Vandy - Tenn, Ken

I honestly don't know how you would do it. UGA would have Florida & Auburn as its " must haves" while Alabama would have Auburn & Tennessee as its "must-haves." But then don't forget teams like South Carolina, Kentucky, and Mississippi State who like playing UGA, Tennessee, and Auburn regularly. You could pair up MSU & Arkansas which was a decent matchup back in the day, but I don't know if either would go for it.

(04-13-2024 02:24 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(04-12-2024 07:34 PM)goofus Wrote:  With 2 fixed rivals

Ga - Florida, Auburn
Florida - GA, FSU
FSU - Florida, Clem
Clem - FSU, S. Car
S. Car - Clem, Ga

LSU - A&M, Ole Miss
A&M - LSU, Tex
Tex - A&M, Ok
Ok - Tex, Mizzou
Mizzou - OK, Ark
Ark - Mizzou, MSU

Bama-Auburn, Tenn
Auburn - Bama, UGA
MSU - Ole Miss, Arkansas
Ole Miss - MSU, LSU

Ken - ?, Vandy
Tenn - Vandy, Bama
Vandy - Tenn, Ken

I honestly don't know how you would do it. UGA would have Florida & Auburn as its " must haves" while Alabama would have Auburn & Tennessee as its "must-haves." But then don't forget teams like South Carolina, Kentucky, and Mississippi State who like playing UGA, Tennessee, and Auburn regularly. You could pair up MSU & Arkansas which was a decent matchup back in the day, but I don't know if either would go for it.

Things are different in SEC Land than up in Big Ten Land but in the Big Ten scheduling office they told the lesser schools "too bad". You don't think Illibuck and the Little Brown Jug were big? They're not annual games anymore. The last time Illinois and Ohio State played in football was 2017! South Carolina might want to play Georgia annually but if Georgia doesn't want to play South Carolina annually they shouldn't. And even if Georgia and South Carolina do want to play annually, if Georgia plays South Carolina annually on top of Florida and Auburn then that's fewer times everyone else in the conference plays Georgia and that's worse for the conference annually because non SEC fans want UGa playing the top SEC teams like Alabama. You non Big Ten fans don't want to see Ohio State play a mediocre Illinois team or Michigan a mediocre Minnesota team annually, you'd rather them play Penn State, Washington, and USC more often. I'm sure there's lots of SEC rivalries SEC fans care about that non SEC fans care don't but if the SEC wants non SEC fans to care they need more games among the popular teams not "divisional" or lesser historical rivalries (there's nothing wrong with the Iron Bowl, Georgia-Florida, Alabama-Tennesee, Texas-Oklahoma, etc).

When it comes to permanent rivalries, less is more, especially among the "popular" teams.

(04-12-2024 07:38 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  You forgot about Florida-FSU. That *has* to continue.

That’s part of why I don’t think there’s as much of an increase in high profile matchups for ESPN in an FSU/Clemson move to the SEC as a lot of people to think. Florida-FSU is already a guaranteed ESPN game regardless of FSU being in the SEC or ACC. If the SEC still insists upon only 1 protected rival, ESPN is actually *losing* high profile annual games like FSU-Clemson, UF-UGA, etc. on top of losing FSU-Miami entirely. It’s much different than the Texas/Oklahoma move to the SEC where there’s pure creation of net new high profile games because the Big 12 didn’t have any other marquee brand names or locked-in non-conference rivalries.

Now, of course, I think this exercise proves the point that the SEC has to move to 9 conference games and go to either 3 protected rivals each or a flex-protect model like the Big Ten whether the SEC adds FSU/Clemson or not. It’s still breaking my brain that they could add Texas to the league and *not* have Texas-Texas A&M be an annual game from the get go. I get the attempt to extract more money from ESPN, but Disney has made it clear that it doesn’t want to pay more money, so the SEC just has to suck it up here. (That’s another point of evidence that all of this talk about ESPN supposedly making moves to get FSU/Clemson into the SEC makes little sense outside of biased fan message board world when the network doesn’t even want to pay the SEC to have a 9th conference game *now*.) It’s bonkers to me that the SEC would just keep 8 conference games for the next decade until the ESPN contract runs out just because ESPN won’t pay an additional amount that it’s not obligated to pay in the first place - that’s such a penny wise pound foolish move if it comes to that.

hahaha! The Big Ten's #1 homer thinks the SEC should just suck it up and take a bunch of extra losses! SEC should absolutely remain at 8 games until ESPN pays for a 9th game. SEC will have 8 fewer losses as a conference as they will almost always win the non-conference game plus that game will almost always be at home. 3 great reasons to stay at 8 games. Awful take!

(04-13-2024 02:24 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(04-12-2024 07:34 PM)goofus Wrote:  With 2 fixed rivals

Ga - Florida, Auburn
Florida - GA, FSU
FSU - Florida, Clem
Clem - FSU, S. Car
S. Car - Clem, Ga

LSU - A&M, Ole Miss
A&M - LSU, Tex
Tex - A&M, Ok
Ok - Tex, Mizzou
Mizzou - OK, Ark
Ark - Mizzou, MSU

Bama-Auburn, Tenn
Auburn - Bama, UGA
MSU - Ole Miss, Arkansas
Ole Miss - MSU, LSU

Ken - ?, Vandy
Tenn - Vandy, Bama
Vandy - Tenn, Ken

I honestly don't know how you would do it. UGA would have Florida & Auburn as its " must haves" while Alabama would have Auburn & Tennessee as its "must-haves." But then don't forget teams like South Carolina, Kentucky, and Mississippi State who like playing UGA, Tennessee, and Auburn regularly. You could pair up MSU & Arkansas which was a decent matchup back in the day, but I don't know if either would go for it.

As one sided it has been, Alabama vs Mississippi State has been long, sustained rivalry. The universities are very close and is easy travel. For MSU, playing Alabama is more important than playing Auburn. Only playing Ole Miss is a bigger rivalry. Ole Miss is closer to Arkansas than MSU.

Georgia is USC’s biggest rival other than Clemson. Of course, Georgia is surrounded by intense rivals I. e. Florida, Tennessee, GT, USC, Kentucky, and Alabama and Clemson when they play.

All of the SEC would see games with Georgia as high value.

(04-14-2024 12:18 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(04-12-2024 07:38 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  You forgot about Florida-FSU. That *has* to continue.

That’s part of why I don’t think there’s as much of an increase in high profile matchups for ESPN in an FSU/Clemson move to the SEC as a lot of people to think. Florida-FSU is already a guaranteed ESPN game regardless of FSU being in the SEC or ACC. If the SEC still insists upon only 1 protected rival, ESPN is actually *losing* high profile annual games like FSU-Clemson, UF-UGA, etc. on top of losing FSU-Miami entirely. It’s much different than the Texas/Oklahoma move to the SEC where there’s pure creation of net new high profile games because the Big 12 didn’t have any other marquee brand names or locked-in non-conference rivalries.

Now, of course, I think this exercise proves the point that the SEC has to move to 9 conference games and go to either 3 protected rivals each or a flex-protect model like the Big Ten whether the SEC adds FSU/Clemson or not. It’s still breaking my brain that they could add Texas to the league and *not* have Texas-Texas A&M be an annual game from the get go. I get the attempt to extract more money from ESPN, but Disney has made it clear that it doesn’t want to pay more money, so the SEC just has to suck it up here. (That’s another point of evidence that all of this talk about ESPN supposedly making moves to get FSU/Clemson into the SEC makes little sense outside of biased fan message board world when the network doesn’t even want to pay the SEC to have a 9th conference game *now*.) It’s bonkers to me that the SEC would just keep 8 conference games for the next decade until the ESPN contract runs out just because ESPN won’t pay an additional amount that it’s not obligated to pay in the first place - that’s such a penny wise pound foolish move if it comes to that.

hahaha! The Big Ten's #1 homer thinks the SEC should just suck it up and take a bunch of extra losses! SEC should absolutely remain at 8 games until ESPN pays for a 9th game. SEC will have 8 fewer losses as a conference as they will almost always win the non-conference game plus that game will almost always be at home. 3 great reasons to stay at 8 games. Awful take!

If you think that he was posting that as some sort of anti-SEC agenda then you haven't been paying attention. A lot of people assume that the SEC will end up going to 9 games, with or without SEC money, and there are plenty of reasons for it. I personally think that we're keeping that 9th game up our sleeve to combine with FSU/Clemson and more TV slots to fill with a reduced ACC presence on ESPN, with the expectation that it would unlock some more money, and, if no money is forthcoming, we'll just keep at 8 until 2034 then use the 9th game then to unlock more money. However, I've been wrong before, and it doesn't take an SEC hater to think that we'll go to 9 games in the next few years, with or without more money.

(04-12-2024 07:30 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I wish the Big 12 and ACC would work together to make Pitt-WVU, Cincy-L’ville, SMU-TCU, and USF-UCF all longstanding series for at least the next 10-12 years. It only helps the value of their tv contracts by having attractive match ups that fans are excited to see.

From a Louisville fan's perspective, I'd absolutely love to see the Keg series revived, but not at the expense of the Kentucky series. Now, in the event that does end up going away, I'd be all for it.

While less than ideal, I wouldn't even mind a scenario in which Louisville plays Kentucky and Cincinnati on alternating years.