Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Bobby Burton

 

Most of the national college football news made yesterday did not originate from the SEC meetings. Rather, it came from reactions to the SEC meetings by the brass at the Big 12 and Big 10.

The Big 12 announced it is in favor of a 5-11 CFP format. That means just five conference champions would receive automatic bids to a 16-team college football playoff.

The Big 10, meanwhile, said they were not in favor of the 5-11 format unless the SEC adds a ninth conference game.

What was SEC commissioner Greg Sankey’s response to all the hubbub?

Essentially, he said we don’t tell other conferences what to do, so why should any one presume they can tell us.

And he’s right.

The SEC is not going to be brought to heel by the Big 10, the Big 12 or whoever. If worse comes to worse, we’ll just have a 12-team playoff for the next five years instead of expansion.

My sense is that there are a lot of conferences over-playing their hand. While the outside world may disagree with me, I don’t believe the SEC is one of them.

From what I witnessed in Destin this week, the SEC and Greg Sankey are only going to make decisions that protect and cement the SEC as the nation’s premier athletic conference. There’s absolutely no reason to risk doing otherwise.

Posted

Why would SEC be against 5-11? SEC would get the majority of those 11 every year. Big 10 is probably against it because they want the 4 guaranteed spots, there will likely be years they get less than 4 if everything is at large. I’m surprised Yormark favors it because the other proposal gives them 2 guaranteed spots and there will likely be years that only the champ gets in if everything is at large. Am I missing something? Also nobody is “telling SEC what to do,” these are negotiations leading to agreement and SEC will probably get its way eventually because they’ll have support of the networks. Maybe he’s referring to Big 10 saying they wanted to see SEC play 9 game conference schedule? I think there are plenty of others in favor of that including the networks paying for all of this stuff.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
52 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Why would SEC be against 5-11? SEC would get the majority of those 11 every year. Big 10 is probably against it because they want the 4 guaranteed spots, there will likely be years they get less than 4 if everything is at large. I’m surprised Yormark favors it because the other proposal gives them 2 guaranteed spots and there will likely be years that only the champ gets in if everything is at large. Am I missing something? Also nobody is “telling SEC what to do,” these are negotiations leading to agreement and SEC will probably get its way eventually because they’ll have support of the networks. Maybe he’s referring to Big 10 saying they wanted to see SEC play 9 game conference schedule? I think there are plenty of others in favor of that including the networks paying for all of this stuff.

Sankey’s just lying to establish his justification to blow everything up and act like he had no choice.

By the time the actual financial fallout of alienating a large chunk of college sports fans hits, he’ll be retired.

Squeeze max profits for next quarter, who gives a fuck about 10 years from now, fuck you you poor loser who has less say than me.  The American way.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Sort of realignment related. OKST @ Oregon at 2:30 pm on CBS. It's a nice slot for us in the non-con schedule. I don't think I recall us ever playing on CBS (for obvious reasons). We had a really good portal haul this offseason and will be a lot better but will be breaking in a new QB and immediate turnarounds aren't to be expected. I just hope we can compete and avoid a blowout.

 

image.png.1788f3b1ea9cfe24ff743beba0539226.png

 

Posted
2 hours ago, 'stache said:

Why would SEC be against 5-11? SEC would get the majority of those 11 every year. Big 10 is probably against it because they want the 4 guaranteed spots, there will likely be years they get less than 4 if everything is at large. I’m surprised Yormark favors it because the other proposal gives them 2 guaranteed spots and there will likely be years that only the champ gets in if everything is at large. Am I missing something? Also nobody is “telling SEC what to do,” these are negotiations leading to agreement and SEC will probably get its way eventually because they’ll have support of the networks. Maybe he’s referring to Big 10 saying they wanted to see SEC play 9 game conference schedule? I think there are plenty of others in favor of that including the networks paying for all of this stuff.

5-11 doesn’t allow for them to sell play-in games.

The Big 12 thinks being codified as a lesser conference than the B1G/SEC is worse than only getting a single bid to the playoff each year.

I don’t particularly care either way but find this whole scenario fascinating.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)

Bobby Burton

 

SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey said the quiet part out loud yesterday afternoon.

The SEC and the general quality of its teams, thereby the strengths of its schedules, are different than every other conference. He even provided media a 7-page document explaining exactly why. Only two of the conferences 16 schools have averaged being outside of the top 50 teams in college football over the past 10 years. Meanwhile, every other conference has at least twice as many, if not three times as many.

What’s the net of all of it?

While the Big 10 is trying to force the SEC into a 9-game conference schedule, I just don’t think it’s in the cards. The coaches simply don’t want it and the commissioner can’t push it through without guarantees and/or concessions from the College Football Playoff.

The Big 10 and Big 12 both play nine game conference schedules while the ACC and SEC play eight conference games. Unless there is a fundamental change in thinking between now and the first of December, I don’t see the SEC going to a 9-game conference schedule next year.

As a result, I’m not sure if the CFP will expand beyond 12 teams for next season either.

 

 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
Posted

Lol as if anyone needed any more proof of the incestuous SEC/ESPN relationship that has created the shitshow, Sankey presents "proof" using 5 metrics, 4 of which are published by ESPN using unpublished algorithms.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
On 5/29/2025 at 5:57 PM, TKthunder2 said:

5-11 doesn’t allow for them to sell play-in games.

The Big 12 thinks being codified as a lesser conference than the B1G/SEC is worse than only getting a single bid to the playoff each year.

this and this

astute

Posted
3 hours ago, Im_smarter_then_you said:

Big/ sec scheduling alliance in the works

yormark thinks he has agency in the negotiation of this topic

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/big-12-commish-shoots-down-scheduling-change-adopted-by-big-ten-sec/ar-AA1FNZDI

....

The Big 12 has been busy with spring meetings this weeks, and commissioner Brett Yormark was asked about the scheduling partnership between the Big Ten and SEC. Right now, it doesn’t sound like the conference is working on anything similar.

“No. We’re fine. We love our out-of-conference schedule,” Brett Yormark said, according to an article from Front Office Sports. “We don’t necessarily have an alliance with any particular conference. We play them all.”

There is nothing offical between the Big Ten and SEC, but things seem to be trending in that direction. One thing that the Big Ten wants to see before it signs off on anything is the SEC adding a ninth conference game. Right now, each team only plays eight.

Scheduling partnership or not, the Ben Ten and the SEC are the two big dogs of college football. They have been calling the shots in terms College Football Playoff expansion models, and they have the power over the Big 12 and ACC. Still, Yormark trusts that they will do the right things for the sport.

“Well, I wouldn’t say they have complete decision-making,” he said. “They need to have meaningful consultation with us. Yes, they have the pen. But with that pen comes responsibility to do the right thing. It’s not written anywhere in the Memorandum of Understanding that they can take the CFP and create a format or make a decision that only benefits their two conferences. So, yes, they have the pen. And with that, again, comes the responsibility to lead and lead responsibly. And I’m hopeful that that’s what will happen.”

  • Haha 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

yormark thinks he has agency in the negotiation of this topic

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/big-12-commish-shoots-down-scheduling-change-adopted-by-big-ten-sec/ar-AA1FNZDI

....

The Big 12 has been busy with spring meetings this weeks, and commissioner Brett Yormark was asked about the scheduling partnership between the Big Ten and SEC. Right now, it doesn’t sound like the conference is working on anything similar.

“No. We’re fine. We love our out-of-conference schedule,” Brett Yormark said, according to an article from Front Office Sports. “We don’t necessarily have an alliance with any particular conference. We play them all.”

There is nothing offical between the Big Ten and SEC, but things seem to be trending in that direction. One thing that the Big Ten wants to see before it signs off on anything is the SEC adding a ninth conference game. Right now, each team only plays eight.

Scheduling partnership or not, the Ben Ten and the SEC are the two big dogs of college football. They have been calling the shots in terms College Football Playoff expansion models, and they have the power over the Big 12 and ACC. Still, Yormark trusts that they will do the right things for the sport.

“Well, I wouldn’t say they have complete decision-making,” he said. “They need to have meaningful consultation with us. Yes, they have the pen. But with that pen comes responsibility to do the right thing. It’s not written anywhere in the Memorandum of Understanding that they can take the CFP and create a format or make a decision that only benefits their two conferences. So, yes, they have the pen. And with that, again, comes the responsibility to lead and lead responsibly. And I’m hopeful that that’s what will happen.”

Yes. It’s the big three not the big two

Posted
1 hour ago, mdmost said:

I'd love us to have a home and home with Washington, Oregon, USC, and UCLA. 

Lol...I keep forgetting those 4 are in the B1G - senior moment.

Good call. I'd be on board with that. Just no to the Rust Belt teams; Iowa, WI, IL, NE, etc.

Posted
26 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

Lol...I keep forgetting those 4 are in the B1G - senior moment.

Good call. I'd be on board with that. Just no to the Rust Belt teams; Iowa, WI, IL, NE, etc.

Right. No bullshit games with any of the Rust Belt. There’s a reason we didn’t go to the Big 10. Minnesota and Northwestern is fine since those are decent cities.

Posted (edited)

Iowa and Nebraska aren't really Rust Belt, but I don't blame you for not wanting to play those games.  Iowa fans throw beer and urine at you.  Nebraska fans condescend and hide it behind "aw shucks" Midwest Nice.

And if there's a scheduling deal, all either conference will really care about is creating marquee matchups.  Texas/Bama/UGA/etc will not be going to the Big 10 West.  That will be Mizzou, Kentucky, Arkansas, Miss St.  They'll make all the "lucky to be here" schools play each other.  And they might not even care enough to do that because games like the Palmetto Bowl and CyHawk generate better ratings than Iowa vs South Carolina would.

Edited by Al_4_ISU
Posted
2 hours ago, mdmost said:

I'd love us to have a home and home with Washington, Oregon, USC, and UCLA

Triggered...

 

1 hour ago, DFW Horn said:

Lol...I keep forgetting those 4 are in the B1G - senior moment.

Good call. I'd be on board with that. Just no to the Rust Belt teams; Iowa, WI, IL, NE, etc.

Wisky would be ok.

Here is my complete list of eligible schools for our "premiere opponent" slots:

Notre Dame

Michigan

Ohio State

USC

UCLA 

Washington 

Oregon

Wisconsin

Penn State

Florida State

North Carolina 

Clemson

Miami

 

Others acceptable for various reasons, would prefer they be in a season with one of the above:

Utah, Stanford, Army, Navy

Posted
4 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

Wisconsin - Great college town

Here is my complete list of eligible schools for our "premiere opponent" slots:

Notre Dame

Michigan

Ohio State

USC

UCLA 

Washington 

Oregon

Wisconsin

Penn State

Florida State

North Carolina 

Clemson

Miami

 

Others acceptable for various reasons, would prefer they be in a season with one of the above:

Utah, Stanford, Army, Navy

The military academies would clearly only need to be a 1 off home game for us because it is cool playing military academy and I would not schedule Stanford at all. 

As far as home/home opponents I agree with most of your list. I'd add the following which aren't "premier" but would be good home/home candidates:

Nebraska
Boise State
Arizona State - Which I think we already have setup, right?
Arizona
Colorado
Georgia Tech - Recruiting standpoint in the state of Georgia
BYU
Kansas State


 

Posted
4 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

The military academies would clearly only need to be a 1 off home game for us because it is cool playing military academy and I would not schedule Stanford at all. 

As far as home/home opponents I agree with most of your list. I'd add the following which aren't "premier" but would be good home/home candidates:

Nebraska
Boise State
Arizona State - Which I think we already have setup, right?
Arizona
Colorado
Georgia Tech - Recruiting standpoint in the state of Georgia
BYU
Kansas State


 

Boise, BYU, K State?

No Way Reaction GIF

  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...