9 game conference schedule coming?

[AUght2win 6,873]

On 8/22/2022 at 4:40 PM, aubaseball said:

Can I just say you sound like a Bama fan.   Auburn doesn’t deserve to beat anyone. It’s called, earning a victory.  You make it sound like the other schools aren’t trying to compete.    The only school that truly does that is vandy.   If you think it’s been competitive with Georgia in the last 15 years, you are a delusional fan.   
 

Wow. Earth shattering take.

[aubearcat 2,138]

In that scenario AUburn would play it’s fellow pod members plus uga from the other pod. I don’t think that AUburn would schedule 2 members from the same pod as permanent opponents.  Which means one of the Mississippi schools would probably be the other permanent opponent in this scenario. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

3 minutes ago, aubearcat said:

This was a pod system proposed by this poster. Pablo Escobarner proposed switching mizzou and a&m. 
 

 

Don't see TV or several schools signing off on that.  They want BIG games and rivalries.  Those pods kill off some key ones.

[AUght2win 6,873]

On 8/22/2022 at 10:37 AM, CoffeeTiger said:

 

You know that UGA has whipped AU's butt for the past 20 years, right?. AU's been 5-15 in the deep south's oldest rivalry during that time (2-8 the last 10) and the distance between the two programs is about as big now as it's ever been...and not likely to close anytime soon. 

I'm not arguing to do away with the UGA game just because of the history, but I'm 100% in agreement with the notion that we need a fair and balanced schedule, and that doesn't include having 3 perennial superpowers as our permanent games every year.  

 

Fact is AU football just isn't good enough on a year to year basis for it. We are never a basement dweller, but we also have never reached the consistent heights and talent that BAMA and UGA have had recently, and we're not exactly on a obvious path to getting there now. 

 

It's not "running away" from anything. It's being realistic about the talent level and capabilities of the team we support and wanting them to be put in the best situation for them to compete successfully while also giving the fans an entertaining schedule to watch. 

Advocating for permanent decisions based on recent results. Make it make sense.

Just nut up and get through this rough patch instead of permanently hindering Auburn football tradition by running from Alabama and UGA.

If history has proven anything, it’s that we are scarily-equal to UGA (down to the overall point total in the rivalry) and have beaten Alabama more than any other program. 

[AU80cruiser 1,102]

12 hours ago, aubearcat said:

This was a pod system proposed by this poster. Pablo Escobarner proposed switching mizzou and a&m. 
 

 

This is almost the exact grouping I proposed earlier in this or some other thread with the exception of swapping kentucky and Tennessee. I dont see the big deal when you play every team in your pod every year and every team in the entire conference in just a two year span.

 

I want to play Florida more often and also get to play the two new comers often as well.

Edited August 25, 2022 by AU80cruiser

[AUwent 3,768]

19 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

The split for the Permanent 3 games I saw was that the teams would split by "Big 8" and" Little 8"

Big 8: AU, Bama, LSU, UF, UGA, Texas, OU, A&M

Little 8: Tenn, Ark, OM, MSU, Vandy, Mizzou, UK, USC

Each of the "Big 8" teams would have 2 permanent opponents from that pool and one permanent "Little 8"

 

So for example:

AU = Bama, UGA, Vandy

Bama = AU, OU, Tenn

Tex = OU, A&M, Arkansas

A&M = Tex, LSU, MSU

LSU = A&M, UF, OM

UF = LSU, UGA, UK

UGA = AU, UF, USC

OU = Tex, Bama, Mizzou

Inject this in my veins.

[AUBwins 10,082]

20 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

The split for the Permanent 3 games I saw was that the teams would split by "Big 8" and" Little 8"

Big 8: AU, Bama, LSU, UF, UGA, Texas, OU, A&M

Little 8: Tenn, Ark, OM, MSU, Vandy, Mizzou, UK, USC

Each of the "Big 8" teams would have 2 permanent opponents from that pool and one permanent "Little 8"

 

So for example:

AU = Bama, UGA, Vandy

Bama = AU, OU, Tenn

Tex = OU, A&M, Arkansas

A&M = Tex, LSU, MSU

LSU = A&M, UF, OM

UF = LSU, UGA, UK

UGA = AU, UF, USC

OU = Tex, Bama, Mizzou

First I've seen of this line of thinking.  I like it .... a lot. 

[Mikey 16,723]

7 hours ago, AUBwins said:

First I've seen of this line of thinking.  I like it .... a lot. 

I don't think Tennessee can be relegated to "little" on any permanent basis. For that matter, can any team be called that, or would any team, even Vandy, accept being placed in the bottom, LITTLE category?

[AUBwins 10,082]

10 minutes ago, Mikey said:

I don't think Tennessee can be relegated to "little" on any permanent basis. For that matter, can any team be called that, or would any team, even Vandy, accept being placed in the bottom, LITTLE category?

I did think about that myself. What classifies them as little, budget? 

[Mikey 16,723]

4 minutes ago, AUBwins said:

I did think about that myself. What classifies them as little, budget? 

I'm guessing history of winning.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

27 minutes ago, AUBwins said:

I did think about that myself. What classifies them as little, budget? 

Eyeballs they draw and relevancy.  Tennessee hasn't done a damn thing in 20 years and doesn't draw nearly the eyes that the other teams do.  They've also had a losing record 9 times since making the SEC Title game in 2004.  2007 was their last appearance in that game as well.

2001 was their last top 10 finish in a major poll.

[AUBwins 10,082]

5 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Eyeballs they draw and relevancy.  Tennessee hasn't done a damn thing in 20 years and doesn't draw nearly the eyes that the other teams do.  They've also had a losing record 9 times since making the SEC Title game in 2004.  2007 was their last appearance in that game as well.

2001 was their last top 10 finish in a major poll.

I agree with the 2 sides but if this was the going model, curious on the Political Correct answer as to why these are grouped.  There was a long time Florida sucked as well.  

[Rednilla 5,397]

On 8/24/2022 at 7:36 PM, AUght2win said:

Advocating for permanent decisions based on recent results. Make it make sense.

Just nut up and get through this rough patch instead of permanently hindering Auburn football tradition by running from Alabama and UGA.

If history has proven anything, it’s that we are scarily-equal to UGA (down to the overall point total in the rivalry) and have beaten Alabama more than any other program. 

Pretty sure no one is suggesting we "run" from the Iron Bowl or The Oldest Rivalry in the Deep South. What is being suggested is that we not face Florida as the third permanent rival, thus virtually ensuring us of playing more than half of our conference games every year against another team from the top half of the conference, and sometimes running the slate of all seven. That's a nightmare scheduling.

[Rednilla 5,397]

On 8/24/2022 at 7:27 PM, Brad_ATX said:

The split for the Permanent 3 games I saw was that the teams would split by "Big 8" and" Little 8"

Big 8: AU, Bama, LSU, UF, UGA, Texas, OU, A&M

Little 8: Tenn, Ark, OM, MSU, Vandy, Mizzou, UK, USC

Each of the "Big 8" teams would have 2 permanent opponents from that pool and one permanent "Little 8"

 

So for example:

AU = Bama, UGA, Vandy

Bama = AU, OU, Tenn

Tex = OU, A&M, Arkansas

A&M = Tex, LSU, MSU

LSU = A&M, UF, OM

UF = LSU, UGA, UK

UGA = AU, UF, USC

OU = Tex, Bama, Mizzou

This would be outstanding, IMHO. Maybe not Vandy for the third permanent opponent (I actually like Mississippi State as the 3rd, because we have a lot of played history with them. . . and we've won at a 70% clip), but I love the idea behind it.