Home General
Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:

- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)

- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans

- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum

- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.

Pat Dye wants to move Auburn to the SEC East and Missouri to the West....

SavageDawg17SavageDawg17 Posts: 1,534 mod

Via Gridiron Now

Former Auburn coach Pat Dye wants to see some realignment happen in the SEC.

Dye said Monday on the “Paul Finebaum Show” that Auburn and Missouri should switch divisions in the SEC.

“We (Auburn) touch Florida, Georgia and Tennessee,” Dye said. “We need to be in the (SEC) East and Missouri needs to be in the (SEC) West. If we played nine (conference) games, we could do that, because we could still play Alabama every year, and then we’d have our meeting with Tennessee and Florida and Georgia.”

With a nine-game conference schedule, Auburn would be able to keep Alabama as a permanent fixture on its schedule each season without issue, as the Crimson Tide would not be forced to give up an annual rivalry between the Tigers and current permanent cross-divisional rival Tennessee.

If Auburn were in the SEC East, it would play its current permanent cross-divisional rival, Georgia, by default every season.
_
What say you, should the SEC realign as Dye suggests?_

Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • moosmoos Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    He's definitely not the first. This has been on the discussion table since we added Mizzou and A&M. Makes no sense for Mizzou to be in the East.

    They should have done this from the start. We're probably going to talk about it for a few more years though

    @SavageDawg17 you talked about Oklahoma and Oklahoma State coming over on the podcast yesterday. If we kept with the current arrangement, OK would probably go to the West and State would go to the East. What sense would that make?

    If it's geographic, let it actually be geographic. If it's for money or TV arrangements, then rename it as Bling and Dolla Bills and get over it.

  • JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,511 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Auburn is in Alabama (eastern side) but come on, we all know why he wants realignment. The West is too hard to win with Alabama sitting on top. Makes sense to move Mizzou. Auburn--could go either way. Since they have orange in the uni's--I don't have sympathy for them getting beat by Bama annually.

  • dawgnmsdawgnms Posts: 3,538 mod

    I say expand by 2 more teams then talk about moving teams around and play a 9 game SEC schedule. Even with the 14 we have now should be playing 9 games in conference.

  • levanderlevander Posts: 4,481 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited May 2017

    Is Auburn, AL East or west of Tuscaloosa?

    I'm kind of liking the idea.

    Yeah he's pushing for it right now because the timing is good for him with Alabama being on top of their game. But it makes sense long term to.

    Missouri is a boring game for UGA. Sometimes I even miss that game accidentally because I'm not excited about it.

    And it would be cool to get to play a different cross-division rival from the West instead of Auburn. UGA is a big name team. I bet we'd get a good team. I just looked and Missouri's cross division rival is Arkansas! I'd love to play Arkansas every year. Lot of history and pride behind that team.

    Maybe states that are physically located closer to Missouri would get more excited about playing them?

    How much money would it save on transportation costs for road games? Would it mean the difference between leasing a plane and being able to bus the team for many games?

  • levanderlevander Posts: 4,481 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited May 2017

    Would Alabama be Auburn's cross division rival or would that just count as their end of year in-state rivalry mqtch?

    If it just counts as their end of year, I'm counting four teams that would need a cross division Missouri, UGA, Auburn, Arkansas.

    I think .Auburn should have to take Missouri because this whole move is being made to accommodate them. And we get Arkansas.

    Because despite Missouri being in the same division as us, and a couple of years we even competed directly against each other for the division title, no real rivalry has developed between the two schools. There's just not enough heat in the UGA/Mizz matchup.

  • Palm_City_DawgPalm_City_Dawg Posts: 1,661 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Not to be rude here, but...who cares what Pat Dye has to say?

  • SavageDawg17SavageDawg17 Posts: 1,534 mod

    @Palm_City_Dawg said:
    Not to be rude here, but...who cares what Pat Dye has to say?

    Sorry, just trying to share an SEC-related topic in the Dawg days of summer that made headlines across the league.

  • moosmoos Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited May 2017

    @levander said:

    And it would be cool to get to play a different cross-division rival from the West instead of Auburn. UGA is a big name team. I bet we'd get a good team. I just looked and Missouri's cross division rival is Arkansas! I'd love to play Arkansas every year. Lot of history and pride behind that team.

    Maybe states that are physically located closer to Missouri would get more excited about playing them?

    How much money would it save on transportation costs for road games? Would it mean the difference between leasing a plane and being able to bus the team for many games?

    IMO, the cross division rival thing is overblown. The only reason we have one is because Auburn was our rival waaayy before the 1990 expansion that broke the SEC into divisions. Tennessee and Vanderbilt were both places in the East to preserve thier rivalry. The main problem with moving only Auburn to the East, as has been pointed out, is that the Iron Bowl becomes a cross division game.

    Adding more teams and moving both Alabama AND Auburn to the East would solve that as Alabama also has a rivalry with Tennessee that would be preserved in that scenario.

    Imo, moving both of the Alabama teams to the East would require bringing a traditional power, or two, into the West to keep any sort of balance. OK and OK State fit that bill. Texas and a team-to-be-named-later would also work.

    Imo, the Big 12 doesn't exist inside of 10 years.

  • levanderlevander Posts: 4,481 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited May 2017

    This is a good deal for UGA.

    We'd trade a game against Missouri each year for a game against Arkansas. A team that when we're having a good year and competing for a title, we should beat Amd what's more exciting to watch? Playing Arkansas or playing Missouri?

    And I don't think it makes it significantly harder to win the division. Because Auburn has to play Alabama every year and that puts them at a disadvantage. And Tennessee and Florida will have to play Auburn just like we do.

    There could be squeaker years where it'll make a difference. But I've never really gotten all that excited about making the SEC championship game when we know we're gonna lose anyway, which is what happens in squeaker years.

  • levanderlevander Posts: 4,481 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited May 2017

    @moos said:

    @levander said:

    And it would be cool to get to play a different cross-division rival from the West instead of Auburn. UGA is a big name team. I bet we'd get a good team. I just looked and Missouri's cross division rival is Arkansas! I'd love to play Arkansas every year. Lot of history and pride behind that team.

    Maybe states that are physically located closer to Missouri would get more excited about playing them?

    How much money would it save on transportation costs for road games? Would it mean the difference between leasing a plane and being able to bus the team for many games?

    IMO, the cross division rival thing is overblown. The only reason we have one is because Auburn was our rival waaayy before the 1990 expansion that broke the SEC into divisions. Tennessee and Vanderbilt were both places in the East to preserve thier rivalry. The main problem with moving only Auburn to the East, as has been pointed out, is that the Iron Bowl becomes a cross division game.

    Adding more teams and moving both Alabama AND Auburn to the East would solve that as Alabama also has a rivalry with Tennessee that would be preserved in that scenario.

    Imo, moving both of the Alabama teams to the East would require bringing a traditional power, or two, into the West to keep any sort of balance. OK and OK State fit that bill. Texas and a team-to-be-named-later would also work.

    Imo, the Big 12 doesn't exist inside of 10 years.

    Why does the Iron Bowl being a cross division game make a difference? That seems to be the root of your issue that leads to the other things you talk about.

    My family is originally from Alabama and I know a lot of Alabama fans. They don't care that much about Tennessee. it's not a huge rivalry to them.

  • moosmoos Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @levander said:

    Why does the Iron Bowl being a cross division game make a difference? That seems to be the root of your issue that leads to the other things you talk about.

    Because Alabama also has a rivalry with Tennessee. Both of them would be cross division then instead of just one. Either they'd have to play those more, and the other East teams would get to play Alabama less. Or they'd almost never get to play Tennessee. Both scenarios are bad.

  • moosmoos Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Moving Alabama over instead would solve their rivalry issue but be really bad for us. We'd have to play both Alabama schools every year, but the other East teams would only play Alabama. It would also put the west into an Auburn/LSU toss up every year with LSU getting the upper hand because of of the Iron Bowl.

  • Palm_City_DawgPalm_City_Dawg Posts: 1,661 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @SavageDawg17 said:

    @Palm_City_Dawg said:
    Not to be rude here, but...who cares what Pat Dye has to say?

    Sorry, just trying to share an SEC-related topic in the Dawg days of summer that made headlines across the league.

    Sorry, BA...I wasn't offended at all, just expressing my distaste for Pat Dye! My apologies for coming across as such...

  • JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,511 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited May 2017

    @dawgnms said:
    I say expand by 2 more teams then talk about moving teams around and play a 9 game SEC schedule. Even with the 14 we have now should be playing 9 games in conference.

    I have always thought this is a good way to go. However, to play devil's advocate, if we did that and other conferences loaded up with cupcakes--we would kill each other off and might lose poll recognition. Might even hurt our chances to get two teams in the top four.

    We should change the MNC to a real championship. Teams play majority of games in the conference (maintaining a few out of conference rivalries) and then conference champions play each other in a tournament. No need to worry about rankings then--just seeding.

  • dawgnmsdawgnms Posts: 3,538 mod

    @JayDog said:

    @dawgnms said:
    I say expand by 2 more teams then talk about moving teams around and play a 9 game SEC schedule. Even with the 14 we have now should be playing 9 games in conference.

    I have always thought this is a good way to go. However, to play devil's advocate, if we did that and other conferences loaded up with cupcakes--we would kill each other off and might lose poll recognition. Might even hurt our chances to get two teams in the top four.

    We should change the MNC to a real championship. Teams play majority of games in the conference (maintaining a few out of conference rivalries) and then conference champions play each other in a tournament. No need to worry about rankings then--just seeding.

    8-12 team playoff using 1st and 2nd tier Bowl Games as the play in games to the NC. Could even expand it to 16 teams go back to a 10 game schedule (9 conference and 1 Major or Mid Major, make that a requirement to get in the playoff) use the bowls as play in and rotate the NC game as it is now between the top tier bowls. But Disney would never go for cutting back on the regular season so it is moot. The best we can ever hope for is 6 or maybe even a 8 team playoff with an extra game or 2 added because that means more $$$$$$ for.............Disney and the Conferences......

  • bobbypiperbobbypiper Posts: 146 ✭✭✭ Junior

    I think having Auburn would help the east. As it stands the east is looked at as a second tier league. Granted recent play hasn't helped. But let's just say Kirby turns UGA around, with the play of the rest of the east the polls would hurt.

  • JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,511 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @dawgnms said:

    @JayDog said:

    @dawgnms said:
    I say expand by 2 more teams then talk about moving teams around and play a 9 game SEC schedule. Even with the 14 we have now should be playing 9 games in conference.

    I have always thought this is a good way to go. However, to play devil's advocate, if we did that and other conferences loaded up with cupcakes--we would kill each other off and might lose poll recognition. Might even hurt our chances to get two teams in the top four.

    We should change the MNC to a real championship. Teams play majority of games in the conference (maintaining a few out of conference rivalries) and then conference champions play each other in a tournament. No need to worry about rankings then--just seeding.

    8-12 team playoff using 1st and 2nd tier Bowl Games as the play in games to the NC. Could even expand it to 16 teams go back to a 10 game schedule (9 conference and 1 Major or Mid Major, make that a requirement to get in the playoff) use the bowls as play in and rotate the NC game as it is now between the top tier bowls. But Disney would never go for cutting back on the regular season so it is moot. The best we can ever hope for is 6 or maybe even a 8 team playoff with an extra game or 2 added because that means more $$$$$$ for.............Disney and the Conferences......

    I favor the 16 team format. It allows the major conferences to place a team in the tournament. Anything less--anything that allows a committee to decide who is in--and we will be playing for the Mythical National Championship. I don't see why ESPN/Disney would not want such a format. Every regular season game would truly matter. No more wasted games playing teams who are physically outclassed. If we played every team in our division once it still allows for classic rivalries and out of conference games. I believe there would be just as much money involved-if they could learn the formula for hyping the games.

  • JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,511 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @moos said:

    @levander said:

    And it would be cool to get to play a different cross-division rival from the West instead of Auburn. UGA is a big name team. I bet we'd get a good team. I just looked and Missouri's cross division rival is Arkansas! I'd love to play Arkansas every year. Lot of history and pride behind that team.

    Maybe states that are physically located closer to Missouri would get more excited about playing them?

    How much money would it save on transportation costs for road games? Would it mean the difference between leasing a plane and being able to bus the team for many games?

    IMO, the cross division rival thing is overblown. The only reason we have one is because Auburn was our rival waaayy before the 1990 expansion that broke the SEC into divisions. Tennessee and Vanderbilt were both places in the East to preserve thier rivalry. The main problem with moving only Auburn to the East, as has been pointed out, is that the Iron Bowl becomes a cross division game.

    Adding more teams and moving both Alabama AND Auburn to the East would solve that as Alabama also has a rivalry with Tennessee that would be preserved in that scenario.

    Imo, moving both of the Alabama teams to the East would require bringing a traditional power, or two, into the West to keep any sort of balance. OK and OK State fit that bill. Texas and a team-to-be-named-later would also work.

    Imo, the Big 12 doesn't exist inside of 10 years.

    Cross division rivalries seem to make the networks money--so they are favored in coverage.

    I love the idea of moving Alabama and Auburn to the East. So we move Mizzou to the West. That means we'd need to move another team there as well. I'm thinking Mississippi because they are the stronger team. However, as you say, competitive balance is still a concern. That would require two teams be added to the conference--one to the West and East.

    To the West--agreed--Texas would be a great addition. We'd have Texas and Texas A&M in the same division. If not Texas, then Oklahoma.

    To the East -- Who do we add there? Another Florida school? Georgia Southern?

  • moosmoos Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited May 2017

    @JayDog said:

    Cross division rivalries seem to make the networks money--so they are favored in coverage.

    I love the idea of moving Alabama and Auburn to the East. So we move Mizzou to the West. That means we'd need to move another team there as well. I'm thinking Mississippi because they are the stronger team. However, as you say, competitive balance is still a concern. That would require two teams be added to the conference--one to the West and East.

    To the West--agreed--Texas would be a great addition. We'd have Texas and Texas A&M in the same division. If not Texas, then Oklahoma.

    To the East -- Who do we add there? Another Florida school? Georgia Southern?

    The ultimate coup as far as big names to the SEC would be getting both Texas and Oklahoma.

    Cord cutting and streaming is changing the value proposition the TV deals that ESPN originally struck, and some have said it's the main reason behind the recent cuts there. So as these deals come up for renewal, the schools and conferences may opt to get their revenue elsewhere.

    If/when the big 12 does collapse, I think it would be for that reason. Thus it also stands to reason that there'd be some major realignment across the board over a couple of years. The power 5 might drop all the way to the power 3. This would mean that some schools in the Eastern time zone would be open to leaving their current conferences and coming to the SEC East. Of course, the SEC would be selective based on the value add. They're not going to dilute themselves by splitting​ a similar size bucket of money across more schools.

    Long story short, it might not be a cupcake school.

    This would also mean that some weak power 5 schools would fall down to G5 or become independent.

  • JayDogJayDog Posts: 5,511 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @moos -- interesting take. I had not considered how adding teams might dilute revenues. However, that I do think that would be temporary as the new format solidifies. I know ESPN's and the University presidents fear changing the landscape, but it is changing anyway.

Sign In or Register to comment.