Author
Topic: Rivalry Talk
(Read 17088 times)

Cincydawg · « **Reply #28 on:** August 09, 2021, 04:48:03 PM »

UGA-OU would be a good pair I think because they have played but once, and it was a great game (in every respect). It would be bad for other reasons.

Tenn-Texas could battle for who can be called UT for a year. Bama-LSU has produced some epics of late. Arky-USCe seems to fit. A&M-Auburn?

Florida and .... A&M.

CWSooner · « **Reply #29 on:** August 09, 2021, 09:30:22 PM »

Quote from: Gigem on August 09, 2021, 02:18:36 PM

On the other hand playing the rivalry twice out of every fourth year would take some wind out of the hate like OU/NU had in the Big 12. Hard to sustain the hate that way with more than half the team not playing the rival every 3rd year.

OU and Nebraska had an unusual rivalry. There wasn't much hate to it, at least not in the '70s and '80s. OU dominated the series in the '50s, Nebraska was better in the '60s. Both programs were really good in the '70s and 80s. Then Nebraska dominated in the '90s. And then it fell off to 2 games every 4 years. And Nebraska tailed off. And then the Big 12 had its first falling apart.
Some 40-ish Sooner fans hate Nebraska, ostensibly because they believe that Osborne ran up the scores in the '90s when OU was crappy (and those fans were not quite mature enough to accept beat-downs as what happens when you have four different HFCs in one decade, having fired three in four years). My response to that is that we should have been good enough not to get RUTSd.

Gigem · « **Reply #30 on:** August 09, 2021, 09:38:45 PM »

One more wildcard. There is always the chance there will be more than the 9 conference games we are assuming. Especially if money is driving all this madness. I mean who really enjoys seeing Alabama beat Troy state 66-0 or LSU beat La Tech or A&M whip North Texas. It’s nothing more than a tune up game. A lot of problems could be solved by adding conference games.

Not to mention these players will son be up to their ears in NIL money. 10 conference games, 1 non-con versus another power 5, and then maybe 1 tune up game. Not too much different than now except most programs schedule one pansy, one tweener like UH, and one marquee opponent. Drop one for another conference foe.

FearlessF · « **Reply #31 on:** August 09, 2021, 09:46:07 PM »

one tune up game per season is enough

utee94 · « **Reply #32 on:** August 09, 2021, 09:48:50 PM »

Quote from: Gigem on August 09, 2021, 09:38:45 PM

One more wildcard. There is always the chance there will be more than the 9 conference games we are assuming. Especially if money is driving all this madness. I mean who really enjoys seeing Alabama beat Troy state 66-0 or LSU beat La Tech or A&M whip North Texas. It’s nothing more than a tune up game. A lot of problems could be solved by adding conference games.

Not to mention these players will son be up to their ears in NIL money. 10 conference games, 1 non-con versus another power 5, and then maybe 1 tune up game. Not too much different than now except most programs schedule one pansy, one tweener like UH, and one marquee opponent. Drop one for another conference foe.

I'd be all for the SEC dropping all those embarrassing FCS games for sure, and then going to 10 conference games. One tune-up against a G5, one marquee intersectional matchup, and 10 conference games works great for me.

But there's no way the SEC or any other conference is going to do that, unless/until EVERYBODY is doing it.

CWSooner · « **Reply #33 on:** August 09, 2021, 10:04:10 PM »

I'm not against the idea of a 10-game conference schedule per se, but it is complicated when you have 16 teams, whether split into two divisions or four subdivisions.

So, with four subdivisions (pods), you play your 3 podmates, then you have to distribute 7 more games over the other three pods.

Or, with two 8-team divisions, you play 7 divisional games and then 3 of the 8 teams in the other division.

It's also not clean if you go to permanent interdivisional rivalries if you are in two divisions. You'd play 7 divisional games, your permanent rival in the other division, and then distribute 2 games over the 7 remaining teams in the other division.

3 doesn't go into 8 evenly and neither does 2 go into 7. So it takes a long cycle before you've played the 7 non-permanent-rivals in the other division the same number of times.

Similar problems with 10 games, pods, and a permanent interpod rival. You play your 3 podmates, your permanent rival, then you spread 6 games over the other 11 schools. 6 does not go evenly into 11. So, again, a long cycle before it all evens out.

The cleanest is 9 games with no permanent rival. 3 pod games, 2 games from each of the other 3 pods. With home-and-home, it takes 4 years and you've played everybody not in your pod twice.

With divisions, 9 games, no permanent rival, you get 7 divisional games, then 2 more games distributed across the 8 schools in the other division. It takes 8 years to complete the cycle, and you've played everyone in the other division twice.

FearlessF · « **Reply #34 on:** August 09, 2021, 10:33:30 PM »

With divisions, 9 games, no permanent rival, you get 7 divisional games, then 2 more games distributed across the 8 schools in the other division. It takes 8 years to complete the cycle, and you've played everyone in the other division twice.

done

utee94 · « **Reply #35 on:** August 09, 2021, 11:20:19 PM »

Quote from: CWSooner on August 09, 2021, 10:04:10 PM

With divisions, 9 games, no permanent rival, you get 7 divisional games, then 2 more games distributed across the 8 schools in the other division. It takes 8 years to complete the cycle, and you've played everyone in the other division twice.

Since I believe the traditional, regional rivalries are the most important aspect of college football, this is something I can't agree with. Because there's just no way to fit all traditional regional rivalries into the same division.

Gigem · « **Reply #36 on:** August 09, 2021, 11:36:28 PM »

Quote from: CWSooner on August 09, 2021, 10:04:10 PM

I'm not against the idea of a 10-game conference schedule per se, but it is complicated when you have 16 teams, whether split into two divisions or four subdivisions.

So, with four subdivisions (pods), you play your 3 podmates, then you have to distribute 7 more games over the other three pods.

Or, with two 8-team divisions, you play 7 divisional games and then 3 of the 8 teams in the other division.

It's also not clean if you go to permanent interdivisional rivalries if you are in two divisions. You'd play 7 divisional games, your permanent rival in the other division, and then distribute 2 games over the 7 remaining teams in the other division.

3 doesn't go into 8 evenly and neither does 2 go into 7. So it takes a long cycle before you've played the 7 non-permanent-rivals in the other division the same number of times.

Similar problems with 10 games, pods, and a permanent interpod rival. You play your 3 podmates, your permanent rival, then you spread 6 games over the other 11 schools. 6 does not go evenly into 11. So, again, a long cycle before it all evens out.

The cleanest is 9 games with no permanent rival. 3 pod games, 2 games from each of the other 3 pods. With home-and-home, it takes 4 years and you've played everybody not in your pod twice.

With divisions, 9 games, no permanent rival, you get 7 divisional games, then 2 more games distributed across the 8 schools in the other division. It takes 8 years to complete the cycle, and you've played everyone in the other division twice.

Great point. I didn’t think it fully through.

There’s a reason why this failed the first time. I’ll bet you the conference head honchos are having a devil of a time figuring it out as well.

CWSooner · « **Reply #37 on:** August 10, 2021, 07:26:07 AM »

Quote from: utee94 on August 09, 2021, 11:20:19 PM

Since I believe the traditional, regional rivalries are the most important aspect of college football, this is something I can't agree with. Because there's just no way to fit all traditional regional rivalries into the same division.

Are you saying that you see pods as the better solution?

Cincydawg · « **Reply #38 on:** August 10, 2021, 07:29:04 AM »

I can't think of a real rivalry that would be lost with two divisions. Can you?

CWSooner · « **Reply #39 on:** August 10, 2021, 07:36:24 AM »

I'm not sure of the real rivalries in the SEC.

Is Bama-LSU not one? I have thought that it was, but maybe there's some recency bias there.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #40 on:** August 10, 2021, 07:45:29 AM »

I'd say the historical rivalries, aside fron the in state things like the Egg bowl, are:

Bama - Tenn
Auburn - UGA
UGA - UF

That's it. I'm not including matchups between teams that have been good of late, those are just important games, like LSU-UF.

FearlessF · « **Reply #41 on:** August 10, 2021, 08:25:10 AM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on August 10, 2021, 07:29:04 AM

I can't think of a real rivalry that would be lost with two divisions. Can you?

you do the best you can and suffer maybe one lost?

better than losing more than that to pods or some other system

The B12 (XII) Forum, home of the 'Front Porch, y'all' at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: Rivalry Talk

Cincydawg

Re: Rivalry Talk

CWSooner

Re: Rivalry Talk

Gigem

Re: Rivalry Talk

FearlessF

Re: Rivalry Talk

utee94

Re: Rivalry Talk

CWSooner

Re: Rivalry Talk

FearlessF

Re: Rivalry Talk

utee94

Re: Rivalry Talk

Gigem

Re: Rivalry Talk

CWSooner

Re: Rivalry Talk

Cincydawg

Re: Rivalry Talk

CWSooner

Re: Rivalry Talk

Cincydawg

Re: Rivalry Talk

FearlessF

Re: Rivalry Talk