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

the TV networks will want Aggies/Horns annually

Yes, I believe that's true.  And they'll also want TX-OU annually.  

From what I've seen, Missouri and A&M are alternate choices for the "other" team in a pod that has OU, Texas, and Arkansas.
I suppose that LSU could take that spot, leaving A&M and Mizzou in the same sub-division.  That would create a very helmet-y group, with OU and Texas solid helmets and LSU on the borderline.

I hate that pod already.  The fact that so will most LSU fans is how I know that's probably what will happen. 

Well now I know you're just trying to start a rivalry.

LSU has won 5 MNC's and played for a 6th.  If you use the Alabama method of how many NC's a school claims, it drops to 4, tho.  They don't claim 1908 even though recognized by polls recognized by the NCAA, and listed on the NCAA's website as NC's for that year....for what little bit of nothing that's worth.  There's a segment of fans who want the school to claim 1908, quite a few who don't know anything about it, and as for the school itself, it's like they won't claim it now by tradition.  Like they don't see the point in doing it now if they haven't done it already. 

There is a pretty interesting back-story to what happened.  Very political, very media-driven.  I'm so glad we've come a long way in society and politics and media don't interfere with how things get done anymore. 

Suffice it to say, it was an Auburn journalist's doing at the time, his rumors were unsubstantiated and ultimately proven false, but back then if there was dirt on your name for a season, I guess you didn't squabble about it.  I've read through a lot of old newspapers on LSU football through the years, and from what I can glean, programs did not care about NC's at that time the way they do now.  It was all about your schedule and hopefully winning your conference.  What it does show, tho, is that Auburn has been Auburn since the beginning of time. 

I must have edited my post because it should have said “ this century”. 

as I remember 2003 2007 2019 and the infamous 2011 rematch. Of course didn’t the 2007 team have two losses?  That right thar should tell you who is and who is not a helmet. 

I must have edited my post because it should have said “ this century”.

as I remember 2003 2007 2019 and the infamous 2011 rematch. Of course didn’t the 2007 team have two losses?  That right thar should tell you who is and who is not a helmet.

Eyeballs, television sets, and favor from poll voters/committee members, even without having success for decades, is what tells you who and who is not a helmet.

somehow, UNL still has eyeballs in the seats and better than average TV ratings

Vol attendance has been off of late.  But I suspect eyeballs are there for the first half anyway.

When do we get around to talking BBQ and Beer here?

Is there no good food in B1G land?

If we have Divisions then I'm assuming they'll assign one x-div perma-rival. 

If we use pods, I guess they can still do that but it starts to impair the scheduling flexibility that's the primary benefit to using pods in the first place.

Anyway, my preference for a x-div perma-rival from all schools currently in the East, would probably be Georgia, Florida, or Tennessee, in that order.  Obviously those schools might already have their dance card full with a more traditional SEC rival, in which case it doesn't really matter to me who we'd get annually out of Kentucky, USCe, or Vandy.

As you note, having permanent inter-divisional games undercuts the reasoning for going to pods (sub-divisions).
It's easy for me to say this, as the fan of a going-to-be "newbie" member of the SEC, but I'd rather there not be permanent non-divisional (or sub-divisional) games.  For one thing, they cement scheduling disparities in place.  (I suppose that could be addressed by rotating "permanent" games, but then what's the point of having them?)  I'm looking forward to seeing OU play the eastern powerhouses of Alabama, Georgia, and Florida as much as old conference-mates A&M and Mizzou.  I would be disappointed to see the interdivisional big dogs come to Norman only once a decade or so.
IF permanent rivalries are the deal, while OU has a little history with Tennessee, I like Cincy's idea of UT vs. UT, two orange helmet programs that haven't acted like helmets lately.
As for OU, I guess I'd pick the crimson school of the east, Bama.  But Bama's already got a boatload of permanent rivalries, so that might be out of the question.  So, then, Georgia.

My ideal would be subdivisions where you play the 3 other teams in your own subdivision, all 4 teams of one other subdivision, and 1 each team from the other 2 subdivisions.  After 8 years, rotate the subdivision vs. subdivision lineup.  I suspect that most folks would find that quirky, so my fall-back would be play your own 3 subdivision mates and 2 each from each of the subdivisions.  After 6 years, you would have played at least a home-and-home with every school in the conference.

I'll bet it's going to be divisions, and I'll bet there will be permanent rivalry games.