Re: [gatortalk] Expansion mania

Jerry,

You're missing the point and focusing on the trivial. Admittedly, I'm rounding stuff off, but that's because I don't really see a difference between playing a particular team once every eight years and once every ten years. (Every eight years would allow you to play each team once in each decade. Every 50 years, you'd have a second game in the same decade. I don't know about you, but I don't expect to be here in 50 years. That's what I'm thinking when I say you'd play once each decade.) From a rivalry perspective, eight or ten years makes no difference, and organizing it into two or four divisions doesn't change that. 

The whole point of a conference is the establishment of rivalries, the thought of getting revenge for a loss (or kicking butt again next year), and the knowledge that you'll have to face the opponent again soon. Whether it's eight or ten, isn't it obvious that a so-called rivalry is just not going to matter to fans or players when they won't play a team again for many years? Let's say we went to 16 teams and we lost to A&M this year... how satisfying is it to say, "just wait 'till 2020... we'll show you who's the better team?!" Yeah, that'll put fear in their hearts. Of course, both teams will probably have new coaches by then, and the players of that next game are in 5th - 8th grade right now, but it's a rivalry because we're in the same conference. Heck, we'll probably end up playing some patsy teams more often than teams in our own conference. 

Seriously, quibble about the math if you want, but the point remains... that's not really being in the same conference, whatever it says on paper. That's why SOS is proposing that we not count games against west opponents... because he recognizes that we're already not really in the same conference as them. Anyway, here's the math that really matters... 16 teams is not a sustainable model for a football conference. It will eventually fall apart or split into two conferences.

Rob

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 2, 2012, at 9:32 PM, "Jerry D. Belloit" <belloit@clarion.edu> wrote:

Rob,

 

I am not sure about your math.  With four divisions, you will have three division games and four non-division games.  Over a six year period, you could rotate home and home through the rest of the teams.   If you keep one "rival" or permanent game,  that would increase the time between playing everyone home and home to eight years.

 

Jerry

 

From: gatortalk@googlegroups.com [mailto:gatortalk@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rob Alexander
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 11:58 PM
To: gatortalk@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [gatortalk] Expansion mania

 

Well, sure, the number 16 can be divided in half twice and the number 14 can't, but there is no organization of 16 teams that gets you around the problem I am talking about -- at least, not  without increasing the total games in a season or decreasing the non-conference games. Four divisions sound clever on paper, but it doesn't change the fact that there will be teams in your conference that you don't play more often than once in a decade (even less frequently under your plan). When you consider what a conference is -- a group of teams you play regularly, and thereby develop rivalries with -- then it wouldn't really be a single conference anymore, and teams and fans would stop caring about those in the other division. If we stop playing west teams in the season, and our only involvement with the west is that the east champion plays them for the championship, then it's a post-season relationship, not a conference relationship. The four-division idea would just exacerbate that. If we do ever go to 16 teams, then remember that you heard it here first. The conference will split within 15 years.

 

Rob

 

 

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 1, 2012, at 9:57 AM, "Jerry D. Belloit" <belloit@clarion.edu> wrote:

Actually 16 teams would be easier to schedule.  You would break the 16 teams into four divisions.  Two Eastern divisions and Two Western Divisions.  Each division champion would play in the first round of the SEC playoffs.  The East and West Champions would play for the title.  This could actually allow for playing more teams from other conferences.

 

Jerry

 

From: gatortalk@googlegroups.com [mailto:gatortalk@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rob Alexander
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 5:14 PM
To: gatortalk@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [gatortalk] Expansion mania

 

The weird thing is that nobody writing about this seems to recognize the limitations inherent in the number of games we play. With our two new members, we're already down to two western division opponents a year. If you do home-and-home with West teams, you'd be about 12 years between playing any particular team. Even with one-game matchups, it's 6 years. At that rate, the SEC West is already barely the same conference as us. Add two more teams and you'll effectively make two separate 8-team conferences. If we played everyone from our own division, we'd only be able to play one team from the other division each year. It's hard to keep rivalries going when you only play a team once every 8 years. Everyone says it would be a super-conference, but I think it would eventually collapse under its own weight and would just end up as two conferences.

Rob

 

 

Sent from my iPad

On May 31, 2012, at 4:29 PM, "John Bowers" <jbowers4@cfl.rr.com> wrote:

Why SEC Must Consider Eastern Expansion Now

 

Why not just add EVERY DAMN TEAM in America to the SEC?  Get it over with.  We'll have all the money, all the TV, all the everything.  Hell with everyone else.

Add Ohio State, THAT would piss Urban Meyer off!  Hey Urban, welcome to the SEC!  Heard of us?

 

Seriously, add two more teams before A&M and Mizzou have played at all?  That's crazy.  Pretty soon the Gators will take the field and we'll look across at the fans of the other team and say "are they in the SEC with us?  Anybody know?"

 

Bueller?

 

JB

 

 

 

 

--
GATORS: ONE VOICE ON SATURDAY - NO VOICE ON SUNDAY!
1996 National Football Champions | 2006 National Basketball Champions
2006 National Football Champions | 2007 National Basketball Champions
2008 National Football Champions |
Three Heisman Trophy winners: Steve Spurrier (1966), Danny Wuerffel (1996),
Tim Tebow (2007) - Visit our website at www.gatornet.us

--
GATORS: ONE VOICE ON SATURDAY - NO VOICE ON SUNDAY!
1996 National Football Champions | 2006 National Basketball Champions
2006 National Football Champions | 2007 National Basketball Champions
2008 National Football Champions |
Three Heisman Trophy winners: Steve Spurrier (1966), Danny Wuerffel (1996),
Tim Tebow (2007) - Visit our website at www.gatornet.us

--
GATORS: ONE VOICE ON SATURDAY - NO VOICE ON SUNDAY!
1996 National Football Champions | 2006 National Basketball Champions
2006 National Football Champions | 2007 National Basketball Champions
2008 National Football Champions |
Three Heisman Trophy winners: Steve Spurrier (1966), Danny Wuerffel (1996),
Tim Tebow (2007) - Visit our website at www.gatornet.us

--
GATORS: ONE VOICE ON SATURDAY - NO VOICE ON SUNDAY!
1996 National Football Champions | 2006 National Basketball Champions
2006 National Football Champions | 2007 National Basketball Champions
2008 National Football Champions |
Three Heisman Trophy winners: Steve Spurrier (1966), Danny Wuerffel (1996),
Tim Tebow (2007) - Visit our website at www.gatornet.us

--
GATORS: ONE VOICE ON SATURDAY - NO VOICE ON SUNDAY!
1996 National Football Champions | 2006 National Basketball Champions
2006 National Football Champions | 2007 National Basketball Champions
2008 National Football Champions |
Three Heisman Trophy winners: Steve Spurrier (1966), Danny Wuerffel (1996),
Tim Tebow (2007) - Visit our website at www.gatornet.us