Falconsfan567

#7 Auburn vs. #10 Florida

148 posts in this topic

Ridiculous that Auburn and Florida don't play every year anymore!! I absolutely hate it!! First time they've played since 2011.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

I believe Auburn is gonna expose Florida as the pretender that they are.   

I'm not counting my chickens before they hatch. Auburn has gotten better every game but this is still Gus Malzahn and his team is known to lay a couple eggs because he comes out with the stupidest offensive game plans ever and refuses to adapt when they don't work during the game and it leads to a loss.

BamaBirdLady likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Falconsfan567 said:

Ridiculous that Auburn and Florida don't play every year anymore!! I absolutely hate it!! First time they've played since 2011.

When we go to 9 game conference schedule in the future then that will help if they make you guys a permanent rival with Florida.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, usmcdirtybird said:

When we go to 9 game conference schedule in the future then that will help if they make you guys a permanent rival with Florida.  

Auburn to the East, Missouri to the West, and a 6-2-1 schedule. 6 vs the west, 2 permanent rivals, and 1 rotating opponent. 

Will also be interesting to see what happens with games like UGA/GT, UK/UL, UF/FSU, USC/UC. They'll keep them I'm sure and likely more teams will start to move to 11 games vs. P5 opponents I would think. The real losers are going to be the G5 teams that get pay checks from those games against the big boys. 

Porter Osborne Jr likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tl;dr said:

Auburn to the East, Missouri to the West, and a 6-2-1 schedule. 6 vs the west, 2 permanent rivals, and 1 rotating opponent. 

Will also be interesting to see what happens with games like UGA/GT, UK/UL, UF/FSU, USC/UC. They'll keep them I'm sure and likely more teams will start to move to 11 games vs. P5 opponents I would think. The real losers are going to be the G5 teams that get pay checks from those games against the big boys. 

I am sure politics will be involved and in UGAs best interest for Auburn to stay in West.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tl;dr said:

Auburn to the East, Missouri to the West, and a 6-2-1 schedule. 6 vs the west, 2 permanent rivals, and 1 rotating opponent. 

Will also be interesting to see what happens with games like UGA/GT, UK/UL, UF/FSU, USC/UC. They'll keep them I'm sure and likely more teams will start to move to 11 games vs. P5 opponents I would think. The real losers are going to be the G5 teams that get pay checks from those games against the big boys. 

I was going to say the auburn to the east thing.  when Texas can leave the Big 12 then I see us going to 4 super conferences.  this is what I see happening as follows:

Big ten gets Kansas and Iowa St to get to 16.  

PAC 12 gets Texas, Texas Tech. Oklahoma and Oklahoma St.   

ACC gets West Virginia and Kansas St (or South Carolina goes back to ACC and SEC takes Kansas St)

SEC gets TCU and Baylor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

I am sure politics will be involved and in UGAs best interest for Auburn to stay in West.

I know Auburn people want to be in the East or at least that's been what I've heard from the Auburn people I know lol. At first there was some push back from Alabama people due to the potential of the UT game being in jeopardy, but I think those concerns have pretty much gone away due to at 6-2-1 format. 

It's in UGA's best interest to keep Auburn in the West for sure, but I think it would help the balance of power a bit. Although if A&M can't every get it figured out, I'm not sure the balance is as big as people think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an SEC guy, I would love to bring SMU to the SEC.  The SEC money can rebuild that team.  We have a team in Dallas that gets us a recruiting foothold to get more recruiting for us.  SMU has a pretty decent BB team.  just this guys opinion.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, usmcdirtybird said:

I was going to say the auburn to the east thing.  when Texas can leave the Big 12 then I see us going to 4 super conferences.  this is what I see happening as follows:

Big ten gets Kansas and Iowa St to get to 16.  

PAC 12 gets Texas, Texas Tech. Oklahoma and Oklahoma St.   

ACC gets West Virginia and Kansas St (or South Carolina goes back to ACC and SEC takes Kansas St)

SEC gets TCU and Baylor

I wouldn't be shocked to see something like this if we go to four 16 team conferences. I think you also have to factor Notre Dame into the picture and they would be an ACC team, so I think five 14 team conferences is more likely (the ACC would have 15 in this case more than likely). 

SEC: stands pat
ACC: adds Notre Dame 
Big 10: stands pat
Big 12: Adds Houston, Memphis, UCF, USF
Pac 12: Adds BYU, Boise State

So you now have 71 P5 teams

I also would LOVE a promotion/relegation system, but that ain't ever happening lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tl;dr said:

I wouldn't be shocked to see something like this if we go to four 16 team conferences. I think you also have to factor Notre Dame into the picture and they would be an ACC team, so I think five 14 team conferences is more likely (the ACC would have 15 in this case more than likely). 

SEC: stands pat
ACC: adds Notre Dame 
Big 10: stands pat
Big 12: Adds Houston, Memphis, UCF, USF
Pac 12: Adds BYU, Boise State

So you now have 71 P5 teams

I also would LOVE a promotion/relegation system, but that ain't ever happening lol

I think SMU will push for bigger offers also.  It helped Baylor.  It could do the same for SMU.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, usmcdirtybird said:

I think SMU will push for bigger offers also.  It helped Baylor.  It could do the same for SMU.  

Just read your post on that too lol. Inevitably, I think we will see some difference between P5 and G5. I would worry if I'm a program like New Mexico State that literally funds their athletic department off pay days from big schools

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the powers that be would go to a 16 game playoff and require Power 5 teams only play each other in and out of conference we could really have something special.

I would love to see a two loss team that played a beast of a schedule get in playoff and win it all.

For all those saying a 16 team playoff makes the regular season not as important I say - when 3 games are the likes of Murray State, Arkansas State and NE Missouri Tech - the regular season isn’t that important anyway.

There would still be arguments about who teams #12-16 are that make the playoff - but you are arguing there for teams that likely go out in the 1st round anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tl;dr said:

Just read your post on that too lol. Inevitably, I think we will see some difference between P5 and G5. I would worry if I'm a program like New Mexico State that literally funds their athletic department off pay days from big schools

I think the payoff games will come from basketball.  They can add these games and pay schools to come as warm ups.  

 

If it goes like you and I are talking.  I see many schools moving down to FCS play.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want 16 team conferences. That's how we ended up in this current situation. SEC went from 10, to 12 by adding Arkansas and South Carolina because (money talks and ******** walks) and then ended up at 14 by adding Missouri and Texas A&M because (money talks and ******** walks 2.0). 16 would be even worse than the current 14 is.

I think the best solution to the scheduling problem is getting rid of divisions altogether. I absolutely think divisions should be done away with. You can keep the 8 conference games schedule, although I vote for 9 conference games. Then you have 4 or 5 permanent opponents and rotate the rest. For Auburn if you've got 4 permanent opponents you pick, Florida, Georgia, LSU, and Alabama and if you add a 5th you pick Tennessee. Auburn used to have a great rivalry with Florida and Tennessee from playing every year back in the 10 team days. The yearly Tennessee game went away in 1992 when Arkansas and South Carolina was added. We lost the Florida game after 2003 when they changed the schedule for some stupid reason.

Getting rid of divisions also guarantees you get the two best teams in the championship game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Porter Osborne Jr said:

I don’t want a two loss team or 16 teams.  Maybe 8 teams with conference champs and a few at large at most.

Why not?  With 8 teams, there is still an advantage to playing a soft schedule.   Still an advantage for teams like Clemson that play in tissue-paper soft conferences.

Would a "two loss" Auburn team be worse than a "one loss" USC or Washington team?

What if UGA's non-conference schedule was Penn State, Clemson and Texas and they go undefeated in conference play, lose on road to Clemson and lose a nail-biter to Bama - but they play a 100% legit schedule.     Went 10-2.

You have to consider 16 teams, no directional schools and legit out of conference schedules.   SEC otherwise would still be at a disadvantage as even though they get 2 teams in an 8 team playoff - they probably would deserve 3-4 teams most years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Falconsfan567 said:

I don't want 16 team conferences. That's how we ended up in this current situation. SEC went from 10, to 12 by adding Arkansas and South Carolina because (money talks and ******** walks) and then ended up at 14 by adding Missouri and Texas A&M because (money talks and ******** walks 2.0). 16 would be even worse than the current 14 is.

I think the best solution to the scheduling problem is getting rid of divisions altogether. I absolutely think divisions should be done away with. You can keep the 8 conference games schedule, although I vote for 9 conference games. Then you have 4 or 5 permanent opponents and rotate the rest. For Auburn if you've got 4 permanent opponents you pick, Florida, Georgia, LSU, and Alabama and if you add a 5th you pick Tennessee. Auburn used to have a great rivalry with Florida and Tennessee from playing every year back in the 10 team days. The yearly Tennessee game went away in 1992 when Arkansas and South Carolina was added. We lost the Florida game after 2003 when they changed the schedule for some stupid reason.

Getting rid of divisions also guarantees you get the two best teams in the championship game.

not 16 team conferences

16 team playoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, g-dawg said:

not 16 team conferences

16 team playoff

There was talk of 16 team conferences in this thread. That is what I was responding to.

g-dawg likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Falconsfan567 said:

There was talk of 16 team conferences in this thread. That is what I was responding to.

OK.

I like the 16 game playoff as it takes out advantages/disadvantages of scheduling and playing in soft conferences.  The best team/hottest of the best teams will win every year.   There will be playoff upsets and a four week elimination tourney that would create ridiculous excitement.  You would never have a team like UGA or LSU or Ohio State feeling like they got screwed out of their chance to be in a playoff.  Even in an 8 game playoff there will be conference and scheduling advantages for teams - with 16 game playoff - NCAA/CFP could demand tougher out of conference scheduling.

You should be able to lose two tough games and still make a playoff - if you play a legit schedule.

16 team playoff would also drive HUGE ratings - you would likely have at least 2 Pac 10 teams and 2 Big 12 teams every year - gets the Dallas market, the Texas market - more of midwest market....would be huge.

Going from 4-8 is just a tweak - going to 16 is ripping the band-aid and fundamentally changing the system - if we go to 8, the drum beat will start for 16 teams within two years anyway - the 3 "at-large" teams - there will be crazy controversy on how those are selected and screams and shrieks from Athletic Director's and Coach's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

OK.

I like the 16 game playoff as it takes out advantages/disadvantages of scheduling and playing in soft conferences.  The best team/hottest of the best teams will win every year.   There will be playoff upsets and a four week elimination tourney that would create ridiculous excitement.  You would never have a team like UGA or LSU or Ohio State feeling like they got screwed out of their chance to be in a playoff.  Even in an 8 game playoff there will be conference and scheduling advantages for teams - with 16 game playoff - NCAA/CFP could demand tougher out of conference scheduling.

You should be able to lose two tough games and still make a playoff - if you play a legit schedule.

16 team playoff would also drive HUGE ratings - you would likely have at least 2 Pac 10 teams and 2 Big 12 teams every year - gets the Dallas market, the Texas market - more of midwest market....would be huge.

Going from 4-8 is just a tweak - going to 16 is ripping the band-aid and fundamentally changing the system - if we go to 8, the drum beat will start for 16 teams within two years anyway - the 3 "at-large" teams - there will be crazy controversy on how those are selected and screams and shrieks from Athletic Director's and Coach's.

I find it stupid that they say that would lead to too many games because all the other levels of college football have a long-term playoff structure like that one. Why can't we in major college football?

g-dawg likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Falconsfan567 said:

I don't want 16 team conferences. That's how we ended up in this current situation. SEC went from 10, to 12 by adding Arkansas and South Carolina because (money talks and ******** walks) and then ended up at 14 by adding Missouri and Texas A&M because (money talks and ******** walks 2.0). 16 would be even worse than the current 14 is.

I think the best solution to the scheduling problem is getting rid of divisions altogether. I absolutely think divisions should be done away with. You can keep the 8 conference games schedule, although I vote for 9 conference games. Then you have 4 or 5 permanent opponents and rotate the rest. For Auburn if you've got 4 permanent opponents you pick, Florida, Georgia, LSU, and Alabama and if you add a 5th you pick Tennessee. Auburn used to have a great rivalry with Florida and Tennessee from playing every year back in the 10 team days. The yearly Tennessee game went away in 1992 when Arkansas and South Carolina was added. We lost the Florida game after 2003 when they changed the schedule for some stupid reason.

Getting rid of divisions also guarantees you get the two best teams in the championship game.

I do not want 16 team conferences.  If Texas leaves Big 12 then the Big 12 is done.  I see it happening ONLY if Texas leaves Big 12.  I like the divisions but no divisions is where we will go if the playoff expands.  

If the Playoffs expand then the first round can be home games or all major bowls get used for all playoff games.  It will be very interesting after 2026 (I think that is the year) when the current format for the college football playoff changes.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Falconsfan567 said:

I find it stupid that they say that would lead to too many games because all the other levels of college football have a long-term playoff structure like that one. Why can't we in major college football?

and DECEMBER is a giant donut hole in the college football schedule - why should there be ZERO games from like December 8th - December 31st that matter?   You could have two playoff weeks in December where it goes from 16 teams down to 4 - then have two games in January where it goes from Final 4 down to the champion.

Falconsfan567 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, g-dawg said:

Why not?  With 8 teams, there is still an advantage to playing a soft schedule.   Still an advantage for teams like Clemson that play in tissue-paper soft conferences.

Would a "two loss" Auburn team be worse than a "one loss" USC or Washington team?

What if UGA's non-conference schedule was Penn State, Clemson and Texas and they go undefeated in conference play, lose on road to Clemson and lose a nail-biter to Bama - but they play a 100% legit schedule.     Went 10-2.

You have to consider 16 teams, no directional schools and legit out of conference schedules.   SEC otherwise would still be at a disadvantage as even though they get 2 teams in an 8 team playoff - they probably would deserve 3-4 teams most years.

I’m absolutely against anything more than a 8 team playoff and honestly prefer 6 team playoff. I’ve not seen a year where more than 6 teams deserved to play for a championship. Plus, it absolutely waters down the regular season. 

Falconsfan567, Carter and frankly88 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now