It's a stopgap solution for a few years - at best.

It doesn't solve many challenges to scheduling, but it keeps current rivalries and featured games intact until the scheduling debate is solved or made even more complex.

It's also a solution made partially in jest since I don't know how truly serious the league is about rotating opponents or even making logical decisions at this point.

TheSwingingGate said:

---

It's a stopgap solution for a few years - at best.

It doesn't solve many challenges to scheduling, but it keeps current rivalries and featured games intact until the scheduling debate is solved or made even more complex.

It's also a solution made partially in jest since I don't know how truly serious the league is about rotating opponents or even making logical decisions at this point.

---

What evidence do you have that they aren't interested in rotating since that has already been voted on and approved to the best of my knowledge. Only the 8 or 9 conference game schedule is being discussed.

TheSwingingGate said:

---

It's a stopgap solution for a few years - at best.

It doesn't solve many challenges to scheduling, but it keeps current rivalries and featured games intact until the scheduling debate is solved or made even more complex.

It's also a solution made partially in jest since I don't know how truly serious the league is about rotating opponents or even making logical decisions at this point.

---

They are very serious about the rotation. Now, they might well adopt a temporary 8 game schedule to facilitate an ultimate movement to 9 in a couple of years (which would address concerns about having to cancel contracts), but it would not involve divisions. They would probably just ensure that the "must play" games get played, and that games like UGA at A&M, which still haven't taken place, end up on that schedule.

I suspect rotating opponents is lower on the list of priorities when compared to preserving rivalries and getting funding for a 9th conference game.

I think a stop gap solution would be the next alternative until a 9 game conference schedule is implemented. I also think future expansion creates a short term solution.

If the votes have been cast for rotating opponents then that's great. Making it happen is another matter.

I agree that an 8 game temp schedule is what we will see next.

ironmanag said:

---

If it is one rival you know who we will be saddled with for eternity. This trucking sucks.

---

But it isn't our rival though...

Good.

Microwave Onions said:

---

ESPN article on the topic sheds some light on Sankey's thinking:

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/37756429/greg-sankey-hopes-resolution-sec-football-schedule-soon

He's interested in keeping the league at the forefront of change, and has zero interest in the non-conference schedule. Says almost nothing about the loss of a home game, and minimizes other potential downsides.

Article also points out it's possible that the schools do not vote at all at this next meeting.

I have a feeling most schools are more interested in the number of home games, as well as having some interesting non-cons, than he is.

---

I think many schools are just interested in another cupcake auto-win. It is pathetic.

I'm interested in causing as much pain for the schools that screwed us over as possible.

Too many Aggies on here are anxious to jump back into bed with the 'sips, it's pathetic.

Sethtevious said:

---

Too many Aggies on here are anxious to jump back into bed with the 'sips, it's pathetic.

---

This. It drives me nuts about this fanbase.

shady said:

---

Doesn't matter what a couple of corn dogs on a message board said...the permanent rival requests have already been submitted and we chose LSU and they chose us.

---

Sounds to me like the corndogs can't wrap their egos around the fact that Bama, Florida and Ole Piss have other schools that they consider bigger rivals. Boo hoo, swamptards

dixichkn said:

---

shady said:

---

Doesn't matter what a couple of corn dogs on a message board said...the permanent rival requests have already been submitted and we chose LSU and they chose us.

---

Sounds to me like the corndogs can't wrap their egos around the fact that Bama, Florida and Ole Piss have other schools that they consider bigger rivals. Boo hoo, swamptards

---

Bama has Auburn and Tennessee, Florida has Georgia and Tennessee. LSU is a tertiary rival, at best, for both schools. The positive is all three schools will suffer under an 8 game schedule.

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

Sethtevious said:

---

Too many Aggies on here are anxious to jump back into bed with the 'sips, it's pathetic.

---

This. It drives me nuts about this fanbase.

---

The fact that we lose Alabama and Auburn as annual games is disgraceful, yet these losers would make that trade for texas.

Sethtevious said:

---

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

Sethtevious said:

---

Too many Aggies on here are anxious to jump back into bed with the 'sips, it's pathetic.

---

This. It drives me nuts about this fanbase.

---

The fact that we lose Alabama and Auburn as annual games is disgraceful, yet these losers would make that trade for texas.

---

No, we are making that trade for Georgia and Florida, which I am on board with. We are potentially trading South Carolina for tu, which I am also okay with.

ESPN source told @ActionNetworkHQ they were "not surprised" SEC remained at 8 league games in 2024. The only schools that supported 9-game SEC schedule were Florida, Georgia, LSU, Missouri & Texas A&M. Also, OU & Texas wanted 9 SEC games but did not have a vote

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) June 2, 2023

ironmanag said:

---

If it is one rival you know who we will be saddled with for eternity. This trucking sucks.

---

LSU?

Hope you don't really think Texas and OU aren't going to be paired