Wednesday Morning Dawg Bites Wishes We Could Turn Back the Clock About 30 Years
by T Kyle King on Jan 18, 2012 8:30 AM EST
in Georgia Bulldogs Dawg Bites
Email
PrintIf my math is correct, we are two weeks away from national signing day, reminding us yet again that "offseason" is a bit of a misnomer; yeah, there’s no college football being played at the moment, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t news of note here in Bulldog Nation. Here’s what you need to know before you check your e-mail, listen to your voice mail, and down that first cup of coffee:
Despite playing better against Vanderbilt, the Hoop Hounds still are winless in league play, which is why it is all the more imperative that Mark Fox’s team notch a win tonight over Tennessee. (Another reason: Georgia got hosed last year.) Tip-off is at 8:00 p.m. Eastern. The game is on the SEC Network. There will be a comment thread here, but, if you can make it to Athens for the game, please do . . . and, if possible, be there on time. This is a big one, folks. Unfortunately, the Vols play defense.
The good news is that the SEC will be sticking with an eight-game conference schedule for the foreseeable future. The bad news is that the powers that be are considering doing away with the permanent interdivisional rival. Personally, I think they’re going to soft-pedal this the way they soft-pedaled the implementation of rotating opponents in 1992, and that it will all be moot when the league expands to 16 teams with pods in the next five years or so, but, for now, I will say this: SEC expansion already has cost the Bulldogs their annual series with Clemson; if it costs us our annual series with Auburn, too, that will be two Tiger rivalries dating back to the 1890s interrupted due to conference realignment. I know tradition always takes a back seat to the almighty dollar---remember Penn State-Pitt? Nebraska-Oklahoma? Texas-Texas A&M?---but losing yearly series with two of our four traditional rivals is too great a price for us to be asked to pay. Since Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, and Tennessee will stand foursquare against any attempt to interfere with the Deep [sic] South’s Oldest Rivalry and the Third [sic] Saturday in October, I don’t think the permanent rival will be ditched---honestly, what would have been the point of putting Missouri in the East, if not to preserve Alabama-Tennessee by keeping the Iron Bowl in the West rather than breaking up the Yellowhammer State rivals?---but it’s annoying that it’s even being discussed as an option. Frankly, I don’t like the turn expansion has taken.
This fact won’t be popular with a lot of Georgia fans, but Mark Richt’s staff is one of only 26 to have remained unchanged this offseason, thanks partly to the fact that fears of Todd Grantham bolting for the Falcons proved unfounded. So, does staff continuity produce salutary stability or slow stagnation? The jury is out: Michigan State, Southern California, and Virginia Tech saw no turnover this year, but neither did such tire-fire programs as Colorado, Miami, and UNLV. Likewise, the only two programs to have preserved a football staff completely intact since 2009 are highly successful Oregon and highly unsuccessful Army.
Our conference mates already have seen offseason arrests for disorderly conduct and marijuana possession. The out-of-control Georgia program has had one player arrest in the last 15 months. This has been a public service announcement.
While Hutson Mason has opted to redshirt, Barrett Trotter has elected to end his college football career. I’m hardly an unbiased observer in either instance, but I approve of both decisions.
Finally, my thanks go out to MidnightFrost1701 for kicking off the playoff discussion now that a playoff appears inevitable in the relatively short term. (It’ll be interesting to see how a four-team playoff affects future conference expansion, won’t it? Four-team playoff . . . four 16-team leagues. . . . Does anyone else foresee the Big East becoming the new WAC and the Big 12 being cannibalized for spare parts more than it already has been?) If you don’t feel like you’re up to the task of debating a playoff, this should get you up to speed.
Consider yourself fully briefed and ready to dive into your Wednesday morning.
Go ‘Dawgs!
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Was glad to see the Dawgs play better Saturday vs. Vandy
but an 0-3 start is an 0-3 start.
Still holding out hope for an NIT bid (6-10 in conf. + 1 win in SEC tourney would probably do it) but a loss tonight would make that task appear extremely unlikely.
They hit the road doing ninety
Leave them steel mills far behind.
Ain't no good life down at the Ford plant
Three guitars or a life of crime.
by Dawg in Beaumont on Jan 18, 2012 8:43 AM EST reply actions
I'm having a hard time finding six wins in Georgia's SEC schedule.
After an 0-3 start, getting to 6-10 means going 6-7 the rest of the way. While 6-7 will get you on the hot seat in football, winning six out of the Bulldogs’ next 13 basketball games would be some feat.
Manager, Dawg Sports, SB Nation's Georgia Bulldogs weblog.
Go 'Dawgs!
Georgia-Auburn
I’m making sure my pitchfork is sharpened and my torch is well soaked for a road trip to Birmingham if necessary.
Editorial Staff, Dawg Sports, SB Nation's Georgia Bulldogs weblog.
@NCThom
Go 'Dawgs!
by NCT on Jan 18, 2012 9:11 AM EST via mobile reply actions 1 recs
How about Auburn is kicked out of the SEC for such flagrant cheating
then we add them to the non-conference slate?
They hit the road doing ninety
Leave them steel mills far behind.
Ain't no good life down at the Ford plant
Three guitars or a life of crime.
by Dawg in Beaumont on Jan 18, 2012 10:10 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
I think I could live with that.
Editorial Staff, Dawg Sports, SB Nation's Georgia Bulldogs weblog.
@NCThom
Go 'Dawgs!
Kiss 'Em Goodbye
because the 8 game SEC schedule means the permanent out of division rivalries will be toast. The evidence is overwhelming that the abstract concept of more $ (meaning TV and licensing $) trumps tradition and fan convenience every time (see Kyle’s examples), and even the real possibility of less resulting $ on the ground for the host cities. I don’t like it a bit, but I feared from the start that expansion, especially with an 8 game schedule, would lead to this result. That’s why I’m repeatedly on record as supporting a 9 game SEC schedule in an expanded conference. I don’t care if we never play another cupcake and can’t stand next year’s easy-peasy MAC schedule. I’ve got better things to do then spend a Saturday at Sanford watching my Dawgs light up some 3d tier program. And I hope I’m in my grave before we wind up with 16 teams and pods. We’re lurching toward an outcome in which they’re all just games to be played with no special meaning, a play off, etc, and much of the unique charm of college football will be lost. If I wanted this, I’d be glued to NFL games, which I’m not.
…deep breath…
Really, 90% of the time, I’m the optimist in the room!
by Chickasaw on Jan 18, 2012 11:46 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
You may need to die soon -
because 16 teams is on the way (please don’t die soon). But losing UGA-AU, that’s crap.
Also, and I am slowly getting a post round up about this, but all Div 1A should play Div 1A and nothing below your division. And I would cut Div 1A down to around 75 schools as well. The home schedule for 2012 is quite lame, although the rotation does affect it to some extent.
Editor, "Dawgsports"
"The ball ain't heavy." Herschel Walker
I wonder if a hang up about the reduced D1A...
is how to handle basketball? Cutting to solely major conferences for football would be difficult, but doable. Cutting to just them in hoops would be a nightmare logistically.
http://sportsandgrits.com/
by Mr. Sanchez on Jan 18, 2012 12:10 PM EST up reply actions
Football and basketball are already handled so differently I dont think it's an issue.
I dont like playing cupcakes in football. I do like having 500 teams in basketball, as they can play a lot more games a lot more often. I like the contrast in the two major sports.
Editor, "Dawgsports"
"The ball ain't heavy." Herschel Walker
Yes, but as a major conference playing politics...
how do you tell teams to get lost when it comes to sharing football money, at the same time you are begging them to stick around and stay on the schedule for basketball money? You either cut the little conferences off completely, or your left with that dangling severed limb knocking over lamps, putting stains on the walls, just messing stuff up.
http://sportsandgrits.com/
by Mr. Sanchez on Jan 18, 2012 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
It's already happening though - Boise State and one of those other schools I dont care about went "football only" for their conference.
And there are litterally hundreds of basketball schools in Div 1A that don’t have D1A football (or even football).
But step one – for football, is you can’t play below your division. IMHO.
Editor, "Dawgsports"
"The ball ain't heavy." Herschel Walker
It's really just getting the Oligopoly in a room
having them play nice with each other, and figure out how they’re going to cut this pie they made out of us up.
http://sportsandgrits.com/
by Mr. Sanchez on Jan 18, 2012 12:35 PM EST up reply actions
not exactly
There are ~120 schools in FBS (formerly IA, where the big-time programs play).
There are another ~120 schools in FCS (formerly IAA, with fewer scholarships — and none in some conferences — and actual playoffs).
And then there are another ~100 schools in division I that don’t sponsor football at all, but do sponsor basketball (there are ~340 division I basketball programs). There may be some schools that are division I for all sports but don’t sponsor basketball, but I’m not aware of it; there are a few schools that are division I for one non-revenue sport (hockey or lacrosse, that I’m aware of) but I’m pretty sure no one new can do that, even if the existing programs are grandfathered in.
Is the UGA Athletic Department paying off the cops, or getting better at the cover up?
The out-of-control Georgia program has had one player arrest in the last 15 months. This has been a public service announcement.
/AJC’d
http://sportsandgrits.com/
Also, on the scheduling thing
http://www.sportsandgrits.com/2012/01/proposal-for-altering-sec-football.html
No love? I’m hurt man, hurt. I like my idea of getting the NCAA to reword their requirements for a conference championship game. Then we can reset, without divisions, so that the best two overall records (tiebreakers of head to head or BCS rank) square off in the championship game. And have it as either a 4 permanent with 4 rotating 8 game schedule. Maybe 5 permanent and 3 rotating, or go to 9 games and make it 5/6 and 3/4. But I like my idea of I guess pod style scheduling, but with various pods for each team.
http://sportsandgrits.com/
It would be so much better to do exactly what you said at first:
Get the NCAA to drop the requirement for divisions, then drop divisions. Give each team 3 permanent opponents, and then rotate the rest. 3 permanent opponents should be enough to give every team a game their longest historical rivals every year.
Tennessee would still be able to get Vandy, Kentucky, and Alabama. Georgia would still get Florida, Auburn, and (insert team name here, probably South Carolina). And so forth.
Editor, Dawg Sports.
Go Dawgs!
by vineyarddawg on Jan 18, 2012 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Tennessee was my hardest one
they’ve got Vandy (and after looking at it, I should have kept UT/VU, and given SC one of Vandy’s two Mississippi schools).
They’ve got traditional rivalries with Kentucky, and Bama, (and Auburn), as well as recently emerging rivalries with Eastern foe Florida from the 90s dominance of the two, and against neighboring Georgia and South Carolina (both where they recruit heavily). Cutting Tennessee down to 3 would eliminate several, of course, it was hard to get above 3 for just about everyone else. So that would have to come out in the wash, be it 3 permanent, 4 or 5 perm, and the rest rotating. But I think that’s the easiest, and best solution. Drop the division requirement for a championship game, and drop divisional scheduling. You keep enough permanence to maintain traditional, as well as some emerging current, rivalries, while rotating the rest to stay somewhat fresh as competition (where the current 6-1-1 model wouldn’t do on the rotating 1).
http://sportsandgrits.com/
by Mr. Sanchez on Jan 18, 2012 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, but all of Tennessee's rivalries with Eastern division opponents...
… happened because of the creation of the Eastern division in 1992. They’d almost never played Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina before that. It would be like saying our rivalry with Missouri in 2032 would be a shame to drop. People in 2012 would be saying, “what rivalry?”
There are valid sides to both arguments, of course, but it’s hard to dispute that Tennessee’s biggest historical rivals are Vandy, ’Ucky, and Alabama. Auburn would be #4, but they sacrificed the Tigers to preserve the Third(ish) Saturday in October.
Likewise, pretty much every Western Division opponent would want to play Alabama every year, but how many of those teams actually have a long historical rivalry with the Tide?
Editor, Dawg Sports.
Go Dawgs!
by vineyarddawg on Jan 18, 2012 1:14 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed...
as for Bama, I figured LSU, Ole Miss, Auburn, and Tennessee were the easy 4. Arkansas? At best is a Western division creation from 92 as you say. Which leaves A&M (and think of all those soft-story Bear Bryant stuff ESPN could do for this game), and Miss St. I guess they might have a rivalry with Starkville, but as the bottom of the tottem pole, LSU, Ole Miss, Auburn, and UT trump them easy. Bama was an easy 4. Same with LSU-Arkansas, Ole Miss, A&M, Bama. Yeah, Miss St gets screwed out of a few, which for their sake may be a reason to go 5 permanent.
http://sportsandgrits.com/
My bad, Mr. Sanchez. I just flat missed it.
I agree with absolutely everything vineyarddawg said above.
Manager, Dawg Sports, SB Nation's Georgia Bulldogs weblog.
Go 'Dawgs!
I think you're a little off here
The Big East is the new Mountain West — it’s where all the cool mid-majors want to be. The MWC/CUSA alliance is the new WAC.
I actually meant that the other way:
When the ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12, and SEC all go to 16 teams, the Big 12 will not exist, and whatever’s left of the Big East will be reduced to mid-major status.
Manager, Dawg Sports, SB Nation's Georgia Bulldogs weblog.
Go 'Dawgs!
I still think you're wrong on that
Texas and Oklahoma want the Big 12 to exist, so it will continue to exist (and the other Texas & Oklahoma schools will not go anywhere else, because they like the SWC Big 12), and that makes it very difficult for anyone but the ACC to go to 16.
Texas wants the Big 12 to exist as long as the existence of the Big 12 . . .
. . . is in the Longhorns’ interests. Currently, it is. It won’t be for long.
Oklahoma is in a much, much more precarious position than the Sooners suppose. Basically, Texas is only team left in the Big 12 that has options as good as it believes itself to have. Eventually, the needle will drop on the next round of musical chairs, and everyone will be scrambling to find a seat before the record stops.
Manager, Dawg Sports, SB Nation's Georgia Bulldogs weblog.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jan 18, 2012 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
The playoff link discussion -
There are some good points on why there was a ratings drop for the BCS NC. And I think it is all of them: the rematch in the same conference, the long, long delay to get to the game, the time slot and day, the 8 minute long commercials, and the fact (one I still don’t get) it was on cable and not public tv. So, the writer is correct, all this happens, ratings go down, panic happens – knee jerk reaction leaning towards a playoff.
Editor, "Dawgsports"
"The ball ain't heavy." Herschel Walker
by chuckdawg on Jan 18, 2012 3:56 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I hadn't heard that playoffs might be seriously discussed.
That warms the cockles of my heart, even though I agree with Tank that it may be for the wrong reasons. Oh well, not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth.
BTW, thanks for the reference to my post!
Betting on college football is for people who find the outcomes of squirrel races contested upon miniature minefields entirely too predictable. ~MaconDawg
by MidnightFrost1701 on Jan 18, 2012 9:49 PM EST reply actions
Not a problem.
I’m always happy to highlight quality reader content. Thanks again!
Manager, Dawg Sports, SB Nation's Georgia Bulldogs weblog.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jan 18, 2012 11:30 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Dawg Sports
Related FanShots on Dawg Sports
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
