Who ya got?
I’m thinking South Carolina, Tennessee and Vanderbilt.
I’m thinking South Carolina, Tennessee and Vanderbilt.
Our 3 permanent opponents
- Thread starter seccats04
- Start date
That would make the most sense though I could see SC getting switched for Mizzou.
I think we get Missouri, Georgia, and Tennessee. They aren’t going to give UK any breaks. UK is supposed to be a “gimme” game for those teams so their playoff chances don’t get damaged.
I really think the SEC has screwed themselves with how difficult it's going to be to navigate this new format. The SEC champs will be lucky to go 10-2 or 9-3 most years, depending on who your permanent opponents are. Look at Bama for example. They may get Auburn, Tennessee and LSU EVERY year and then you mix in a Georgia, Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, etc. Good luck going 8-4 even with all their talent and resources.
I look for the B10 to continue winning national titles because their top teams have a much easier path to better records. So they will continue to get higher seeds and home field advantage over the SEC, who will cannabalize each other throughout the year. And it's all because of greed.
I look for the B10 to continue winning national titles because their top teams have a much easier path to better records. So they will continue to get higher seeds and home field advantage over the SEC, who will cannabalize each other throughout the year. And it's all because of greed.
I think that makes the most sense (personally I hope its those 3) which is why it probably wont happen.
I agree. I don't think we'll get a favorable schedule like that. The league sees us as an automatic win so we'll probably get something like Georgia, Florida, South Carolina.
Permanency is unimportant to me.
A nice rotation throughout the conference is more appealing although it makes sense to keep Tennessee as a regular, I guess.
A nice rotation throughout the conference is more appealing although it makes sense to keep Tennessee as a regular, I guess.
Spot on. The reality is that the Big 10 only has 4-5 teams (OSU, MICH, PSU, Oregon, and then MAYBE use) that have the resources and dedication to winning football that the SEC does. That is 5 teams in an 18 team league.
That makes perfect sense for UT.
UK is trickier as we don't have a lot of clear so called rivals. I would say SC and Vandy make the most sense but don't see UK getting both of those.
UK and Vandy for sure. UK and UT for sure for me I wish it was OU, or Texas, or Geogria, or Florida. Give the fans good games against good teams
UK has a history with OU going back to the 50’s
UK has a history with OU going back to the 50’s
If I had my choice it would be Vandy, Missouri, Arkansas. We would still probably play at least 5-6 ranked teams every year. You have to think give yourself a chance to some extent. Of course there is no chance of this actually happening. It's just my ideal scenario.
Last edited:
To be the best you have to beat the best give me Texas, Georgia , and Alabama. I'm kidding I honestly don't care who the 3 permanent opponents would be but if I had an honest choice it would be Vandy, UT, and South Carolina.
Everyone is entitled to their personal taste here but I just don't get the Tenn, SC attachment that seems to be the popular opinion.
Last edited:
You know in the end the SEC won't do us no favors anyway. We will definitely end up with 3 that we don't want.
Perm games hinder the ability to cycle through a full conference schedule.
It’s basically a division which the league has already moved away from.
The obvious goal with the changes we’re seeing across CFB is more games. Not only expanding schedule but more variety and mixing things up.
Better more competitive matchups. More games between opponents that haven’t been playing one another but every 3,4,5 years.
Having perms doesn’t help that.
SEC needs ability to move off lopsided games
For example right now UK v Ole Miss is a great game and needs to be on the schedule for another year or two.
Actually have played UGA tough many times in Stoops tenure.
If gators and gamecocks blow us out again…probably don’t need to see them for a couple seasons.
Essentially flex into good games move off stinkers. It’s good business. General rule of thumb being, after a blowout and most definitely two in a row find a different match up for both teams.
It’s basically a division which the league has already moved away from.
The obvious goal with the changes we’re seeing across CFB is more games. Not only expanding schedule but more variety and mixing things up.
Better more competitive matchups. More games between opponents that haven’t been playing one another but every 3,4,5 years.
Having perms doesn’t help that.
SEC needs ability to move off lopsided games
For example right now UK v Ole Miss is a great game and needs to be on the schedule for another year or two.
Actually have played UGA tough many times in Stoops tenure.
If gators and gamecocks blow us out again…probably don’t need to see them for a couple seasons.
Essentially flex into good games move off stinkers. It’s good business. General rule of thumb being, after a blowout and most definitely two in a row find a different match up for both teams.
I think the perms should be old time rivalries first wrt to the strength of those opponents. Why? B/c if u have a weak set of perms then the revolving opponents are stronger & visa versa. Net, so what wrt to strength?
That said, I think UK should get TN & V with 3rd being an old East Div. team.
That said, I think UK should get TN & V with 3rd being an old East Div. team.
UK's 3 are TN, USCjr and UF
TN probably came out the best of all teams with Vandy, UK and Bama
TN probably came out the best of all teams with Vandy, UK and Bama
Right on cue we are going to have South Carolina and 2 schools (UF & UT) that held like decades long winning streaks over us. I knew the SEC wouldn't do us any favors.
Yeah dumbest **** ever.
I think perms will ultimately fade for all the reasons I mentioned above, but obviously change is slow. Especially in the old ball conference. To many old farts want to hold on to something from a by gone era.
Locking UK in with 2 schools they historically rarely beat. Most of the time it’s not close.
I think perms will ultimately fade for all the reasons I mentioned above, but obviously change is slow. Especially in the old ball conference. To many old farts want to hold on to something from a by gone era.
Locking UK in with 2 schools they historically rarely beat. Most of the time it’s not close.
NIL, the NEW SEC is making me hate CFB so much. So TN gets to RUN from 2 teams it gets beat by on the norm and gets to play 2 teams it normally beats. That makes total sense.
Money will always win boys, it will always win.
Money will always win boys, it will always win.
• Alabama: Auburn, Tennessee, Mississippi State
• Arkansas: LSU, Texas, Missouri
• Auburn: Alabama, Georgia, Vanderbilt
• Georgia: Auburn, Florida, South Carolina
• Florida: Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina
• Kentucky: Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee
• LSU: Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Arkansas
• Mississippi State: Alabama, Ole Miss, Vanderbilt
• Missouri: Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
• Oklahoma: Missouri, Ole Miss, Texas
• Ole Miss: LSU, Mississippi State, Oklahoma
• South Carolina: Georgia, Florida, Kentucky
• Tennessee: Alabama, Kentucky, Vanderbilt
• Texas: Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
• Texas A&M: LSU, Missouri, Texas
• Vanderbilt: Auburn, Mississippi State, Tennessee
1. Not ideal for UK (I think we'd all prefer Vandy be in there vs. Florida/USC)
2. You can feel UK adn Vandy get split up to make it easier on higher tier schools.....typical SEC.
3. How Miss St is an Alabama perm...is SEC kissing up to Alabama
• Arkansas: LSU, Texas, Missouri
• Auburn: Alabama, Georgia, Vanderbilt
• Georgia: Auburn, Florida, South Carolina
• Florida: Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina
• Kentucky: Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee
• LSU: Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Arkansas
• Mississippi State: Alabama, Ole Miss, Vanderbilt
• Missouri: Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
• Oklahoma: Missouri, Ole Miss, Texas
• Ole Miss: LSU, Mississippi State, Oklahoma
• South Carolina: Georgia, Florida, Kentucky
• Tennessee: Alabama, Kentucky, Vanderbilt
• Texas: Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
• Texas A&M: LSU, Missouri, Texas
• Vanderbilt: Auburn, Mississippi State, Tennessee
1. Not ideal for UK (I think we'd all prefer Vandy be in there vs. Florida/USC)
2. You can feel UK adn Vandy get split up to make it easier on higher tier schools.....typical SEC.
3. How Miss St is an Alabama perm...is SEC kissing up to Alabama
O am not saying you are wrong, but I do have a different opinion. The big rivalries like Texas vs OU, Michigan vs OSU, inner state rivals are what made college football so popular, imo. UGA has stepped out of conference for some big name schools that we seldom play. For me the excitement and anticipation wasn't as high as is for our longtime rivals. Not saying we should play the same 12 teams every year, but I think the current format is a good compromise.
Miss St is Bama's oldest rival. They have played more games against Bama than Bama has played anyone else. I was expecting Bama to get the 3 the got.
From reading this doesn't look like UK is happy with their 3. UGA was expecting UF and AU, there was speculation on the 3rd, most were thinking it was going to be UK, but USCjr was who a few thought. I guess I am happy with those 3.
UK has had some success against UF and USC. So I guess we shouldn’t complain a ton. But it’s up to the school and Admin if they want to remain competitive with them. UT’s style of play is something UK can’t handle as long as Stoops is here.
I was thinking about the UT offense yesterday. UT looses Nico and some top receivers and they don't miss a beat. The last I heard Nico is having an average year. I wish UK could have an offense like that.
Where's the official link for this? I'm not seeing this on the SEC website. EDIT: Never mind, saw the link on the top banner.
Last edited:
I'm ok with UKs 3.
I do not really get auburn drawing vandy over UK though. Vandy was clearly the league after thought as they got msu and auburn...why? Lol
Myself, most folks, and obviously the big media decision makers allow room for big rivalries. Key word being big.
UK really doesn’t have a historical football rival that the country clamors to see so I’m not sure it would be essential for us to keep anyone. Same could be said for a lot of programs.
Also, I think the idea of a rival has evolved over the years to being something other than a team you have played every year.
UK v Duke in bball. Don’t play them but once in a blue moon. Always a big deal and intense atmosphere. Same goes for the other blue bloods. Haven’t played IU in a while, rest assured if that game gets up and running again it will be what a rivalry is.
The Bama perms are a great example. It would make more sense if you all played one another regularly as opposed to them getting Miss St, even UT you all getting Auburn and SC.
Bama UGA is still very big time even with Saban gone and Tide sliding just a bit. Still two multi championship programs who have been dominating the game.
Not saying it has to be a permanent fixture as things naturally ebb and flow, but right now it’s as big of a game as there is in sports.
I can't argue with anything you said. But from articles I read things that were going to be taken into consideration was geography and I think they did that, another was long time rivalries and I believe they kept all of them. Like you said UK doesn't really have that big rival game. I personally don't think oh USCjr as a rival, but it is nearby. I can't complain about our draw, UF likely has a new coach next year, I still think Beamer is the worst coach in the conference.
It's a new world for college football, I am not over the top with it when teams are just buying players left and right, but it's where we are. Texas Tech has a retired multi billionaire buying players left and right. They may have a 75m team in 2 years.
I hate the way this works out for UK. UK's records against these 3 are USC (14-21-1), UF (21-54), UT (20-80-8). That's a grand total of (55-155-9). I can't see any way to spin this as a positive. It looks like every consideration has been made to manipulate as many Bell cow teams to the playoffs as possible.
Why are you surprised? Insiders have told us this for over a year. UF isn’t surprising but I they were the one that some had different.
Yeah, 2 of these 3 were pretty much what people were predicting. And our record against most of the sec is garbage so almost any way we cut it, it wasn't gonna be good for UK.