• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

From the home page...Alliance announcement today (likely)!


"An agreement where each football team in the three conferences would play one opponent from each of the other two leagues on an annual basis."

So forget about ever playing Oklahoma, Missouri, or Texas again (any SEC team, really) outside of a bowl game?

They mention the B1G would drop to 8 conference games (allowing us 4 non-cons), but I can't see our leadership wanting to play, say a schedule of Georgia Tech, Washington and THEN add Oklahoma along with some cupcake like Buffalo.

Unless we get a year with two bottom feeders (Vanderbilt + Cal?) it's going to be hard for them to willingly pick up OU or even Texas anymore.
 
The Alliance will fall and shatter in a few years. When they realize these matchups won’t make USC and Oregon enough money to catch up to the BIG!
 



goodnterribles said:
I'm hoping the reason for this "alliance" has less to do with scheduling and more as an agreement that if college football has some type of voting committee for things like the playoff, they will have a united voting bloc to prevent the SEC from running everything.
Click to expand...
And I think that's probably what this will mostly be about, but coming right out and saying that might not sit too well or be the best look. Bottom line is that college football is changing fast and we as fans are not gonna get to keep all the things we've gotten used to over the years.

I was doing a video call on my phone with an ad member and I asked him what the feel was in the department and he basically said nobody is even talking about it. They can't control it and they'll just follow with whatever happens. I will say this, I feel better having TA direct our positioning on this than I do Moos. Also, Alvarez in Warren's ear will put football and the conference first.
 
goodnterribles said:
I'm hoping the reason for this "alliance" has less to do with scheduling and more as an agreement that if college football has some type of voting committee for things like the playoff, they will have a united voting bloc to prevent the SEC from running everything.
Click to expand...
I think that’s what it is. Honestly I think it’s a short term bandaid. It won’t fix the issues in revenue disparity. So in a few years don’t be surprised when the BIG expands.
 
So what does this mean for the SeC scheduling wise? Will they not be able to get games against Alliance teams? I mean will anyone want to schedule a game against an SEC opponent? This might be interesting on how much it really hurts the SEC nationally.
 




Frosty1980 said:
So what does this mean for the SeC scheduling wise? Will they not be able to get games against Alliance teams? I mean will anyone want to schedule a game against an SEC opponent? This might be interesting on how much it really hurts the SEC nationally.
Click to expand...
I think that all remains to be seen and why the official announcement will be paid attention to by a lot of people nationally, but especially the SEC. My opinion is that SEC teams will continue to be able to schedule with those conferences, but besides the ACC, do they really schedule much with the B1G and Pac 12 anyway?
 
NY Husker said:
I think that all remains to be seen and why the official announcement will be paid attention to by a lot of people nationally, but especially the SEC. My opinion is that SEC teams will continue to be able to schedule with those conferences, but besides the ACC, do they really schedule much with the B1G and Pac 12 anyway?
Click to expand...
Alabama and LSU recently played Wisconsin. Outside of that I’m not sure.
 
Frosty1980 said:
So what does this mean for the SeC scheduling wise? Will they not be able to get games against Alliance teams? I mean will anyone want to schedule a game against an SEC opponent? This might be interesting on how much it really hurts the SEC nationally.
Click to expand...
SEC teams may then have all four non-conference games outside of p5 schools. If so, most will start the season 4-0 (or 3-0 since they save an easy non-conference game for late), while most of the other 3 conferences will have most everyone with at least one loss. Not sure what that means.
 



weaver75 said:
SEC teams may then have all four non-conference games outside of p5 schools. If so, most will start the season 4-0 (or 3-0 since they save an easy non-conference game for late), while most of the other 3 conferences will have most everyone with at least one loss. Not sure what that means.
Click to expand...
We all aren’t sure!
 
weaver75 said:
SEC teams may then have all four non-conference games outside of p5 schools. If so, most will start the season 4-0 (or 3-0 since they save an easy non-conference game for late), while most of the other 3 conferences will have most everyone with at least one loss. Not sure what that means.
Click to expand...
Thus, the reason I think this is more about voting power than anything else.
 
Last edited:

And if the B1G expands to 16...perhaps adding Kansas and some other school...it will be interesting to see how the schedule evolves. Maybe the pod system is how they'll go because playing all seven schools in your division and three non-cons leaves just two crossovers.

SESPNC sure created a mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top