UT/AU, AU/UF, VU/Bama, LSU/UK....These rivalries are crippled because of the new SEC rotation.

What if, instead of two divisions, the conference had three?

East Division Auburn Florida Georgia South Carolina

Central Division Alabama Kentucky Tennessee Vanderbilt

West Division Arkansas Louisiana State Mississippi Mississippi State

Divisional round-robins with each team having three constant rivals from the other divisions:

East Division Auburn - Bama/MSU/UT Florida - UK/LSU/MSU Georgia - UK/UM/UT South Carolina - Ark/UM/VU

Central Division Alabama - AU/LSU/MSU Kentucky - UF/UGA/LSU Tennessee - Ark/AU/UGA Vanderbilt - Ark/UM/USC

West Division Arkansas - USC/UT/VU Louisiana State - Bama/UF/UK Mississippi - UGA/USC/VU Mississippi State - Bama/AU/UF

Top two division winners play for the SEC title. If there is a tie for the 2nd and 3rd division winner, any number of tie-breakers can be used (head to head, division head to head, record vs. opposing division, record vs. common opponents, combined opponents' SEC record, etc).

With this line-up, all should-be constant rivalries are preserved, and most of the traditional rivalries are preserved.

SEC, go to three! (You too, ACC!)

I do, however, see no real way the Big XII could do it. The only way it would make much sense to me (given that state lines are not broken by divisional lines) is:

North Division Colorado Iowa State Missouri Nebraska

Central Division Kansas Kansas State Oklahoma Oklahoma State

South (or LoneStar) Division Baylor Texas Texas A&M Texas Tech

The North Division, though contiguous, is truly warped. I doubt this would work.

LSUtootnanny,

Interesting idea here and I always enjoy seeing someone think outside the box. I do wonder if it makes sense to have a divison whose winner gets nothing; I think that might be unparalleled in sports. Seems to me you can't have a race unless you get something from winning it.

That aside, I wonder if rather than going with three divisons, conferences like the SEC and Big 12 should consider the following:

up that # of conference games from 8 up to at least 10. Ten league games and 2 ocg. Think about it: with a set-up like that you wouldn't need the three divisions (and maybe not even the two)

It might be more like a suggestion I made under another thread: let the 12 teams in a league play out the season and only have a championship game to break at tie at the top. Yes, yes...I do know that conferences are not that willing to give up the yearly money from a championship game. Still....

I think no divisions might be better for the SEC, as the West had three schools that had or recently had a shot at the NATIONAL title heading into the Alabama-LSU game.