SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey said the conference won’t commit to preserving Alabama-Tennessee, Auburn-Georgia, and other traditional rivalries in the upcoming eight-game conference schedule format.

The Southeastern Conference (SEC) is undergoing a period of significant change, marked by expansion, evolving competition formats, and a shift toward maximizing television and playoff opportunities. Amid these transformations, long-standing traditions such as iconic rivalries face new uncertainty. Recently, SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey publicly acknowledged that the conference will not guarantee the preservation of certain historic rivalries, including Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia, under the forthcoming eight-game conference schedule format.

This announcement marks a notable departure from the SEC’s usual approach of safeguarding marquee matchups, reflecting the complexities and challenges involved in balancing tradition with modernization. This article explores the background of this decision, the importance of traditional rivalries in college football, the reasons behind the SEC’s scheduling overhaul, potential impacts on teams and fans, and what this means for the future of the SEC and college football at large.

The SEC’s Rich Rivalry History: Why These Games Matter

The SEC is widely regarded as college football’s most passionate and storied conference. Central to that identity are its fierce rivalries—annual showdowns that resonate deeply with fans, alumni, and players. Among these, some of the most celebrated include:

• Alabama vs. Tennessee (“Third Saturday in October”): A rivalry dating back over a century, this matchup is a highlight for both programs and their fanbases, steeped in tradition and regional pride.
• Auburn vs. Georgia (“Deep South’s Oldest Rivalry”): One of the longest continuous rivalries in college football, this game often has significant implications for SEC standings and postseason prospects.
• Other notable rivalries: LSU vs. Alabama, Florida vs. Georgia, Ole Miss vs. Mississippi State, among others, each carrying unique histories and significance.

These games are not just about competition; they are cultural events that unite communities, fuel recruiting battles, and generate immense television ratings.

The Shift Toward an Eight-Game Conference Schedule

The SEC’s decision to move to an eight-game conference schedule aligns with broader trends in college football. As the playoff system expands and television contracts grow increasingly lucrative, conferences seek to optimize schedules for competitiveness, viewer engagement, and financial returns.

Previously, SEC teams played seven conference games annually, supplemented by four non-conference contests. The shift to eight conference games aims to:

• Increase competitiveness: More conference games enhance strength of schedule, better preparing teams for the playoffs.
• Generate more high-profile matchups: An extra conference game creates additional opportunities for marquee showdowns.
• Balance scheduling with an expanding conference: With Texas and Oklahoma joining, the SEC must realign schedules to accommodate more teams.

However, expanding conference play creates logistical challenges, especially in preserving traditional rivalries when there are more teams to rotate.

Greg Sankey’s Statement: No Guarantees for Rivalry Preservation

In a recent public comment, SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey addressed the future of scheduling amidst these changes. Sankey acknowledged that while the conference values its historic rivalries, it cannot commit to protecting all of them under the new eight-game format.

Specifically, Sankey mentioned that traditional matchups such as Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia may not be annual fixtures going forward. This statement signals a pragmatic approach focused on the broader needs of conference balance and competitive fairness rather than strictly maintaining tradition.

Why the SEC Can’t Guarantee Traditional Rivalries

Several factors explain the SEC’s reluctance to commit to protecting all historic rivalries:

1. Conference Expansion: The addition of Texas and Oklahoma expands the SEC to 16 teams, making it difficult to preserve all longstanding rivalries with a balanced schedule.
2. Scheduling Balance: The SEC aims to create a schedule that is competitive and equitable. Guaranteeing all rivalries might skew scheduling fairness or force unbalanced matchups.
3. Playoff and TV Considerations: The conference must prioritize games that maximize exposure and playoff positioning. Some rivalries, while historic, may not always involve top-ranked teams, influencing scheduling decisions.
4. Flexibility and Rotation: The SEC plans to implement a rotating schedule system to ensure all teams play each other periodically, further complicating permanent rivalry preservation.

Potential Impact on Teams and Fanbases

The uncertainty around traditional rivalry games carries significant implications:

• For Teams: Coaches and players cherish rivalry games as season highlights and recruiting tools. Losing annual matchups could affect program identity and preparation strategies.
• For Fans and Alumni: Rivalry games are annual traditions that fuel passion, travel, and engagement. Interruptions or irregularity could diminish fan enthusiasm and game-day experiences.
• For Recruiting: Rivalries often serve as recruiting showcases. Not playing certain rivals yearly may impact recruiting battles in key regions.
• For the Conference: The SEC risks alienating some fans who value tradition, potentially impacting viewership and attendance.

Balancing Tradition and Modernization

The SEC faces the difficult task of balancing cherished traditions with the demands of modern college football’s competitive and commercial realities. Some perspectives on this balance include:

• Embracing Change for Growth: Adapting scheduling to accommodate expansion and playoff ambitions may benefit the conference’s overall strength and national prominence.
• Prioritizing High-Quality Matchups: Focusing on games that feature top-ranked teams could enhance national appeal, even if some rivalries take a backseat temporarily.
• Maintaining Core Rivalries: The SEC might preserve certain rivalries while rotating others, attempting to safeguard the most historically and commercially significant matchups.
• Engaging Fans in New Ways: Through enhanced media coverage, fan experiences, and marketing, the SEC can keep fans connected even if some traditional games are less frequent.

Examples of Other Conferences’ Scheduling Approaches

The SEC is not alone in wrestling with scheduling amid expansion. Other Power Five conferences provide examples:

• Big Ten: With 14 teams, the Big Ten uses a rotating schedule, maintaining some permanent rivalries but rotating most matchups, balancing tradition with variety.
• ACC: The ACC employs divisions but also rotates opponents, preserving key rivalries while offering diverse matchups.

These models illustrate possible frameworks the SEC might adopt, blending rivalry protection with competitive balance.

What Fans and Stakeholders Can Expect

While Greg Sankey’s comments indicate uncertainty, they do not mean that traditional rivalries will disappear entirely. Fans can anticipate:

• Some rivalry games remaining annual: The SEC is likely to protect a handful of key rivalries.
• Rotating rivalries: Other historic matchups may occur less frequently but still feature regularly enough to maintain their importance.
• More marquee matchups: Fans will enjoy a broader slate of competitive, nationally relevant games, featuring new conference opponents.
• Enhanced fan engagement: The SEC will likely invest in media and event experiences to maintain enthusiasm regardless of scheduling shifts.

Conclusion: The Future of SEC Rivalries in a Changing Landscape

Greg Sankey’s acknowledgment that the SEC cannot commit to protecting all traditional rivalries under the new eight-game conference schedule highlights the complex realities facing college football’s premier conference. As the SEC grows and adapts to modern demands—from expanded playoffs to television revenue—the conference must carefully balance tradition, competition, and business interests.

For fans, alumni, and players, the potential disruption of historic matchups like Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia is bittersweet. These rivalries have defined decades of college football passion, but the evolving landscape calls for flexibility and openness to change.

Ultimately, the SEC’s challenge will be to preserve the spirit and significance of its storied rivalries, even if their frequency changes, while embracing a future that promises exciting new matchups and a vibrant competitive environment.