with the expansion. I am not sure if you are aware of this tidbit or not, but back when the SEC expanded to 12 teams the SEC wanted to make sure it had a balance of the name brands between the divisions. At the time the SEC only considered 4 ('Bama, UF, LSU, and Tenn) to be the main name brands. Hence why both divisions had 2. Auburn and UGA were quasi name brands and explains why they were placed in opposite divisions. Then the SEC filled in the rest based on geography and rivalries.

If/When the SEC expands again, then there is a good chance it will want to try to maintain that same balance between the divisions. Assuming the 2 AL schools move to the East, then the name brand allotment would look like this:

East: 'Bama, Auburn, UF, UGA, and Tenn
West: LSU and TAMU

Since there is an odd number of name brand teams, the SEC will want to add 2 name brands to the West to try to balance it out as much as possible. The information on the methodology the SEC used during the 1990 expansion is from an interview Roy Kramer gave while he was Commissioner. Later on when Slive gave an interview, he confirmed the methodology used under Kramer and implied the same methodology would be used with future expansion and/or division realignment. Given the influence the 2 men have within the SEC, I don't think any future commissioners would deviate too much from any methodologies established by either men.

I do agree that the SEC will eventually go to a 9 game conference schedule. Once the protected cross-division game is eliminated from their scheduling model, then the SEC could have 2 rotating cross-division games and complete the cycle much sooner.