Latest Topics

[Noah]

This time five months ago the league said there was no way it would go to nine-games.  Then some schools like Alabama and Tennessee (and Tide coach Nick Saban) made it clear at the SEC Meetings in Destin that they would be fine with a move to nine games.  Their counterparts at some of the traditionally weaker football programs stood their ground, stating that they needed four cupcake nonconference games for the sake of bowl eligibility.
But while the league did go with an eight-game plan, a nine-game plan got more talk than many expected.  The new playoff — which we knew was coming at the time — seems to be giving a little bit more gas to the nine-game engine.  Good.  The league should have just gone with nine in the first place:


One, it would mean that league teams would see each other more often.  (What person doesn’t want to visit an opposing campus — or have an opponent visit his campus — more often?)

Two, it would mean ticket-buying fans would get more value for the dollar.  (Would you rather see Auburn or Akron in your town?  South Carolina or South Dakota State?)

Three, it would please the SEC’s television partners who want better games to televise.  (Adding two more schools to the SEC already creates more inventory.  The league played 48 conference games a year ago.  With Missouri and Texas A&M, there will now be 56 SEC contests this fall.  Add a ninth game to the schedule and the number of SEC versus SEC games would jump to 63… which would be about a 30% increase over the number of league games played per year in the old 12-team league.)

Four, it would prevent all those folks in regions not called “the South” from pointing out that the SEC is the only major conference that does not require its members to play at least nine foes from other major leagues.  (While that might not matter to you, it could matter in the selection committee meeting room… especially since “spreading the wealth” of football titles was a big part of the drive to the playoff.)

Five, if/when the league starts an SEC Network, it will be easier to get that game picked up by cable systems if there are actually good games on it.  (Fans would be quicker to demand a channel showing Georgia-Ole Miss than Georgia-Georgia Southern.)

[Matt]

I'd be fine with it if one year the everyone in the east plays 5 home conference games and the next the west.

[Mizzou_Fan]

I am up for nine conference games. I don't like the idea of having to wait so long to see a team from the other division. If you had one cross division rival and two rotating it wouldn't take nearly as long to rotate through the teams.

[ALA2262]

Noah.Dreams, on 10 July 2012 - 09:02 AM, said:

This time five months ago the league said there was no way it would go to nine-games.  Then some schools like Alabama and Tennessee (and Tide coach Nick Saban) made it clear at the SEC Meetings in Destin that they would be fine with a move to nine games.  Their counterparts at some of the traditionally weaker football programs stood their ground, stating that they needed four cupcake nonconference games for the sake of bowl eligibility.
But while the league did go with an eight-game plan, a nine-game plan got more talk than many expected.  The new playoff — which we knew was coming at the time — seems to be giving a little bit more gas to the nine-game engine.  Good.  The league should have just gone with nine in the first place:


One, it would mean that league teams would see each other more often.  (What person doesn’t want to visit an opposing campus — or have an opponent visit his campus — more often?)

Two, it would mean ticket-buying fans would get more value for the dollar.  (Would you rather see Auburn or Akron in your town?  South Carolina or South Dakota State?)

Three, it would please the SEC’s television partners who want better games to televise.  (Adding two more schools to the SEC already creates more inventory. The league played 48 conference games a year ago.  With Missouri and Texas A&M, there will now be 56 SEC contests this fall.  Add a ninth game to the schedule and the number of SEC versus SEC games would jump to 63… which would be about a 30% increase over the number of league games played per year in the old 12-team league.)

Four, it would prevent all those folks in regions not called “the South” from pointing out that the SEC is the only major conference that does not require its members to play at least nine foes from other major leagues.  (While that might not matter to you, it could matter in the selection committee meeting room… especially since “spreading the wealth” of football titles was a big part of the drive to the playoff.)

Five, if/when the league starts an SEC Network, it will be easier to get that game picked up by cable systems if there are actually good games on it.  (Fans would be quicker to demand a channel showing Georgia-Ole Miss than Georgia-Georgia Southern.)

What rubs me wrong is the fact that with  8 conference games in a 12 game schedule, no matter how many teams you have, you are still playing the same number of OOC games as conference games. 48 OOC games last year along with the 48 conference games. 56 OOC games this year along with the 56 conference games. That is silly. IMO, the only conference that should play 8 conference games is one that has 9 members. A conference should be just that, a conference, and play each other. If you don't want to play the other members, then get the hell out and go independent.

[insaneinthequatrain]

I'm in favor of the idea. I would go with 9 conference games along with one quality OOC game and 2 scrubs.

[ALA2262]

insaneinthequatrain, on 11 July 2012 - 12:58 AM, said:

I'm in favor of the idea. I would go with 9 conference games along with one quality OOC game and 2 scrubs.

My ideal schedule is 9 conference games, one Top 40 OOC game, one Middle 40 OOC game, and one Bottom 40 OOC game. No 1AA games!

[TrueGCFan]

Going to nine conference games will take away a home game every other year for most SEC teams.  That could mean teams like UGA and UF could only have 6 homes games in a year.  

I'll pass.

[MizzouMark]

I like some variety in the schedule, it makes things interesting if you're scheduling decent opponents... Mizzou is playing Syracuse, Ariz St, and UCF in their OOC... Granted these schools are much more of a cupcake than SEC schools, but I still like seeing as many OOC games as possible, especially against other major conferences.

[ALA2262]

TrueGCFan, on 11 July 2012 - 03:28 PM, said:

Going to nine conference games will take away a home game every other year for most SEC teams.  That could mean teams like UGA and UF could only have 6 homes games in a year.  

I'll pass.

All that would be required to avoid that is for UF, UGA, and SC to flip, if necessary, where they played their End of Year ACC rivals. Schedule the rival at home in the year of 5 conference road games, and schedule them away in the year of 5 conference home games.

Edited by ALA2262, 12 July 2012 - 01:39 PM.

[TrueGCFan]

ALA2262, on 12 July 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

All that would be required to avoid that is for UF, UGA, and SC to flip, if necessary, where they played their End of Year ACC rivals. Schedule the rival at home in the year of 5 conference road games, and schedule them away in the year of 5 conference home games.

Somehow I don't think FSU, GT, Clemson, Louisville, or any other out of conference rival will go out of their way to help the cause.

[ALA2262]

TrueGCFan, on 12 July 2012 - 01:52 PM, said:

Somehow I don't think FSU, GT, Clemson, Louisville, or any other out of conference rival will go out of their way to help the cause.

They would do it without thinking if you start it by giving them two consecutive homes games in your series.

You sound like my brother. LOL! In 1991, Bama played at LSU. In 1992, when the SEC took over the scheduling, they had Bama at LSU again. My brother is still bitching about it! No big deal to me. The only thing that changed was which year they played where. Each is still playing at home every other year. Each is still playing away every other year.

Edited by ALA2262, 12 July 2012 - 02:48 PM.

[TrueGCFan]

ALA2262, on 12 July 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

They would do it without thinking if you start it by giving them two consecutive homes games in your series.

So not only would each SEC add another hard conference game, but then teams with out of conference rivals would give their hated rival two home games in a row?  Yeah, that will go over well.

[ALA2262]

TrueGCFan, on 12 July 2012 - 02:36 PM, said:

So not only would each SEC add another hard conference game, but then teams with out of conference rivals would give their hated rival two home games in a row?  Yeah, that will go over well.

The only guy that matters is the President of the University. Give him 7 home games per year and he is going to be happy. Just ask Dave Hart. He was the AD at FSU for 13 years. 1995-2007. In 2007 he gave his President an unbelievable 5 home games, 6 away games, and the neutral site game in Jacksonville against Bama. Little wonder that 2007 was his last year there.

Edited by ALA2262, 12 July 2012 - 03:43 PM.

[shamoan]

ok, ill go along with it as long as vandy, ole miss, uk, mizzou, tennessee, auburn & atm, are always 7 of our 9.  they need to to move to a 13 game regular season and allow us to keep the 4 ooc games.  more football is ALWAYS better than less football.  the nfl expanded, its only natural that we follow suit.

[UAdan]

A 9-game conf schedule makes too much sense for it to not happen eventually. Only playing 8 games and rotating the 6 non-perma rival teams yearly just seems weird. If we're in the same conference as Georgia, for example, we shouldn't have to go six years without playing them. Play all the teams in your division, one perma-rival cross division (Tennessee, for us) and then rotate two cross division games per year, not one.