Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/7/13 at 7:52 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Pretty much everyone in the SEC wants a 9 game schedule except for bottom feeders like MSU, Vandy, etc who need 4 easy wins and a 2-6 SEC record to go to a bowl game and keep the fans happy.
quote:
Also Florida and Georgia are against it
As well as, UK and USC with their OOC games. There are too many teams against to get a passing vote at this time. It would take some sweet talking and quid pro quo for those teams to change thier vote.
OP, please provide an actual quote from slive that says they are going to a 9 game schedule
Posted on 5/7/13 at 8:12 am to Sheetbend
It does not matter if you want a 9 game schedule or not. It is going to happen.
Might as well embrace it.
Might as well embrace it.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 8:23 am to SavageOrangeJug
Yeah, we will need the 9 game schedule to bolster getting more teams into the playoff. A one loss SEC team w/a 9 game schedule is a hell of a lot stronger to the voting folks than a one loss 8 game schedule team.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 8:25 am to SavageOrangeJug
Total number of conference games in a 9-game conference schedule is not 14 x 9.
Each division plays a total of 21 games in that division (6+5+4+3+2+1) for a total of 42 games. That doesn't change.
Each of the cross-divisional games are played every year. That's a total of 7 more games. THAT doesn't change either.
Now you have a total of 49 games. Now add 7 more games and you have 56.
Add the current four non-conference games and you have 56 additional games in the inventory for a grand total of 112 games over the course of the season (113 if you include the SEC Title Game).
If you increase the number of conference games to 9, you have 63 total conference games. Add THREE non-conference games to each team and you add an additional 42 games.
This actually DECREASES the total inventory of games to 105 (106 if you include the SEC title game) resulting in a net LOSS of 7 games worth of inventory.
For every conference game you add, you lose 7 games of overall inventory.
Each division plays a total of 21 games in that division (6+5+4+3+2+1) for a total of 42 games. That doesn't change.
Each of the cross-divisional games are played every year. That's a total of 7 more games. THAT doesn't change either.
Now you have a total of 49 games. Now add 7 more games and you have 56.
Add the current four non-conference games and you have 56 additional games in the inventory for a grand total of 112 games over the course of the season (113 if you include the SEC Title Game).
If you increase the number of conference games to 9, you have 63 total conference games. Add THREE non-conference games to each team and you add an additional 42 games.
This actually DECREASES the total inventory of games to 105 (106 if you include the SEC title game) resulting in a net LOSS of 7 games worth of inventory.
For every conference game you add, you lose 7 games of overall inventory.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 8:55 am to Sheetbend
You can expect to see more implicit pressure from non-SEC coaches, too. Like this from UCLA's Mora:
"If we're going to have a playoff, we should have some form of standardization."
"If we're going to have a playoff, we should have some form of standardization."
Posted on 5/7/13 at 9:15 am to Sheetbend
quote:
Matchups such as Missouri vs. Murray State Racers or Toledo Rockets would almost never be considered worthy of an SEC Network
They aren't good games, but they will be shown on the SEC network. There is no more PPV.
I'm sorry you can't do math.
This post was edited on 5/7/13 at 9:18 am
Posted on 5/7/13 at 9:20 am to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
This actually DECREASES the total inventory of games to 105 (106 if you include the SEC title game) resulting in a net LOSS of 7 games worth of inventory.
From TV's perspective, Quality > Quantity, especially as you start going down the list. If you were to rank the 113 games in terms of quality, those that would get replaced in the event of a 9-game SEC schedule would likely rank in the bottom half or third of the list, behind most conference games and the marquee non-conference matchups. (South Carolina isn't going to drop Clemson, for example.) Adding 7 more conference games strengthens the overall TV lineup and should reduce those Saturdays when you have 10+ games involving SEC teams because of the extra OOC games (look at September 7, 2013, for an example of bloated inventory)...those games have created spillover beyond the CBS/ESPN contracts to the likes of CSS and formerly, PPV.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 9:36 am to Sheetbend
quote:
A 9-Game SEC Schedule?
I think we'll eventually do it, which will be good for making the conference schedules more fair, making it harder for teams to skate through with nothing but bottom feeders from the other division like the last couple of years with Georgia and Alabama. I just hope we don't stop scheduling good non-conference games when it happens. There's no reason why we'd have to. We'd have five home SEC games one year and four the next. We could do home and home games with high-profile teams, playing the road game in the years we have five home SEC games. Of course, we could do neutral site games, too, which can be almost as good as a home game from a financial standpoint. I'd love to see us do a home and home game with the road game in the year we have five home SEC games, and a neutral site game in the years we have only four home SEC games. That would be 7 home games half the time and nearly 7 (6 plus a neutral site) the other half. That way, we'd only have one or two cupcakes a year. No one could disparage those schedules, even if they had an anti-SEC agenda. It would make it harder for a team to go undefeated or have only one loss, but with the 4-team playoff, it wouldn't be necessary like it (almost<g>) always is now.
This post was edited on 5/7/13 at 9:40 am
Posted on 5/7/13 at 9:50 am to USMC Gators
quote:
My issue with 9 games is unequal home and away games.
Not for UF and UG
That's assuming they set it up so that UF and UGa each get four home and four away games every year, instead of three one year and five the next. I assume that's what they'll do, but we won't know until they actually do it.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 9:55 am to GoldenFlakes
quote:
From TV's perspective, Quality > Quantity
For us viewers definitely. We have to see what numbers the SEC and ESPN crunch for ad revenue for both contingencies to see whether they come to the same conclusion.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 10:02 am to Monticello
quote:
Pretty much everyone in the SEC wants a 9 game schedule except for bottom feeders like MSU, Vandy, etc who need 4 easy wins and a 2-6 SEC record to go to a bowl game and keep the fans happy.
They will be screwed anyway when tons of bowls die and the win cap is 7 wins in the playoff era.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 10:22 am to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
This talking point will be important in 2014. Should a 11-1 or 11-2 SEC runnerup be left out for a another conference champion with a better record?
A conference runner up shouldn't be in a college football playoff. Conference championships can be an objective way to whittle down the field. Too many teams and too few games to take two or representatives from one conference.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 10:31 am to Nuts4LSU
quote:
That's assuming they set it up so that UF and UGa each get four home and four away games every year, instead of three one year and five the next. I assume that's what they'll do, but we won't know until they actually do it.
For balance issues, and having the neutral game being a division game, and wanting 3 home 3 away division games, for symmetry purposes, you'll get 4 home, 4 away, and one neutral. Same for A&M/Arky in Jerry World.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 10:32 am to Colonel Flagg
I support the nine game schedule BUT ONLY if they only count divisional games only. That way the addition creampuff on Bama's schedule and hard game on LSU's won't matter. How do they assign cross divisional opponents? LSU plays SEC East 1,2,3 and Bama plays 7,6, 5 Good news for SEC East 4!
Posted on 5/7/13 at 10:34 am to LA kid but AU fan
quote:
They aren't good games, but they will be shown on the SEC network. There is no more PPV. I'm sorry you can't do math.
In TV terms, there would be the same number of games within each teams TV market , and more of those games would be TV eligible for broadcast because they would be SEC vs SEC instead of SEC vs Sun Belt, WAC, MAC. , or even Division II schools. Why can’t you understand that?
The overall number of games nobody wants to watch will decline, and the overall number of games everyone would want to watch will increase.
Do the math.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 10:42 am to LSUDonMCO
quote:
How do they assign cross divisional opponents? LSU plays SEC East 1,2,3 and Bama plays 7,6, 5 Good news for SEC East 4!
I know right, it's almost like LSU didnt play the easy teams from the east(UT, UK, Vandy) 2011 and prior.
Hopefully LSU gets that easy SEC schedule back from two seasons ago and prior, that way yall wont bitch any more.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 10:42 am to Sheetbend
quote:
The overall number of games nobody wants to watch will decline, and the overall number of games everyone would want to watch will increase.
A scheduling arrangement with the ACC would accomplish the same thing without reducing how many bowl-eligible SEC teams there are.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 10:45 am to Sheetbend
quote:
In TV terms, there would be the same number of games within each teams TV market
But you do lose games when adding games to the conference
quote:
and more of those games would be TV eligible for broadcast because they would be SEC vs SEC instead of SEC vs Sun Belt, WAC, MAC. , or even Division II schools. Why can’t you understand that?
Why do you think they would not broadcast those games?
quote:
The overall number of games nobody wants to watch will decline,
How so? Fans want to watch their school play. doesnt matter who they are playing. With the SEC network, now they have the ability to watch those games, no matter where they are in the country.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 10:46 am to cardboardboxer
quote:
A scheduling arrangement with the ACC would accomplish the same thing without reducing how many bowl-eligible SEC teams there are.
How about a best of seven series with the ACC, a trophy on the line and everything. Four permanent, the remaining ten play three, home and home or neural it doesn't matter, but it is in a constant rotation. So hypothetically you'd see:
Four Permanent:
UGA/GT - easy SEC win
Florida/FSU - toss up
USC/Clemson - easy ACC win
Louisville/UK - easy ACC win
Alabama/Miami - Easy SEC win
Texas A&M/Virginia Tech - Easy SEC win
Miss State/Wake Forest - Easy ACC win
Seems like it would be fun.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News