Started By
Message
re: ACC's turn to decide 8 vs. 9; implications for non-conference games vs. SEC?
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:27 pm to Damn Good Dawg
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:27 pm to Damn Good Dawg
not when any of their OOCs where still OOCs with their move. unlike our situation with arkansas
1
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:28 pm to Damn Good Dawg
quote:
Right, but y'all losing the Arkansas game and them not having something schedule that difference? Both teams were left to scramble last minute or am I wrong? Seriously asking.
Arkansas was willing to scramble for a home/away series. A&M already had one on the books with SMU.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:29 pm to WestCoastAg
Maybe I am missing something but they had to add Syracuse late and maybe IU? Idk if that was their own scheduling incompetence or if they had to end some of their deals.
Where the frick are those yankee shits when you actually need them for information?
Where the frick are those yankee shits when you actually need them for information?
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:29 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Arkansas was willing to scramble for a home/away series. A&M already had one on the books with SMU.
Why did the SMU deal fall through?
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:29 pm to Damn Good Dawg
quote:
This is a silly flame. You've heard the reasoning enough to know why it's necessary.
It isn't necessary that Georgia schedule double directional state every year. Georgia has enough money to survive on one less home game every other year.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:30 pm to Damn Good Dawg
I cant answer you question about why mizzou ended up scheduling IU and cuse last second. but our SMU deal did not fall through. we are completing it this year
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:32 pm to Damn Good Dawg
quote:
Why did the SMU deal fall through?
The SMU deal didn't fall through. We played SMU last year. And the year before. And the year before that. We play them this year as well. It was a 4 game home/away series.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:32 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
It isn't necessary that Georgia schedule double directional state every year. Georgia has enough money to survive on one less home game every other year.
Money drives everything in college football. Why just survive when we could thrive under the current format? That's not to mention that puts us at a competitive disadvantage with our peers.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:35 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
It isn't necessary that Georgia schedule double directional state every year. Georgia has enough money to survive on one less home game every other year.
Because we are in a spending war with programs that are shelling out $5M for coaches, building 100,000+ stadiums, and blowing money on the recruiting trail. The Georgia football program spends less than a lot of program already and gives a sizable portion, maybe more than some (can't be sure), to the school itself. I know that's the case with all programs but outside of Georgia football no sport is self sustaining IIRC.
So why would Georgia purposefully set itself back to other programs? Why would we decide to bring less income to not only the football program but university and town itself? Why deprive the fans of home games? And ultimately why would Georgia do all of that so that they could schedule harder than just about the rest of the conference?
If you're running a university that just isn't a good decision from a financial stand point as well as a competitive stand point. When your fans are clamoring for more success as other rivals do well the worst thing you could do is further hamstring yourself by depriving yourself of home games, money, and so on.
quote:
I cant answer you question about why mizzou ended up scheduling IU and cuse last second. but our SMU deal did not fall through. we are completing it this year
Ahh ok
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:36 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
Money drives everything in college football. Why just survive when we could thrive under the current format? That's not to mention that puts us at a competitive disadvantage with our peers.
I would argue playing Georgia Tech every year puts you at a competitive advantage. You get to beat up on a team from a power conference every year and act like it's some big time opponent.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:38 pm to Damn Good Dawg
quote:
Why deprive the fans of home games?
You don't think Georgia fans would give up a home game against double directional state every other year in favor of seeing Alabama, LSU, A&M in Athens more than once every 12 years? Your decision isn't for the fans at all. That's a complete farce.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:40 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
I would argue playing Georgia Tech every year puts you at a competitive advantage. You get to beat up on a team from a power conference every year and act like it's some big time opponent.
I'm all for bashing GT, but they've been an above average BCS conference team over the past decade. They've played in BCS bowls, conference championships, etc. UGA beating the shite out of them doesn't change that.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:41 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
You don't think Georgia fans would give up a home game against double directional state every other year in favor of seeing Alabama, LSU, A&M in Athens more than once every 12 years? Your decision isn't for the fans at all. That's a complete farce.
No, but in reality that's not what we'd be giving up. We'd be giving up the chance to play Clemson, ND, etc. the AD will always take the home games because the AD needs the home games.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:42 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
I would argue playing Georgia Tech every year puts you at a competitive advantage. You get to beat up on a team from a power conference every year and act like it's some big time opponent.
Well, it is now. Who knows if they continue to suck. Probably will.
quote:
You don't think Georgia fans would give up a home game against double directional state every other year in favor of seeing Alabama, LSU, A&M in Athens more than once every 12 years? Your decision isn't for the fans at all. That's a complete farce.
I do think they're fine with it. I also think that those who differ realized the financial strains as well as the opportunity to play different opponents like regional rival Clemson or a trip to South Bend they'd be ok with it.
We've seen Bama and LSU recently. We have plenty of rivalries and we'll likely see them in ATL every now and then anyway. So no, not a farce.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:45 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
No, but in reality that's not what we'd be giving up. We'd be giving up the chance to play Clemson, ND, etc. the AD will always take the home games because the AD needs the home games.
You're only giving that up in order to keep playing two or three double directional states at home every year. That's the point.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:47 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
You're only giving that up in order to keep playing two or three double directional states at home every year. That's the point.
We're always going to play 2 cupcakes per season, just like everybody else. That was never changing, so the 8 game schedule is best for UGA.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 2:48 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
1. Other conferences playing more games won't help them be better teams. they areayd play 8 and only like 4 teams can compete with the top dogs in the SEC.
2. IF you look at a map of where the best players are form you will understand why conference doesn't matter as much as geography
3. Babtism by fire, you can't just add another heat lamp and expect it to have the same result.
I think you misunderstand me. It's not a question of whether I think the SEC is the best. I do, very much. It's a question of perception and going with the flow. If the perception is that the committee will be rewarding programs that played 9 conference games -- especially if the average SEC program only plays one OOC program from a major conference -- then the presidents (i.e. the coaches and ADs) will start gravitating toward the 9 game schedule. Just being the best doesn't guarantee anything...all it takes is for one other program to be better to miss out on the NC, and four other programs to be better to miss out on the playoffs. They don't even have to be radically better...if the committee decides that the 11-2 SEC champion played a slightly less difficult schedule than 10-2 Notre Dame or the 11-2 Pac 10 runner-up, they could shut the SEC out. That won't mean the SEC champion isn't the better of the two, just that the committee rewarded schedule. At that point, the drive for a 9 game conference schedule will pick up steam again.
This is just my prognostication, obviously. It may never come to pass. But I honestly think it's inevitable. Not tomorrow or next year, but eventually.
This post was edited on 5/12/14 at 2:54 pm
Posted on 5/12/14 at 3:07 pm to randomways
ACC, staying at 8 with an additional game against power 5 or ND
Acc
Acc
This post was edited on 5/12/14 at 3:09 pm
Posted on 5/12/14 at 4:13 pm to randomways
An SEC team gettign elft out of a 4 team playoff would take a lot.
Posted on 5/12/14 at 7:27 pm to CheerWhine
quote:
CheerWhine
ACC's turn to decide 8 vs. 9; implications for non-conference games vs. SEC?
The biggest thing with the ACC is that Notre Dame is essentially a half-member for football, and plays 5 games a year against ACC teams. For teams with permanent SEC rivals, 9 ACC games in a year where you play Notre Dame and your rival non-conference means that you only really have control of one game that season.
GT is in favor of 9 games despite playing Georgia every year, though.
How are you getting that. Wouldn't the ND game be part of the 9 game rotation?
Page 3 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News