Started By
Message
"Updates" On New Scheduling?
Posted on 4/28/23 at 11:18 pm
Posted on 4/28/23 at 11:18 pm
https://www.si.com/college/2023/04/28/sec-deciding-between-eight-and-nine-game-formats-for-football
WHY do these articles keep getting written telling us what we already know:
- the "Upper Half" want 9 games
- the "Lower Half" want 8 games
- what will be the tie-breakers?
WHY do these articles keep getting written telling us what we already know:
- the "Upper Half" want 9 games
- the "Lower Half" want 8 games
- what will be the tie-breakers?
9
Posted on 4/28/23 at 11:19 pm to southernboisb
quote:
- the "Upper Half" want 9 games
- the "Lower Half" want 8 games
... but is that really true?
Posted on 4/28/23 at 11:54 pm to scrooster
I haven't found anything contradicting it.
Posted on 4/28/23 at 11:58 pm to southernboisb
I do not think the 16-team SEC divides neatly into top half and bottom half. Where do Texas A&M and Tennessee fit in that divide?
Posted on 4/28/23 at 11:58 pm to southernboisb
Seems like a no-brainer to do the 6 rotational and 3 permanent, 9 game format. Just drop the one game P5 OOC requirement to offset that.
Posted on 4/29/23 at 12:00 am to southernboisb
quote:
- the "Upper Half" want 9 games - the "Lower Half" want 8 games - what will be the tie-breakers?
My vote is I don’t give a shite.
Play the damn games.
If someone wants a weak schedule there’s plenty of other conferences out there.
Posted on 4/29/23 at 12:05 am to GeorgeWest
quote:
Where do Texas A&M and Tennessee fit in that divide?
Considering Tennessee beat the 2 best teams from the West last year, we are most definitely in the upper 1/3rd. Mattie of fact Tennessee can claim the west with the beat down they gave the coin asses on there own field. Tennessee has shown an upward trajectory ever since Heupel has shown up. Now aTm is another story. They are tending in the wrong directions and belongs in the bottom 1/3rd. aTm doesn’t have near the history that UT has.
This post was edited on 4/29/23 at 12:06 am
Posted on 4/29/23 at 12:36 am to BigDickRick16
Whoa whoa whoa. Let’s see Tennessee get their 2nd 10 win season since 2007 before we start saying they are definitely upper 3rd
Posted on 4/29/23 at 12:36 am to southernboisb
9 “upper” level revenue
all but Alabama want 3 perm
(if that article is correct)
“Lower” 7 + Alabama = split vote
Why doesn’t Arkansas, for example, not want to play Texas every year? I’m not sure that makes sense to me.
I assume that means all voting for 1-7 are in favor of playing Cream Puff U at home each year for extra home gate revenue?
It is also possible that this is all just a negotiation with ESPN to get more money out of them for the extra inventory.
all but Alabama want 3 perm
(if that article is correct)
“Lower” 7 + Alabama = split vote
Why doesn’t Arkansas, for example, not want to play Texas every year? I’m not sure that makes sense to me.
I assume that means all voting for 1-7 are in favor of playing Cream Puff U at home each year for extra home gate revenue?
It is also possible that this is all just a negotiation with ESPN to get more money out of them for the extra inventory.
This post was edited on 4/29/23 at 12:38 am
Posted on 4/29/23 at 12:50 am to southernboisb
It’s going to nine games
Posted on 4/29/23 at 1:11 am to BigBinBR
quote:
Let’s see Tennessee get their 2nd 10 win season since 2007 before we start saying they are definitely upper 3rd
My teams in order next year to start season.
Now it’s only my opinion.
1.Bama
2.UGA
3.UT
4.LSU
5.Ole Miss
6.Kentucky
7.South Carolina
8.Arkansas
9.Auburn
10.UF
11.Mississippi State
12.aTm
13.Vandy
14.Missouri
This post was edited on 4/29/23 at 1:13 am
Posted on 4/29/23 at 6:32 am to BigBro
quote:
It is also possible that this is all just a negotiation with ESPN to get more money out of them for the extra inventory
I think this is what’s happening. It’s a negotiating tactic with ESPN to get compensation for the improved inventory of games. Especially with the way they labeled the 2 sides - smaller vs larger budget schools. Basically saying the smaller budget schools can be bought for the right amount.
If there are holdouts for 9 games I doubt it’s half the current conference (UT/OU don’t get a vote for this). Maybe 3 or 4 and they’re wanting some extra revenue to offset what will likely mean some missed bowl opportunities because of the more difficult schedule.
Question is will ESPN make those kind of promises within the next month or so. If they won’t offer more why would anyone agree to it right now besides doing it for the fans. And it’d be nice if there has already been some number agreed to for the addition of OUT, that way this could just be tacked on instead of them offering one amount now and then just lessening the other. The SEC should be right there with the B1G and ESPN needs to make it happen.
Posted on 4/29/23 at 6:33 am to BigDickRick16
quote:
1.Bama 2.UGA 3.UT 4.LSU
Why would you have a 9-3 team over a 12-0 team? You a soccer fan?
Posted on 4/29/23 at 6:59 am to BigBro
>It is also possible that this is all just a negotiation with ESPN to get more money out of them for the extra inventory
This is what it is. They're not going to publicly commit as a unit to the 9 game schedule in any fashion until the $$$ bump on the contract is signed. The threat of 8 games ruins a lot of money games
This is what it is. They're not going to publicly commit as a unit to the 9 game schedule in any fashion until the $$$ bump on the contract is signed. The threat of 8 games ruins a lot of money games
Posted on 4/29/23 at 6:59 am to southernboisb
I would think it more be the teams with built in in-state rivalries would want 8, plus the teams that struggle to get 6 wins. Teams like Alabama, LSU, Auburn, and Texas would like 9.
9 games for them then scheduling an OOC P5 plus 2 FCS schools is great.
For UGA, UF, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Kentucky. 8 games is really better if you can keep the instate P5 game, plus schedule P5 OOC. Then you get 2 FCS/G5 games. With a ninth , it makes if difficult because of the home and home aspect.
The others not mention just want to make a bowl.
9 games for them then scheduling an OOC P5 plus 2 FCS schools is great.
For UGA, UF, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Kentucky. 8 games is really better if you can keep the instate P5 game, plus schedule P5 OOC. Then you get 2 FCS/G5 games. With a ninth , it makes if difficult because of the home and home aspect.
The others not mention just want to make a bowl.
Posted on 4/29/23 at 7:06 am to southernboisb
I think they’re doing it like Tennessee’s past football coach searches. They’re leaking things to social media to see if the fans like it. It’s sort of a marketing for Facebook.
A sort of Focus group of idiots trying to make big decisions on the Internet for their formerly great football program.
A sort of Focus group of idiots trying to make big decisions on the Internet for their formerly great football program.
Posted on 4/29/23 at 7:27 am to GeorgeWest
quote:
do not think the 16-team SEC divides neatly into top half and bottom half. Where do Texas A&M and Tennessee fit in that divide?
Posted on 4/29/23 at 7:41 am to Clark14
No point in expanding conference to play 8
It has to be 9
It has to be 9
Posted on 4/29/23 at 8:10 am to BigDickRick16
quote:
aTm doesn’t have near the history that UT has.
Haha. Aggie doesn’t have near the history Arkansas has
Posted on 4/29/23 at 8:17 am to southernboisb
Tanner has said he's a proponent of the 8 game model bc of who South Carolina has scheduled in the future as OOC games (in addition to our annual game with Clemson). I'm sure the "big dogs" will roll their eyes. We have additional games with UNC, NC State, Miami and Virginia Tech all scheduled as OOC games in the upcoming yrs along with Clemson. We don't want to cancel any of those. Go to a 9 conference game schedule and it would be idiotic to not cancel those additional OOC games so that we could still have 1 rent-a-win plus keep the rivalry game with Clemson intact.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News