Started By
Message
re: Home OOC schedule just goes from bad to worse.
Posted on 9/12/18 at 5:49 pm to TideWarrior
Posted on 9/12/18 at 5:49 pm to TideWarrior
Imo, the SEC should add a 9th conference game and should also ban playing FCS opponents. It's somewhat of a head scratcher to me that the SEC commisioner seems so set against doing it.
Key reasons for those two changes include:
(1) Stronger resumés to help ensure the SEC's inclusion in the CFP;
(2) Larger slate of appealing games to boost TV and attendance revenues;
(3) Enhanced appeal for higher-payout bowls and lucrative neutral-site games.
Imo, the best format is to keep the cross-division fixed opponents and rotate two of the other six every year, playing one stronger and one weaker. Bama example:
Cross-division rotation
2019: vsSC, atTN, atKY
2020: atGA, vsTN, vsVB
2021: vsFL, atTN, atMO
2022: atSC, vsTN, vsKY
2023: vsGA, atTN, atVB
2024: atFL, vsTN, vsMO
With that rotation format, all SEC teams would play a 9th quality SEC team every year instead of an FCS team. They'd play all cross-division teams much more often, and players would get to play all cross-division teams at least once. They don't now.
In order to have the same number of home games each season, teams can schedule their P5 OOC games so the home sides fall during the seasons they have the extra SEC away game.
It would be challenging to rework all the SEC teams' schedules equitably so that no teams get stuck with unfair stretches, etc., but it can be done.
For the SEC teams that now play a late season FCS game, put the weaker cross-division game there. That would be enough of a "breather" opponent.
SEC teams worried about adverse impact on bowl eligibility can compensate by scheduling three OOC teams they know they can beat.
Some people have mentioned that the FCS game provides the ability to economically take their family to a game every season. But there would still be home games vs G5 teams each season that they could economically attend.
I really don't know the financials, but it seems like replacing 14 SEC vs FCS home games with 14 SEC vs SEC home-away games would boost attendance and TV revenues by more than enough to offset one less home game every other year, considering that two years' FCS rent-a-win payouts would be eliminated.
The B1G, PAC12 and BigXii play 9 conf games and at least 1 P5 OOC team. Only the SEC & ACC play 8 conf games. Playing FCS teams is a bad look and weakens all SEC teams' resumés, especially with only 8 conf games. The B1G has banned playing FCS teams.
Tbh, the SEC vs FCS games suck and really should be replaced by a 9th conf game. If implemented properly, it makes much more sense than the status quo does.
Key reasons for those two changes include:
(1) Stronger resumés to help ensure the SEC's inclusion in the CFP;
(2) Larger slate of appealing games to boost TV and attendance revenues;
(3) Enhanced appeal for higher-payout bowls and lucrative neutral-site games.
Imo, the best format is to keep the cross-division fixed opponents and rotate two of the other six every year, playing one stronger and one weaker. Bama example:
Cross-division rotation
2019: vsSC, atTN, atKY
2020: atGA, vsTN, vsVB
2021: vsFL, atTN, atMO
2022: atSC, vsTN, vsKY
2023: vsGA, atTN, atVB
2024: atFL, vsTN, vsMO
With that rotation format, all SEC teams would play a 9th quality SEC team every year instead of an FCS team. They'd play all cross-division teams much more often, and players would get to play all cross-division teams at least once. They don't now.
In order to have the same number of home games each season, teams can schedule their P5 OOC games so the home sides fall during the seasons they have the extra SEC away game.
It would be challenging to rework all the SEC teams' schedules equitably so that no teams get stuck with unfair stretches, etc., but it can be done.
For the SEC teams that now play a late season FCS game, put the weaker cross-division game there. That would be enough of a "breather" opponent.
SEC teams worried about adverse impact on bowl eligibility can compensate by scheduling three OOC teams they know they can beat.
Some people have mentioned that the FCS game provides the ability to economically take their family to a game every season. But there would still be home games vs G5 teams each season that they could economically attend.
I really don't know the financials, but it seems like replacing 14 SEC vs FCS home games with 14 SEC vs SEC home-away games would boost attendance and TV revenues by more than enough to offset one less home game every other year, considering that two years' FCS rent-a-win payouts would be eliminated.
The B1G, PAC12 and BigXii play 9 conf games and at least 1 P5 OOC team. Only the SEC & ACC play 8 conf games. Playing FCS teams is a bad look and weakens all SEC teams' resumés, especially with only 8 conf games. The B1G has banned playing FCS teams.
Tbh, the SEC vs FCS games suck and really should be replaced by a 9th conf game. If implemented properly, it makes much more sense than the status quo does.
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 2:36 pm
1
Posted on 9/12/18 at 6:14 pm to TidalSurge1
quote:
The B1G, PAC12 and BigXii play 9 conf games and at least 1 P5 OOC team. Only the SEC & ACC play 8 conf games
For the record, I think 9 games is a good idea for the SECbut there are a couple of things to note...
The PAC12 and Big12 did it solely because they were ten team leagues when they did it and it made sense to play the entire conference. They are also the weakest conferences overall. They have combined to place two out of 16 playoff teams. I wouldn't use them as an example for anything involving football.
The B1G is a different story. They switched two years ago with the sole intent of expanding inventory for their new TV deal, and it worked. This is where it could make sense for the SEC. Not sure when our contract is up, but this probably won't be a serious discussion for us until then.
Currently, only one school has any interest in 9 games, and the rest will continue to block it until it comes time to talk about money.
This post was edited on 9/12/18 at 6:44 pm
Posted on 9/12/18 at 6:33 pm to Evolved Simian
Idk when the current SEC TV contracts end, but it seems to me the TV networks might be willing to adjust the current contracts if the SEC aproached them with the idea of expanding the slate with a 9th conference game. I know the other coaches except for Saban and Malzahn are against it, but I think the voting power really belongs to the school presidents. If a plan is developed for doing it that's financially advantageous and also resolves the issues that have been raised about it by the coaches (as noted in my prior post), I think the comissioner could get the buy in from ADs, coaches and presidents to make it happen.
This post was edited on 9/12/18 at 6:48 pm
Posted on 9/12/18 at 7:36 pm to TidalSurge1
I believe the SEC contracts start to expire around 2024. It's hard to imagine a company like ESPN giving the SEC more money considering their current financial situation.
Another reason we continue to play FCS games is money. We paid Charleston Southern $500,000 back in 2015. We are supposedly paying New Mexico $1.9 million to come to BDS in 2021.
Another reason we continue to play FCS games is money. We paid Charleston Southern $500,000 back in 2015. We are supposedly paying New Mexico $1.9 million to come to BDS in 2021.
Posted on 9/12/18 at 7:37 pm to BamaGradinTn
This is pathetic. The fans should be raising hell.
Posted on 9/12/18 at 7:39 pm to TidalSurge1
Look, I'm as pissed off about this scheduling embarrassment as anyone, but I can promise you it ain't changing anytime soon. Why? Because it's working, that's why. You had an ALL SEC Natty last year. The B1G and the Big 12 and the ACC and the PAC can bitch and moan all they want to, but until it's mandated or it stops working, why should the SEC change? The short answer is they shouldn't. I don't like it but I get it.
Secondly, they won't change because of $$$. Giving up a guaranteed home game every other year won't sit well with the bean counters. Even after paying Eastern Kentucky A&T their payout, a home game generates a lot of dollars. Dollars certain SEC AD's have gotten used to in their budget. If we go to 9 SEC games, every other year that's 4 at home and 5 away, so 7 home games at best. If you have a home and home with someone and it's the wrong year, that number drops to 6 which is unsustainable. Thank God, we've finally seen the light and decided to slowly wean ourselves off the neutral site season opener as it's like crack to an addict with the money it generates.
We're stuck with the system we have at the moment, but I think it's a polarizing subject and more teams outside the SEC are pushing for some sort of mandate or preference for teams playing 9 league games instead of 8. If that happens, SEC teams would be penalized for not complying. In the meantime, if we're going to play this game, can we at least stick to FBS opponents and stop beating up on FCS teams? That's not too much to ask is it? And we should play at least 1 Power 5 school each year in OOC games. It doesn't always have to be Michigan or USC, although those are cool. Illinois, Oregon State, Virginia, and Rutgers all count as P5 too. Yeah, we might have to bite the bullet and travel to their stadium one year. Other teams do it. Why not?
Secondly, they won't change because of $$$. Giving up a guaranteed home game every other year won't sit well with the bean counters. Even after paying Eastern Kentucky A&T their payout, a home game generates a lot of dollars. Dollars certain SEC AD's have gotten used to in their budget. If we go to 9 SEC games, every other year that's 4 at home and 5 away, so 7 home games at best. If you have a home and home with someone and it's the wrong year, that number drops to 6 which is unsustainable. Thank God, we've finally seen the light and decided to slowly wean ourselves off the neutral site season opener as it's like crack to an addict with the money it generates.
We're stuck with the system we have at the moment, but I think it's a polarizing subject and more teams outside the SEC are pushing for some sort of mandate or preference for teams playing 9 league games instead of 8. If that happens, SEC teams would be penalized for not complying. In the meantime, if we're going to play this game, can we at least stick to FBS opponents and stop beating up on FCS teams? That's not too much to ask is it? And we should play at least 1 Power 5 school each year in OOC games. It doesn't always have to be Michigan or USC, although those are cool. Illinois, Oregon State, Virginia, and Rutgers all count as P5 too. Yeah, we might have to bite the bullet and travel to their stadium one year. Other teams do it. Why not?
This post was edited on 9/12/18 at 7:42 pm
Posted on 9/12/18 at 8:07 pm to phil4bama
quote:
It doesn't always have to be Michigan or USC, although those are cool. Illinois, Oregon State, Virginia, and Rutgers all count as P5 too
Virginia isn't the dumpster fire they used to be, but there are tons of G-5 and maybe even some FCS teams that are better than Illinois, Oregon State, and Rutgers. That Arkansas State team we just beat by 50 would give all 3 of those teams a good game, and might even beat them. Scheduling those games does literally nothing but make some fans bitch less about scheduling because technically it's a P-5 opponent.
Posted on 9/12/18 at 10:19 pm to Robot Santa
quote:
but there are tons of G-5 and maybe even some FCS teams that are better than Illinois, Oregon State, and Rutgers.
Interestingly, Arknsas State has one more conference championship in the last 13 seasons than Oregon State does in 125 seasons. And 5 more conference titles in the past 13 years than Rutgers does in 149 seasons. And the same Number in 13 years that Illinois has in the last 67 seasons. (At least Illinois is a loser in a strong conference)
I wonder if the guys who complained about Arkansas State and sold their tickets would do the same for a true shitshow like Kansas or Arizona.
The fact is, that NO teams outside a handful of playoff contenders are quality opponents for Alabama in this era.
Complaining about Kent State in lieu of, say North Carolina is stupid. There is zero difference in the outcome. The name just makes you feel superficially better.
"But, but, p5!" Is an irrelevant complaint unless you're talking about Ohio State or the equivalent. EVERY other OOC is pretty much irrelevant until Saban leaves.
This post was edited on 9/12/18 at 10:21 pm
Posted on 9/12/18 at 11:50 pm to Evolved Simian
The reason the PAC12, Big10 and Big12 play 9 game conference schedules is because of money. At least the PAC12 had admitted it. They cannot fill up the stadiums with Sun Belt, MW type teams so they have to schedule more conference games. Which still don't sell out but they do better than the weak OOC games. Then some try to sell it like they are being more competitive. They are pulling the wool over some of your eyes.
Outsiders want the SEC to go to a 9 game schedule so that they will further cannibalize themselves. The SEC would be a fool to do so. The SEC West would be further jeopardizing their chance at the College Football Playoff. It has become obvious that the first consideration is the lack of losses on the resume. Then it is quality wins and quality losses. Anyone in the SEC West who wants to toughen his schedule is an idiot. No SEC team has been close to missing the playoff because of a weak schedule.
The reason for the Troy, So Ala type games is because of money. They will come without demanding a return game. It's as simple as that.
Bama has played 25 ranked teams the last 3 years, including 10 in 2016. What do some of you want? The Patriots, Eagles and Rams.
Outsiders want the SEC to go to a 9 game schedule so that they will further cannibalize themselves. The SEC would be a fool to do so. The SEC West would be further jeopardizing their chance at the College Football Playoff. It has become obvious that the first consideration is the lack of losses on the resume. Then it is quality wins and quality losses. Anyone in the SEC West who wants to toughen his schedule is an idiot. No SEC team has been close to missing the playoff because of a weak schedule.
The reason for the Troy, So Ala type games is because of money. They will come without demanding a return game. It's as simple as that.
Bama has played 25 ranked teams the last 3 years, including 10 in 2016. What do some of you want? The Patriots, Eagles and Rams.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 6:17 am to Evolved Simian
quote:
I wonder if the guys who complained about Arkansas State and sold their tickets would do the same for a true shitshow like Kansas or Arizona.
I'd rather see Arizona or Kansas. At least it's a team I haven't seen us play before.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 6:24 am to BamaGradinTn
Again.....why done we play instate Alabama schools again??
Posted on 9/13/18 at 7:07 am to pvilleguru
I went to the Arkansas St game only because my dad wanted to go and my mom and sister were busy. Ended up selling our 2 extra tickets to a scalper for $15 total. Maybe a 1/5 of the stadium emptied out after the 1st quarter, and less than 1/2 of the stadium remained at the start of the 2nd half.
I've now seen Arkansas St (2x), Bowling Green, UCF, Colorado St (2x), ECU, FAU, FIU (2x), Fresno St, Georgia Southern, Georgia St, Kent St (2x), La Monroe (3x), La Tech (3x), MTSU (3x), North Texas (4x), San Jose St, South Florida, Southern Miss (10x), Tulane (3x), UT Chatt (2x), Utah State (2x), Western Carolina (3x), and WKU. So yeah, I'd rather not see one of those teams if it meant we get some added variety with Kansas or Arizona.
And that list doesn't count some of the games I've skipped recently like WKU and UTC in 2016, FAU in 2014, Georgia St and UTC in 2013.
I've now seen Arkansas St (2x), Bowling Green, UCF, Colorado St (2x), ECU, FAU, FIU (2x), Fresno St, Georgia Southern, Georgia St, Kent St (2x), La Monroe (3x), La Tech (3x), MTSU (3x), North Texas (4x), San Jose St, South Florida, Southern Miss (10x), Tulane (3x), UT Chatt (2x), Utah State (2x), Western Carolina (3x), and WKU. So yeah, I'd rather not see one of those teams if it meant we get some added variety with Kansas or Arizona.
And that list doesn't count some of the games I've skipped recently like WKU and UTC in 2016, FAU in 2014, Georgia St and UTC in 2013.
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 7:18 am
Posted on 9/13/18 at 7:33 am to MrBiriwa
I agree with playing teams in state vs these type opponents. The money earned from playing Alabama would help them as much as it does the other schools. Its like investing in your own infrastructure or local economy.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 7:50 am to Lucky_Stryke
quote:
The money earned from playing Alabama would help them as much as it does the other schools
They are probably making more from playing other teams than they would from Alabama.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 8:14 am to pvilleguru
quote:
They are probably making more from playing other teams than they would from Alabama.
If thats the case that is a shame and very easily resolved
Posted on 9/13/18 at 8:14 am to 14&Counting
quote:
Yeah but we open with So Cal at Jerryworld. I'll be there!
Me too, i like the neutral site openers. Intersperse some quality home and homes along the way.
The unfortunate reality is that teams need to schedule these bullshite games as sort of in-season scrimmages to give players time to heal up, etc. The football season is too long for just one bye week and playing big opponents week in and week out.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 8:31 am to TomRollTideRitter
I dont know why ALABAMA wont schedule them.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 8:32 am to phil4bama
quote:
but I can promise you it ain't changing anytime soon. Why? Because it's working, that's why. You had an ALL SEC Natty last year.
And one of those SEC teams played a road game at Notre Dame and another road game at Georgia Tech.
A third playoff team, Oklahoma, had a road game at Ohio State. The fourth team, Clemson, had a home game with Auburn and a road game at South Carolina.
Which team was on the bubble and was only a Wisconsin TD vs. Ohio State away from getting left out of the playoffs?
The one with the shitty OOC schedule. It's working? Seriously?
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:29 am to BamaGradinTn
adding a 9th conference game doesn't help your resume
ask the Pac 12 > LINK
ask the Pac 12 > LINK
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 9:30 am
Posted on 9/13/18 at 2:02 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
Which team was on the bubble and was only a Wisconsin TD vs. Ohio State away from getting left out of the playoffs?
The one with the shitty OOC schedule. It's working? Seriously?
That's an apples/oranges situation. Alabama wasn't on the bubble because of their OOC schedule (In fact, it's pretty obvious the committee considered FSU a top tier game for Alabama since they were ranked #3 and their starting QB was injured for the season). Alabama was only on the bubble because we didn't win the SEC.
Page 3 of 4
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News