Started By
Message
The 9th conference game
Posted on 9/20/12 at 5:50 pm
Posted on 9/20/12 at 5:50 pm
Moving from the other thread
Advantages:
- 7 extra conference games which are generally good games
- more continuity to the conference as you don't go such long periods not playing cross-div opponents
- fans are happier bc we have more good games to be excited about
Disadvantages:
- less tv content. Yes, less. All games played with an SEC team as host are covered in the television contract. By removing an OOC game, which is clearly more often a home game, you end up with fewer games (though better ones)
- less gate receipt. We sold out our season ticket allotment. This is pretty standard in the SEC. The only tickets not sold for any game are those returned by opponents. Gate receipts/concessions generate $5-6m. Maybe 4.5-5 for weaker games. You are therefore losing several million on average every season
- more restrictive scheduling. Especially due to the perm OOC rivalry games, some schools will have their hands forced in scheduling. Imagine us playing a 9-game SEC sched plus the sips every year. No way we schedule any attractive OOC games. And while our schedule is very cool, it becomes fairly monotonous. That's where a school like UF is right now
- less hype. One of the big sells for the SEC is that we have many teams with good records. It's the sad truth that downscheduling as a mediocre team has proven successful in building from the bottom in virtually every conference (you think TCU got hype if they played in the Big 12 all these years?). The long term implications of fewer conference games is actually one reason the SEC has become the juggernaut it is today. More wins.
- fewer bowl opportunities. Everyone wants to go to a bowl. They can sell their program. Even Vandy. You add a conference game and the bottom tier teams in conference will go to bowls far less often and you will permanently create an underclass. No school wants to be in that situation
- SEC and OOC. In 2004, an undefeated Auburn got shut out because the SEC wasn't playing outside their sandbox. Since then you've seen a shift away from this a bit and when Bama goes and pounds PSU or Mich and LSU does the same to Oregon, WVU, Wash, when they get to the season end there is a way to compare. If we move to 9 games and play even fewer big OOC games such an event could happen again.
But even more importantly, our options are not limited to 9-games or 8 + 4 patsies. For better games we have the option to either add an extra conference game or schedule up OOC. Scheduling up allows more flexibility to the bottom teams to get wins as needed and allows the top teams like Bama or LSU to take on anyone they like while still giving the OOC rivalry teams scheduling flexibility. IMO, it's the best of all worlds.
As I've said, I have no idea if the ADs believe the advantages trump the disadvantages. I think they don't but I don't get a vote. It's not at all a no-brainer though and the group-think that it is, tends to be fairly fan centric (weighting better games over all else)
Advantages:
- 7 extra conference games which are generally good games
- more continuity to the conference as you don't go such long periods not playing cross-div opponents
- fans are happier bc we have more good games to be excited about
Disadvantages:
- less tv content. Yes, less. All games played with an SEC team as host are covered in the television contract. By removing an OOC game, which is clearly more often a home game, you end up with fewer games (though better ones)
- less gate receipt. We sold out our season ticket allotment. This is pretty standard in the SEC. The only tickets not sold for any game are those returned by opponents. Gate receipts/concessions generate $5-6m. Maybe 4.5-5 for weaker games. You are therefore losing several million on average every season
- more restrictive scheduling. Especially due to the perm OOC rivalry games, some schools will have their hands forced in scheduling. Imagine us playing a 9-game SEC sched plus the sips every year. No way we schedule any attractive OOC games. And while our schedule is very cool, it becomes fairly monotonous. That's where a school like UF is right now
- less hype. One of the big sells for the SEC is that we have many teams with good records. It's the sad truth that downscheduling as a mediocre team has proven successful in building from the bottom in virtually every conference (you think TCU got hype if they played in the Big 12 all these years?). The long term implications of fewer conference games is actually one reason the SEC has become the juggernaut it is today. More wins.
- fewer bowl opportunities. Everyone wants to go to a bowl. They can sell their program. Even Vandy. You add a conference game and the bottom tier teams in conference will go to bowls far less often and you will permanently create an underclass. No school wants to be in that situation
- SEC and OOC. In 2004, an undefeated Auburn got shut out because the SEC wasn't playing outside their sandbox. Since then you've seen a shift away from this a bit and when Bama goes and pounds PSU or Mich and LSU does the same to Oregon, WVU, Wash, when they get to the season end there is a way to compare. If we move to 9 games and play even fewer big OOC games such an event could happen again.
But even more importantly, our options are not limited to 9-games or 8 + 4 patsies. For better games we have the option to either add an extra conference game or schedule up OOC. Scheduling up allows more flexibility to the bottom teams to get wins as needed and allows the top teams like Bama or LSU to take on anyone they like while still giving the OOC rivalry teams scheduling flexibility. IMO, it's the best of all worlds.
As I've said, I have no idea if the ADs believe the advantages trump the disadvantages. I think they don't but I don't get a vote. It's not at all a no-brainer though and the group-think that it is, tends to be fairly fan centric (weighting better games over all else)
4
Posted on 9/20/12 at 6:09 pm to tmc94
More gate receipt. You get more gate receipt for an SEC game than you would a patsy.
Posted on 9/20/12 at 6:14 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
More gate receipt. You get more gate receipt for an SEC game than you would a patsy.
lol - if this were true then teams would schedule better OOC. It's simply not. You can play 2 for 1 vs SMU and get 4 home games for every 3 you'd get vs an SEC opponent. 4 home games even if worse quality will still generate more than 3 vs an SEC East opponent as long as we keep the rest of our sched.
And that's a 2-for-1. We're buying Rice and NM next season as home games. They won't get any game back. We give them 600k or so and keep the rest. Far more money in that than home and home
This post was edited on 9/20/12 at 6:16 pm
Posted on 9/20/12 at 6:18 pm to tmc94
quote:
lol - if this were true then teams would schedule better OOC. It's simply not. You can play 2 for 1 vs SMU and get 4 home games for every 3 you'd get vs an SEC opponent. 4 home games even if worse quality will still generate more than 3 vs an SEC East opponent as long as we keep the rest of our sched.
If it weren't true, then teams like Alabama, which get a sell out regardless of opponent, would never do a home and home.
Look at Alabama's OOC schedule for the last 10 years, and tell me how many times they've gone on the road.
Posted on 9/20/12 at 6:30 pm to TeLeFaWx
You really are bad at this. You've completely decimated your own (and only so far) point. If Bama can get the same thing by playing Home and Home OOC, why do we need a 9th conf game? So that we can make Vandy and Ol Miss suffer? Schools that want to can just schedule a good OOC game.
And Bama plays big games for other reasons than money. They generally play 3 patsies for revenue and 1 big game. It's the formula I actually suggested as opposed to a 9th conf game
And Bama plays big games for other reasons than money. They generally play 3 patsies for revenue and 1 big game. It's the formula I actually suggested as opposed to a 9th conf game
Posted on 9/20/12 at 6:46 pm to tmc94
I'm being a doosh and I know it. And I'll apologize. I just get so annoyed at the message board group think that takes place and anyone that suggests different than that group think gets shouted down with no logical argument, only a "nuh-uh" or "you'll see". That's what you originally did and it annoyed me but I shouldn't take it out on you.
There are reasons to go to 9 for sure. There are reasons to stay at 8 though. I don't know what we'll do and I'm sure that's part of what they studying long term and why we have no schedule yet. Looking at the recent OOC games scheduled (MSU-OSU, UGA-Clem, UF-Miami) it seems pretty likely we aren't doing so next season. But we may well do so down the road. We'll see.
There are reasons to go to 9 for sure. There are reasons to stay at 8 though. I don't know what we'll do and I'm sure that's part of what they studying long term and why we have no schedule yet. Looking at the recent OOC games scheduled (MSU-OSU, UGA-Clem, UF-Miami) it seems pretty likely we aren't doing so next season. But we may well do so down the road. We'll see.
Posted on 9/20/12 at 8:42 pm to tmc94
Jeez ya negative nancy.
Posted on 9/20/12 at 9:23 pm to tmc94
quote:
I'm being a doosh and I know it. And I'll apologize. I just get so annoyed at the message board group think that takes place and anyone that suggests different than that group think gets shouted down with no logical argument, only a "nuh-uh" or "you'll see". That's what you originally did and it annoyed me but I shouldn't take it out on you.
There are reasons to go to 9 for sure. There are reasons to stay at 8 though. I don't know what we'll do and I'm sure that's part of what they studying long term and why we have no schedule yet. Looking at the recent OOC games scheduled (MSU-OSU, UGA-Clem, UF-Miami) it seems pretty likely we aren't doing so next season. But we may well do so down the road. We'll see.
You are forgiven.
Thread bookmarked for when the 9th game comes around and the financial windfall as the primary reason though.
Posted on 9/20/12 at 9:27 pm to TeLeFaWx
My personal opinion. Another aggie football game.
The end.
The end.
Posted on 9/20/12 at 11:46 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
You are forgiven.
Thread bookmarked for when the 9th game comes around and the financial windfall as the primary reason though.
this is like bizarro world. I'm apologizing to you for being a touch too forceful in pointing out that you are treating your own speculation as 100% fact with no palpable basis for it beyond "just because." Yet you are going to bump this thread and talk shite if you are right?
If you can't articulate a single reason for your position, please stop with the hyperbole. That's the entirety of the problem I have here
Posted on 9/20/12 at 11:46 pm to Greg09Ag
quote:
My personal opinion. Another aggie football game.
in either case, we play the exact same number of games
Posted on 9/21/12 at 1:44 am to tmc94
I'd kind of rather stay at 8 and have the flexibility to schedule many different teams.
It'll probably go to 9 once SECNet starts up though.
It'll probably go to 9 once SECNet starts up though.
Posted on 9/21/12 at 7:31 am to Dr RC
I'm in favor of the 9th conf game. You would only lose the extra home game every other year. In fact, it would help us because it would guarantee at least 4 home SEC games at Kyle on the years we are the "home" team at Jerryworld.
And if tu ever decides to play us again, just add them in. UF, UGA, USCe, Kentucky, (and likely MU) will all be in the same boat as us - 9 SEC games/1 in state OOC rival.
And if tu ever decides to play us again, just add them in. UF, UGA, USCe, Kentucky, (and likely MU) will all be in the same boat as us - 9 SEC games/1 in state OOC rival.
Posted on 9/21/12 at 8:59 am to tmc94
It's all about the money, both for good and bad. Another thing you have to remember is Mike Slive thinks outside the box and understands the power the SEC holds is unique, he can change the rules to an extent just as he is blowing up the BCS to the SEC's favor and creating the Champions Bowl. Slive also is always doing things looking 4 moves down the chess board, he is the smartest man in college football imo.
The biggest driver of the 9th game would be the SEC Network deal that is being negotiated. If ESPN is willing to put enough cash in the kitty then it will happen because the TV revenue could be enough to overcome everything else. My guess is the deal will combo with the 2nd tier rights deal because as it stands there are only 14 games available for the SEC Network, they will want to double or triple that. They may even broach more dreaded Thursday/Friday Night games but that's a different topic. The key is the TV for SEC Conference games is valuable.
There is a push for more neutral site games, meaning having every team have at least one. The original appeal for us playing the Arkie game in Dallas is we get about $5 million for that game which is as much as we make from a home game (outside of seat donations of course) except we get it every year instead of every other year. It also is a marketing opportunity. Of course the fans get the short end to an extent but dollars win. If the SEC doesn't go to a 9 game though I don't see the Arkie in Dallas game lasting.
The bowl eligibility is a huge issue. A 9th conference game could cost 2 teams a year from making a bowl in the current format. My guess is they will do more to make the "6 wins" rule go away or Slive may just tell the NCAA to frick itself and make his own rules. He certainly isn't going to get resistance from the Big 1G and anything those 2 conferences want to happen will happen. The 13 game scenario is also possible.
The SEC has a lot of OOC big name games that they will want to keep and that causes an issue. Virtually all the power teams play a significant OOC opponent every year and that is good for the conference PR wise. That is a concern that has to be addressed.
The OOC patsy games are a cash cow for teams as well. A&M will make about $4 million on the SC State game and likely have to pay out $500-750k. For Florida they likely made a little over $5 million (maybe $6 million) but theoretically have a return trip making the net no more than $3 million and probably less. That adds up. Having a team with a better record also affects attendance so if you blow a couple of early conference games it is going to cost you vs getting easy wins over patsies.
At some point I think the 9th game happens, it's just a matter of time. The other conferences want the SEC to add it as well since most of them have it. In the end though Slive is going to make sure it makes a shitload of money though or else it isn't happening.
The biggest driver of the 9th game would be the SEC Network deal that is being negotiated. If ESPN is willing to put enough cash in the kitty then it will happen because the TV revenue could be enough to overcome everything else. My guess is the deal will combo with the 2nd tier rights deal because as it stands there are only 14 games available for the SEC Network, they will want to double or triple that. They may even broach more dreaded Thursday/Friday Night games but that's a different topic. The key is the TV for SEC Conference games is valuable.
There is a push for more neutral site games, meaning having every team have at least one. The original appeal for us playing the Arkie game in Dallas is we get about $5 million for that game which is as much as we make from a home game (outside of seat donations of course) except we get it every year instead of every other year. It also is a marketing opportunity. Of course the fans get the short end to an extent but dollars win. If the SEC doesn't go to a 9 game though I don't see the Arkie in Dallas game lasting.
The bowl eligibility is a huge issue. A 9th conference game could cost 2 teams a year from making a bowl in the current format. My guess is they will do more to make the "6 wins" rule go away or Slive may just tell the NCAA to frick itself and make his own rules. He certainly isn't going to get resistance from the Big 1G and anything those 2 conferences want to happen will happen. The 13 game scenario is also possible.
The SEC has a lot of OOC big name games that they will want to keep and that causes an issue. Virtually all the power teams play a significant OOC opponent every year and that is good for the conference PR wise. That is a concern that has to be addressed.
The OOC patsy games are a cash cow for teams as well. A&M will make about $4 million on the SC State game and likely have to pay out $500-750k. For Florida they likely made a little over $5 million (maybe $6 million) but theoretically have a return trip making the net no more than $3 million and probably less. That adds up. Having a team with a better record also affects attendance so if you blow a couple of early conference games it is going to cost you vs getting easy wins over patsies.
At some point I think the 9th game happens, it's just a matter of time. The other conferences want the SEC to add it as well since most of them have it. In the end though Slive is going to make sure it makes a shitload of money though or else it isn't happening.
Posted on 9/21/12 at 10:06 am to tmc94
I may have missed it in your earlier post, but 9 conference games means half the teams have one extra conference home game. Some teams will have 5 home SEC games, and the rest will have just 4 home SEC games. Definitely an advantage for half the teams, but I guess the Big 12 is doing it now, so it can't be that big of a deal.
Posted on 9/21/12 at 10:14 am to Chicken
It's just a year by year thing. That's also why the neutral site games such as A&M/Arky and Fla/Ga may continue to spread. That way you can still have a 4/4 home and away schedule.
Posted on 9/21/12 at 12:43 pm to Chicken
quote:
I may have missed it in your earlier post, but 9 conference games means half the teams have one extra conference home game.
actually it's the other way. Half the teams have one fewer home game. This doesn't add a game to the schedule, only a conference game, LSU would remove Idaho or a similar type home game
Posted on 9/21/12 at 12:52 pm to tmc94
The part about having one more conference home game is still true. Your point about it not mattering for schools that sell out every game is valid though. If Alabama was playing A&M at home or Idaho it wouldn't make a difference to them in terms of tickets sold.
Posted on 9/21/12 at 12:55 pm to aggressor
quote:
The biggest driver of the 9th game would be the SEC Network deal that is being negotiated. If ESPN is willing to put enough cash in the kitty then it will happen because the TV revenue could be enough to overcome everything else. My guess is the deal will combo with the 2nd tier rights deal because as it stands there are only 14 games available for the SEC Network, they will want to double or triple that.
this is erroneous. ESPN owns all the games but the 14 you mention. ESPN will be a partner in SECtv. And ESPN does not currently air all the games it owns.
1 game/week is sold to a distribution network called SEC network (it's playing UK-UF this week and A&M-Ark next)
1 gamme/week is sold to FSN
1 game every other week is sold to CSS
All these contracts expire after 2013 and normally ESPN would put them back up for bid. They won't. They are being added to the inventory for SECtv. That means SECtv likely has 3 games every single week and 4 some weeks. That's with zero change to our current setup.
The single biggest driver to whether we go to 9 games is one you guys aren't even talking about. The old guard of the SEC doesn't want to never play each other. LSU-UK used to play every year. So did UA-UF. And AU-UT. At 8 conf games, these games would be every 6 years and it makes the conference feel distant, something that doesn't really matter to us because we are new here. The close-knit feel of the SEC is something many are fighting for.
Posted on 9/21/12 at 12:57 pm to tmc94
Another conf game is what I meant. Had a few beers.
Page 1 of 2
Latest Texas A&M News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News