re: Dana Holgorsen: Every Power 5 conference should play a nine game conference schedule

That's basically what I said in my post.
Hince why I, personally, get irritated when those 10 schools don't understand our limitations on scheduling.

quote:

---

We make $5M on neutral site games

---

Slow your roll. I seriously doubt Bama stops doing your neutral site tour if the conference goes to 9 games. But Bama would trade a home only game for a home and home. And that is where you lose money (1 less home game every other year... who knew fans were in favor of fewer home games. Ask your chamber of commerce how they feel about that).

quote:

---

- How are fewer games televised? All SEC games are televised. We are all still playing 12 games a season and all of them will be televised

---

Seriously, Clark? You don't see how trading a weeks worth of 14 OOC games for 7 conference games (between 14 teams) means fewer games to be televised? Fewer games for radio? We already brought up 7 fewer home games for the conference each season.

quote:

---

We already have rematches in the SECCG sometimes. What the hell does that matter?

---

Newsflash... TV revenue for rematches sucks. The winning team doesn't get a national bump for beating a team twice. A 9 game conference schedule would force more rematches. In case you haven't noticed, the winner of the conference championship game is a big deal. And a rematch is doing everything that we can to negate that. Hell... we play so few games, forcing the rematch is almost downright criminal.

The point of 9 conference games is to play teams more often.

Well... we added more teams to make more money. You think we are going to voluntarily give up TV and home game revenue because we added more teams? You missed the point entirely, and maybe you should have opposed Mizzou and the Aggies stronger.

If you want to play teams more often, then you should argue to play teams less often (fewer games against Ole Miss, Arkansas, LSU,etc..)

A 9th conference game for UGA kills our matchups against Notre Dame, Clemson, Oklahoma State, Colorado, Arizona State, etc... those are away games that our fan base love in case you haven't noticed. Maybe Bama can take you somewhere other than Dallas or Atlanta sometime. You may love it. And yes, college football is better for UGA playing these road games (as opposed to encourging more games of UGA vs. Kentucky or vs. Arkansas, or vs. Vandy). Go big. Don't go average (which is what the 9th game forces on everyone).

quote:

---

Did you read all of my post? The point of the ideas mentioned is to create a situation where South Carolina gets to play Clemson and North Carolina and feels ok about it because Alabama and Missouri are also playing 2 P5 schools.

The situation you are discussing would be totally valid and not an acceptable measure

---

Unfortunately, your situation still isn't good for UGA or Florida (I know, it is an inconvenience to only 2 schools. But just improve your own damn scheduling and leave everyone else alone. If the team is worth a damn, you will see them in the SECCG).

UGA and Florida play a neutral site game every year. We have already sacrificed a home game every other year.
If UGA has a 9th conference game, we could see a year with 5 home games at Sanford Stadium.

Again... every school loses a home game. For UGA and Florida, that will push us down to 5 home games in a season.

quote:

---

Slow your roll. I seriously doubt Bama stops doing your neutral site tour if the conference goes to 9 games. But Bama would trade a home only game for a home and home. And that is where you lose money (1 less home game every other year... who knew fans were in favor of fewer home games. Ask your chamber of commerce how they feel about that).

---

I 100% guarantee we continue doing the neutral site tour. Why would we not?

I'm not in favor of "fewer home games" in general. But I am 100% in favor of sacrificing 2 home games against Mercer for 1 home game against Georgia.

quote:

---

Seriously, Clark? You don't see how trading a weeks worth of 14 OOC games for 7 conference games (between 14 teams) means fewer games to be televised? Fewer games for radio? We already brought up 7 fewer home games for the conference each season.

---

You think the SEC Network is feigning for inventory of more Auburn-Chattanooga or Missouri-Missouri State games? Seriously?

quote:

---

Newsflash... TV revenue for rematches sucks. The winning team doesn't get a national bump for beating a team twice. A 9 game conference schedule would force more rematches. In case you haven't noticed, the winner of the conference championship game is a big deal. And a rematch is doing everything that we can to negate that. Hell... we play so few games, forcing the rematch is almost downright criminal.

---

Newsflash, using that logic why don't we just play divisional foes and not play any cross divisional games? If your logic is correct, isn't that the logical conclusion? Especially considering the 3 biggest yearly cross-divisional games involve the 6 teams that make the SECCG 95% of the time (Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee). The odds are MUCH heavier that one of those games get repeated than the random draw of an extra interdivisional game.

quote:

---

A 9th conference game for UGA kills our matchups against Notre Dame, Clemson, Oklahoma State, Colorado, Arizona State, etc... those are away games that our fan base love in case you haven't noticed. Maybe Bama can take you somewhere other than Dallas or Atlanta sometime. You may love it. And yes, college football is better for UGA playing these road games (as opposed to encourging more games of UGA vs. Kentucky or vs. Arkansas, or vs. Vandy). Go big. Don't go average (which is what the 9th game forces on everyone).

---

I've addressed this above multiple times in posts above.

Everyone of your examples is playing one of the have-nots from the other division. It also means more Alabama-Georgia, Auburn-Florida, Tennessee-LSU games, which draw the helluva out of eyeballs (and local interest).

quote:

---

Maybe Bama can take you somewhere other than Dallas or Atlanta sometime. You may love it.

---

I'm very much on record hating playing neutral site games every year. It's the single worst thing we do as a program IMHO and it sucks for fans. However, we play on the road OOC more often than we play Georgia at home....................

If you go to 9 games, when UGA/UF/USC/UK have 4 Home conf. games, they HOST their ACC rival. That guarantees 5 home games MINIMUM.

I'ld LOVE to do H/H with the Swamp Rats!!!

quote:

---

pvilleguru
Dana Holgorsen: Every Power 5 conference should play a nine game conference schedule

quote:
Then let's grow the conf


If you add more teams to the conference, we'll be back to 8-10 team conferences within a few years.

We already went through this 90 years ago.

---

Do explain.

quote:

---

Whatever I guess. I'd prefer we just scrap divisions, grab 3 rivals and rotate all the other games. Alabama has much closer ties to Georgia and Vanderbilt than we do Arkansas and Texas A&M. I'd much rather at least play Georgia, Florida and Vanderbilt as much as those schools if not more

---

Now you are cooking with oil.

I love the idea of playing teams more. But I really don't need kentucky, vandy, missouri, etc. on an annual basis.

Amen

quote:

---

We can agree to disagree. I don't think our ideas are far removed from each other (playing quality OOC opponents). But rotating schedules faster can be done without a 9th game. If you hate patsies, schedule fewer of them (that is the only part of your schedule that you control).

---

Without going back through all of that I agree. I also agree re: rotational vs 9th game.

The best solution is 3-4 rival games (whatever they determine, people have mathematically calculated it all out on about 100 different blogs) and rotate the rest. That get everyone in and out and maintains the 3-4 games each fanbase wants yearly. And, it actually works out pretty well in terms of each base getting the main games they want.

Then, I'd prefer the league mandating at least 2 P5 OOC games for each school. But I doubt schools that really need those 3 gimme games to get to bowls (State, Ole Miss, Kentucky, Vandy, etc) would accept that.

And, all of that is just a pie in the sky idea unless the NCAA removes the divisional requirements and the SEC opens up to radical change.