re: Does the 9-game SEC experiment last?

I mean conference expansion as a whole was trash. It's taken away so many potentially fun matchups. You need interconnectivity to truly get a sense of rankings. Now these major conferences are just playing each other and then patsy state.

I think all p4 teams should have to play 2 teams OOC that are p4. It would sure help figure out which conferences are legit each year.

9 SEC games is GREAT for the fans.

Leave it alone.

If you miss the playoffs get better.

And now the playoffs will be 24 (which is retarded in its own right but if you can't make it now)

I like the 9 game schedule. Gives fans more great games. It Just Means More. I’m sure coaches hate it though. The SEC should get automatic bids to the playoffs, but unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. The playoff committee is filled with idiots who only look at win/loss record.

quote:

---

Gives fans more great games.

---

Only if you are replacing cupcakes.

Georgia has dropped Clemson, Louisville, and FSU on future schedules so far.

You are just as likely to get Vanderbilt added to your schedule as you get Alabama.

When fans claim that they are getting more great games, it tells you about the quality of OOC opponents their athletics director have been feeding them.

quote:

---

I’ve never understood how one-sided this is. Half the teams gain an extra SEC victory. All of the teams gain a SOS bump. And most importantly, since when did fans prefer comparing a stat (# losses) over an actual, in the flesh, IRL, game experience? Who would rather hop on a message board M-F trolling about their loss record rather than watching their team play in, or perhaps even attending the game to witness, a great game against a tradition-laden program? Seems to me most of you “fans” have totally lost the plot, and what you really want is some tribalism badge to wave in the face of people from other tribes. How pathetic

---

Bravo. The people bitching about a 9 game schedule are fricking fairies.

I'm more concerned with who the best SEC team is than who is the National Champion since the National Champion tournament now includes a bunch of teams. Now, things are more even than when we had a West vs East division and teams will be more battle tested.

People saying this won't hurt the SEC are lying ti themselves. They forget undefeated SEC teams getting left out of the Natty and how the perception was prior to 2006.

The major problem is the SEC will not get as many chances to play OOC teams (fresh and healthy) as they have before. Early season matchups help prove conf strength BEFORE playoff selection. Who cares if we proved it in the playoff if 1-2 teams didn't get in because of public misconception. Just listen to these idiots saying that the SEC sucks bc the top teams have been losing. It's idiotic how ignorant most casual fans are.

Next, a big thing that will hurt is the unequal wear and tear of the teams come playoff time. Sure, in the playoffs we'll get a chance to compete, but SEC teams after 9 conf games will likely be extremely beat up. Not even UGA or Bama have great depth nowadays so even they WILL feel it. It's already happened in the last couple years.

Also, I think the idea that SOS will be rewarded as they say is complete BS. Big10 conned the SEC into 9 conf games bc they knew our bottom half is much stronger than theirs. "Oh but 3 loss teams will get in!" Sure maybe 1 or 2 and then we'll be fighting internally each time a 3 loss ga or Bama gets in over a 3 loss Mizzou or Kentucky. Just look at the rankings. 1 loss Wake is ahead of the majority of solid SEC teams. That isn't changing for the playoffs. Every other conference gained with this decision save ours IMO.

Take a look at the records of some of the FCS teams that make the playoffs over there. 8-4 is pretty common