re: Games holding up the SEC from going to a 9 team yearly schedule.

Really screwing the other 10 teams royally.

No need for that.

Self-centered much?

quote:

---

FWIW: I'm also only 23, so the older UGA contingent might disagree with me

---

I'm 59-years-old, a 1982 grad of UGA, and I could care less if we continue to play Chop Block U. I would much rather replace Tech with Clemson.

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.

quote:

---

ames holding up the SEC from going to a 9 team yearly schedule.

---

There's only one coach that wants a 9 game conference schedule and he doesn't live in Auburn.

OP: is your next thread going to be about how A&M should play tu annually?

How about only wins losses count are the games in your own division. You must schedule cross divisional games but they don’t count against you as far as conference record. You must play 2 but you can schedule another if you want to. I think it will give a better division champ.

quote:

---

Key reasons for those two changes include:
(1) Stronger resumés to help ensure the SEC's inclusion in the CFP;

---

Adding a 9th game does not improve the strength of schedule for 2 reasons.
1) it is more of the same. Half of the conference is below average. UGA whipping on Arkansas or Vanderbilt does not help our strength of schedule. It hurts it.
2) you are hurting the strength of the conference by guaranteeing 7 more losses on everyone's record.

quote:

---

(2) Larger slate of appealing games to boost TV and attendance revenues;

---

This can be done out of conference. UGA has played at Notre Dame, at Clemson, at Colorado, at Oklahoma State, at Arizona State all on top of our home and homes with GA Tech.
You do not improve this quality scheduling by forcing us to play Ole Miss and Arkansas more often and stacking an additional loss on Ole Miss and Arkansas while doing so.

quote:

---

Enhanced appeal for higher-payout bowls and lucrative neutral-site games.

---

What? The SEC already has the most lucrative bowl season. It won't get more lucrative because of a 9th conference game. If anything, you may be pushing a team out of bowl contention
(i.e. less lucrative).

quote:

---

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

---

You don't need a rule against FCS opponents. Just tell your AD to stop scheduling them. The reality is that it is difficult to fill home only slates on the schedule.
UGA just played FBS UMass. To get the home only game, we tied in a home and home for the basketball season. These home and homes are costing more and more each season. Striking the FCS completely off the table will jack up the price of having a UMass come out (supply/demand). Having the FCS as a backup may be a necessity (this will be one if the unintended consequences from idiots whose ADs can't solve their own scheduling and so people clamor for less local control and more rules and restrictions from a governing body. Who in their right mind voluntarily gives up rights and freedoms so a larger body can punitively enforce a standard with unintended consequences).

quote:

---

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.

---

People will always complain. UGA played FBS UMASS and we got called out by Joe Klatt in the same sentence as Bama playing FCS Citadel. Never mind the facts. There will always be a worst game on the schedule and there will always be bitching.

quote:

---

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.

---

You really don't understand the economics of games. All games cost the same. Some season ticket holders are more willing to get rid of seats without a profit for games that are not a priority. Home against Vandy, Arkansas, etc.. is still not a priority. It is affordable to grab conference "cupcakes" just like the OOC ones.

quote:

---

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.

---

You don't understand them at all.
Right now, the conference plays 112 games each year (14 teams play 8 conference games = 56 games. and 14 teams play 4 OOC games = 56 games. Totals 112). Going to a 9 game conference schedule only plays 105 games each season. (14 teams play 9 conference games = 63 games. 14 teams playing 3 OOC games = 42 games. Totals 105 games).
You just made 7 games of TV, radio, and potentially home games disappear into thin air. And you aren't necessarily making the games better. Just more of the same (half of the teams in the conference are below average).

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. 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.

---

If the issue is FCS, then why do people bitch when UGA plays UMass? Because the media and people will find a reason to bitch. You won't stop it. There will always be a weakest team on the schedule. There will always be a 2nd weakest team on the schedule.

The focus should be on the toughest OOC games. The focus is on the wrong spot. How tough can you make your top 1, 2, or 3 OOC games. But people and the media are too lazy to make that comparison.

quote:

---

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

---

Tbh, no.
The weakest game on every schedule sucks. It doesn't matter if it is FCS, FBS, or Arkansas. You can't eliminate that.

The unintended consequences aren't worth it when ADs can just schedule better for their fans.

I don't know which is worse in that reply, your reading comprehension or thinking (logic, math).

I'll pass. Happy Thanksgiving!