re: Vote to keep 8 game schedule was 13-1

quote:

---

meansonny
Vote to keep 8 game schedule was 13-1
quote:

Sounds pretty good to me. Clemson, VT, Penn State, Michigan, Michigan State...makes our dick bigger than most.


How many of those were road games?
And none of those were in the same season.

Still... you've got one good OOC opponent.

You're doing what you should be.

---

Well, you're the one who suggested measuring dicks starting with the hardest game on the schedule.

In what year was any of those OOC games the hardest on bama's schedule?

quote:

---

The B1G elimination of FCS games won't be phased in for a couple of years though, and they also are looking at a nine (and maybe even ten) game conference schedule.

---

I already suspect that the real reason the Big Ten wants to go to 9 conference games is more b/c they are scared of OOC upsets due to their continuing decline and only tossed in the no FCS stuff as a smokescreen to hide that fact.

If they go to 10 conference games out of a 12 game schedule I don't see how it could be anything other than them trying to hide their decline by avoiding other teams from around the nation until a potential playoff.

I think a lot of it has to do with their network. They are seeing great ratings for some games and horrible ones for the crap end of their schedule (which is the bulk of BTN games). The financial implications with their ownership stake makes improving content, for those low-end games specifically, extremely important. Those are the games the conference has a financial stake in. The extra conference games are really for the network partners (ABC/ESPN). So I think it's two-fold for them

In our case, starting in 2014, we will also have a financial stake in the worst end of our schedule. The best games will remain on CBS and ESPN most likely (though ESPN also has a stake in SECN). We get a fixed amount no matter the ratings there. So the biggest financial incentive for us is to increase ratings on SECN and thus, improve the bottom of our schedule, not the top. It's why elimination of FCS should be important to us. There is money in it.

quote:

---

No, you're not. Ten years ago isn't now. And no, you won't be scheduling them more often regardless of whether or not we go to 9 conference games. You've already got 4 OOC games scheduled for 2014 (Idaho, E. Michigan, E. Kentucky, FSU), and Miami already has four scheduled for 2016 (Toledo, FAMU, Notre Dame, FAU).

---

Thanks for clearing that up. Now that you have pointed out 2 years we can't play, it is obvious now we will never schedule each other again.

quote:

---

Well, you're the one who suggested measuring dicks starting with the hardest game on the schedule.

---

UGA opens @ Clemson and finishes @ Georgia Tech.
That's our OOC.

In conference, we have @ Jacksonville as our toughest.
South Carolina and LSU are home games for the next 2.
@ UT. @ Vandy. @ Auburn.
Kentucky and Missouri at home.

That's our 10 game schedule.
Hopefully, we'll get an SECCG in there as well.

quote:

---

Point taken.

But you're measuring a season's worth of SOS.

1 game a season does not make.

---

You're correct, but most teams in the SEC aren't even scheduling one big game. UF and South Carolina have one every year. UGA's is iffy because GT isn't a great opponent in many years, but they're playing Clemson and others in the future which makes up for it most years. Those three teams get credit. So does LSU with their recent games (but still only one "real one" per year in almost every recent and future example).

My point is that you're calling out Alabama when we're doing at least as much (and often doing much more) than other schools in the conference. The only time someone has a tougher OOC slate than us is when our scheduled opponent is down (Penn State) or the rare year when a team has two bigger names OOC opponents. Alabama would have to be considered a leader in the OOC scheduling of the conference.

I agree with those of you that say we should drop the FCS games. I just don't see why you can't get on board for 9. I know that I'm biased towards Saban, but his plan does make good sense:

9 SEC games per year
1 big time OOC game
2 games against other teams from "big 5" conferences (so your cupcakes are Kansas and Colorado instead of Chattanooga and Georgia State)

Every team has 10 good games and 2 decent ones. Good for TV, good for the fans, good for competition. Good for rivalries and rotation because 9 would allow you to keep the permanent rivals but still get more rotation. I just don't see the downside for anyone except the Mississippi States of the world who are dying to make a bowl game every year and would be on the bubble. But let's face it, the bubble teams don't matter. And as far as the home games argument, TV money is going to make up for it, and in addition to that, ADs just need to be smart and time their home and homes to coincide with the years when they have 4 SEC home games vs 5. Times are changing. Yes, it will take some work to get the scheduling right, but it's worth it.

quote:

---

It really doesn't. It makes some sense for Bama

Other schools have a fixed big time OOC game
Other schools have a fixed neutral site conference game

These two things mean that with a 9 game schedule combined with the fixed opponent, they will alternate 5 and 4 home games through those 10 games. The years they have 4, they have to schedule both other games at home just to get to 6 home games. And they also have to schedule 1 of 2 home game in years with 5. That makes this impossible. Meanwhile Bama gets 6 every year with this schedule.

UF, UGA, and Arky (they play one home game in LR) are in this boat. When the A&M-tu series restarts we will be as well. It's simply not possible for those schools to play that schedule. Moreover, almost every single SEC school plays 7 home games annually. And almost every one makes over $5million per home game even after paying opponents. So you are asking athletic departments to take a $5 million cut to do this.

This concept is not even a realistic possibility.

---

The TV money makes that $5MM a non factor.

Arky doesn't count. LR is still a home game.

A&M and UT could set it up to line up with their 4/5 years.

In the new world of college football scheduling - let's call it 5 years from now - every one of the big 5 conferences would be playing only each other under this plan. So the lowest tier teams (Iowa State and others) will be forced to take one off road games or 2 away, 1 home arrangements. This facilitates the scheduling difficulties of the SEC teams. They'll become the new FCS schools because they'll be the bottom of the new barrel. They'll gladly take the money and not get the return game.

The only issue you bring up that I see as an actual problem is UF and UGA. Since they both have OOC rivals, they may have to change the Cocktail Party to a home and home. It sucks, but if that's the only change it takes to make everything else work then so be it.

quote:

---

no, it doesn't. Our contract with CBS is for 14 games and is like $65m. That's the very top game and we aren't getting $5m per. People wildly exaggerate how much money comes from tv. Right now everyone gets about $20m annually for tv. In the future it's estimated at $28m for the whole season. Anyway more conference games mean fewer broadcasts overall so even if there is more money per game, it may not even be more overall.

---

I think the SEC Network makes this argument more complicated, but we don't know so I can't throw a number at you to refute what you're saying.

quote:

---

It's not though. One big reason that schools want home games is there is a direct correlation between setting foot on campus and making donations to the school (both academic and athletic). Schools work very hard to find ways to get alumni on campus for any reason. LR is not campus

---

That is Arkansas' fault. Alabama played home games in Birmingham forever but stopped because it was stupid (there were several reasons, but stupid sums it up). Arkansas can do the same. I know you'll probably talk about Arky's location in the state and the big base in LR etc etc but if getting people on campus is so important, they should move all the games there. Plus, they're talking about expanding.

quote:

---

we won't have a 5 year. We play Arky in Dallas annually after this year. We would have 4 home games, 4 road games, and 1 neutral every year

---

That's only for 10 years, correct? After that it would presumably go home and home.

quote:

---

wake me when this happens. ISU can and will continue to schedule Northern Iowa and South Dakota State rather than take a massive pay cut to come get stomped by Florida. Your new world vision is comically unrealistic. You are making paupers out of schools that aren't today and you are killing schools that are paupers. Who is going to vote for that? The SEC, none of whom are paupers, wouldn't even vote for it.

---

I agree this is the hardest part to visualize. But if you've followed the deregulation/full cost of attendance/etc debates, there is a very real possibility that the major conferences could create their own modified ecosystem within the next decade. If that occurs, someone has to be the pauper. The only value for those schools will come from the massive tv deals and from payouts for OOC games. Obviously there's no value to them from a competitive standpoint, but those teams aren't the ones pushing for full cost of attendance or deregulation anyway.

quote:

---

So in order to facilitate your ideas, you want to stomp all over the tradition of the cocktail party? Get out of here with that shite. And somehow that's the only issue

---

How is it any more of a loss than any of the other things that have changed?
No more OU/Nebraska
No more Texas/Texas A&M (I know you say it will come back, and maybe it will, but we just don't know yet)
No more Texas A&M / Texas Tech
No more ND / Michigan
There are others but I'm pretty dead from a long day and can't think of them.

You'd still be keeping the game, just moving the location. Small price to pay.

quote:

---

The only issue you bring up that I see as an actual problem is UF and UGA. Since they both have OOC rivals, they may have to change the Cocktail Party to a home and home. It sucks, but if that's the only change it takes to make everything else work then so be it.

---

So, we have to sacrifice our traditions yet somehow UT-Bama is untouchable?

UF and UGA want the game in Jacksonville and will continue to vote down the 9 game schedule because of it. Good luck getting it done without us.