Started By
Message
re: Keep our cupcakes in-state?
Posted on 9/10/19 at 9:40 am to RD Dawg
Posted on 9/10/19 at 9:40 am to RD Dawg
I just checked. USC has played an instate college in 9 of the last 10 years in addition to Clemson, with 2016 being the only exception (they still played Western Carolina, a regional school)
Clemson has played an instate college every year for the past 10 years. SC State is an HBCU who they played several times.
As far as the law, I may be confusing the fact that the USC and Clemson game is required by state legislature, but still I think it may be a thing
Clemson has played an instate college every year for the past 10 years. SC State is an HBCU who they played several times.
As far as the law, I may be confusing the fact that the USC and Clemson game is required by state legislature, but still I think it may be a thing
1
Posted on 9/10/19 at 9:47 am to meansonny
quote:
But who cares about watching the freshmen and redshirt freshmen play, right?
SallySonnyStruthers,
You have stated over and over that the SEC is made up of mostly "cupcakes".
So, here's a wild and crazy idea...…
What if the freshmen played in second half of the new 9th conference game "cupcake"??????
Sheesh. This is dumb.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 10:17 am to Jefferson Dawg
quote:
What if the freshmen played in second half of the new 9th conference game "cupcake"??????
Sheesh. This is dumb.
Only 70 can travel to conference games.
You are bright enough to know that.
There is a lot more opportunity for our redshirts and freshmen to play against the home only cupcake versus against the @ vandy cupcake. The home only cupcakes add value that the @Vandy/@Tennessee cant.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 10:18 am to Jefferson Dawg
Still waiting on your proof regarding 9 conference games making it more likely for more teams in the playoff.
I will check back tomorrow. Thanks in advance (do you know what fake news is?)
I will check back tomorrow. Thanks in advance (do you know what fake news is?)
Posted on 9/10/19 at 10:52 am to meansonny
Here is what I know that absolutely cannot be refuted: we have not gone undefeated in our regular season SEC schedule since 1982. That's over 25 seasons in a row and counting that we have at least 1 SEC loss at the end of November. That is a fact. If we've gone 3 decades without going 8-0, what sense does it make to tack on another SEC team and increase our odds of having another loss come playoff time?
Furthermore, we only have 6 teams to play in our division, plus our annual game with AU. Currently we play 1 "extra" west team, so obviously if we add a 9th game we're getting 2 west teams. It's not like we're gonna get ole miss or arkansas every year. So in addition to our 6 plus AU, you could have a year where we play bama and LSU as well. Or LSU and aTm. What kind of sense would that make?
Furthermore, we only have 6 teams to play in our division, plus our annual game with AU. Currently we play 1 "extra" west team, so obviously if we add a 9th game we're getting 2 west teams. It's not like we're gonna get ole miss or arkansas every year. So in addition to our 6 plus AU, you could have a year where we play bama and LSU as well. Or LSU and aTm. What kind of sense would that make?
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:00 am to deeprig9
quote:
and for everyone watching on the TeeVee.
So literally dozens of people, then. Even announcers for some of the games have been saying that college football needs to get better/more interesting games.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:10 am to FaCubeItches
quote:
Even announcers for some of the games have been saying that college football needs to get better/more interesting games.
why? They only say that because the elite teams have zero trouble sleepwalking through them, it's the same as it's alwasy been.
Nobody copmlained about us playing NW State or ULM in the last 90s because those were fun tuneup games and we were typically an 8-4 type team. Now we're a top 3 national team so people complain.
The real "problem", if you can call it that, is that we're currently in a situation where there are only 4-5 teams every season wiht a real shot to win the title. Bama, us, OU, OSU, Clemson are pretty much duking it out then there's everyone else. If there were say 10-15 teams wiht a legit shot before the season nobody would be complaining about these cupcakes.
I truly believe that when saban retires and bama gets knocked down even if ever so slightly, the country is going to enjoy CFB a whole lot more.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:17 am to meansonny
quote:
Only 70 can travel to conference games.
MensaSonny,
The 9th conference game won't always be an away game.
And an additional conference game still leaves one Murray State type "cupcake" on the schedule. Two of them even, in some years.
Fakity, fake, fake..
Fake fake
Fake
News
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:23 am to meansonny
quote:
Still waiting on your proof regarding 9 conference games making it more likely for more teams in the playoff.
I will check back tomorrow. Thanks in advance (do you know what fake news is?)
FakeNewsSonny,
The SEC has never had a 9 game conference schedule in the playoff era, so the fact that you want some kind of example as "proof" is hilarious.
It's called a common sense observation based on what we've seen so far.
Heck, who knows. If the 9 game SEC schedule existed last year, and we had beat the right team, in the right way, it might have been enough to have gotten us in playoff last year. SO, thanks a lot for ruining our playoff opportunity last year fake-news-face.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:50 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Nobody copmlained about us playing NW State or ULM in the last 90s
The game has changed a lot since the late 90s, which is the midpoint between the Herschel era and now. There are a lot more entertainment options now than there were then. Offering up a slate of 70-0 beatdowns of directional schools was one thing when it was the only thing there was to watch, but now, there are a lot of other options.
CFB season only lasts a couple of months. To have three weeks of that brief period largely consisting of irrelevant massacre games isn't really a great thing, at least not from a broadcast standpoint.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 11:51 am to FaCubeItches
quote:
The game has changed a lot since the late 90s, which is the midpoint between the Herschel era and now. There are a lot more entertainment options now than there were then.
sorry but I don't think we need to fundamentally change the way we schedule our season based on the shortened attention spans of millenials that can't live without their phones for 10 minutes.
quote:
CFB season only lasts a couple of months. To have three weeks of that brief period largely consisting of irrelevant massacre games isn't really a great thing, at least not from a broadcast standpoint.
I couldn't care less about a broadcast standpoint. Again nobody complained about these games before, it's not the schools' fault that people have to constantly find something to stimulate their attention.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 12:29 pm to FaCubeItches
quote:
CFB season only lasts a couple of months. To have three weeks of that brief period largely consisting of irrelevant massacre games isn't really a great thing
Agree.
And it's not at crisis levels yet, but attendance is way way down all across the college football world. Even in the mighty SEC.
IF people don't think that's a problem, then their opinions about any this are basically irrelevant.
Just ask Nick Saban himself. ..
Last I checked, he wants a 10 game SEC conference schedule. and two power 5s per year. And I would imagine Sick Naban agrees.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 1:18 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Again nobody complained about these games before, it's not the schools' fault that people have to constantly find something to stimulate their attention
Because we didn't have schedules like this in the not too distant past.Look at our schedules from the 80's.We played grand total of TWO FCS teams the entire decade.Sure,we played a Tulane o Memphis State and Southern Miss but we also had multiple P5 OOC games and I get we played fewer conference games but the home schedules were MUCH better.
The amount of schools jumping up to FBS just to get a payday from a P5 school is ridiculous.Coastal Carolina? WTF?
P5 schools are responsible for the proliferation of these garbage teams and it needs to stop.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 1:29 pm to Arch Madness
quote:
just checked. USC has played an instate college in 9 of the last 10 years in addition to Clemson, with 2016 being the only exception (they still played Western Carolina, a regional school)
Clemson has played an instate college every year for the past 10 years. SC State is an HBCU who they played several times.
Sure,all that's correct but once again it's more of a courtesy than anything else.Both Clemson and SC try to their best to keep the money in state but it's not required by the legislature.
quote:
required by state legislature, but still I think it may be a thing
It has been proposed but not passed as a law.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 3:12 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
sorry but I don't think we need to fundamentally change the way we schedule our season based on the shortened attention spans of millenials that can't live without their phones for 10 minutes.
The choice isn't "ours" to make. Like it or not, the game is changing. If, or more likely *when*, it goes to an 8 team playoff, it will change even more. And again, like it or not, Millennials are the future market - they're coming into their peak earning years. The Boomers are out of them, and Gen X is starting to exist them. Everyone is going to be chasing the emerging market, not the receding one.
quote:
I couldn't care less about a broadcast standpoint. Again nobody complained about these games before,
Bully for you, I suppose. But broadcast dollars are huge in sports. And yeah, people have long complained about shitty matchups against dinky schools. It's just gotten more noticeable now. Back when you only had the major networks and ESPN (as a single channel) showing games, they could be pretty selective and pick the best available, but even back then, you could still stuck with "regional coverage" of a dynamic game like Nebraska vs. Creighton. As the number of channels grows, the more uninteresting, unimportant games that get aired.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 3:37 pm to FaCubeItches
So the TeeVee market says there's a shortage of good games, instead of admitting there's no market for shitty games like Akron vs Southern Illinois.
I bet ESPN2 sold a few mill of ads for the uga Murray State game. Are they complaining about that?
If they had their way, and there were 25 quality games on the same day every week, the viewership wouldn't necessarily go up because there's a fixed amount of audience that would peanut butter out across all the games. The TeeVee people might even lose money.
I bet ESPN2 sold a few mill of ads for the uga Murray State game. Are they complaining about that?
If they had their way, and there were 25 quality games on the same day every week, the viewership wouldn't necessarily go up because there's a fixed amount of audience that would peanut butter out across all the games. The TeeVee people might even lose money.
Posted on 9/10/19 at 4:51 pm to deeprig9
quote:
I bet ESPN2 sold a few mill of ads for the uga Murray State game. Are they complaining about that?
It was a lot of the same ads run over and over (looking your way, Fansville). Any network would be happier with more ads from different advertisers. Pretty sure they made more from LSU/Texas than UGA/Wow, there's a college named "Murray State"? Bigger games also draw national advertisers, who probably pay more than say, Zaxby's, which is a regional restaurant, with a smaller ad budget.
quote:
If they had their way, and there were 25 quality games on the same day every week, the viewership wouldn't necessarily go up because there's a fixed amount of audience that would peanut butter out across all the games. The TeeVee people might even lose money.
Individual channels might see a drop in viewers, but overall viewing would almost certainly rise. Given that the majority of channels are all owned by the same couple of companies (primarily Disney) they'd be pretty happy with this.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 5:38 am to deeprig9
quote:
Jefferson
quote:
You are obtusely dismissing everything I've said.
Just in case we forget who we are replying to...
Posted on 9/11/19 at 5:39 am to Jefferson Dawg
quote:
In fact, having 9 conference games would significantly increase the odds of getting two SEC games into the playoff again at some point. Dumbo.
Facts or fake news?
I gave you a day to make something intelligent of yourself.
You and I both knew that wasnt happening.
Conference appearances in the playoff:
SEC 6
ACC 5
Big xii 3
Big x 3
Pac x 2
ND 1
Conference playoff wins:
SEC 7
ACC 5
Big x 2
Pac x 1
Conferences with 8 regular season conference games:
SEC
ACC
Conferences with 9 regular season conference games:
Bigxii
Pac x
Big x
There is pretty clear evidence about 9 conference games. But you won't withdraw your assassment.
Posted on 9/11/19 at 5:39 am to Jefferson Dawg
quote:
And an additional conference game still leaves one Murray State type "cupcake" on the schedule. Two of them even, in some years.
Actually, no. You can't schedule 4 opponents in 3 weeks. A 9th conference game does not allow the football team and AD to strike up whatever balance they want for home only games (cupcakes) and OOC home and home games where you lose that home game every other year.
Since when did you lose your balls, Jefferson? A freedom fighter like yourself should never give up local control (scheduling) to a federation of 13 other universities with their own interests at the forefront. Boyfriend problems at home? You seem a little edgy as of late. Put simply, weak.
I'd offer you 3 days to come up with an intelligent response. But who are we kidding. You and I both know that you won't even try.
Page 4 of 5
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News