🏈 One point I've seen overlooked about the vote against the 9 game schedule

[TerryP]

It didn't dawn on me until last night when I was taking a break at work.

I was talking with two guys; one who is the sports editor and a UGA fan and the other a beat writer who follows UofSC.

As they are complaining about the new rotation I asked why they thought their schools administration voted against the idea of playing nine games in a season. Both guys didn't answer the question but chose to take a stance of the SEC administration bowing to the wishes to Bama and UT to keep traditional rivalries intact. As you probably expect, they immediately repeated the line about how the TN game is just another check in the win column for the Tide.

As best as I could I set that aside and asked again, "why do they think their schools administration voted against the nine game schedule?" Almost beat for beat both echoed, "look at our out of conference game against Clemson/Georgia Tech. It would make the schedule practically unbearable."

Here's where irony reared it's beautiful head.

Clemson has lost the last five in a row to UofSC; six of the last eight. Georgia Tech has lost every game in the past decade sans one—2008.

And it's Bama wanting to keep UT on the schedule because it's an automatic win?

 

[planomateo]

Lots of teams are protecting their interests, whether it be easier wins or keeping tradition alive.

The question is, will the short sided decision hurt the long.

 

[BamaFan334]

It didn't dawn on me until last night when I was taking a break at work.

I was talking with two guys; one who is the sports editor and a UGA fan and the other a beat writer who follows UofSC.

As they are complaining about the new rotation I asked why they thought their schools administration voted against the idea of playing nine games in a season. Both guys didn't answer the question but chose to take a stance of the SEC administration bowing to the wishes to Bama and UT to keep traditional rivalries intact. As you probably expect, they immediately repeated the line about how the TN game is just another check in the win column for the Tide.

As best as I could I set that aside and asked again, "why do they think their schools administration voted against the nine game schedule?" Almost beat for beat both echoed, "look at our out of conference game against Clemson/Georgia Tech. It would make the schedule practically unbearable."

Here's where irony reared it's beautiful head.

Clemson has lost the last five in a row to UofSC; six of the last eight. Georgia Tech has lost every game in the past decade sans one—2008.

And it's Bama wanting to keep UT on the schedule because it's an automatic win?

I'd laugh in their face, because in the 90's, Georgia was a check in the win column for Tennessee, and Florida could say the same about Georgia as Tennessee could. Georgia fans only want to talk about recent success, not the mediocrity of the 90's and couple years in the 2000's before Richt got there. They want to keep acting like Clemson is a college football giant that is tearing it up otherwise, but they're not. They don't want to talk about three and four years ago when they had the most cupcake schedule in the SEC and maybe the country. They want to poor mouth theirselves and act like they get picked on instead of "hunkering down" and being realistic. My dad and family for the most part are Georgia fans, so I consistently have to bring them down to Earth about their beloved Bulldogs and their slighted and biased opinions on their team. sometimes it makes you wonder how these beligerant folks make it in the real world and hold down real jobs.

 

[252BAMA]

That issue, like playing 5 away games EOY, is more perceived than it is real. Like looking at a half of glass of water for two years. One year is is half full. The other year it is half empty. At the end of two years it is still a half of glass of water. With a nine conference game schedule, at the end of two years all schools will have played nine conference games at home and nine conference games away.

The real issue is the fact that, in order for 14 schools to play seven additional conference games, 14 OOC games have to be eliminated. Now we are looking at 7 full glasses of water (read money) and 7 empty glasses instead of 14 full glasses of water (read money). Big difference.

The solution they have chosen ( playing OOC with the other major conferences) will work only if more than half of the 14 games are played at home or at a neutral site. It will be interesting to analyze the 2016 and 2017 SEC schedules to see if at least 14 of the 28 games have been played at home or at a neutral site.

 

[TerryP]

The real issue is the fact that, in order for 14 schools to play seven additional conference games, 14 OOC games have to be eliminated. Now we are looking at 7 full glasses of water (read money) and 7 empty glasses instead of 14 full glasses of water (read money). Big difference.

To continue with your analogy, no one is paying attention to the pitcher of water sitting on the table—the revenue stream from the SECN. It will not change the effect of losing one home game every other year on the community around the program. It will affect that lost revenue from one game as will not having to pay 1MM plus to a visiting team (though that's a small percentage of the game day revenue.)

The solution they have chosen ( playing OOC with the other major conferences) will work only if more than half of the 14 games are played at home or at a neutral site. It will be interesting to analyze the 2016 and 2017 SEC schedules to see if at least 14 of the 28 games have been played at home or at a neutral site.

If I'm not mistaken, the payouts for playing a game at a neutral site are school specific. In other words, that money doesn't go into the SEC coffers but goes directly to the school.

It's a decision I like, versus continuing with a lot of FCS teams, but it's also one that favors the "haves" of a conference. Ole Miss isn't going to get the payout from a neutral site game that teams like LSU, Bama, and even UT will receive. They (Ole Miss) have the draw for ticket sales but don't carry the viewers for TV.

 

[252BAMA]

I'd laugh in their face, because in the 90's, Georgia was a check in the win column for Tennessee, and Florida could say the same about Georgia as Tennessee could. Georgia fans only want to talk about recent success, not the mediocrity of the 90's and couple years in the 2000's before Richt got there. They want to keep acting like Clemson is a college football giant that is tearing it up otherwise, but they're not. They don't want to talk about three and four years ago when they had the most cupcake schedule in the SEC and maybe the country. They want to poor mouth theirselves and act like they get picked on instead of "hunkering down" and being realistic. My dad and family for the most part are Georgia fans, so I consistently have to bring them down to Earth about their beloved Bulldogs and their slighted and biased opinions on their team. sometimes it makes you wonder how these beligerant folks make it in the real world and hold down real jobs.

An UGA fan on an SEC board says that half of their fan base is retarded. Me thinks he is at least 50% off.

 

[rick4bama]

So what it boil down to, is will we play Tenn. even year? It wouldn't hurt my feeling one bit it this happen we don't play them each year. Wonder what the two team that tell us every year "We have the oldest rival in the SOUTH!!"

 

[sean]

i'm sorry, but if you don't want to play more conference games because you're afraid it'll be "too tough", then you're in the wrong damn sport in the wrong damn conference!

go cry somewhere else with your wussy (being nice, there) attitude and not wanting to play anybody that might be too "tough".

if you wanna be the best, you gotta beat the best. if you wanna be number 1, you gotta beat number 1.

playing tougher and better opponents will only make you tougher and better.

 

[252BAMA]

To continue with your analogy, no one is paying attention to the pitcher of water sitting on the table—the revenue stream from the SECN. It will not change the effect of losing one home game every other year on the community around the program. It will affect that lost revenue from one game as will not having to pay 1MM plus to a visiting team (though that's a small percentage of the game day revenue.)



If I'm not mistaken, the payouts for playing a game at a neutral site are school specific. In other words, that money doesn't go into the SEC coffers but goes directly to the school.

It's a decision I like, versus continuing with a lot of FCS teams, but it's also one that favors the "haves" of a conference. Ole Miss isn't going to get the payout from a neutral site game that teams like LSU, Bama, and even UT will receive. They (Ole Miss) have the draw for ticket sales but don't carry the viewers for TV.

My point is that the ninth conference game assures all SEC schools the extra home game EOY. Attempting to schedule an OOC H/H series with a major conference school assures nothing for the lower tier of the SEC. For example, if I am the AD at one of the major conference schools and the Vandy AD is on the phone attempting to schedule a H/H with me, I am going to tell him I will schedule one or both games at my place, but I am not coming there. He HAS to play me. I don't have to play him.

 

[252BAMA]

If the lower tier SEC schools wind up having to play most, if not all, of the mandated OOC games away from home , they will be begging for the nine conference game schedule.

 

[TerryP]

If the lower tier SEC schools wind up having to play most, if not all, of the mandated OOC games away from home , they will be begging for the nine conference game schedule.

There's an interesting thought although I wonder if it would come to that.

Texas did agree to a home and home with Ole Miss. Oregon did with Mississippi State a decade or so ago. Vandy just finished up theirs with Wake Forest.

I'm thinking that some of these other bowl cities will get into the mix with neutral site games. We saw it start catching popularity in ATL, now Dallas and Houston are making it an annual thing as well.

People have suggested a type of pre-season for college ball. It doesn't seem like much of a stretch to see the first week, week and a half, filled with games like Mississippi State vs Oklahoma State, etc. That one happened last year.

 

[planomateo]

Here's a perspective, if someone posted this thinking earlier I obviously missed it.

 

[TerryP]

@planomateo I've mentioned scheduling is difficult for a team to get a home and home series with another Big5 team simply due to so many factors that are involved. IE: SEC sets its conference schedule requiring SEC teams to fill open dates...ACC does the same, and a lot of the times the dates needing filled don't coincide.

I've never thought about the situation ND was in when they are scheduling 12 games a year. I won't go as far as to say I sympathize, but I can manage to empathize.

 

[252BAMA]

If SEC schools still made out their own schedules, I do not believe Bama could find 8 SEC schools willing to schedule them.