🏈 Pac-10 coaches vote 6-4 against round-robin scheduling

[252BAMA]

"While every other conference is looking for more money, the SEC is looking for a bigger safe. The SEC recently signed a new 15-year contract worth $2 billion – that’s BILLION – with ESPN."--Jeff Schultz-AJC

The above quote from another thread I posted this morning came to mind while I was reading this Pac-10 article. Which raised this question in my mind---If money problems are part of the reason the Pac-10 wants the additional money making home game each year, then should not the lack of money problems by the SEC allow them to schedule fewer money making home games each year? I am no longer buying Bama's argument that they need 7 home games per year to meet budget.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/pac10/0-9-76/Pac-10-coaches-vote-6-4-against-round-robin-scheduling.html

 

[psychojoe]

I think that the SEC's lucrative deals with CBS and ESPN will make it more likely that we will schedule some attractive OOC games each year. That would translate into maybe one extra road game per season. I can't really picture us playing six road games a year though, not with all the money we've put into BDS. For much of the seventies Bama had two attractive non conference games a year, one at home and one away. We took on such opponents as Nebraska, Penn State and Southern Cal. Perhaps we can return to scheduling like that.

Which leads to a pet peeve of mine. If our goal each year is the NC, as long as we have the BCS we would be shooting ourselves in the foot to play the typical SEC schedule, SEC CG, and say USC and Penn State each year. It would be difficult to get to #1 or #2 to say the least. Put in a true playoff system, with some realistic selection scheme for the teams (how's that for getting rid of the BCS, LOL?) and a school wouldn't be penalized for a difficult non conference schedule. Indeed it would probably be valuable in preparing them for the tournament.

 

[252BAMA]

I think that the SEC's lucrative deals with CBS and ESPN will make it more likely that we will schedule some attractive OOC games each year. That would translate into maybe one extra road game per season. I can't really picture us playing six road games a year though, not with all the money we've put into BDS. For much of the seventies Bama had two attractive non conference games a year, one at home and one away. We took on such opponents as Nebraska, Penn State and Southern Cal. Perhaps we can return to scheduling like that.

Which leads to a pet peeve of mine. If our goal each year is the NC, as long as we have the BCS we would be shooting ourselves in the foot to play the typical SEC schedule, SEC CG, and say USC and Penn State each year. It would be difficult to get to #1 or #2 to say the least. Put in a true playoff system, with some realistic selection scheme for the teams (how's that for getting rid of the BCS, LOL?) and a school wouldn't be penalized for a difficult non conference schedule. Indeed it would probably be valuable in preparing them for the tournament.

The thought of Bama mailing in the Auburn game, to prepare for the SECCG, because they are already qualified for that game, and they must win it in order to qualify for the playoffs, just terrifies me.

 

[psychojoe]

The thought of Bama mailing in the Auburn game, to prepare for the SECCG, because they are already qualified for that game, and they must win it in order to qualify for the playoffs, just terrifies me.

If we have kids and a coaching staff that "mail in" the Aub game we've got the wrong people.

 

[252BAMA]

If we have kids and a coaching staff that "mail in" the Aub game we've got the wrong people.

Agreed, but you see it at the end of every NFL season, and there is no assurance that it would not happen in CFB. No playoff, no problem.