🏈 SEC needs 9 conference football games, even if there's no stomach for it yet

[BAMANEWSBOT]

Ex-SEC commissioner Kramer says league should take "hard look" at 9 games

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- Perfect solutions don't exist for a 14-team SEC football schedule. So go with the most logical choice, which coaches and ADs don't want to hear: Play nine SEC games.

Give fans more, not fewer, reasons to purchase pricier season tickets.

Give TV more, not fewer, attractive games to maximize the SEC's value.

Give newcomers more, not fewer, chances to build SEC rivalries.

Give traditionalists equal, not fewer, Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia games to ensure the past doesn't get lost in translation.

Read More Here...

 

[TerryP]

:chat_bs:

Does anyone, anywhere, believe SEC fans would rather watch an Ole Miss vs Kentucky game versus a marquee out of conference match-up?

Does anyone, anywhere, want their team to NOT play some of the marquee programs outside the SEC each year outside of the post season? I'd guess some who don't like the SEC's rankings and see a benefit of SOS dropping.

Eight is enough.

 

[UAgrad93]

I agree Terry. Eight regular season games is plenty! I'd rather keep one of those big OOC games and a couple of cupcakes rather than play 9 conference games and 3 cupcakes.

 

[LBS]

Noting that the cupcakes are there to increase the chances of surviving the toughest schedules around, and the marquee OOC games are taken on when more is needed/wanted, when it comes to selecting which OOC game is axed, it will be the ones that everyone wants to see that are the first to go.

 

[TerryP]

Noting that the cupcakes are there to increase the chances of surviving the toughest schedules around, and the marquee OOC games are taken on when more is needed/wanted, when it comes to selecting which OOC game is axed, it will be the ones that everyone wants to see that are the first to go.

? When more of what is needed/wanted?

 

[planomateo]

I'm gonna lump two topics into my response.

1) This begs the question, which teams would fight to keep their yearly cross divisional games? It is my opinion that this is an important discussion in the 8 vs 9 game talks. If teams fight to keep cross divisional, then we will not see another team at home but every 12 years (believe my thinking is right), compared to every 7 or 8 years. I can see a few teams fighting to keep their cross divisional rivals - I'd imagine there are a few teams who would be ok allowing their cross divisional rivals go away. I'd imagine the teams willing to fight are probably the bigger schools, but I could be wrong.

Along the lines of cross divisional rivals - USCe and TAMU locking up for cross divisional games is being discussed in public now.​

http://www.abccolumbia.com/sports/AM-May-Become-Gamecocks-SEC-Cross-Rival-141307253.html​

2) Most if not all the other major conferences are going to 9 game schedules + conference championship games. What is our answer to this - I see this as a threat to the SEC's dominance of football, regardless of what the other conferences opponents are, they are doing this as a way to out maneuver the SEC. My opinion, we should answer and answer big. Realizing we've added some additional teams to the mix, we still play several cupcakes and most SEC schools play at least 1 big OOC game each season.

Do we increase this to 2 big OOC games, do we go to 9 conf games. I don't have a good out of the box idea for this, I'm not convinced sticking to 8 is in the best interests of the SEC for the long term...​

 

[TerryP]

In terms of keeping those cross-divisional rivalries there really are only four teams left with that history: Bama, Georgia, Tennessee, and Auburn. (That very well could be six. A&M and Mizzou have met over 100 times as well as UGA and AU.)

You ask any fan from Arkansas—and I have—they don't care. Same with South Carolina. Who would be a cross divisional rivalry for any other SEC team? You won't find one outside of LSU and Florida and that has only developed since the 90's.

I fear agendas. By that, let me use one of the AD's comments from Mississippi. He mentioned the SEC going into a NFL type format where we schedule games before each season. During that season you'd have the best teams facing each other during the regular season which at face value seems like a good idea.

But, who benefits from such a plan?

 

[planomateo]

I suspected they were the only four willing to fight for the cross divisional rivals. If that's it, I'd draw the conclusion that it could very well mean the end of the cross divisional rivals unless the SEC lets a few schools have permanent cross divisional games but not have to go to 9 games. I could even see a few schools saying that if we wanted to keep cross divisional games, we have to go to 9 games to do this (we saw how some were willing to make adjustments during the BYE week adjustment conversations a few years ago)

I'm afraid we all have agenda's.

I'd imagine the Mississippi school you are referring to is the same school who said that if they went to 9 SEC games, they wouldn't make a bowl. How soon can we get to 7 wins equals a bowl game

(NOTE: can we add this smiley please)

 

[TerryP]

You know what just crossed my mind? If the same scenario were on the table a decade ago I'd bet we'd find the majority of Alabama fans' feelings nonchalant when it came to losing our annual game versus Tennessee. I grew up in Huntsville and I'm sure a lot of that plays into the point I consider UT to be a bigger rival than Auburn. So, you know what side of the fence I'm on.

...a bowl. How soon can we get to 7 wins equals a bowl game

(NOTE: can we add this smiley please)

:blah_1_many2:

 

[TerryP]

:muahaha:

 

[LBS]

? When more of what is needed/wanted?

When more splash, pazaaz, respect.


There seems to be this belief that in order to decide a conference champion, everyone has to play everyone else during the regular season, or as close to it as possible. This not the case. The Confernece Champhionship game decides the champion, the regular season simply has to decide the two contenders (note the I did not say the two best teams...a flaw in our current system IMO)

In 1991, in a 10 team conference with no Conference Championship game, Bama played 7 conference games. We did not play Ole Miss nor Kentuncky, but we did play Georgia and Florida. College footaball did not emplode. Could we have figured out who the two best teams were, had we needed to select two to play in the SECCG? Yes.

My point is that a 9th game is not NEEDED in order for the conference to survive. The question would then become is there greater value to the teams and conference by using that game for an OCC or a 9th Conference game.

I think an OCC.

 

[psychojoe]

Personally i would rather lose the Aub game and keep UT if it came down to it. I'd like to go to nine games. 6 divisional games plus UT permanently, rotate the other 6 teams through home and home, two a year. The chief merit of present set up seems to be toaloow us to play Ga State or Ga. Southern at home and let some of the non season ticket holders get to see a game. If we losee that kind of game, so be it.

 

[Bo]

I'm with psycojoe on this. I'd like to go to 9 SEC games.