There is no longer a viable excuse for the rich not to play a nine-game conference schedule. The SEC mansion needs quality competitive furnishings, not knock-offs from the FCS thrift store.
The Pac-12 is doing it now. So is the 10-team Big 12, which doesn't have a title game and doesn't need one with everyone playing every opponent in the regular season. The Big Ten formally announced last month that it is headed to nine games in 2016.
quote:I believe any true and secure SEC fan (or LSU fan) would have to be absolutely in favor a 9 game SEC schedule. Not because the other leagues are doing it (we're not a "me-too" league). But because our fans deserve better games than a small annual handful of Cream Puff U games of the week. Plus, IMO, increased SEC exposure puts more pressure on the whole league to improve. That can only be a win/win for all of us.
I'm for it.
I believe any true and secure SEC fan (or LSU fan) would have to be absolutely in favor a 9 game SEC schedule.
You realize the only possible reason they would decide to go to 9 games is to protect the permanent opponents, right?
quote:On the surface, this appears to make sense to me. Can someone retort?
As it stands now, top SEC teams schedule good games outside of the conference. A 9 game SEC schedule will incentivize scheduling worse OOC teams. The less good teams the SEC plays OOC, the easier for idiots like Pat Forde to claim that the SEC is not the premier conference.
I've read about scenarios in which a team could choose to play one permanent cross-divisional opponant while rotating two opponants, and everyone else could rotate three. Don't know what the logistics would be, but it might work.