While it is certainly true that the average SEC eight-team conference schedule compares favorably to a nine-gamer in any other conference, it won't always be so. Eventually the selection comittee may come to see our position as presumptuous and regard the lack of an extra conf game unfavorably. To boldy state "we don't need to do it how everyone else does, we're just that good" is going to come back to bite us in the rear.
And, it is entirely accurate to say that it is "gaming the system" by allowing an extra rent-a-win per team per season. If we play each other, that's seven more loses for the conf (assuming we were all going to beat our pansies. . .).
Increasing the overall number of wins for the season for the conf as a whole -> more teams bowl eligible -> more money for the conference teams to split and more practice time. Noone likes a greedy bastard.
Keeping eight games reeks of arrogance and manipulation, especially to those who already reek of envy themselves, and giving them legitimate gripes will
eventually turn the tide of public opinion/perception from one of strength to one of sneaky conniving bottom dealers.
Having said all that, just about every argument against the nine team sched is also valid, at least in the forseeable future.
Pick your poison. Just get rid of the permanent cross div opponents, for the love of God!
This post was edited on 5/17 at 11:05 pm