There may also be a bridge schedule starting 2014. What say ye?
Printable View
There may also be a bridge schedule starting 2014. What say ye?
I hate it.
Not a fan, unless they change bowl eligibilty rules to take the 70 best teams, regardless of record.
is this confirmed ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
yep
6-1-1 bridge in 2014
6-2-1 with a set cross-division rotation beginning in 2015
The worse thing about it will be the unbalanced home/away schedule from year to year.
5 SEC road games will be Hell...
and makes it that much harder for us to go bowling and to get to Atl
The Power of Saban.
I stand with the Hatter on this one - screw that !!!
The rumor i heard was that in addition to the 9-game schedule, everyone would have to play one hard non-conference game each year. More tv $$$ and "fair" to Georgia/Florida/South Carolina. Any word on that?
It could potentially bite the upper teams too. The ninth game could be a roadblock to getting sec team in championship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Worst idea ever. The SEC will realize it ****ed up when it goes from 8-10 teams routinely in bowls to 6-7. Because we won't be the only ones on the short end of this change. Mississippi, Vandy, TN, and Mizzou will all be in the same boat. Hell, it's all Vandy can do now to go 6-6. That loss of revenue will force a re-evaluation at some point. For all the good it'll do us after missing bowling for a couple of years running.
I haven't heard anything but I do think this will be the case. They will probably put in a rule against FCS teams sometime in the futureQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
It's going to really hurt teams like us. Especially on the "away heavy" years. I big time hate this.
Technically that would be 'fair'. Would not benefit us, but it would be fair.
We should be on the horn with Iowa State, Duke, Oregon State, Kansas State, Texas Tech, Indiana, N.C. State, etc. RIGHT NOW. Beat them to the punch. And depending on who they consider 'hard', go after others like Colorado State, Wyoming, UConn, etc.
I wonder how Scott voted? I suppose those fans that said we need to up our schedule by adding in a team like OSU will be thrilled with this requirement. This way we get to up the schedule quality right here in the conference.
If we have to play an even tougher schedule to make it fair for Florida, then they should have to share their profits with us equally. Fair is fair.
I need to buy a vowel here. What do 6-1-1 and 6-2-1 mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
A couple of weeks ago Bo Bounds interview Scott who said he was opposed to the idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakePlissken
One would think that Mizzou, Vandy, OM, Kentucky, and maybe even Tennessee would oppose it. I wonder how it ever passed.
For us 6-2-1 means 6 games vs west, 2 vs non permanent east teams, and permanent east team (Kentucky)Quote:
Originally Posted by FlabLoser
We sold our soul to ESPN. No coincidence financials behind the mega deal were never released.
Nailed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlabLoser
ESPN desperately needs a legitimate competitor. Never thought I'd see a day where a ****ing TV network runs the sports world. ESPN wants a coach fired? He's fired. ESPN wants a coach hired? He's hired. ESPN cries foul at lack of minority hiring? Rooney Rule. Whatever the **** ESPN wants, ESPN gets because everyone is scared of the power they wield. And for all their meddling, the on-field products aren't improved.
If Florida is upset about playing FSU and having 9 conference games they can leave the conference and/or quit playing FSU. To require us to play a tenth tough game is BS.
Ole Miss's 2 win season will not seem like such an anomaly in a few years. Mizzu, Vandy, UT, Kentucky, OM, & State are screwed. If they place this much control iver the schedule and don't leave the NCAA, people should boycott. They're ruining the game.
Bingo! Whatever you do, protect the brand. The Masters takes less money from CBS but the Augusta National runs the show and does what is best for the Masters. CBS cares about CBS, Augusta National cares about the Masters.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlabLoser
Great leadership cares more about protecting the brand than kissing ESPN's butt.
More lousy leadership from Slive...a man who thinks Larry Templeton is smart.
This has to be it. ESPN is the man behind the curtain. Other than a giant financial incentive from ESPN, there is zero reason to play an additional conference game.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlabLoser
Good lord this is bs. If we have to play 9 SEC games there should be no restrictions on non conference games. Keeping a good coach will even be harder now.
But a nine game conference schedule removes 7 games from the number of possible games being broadcast. I'd rather have seen an acc-sec challenge for football.
Still far, far from a done deal.Quote:
Chuck Dunlap ?@SEC_Chuck 9m
RT @jonsol Slive: 6-1-1 football scheduling format is still likely for 2015. Ongoing discussion about scheduling.
This is the worst news I've had today, and I blew out my tire driving down the road today.
What is the reason why people in the SEC want this so bad? What benefits are they claiming this does for us? Do schools make that much more off of conference games, that it's worth it to give the conference about 4-7 more losses per season?
I dont see the SEC going to 9 conference games at all because of money. Having 9 SEC games means seven more losses for teams, and there are already teams barely getting to bowl eligibility. Less bowl teams means less money and prestige for the SEC. Could be wrong but dont see this happening.
Agree with Paul, but I do think they may limit the FCS games going forward to help with TV ratings. No more cupcakes is a lot better than a 9th SEC game though. They also need to think about TV ratings in SEC markets. Games against non-BCS opponents can still be relevant in some large markets (Houston, Memphis, USF, Central Florida, etc...). If they want to generate more viewers, there's creative ways to do that without risking the dominance of the conference by making everyone play a ridiculous schedule.
I don't see it happening either. A bunch of people jumping the gun in assumptions on this one based on some secondhand tweets. We already know for sure that Florida and Georgia are voting it down -- as are MSU, OM, Vandy, Kentucky, and Mizzou. They can't pass anything with 7(or fewer) votes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones
ESPN does not have the power to force a 9-conference game schedule down our throats -- nor do I see how it would help them, since they essentially lose a half-dozen games of overall inventory. People shouldn't be getting hung up on the fact that "espn owns the SEC network" -- because the SEC retained full rights to ALL the content -- thus why it's actually a full 50-50 partnership. They own the channel -- we own the content. We absolutely did not sell our souls in this deal -- and the reason that the $$ figure hasn't been disclosed is because no one has a dang clue what it will be worth yet. That will depend on who picks it up, to what extent, and how quickly...
I think we keep the 8-game conference schedule and work out scheduling alliances with other conferences to balance the nonconference SOS and add the inventory that ESPN wants. In that way, I could see them strongly suggesting more prime OOC games -- particularly with the ACC, which is also an ESPN-exclusive partner, while the B1G and Big12 are Fox partners, thus necessitating "sharing" profits in series against those schools...
The article that came out this week quoting Scott stricklin as the chairman of the committee to improve sec attendance (no idea what the actual name was) made this suggestion, among other ways to improve game day experiences. I don't know what the pros are necessarily for the conference, but I wouldn't assume espn is behind it.
I don't know that it's the worst thing. Obviously when a team is in rebuilding mode it pays to have a pancake schedule and get to a bowl game, but should a team that is 6-6 (2-6) with four wins over Directional State School Tech really be rewarded anyway? I know for me as someone who goes to the games I'm a lot more excited to go to a conference game than a game against the SWAC.
Obviously we all want to do better than 6-6, but the reality is we are going to struggle a lot of years getting that. I would rather have the bowl game than an extra SEC game. But that's just me.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickiedawg
Per Brando this morning - based on his interview with Saban yesterday, this is NOT happening.Quote:
Originally Posted by engie
ROGER THAT - def NOT confirmed :Quote:
Originally Posted by NewTweederEndzoneDance
SEC commissioner Mike Slive announced yesterday what everyone expected to him to announced — that his league would head into 2014 with an eight-game conference schedule and a 6-1-1 format. He also said that the 2015 season will “probably” use the same plan.
“Probably” being the key word.
As we’ve noted on numerous occasions, if SEC officials find themselves being snubbed by the College Football Playoff selection committee for strength of schedule reasons, they’ll vote to go to nine games ASAP. If SEC officials see an opportunity to improve attendance and/or make more money by going to nine games, again, they’ll do it.
As for Slive, he says nothing will happen until Friday at the earliest:
“I do want to tell you in capital letters that the First Amendment is alive and well… I just came out of the football coaches’ meeting and we had a healthy discussion there. They’re gonna continue that discussion tomorrow. We had a discussion with our ADs and we’ll continue to have discussions throughout the week. I certainly don’t believe we’ll come to any closure here, but my hope is that everybody will weigh in on the discussion. We’ll see where we are by Friday as to what the next step is.”
There is little chance of a nine-game schedule passing for 2015, 2016 or any other year by Friday. But that didn’t keep a pair of coaches from sounding off on the league’s scheduling issues yesterday.