2 ways to look at this football scheduling stuff.......

[Goat Holder]

1) Do you want to do what's best for the college football game?

2) Do you want to do what's best for Mississippi State?

Now, before you answer the obvious choice, which is likely #2 for all of us, think about the consequences. I don't like for MSU to be the martyr either, but doing what's best for 'us' because the rest of the country is doing the same, isn't exactly the best mindset. Playing 9 games with another BCS OOC opponent is hands-down what is best for the overall college game, assuming the committee is fair at the end. I would even go so far as to ban D1AA and D2 games, and then make teams play regional counterparts, ie MSU has to play USM, and Auburn has to play Troy/UAB/etc. on some sort of rotating basis. You get the best of both worlds, cross pollenation amongst conferences, regional rivalries that whole states will be interested in, and you determine the best inside the conferences. You'd also have to limit the number of home games, and revamp the bowl system. A true SOS/RPI type deal would need to be enacted, not just a poll with too much emphasis on Ws and Ls like it is now.

We all have to sit down and iron out a rigid format that works for everyone. 'Fair' is the key word. Basically the money will have to take a back seat to the product, which in the end, will make even more money. But Slive and Co. are too stupid and greedy to see this.

[FlabLoser]

We sold our soul to ESPN. Now come the consequences.

[Goat Holder]

We have more power than you think, doomsayer.

[hometowndawg]

Truth has it that money called shot gun and ain't moving to the back seat.

Slive wants to keep the SEC strong and winning the ship every year. Why schedule your two top competitors against each other to knock each other off. The SEC is all on the same team come post season

[LiterallyPolice]

I'm torn on this issue, but I will say this: As a fan, I want to see meaningful games. I can see the value of a cupcake here and there (early in the season, homecoming, etc), but for the most part those are glorified scrimmages and I just don't care as much.

It seems everyone's fear is that this will hurt our chances of making bowl games, which is a legitimite concern. However, I think that indicates that the NCAA needs to fix an antiquated and broken bowl system. The current 6-wins-for-bowl-eligibility-system rewards teams for scheduling easy wins, which isn't good for fans or NCAA football in general.

[maroonmania]

Number 2 all day every day. I have an emotional attachment to MSU in general because of the part of my life I spent there so in turn I have an attachment to MSU football. I have no such attachment to college football in general though I do enjoy watching it on Saturdays when I can. But that is the reason I GO to MSU football games when I could spend a LOT less and sit on my couch and just watch the MSU game along with umpteen SEC and other college games from across the country in HD. I don't necessarily enjoy going to MSU games when I feel we are at a big competitive disadvantage (like playing the ALs and LSUs that have their pick of most of the top ranked recruits across the nation) and have little chance to win and NOW we won't even get to balance that out a little by the fact that we would be limited to playing no more than 2 teams in a year that we have a competitive advantage against. I guess that's the downside of having a lot of disadvantages relative to fan base size, tradition and a poor state when we are in the toughest league in the country. Its easy for the AL HC to sit up there and talk about toughening up the schedules when they are more talented than ANYONE ON their schedule no matter who it is. We are not so fortunate though and if we get our schedule loaded up with 9 SEC games and one other tough OOC game it will be VERY difficult for us to have bowl type seasons which will in turn impact our crowd support.

[engie]

We sold our soul to ESPN. Now come the consequences.

How? You keep saying that -- but the fact is, we haven't sold anything new to ESPN. Why is there a sudden witch hunt to "blame" someone for something they have no actual control over? We(the SEC) still own 100% of the content making us a full 50% partner in the deal with ESPN. They don't own us anymore than we own them.

For the SEC to go to a 9-game conference schedule, it will require a vote of our athletics directors and presidents. At least half of the teams have publicly renounced it already. It hurts all non-powers in the SEC -- and it f'n kills Georgia and Florida -- and aTm and Arky(for as long as they continue their neutral site series in Jerrysworld) and both look to schedule old SWC teams on a semi-permanent home and home basis. So, despite significant pressure from around college football, it's still a LONG way from becoming reality in the SEC at this point. Why would ESPN pressure us on this when it actually loses them 7 games of overall inventory? Much, much more likely that they are pushing for a full scheduling partnership with the ACC where we all play 1 OOC game/yr against them on a (at least semi) rotating basis and are otherwise pushing for great OOC games to build MORE data -- instead of giving themselves less with a 9-game conference schedule. The way ESPN is going to attack this is by having interesting OOC games -- not cramming a 9-game schedule down our throats.

Too much inferiority complex without reason on this right now. If we win half of our conference games, as I expect to generally do in the future under Mullen if we are TRULY moving forward, how does 5-4 or 4-5 hurt us? If we are TRULY hovering around 6-wins by the time this is alleged to hit(2014-2015), when the Mullen system should be at FULL strength, then college football is simply moving forward more quickly than WE are -- meaning in reality, we are going backwards.

[Goat Holder]

The SEC is all on the same team come post season

Not in my household.

[Goat Holder]

How?

Think you answered your own question here:


Too much inferiority complex without reason on this right now.

Flab is a good guy, but he's big into the woe is us stuff. However Flab, PLEASE keep up your Ole Miss witch-hunt, and I'll help any way I can.

[Quaoarsking]

I would be ok if the top 5-7 conferences broke away, got the same number of teams each, everyone used the same scheduling formula, and no one could play games outside those top 5-7 conferences (or maybe just 1 game). I would also want to see some system in place where we would be rewarded for having a harder than average schedule among those 80 or so teams.

But until all that happens, there's no need for the SEC to act alone in this.