SEC Sprint Meeting con't ...

Thiefery said:
ESPN is investing a lot of dough into the SEC.. they want those rivalries in tact. Because let's face it, people still tune in even if one or both of the participants are having a down season
Click to expand...
I get that. But claiming playing other members with frequency is just as important as those rivalry games is a croc for the reasons you stated.
 
Goldbug said:
I'm in favor of the SEC doing whatever is in its own best interests. I'll always support the best teams/conferences looking out for themselves even if OU ends up getting its ass banged in the playoff like a screen door in a hurricane.
Click to expand...
Playoff?!?

After yall join the SEC?

:nonono:
 
Deep Creek said:
Doesn't look like it is "just as important" to me if they are allowing some and not others. If that is the case, why not just do away with all permanent rivals? Allowing some and not others is not "equitable" which is what many claim to be seeking.
Click to expand...
I don't get the point you are making. We play 3 teams every year, all others every other year. It should be obvious why WLOCP, Red River Rivalry, Iron Bowl, UGA v. AU, etc. should be played every year. What do you mean by some and not others?
 
Thiefery said:
does the vote have to be unanimous for the change of schedule? Because I can think of a few teams that would want to stick to 8 conference games. Having 4 OOC games, guaranteeing 3 of them being home games would be hard to pass up for some schools.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. I did see somewhere that a majority of the P5 has to which could shift power to The Alliance if the B1G is stupid enough to vote against their best interests.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
No, it doesn't. I did see somewhere that a majority of the P5 has to which could shift power to The Alliance if the B1G is stupid enough to vote against their best interests.
Click to expand...
I was referring to the sec
 
Thiefery said:
I was referring to the sec
Click to expand...
Gotcha ... majority rule, but at the end of the day, the bog boys have the weight. They will then be "unanimous." It will be 3-6/9, with the lower 8 teams getting 2 lower teams, one upper, and the 8 upper teams getting 2 uppers and 1 lower. Or thereabouts. I mean is Auburn really an upper team and UTjr lower? What if Arkansas continues its resurgence. So there will be some grey in the middle.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I don't get the point you are making. We play 3 teams every year, all others every other year. It should be obvious why WLOCP, Red River Rivalry, Iron Bowl, UGA v. AU, etc. should be played every year. What do you mean by some and not others?
Click to expand...
Why not A&M and Texas?
 
Deep Creek said:
Why not A&M and Texas?
Click to expand...
I would hope that would be one of the rivalries, but they aren't going to get them all. I can see the following that might not be possible:

UF v. AU
AU v. LSU
UF v. LSU

UF has UGA, then for the other top opponent you have to pick between AU and LSU. They should then get UTjr, but while they are a bottom, they are more likey to become a top than any other bottom.

LSU has Bama and UF, but they are contiguous with the Texas schools. Also, the LSU Arky rival has been going on for a while.

Bama has to get AU, and they have to get UTjr. The question is whether you give them LSU. If you look at UTjr as a bottom, then that works.

In other words, it won't be perfect, but better than what we have now.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I would hope that would be one of the rivalries, but they aren't going to get them all. I can see the following that might not be possible:

UF v. AU
AU v. LSU
UF v. LSU

UF has UGA, then for the other top opponent you have to pick between AU and LSU. They should then get UTjr, but while they are a bottom, they are more likey to become a top than any other bottom.

LSU has Bama and UF, but they are contiguous with the Texas schools. Also, the LSU Arky rival has been going on for a while.

Bama has to get AU, and they have to get UTjr. The question is whether you give them LSU. If you look at UTjr as a bottom, then that works.

In other words, it won't be perfect, but better than what we have now.
Click to expand...
That was my point. Choosing some and letting others go....and they don't have a choice if the goal is to get all teams to play each other with more frequency.

But if it is about maximizing television revenue, creating the highest number of "must see" games would be best wouldn't it? I would think ESPN (and others) are willing to pay more if the inventory is full of as many of those games as possible...at least for drawing national eyeballs more than regional ones.
 
outofyourmind said:
That far South one could get tough
Click to expand...

For balance, I could see the two Mississippi's in that far South one and Alabama/Auburn in the Midwest one with UT, Vandy, and UK. You would keep more rivalries that way as well.

Some teams are also noticeable absent. USC Trojans would be in the super league if it happened along with perhaps Oregon/UCLA. I also think Virginia Tech would get an invite.
 
Volbound1700 said:
For balance, I could see the two Mississippi's in that far South one and Alabama/Auburn in the Midwest one with UT, Vandy, and UK. You would keep more rivalries that way as well.

Some teams are also noticeable absent. USC Trojans would be in the super league if it happened along with perhaps Oregon/UCLA. I also think Virginia Tech would get an invite.
Click to expand...
Those three are definitely better than some that currently reside in the two conferences that will morph into the super league.
I know, I know....charter members and shit.
 
Deep Creek said:
That was my point. Choosing some and letting others go....and they don't have a choice if the goal is to get all teams to play each other with more frequency.

But if it is about maximizing television revenue, creating the highest number of "must see" games would be best wouldn't it? I would think ESPN (and others) are willing to pay more if the inventory is full of as many of those games as possible...at least for drawing national eyeballs more than regional ones.
Click to expand...
The balance isn't just scheduling issues, it's fairness. You can't make Auburn play UF, AU, and LSU although those would be the most compelling "rivalry" games for Auburn. I mean if you want to maximize revenue, you would have UGA v. UF and Auburn, true long-time rivalries, but then have UGA v. Bama. But you can't have that from a fairness perspective, and the UGA UA game has never really been a yearly rivalry anyway. "Must see" games, as you put it are important, but you have to have balance. There will still be plenty of inventory, way better than any other conference by far without getting carried away.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
The balance isn't just scheduling issues, it's fairness. You can't make Auburn play UF, AU, and LSU although those would be the most compelling "rivalry" games for Auburn. I mean if you want to maximize revenue, you would have UGA v. UF and Auburn, true long-time rivalries, but then have UGA v. Bama. But you can't have that from a fairness perspective, and the UGA UA game has never really been a yearly rivalry anyway. "Must see" games, as you put it are important, but you have to have balance. There will still be plenty of inventory, way better than any other conference by far without getting carried away.
Click to expand...
Who cares about fairness and balance. It is all about the Benjamin's.
Make It Rain Money GIF by yvngswag
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top