In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1344
Online now 1190 Record: 6475 (12/7/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Do you think it hurts the or helps the sec with only a four team playoff? Imo it prob does not matter if we go to 8 teams playoff. Imo its happening bc of tv $$$ and other conferences already doing it
2. Do you think it helps or hurts keeping Bama? Seems like there is more steam than ever to abandon it ....and I want to keep them. Keeping bama and rotating two west teams still means overfour yrs a player at ut gets to play every west team which is key
3. If 9 games....imo only the 6 east games should decide the east champ with head to head and THEN the west games being the tie breaker or national ranking. It is by far the fairest way as Spurrier recommended. If not UT could go ten yrs playing the best west teams and uga for example could time it right and get The best teams on down yrs while we got them at their best and with our best teams and happen to lose one key game or so.
4. I would love to see Hart adopt what ND does....they schedule KNOWN teams and most are avg at best like Purdue, Indiana, Colorado, Virginia, Minn, Maryland etc....imo this would increase ticket sales and national image vs playing Troy and teams that don't help our recruiting like it would if we played Virginia or Indiana for example. Thoughts??
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by SamVolsam 11 months ago
I've been on the record as favoring a 9-game SEC schedule for a long time, and preserving the traditional rivalries is a big reason for it.
I think the league could maintain the balanced home and away schedule by scheduling a neutral site conference game for each team each year. UT, for example, could play Arkansas or either Mississippi school or even Missouri in Memphis. Georgia and Florida already play a neutral site game each year in Jacksonville. So each team would play 4 games at home, four on the road, and the ninth at a neutral site.
I'm a bit of a purist on the standings. If you lose to a team in the other division, it is still a conference loss, IMO. I'd hate to see a team make the championship after losing one or two games to teams in the other division.
Obviously, short term, it hurts UT to keep Alabama on the schedule. But since when do we run from a fight? The Tide will turn, literally, and we'll be beating those SOBs before long.
Your team. All the time.
BUTCH IS NOT FOR THE FAINT OF HEART. GO VOLS!
Although I don't agree with the 9 game schedule, this is still a very good post with valid points. +1
"Give him six" "We don't give a damn about the whole state of Alabama" "Grit N Grind"
Great points here. +1
Senior Writer, govols247
I would be okay with 9 league games, if it guaranteed Alabama remains an annual cross division rival....
This post was edited by tlepage99 11 months ago
I love points 3 & 4, the other 2 I'm a bit undecided on.
I don't see how you make a 14 team conference work without a nine game schedule. It is essentially two diffrrent conferences at 8 games. It will take something like 10-12 years to play all the teams in the West. I know it will up the difficulty and makes OOC scheduling harder but that is going to the case either way since almost everyone else is going to 9 games.
Staff writer for govols247 — http://www.twitter.com/RyanCallahan247 — firstname.lastname@example.org
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports