When and why did they decrease the amount of Conference games

[michaeljordan_fan]

Um, we do have 9 conf games already. I was saying if we went down to 8 the added game wouldn't be against a big program. 100% sure it would be another fluff game. The SEC has proven well that you do not need to play more than one decent OOC game and the Pac teams normally already do that. So dropping a conf game would for sure reduce the quality of the game that replaces it.

This.

Unless SEC fans would just schedule 3 creampuffs and no AQ-level teams with a 9-game conference sched. That would get transparent pretty quick.

 

[cwerph]

Don't know when, but for many years now the answer to "Why?" has been $$$$$$$.

 

[Nascar Addict]

The SEC needs a whipping boy. And I guess Louisiana-Monroe is more than willing. Giving the payouts, of course. But it would be great for a Appalachian State vs. Michigan miracle in such a game. But don't hold your breath.

 

[4down20]

Um, we do have 9 conf games already. I was saying if we went down to 8 the added game wouldn't be against a big program. 100% sure it would be another fluff game. The SEC has proven well that you do not need to play more than one decent OOC game and the Pac teams normally already do that. So dropping a conf game would for sure reduce the quality of the game that replaces it.

Not really. It would be hit or miss on which 9th game you get in conference.

 

[HuskerOC]

The SEC needs a whipping boy. And I guess Louisiana-Monroe is more than willing. Giving the payouts, of course. But it would be great for a Appalachian State vs. Michigan miracle in such a game. But don't hold your breath.

2007

UL-Monroe 21
Alabama 14

 

[Codaxx]

Not really. It would be hit or miss on which 9th game you get in conference.

I have to agree. Nobody has answered what a 9th game accomplishes over 8. It makes sense in the Big12, where the 9th game means everybody plays each other. It adds little value in the 14 team SEC. Playing 3 of 7 still presents the same problems as playing 2-7 in the other division. Like I said prior, 6 or 13 make logical sense in a 14 team league. Anything in the middle is ripe for SOS issues.

 

[WizardHawk]

Not really. It would be hit or miss on which 9th game you get in conference.

No, Even Colorado > Portland State. Sorry, but you are wrong when it comes to the Pac.

With the rotation of teams from the south some years you are adding USC, UCLA, and the arizonas for our northern teams. Yes, you get utah and colorado as well, but the game that would be added if we dropped that IC game would be the portland state, sacramento state, and other similar teams.

Dropping an additional conference game to go to 8 like so many other conferences have would without a doubt lower the quality of strength of schedule and reduce the quality of that extra home game. Yes, it gives us an extra home game half the years, but the quality of that game is suck ass and a complete waste of both my time and money. Period.

 

[WizardHawk]

I have to agree. Nobody has answered what a 9th game accomplishes over 8. It makes sense in the Big12, where the 9th game means everybody plays each other. It adds little value in the 14 team SEC. Playing 3 of 7 still presents the same problems as playing 2-7 in the other division. Like I said prior, 6 or 13 make logical sense in a 14 team league. Anything in the middle is ripe for SOS issues.

In the pac it's all about the california games. California is the most fertile recruiting grounds in our conference. Our rotation now makes it so every team has at least one road game somewhere in the state of California every single year. The cali teams all play each other every year which was the only way they would agree to the split of divisions having half of them in the south and half in the north. That leaves every other team only playing only one of the cali teams from the other division every year.

It's a complicated formula. Dropping a conference game would ensure there is no way that every team would get a road cali game every year. The uproar over that would probably destroy the current division agreements.

There is no way the non cali schools in the conference would go along with it.

As I already said, as fans we wouldn't be happy with it either. More OOC games ALWAYS equals lower quality competition that we are forced to pay full price for. ALWAYS.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

9 is too many.

They need more OOC games because it creates links between the conferences which helps accurately gauge conference and team strength.

FCS games need to go.

Amen to THAT!

 

[The Crimson King]

The SEC needs a whipping boy. And I guess Louisiana-Monroe is more than willing. Giving the payouts, of course. But it would be great for a Appalachian State vs. Michigan miracle in such a game. But don't hold your breath.

Ole Miss just lost to Jacksonville State a couple years ago

 

[The Crimson King]

This.

Unless SEC fans would just schedule 3 creampuffs and no AQ-level teams with a 9-game conference sched. That would get transparent pretty quick.

You mean like Arizona, Oregon State, and Colorado did for 2014

 

[4down20]

No, Even Colorado > Portland State. Sorry, but you are wrong when it comes to the Pac.

With the rotation of teams from the south some years you are adding USC, UCLA, and the arizonas for our northern teams. Yes, you get utah and colorado as well, but the game that would be added if we dropped that IC game would be the portland state, sacramento state, and other similar teams.

Dropping an additional conference game to go to 8 like so many other conferences have would without a doubt lower the quality of strength of schedule and reduce the quality of that extra home game. Yes, it gives us an extra home game half the years, but the quality of that game is suck ass and a complete waste of both my time and money. Period.

You still have a FCS game even with 9 conference games. So does Oregon and many others.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

You mean like Arizona, Oregon State, and Colorado did for 2014

Fuc u, We played a top5 EWU FCS club, that ran circles around us. SEC can't say that.

 

[WizardHawk]

You still have a FCS game even with 9 conference games. So does Oregon and many others.

Yes, and that's the point. With 3 OOC games a year they already add garbage so what is the likelihood that adding another one will somehow make them go the other way and schedule more meat? I mean the teams with 4 OOC are not doing that, so what makes you think the Pac would?

 

[The Crimson King]

Fuc u, We played a top5 EWU FCS club, that ran circles around us. SEC can't say that.

yeah, guess not

 

[Codaxx]

In the pac it's all about the california games. California is the most fertile recruiting grounds in our conference. Our rotation now makes it so every team has at least one road game somewhere in the state of California every single year. The cali teams all play each other every year which was the only way they would agree to the split of divisions having half of them in the south and half in the north. That leaves every other team only playing only one of the cali teams from the other division every year.

It's a complicated formula. Dropping a conference game would ensure there is no way that every team would get a road cali game every year. The uproar over that would probably destroy the current division agreements.

There is no way the non cali schools in the conference would go along with it.

As I already said, as fans we wouldn't be happy with it either. More OOC games ALWAYS equals lower quality competition that we are forced to pay full price for. ALWAYS.

I get that, but that isn't the situation in other conferences. I am just asking what a 9th game really accomplishes? PAC playing 9 games for politics is not a reason for the SEC to do it.

 

[4down20]

Yes, and that's the point. With 3 OOC games a year they already add garbage so what is the likelihood that adding another one will somehow make them go the other way and schedule more meat? I mean the teams with 4 OOC are not doing that, so what makes you think the Pac would?

Well that's my point as well, if they add an extra conference game it's likely not going to be the FCS game that goes away, so what is the point?

If it was going to get rid of the FCS game, I would be more for it.

 

[trojanfan12]

Well that's my point as well, if they add an extra conference game it's likely not going to be the FCS game that goes away, so what is the point?

If it was going to get rid of the FCS game, I would be more for it.

It still replaces a likely FCS or low tier FBS game and replaces it with a BCS opponent.

 

[olympicoscar]

I was going back looking at old schedules trying to figure out when I went to my first Buckeye game (it was 1983 vs. Oregon, guess who won?) and realized that we played 9 conference games back then.

Maybe the answer is common knowledge but it seems strange that they added a game to make a 12 game schedule but at some point decreased the amount of conference games.

Why?

I can't remember 9 conference games back then. Was the schedule for 10 or 11 regular season games?

 

[Codaxx]

It still replaces a likely FCS or low tier FBS game and replaces it with a BCS opponent.

This argument isnt really about 8 or 9 conference games, it is about certain schools decisions regarding their open games. If the 4 OOC games were Oregon, Baylor, Wisconsin, and VT there is no complaints. If the 9th game is UK and the OOC is FBS, La directional, and MAC doormat than nothing has really changed. Only fix I see to that is a larget playoff that rewards conference champs and de-emphasizes the importance of OOC games