Should the SEC adopt a 9 game conference schedule?

[belcherboy]

That's just why divisions should go away, not a case for more conference games, aka just regionalising the game more when it needs to be more national.

As if we lack data points between conference members or something - we DON'T.

But you can't get rid of divisions if you don't play everyone in conference, right? I mean, how would you determine which teams are represented in the championship game?

 

[ericd7633]

I really don't know the answer to this, but does the SEC play a better OOC schedule than the B10 who have 9 conference games? It seems like many SEC and B10 teams play 1 marquee OOC game, and the other OOC games are just "throw away" games.

Some of the teams in the Eastern division of the SEC play 2 P5 schools. South Carolina played NC State and Clemson, UGA played ND and Ga. Tech, Florida played Michigan and FSU. If 8 conference games were mandated, I would also push for a rule to play 2 P5 schools OOC.

 

[ericd7633]

With a mandatory 2 P5 opponents.

Agreed, that would be perfect.

 

[Chewbaccer]

But the next 3 years (2018, 2019, 2020), your schedule has only 1 power 5 team on it (Georgia Tech), and one game against ND. It's not like you're trading a lot for another conference game. (although I didn't see what you have after 2020)

Next year, there's only one, I already that and already said it sucks.

In 2019, there's Notre Dame and Georgia Tech
in 2020, there's Virginia(new Falcons stadium) and Georgia Tech

 

[4down20]

But the next 3 years (2018, 2019, 2020), your schedule has only 1 power 5 team on it (Georgia Tech), and one game against ND. It's not like you're trading a lot for another conference game. (although I didn't see what you have after 2020)

Making strength arguments with labels like "P5" is dumb. When I say I want to see more P5 OOC games for example, it's not because I care that it's going to make the schedule stronger, it's because it's valuable information/data point for them to be from another region, aka "P5 Conference".

Simply adding "P5" team or pretending that "11 P5's" mean they played a tougher schedule than "10 P5's" or "9 P5's" is about the worst method of SoS I have ever seen. I just kind of gloss over people who do this as being not very smart.

The fact that Oregon St this year is a "P5" team vs say Boise St being a "G5" should clue people in that these labels mean absolutely NOTHING when it comes to actual SoS.

 

[7Samurai13]

Making strength arguments with labels like "P5" is dumb. When I say I want to see more P5 OOC games for example, it's not because I care that it's going to make the schedule stronger, it's because it's valuable information/data point for them to be from another region, aka "P5".

Simply adding "P5" team or pretending that "11 P5's" mean they played a tougher schedule than "10 P5's" or "9 P5's" is about the worst method of SoS I have ever seen. I just kind of gloss over people who do this as being not very smart.

And how exactly could conferences regulate stronger SoS?

 

[belcherboy]

Some of the teams in the Eastern division of the SEC play 2 P5 schools. South Carolina played NC State and Clemson, UGA played ND and Ga. Tech, Florida played Michigan and FSU. If 8 conference games were mandated, I would also push for a rule to play 2 P5 schools OOC.

What's wrong with that? Regardless, it isn't an every year thing for these schools anyway. Florida plays 1 Power 5 team OOC in 2018 and 2020. Same with SC and UGA.

 

[Eco]

Gotta get that extra game against Mercer in to make sure you don't lose.

Still harder than Wisconsin's SOS.

FYI - UW was 87th in the country in SOS.

A new, improved CFB strength of schedule measurement

 

[Rolltide94]

2017 Stanford Cardinal Football Schedule <--- 10 P5 and no FCS. Usually Stanford plays 11 P5.

2017 USC Trojans Football Schedule <---- 11 P5 and no FCS. USC has never played an FCS opponent in its entire history.

2015 USC - 10 P5's

As I said your average requires 30 points of rounding just in the last 3 years.

USC, we've never played an FCS school in our history, but we've played 12 high schools.

 

[4down20]

And how exactly could conferences regulate stronger SoS?

You can't. You can only reward people for playing tougher schedules. It's all relative to what the team looks for. If you play a "OMG I hope I make a bowl this year" schedule, and you don't make it to the playoffs - your fucking fault. If you want to be a champion, then you play the schedule that goes with it.

But if they add in extra P5 games, it adds more data points between conferences and it will help a lot with metrics and such to give a better clue on who is really deserving etc. Even if a team schedules Kansas every year and makes their schedule easier, it's still a good data point.

 

[ericd7633]

What's wrong with that? Regardless, it isn't an every year thing for these schools anyway. Florida plays 1 Power 5 team OOC in 2018 and 2020. Same with SC and UGA.

I don't understand your question. I have nothing wrong with playing 2 OOC games against P5 competition, along with 8 P5 conference games.

 

[Chewbaccer]

What's wrong with that? Regardless, it isn't an every year thing for these schools anyway. Florida plays 1 Power 5 team OOC in 2018 and 2020. Same with SC and UGA.

This is the second time I've told you now, Georgia plays two OOC P5 teams in 2020. Pay attention, and don't spread false information here.

 

[belcherboy]

You can't. You can only reward people for playing tougher schedules. It's all relative to what the team looks for. If you play a "OMG I hope I make a bowl this year" schedule, and you don't make it to the playoffs - your fucking fault. If you want to be a champion, then you play the schedule that goes with it.

But if they add in extra P5 games, it adds more data points between conferences and it will help a lot with metrics and such to give a better clue on who is really deserving etc. Even if a team schedules Kansas every year and makes their schedule easier, it's still a good data point.

That's a good call on the cross conference OOC games. It does seem allow for a better measurement of teams across conferences.

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

Two things:

--South Carolina NEVER has to apologize for their schedule when they suck most seasons

--The SEC should add 2 more teams and go to four divisions of four teams. This would allow them to keep those precious permanent rivalries, plus it would allow them to play every other team in the league in fewer seasons.

 

[belcherboy]

This is the second time I've told you now, Georgia plays two OOC P5 teams in 2020. Pay attention, and don't spread false information here.

Relax, my second post was just a few minutes after you corrected me. I hadn't read your response yet. Sorry for the misinformation.

 

[belcherboy]

Two things:

--South Carolina NEVER has to apologize for their schedule when they suck most seasons

--The SEC should add 2 more teams and go to four divisions of four teams. This would allow them to keep those precious permanent rivalries, plus it would allow them to play every other team in the league in fewer seasons.

I'd love to see the B10 move in this direction as well...the only problem is, how do determine who goes to the conference championship? You don't want to create a final four for the conference championship, as it would make it WAY easier to knock your teams out of the playoffs IMO. Forcing good teams, to have to play (or play again), 2 tough teams to win the conference at the end of the regular season would be tough.

 

[belcherboy]

I don't understand your question. I have nothing wrong with playing 2 OOC games against P5 competition, along with 8 P5 conference games.

That's what I'm saying, what's wrong with that? I like it!

Although, I think it can still be done with 9 conference games.

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

I'd love to see the B10 move in this direction as well...the only problem is, how do determine who goes to the conference championship? You don't want to create a final four for the conference championship, as it would make it WAY easier to knock your teams out of the playoffs IMO. Forcing good teams, to have to play (or play again), 2 tough teams to win the conference at the end of the regular season would be tough.

No, I wouldn't advocate for a 4-game playoff just for the Conference Title. I figure there'd be some convoluted tie-breaker that determines the two CCG participants. Or, we could still keep the "East-West" halves and use tiebreakers between the two division winners in those halves.

So, why don't you guys pick up the Oklahoma Schools and the SEC will take Kansas and Texas?

 

[belcherboy]

No, I wouldn't advocate for a 4-game playoff just for the Conference Title. I figure there'd be some convoluted tie-breaker that determines the two CCG participants. Or, we could still keep the "East-West" halves and use tiebreakers between the two division winners in those halves.

So, why don't you guys pick up the Oklahoma Schools and the SEC will take Kansas and Texas?

The B10 need to add Texas and Notre Dame. I mean, that would be the DREAM for the B10 IMO. Regardless, the 4 division conference idea would be a disaster if you had to go to tie breakers between them all to determine who goes to the conference championship IMO. It's hard enough with 2 divisions and a big difference in conference strength of schedule right now.

 

[ericd7633]

That's what I'm saying, what's wrong with that? I like it!

Although, I think it can still be done with 9 conference games.

It can be done with 9, but I still like that G5 teams will be capable of playing P5 teams more often as well. I think 2 P5 and 2 G5 teams is a nice balance.