Should the SEC adopt a 9 game conference schedule?

[trojanfan12]

But doesn't it balance out when the teams that do play a FCS late play a big game early in the season? Yes Clemson played The Citadel in it's last home game, but in week 2 we played Auburn, week 3 we played @ Louisville, week 3 we played BC and week 4 we played @ Virginia Tech. By week 4 of the season we had already played three ranked teams, two of them on the road.

Not really. Because many P5 teams are playing those types of games early in the season without playing an OOC cupcake in November.

For example, USC played Western Michigan, Texas and Notre Dame OOC this season. The latest OOC game we played was Notre Dame in October. Every November game was against a PAC-12 opponent.

The only times that changes is every other year, we play Notre Dame in November as a back to back with the UCLA game. So, when some programs are playing OOC cupcakes, we are playing one of our rivals or a PAC opponent.

 

[Kaplony]

You don't, unless Atlanta isn't paying you what it does Alabama which I doubt is the case in a meaningful amount.

Neutral sites = paid every year while Home and Home = paid every other year.

So in your home year, you probably make more money. But then the next year you don't. 2 years of neutral sites ends up being a good bit more money.

Michigan St turned it down and their AD cited local business revenue as the reason.

We do. We lost money when we played y'all in 2008.

It used to also balance out of schedule before the ACC screwed us to placate GT. We typically can get premium ticket prices from four teams: FSU, GT, South Carolina and the second high profile OOC. Used to be we had balance......FSU and the second OOC at home in odd years with GT and South Carolina in even years. A few years back GT wanted to change the years they hosted Clemson and the ACC granted it so now our schedules are heavy in attractive games in the odd years and just South Carolina in the even years.

 

[4down20]

We do. We lost money when we played y'all in 2008.

It used to also balance out of schedule before the ACC screwed us to placate GT. We typically can get premium ticket prices from four teams: FSU, GT, South Carolina and the second high profile OOC. Used to be we had balance......FSU and the second OOC at home in odd years with GT and South Carolina in even years. A few years back GT wanted to change the years they hosted Clemson and the ACC granted it so now our schedules are heavy in attractive games in the odd years and just South Carolina in the even years.

If you compare a neutral cite vs a home game, and you don't include the costs, then yes then you would lose money.

But you are comparing a 1 year deal vs a 2 year deal.

 

[xpuctaqpGT]

You don't, unless Atlanta isn't paying you what it does Alabama which I doubt is the case in a meaningful amount.

Neutral sites = paid every year while Home and Home = paid every other year.

I was skeptical on this, but I ran the numbers. It could go either way.

Alabama got $5 million to play FSU this year. If they got that next year we're talking $10 million total.

In order for a home and home series to be better, Alabama would have to make more than $10 million the year the game was at Bama. Bryant-Denny stadium capacity is listed at ~102k. For the purposes of easy math I'm going to round that down to 100k. This means if Alabama makes a $100 profit per seat at their home game, they would break even. Anything more than that and the home and home becomes more profitable.

Since I'm not an Alabama alumnus, getting ticket pricing for home games is harder. From what I saw for this year, there were tickets between $35 and $100 depending on who they were playing.

I'm a math person, but not necessarily a finance person. Depending on who you got to play home and home, I could see scenarios where you'd charge $100/ticket plus get money from parking, concessions, etc and drive the profit per seat up to the $150 range. And then the home and home series would be better. But I'm not solid on what expenses would be so I could also see where the per seat profit might only be $70.

thoughts?

 

[4down20]

I was skeptical on this, but I ran the numbers. It could go either way.

Alabama got $5 million to play FSU this year. If they got that next year we're talking $10 million total.

In order for a home and home series to be better, Alabama would have to make more than $10 million the year the game was at Bama. Bryant-Denny stadium capacity is listed at ~102k. For the purposes of easy math I'm going to round that down to 100k. This means if Alabama makes a $100 profit per seat at their home game, they would break even. Anything more than that and the home and home becomes more profitable.

Since I'm not an Alabama alumnus, getting ticket pricing for home games is harder. From what I saw for this year, there were tickets between $35 and $100 depending on who they were playing.

I'm a math person, but not necessarily a finance person. Depending on who you got to play home and home, I could see scenarios where you'd charge $100/ticket plus get money from parking, concessions, etc and drive the profit per seat up to the $150 range. And then the home and home series would be better. But I'm not solid on what expenses would be so I could also see where the per seat profit might only be $70.

thoughts?

All I know is the Alabama AD says it's more profitable and that we aren't going to stop doing them anytime in the near future.

I've gotten similar numbers so I can only guess the costs are the difference.

 

[Kaplony]

All I know is the Alabama AD says it's more profitable and that we aren't going to stop doing them anytime in the near future.

I've gotten similar numbers so I can only guess the costs are the difference.

I was skeptical as well but a very well connected IPTAY member showed me the figures and proved it to me.

 

[xpuctaqpGT]

All I know is the Alabama AD says it's more profitable and that we aren't going to stop doing them anytime in the near future.

I've gotten similar numbers so I can only guess the costs are the difference.

It would definitely be more profitable for GT. Even with only a $2.5 million payout. We can barely fill a 55k stadium most weeks.

There are some other side benefits for the home and home though. A lot of the expenses for the home game wind up supporting your own local economy.

Ultimately, the people running athletic departments are usually smarter than I am so I tend to trust their financial judgements.

 

[Kaplony]

Not really. Because many P5 teams are playing those types of games early in the season without playing an OOC cupcake in November.

For example, USC played Western Michigan, Texas and Notre Dame OOC this season. The latest OOC game we played was Notre Dame in October. Every November game was against a PAC-12 opponent.

The only times that changes is every other year, we play Notre Dame in November as a back to back with the UCLA game. So, when some programs are playing OOC cupcakes, we are playing one of our rivals or a PAC opponent.

And when you are playing OOC cupcakes they are playing OOC rivals or conference opponents.

There is absolutely no difference in when you play your cupcake as long as everybody is playing them

 

[amszete]

And when you are playing OOC cupcakes they are playing OOC rivals or conference opponents.

There is absolutely no difference in when you play your cupcake as long as everybody is playing them

Coming into this party late....
If teams plan cupcakes, which most do - they should be played in the beginning of a season and not the end. For example, no one cares to watch Clemson beat the hell out of Kent State in November (not saying you did - just an example). Schedule it as a tune up game in Sept so I can see what your new QB/offense can do? Sure - sign me up. But beating the hell out of a lesser opponent in November is just not good football and I will be off watching a P5 matchup.

 

[4down20]

Coming into this party late....
If teams plan cupcakes, which most do - they should be played in the beginning of a season and not the end. For example, no one cares to watch Clemson beat the hell out of Kent State in November (not saying you did - just an example). Schedule it as a tune up game in Sept so I can see what your new QB/offense can do? Sure - sign me up. But beating the hell out of a lesser opponent in November is just not good football and I will be off watching a P5 matchup.

And everyone got to watch Alabama vs FSU in week 1 instead of a bunch of cupcakes.

And then in week2, they watched Auburn vs Clemson instead of a bunch of cupcakes.

etc.

 

[7Samurai13]

And everyone got to watch Alabama vs FSU in week 1 instead of a bunch of cupcakes.

And then in week2, they watched Auburn vs Clemson instead of a bunch of cupcakes.

etc.

That’s an OOC game like when everyone else plays. A better example for what you are trying to show needs to be a conference game, which Alabama didn’t play any of those until week four.

 

[amszete]

And everyone got to watch Alabama vs FSU in week 1 instead of a bunch of cupcakes.

And then in week2, they watched Auburn vs Clemson instead of a bunch of cupcakes.

etc.

I hear ya. And that makes for great football. But IMO, I tend to like the pattern of seeing the cupcakes in Sept / early Oct soon afterwards. Does last minute scheduling play into this where P5 teams don't have a chance to schedule another P5 opponent? Sure so I get that scenario. But just planning cupcakes in Nov when you don't have to just doesn't make great for great football IMO.

EDIT:
Let me say that I think Bama deserves to be in the Playoff - I am just talking about what I think makes the sport great in terms of watching football.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

But doesn't it balance out when the teams that do play a FCS late play a big game early in the season? Yes Clemson played The Citadel in it's last home game, but in week 2 we played Auburn, week 3 we played @ Louisville, week 3 we played BC and week 4 we played @ Virginia Tech. By week 4 of the season we had already played three ranked teams, two of them on the road.

No because the teams doing so under an 9 game schedule.Are scheduling those games with 3 OOC games to work with not 4.If they want to schedule an FCS team with 3 OOC games to schedule.That reflects their SOS.

I'm not sure why this is the main focal point.When scheduling an FCS team in November as a de facto bye week is actually worse.And the biggest point proponents of an 8 game schedule dodge.Is the fact that the 4th OOC game as opposed to a 9 game schedule.Is avoiding guaranteed conference losses.Which hols the highest impact across the board.Icluding skewing rankings

 

[socaljim242]

I was skeptical on this, but I ran the numbers. It could go either way.

Alabama got $5 million to play FSU this year. If they got that next year we're talking $10 million total.

In order for a home and home series to be better, Alabama would have to make more than $10 million the year the game was at Bama. Bryant-Denny stadium capacity is listed at ~102k. For the purposes of easy math I'm going to round that down to 100k. This means if Alabama makes a $100 profit per seat at their home game, they would break even. Anything more than that and the home and home becomes more profitable.

Since I'm not an Alabama alumnus, getting ticket pricing for home games is harder. From what I saw for this year, there were tickets between $35 and $100 depending on who they were playing.

I'm a math person, but not necessarily a finance person. Depending on who you got to play home and home, I could see scenarios where you'd charge $100/ticket plus get money from parking, concessions, etc and drive the profit per seat up to the $150 range. And then the home and home series would be better. But I'm not solid on what expenses would be so I could also see where the per seat profit might only be $70.

thoughts?

If you were an Alabama fan who actually paid to go see the games at home live (unlike our resident Bama honk) you paid to see Bama play seven home games three of which were Mercer, Fresno State and Colorado State. Last season you payed to watch Western Kentucky , Kent State and Chattanooga. So in two years almost half of your home games were against one legged trucking schools. But hey they made money playing at Jerry world. LOL.

 

[amszete]

If you were an Alabama fan who actually paid to go see the games at home live (unlike our resident Bama honk) you paid to see Bama play seven home games three of which were Mercer, Fresno State and Colorado State. Last season you payed to watch Western Kentucky , Kent State and Chattanooga. So in two years almost half of your home games were against one legged trucking schools. But hey they made money playing at Jerry world. LOL.

I hear ya - but as a general fan of college football, watching them beat the hell out of FSU made up for the short coming with the other weak OOC games. Also if Bama doesn't schedule that premium game, I doubt they would have made it to the playoffs.

 

[Kaplony]

No because the teams doing so under an 9 game schedule.Are scheduling those games with 3 OOC games to work with not 4.If they want to schedule an FCS team with 3 OOC games to schedule.That reflects their SOS.

I'm not sure why this is the main focal point.When scheduling an FCS team in November as a de facto bye week is actually worse.And the biggest point proponents of an 8 game schedule dodge.Is the fact that the 4th OOC game as opposed to a 9 game schedule.Is avoiding guaranteed conference losses.Which hols the highest impact across the board.Icluding skewing rankings

So again we are back to just because your conference was stupid enough to add a 9th game mine should be forced to just 'cuz.

 

[socaljim242]

I was skeptical on this, but I ran the numbers. It could go either way.

Alabama got $5 million to play FSU this year. If they got that next year we're talking $10 million total.

In order for a home and home series to be better, Alabama would have to make more than $10 million the year the game was at Bama. Bryant-Denny stadium capacity is listed at ~102k. For the purposes of easy math I'm going to round that down to 100k. This means if Alabama makes a $100 profit per seat at their home game, they would break even. Anything more than that and the home and home becomes more profitable.

Since I'm not an Alabama alumnus, getting ticket pricing for home games is harder. From what I saw for this year, there were tickets between $35 and $100 depending on who they were playing.

I'm a math person, but not necessarily a finance person. Depending on who you got to play home and home, I could see scenarios where you'd charge $100/ticket plus get money from parking, concessions, etc and drive the profit per seat up to the $150 range. And then the home and home series would be better. But I'm not solid on what expenses would be so I could also see where the per seat profit might only be $70.

thoughts?

Imagine the USC alums and fans spending two three days there for a game. Do you think the hotels and restaurants in the area would make the same as when Mercer or Coastal Carolina was there? You don't think that game wouldn't have great ratings? It would be like a bowl game as far as money to the economy there. I mean if this was about money.

 

[Kaplony]

Coming into this party late....
If teams plan cupcakes, which most do - they should be played in the beginning of a season and not the end. For example, no one cares to watch Clemson beat the hell out of Kent State in November (not saying you did - just an example). Schedule it as a tune up game in Sept so I can see what your new QB/offense can do? Sure - sign me up. But beating the hell out of a lesser opponent in November is just not good football and I will be off watching a P5 matchup.

We played our cupcake in week 5.

 

[4down20]

So again we are back to just because your conference was stupid enough to add a 9th game mine should be forced to just 'cuz.

They are Pac12 fans, it's all they got.

 

[amszete]

We played our cupcake in week 5.

Yep - just using Clemson as a random example as noted in my earlier post.