Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Manufactured match-ups the future of college football
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Gamecock Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,879
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 73
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Manufactured match-ups the future of college football
(12-08-2017 01:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 12:32 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 09:35 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I don't mind the neutral site games as long as they're in interesting locales and the match-up is good. I've been to a couple of them with Bama in recent years and it's pretty fun.

Part of me would prefer the home and home, but I get why they do it this way.

I think the best way to do it though is change cities regularly and try to keep the match-ups fresh. Otherwise, fans will lose interest.

Alabama doesn’t have much to complain about the last few years, but if I was a Bama fan the schedule would be one of them. Opening season neutral site game and three cupcakes every year. 03-puke

Go back and put a star by the schools which have won the national championship in the last 30 years and then grade everyone's schedule by the number of starred teams on it and then reevaluate your assessment of Alabama's schedule when it includes Florida State or Clemson, or Ohio State as that OOC game. Then compare that to the number of stars on the Gamecocks schedule. It's close but Bama has more as do most of the West division schools. Then do the same for the other conferences and their schools. That's why the 8 game SEC schedule is far more difficult than most of the other conferences play. It's also why schools like Ohio State, Oklahoma, Florida State, and Clemson play in those OOC season openers as it helps give the the data points they need to keep pace. They're good enough on their own to keep pace but playing and winning one of those games makes sure they are around at the end of the year in position to make the CFP.

I'm looking at it mostly from a fan's perspective. These games are just so bland most of the time unless it's FSU/Alabama or something very similar.

I agree that intersectional matchups are important, I just think home and home matchups are superior in every way. Ohio St, Texas, Oklahoma, So Cal and others largely insist on them and only rarely do neutral site openers. Alabama does the neutral site openers annually which sort of grew out of the Chick Fil A kickoff and now has seemingly spread across the Southeast.

I think for the SEC an 8+2 model would be ideal, requiring all schools to play two power five teams a year. This is essentially what UGA and SC have been doing for years and I think it would help the conference and individual programs as well.
12-08-2017 01:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 14,489
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 738
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Manufactured match-ups the future of college football
(12-08-2017 01:58 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 01:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 12:32 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 09:35 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I don't mind the neutral site games as long as they're in interesting locales and the match-up is good. I've been to a couple of them with Bama in recent years and it's pretty fun.

Part of me would prefer the home and home, but I get why they do it this way.

I think the best way to do it though is change cities regularly and try to keep the match-ups fresh. Otherwise, fans will lose interest.

Alabama doesn’t have much to complain about the last few years, but if I was a Bama fan the schedule would be one of them. Opening season neutral site game and three cupcakes every year. 03-puke

Go back and put a star by the schools which have won the national championship in the last 30 years and then grade everyone's schedule by the number of starred teams on it and then reevaluate your assessment of Alabama's schedule when it includes Florida State or Clemson, or Ohio State as that OOC game. Then compare that to the number of stars on the Gamecocks schedule. It's close but Bama has more as do most of the West division schools. Then do the same for the other conferences and their schools. That's why the 8 game SEC schedule is far more difficult than most of the other conferences play. It's also why schools like Ohio State, Oklahoma, Florida State, and Clemson play in those OOC season openers as it helps give the the data points they need to keep pace. They're good enough on their own to keep pace but playing and winning one of those games makes sure they are around at the end of the year in position to make the CFP.

I'm looking at it mostly from a fan's perspective. These games are just so bland most of the time unless it's FSU/Alabama or something very similar.

I agree that intersectional matchups are important, I just think home and home matchups are superior in every way. Ohio St, Texas, Oklahoma, So Cal and others largely insist on them and only rarely do neutral site openers. Alabama does the neutral site openers annually which sort of grew out of the Chick Fil A kickoff and now has seemingly spread across the Southeast.

I think for the SEC an 8+2 model would be ideal, requiring all schools to play two power five teams a year. This is essentially what UGA and SC have been doing for years and I think it would help the conference and individual programs as well.

I agree with that. But note: The SEC and ACC agree to neutral site games, especially the Chic-fil-a game in Atlanta because the sponsor is a generous donor to both conferences. So that really explains why we do it. Alabama is fine with the game because otherwise they lack a presence in Georgia most years. It's really a meh game for Auburn because we play Georgia annually and quite frankly our stadium seats more so we would enjoy the ticket sales at home. But then there's Chic-fil-a and we're all grateful to them.
12-08-2017 02:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,879
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 73
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Manufactured match-ups the future of college football
(12-08-2017 02:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 01:58 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 01:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 12:32 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(12-08-2017 09:35 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I don't mind the neutral site games as long as they're in interesting locales and the match-up is good. I've been to a couple of them with Bama in recent years and it's pretty fun.

Part of me would prefer the home and home, but I get why they do it this way.

I think the best way to do it though is change cities regularly and try to keep the match-ups fresh. Otherwise, fans will lose interest.

Alabama doesn’t have much to complain about the last few years, but if I was a Bama fan the schedule would be one of them. Opening season neutral site game and three cupcakes every year. 03-puke

Go back and put a star by the schools which have won the national championship in the last 30 years and then grade everyone's schedule by the number of starred teams on it and then reevaluate your assessment of Alabama's schedule when it includes Florida State or Clemson, or Ohio State as that OOC game. Then compare that to the number of stars on the Gamecocks schedule. It's close but Bama has more as do most of the West division schools. Then do the same for the other conferences and their schools. That's why the 8 game SEC schedule is far more difficult than most of the other conferences play. It's also why schools like Ohio State, Oklahoma, Florida State, and Clemson play in those OOC season openers as it helps give the the data points they need to keep pace. They're good enough on their own to keep pace but playing and winning one of those games makes sure they are around at the end of the year in position to make the CFP.

I'm looking at it mostly from a fan's perspective. These games are just so bland most of the time unless it's FSU/Alabama or something very similar.

I agree that intersectional matchups are important, I just think home and home matchups are superior in every way. Ohio St, Texas, Oklahoma, So Cal and others largely insist on them and only rarely do neutral site openers. Alabama does the neutral site openers annually which sort of grew out of the Chick Fil A kickoff and now has seemingly spread across the Southeast.

I think for the SEC an 8+2 model would be ideal, requiring all schools to play two power five teams a year. This is essentially what UGA and SC have been doing for years and I think it would help the conference and individual programs as well.

I agree with that. But note: The SEC and ACC agree to neutral site games, especially the Chic-fil-a game in Atlanta because the sponsor is a generous donor to both conferences. So that really explains why we do it. Alabama is fine with the game because otherwise they lack a presence in Georgia most years. It's really a meh game for Auburn because we play Georgia annually and quite frankly our stadium seats more so we would enjoy the ticket sales at home. But then there's Chic-fil-a and we're all grateful to them.

The Atlanta game is usually OK. That's an incredible stadium as is the one in Ft. Worth.

The games in DC, Charlotte, and Orlando are usually the ones that are awful. Those matchups should go away. South Carolina has Charlotte in 2019 and 2023, both agreed to under Spurrier, and I hope they are the last two.
12-08-2017 03:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,971
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 79
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Manufactured match-ups the future of college football
One of the main reasons we do it that way at Bama is the exposure an early season event like that creates.

Recruiting is a big part of it which is why you've found us in Atlanta and DFW almost exclusively. Next year, we're playing in Orlando which is also in the heart of prime recruiting territory although the stadium experience won't compare. The schools from other regions have been more than happy to participate so they can play in front of recruits they don't normally reach.

The TV exposure is just as important. It creates brand value, especially if you win. Alabama is already a big draw, but the early season game with the cooperation of network and other corporate sponsors guarantees a big show. We actually didn't start doing these until Saban showed up. He understood the value.

That and we get more money per season than doing a home and home.

Now admittedly, I would like to see more quality home games so I like Gamecock's idea of the SEC calling for 2 P5 opponents on the schedule at all times.
12-08-2017 06:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.