(08-03-2020 11:57 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2020 11:46 AM)YNot Wrote:  

(08-03-2020 11:43 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(08-03-2020 11:31 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-03-2020 09:00 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  There's a smidge of truth in the bolded, but not much, as it assumes that your conference's protocols are better than those of the other conference (or independent), which may not be true. Better to just use protocols as a basis if you really care about that.

The rest of what you say is entirely true.

Ultimately, I suspect it is because they think some games will have to be postponed, so they want flexibility to re-schedule them.

Possibly - but by moving the season back three weeks they didn't give themselves much flexibility either. As I understand it there will be one bye week for teams and then just one open week for makeup games on Dec 12. If any more than two games get postponed/cancelled it's going to throw the whole thing off and you'll have some teams playing fewer games than others.

Exactly. You need more flexibility in the schedule to improve the likelihood to get get all you're games in.

Should start the season on Aug. 29. Give everyone 3 or 4 bye weeks and the Dec. 12 flex week.

I told you guys, it's not about virus control, it's not about flexibility, it's about liability as I posted above. But sometimes everyone gets into the mode of only reading the last post when they check into a thread. The 10 game all one conference format was adopted because it is the most legally defensible one. No player is compelled to play, all games are within conference with the same precautionary protocol so no variations that open legalities, and it maximizes the profits under the circumstances because there are no games which split revenue with another conference and no OOC away games.

As far as pushing back the opening until to mid to late September, they aren't looking for flexibility. This too is a risk averse move in that the conference is delaying, as long as is possible, the opening of the season hoping for a downturn in the viral activity. This too is a mitigating decision where legal risk is concerned.

I agree that liability mitigation is a major concern. Good point on pushing the season back in hopes of a downturn. But, I don't buy the protocol argument when it comes to P5 conferences not playing each other. The SEC and Big Ten are going to use the same or substantially similar precautionary protocols.

It's about $$$$. Smaller schools and conferences probably won't be able to afford the same precautionary protocols - so, there's too much risk - so, that's a no go.

It's also about $$$$ in that the SEC and Big Ten will control the media rights to every game played by their conference schools this year. This better ensures that the conferences get the maximum possible payout, even if some games are cancelled....the conferences will have the flexibility to quickly rearranged schedules to ensure that attractive games are still played each week in the most lucrative timeslots...even when certain games are postponed.