<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[Get The Picture]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[https://blutarsky.wordpress.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Senator Blutarsky]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://blutarsky.wordpress.com/author/blutarsky/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[&#8220;You also have to remember we play the SEC Championship&nbsp;Game.&#8221;]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>Judging from <a href="http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/03/majority_of_sec_ads_favor_8_le.html" target="_blank">this article</a>, a majority of Southeastern Conference athletic directors favor sticking with an eight-game conference schedule.  What&#8217;s interesting is that there isn&#8217;t a single mention in the article about television contracts being a motivating factor in the equation.  Instead, it&#8217;s almost all about the playoffs.</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;I think we&#8217;ve done a really good job convincing the country that a one-loss SEC team deserves to play for the national title,&#8221; said Mississippi State Athletics Director Scott Stricklin, who supports eight games. &#8220;Are we going to be able to make the same argument for a two-loss team, which would happen more often (with nine games)?&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>I think Stricklin&#8217;s missing the point there.  Greg McGarity, however, isn&#8217;t.</p>
<blockquote><p>Said Georgia Athletics Director Greg McGarity: &#8220;The eight-game formula has served us well in the national championship discussion. Is that the right pattern moving forward? I think a lot of us think it is until proven differently.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>In other words, until they see proof that the conference is getting burned by the selection committee on the strength of schedule front, nobody&#8217;s inclined to do much of anything.</p>
<p>Which means we should expect scheduling to continue to be a season-by-season process.  And there&#8217;s something else we should continue to expect &#8211; a steady diet of cupcakes.  The recipe for those comes from the perfect combination of arrogance&#8230;</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;I&#8217;m not worried about other schools playing nine games in their league. In some leagues, the bottom half of their league is cupcakes. So big deal you&#8217;re playing nine. You&#8217;re playing a cupcake anyway.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>&#8230; (because all cupcakes are equal, right?) and finances.</p>
<blockquote><p>Gate revenue is also an argument made by some ADs for eight games. For Florida and Georgia, which annually play a neutral-site SEC game and an ACC rival that fluctuates home and away, nine SEC games would mean only six home games every other year.</p>
<p>&#8220;That&#8217;s a net loss of over $2 million what you generate every home game,&#8221; McGarity said. &#8220;So over a 10-year period, in today&#8217;s dollars, you&#8217;re leaving $10 to $11 million on the table.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>By negative implication, I assume that means Slive hasn&#8217;t been able to get the networks to pony up enough for the improved inventory a ninth conference game offers.</p>
<p>So expect Slive to be reactive instead of proactive on this front.  That means we&#8217;ll have plenty of SEC coaches bitching about scheduling for the foreseeable future.  And then even more bitching when one of them gets screwed out of a playoff spot.  Oh, goody for that.</p>
]]></html></oembed>