You pays your money and you makes your choice: a reader poll

Let’s say for the sake of argument that there’s real fire to all the expansion talk smoke going on (Mandel is excited, because everyone in Montana has heard of Florida State).  Fourteen schools mean seven-team divisions.  Seven-team divisions mean six division games instead of five.

Unless they’re expanding the season to thirteen games, that means the slot for the extra division game has to be taken out of one of two places.  Either cross-division games will be reduced to two, or the number of non-conference games each season drops to three.

I expect that the suits will choose the former option, but I’m more curious what fans would prefer.  So pick your poison.


Filed under SEC Football

20 responses to “You pays your money and you makes your choice: a reader poll

  1. I wanna Red Cup

    That’s one less non conference game of directional, Division 2, and sisters of the poor opponents.


  2. Matt

    Losing a nonconf game hurts teams like UGA & FL as they have regular nonconf matchups w/in state rivals. While teams like AL & Aub would benefit from 3 weak nonconf games as opposed to our 2 (ok, admitidly GT is weak too)


  3. heyberto

    I’m saying non-conference simply because another SEC matchup would be fun and great for the ticket going public… but it also makes the slate perennially harder on the players, potential injuries, etc as well as the ‘we beat up ourselves week in/week out’ that you’re so accustomed to hearing.. So the bottom line is I don’t know which I’d rather lose..

    I’m sure we wouldn’t be eliminating our cupcakes, so those Ohio State matchups and Clemson matchups we’ve been scheduling would probably go away.. and that’s ashame.


  4. Macallanlover

    I don’t see 14 teams, it has to go to 16, imo. When it does I hope for 10 conference games per year, 7 in your division, and 3 from the other. Makes for fewer College of Charleston/Utah State/Coastal Carolina. Let’s make the regular season attractive to fans. All this expansion talk again is making me hopeful, we came so close last year…just needed Texas to bolt.


    • Dawgfan Will

      You don’t think 10 conference games a season would negatively impact the SEC’s ability to put teams in the MNC game?


      • Macallanlover

        I don’t believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa, or subjective, media contrived/selected faux national Championship games so I like playing great games during the season and letting the championship of a great conference be the highest EARNED title available. I also feel the 16 team Super Conference concept will lead to a 4 team playoff where a national title can be truly won….for the first time ever.


  5. Rocketdawg

    Just heard on ESPN radio that TAMU, FSU, Clemson, and Missouri to the SEC is a done deal. I personally love it and I hope we go to 9 conference games per year. As a season ticket holder I was not happy with our weak home slate this year. Seeing FSU and Clemson Betweeen the Hedges every other year will be great.


    • W Cobb Dawg

      Agree. It would definitely whip up a feeding frenzy in regional rivalries. Just getting to the sec championship would be one helluva obstacle course. SEC would be the only conference with 3 ‘Tiger’ teams. Only problem – are fsu and clemson fans as big a-holes as UT and UF fans?

      Like Heberto said above, I’d hate to see games like OSU go away, but these in-conference battles would be a lot of fun.


      • Cojones

        Hell, the SEC Champ Game would be tantamount to a NC. I would have rather had Miami instead of FSU. FSU with SEC credentials is a double dip in recruiting in our area.


    • Macallanlover

      Not so fast my friend, Mizzou AD quoted as saying they would definitely not be joining the SEC. Surprised he was that forceful in his response, or what he has in mind if the Big10/12 falls apart. The WWL isn’t known for confirming info before they report.


  6. Bob

    I don’t know if I could stand the thought of not getting to play Southern University or Coastal Carolina. That would sure put a damper on pre-game anticipation wouldn’t it.

    Getting rid of garbage opponents like this might be the only reason I would like expansion.


  7. Stoopnagle

    I like the idea of contraction more than expansion, but then I’m fairly contrarian on most issues in college athletics.

    A&M? I’m all for roadtrips to Texas. I look forward to eating at the Dixie Chicken to celebrate a Georgia win. Shiners all around, gentlemen!

    Who else do you bring? I like the addition of Mizzou. I think they’re competitive in football, good for Arkansas, and bring some hoops cred to the athletics side. MU is a state flagship and really the only game in town for the state of Missouri.

    Florida State and Clemson are O.K. pick-ups, at least as good as A&M. Obviously, Roy Kramer is no longer in charge because I’d doubt seriously he would even give FSU the time of day after the last go around. And, as a Georgia fan, you have to like the plan to bring in our natural rival (over whom we have a win-loss record similar to that over S. Carolina). Bringing in the Noles might tweak the Gators a little, too, so there’s that.

    Personally, I think it would be much cooler to bring in UNC. They’d never go for it, of course. All decisions in the ACC are made on Tobacco Road. They wouldn’t give up their near-veto power in the ACC to our overlords in Alabama (I can’t say I blame them). But this would take some pretty serious back-room sneaking around and I’m not sure Slive has the gumption.

    A&M, MU, FSU and Clemson strikes me as nibbling on the corners. Each brings some nice things athletically, but why not try to expand your footprint in the east just like in the west and try to reel in a prominent flagship type institution now.


    • Stoopnagle

      And you’re right Senator. Nobody is going to willfully give up the extra home game, so I wouldn’t expect the SEC to force its members to play an extra “real” game against each other in lieu of the UL-Ms and Georgia Southerns of the world.

      How else would the Sun Belt Conference make it?


  8. haws1178

    I would like to see a 13th game but that wasn’t an option. The reason I chose one less non-conference game was the fact that usually non-conference cupcake teams aren’t televised(unless you got an extra $30 laying around). That way there is more free football and $30 more to spend on cold beer and boiled peanuts.


  9. G-Man

    16 teams, 4 divisions, semi finals before the SEC championship.


  10. Pantslesspatdye

    As an SEC fan, I believe it would be better for the conference with regards to bowl & NC bids to not play a ninth conference game.

    As a UGA ticketholder, I want to get as much bang for my buck with as many conference games as possible.

    I choose me getting to see an additional conference game. On a related note, after 7 years of tickets, I’m finally moving up – I should be able to see the new scoreboard this year!


    • OKDawg

      Agree completely…as long as no one whines later when the SEC (especially UGA) has a harder time making BCS bowls or the NCG with the tougher gauntlet to run.


  11. Hobnail_Boot

    Only way I’d vote for the latter option would be if Georgia Tech were one of the new SEC members.


  12. Macallanlover

    Why would you support letting them in? Bad fit, small venue, and other-worldly fans. They spat in the face of the SEC once, let them continue to suffer. They belong in the mid-major category, outside the Top 64. I have no problem with giving them an occasional money game in a big stadium like we do Georgia Southern, it would help their recruiting to have a game on the big stage. Beyond that, screw them.


  13. TomReagan

    I posted this as a reply over at T. Kyle’s site, but thought I’d bring it up here as well because I believe there are some big risks that come along with expansion. I could be wrong about these things happening, but they’re definitely something that should be considered before we jump into expansion.

    I expect that if the SEC expands, we either go to 9 conference games and lose the Cocktail Party or lose Auburn every year.

    If we lose an inter-conference game, that only leaves two a year. WIth only two inter-conference games a year, we would either play Auburn every year and cycle through the rest of the conference one at a time, or lose Auburn and put everyone on a cycle. Neither of those possibilities interests me at all. Same goes for losing Tennessee/Alabama and LSU/FLorida.

    If we go to a 9 game conference schedule, then I don’t see any way we don’t lose the Cocktail Party. With McGarity’s views on the number of home games we’re going to be playing from here on out, and with the push to move it currently coming from some of our folks, I don’t think we’d keep it there. At least, not as long as we play Tech every year, and in a battle of keeping Tech versus keeping the Florida game where it belongs, I think the Tech game would win.

    Any of the above scenarios would be terrible. There are absolutely no teams that I’d be willing to add to our conference if it cost us either Auburn or Jacksonville.

    The over-arching point that I think people are missing right now is that the SEC, and college football in general, is special because of tradition. This radical conference re-alignment—and a playoff—runs the risk of losing much of that.

    If people want a league of 30 some-odd teams who are basically on a level playing field, are divided into super conferences, and play a season ending tournament to crown a champion, then they should watch the NFL. It has all of that and is played at a much higher level.

    I’d rather have college football, warts (if you choose to look at them that way) and all, and would appreciate it if it were allowed to retain its wonderful eccentricities. I see no reason why we should risk sacrificing two of the best things Georgia football has going for it in exchange for playing A&M and FSU every few years, and I damn sure don’t want to risk these things for the right to play in Columbia, Missouri.