Of course, Alabama head coach Nick Saban would be opposed to a nine-game SEC schedule…
SEC expansion is coming in two years, but we still don't know if it will be remain an eight-game conference schedule out of fear and control, or if the league will wisely accept the notion of a progressive nine-game slate.
Alabama head coach Nick Saban and the other notable people that make the SEC … the SEC … will meet in Miramar Beach on Tuesday for the league's spring meetings. Perhaps the most important topic up for debate is whether or not to go to a nine-game conference schedule with no divisions and three common opponents once Oklahoma and Texas finally arrive from the Big 12 in 2024.
This was thought to be a shoe-in, but the dynamic has change. Brandon Marcello of 247Sports reports that Alabama was initially in favor of this newfangled scheduling model, but once Saban and company found out the Crimson Tide's three common opponents would be Auburn, LSU and Tennessee, they changed their mind. Let's make Mississippi State Alabama's third opponent then…
Marcello says Alabama is joined by four other schools who are opposed to a nine-game conference schedule (Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi State, South Carolina). Seven are in favor of going to nine (Florida, Georgia, LSU, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M). Three are on the fence (Auburn, Ole Miss, Tennessee). Vanderbilt had not given any indication on where it is leaning.
Here is where it lands from a visual perspective on what each SEC team feels about nine games.
- In Favor (7): Florida, Georgia, LSU, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
- Opposed (5): Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi State, South Carolina
- Undecided (3): Auburn, Ole Miss, Tennessee
- No Idea (1): Vanderbilt
The fact that an eight-game schedule only has one protected rivalry and seven rotating games is why that proposal is not going to work in the end. Rivalries are why the SEC has become the SEC…
Nick Saban, Alabama vehemently opposed to SEC going to nine-game schedule
Admittedly, the eight-game model with one annual rival and seven rotating games is far better than keeping these stupid divisions intact. There was no way to justify it with Oklahoma and Texas coming aboard. While we are still getting a home-and-home with every team in the league over a four-year span, you need to find the right balance between major rivalries and creating new ones.
As a Georgia fan, I know that a nine-game schedule with three annual rivals would mean the Dawgs would face Auburn and Florida every year, with the other game being either Kentucky or South Carolina. If it were an eight-game schedule with one annual rivalry, that game would be Florida. That means Georgia wouldn't play Auburn annually, and Florida wouldn't play Tennessee.
You do understand why that is a massive, massive problem, right?
Prospective recruits go to these schools to play in these games. You don't want to debase the value, or completely eliminate, the importance of secondary rivalries. Everybody can have an arch rival, but not everybody is good enough to have a secondary. SEC secondary rivalries often top many leagues' primary rivalries. Even some tertiary rivalries will get me to a TV faster than some.
To me, it's not that you're failing to include conference game rotation. It's a moot point because these non-rivalry games will rotate as frequently as the other, no matter what schedule is inevitably adopted. What bothers me is five teams, including Alabama, are essentially saying no to two more high-stakes rivalry games a year, as well as one game better than just another cupcake.
It may suck to have to play three top-10 teams annually, but isn't that what Auburn does pretty much every year with Alabama, Georgia and LSU? We have to look at this from a macro perspective. From Alabama's standpoint, we are talking about four more SEC games they would have to play in a four-year recruiting cycle, two of them being against LSU and Tennessee apiece.
When you are growing, you can't be afraid of failure or making a mistake. If the SEC wants to grow the revenue, which is why Oklahoma and Texas left the Big 12 behind they were propping that thing up, then you have to make scheduling concessions. We want a nine-game SEC schedule so that we can get eight more conference games a year and 32 over the course of a four-year cycle.
Do you want to see eight more cupcakes a season or eight more SEC games that actually matter?
