I know our in-conference schedule is TOUGH, but how about Occasionally adding an NATIONAL/REGIONAL out-of-conference team that might be a "draw" for ticket sales AND might be someone for which your team might "circle the date" and compete at a Very high level????!!! As a long-time Gamecock Club Member and Season Ticket Holder, Sure would like to see that Every Now and Then!...
Future Football Sched Additions...Troy...Georgia State...REALLY???
- Thread starter savoirspur74
- Start date
I'll see your Troy and raise you a Charlotte, Wyoming and Akron.
Won't happen. Those 'national/regional ooc teams' you want USC to schedule are too busy trying to sign-up their own 'patsies'.
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
Still...I would LOVE a home and home with Oklahoma. That would be tons of fun for our family.
Want to add quality? Go to nine conference games - like the rest of the civilized world. Still leaves room for two patsies.
Yes, as much as they charge for season tickets, seat fees, dues, etc, it would be nice to get our money's worth in OCC games. All this money we pay and we only get about 4 quality home games a year (5 when we play clemsux here).
This is one of the reasons attendance is dropping in Division I football nationwide. Maximizing revenue has been taken to a ludicrous degree. Everyone wants non-conference nobodies because they come cheap and usually result in wins. Season ticket buyers bite the bullet because they still want the conference games, and as long as they've paid the money, the athletic departments don't care if they don't show up. At some point, though, more fans are going to quit buying tickets because the games are all on TV, and fans will decide the in-person experience of terrible traffic, games that last way more than three hours due to commercials and video reviews by the referees and lousy opponents isn't worth the bother.
Last edited:
Nine conference games. No divisional play. Protect historically recognized rivalries, everything else round robin. Two best teams based on record and tie-breakers go to Atlanta.
As long as none of em run the triple option, I'm good.
I'd be happy if they would just drop one of the worthless OCC games, add another conference game and just do away with the permanent opponents from the other division. That way you play 3 rotating opponents from the other division every year. Of course that would only be another home game every other year, which is why they probably wouldn't want to do it.
We play Clemson OOC and typically an team from NC. Having 2 warm-up games is what everyone has always done
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
That won't happen because of Alabama/UT and Georgia/Auburn.
Your slant has merit, even if it is a little less radical than mine. But nine conference games isn't radical. Every other Power-Five conference has already adopted it.
You have to continue recognized rivalries, and what they are should be self-evident to everybody.
Well Troy DID beat LSU last year. Just sayin
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
He was speaking of doing away with permanent cross division rivals. This was merely an example of why that won't happen. The idea has been floated many times over the years, and those two games are why it's not been entertained in the slightest.
I think you could grandfather in some games and round-robin everything else. With divisional play taken out of the equation, the teams that have grandfathered rivalries would still get around to playing everyone else, some opponents more often than they do now.
The ACC adopted a nine-game schedule when they last expanded, but they put it off. It's going to happen.
Last edited:
I think they did more than put it off. Their deal with ESPN calls for 8 conf and 1 power 5. I dont see them changing unless they lose out on a CFP spot because of it. I would rather keep it how it is and play Auburn, A&M etc versus adding Duke or Virginia.
I think we are saying close to the same thing,except I think you are saying do away with Divisions and I'm saying keep Divisions but do away with permanent opponents from the other division. Your way may be better. At least it would avoid the situation where when one division is far better than the other, perhaps the best two teams are not in the championship game. That sort of goes along with the way the playoff teams are selected to make it a true championship. Yes......I concede - your way is better, except I don't think there should be any permanent opponents regardless of the rivalries as this makes it inequitable across the board.
So you are saying that 4 teams will out vote 10 teams, assuming the other ten are in favor of it? I don't think your math works.
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
It would have been done by now if the other 10 teams mattered. Again, this has been brought up a great deal when schedules are being made.
So some teams would have multiple “recognized” rivals and others would have none?
Would ours be Georgia? If so, Georgia would have Auburn, Florida, us and maybe Tennessee?
The math doesn’t work.
The format of 8 conferences games with the caveat that one of the 4 OOC is required to be a P5 team (which we currently do) is livable for now.
We could schedule 1 good Sun Belt team, 1 patsy and add another P5, which i beleive most fans would welcome, and help with the SOS component, which now carries more weight in todays championship format.
We could schedule 1 good Sun Belt team, 1 patsy and add another P5, which i beleive most fans would welcome, and help with the SOS component, which now carries more weight in todays championship format.
Cocky kebo57
Well-Known Member
Why oh why do we need or WANT to make our schedule any harder than it already is? Do you ever want to see the gamecocks make it to the playoffs? If yes, then we need to schedule teams like these for OOC games.
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
One of the advantages of Being in the SEC, out of conference games, some being a "Patsy" (If there is such a thing) doesnt hurt you.. Run the table you will be in the Playoffs!! PERIOD!!
I love big out of conference games. But for the head coach or AD, there is no incentive to play them. None at all. They are graded and paid on number of wins per year...period. The chance for an SEC East or (please Lord) an SEC title have nothing to do with out of conference games. And with Clemson clicking lately, they will take all the cupcake wins if it equals 9 or 10 or more...and you would too. This doesn't sound sexy at all, but it's the truth.
We only started the College Football Playoff a few years ago. It didn't matter before then. Now, more and more it matters. Things are changing, just like I used to have a land line phone in my house, but not anymore. The more it matters with the playoff situation and having the conference solidified in its standing, the more all the teams will demand it be changed.
If this is true, then why did Ohio State play Oklahoma, Alabama play FSU, and Auburn play Clemmy, etc?
The CFP committee rewards teams who play a tough OOC opponent or two. These can help make up for a bad conference loss like Pitt, Syracuse, Iowa St., etc. I’d also argue having a big time OOC matchup can help with recruiting too.
I just don't think they're going to do away with Alabama/UT. But I'd love to change up who we play with more regularity.
Latest posts
-
-
Gamecock Scoop Podcast: NFL Draft Reaction and Baseball Breaks Through- Latest: Caleb Alexander
-
Gamecock Scoop Podcast: NFL Draft Reaction and Baseball Breaks Through
- Latest: Caleb Alexander
-
