The House of Blue

Oh absolutely. I'm in favor of that regardless. The UL game does NOTHING for us. Its not even a respected out of conference game (for good reason) when they're decent because they play in a high school football conference!!

It's really all prediction at this point. We have no way of knowing how the populous of college football fans is going to react to the new playoffs. My personal belief is that in 10 years or so you're going to see about 25-50% less bowls as media interest (and therefore advertising money) dries up. And I also think you'll see an expansion of the playoff system to at least 8 teams by that point.

The downside to that is you will see an even greater concentration of football money to the top schools--that revenue sharing now occurs when you pay the cupcakes to come to your house and take their whipping. (i.e.- I-AA powerhouses like Appalachian State getting $950,000 to play in the Big House). Those games pay for the entire team's annual budget in a lot of cases!

If you cut those games out all together, you will see a lot of smaller schools have to stop playing football in a relatively short time.

The Big10/Pac 12 agreement was scrapped last week do to scheduling difficulties. To many obstacles with all of their sports teams.

Good catch, I remember seeing that now. Still is the right idea. I think it was perhaps just too much of a hike for them travel-wise. They should have scheduled that with a closer conference.

Drop UofL...

It does NOTHING for UK. It was hoped that the series would help the prep instate talent. It hasn't.

I think it should be 6-1-2 scenario... Where the bottom SEC team would play the bottom 2 SEC divisional finisher from the year prior, the middle SEC finisher would play the 2 middle divisional finisher and so on....

Either we do the 9 with some sort of weighted back end or UK will be relegated to being the Homecoming doormat SEC game forever.

Yea, that really hurt AL last year losing at home to LSU, didn't it? I.e., how does losing to a tough team hurt you? Answer: It doesn't. Net, it's a false wringing of hands.

Given that logic SEC teams should be some of the last schools that need to add tougher out of conference matchups, simply because of just how tough the in conference schedule is. There's a reason we play the patsies we do OOC.

I agree with Joker if that it comes to a vote for 9 games, you have to protect your program and until we gain depth the physical health of our players. I also think that before we talk about adding anything to our OOC we need to work on winning in conference first. Just look at how many games we've dropped late in the season that we shouldn't have because of some very unfortunate injuries and guys who just can't carry that kind of load from season beginning to end. Start adding weight to the OOC and you'll be luck to make it through half of the SEC schedule with the lack of depth we routinely possess.

I don't want any part of a 9 game SEC schedule but the weighted idea would be the way to go IF/WHEN it happens.

I would have zero problem with dropping UL or putting them on a rotation where we play them every other year.