I don’t care....there’s no good reason to schedule an fcs or bowl sub whatever they’re called

Somebody has millon$$$$$$$ of reasons.

We talking point status right: silver, gold, plat?

Platinum, no doubt. And then?

Hawaii in that mix?

No. Provo, Seattle, South Bend, Boulder, Tempe, Berkeley.

Playing the same number of conference games will not level the playing field. All conferences are not equal: the Western Division of the SEC is stronger than some conferences (P5) as a whole.

When Saban took over his comparison was USC and the winning streak they had enjoyed. No one minded a comparison to a good ball club.

A lot miss that very point. No, make that most miss that point.

With escalating ticket costs, along with the "arms races" happening within conferences, the only way schools are going to be able to justify raising prices is offering better competition at home.

The neutral site phase has been good for teams from a revenue standpoint as well as the national exposure they bring.

One of the home and home series scheduled (Bama) has a payout for the visiting team as well. As I recall, it's the game with Texas where the visitor is getting 1MM for their trip. To me, that seems like the most logical course for schools to take. It's a cut of revenue on one home game but more importantly it cuts into the loss of revenue the away games create.
**********
As a side note: How many teams in the SEC would trade their schedules for one of the ACC teams? Or, let's phrase that another way.

How many teams in the SEC would be looking at a 10 win season if they faced the schedule of the Hurricanes this season?



There's a really good chance that last years Kentucky team would have been undefeated against this schedule. Bama, LSU, Georgia, Florida, A&M...all looking at very good chances to roll through that undefeated. I'd argue over half of the SEC would challenge for 10 wins seasons.