re: 1-7 scheduling model gaining momentum per SI’s Ross Dellinger

quote:

---

If you drop from four OOC games to three, the portion of the conference that isn't Georgia won't be cutting that P5 game and instead would drop a cupcake (especially if mandated by the conference). This scenario where even a low-tier ninth conference game (which would always be one of the protected rivalries in the 3/6/6 format, so typically a game of some merit) is less meaningful/valuable than the dropped OOC matchup just doesn't exist in reality

---

This reasoning doesnt merit a change, though.

It would be better to mandate 2 OOC P5 opponents than to add the 9th conference game for several reasons.

1) the AD can schedule the quality of the opposing program (no one knows the quality of the team so many years into the future, but even teams like Baylor, Nebraska, UNC carry a certain level of interest). I would love for the UGA admin to take our fanbase up to Madison Wisconsin. That is on the table with 4 OOC.

2) SEC vs SEC has a guaranteed loser. Whereas one of the lesser SEC teams has a punchers chance against wake, northwestern, kansas etc.. Im not posting about a cupcake win. Im posting p5 vs p5. Being bowl eligible still has to be earned. But at least there is a percentage chance that 2 SEC schools come out on top that week.

3-5 format protects the rivalries and it protects each schools autonomy to schedule a guaranteed interesting game against 2 to 3 P5 opponents each season (as opposed to a blind round robin which hosts mediocre SEC teams half of the time).