Albama Arkansas Auburn Florida Georgia Kentucky LSU Mississippi State Missouri Ole-Miss USC Tennessee Texas A&M Vanderbilt
Latest News

SEC A.D.s Will Discuss 9-Game Schedule; Slive Needs To Push It Past Cowards

If you’ve read for anytime now, you know full well that we believe the SEC needs to go to a nine-game conference football schedule and that it eventually will do just that.

We’ve listed the reasons for such a move dozens of times:

1.  Another SEC game means more value for ticket-buying fans.

2.  The league’s television partners would prefer SEC versus SEC over SEC versus pansy any day of the week.

3.  A nine-game slate allows the best of both worlds — three of the league’s oldest rivalries (Auburn-Georgia, Alabama-Tennessee, Ole Miss-Vanderbilt) would be saved and teams would continue to rotate two cross-divisional foes per year… meaning schools would play each other more often.  (Again, that’s something TV execs would favor.)

4.  A nine-game schedule would decrease the chances of a school like Georgia in 2011 missing all three of the best teams from the other division.

5.  Such a plan would result in more inventory for a potential SEC television network down the road.

6.  Fears of “we’ll play four home games while they play five” have been wildy overstated.  The four/five, home/road advantage would flip every season.  And there are inadequacies in the current system anyway.  While everyone plays four home and four road games per year now, some play easier road schedules than others.  That’s part of any schedule rotation, so the move to a four-this-year, five-next-year plan is not that big of a change.

7.  Cries that schools might be forced to play just six home dates in a season are overblown as well.  Before the NCAA moved to a 12-game football schedule in the past decade, schools often played six or seven home games rather than the current seven or eight.  More importantly, the cash rolling in from CBS and ESPN — and that money which will go up with the addition of Missouri and Texas A&M would go up even further with more SEC versus SEC contests — easily covers the loss of one home date every other year.  Easily.

8.  Perhaps most importantly, the league would hurt itself rather than help itself by softening its schedule.  Other leagues are making their schedules tougher.  The Big 12 is playing a nine-game slate.  The ACC will move to a nine-game plan when Syracuse and Pittsburgh enter that league.  Big Ten and Pac-12 teams will begin playing on a yearly basis on top of their current in-conference schedules in 2017.  The other major conferences are all guaranteeing themselves more BCS-level opponents per season.  If the SEC sticks with an eight-game plan, all the anti-SEC’ers out there will finally have a reason to vote down the league in future polls.  No longer will the SEC be a mini-NFL.  Oh, coaches will tell you that eight SEC games are harder than nine BCS games in other leagues, but folks outside the South won’t buy it.  You can be sure of that.

Quite simply, the only reason not to go to a nine-game slate is pure cowardice.

And cowardice is not a word traditionally associated with the Southeastern Conference.  Mike Slive, it’s time to step up and lead.

Jon Solomon of The Birmingham News reports today that the SEC’s athletic directors — who will meet at both the women’s basketball tournament this week and the men’s tourney next week — will indeed discuss a nine-game plan.  But there’s no real support for such a plan from the ADs or the league’s football coaches at the moment.

Of course.

Tennessee athletic director Dave Hart — an Alabama grad and employee before joining the UT — is one of those ready to talk about a nine-game plan.  Naturally, he wants to save the Alabama-Tennessee rivalry.  And while some fans across the SEC don’t care that Tide-Vols is traditionally the league’s top game played between the two programs with the most SEC titles in history, Hart is right to fight for it.

“I think everything has to be on the table, including playing nine games, which I know terrifies some people when you say it.  I do want to talk about nine games.”

Georgia’s Greg McGarity — who no doubt wants to protect the Auburn-UGA game which is the oldest rivalry in the Deep South — is also in favor of discussing a nine-game plan.

“Many SEC fans have a decision whether to come to our game, or sit at home in front of their 60-inch HDTV.  Would they be more likely to come to a conference game as opposed to a guaranteed (nonconference) game?  I’d probably say yes.”

Solomon goes onto run through the various views of many anti-nine-game ADs as well.

Unfortunately, those ADs should not be allowed to have the final say.

Mississippi State’s Scott Stricklin admits that he’s against a nine-game plan because it might keep State out of a bowl game.  In other words, “We need a steady diet of creampuffs and cupcakes if we’re going to claim to be good.”  This fall, State’s nonconference slate is as follows: Jackson State, Troy, South Alabama and Middle Tennessee State.  In essence, MSU is already 4-0 and need only go 2-6 in the SEC — as it did last year — to reach a bowl.


Kentucky has mastered the art of the weak nonconference slate as well.  Their recent rejuvenation under Rich Brooks was aided immensely by Louisville’s downturn and three lay-up nonconerence games per season.

Again, cowardice.

Just last season, in order to protest bowl eligibility, Tennessee bought its way out of a game at North Carolina and replaced the Tar Heels with a home date against Buffalo.

Sporting karma took effect and kept the Vols from going bowling even with a win over a miserable Buffalo squad on their resume.

Slive has shown in the past that he has the ability to steer the league’s presidents in the right direction.  When the coaches and ADs whined that they needed the ability to sign 37 players per season, Slive and his presidents unanimously overruled them and upped their league’s reputation nationally in the process.

When the coaches yelped over proposed multi-year scholarships, again it was Slive who convinced 3/4s of the league’s presidents to overrule their coaches and do what was right by the student-athlete.  Again, the SEC’s reputation was aided.

Now, Slive must act again.  This decision on scheduling is too big, too important, and worth way too much money to be left to coaches and athletic directors who have only their own self-interests at heart.  This isn’t about individual schools, it’s about the league as a whole.  And when the league rises, all the schools rise.

We’ve been down this road before in the Southeastern Conference.  In 1992, then-commissioner Roy Kramer and the SEC presidents voted to expand their league by two, increase the number of conference games from seven to eight, and to add a first-of-its-kind championship game.

Coaches moaned that the league would never win another national crown.  Proving the coaches’ inability to understand anything beyond the gridiron, Alabama won the national title in that very first year.  Florida followed in 1996.  Tennessee in ’98.  LSU in ’03.  And now the SEC is riding a six-title streak that’s unmatched in the history of college football.  Hell, two SEC teams played one another for the crown last month.

But if Kramer had allowed his coaches and ADs to decide the league’s fate in 1992, you can bet your hindquarters that there would have been no expansion, no eighth conference game and no SEC title game.

As a result, the SEC would not have not have gained the “toughest league in America” reputation that it now holds.  A reputation that has aided it repeatedly in the BCS era as team after team have landed in the national title game.  Unfortunately, that biggest, baddest reputation can be lost.

Acting selfishly and acting cowardly can cause it to disappear.

It’s time for Slive and the SEC to step up just as all the other major leagues are stepping up.

A nine-game schedule is what’s best for the league and, as a result, that’s what will be best for every program in the league.

And if a nine-game slate can’t pass muster, then the league must petition the NCAA for a divisionless format that protects 99% of all the league’s most important and oldest rivalries.

Slive has been viewed by many as a visionary.  To maintain that reputation, he must simply keep pace with the rest of the nation at this point.

He can’t afford nailbiting ADs influence by self-serving football coaches to make this call.  He just can’t.


Playoff in 2012
Playoff in 2012

Still the 14 team SEC is no way to find a champion  Why not divided the SEC into 2 Conferences of 10 teams each.  I am sure 6 really good teams would move, at least teams as good as Kentucky & Tennessee in 2011.  Then you get 9 games and could drop the Patsy teams from the FCS while dropping to an 11 game season with better games for the fans & alums.  TV would go crazy with excitement.  The 2 Champions could play then the winner goes to the National Championship Playoff and the other Champion goes to a New Years Day Sugar Bowl.  Again the best of all worlds


Why is it cowardice for MSU to set their schedule up to go bowling?  They tried beefing up the schedule in the past with Oregon, WVU, and Ga Tech.  All it resulted in was sitting at home during bowl season.  If you are an AD, do you want to keep the fans coming back while hanging on to the hope of a bowl game or do you want to disinterest them by giving them 5 win seasons?  Not every team in a conference can be consistent powers - simple math prevents that. 


MSU's (or a UK, Vandy, Ole Miss) goals are very different than Alabama's and LSU's.  That's fact.  Their goals are winning seasons and bowl games.  If those are your goals and your typical conference schedule is 3/4 Top 15 teams, it's not cowardice to schedule a weak OOC, it's common sense.  Let the whipping boys of the conference have a little something to look forward to at the end of the season.  The moment any of them get screwed over in bowl selections because of their OOC schedule, you will see them beef up the schedule.  The same logic can be carried forward to the upper echelon of the conference.  As soon as they someone is screwed over in the BCS because of a weak OOC, you will see a change.  Until that happens, carry on. 




I agree totally. Either you have a conference. Or you have a confederation. That latter is nonsense.


I see absolutely no advantages to the SEC for going to nine games.    The rivalry games are a poor argument.   Alabama and Tennessee have only done damage to each other over the years and best to end that rivalry.    The same scenario goes for UGA and Auburn.   You can even add in the Iron Bowl which is also a sick destructive rivalry.   There are many advantages for staying at eight--more revenue, more bowl participants, and a much better chance of an SEC team always making the NC game.    The best move for the SEC is to eliminate the divisions and let the two highest BCS ranked teams play for the NC.    The four plus one playoff is a great move so long as it is simple with four highest BCS ranked teams being the participants.    Better yet would be an eight game playoff as the President has suggested or still better a 16 game playoff.   Sixteen playoff teams should be the final limit and perhaps we should move slowly from four plus one to 8 to 16.   

Bubba Gump
Bubba Gump

John, normally I am pretty in tune with your points but I must call foul on this one, what you label cowardice I call common sense.


1) You argue that the big 12 does 9, but look how badly that dysfunctional group has done. Anybody saying the SEC should follow the B12 lead is not playing with a full deck, or has a hidden agenda for such idiotic thinking. I will go so far as if the B12 does something, I want to be in the opposite camp!


2) While I note your observation of the B1G and PAC playing each other OOC, exactly how many BCS MNC's (that have not been recalled for scandals) do both those conferences have between them? The reason they have to play each other OOC is because neither has enough strong teams inside to make up strong schedules that are always deep as well. Again, when the B1G and PAC start bringing home the glass football on a regular basis, then get back to me.


3) As for the ACC, exactly how many glass footballs have they won since they went to 12? Please do not stand there and say adding SU and Pitt has made the football tougher in the ACC? Again, when you follow the laggards, soon you become one yourself, and I would sincerely hate that for the SEC.


Lets call it what it is, and who is really driving the bus. ESPN has the SEC contract and they want better games to show in the opening weeks, and in that critical week before the final week in the SEC where all the rivals play. The SEC already went west with Missouri to protect ESPN's investment in the ACC, why should they have to bow down again just to fill the Mouse with more dollars at the expense of the SEC. There is a reason the SEC schools play the patsy schools in the next to last week, and it has do do with winning more that just dollars. If Alabama plays Western Carolina before the Iron Bowl, can you blame them? The same can be said for Florida playing Jacksonville State before taking on Florida State. I actually like that the SEC schedules this way to allow its best teams a breather before big games, and national championship runs.


Aside from Oklahoma, the rest of the Big 12 schedules the easy wins in the beginning so they are all 3-0 starting conference play. This fall Texas plays the SEC, but they are picking on Old Miss and not Alabama or LSU. In the meantime the Tide rolls into Texas to play Michigan, and I will take that game any day over Bama vs Vandy for their 9th conference game. Do you really think LSU could have afforded to play Oregon and West Virginia on the road if they had 9 conference games as well? Frankly John, if you support the well being of the SEC as a whole, why would you want the 9th game? If you really want to make it better why not use that 9th game to schedule more SEC vs ACC contests in the east, and hold the west open to B12 games? Is there more demand for Missouri vs Oklahoma, or Missouri vs Ole Miss in terms of TV draws? Build it out so it looks like this for that 9th game :


SEC East :

Kentucky vs Duke

Tennessee vs UNC

USC vs Clemson

Florida vs FSU

Georgia vs Ga Tech

Vanderbilt vs UVA

Missouri vs Va Tech (until they play KU again)


SEC West :

LSU vs PAC team

Alabama vs B1G team

Auburn vs Miami

Mississippi vs Northwestern

Mississippi State vs Kansas State

Arkansas vs Kansas

TAMU vs BYU (until they play Texas again)


That would make ESPN happy as the ACC would get more football exposure, while getting 2 conferences involved instead of just the bottom feeders of the SEC. I hate that they always act like that 9th game will be Alabama vs Florida, when the reality is it will more likely be Ole Miss vs Kentucky. An 8 game conference schedule with a solid OOC across the board for the 9th game leaves the weak first game warm up for game 10, a mid season breather non AQ FBS for game 11, and a patsy for the pre rival game as the 12th game. i still think that keeps the SEC plenty competitive for the TV audience, but without adding the extra conference loss that kills MNC runs. What do you think?

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator

Bubba Gump...


I'll only tackle the first of your points here.  The Big 12 just went to a 9-game schedule this year.  And the problems in that league have had nothing to do with schedules.  They've had everything to do with petty backbiting brought about my schools paying more attention to their own good than the good of the league... failing to realize that a rising tide lifts all boats.


The rest of your argument -- "if you like the SEC how can you favor a 9-game schedule" -- could have been made when the league expanded from 6 to 7 league games... from 7 to 8 league games... and when it added a conference title game.  Unfortunately for the naysayers and worriers at those times, the SEC has gained in reputation and in trophies every time it's shown no fear.  It's no time to back down now.


But, if the league does stick with an 8-game schedule while everyone else locks in 9 BCS foes per year, I look forward to hearing SEC fans complain that the national media and coaches from other leagues aren't giving the league enough respect in the national polls.  Because that will be a definite result.  Be ready for it. 


Thanks for reading,


Bubba Gump
Bubba Gump

 @John at MrSEC 

The B12 is now less Nebraska, Colorado, TAMU, and Missouri. Even if West Virginia, TCU, UL, and Cincy are the eventual replacements, all 4 combined will not equal Nebraska. Last year the only 3 OOC games of note were TAMU vs Arkansas, OU vs FSU, and TCU vs Baylor. TAMU is gone, and TCU / Baylor will both see their wins fall at least a game or two a season in the future. In 2012 the only decent OOC game on the B12 schedule will be Oklahoma vs Notre Dame. At some point the sportswriters across the country are going to figure out how "inflated" the 9 game schedule is for the B12, and in 5 years or less they will sink from a legitimate #2 conference to battling the ACC for who gets the #5 slot. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but when that 9th conference game in the B12 is TT, ISU, KU, BU (less RG III) , KSU (less Snyder) , and TCU (with tougher conference games) you can not sit there with a serious face and say these games will command a national TV audience. None of this has to do with petty backbiting, and it is totally based on the lack of national appeal of 6 to 8 of the schools in the conference. I watch football all over the country all season and Texas Tech, Iowa State, Kansas, Baylor, Kansas State, and TCU are not "must see" TV every week. Boone Pickens money, and West Virginia elevate them to the next level, but unless Texas or Oklahoma are playing, how often will the average national fan turn on a B12 game?


The B1G spends the first 4 weeks beating up on MAC schools and how many of those games are getting the prime TV slot on Saturday? At least UM, MSU, and PU played Notre Dame for OOC exposure, but after that you were left with Nebraska vs Washington, Ohio State vs Miami, and Penn State vs Alabama. The PAC plays 9 conference games, but except for a maybe 3 teams (Southern Cal and 1-2 floaters) how many could keep up with even a middle of the pack SEC team? If the ACC follows suit, it will still be just a few teams at the top as Pitt and SU have not been serious football threats in at least a generation, and are probably approaching 2 generations of not mattering. If the 50's, 60's, or 70's were your historic highs, how do you compete with Florida State, Clemson, Virginia Tech, or Miami? I will lay good money that if Ole Miss played the bottoms of the other conference (Duke, Kansas, Indiana, Washington State) they would win 8 or 9 times out of 10. The other conferences have no problem at 9 games because their in conference strength is so weak already. Leave the 9 games to the nancy's outside of the SEC, and keep the SEC at 8 at least until the SEC stops bringing home the crystal football each season.


Every time I hear the SEC going to nine folks act like the worst OOC game on each schools schedule will be the one dropped. Call me the cynic, but I think the exact opposite will happen. With 4 OOC games the SEC schools can afford to gamble on 1 OOC game against an AQ foe in the top 20 or 30. If I am Nick Saban with 9 conference games am I going to keep a Penn State or Michigan on the schedule? If I am Les Miles and 2 of my 3 OOC conference games are Oregon and West Virginia on the road, will I let that schedule happen in the future?The problem with 9 games in the SEC means comparing apples to oranges, when folks keep acting like it is apples to apples. The SEC is the only conference where the worst teams can still beat the top dogs. Kentucky took down LSU 39-16-1 in their MNC year, and went to the bitter end against Auburn in their MNC run, and beat Auburn @ Auburn the year before. When was the last time Washington State took out Southern Cal 57-8-4? Duke took out Florida State 15-0-0? Indiana took out Ohio State 68-12-5? Iowa State took out Oklahoma 69-5-2? Any SEC coach going forward with serious MNC hopes will have to drop top OOC games to compensate for the added conference game or risk coaching suicide when you have a schedule that is much tougher than an ACC / B12 / B1G / PAC has to face to get to the MNC game.


Again, you chose to avoid the main point that this is just a money grab to have more marketable games the week before rivalry week in the SEC. If you put a conference game the week before UF vs FSU / USC vs Clemson / UGA vs GT do not cry foul when the AD's and coaches cancel those final game rivalries in the future. You can not have it both ways, and keep the SEC in the public eye with schools going undefeated at the end of the season. It also effectively closes the door on TAMU vs Texas or MU vs KU as the season ending rival game if they have to play a conference game the week before. There is a reason the SEC schedules weak the week before to enhance the high demand game the following week. To let ESPN change this just so they can get games in the "dead week" seems to be inviting failure. Here was the last two games in the SEC by school last season.


Alabama game 11 vs Georgia Southern, game 12 vs Auburn in Iron Bowl

Auburn game 11 vs Samford, game 12 vs Alabama in Iron Bowl


Arkansas game 11 vs Mississippi State, game 12 vs LSU in Golden Boot

LSU game 11 vs Mississippi, game 12 vs LSU in Golden Boot


Kentucky game 11 vs Georgia, game 12 vs Tennessee in border game

Tennessee game 11 vs Vanderbilt, game 12 vs Kentucky in border game


Mississippi State game 11 vs Arkansas, game 12 vs Mississippi in Egg Bowl

Mississippi game 11 vs LSU, game 12 vs Mississippi State in Egg Bowl


Florida game 11 vs Furman, game 12 vs Florida State in SEC vs ACC game

Georgia game 11 vs Kentucky, game 12 vs Georgia Tech in SEC vs ACC game

South Carolina game 11 vs Citadel, game 12 vs Clemson in SEC vs ACC game

Vanderbilt 11 vs Tennessee, game 12 vs Wake Forest in SEC vs ACC game


Notice a trend among the top schools in the SEC heading into their final games? If ESPN wants a better game 11 in the SEC, will they get it at the expense of the great game 12 games?


The only thing that worries me about a nine-game conference schedule is that schools may possibly stop scheduling quality non conference opponents.  As you noted, above, many schools are already doing this anyway, but I'll give an example of what I'm talking about.


I am a Tennessee fan and every year they schedule a quality (read: BCS school) non conference game, which to me is one of the hi lights of the year.  I believe one reason they do this is for recruiting since they generally need to recruit out of state.  In 2013 for example, they will be traveling to Oregon, and in the coming decade they have scheduled home and homes with Oklahoma, Ohio State and Nebraska.  I think a nine game conference schedule is the best solution, but I don't want to lose these out of conference games.  I hope Dave Hart doesn't show the cowardice you refer to in deciding whether to keep these games.

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator



If the SEC went to a 9-game schedule, but failed to play solid nonconference competition -- and let's face it, not all school face quality noncon opponents now -- then it could bite them at the polls.  And whatever championship system they come up with, polls will somehow be involved -- either in picking the our best teams or the four best conference champions.  Even a selection committee would consider strength of schedule.  


Thanks for reading,



 @John at MrSEC  That is a good point - I really enjoy the regular season quality nonconference games, and I hope respect at the polls is enough to keep them motivated to schedule good nonconference competition.  As a fan, I get a lot more enjoyment out of those games (even in a close loss) than drubbing some D-IAA team up and down the field.


Alabama and LSU really benefited from their nonconference games this year.  That should be an example to the rest of the league.


If they weren't prepared to go to a nine game conference schedule, they should never have expanded the league!


If scheduling goes to nine games, Georgia and Florida will rotate having three homes versus five away games every other year.   That's just simply not fair, regardless of whatever words, labels and put downs you guys want to use.  It's just wrong. 


Doing so would eliminate the World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party, and that's a damn shame.

m_Ag 1 Like

They would have the most balanced conference schedule in the league:  4 conference home games, 4 conference away games, 1 neutral conference game.


Of course, they could only have 6 total home games in the years they play FSU or Georgia Tech away.


 @m_Ag This year Florida finishes the home schedule with UL-Lafayette and Jacksonville State.  I think that is pathetic, and would much prefer playing Ole Miss or Arkansas.  "You'll Laugh"?  Really?


We need nine SEC games!

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator





Thanks for reading,



The Big Ten will have 8 conference games + the Pac 12 game+generally at least one other good game (3 schools play Notre Dame, Iowa plays Iowa State, PSU plays an Eastern team). I'd prefer the SEC stay at 8 conference games but require schools to schedule at least 2 'good' non-conference games. 1 of those might be Big East level, but we should be required to play other decent schools. I'd like our ADs and TV executives to have meetings and reduce TV payments to schools that don't meet this minimum requirement. The Mississippi schools could get away with scheduling a Memphis (which will be a Big East school) but would need at least 1better series. They should be able to get a school like Indiana, NC State, or BYU to schedule them home and away. This requirement would add value to our TV packages, and would give the conference a chance to beat up on other conference schools instead of each other. Sure, we won't win every game, but if we're the best we'll win a solid majority and come out looking better for it.


 @m_Ag Agreed.  While we all understand the non-conference cupcake to start the season and maybe one in the middle of the season.  We need QUALITY non conference games.  I will say Notre Dame is a quality game even if you know you will win it.


As a season ticket holder, I care about watching quality games.  As a fan of football, I care about watching quality games.


We need 8 conference games, 1 FBS  team,  1 lightweight ranked 50-100 type team (SMU/La Tech/Houston),  1 25-50 ranked team and a top 25 team every year.

The SEC just needs to encourage this.


As for Johns thing about saving rivalries, the way to do it is still the 3-5 plan so you get to play every team every other year.  Still get to keep 3 rivalries. 




To match the Big 10-Pac 12 9 conference game + 1 game vs the opposite league, should the SEC set up a similar scheduling format with ACC/Big East or even Big 12 (Texas vs. A&M again?)


I would think the SEC east play the ACC, and the SEC West play the Big 12. 

Mizzou gets a pass to play Kansas from the Big 12.


That would be the perfect plan, but then the Big12 is still in spoiled brat mode


I like this idea and would like the Big 12 as teh other Conference. Texas - A&M and Mizzou - Kansas. One could make an argument that the Big 12 is the 2nd best football conference.

farmerl21 1 Like


 More match-ups I would like to see.

Alabama-Oklahoma State,    Florida-Oklahoma,    Texas-Texas A&M,    Kansas- Missouri,     Auburn- Texas Tech

West Virginia- Kentucky,      Arkansas- Kansas State,     LSU- TCU,    Vanderbilt- Baylor

Would definitely have bragging rights up for grabs.


Tell us how you really feel.:) I love this site.


I believe you also said (correct me if I'm wrong) that the SEC would eventually go to a nine game conference schedule unless 7 wins became necessary for bowl eligibility.  If that scenerio were to occur, do you think the conferences that currently play or are implementing 9 game conference schedules would maintain those or adopt schedules more friendly to bowl eligibility?  I'm interested in knowing you opinion.  

John at MrSEC
John at MrSEC moderator



If the NCAA goes to a 7-game bowl eligibility standard then all bets are off across the board.  But I think there's going to be quite a fight from mid-level programs to prevent a raising of the eligibility standard.  If the eligibility standard does go up, then coaches and ADs in every league would be even more opposed better scheduling.  Cupcakes for everyone!


Thanks for reading... and for reading closely,



  1. [...] I should slide a copy of this under a few [...]

  2. [...] to go along with its expanded membership.  Or, as the always outstanding Mr. put it in his must-read take on the situation, “the only reason not to go to a nine-game slate is pure [...]

  3. [...] to go along with its expanded membership.  Or, as the always outstanding Mr. put it in his must-read take on the situation, “the only reason not to go to a nine-game slate is pure [...]

  4. [...] to go along with its expanded membership.  Or, as the always outstanding Mr. put it in his must-read take on the situation, “the only reason not to go to a nine-game slate is pure [...]

  5. [...] The prolific blogger Mr. SEC describes this matter—quite compellingly—in terms of conference cowardice. [...]

  6. [...] rest of the world toughens their own schedules with additional guaranteed games against BCS foes.  You know our feelings on that one.  We believe being the only league which guarantees eight BCS foes per team per season will [...]

  7. [...] an opinion piece on the matter (bit of a read though) Alabama | MrSEC [...]

  8. [...] game for their money’s worth.We’ve made our case for the nine-game schedule many times, including right here.Finally, last month word leaked that the SEC would likely stay with an eight-game schedule that [...]

  9. [...] A&M – don’t have as much tradition as the others and are expendable.As Mr. SEC points out, a nine-game conference schedule makes sense for several reasons. An additional SEC game [...]

  10. [...] bigger issue here is something that we warned you about back on February 28th when we wrote that by deciding to stick with an eight-game conference [...]

  11. Trackback says:


    I have been told to go and open a WordPress blog account to make web mini sites (web presence) and I am wanting to know if you have better ideas or simply more ideas? Advise for WordPress would be great as well!.

  12. Trackback says:

    Like it

    What are the most effective WordPress plugins to attract the most relevant traffic, the most relevant traffic and maximize website sales?.. I am thinking maybe:. 1. RSS feed plugins,. 2. Cost Per Action (CPA) plugins or code snippets,. 3. Affiliate plu…

  13. Great

    If I start a blog on Myspace, will it get listed in search engines like Google?

Follow Us On:
Mobile MrSEC