Does South Carolina enter the NCAAs undefeated?

[Gamecockfan77]

Lol there's always somebody on tBY that asks this every time SC has a rising challenger in the league. Back then the ask was about MSU. The SEC only plays a 16 game conference schedule, most other P5 conferences play more (around 18) games. The Pac 12 plays a 18 game schedule but their league only has 12 schools, so you see more teams playing multiple times. The SEC has 14 schools on a shorter conference schedule.

Every team in the SEC has a conference rival that they play twice, for SC it's Kentucky. In a perfect world for TV viewership, the conference rival would change every year, matching up the strongest teams to play twice.. but then how fair would that be. Unless they add games to the conference schedule then you can expect conference rivals to go away next year too when Texas and OU join the league.

I think that would be more fair?

What's particularly fair or interesting about having two undefeated teams going unchallenged and then deciding the league on one home court?

 

[TN-Gamecock]

The ACC does it so much better than the SEC and Big 10. 3 geographic pods of 5 teams each. Every team plays their biggest rival twice a year (except for poor Wake Forest and Pitt). One game each vs the other pods, alternating home and away each season.

Maybe in basketball but certainly not in football. How UNC avoids Clemson every year is beyond me. For years, the ACC gave UNC the easiest of schedules.

So to say the ACC does this one thing better, I'll agree. But overall, the ACC is a shit show, which is why they are in the predicament they're in now. The ACC having John Swofford as Commissioner was the absolute biggest mistake the ACC made.

 

[VA Huskie]

I don’t know what the rules were for how the old Big East set up its schedule, but it seems that ND and UConn played each other twice every year. So I assumed that they were scheduling the two best teams to play each other 2X every year on purpose. Is there a reason that the SEC can’t do that for SC and LSU?

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

I don’t know what the rules were for how the old Big East set up its schedule, but it seems that ND and UConn played each other twice every year. So I assumed that they were scheduling the two best teams to play each other 2X every year on purpose. Is there a reason that the SEC can’t do that for SC and LSU?

USC and LSU might be the 2 best teams in the SEC right now, but who's to say they will be next year or the year after? I want to play more games around the country instead of having the same boring road trips all the time.

 

[visitingcock]

I don’t know what the rules were for how the old Big East set up its schedule, but it seems that ND and UConn played each other twice every year. So I assumed that they were scheduling the two best teams to play each other 2X every year on purpose. Is there a reason that the SEC can’t do that for SC and LSU?

Warning. Conspiracy Theory!

Yes there is a reason. The SEC protects its leaders.

In football, have you seen Georgia called for holding in an SEC game the past three years. Bama before that?

 

[SCGamecock]

I think that would be more fair?

What's particularly fair or interesting about having two undefeated teams going unchallenged and then deciding the league on one home court?

The best teams playing one another multiple times would definitely be more interesting. Never said it wouldn’t. I even said something similar when I mentioned my “perfect world” scenario.

But in our imperfect world, the reason it's fair is because outside of your permanent rival, your schedule is predetermined based on a cycle rotation. Your schedule for next year isn't being made more difficult or less difficult based on who's at the top of the league this year and who's at the bottom of the league. The way it is currently, if you have an incredibly difficult or easy conference schedule then that's the luck of the draw. You can't criticize anybody for making your schedule more difficult based on a previous year's result. Nobody in the SEC wants LSU or South Carolina on their schedule twice right now, but if you happen to have them on the schedule twice there's nobody to complain to because it's just your time in the rotation to play them twice. A few years ago you probably didn't want Mississippi State on your schedule twice. Tennessee before that.

So the cycle rotation works because not only does it remove room for criticism, but you're not creating a future schedule on an irrelevant previous result or personal opinion of who's good now and who isn't and who's EXPECTED to be good going forward. The College Football Playoff is the mess that it is now because of the human element. Whenever you add things like emotions or the "eye test" to a decision it immediately becomes biased.

No matter the sport, the SEC protects its winners, so this is the LAST thing you'll see happen. The league will never intentionally make the road more difficult for the teams in the league. If anything, there could be an argument to get rid of permanent rivals in WBB too.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

USC and LSU might be the 2 best teams in the SEC right now, but who's to say they will be next year or the year after? I want to play more games around the country instead of having the same boring road trips all the time.

They could schedulr the two gamers up every year based on preseason expectation.

Granted that could mean an unexpectedly good team could get a softer schedule but that is already happening.

They should strive to have the most marquee matchups possible...at least they would if they wanted to promote the product.

Course sometimes challengers prefer the easier path.

I do think Dawn would be fine with it.

 

[Jumper33]

After UConn’s debacle last night, I’m voting yes for sure

 

[Gamecockfan77]

i would say in football there is/eas an interest worth protecting in promoting schedule balance.

One loss could be very pivotal in a 2 or 4 team playoff and championship game does exist.

In a 68 team playoff conference titles aren't vital and 2 losses to Soith Carolina or LSU is the difference maybe in what high seed you get...or not.

The one interest might be having a semi regular home game against the league's best for everyone, but I think that's less in need of protection and it could probably still be done.