Weirdly Alabama's AD Greg Byrne has been two sided on this scenario. Back in 2019, he was all about scheduling multiple Power 5 out of conference games (when Saban was still coaching).

https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/sports/2019/08... /

More recently, he's rethinking that.

https://www.tuscaloosanews.com/story/sports/college/footb... /

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10146394-alabama-ad-g...

And this sentiment was echoed by Georgia AD Josh Brooks.

https://247sports.com/article/georgia-ad-josh-brooks-defe... /

I think they could make more money for both more SEC games and better OOC games. I'm pretty confident that the proposal to add another conference game isn't about less money.

And I don't agree that the SEC media deal set in stone. It's basically a certainty that the contract includes a number of things that either trigger a renegotiation (like conference expansion) or add incremental value (like additional conference games).

Ultimately, media companies want as many live events to broadcast as possible, and athletic departments want to generate as much revenue as possible. Neither side is incentivized to not go back to the table, and they'll both willingly do so if there are more ads to sell.

The path to success on the field involves spending more money. Kentucky and South Carolina want more money to spend. Kentucky hasn't finished in the top 10 in the nation in 50 years. South Carolina has had maybe 2 seasons in the last 40 years where they'd have made the playoff. The current system isn't exactly serving their playoff interests super well, and I struggle to see how status quo and less money is better for them than SEC/Big 10 Duopoly and more money.

Alabama's AD wasn't saying they want to schedule more G5 games. He was THREATENING to schedule more G5 games. Why? Because everybody knows that there's more money when there are less G5 games, everybody knows that's where the sport's headed, and the SEC is reminding the committee that their OOC games are a cash cow and to act accordingly. He was working the refs. That's all.

Bama's OOC schedule was Western Kentucky, South Florida, Mercer, and a non bowl eligible Wisconsin team. I guess the wear and tear of blowing out Wisconsin led to them losing 3 SEC games?

It's a pretty non-sensical argument, and I wouldn't hang my hat on it as compelling evidence that big schools aren't going to be looking to maximize revenue in a world where they now have a massive new expense.

This, to me, is the much more interesting data point about how P4 schools are thinking about the world right now: https://apnews.com/article/indiana-athletic-department-la...

It's just very, very hard to see the logic of "let's earn less and pay more for less valuable games." Maaaaaaybe that makes sense for a handful of perennial powers who are always going to be in contention for the playoffs (like Ohio State, Georgia, etc).

But West Virginia? Rutgers? Purdue? Indiana? and the other 98% of the P4 who get a playoff birth every 15 years if they're lucky? I fail to see the basic logic there.

If a thread was on coke, it would read like this one.

We've had more than just one thread recently that appeared to have have been written by posters eating psychedelic mushrooms.