The hot button topic of late has been the SEC’s daunting conference scheduling, and it has people between the hot takes of “it’s too grueling for teams to survive” to “the SEC is weak but will still have multiple playoff teams, anyway”.
As a reminder of whatever side of the debate you’re on, it’s a self-inflicted wound. While Sankey will stand tall on the idea that “we did something the B1G was unwilling to do themselves”, it still makes for a ridiculous decision that one can only wonder if it really was for guaranteeing playoff spots or if it was for money.
Well, of course it was for money. No one wants to watch Georgia versus Tennessee State in a crowded TV market, but more people will tune in for Georgia-Vandy and Georgia-Oklahoma, for sure.
What is hurting worse than anything else is that a move made to make the league’s scheduling look tougher is actually having the inverse effect – people are landing on the idea that the SEC is actually a weak conference, and keeping more games in house prevents debacles like Alabama-Florida State last year from exposing a media bias (bwah-ha-ha on that one) and the SEC for what it really is.
In truth, it’s hard to see where the turn on SEC football will abate. Winning it all would help, but short of Texas and Georgia, who are the SEC teams who could make a legitimate run? And, yes, you could say the same of two other conferences (BigXII, seriously, you don’t stand a chance), but when it comes down to Notre Dame, Georgia, Texas, Miami, Ohio State, Oregon, and Indiana (depending on who is playing for them this year), the talk is all talk and we really have no relevant reason to have the CFP given it’s the same teams in the mix each year.
Win it all, and all the talk is just that. Keep bowing out in the early rounds, and Sankey’s decision seems more questionable by the day.


















