Alabama signs a 2 for 1 with USF.

Alabama and USF finalized a 2 for 1 game series that opens in 2023 in Tampa.

This is going to drive UCF crazy.

The U signed a 2 for 1 with South Florida last week, after which UCF accused USF of devaluing the conference by agreeing to these types of deals. UCF is still demanding 1 for 1 deals with P5 programs and getting 0 takers.

The 2024 OOC South Florida schedule opens with Western Kentucky at home, then at Alabama, concluding at home for North Carolina State and Louisville.

The U signed a 2 for 1 with South Florida last week, after which UCF accused USF of devaluing the conference by agreeing to these types of deals. UCF is still demanding 1 for 1 deals with P5 programs and getting 0 takers.

Value is created it’s not given abitrarily. The AAC will gain value by USF playing well against Bama and the U regardless of where the game is played. USF gets it. If you want to be respected, go out and force people to respect you. Especially, if your goal is to get into the playoffs. Would UCF have been left out of the playoffs either of the last 2 years with a win over Bama or for that matter if they had a close loss to Bama? I don’t know, but it certainly would have been a much better debate. 11-1 UCF, USF, UC, etc. with a close loss against Bama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Ohio State, etc. is arguably in better shape than a 12-0 AAC squad but without playing another playoff contender.

Value is created it’s not given abitrarily. The AAC will gain value by USF playing well against Bama and the U regardless of where the game is played. USF gets it. If you want to be respected, go out and force people to respect you. Especially, if your goal is to get into the playoffs. Would UCF have been left out of the playoffs either of the last 2 years with a win over Bama or for that matter if they had a close loss to Bama? I don’t know, but it certainly would have been a much better debate. 11-1 UCF, USF, UC, etc. with a close loss against Bama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Ohio State, etc. is arguably in better shape than a 12-0 AAC squad but without playing another playoff contender.

This 100%

It continues to be hilarious how UCF views themselves. :lol2: Like they are in some way too good to play in 2 for 1's that EVERY up and coming program has to play in.

Keep it up, we're all still laughing at you.

What I find interesting is Alabama continues with their history over the last 10 years of weak non-conference scheduling. Alabama has not scheduled a "home and home" Power 5 opponent since 2010 (Penn State) and will not have one on the schedule again until 2022-2023 with games vs. Texas.

What I find interesting is Alabama continues with their history over the last 10 years of weak non-conference scheduling. Alabama has not scheduled a "home and home" Power 5 opponent since 2010 (Penn State) and will not have one on the schedule again until 2022-2023 with games vs. Texas.

It is clearly hurting their ability to be ready for the SEC and the National Championship playoff. They aren't obligated to play anyone non-conference so fans can have better games early in the season. Their job is to get their kids ready for the SEC and the playoff, and to maximize their revenue streams -- I'd say they are coming up aces on both fronts.

It is clearly hurting their ability to be ready for the SEC and the National Championship playoff. They aren't obligated to play anyone non-conference so fans can have better games early in the season. Their job is to get their kids ready for the SEC and the playoff, and to maximize their revenue streams -- I'd say they are coming up aces on both fronts.

This has never been the argument people are trying to make. Nobody is saying Alabama needs to play these games to prepare them for the playoff or that they need these games to make the playoff. The point is and has always been Alabama’s reluctance to play these games is a weak look for the strongest program in college football for the past decade. At the end of the day football and sports are entertainment. The fans want to see Bama play under the lights in Norman, LA Coliseum, The Horseshoe, The Big House, the fake Death Valley in Clemson, etc. These neutral site games are great for Bama. No doubt about it. Bama is under no obligation to cater to anyone else wishes. I, along with many others, believe it to just be a bad look for the program. Home and homes are fantastic for the sport, and it’s just a shame Bama has chosen not to participate. It in no way is meant as a knock against the programs dominance, it’s just about what’s good for the sport.

it’s just about what’s good for the sport.

Nick Saban is paid to worry about what's good for Alabama. What's good for the sport isn't in his job description, and I don't blame him one second for not giving a plugged nickel for what "fans want to see" him do. They have earned the right to be reluctant to play people, and until his way isn't working, why change?

I mean no disrespect by this, but I'm fairly certain your opinion of their scheduling being a bad look for them probably means less than zero to anyone associated with their program. You know what a good look for them is? Stacking rings and titles. Producing more 1st round draft picks, and changing generations of those kids' families in the process, than I can count.

What I find interesting is Alabama continues with their history over the last 10 years of weak non-conference scheduling. Alabama has not scheduled a "home and home" Power 5 opponent since 2010 (Penn State) and will not have one on the schedule again until 2022-2023 with games vs. Texas.

This has never been the argument people are trying to make. Nobody is saying Alabama needs to play these games to prepare them for the playoff or that they need these games to make the playoff. The point is and has always been Alabama’s reluctance to play these games is a weak look for the strongest program in college football for the past decade. At the end of the day football and sports are entertainment. The fans want to see Bama play under the lights in Norman, LA Coliseum, The Horseshoe, The Big House, the fake Death Valley in Clemson, etc. These neutral site games are great for Bama. No doubt about it. Bama is under no obligation to cater to anyone else wishes. I, along with many others, believe it to just be a bad look for the program. Home and homes are fantastic for the sport, and it’s just a shame Bama has chosen not to participate. It in no way is meant as a knock against the programs dominance, it’s just about what’s good for the sport.

I believe this discussion is already going on in another thread, no reason to start it over in this thread.

It is clearly hurting their ability to be ready for the SEC and the National Championship playoff. They aren't obligated to play anyone non-conference so fans can have better games early in the season. Their job is to get their kids ready for the SEC and the playoff, and to maximize their revenue streams -- I'd say they are coming up aces on both fronts.

Yep, came up aces except for last year's National Championship game thrashing. Funny how the last two games of the year for Bama were the two worst in terms of giving up points so maybe scheduling a little tougher opponents other than Arkansas State and Louisiana-Lafayette may have been a little more helpful down the stretch. Their formula has worked well for the most part so I guess if it's not broke don't fix it. The SEC (I mean LSU and Georgia) are truly the only teams Bama is concerned about when the rubber meets the road. Your point of generating revenue streams holds no water vs teams like New Mexico State and Western Carolina as their attendance drops dramatically for those games thus lesser revenue, that is unless your talking about revenue streams for the sacrificial lambs on the schedule.

Alabama could still schedule tougher opponents and if by chance they somehow lost they would still most likely be in playoff contention at the end of the day given their history.

I believe this discussion is already going on in another thread, no reason to start it over in this thread.

You're correct. My bad.

USF walking the walk, UCF still just yammering.

Nick Saban is paid to worry about what's good for Alabama. What's good for the sport isn't in his job description, and I don't blame him one second for not giving a plugged nickel for what "fans want to see" him do. They have earned the right to be reluctant to play people, and until his way isn't working, why change?

 

I mean no disrespect by this, but I'm fairly certain your opinion of their scheduling being a bad look for them probably means less than zero to anyone associated with their program. You know what a good look for them is? Stacking rings and titles. Producing more 1st round draft picks, and changing generations of those kids' families in the process, than I can count.

You clearly aren’t understanding what I’m saying. I don’t disagree with any of your point. All I’m saying is I, along with many other people, don’t care for the way Bama schedules. But as JD pointed out, there is already another thread on this subject.