| HolyHandgernade |
10-25-2011 10:54 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
(Post 8047635)
Why would adding another team force anyone to drop a non-con?
If they stick to 4 non-con games and play 6 'divisional' games, they have their 'rival' game against the other division and an additional non-rival game across the division (crosses fingers; hopes for Ole Miss...).
Sooner or later they'll likely switch to 9 conference games and 3 non-con, but absolutely nothing that happens over the next couple of weeks would mandate that.
Yeah, it probably is just a simple process of 'insert Missouri here'; especially since it would actually make conference scheduling much easier on balance. They could have it knocked out in a matter of hours, really. A computer algorithm would spit out a bunch of alternatives, they'd probably be able to boot several of them out immediately and have a schedule voted on and finalized by the end of the day.
It wouldn't be that difficult at all.
|
OK, but that is predicated on "ifs". I remeber reading that the conference schedule finalizations were coming up, which I believe what prompted Neinas to say he didn't think MU would be able to leave for next year, to which Alden said they still could. Also, the official word out of the conferences so far is that they haven't made a 14 team schedule (although I highly doubt that). Without knowing the structure of that schedule, there could indeed be deadlines, but they could be internal deadlines like, "If they join by this date, we'll do this, this date, we'll do this, and then by this date, they'll just have to wait until next year".
My point is, the SEC wants to get things finalized as well and I'm sure they are working with MU in determining when they would like this business finished up, to which, I'm sure MU is trying to comply. The Big XII isn't going to do anything to appear as though they are pushing them out, so most of the time constraints are on MU. |
