Well, to be clear CNS does say otherwise. But, for very different reasons. There are two arguments for the 9th game and really they are based on completely different things. The first argument, the one that CNS puts out there, is the entertainment value/comradery angle. The idea that it helps the enthusiasm and what not if the SEC teams play each other more often. My main counter to that line of thought is that it doesn't help one bit if they play each other twice in one season, which an extra game makes more likely. Otherwise, I can't really argue with the notion that the SEC is more important than the other conferences, hence playing each other would result in better games.
The other argument is that it's needed for SoS, that it's easier on the SEC to not have a 9th conference game. That's utter rubbish and easily dismissed. I actually did a breakdown which showed that basically the SEC could play anyone else with that 9th game and still have the most difficult 9 game slate:
http://www.tidefans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=222363
My actual response earlier should have been in blue though... I think doing something just because someone else does it has to be one of the poorest reasons imaginable to do anything.
I think there's a very different way of looking at it. One is the entire point of the rivalry game, this insures that everyone gets to play their rival, and the SECCG insures top teams have a chance of meeting. What we "miss out" on, are the middling games, for example Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Vanderbilt have never been to the SECCG.
On the flip side, Alabama has played Florida 7 times in the SECCG.