Does the SWAC need strengthening???


Rat Patrol

Rat Patrol

New Member
I've been tossing this question up in my head every since I saw that Alcorn had to play in a "play-in" game to make it to the tournament. It was the first I've heard of this play-in game.

According to what I've read, it was because the SWAC was one of the two weakest conferences represented in the tournament.

To add fuel to the fire, I just left another black college forum and noticed someone started a thread comparing SIAC football to SWAC football.

Just curious to know if anyone had any thoughts on the matter.
 
The non-conference schedule hurts the SWAC when it's compared to other D-1 conferences. Several SWAC schools schedule D-2 schools and even some NAIA schools. That brings the overall strength of schedule numbers (for the SWAC) down.

And while I don't have specifics for every SWAC school (this year), I know that the individual strength of schedule does become a factor. That's where we (SWAC) gets killed in the RPI ratings. but if each schools could start playing more D-1 schools, the RPI would go up, and probably get us out the NCAA basement.

I know Jackson State has played (over the past few years) Missouri, Arkansas, Arizona, Tulane and some other well-known schools in non-conference games. And it's helped, I believe. We just need more SWAC schools to do the same.
 

Click here to visit HBCUSportsShop
I agree Taylor-Made.....

The rest of the SWAC does need to start scheduling more D-1 schools in the major and mid-major (whatever that means :confused: ) conferences. This can only help the SWAC, MEAC, etc. Not only publicity wise, but playing these tougher teams can only help your team get better down the line. Sure your going to take you lumps, but any good athlete should want to play the best....or the "so-called" best there is. I know I would. It's the only way to get better....but that's just my opinion!

::thinking:: 'I wonder how much my opinion matters???' hmmmmm?????
 
Taylor Made:
I beg to differ. It's my understanding that wins & losses against D-II, NAIA schools don't count in the RPI calculation. I think the SWAC's problem is we schedule TOO MANY of the high profile teams on your list. This year we went 13-69 against those D-1 teams.

I think we need to schedule more of the weaker conferences like Southland, MEAC, etc since we might beat these teams. Scheduling the big boys has not done anything for us lately. Most schools that schedule them usually go 0-6 and it defeats the purpose. Maybe a 5-1 record against the weaker teams may look better

Let me give you an example.... all of this is on collegerpi.com.

The SWAC out of conference strength of schedule (SOS) was 14th of the 32 conferences this year. This means 18 other conferences had weaker non conference schedules. We were even higher than the Big East. Guess what.... we lost almost all those games. On the other hand, the Southland's team (Mcneese) received a 14th seed with a weaker schedule but some quality wins.

As a conference, we're just not ready for the major programs. I think some quality wins against other D-1 schools will help us in recruting, seeding, etc. We can then think about the scheduling the big boys again.
 
Kent St. coach is having same problem. There are about four good teams in every conference. On every level you have weak teams based on the competition they play. But then again it is what is being used as a reference point. Cinn is out, Ohio St, is out and the list goes on and on. Alcorn should be commended for winning the SWAC. They had no easy games. I have attended several money games and the big schools are not going to allow us to win them. They did everything under the sun to win.
 
JV's on point again...

It may look good with a schedule playing the likes of Duke, Cincy, M-State, Maryland, etc. but when you lose to those teams by an avg margin of 53 pts., as most HBCU's do, it serves no purpose. We would do better to play the Oklahoma Mining & Technology schools of the world and beat them. You get stronger with wins, not who you play. L, it doesn't even help recruiting, who's gonna come to your school when you lost by 40 to Texas?

The only school this really helps is MBC. They travel around the country play money games and get a little experience. But they're an independent and wouldn't get a bid anyway. ;)
 
I agree with JV and BE. We are playing too many big schools and getting killed. Sometimes I think we forget that there are a ton of Division I basketball teams. We often think of these schools in terms of football (where they are Div I-AA). We could play Northwestern, McNeese, Stephen F. Austin and some of the other smaller Division I schools (these are just examples of schools - I know nothing about their basketball programs and not specifically suggesting that we play these particular schools). We could even mix in some of the larger schools (even though we are probably going to get whipped). We need to add more W's to our out of conference schedule but keep it on the Divison I level so that it can count toward our RPI.
 
I agree with scheduling more smaller division one programs. But I have to look at what happened 20 years ago. When the SWAC started playing these schools, most of the better Black athletes had already left for the PWCs. Still the wins by the PWCs were at most 25-30 point wins. Now, those losses by the HBCUs are 50-75 point losses. Now, I understand that a 25 point loss is a big loss. But a 25-30 point loss is not like a 50-75 point loss.

I say that to say that the talent level in the SWAC is probably not what it was during the early 80s. I can tell you that it is not what it was during the late 70s when the conference had a number of NBA draft picks. (Remember how Alcorn won a few games against the bigger schools?) Yes, I remember that the NBA had a five-round draft then. But if the league had a five-round draft today, I doubt that there were be as many draft picks from the SWAC. If this was 1980, Alcorn would have blown Siena off of the court in the play-in game.

In addition to re-thinking some of the scheduling, I think that we need to increase the level of talent. Now, in re-thinking the scheduling, let's not play bad divison one teams. Schools like Pepperdine, Butler, and Southern Illinois defeated schools like Indiana, UCLA, and USC. With so many players going pro early, it is not an accident that Kent State and S. Illinois are doing what they are doing in the tournament this year. They have a lot of seniors while a lot of bigger schools do not.

Despite being frustrated from what I have seen of the coaching, I will say that there are some good coaches at the HBCUs. I think that we need to take advantage of that. I do not think that it would hurt to look at what the other small to mid-major schools are doing to build their programs.
 
I agree with Jag Voice and Bengal E.

Chicken before the Egg or Egg before the Chicken!!

It is a budgetary issue mandated by our respective institution's president, that require most of our basketball programs to be for the most part self sufficient. Most of our programs must generate $150,000 a year during the non-conference season to allow for our yearly basketball operating budgets.

The bigger question in mind. Is that yearly basketball operating budget surplus sent to the university general operations fund or back to the university athletic operations fund?

For your institution you guess which one.
 
Originally posted by Jag Voice
Taylor Made:
I beg to differ

Let me give you an example.... all of this is on collegerpi.com.
Click to expand...

I see your point. And thanks for the web link. I'm out there now checking it all out....


Good looking out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top