From the Desk of the Commissioner...

[DAHILL]

I don't think you answered my question...

So are you saying that both bands playing on top of each other will help MY team come from behind? What will help my team is to hear MY band playing and not the other band.

Again, why do bands alternate during a battle of the bands? I'm not trying to be funny I'm just trying to understand the history behind how it all started just so I can get some perspective on the difference.

And if we're honest, are all of our bands playing to motivate the team or just to hear themselves play? I know SU will play Defense jags, defense, when we need to hear it, but not all the time.

no you arent hearing what I am saying... of course a band cant actually "help" a team come from behind.... Cheering, clapping, yelling at a game cant either, buts a form of support for our team.

Once again a Battle of the Bands is strictly for bands... they are the focus of a battle of the bands. A bands mindset at a BOTB and a football game SHOULD be different. A band is at a football game to SUPPORT ITS TEAM... a band is at a botb to "battle".

 

[JR]

After reading this thread more and more I am shole glad I marched in the 80s when we didn't have all this controversy. We played alot during the game and nothing was said. I think the bands should be able to play during timeouts and dead balls as long as the refs are not explaining a penalty.The problem now is that the bands try to play at the same time. We never did that. But we played as soon as we got back into the stands after halftime and even before the game. The players aint bothered by the bands playing while they warm up. Actually it looks like SU players kind of like it and get hype. Same for the JSU players. As long as the bands don't try to play on top of each other or when the the teams are in the huddle and trying to get a play started, then I think it is fine.

Heck Ohio State's band plays throughout the game. It might only be a for a few seconds each time but they get their's in during dead balls or after a good play or to fire up the team and certainly after halftime. Same for USC's band or any good PWC band. Not all PWC bands sit on their hands. The only difference is most of the time there is no visiting band to compete with. Like most have said it is the playing at the same time that drives me crazy. That is just disrespectful and arrogant. That is where the problem lies.

 

[Jag-Tig]

no you arent hearing what I am saying... of course a band cant actually "help" a team come from behind.... Cheering, clapping, yelling at a game cant either, buts a form of support for our team.

Once again a Battle of the Bands is strictly for bands... they are the focus of a battle of the bands. A bands mindset at a BOTB and a football game SHOULD be different. A band is at a football game to SUPPORT ITS TEAM... a band is at a botb to "battle".

Ok, thanks for the clarification. see my last post on supporting a team and what constitutes support...this is quite funny actually.

 

[Jag-Tig]

After reading this thread more and more I am shole glad I marched in the 80s when we didn't have all this controversy. We played alot during the game and nothing was said. I think the bands should be able to play during timeouts and dead balls as long as the refs are not explaining a penalty.The problem now is that the bands try to play at the same time. We never did that. But we played as soon as we got back into the stands after halftime and even before the game. The players aint bothered by the bands playing while they warm up. Actually it looks like SU players kind of like it and get hype. Same for the JSU players. As long as the bands don't try to play on top of each other or when the the teams are in the huddle and trying to get a play started, then I think it is fine.
Heck Ohio State's band plays throughout the game. It might only be a for a few seconds each time but they get their's in during dead balls or after a good play or to fire up the team and certainly after halftime. Same for USC's band or any good PWC band. Not all PWC bands sit on their hands. The only difference is most of the time there is no visiting band to compete with. Like most have said it is the playing at the same time that drives me crazy. That is just disrespectful and arrogant. That is where the problem lies.

Hey JR! :wavey: saw you at the game...didn't get a chance to come over that way...I was in section 134, row P...

Thanks...that's all I was trying to say. We need to find a way to reel it in just a bit...the PWCs don't deal with this because there's no one to compete with or share halftime with. But we've got to find a better way instead of just playing to be playing just to be loud. How is that helping our teams?

Anyway, the point of the rule is to control it just a bit because we've gotten out of control and we're acting like there's not a game being played on the field. It's not to stop creativity.

 

[the band fan]

long live the 80s.....:emlaugh:

halftimes always went over the allotted 20 minutes....

 

[SleepyCrat]

I got a question. When did football become so "bitchified" that the people on the field even give a damn about what's happening outside of the field? I never hear anybody in the NFL complain about the 70,000+ fans who will cheer or boo louder than any band can play. What kind of weak mindset do you have where you are worried about what is going on outside of the field?

Hell, when Cole was at TnSU, he would get the band to record CDs for him and he would play them full-blast over the loud speaker at the practice field for the entire practice.

Quit whining and play football.

Something else I've noticed is that when you up by 30+ the band stops being a problem somehow for coaches.

Peace and Practice

 

[ZNSPR8502]

Quick question: does anyone care whether or not the players have time to WARM-UP? Does anyone care that BOTH teams need time to warm up? I love my bands as much as the next person, but it?s not the battle of the bands. Half time provides an OPPORTUNITY for the bands to play, yes, but the REAL reason why we?re all there is because of the football GAME. I know everyone will say the reason why people come to the games is really for the bands. Well, I?m also there to see my team play a game. Now, if we want each band to have 20 minutes each, then we organize and plan a battle of the bands, but when playing at a football game, you adjust your program. Each band gets 8 minutes, for a total of 16 minute half time show, which leaves only 4 minutes for both teams to warm up. Four minutes for both teams? That?s not a long time at all. And trust me, if we ever had a team in a bowl game or post-season championship game, this would be a moot point.

What we don?t want is a player injured because he didn?t have adequate time to warm up because the bands were still playing. If left up to us black folks would be playing football until 2 in the morning. But if we want more tv opportunities we are going to have to learn to adjust what we?re used to doing to accommodate a tv time slot.

On the issues of playing during dead balls, does anyone realize how distracting it is when the official turns on his mic to announce the penalties and you can?t hear him because BOTH bands are playing with no regard to what?s happening on the field? Why is it that bands either stop playing or play low when a player is hurt? Out of respect right? So why not respect the players when they are on the field playing? We play LOUD, that?s what we do and to not play LOUD defeats the purpose of playing. So why not wait until we have a minute of non-activity to play? There are PLENTY of opportunities to play during the game. I don?t like it when both bands play on top of each other trying to outplay each other. Just as I get into one of the songs, the other band starts playing and they blow each other out and then it?s just loud and you can?t enjoy either one.

Why is it ok for a band to ALTERNATE playing during a battle of the bands, but not during the game? What?s the difference? Just wondering.

Have you not realized that the teams warm-up in the endzone long before 4 minutes to the second half kickoff? Certainly you don't think it took this long (2008) for someone to figure out that 8 minutes to 8:30 minutes is too long for bands to or whatever to entertain the crowd between halves? I'm do you recall Doug William or T. Johnson getting hurt from not warming up enough? How many times did McNair or Milton "Slick Barney" grab hamstrings due to lack of warming up before the 2nd half. Did Strahan go down because he didn't properly warm up before a TxSU 2nd Half? How about Sweetness or Jimmy Smith at JSU? Anybody remember them getting injured from lack of warm-ups? Do you really think if the bands took up too much time at half that the brilliant and powerful Eddie Robsinson, Mario Casem, W. C. Gordan, etc... would not have figured that out a long time ago and had all of that in check long before I came along in the 80's. Do not realize how supportive of football great directors like Dr. Greggs were. Certainly, they would have yielded whatever they needed to ensure they completed in time to not impact their respective teams. I know. JR, Big Thunder and I were darn near running in 1984 playing Part Time Lover to make sure the show was within a certain time limite to not impact the Jags and it wasn't no where close to 6 minutes.

It is obvious that the HBCU spirit is no longer welcomed in the SWAC. So, don't waste the school's money sending 200 - 400 folks to sit in the stands and watch a game, eating 3 meals a day and paying for gas for 4 to 8 buses for hundreds of miles.

This is so much crap until it is ridiculas. Let these fools have it the way they want. It definitely is not worth the budget to travel under these conditions. The rules are a mess and will be very confusing and a mess to be fair in enforcing. So, to prevent embarrassing everyone, just stay home and let the home team have 14 minutes to do whatever they want at halftime. They can come in the stadium walking (since the drums can't play) at about 6 minutes before half, and leave afterwards so the refs don't flag them and the league fine them for their view of the rules at that moment.

NO way in the world I would try to work though all of that red tape in this crap the SWAC released.

Peace...

 

[JR]

Hey JR! :wavey: saw you at the game...didn't get a chance to come over that way...I was in section 134, row P...

Thanks...that's all I was trying to say. We need to find a way to reel it in just a bit...the PWCs don't deal with this because there's no one to compete with or share halftime with. But we've got to find a better way instead of just playing to be playing just to be loud. How is that helping our teams?

Anyway, the point of the rule is to control it just a bit because we've gotten out of control and we're acting like there's not a game being played on the field. It's not to stop creativity.

Hey there. :wavey: Sorry I missed you.

Yeah the disrespectful playing on top of each other just to be loud has to stop.

 

[Kendrick]

I would perfer the bands being on the field as long as possible. That way the lines at the concession stands stay short.

As for the rule, I like it. I was watching JSU/Hampton and the bands were playing over the refs making the announcement of the infractions. That is just bush league to me.

 

[Antroy]

Can you imagine what this isht is going to be like when a team scores a touchdown?!?!

Imagine JSU scoring against SU BUT since the Boom just played during the last timeout, SU gets to play a song instead of JSU playing their fight song and another song right after that. There will be some pissed off JSU fans.

That's the way this is headed. Your team scores but since you played at the last time out, you have to sit on your azz and the other band gets to play. Now, your football team is looking at you like, "Why the heyell are yall letting that band play when we just scored?!?!"

 

[Fiyah]

After reading this thread more and more I am shole glad I marched in the 80s when we didn't have all this controversy. We played alot during the game and nothing was said.

The problem now is that the bands try to play at the same time. We never did that. But we played as soon as we got back into the stands after halftime and even before the game.

Yep, we did it much better in the 80's and respected the other schools band. I remember when everyone sort of played it the same way. Pre-game was a bunch of marches and a pop tune. Star Spangled banner by the home band and it always was alternated between bands during the game. You could see each other and tell if the other band was going to play during the break. If not then you would proceed to play. None of this playing on top of the other band just to be playing. At the end of the game, the visiting band played their Alma Matur then the home team. After that it was a back and forth for the post-game entertainment (we didn't call it the 5th back then).

We need to find a way to reel it in just a bit...

Anyway, the point of the rule is control.

Control, thats all it is........

As for the rule, I like it. I was watching JSU/Hampton and the bands were playing over the refs making the announcement of the infractions.

What happened when the refs weren't miked?

You read his hand signals, the same hand signals he gives now.

 

[ZNSPR8502]

Can you imagine what this isht is going to be like when a team scores a touchdown?!?!

Imagine JSU scoring against SU BUT since the Boom just played during the last timeout, SU gets to play a song instead of JSU playing their fight song and another song right after that. There will be some pissed off JSU fans.

That's the way this is headed. Your team scores but since you played at the last time out, you have to sit on your azz and the other band gets to play. Now, your football team is looking at you like, "Why the heyell are yall letting that band play when we just scored?!?!"

That is just one of the stupid results of these irrelevent rules. First, you can't play when you score, because they can't play while the ball is in play. And we all know that, it takes very little time to setup for the PAT. Then after the PAT, only the band next in rotation can play. So, yes, you may not be able to play when your team scores. STUPID! Previously, it has been standard that you play when your team scores and the opposing band may play as the team prepare for kickoff. Now, only the band who has the next turn will play when your team scores and I'm sure they will keep it rolling up to the kick off (when the ball is back in play).

I want even get into the confusion of:
You band played during the last dead ball, but my band played during the last official timeout. Then, a TV timeout happens, who plays next and will the refs indicate the correct band played out of turn and ensure the correct band receives the appropriate punishment. Heck no! Why do we think our refs should be trying to keep up with this crap is literally dumb. Period. And any band that puts themselves in harms way for this ridicule, that the general public will not understand, is lacking just as much wisdom, espcially if they are spending thousands of the school's dollars to create this negative publicity for their school.

Peace...

 

[ZNSPR8502]

What happened when the refs weren't miked?

You read his hand signals, the same hand signals he gives now.

It is obvious people don't want to know the hand signals anymore, which is why they get mad when the refs have issues with their mics. :smh: :smh: :smh:

But, that has been resolved. You want hear the band unless a team calls timeout. So, for teams that don't use most of their timeouts, you will hear very very little from the bands. Bunch of money being spent, for what? Oh well, soccer mom mentally is fully taking over the world.

Peace...

 

[s phi s]

It is obvious people don't want to know the hand signals anymore, which is why they get mad when the refs have issues with their mics. :smh: :smh: :smh:

But, that has been resolved. You want hear the band unless a team calls timeout. So, for teams that don't use most of their timeouts, you will hear very very little from the bands. Bunch of money being spent, for what? Oh well, soccer mom mentally is fully taking over the world.

Peace...

And that is the point I made over a month ago. Soon, bands won't do much traveling. I can't imagine why a band would spend $30,000 to travel to a game to do an 8 minute show and play 4 songs in the stands. It's a waste of money, and to a lesser extent, a waste of the band students' time (practice, travel, missing classes, etc).

 

[ZNSPR8502]

And that is the point I made over a month ago. Soon, bands won't do much traveling. I can't imagine why a band would spend $30,000 to travel to a game to do an 8 minute show and play 4 songs in the stands. It's a waste of money, and to a lesser extent, a waste of the band students' time (practice, travel, missing classes, etc).

If the band, as with the cheerleaders and any other units other than the football team, are actively participating in the game as supporters of their team, then the perception of value for the dollar becomes worth it, especially if the band enters the stadium prior to the game to provide additional entertainment prior to the game and stays after the game to provide additional entertainment at that point.

A plus to the bands playing after the game, is that it allows a gradual filtering of fans from the stadium to post-game traffic, which can lessen the traffic stop down that occurs from releasing 15,000 to 70,000 fans all at one time to parking lots and streets.

So, under previous formats, it is not a waste of funds for bands to travel, because it adds to the value of the ticket to which fans are purchasing, thereby making it a more realistic value for the purchasers. Also, it adds value to the sponsors of the game. Sponsors like excitement. The crowd and the game are certainly more festive with spirited games and bands. So, again, it becomes even more of a value to the school, since it helps promote, or at least doesn't harm, the attraction of additional sponsors to the schools and their programs.

Finally, it has been proven point time after time that there are a number of students that become more interested in a university with successful extra-curricular programs, especially football, band & basketball. Those schools with both excellent football and band programs have a huge magnet, since two powerful university marketing tools are working together in the same space 3 to 12 times a year.

All of these new misplaced edicts from the SWAC office reduce the powerful attraction of a good band program to attractive power of a successful tennis program. So, that is when the value of spending money for 200 - 400 students to travel becomes very unwise.

Peace...

 

[s phi s]

If the band, as with the cheerleaders and any other units other than the football team, are actively participating in the game as supporters of their team, then the perception of value for the dollar becomes worth it, especially if the band enters the stadium prior to the game to provide additional entertainment prior to the game and stays after the game to provide additional entertainment at that point.

A plus to the bands playing after the game, is that it allows a gradual filtering of fans from the stadium to post-game traffic, which can lessen the traffic stop down that occurs from releasing 15,000 to 70,000 fans all at one time to parking lots and streets.

So, under previous formats, it is not a waste of funds for bands to travel, because it adds to the value of the ticket to which fans are purchasing, thereby making it a more realistic value for the purchasers. Also, it adds value to the sponsors of the game. Sponsors like excitement. The crowd and the game are certainly more festive with spirited games and bands. So, again, it becomes even more of a value to the school, since it helps promote, or at least doesn't harm, the attraction of additional sponsors to the schools and their programs.

Finally, it has been proven point time after time that there are a number of students that become more interested in a university with successful extra-curricular programs, especially football, band & basketball. Those schools with both excellent football and band programs have a huge magnet, since two powerful university marketing tools are working together in the same space 3 to 12 times a year.

All of these new misplaced edicts from the SWAC office reduce the powerful attraction of a good band program to attractive power of a successful tennis program. So, that is when the value of spending money for 200 - 400 students to travel becomes very unwise.

Peace...

:tup:

 

[Jag-Tig]

wwooo ya'll are funny to me...I?m really laughing at how extreme some of you are taking these examples?this is quite funny. I mean ya?ll have gone so far as to talk about proven facts with regards to enrollment all because someone says you can only play 8 minutes and only during certain times of the game. But I should have known that most of you only see the ?band? side and if it weren?t for the band, blah, blah blah. Ok. Yes, I know this is real sensitive spot for those of you who are former band members because this is your identity we?re talking about and God forbid we change what you did when you were in school.

This mentality is exactly why we don?t have lucrative tv contracts or million-dollar marketing deals?we aren?t willing to be flexible, we don?t like change and don?t plan on changing and ?we like things the way they?ve always been because that?s the way they?ve always been?. :smh:

The first time someone says you need to do things differently for the betterment of the organization as a whole, we balk because it?s uncomfortable and it's unheard of so we not trying to do it. Never mind that there?s a bigger picture and it?s not all about the band all the time and just maybe if we meet half way we might actually get more than what we had before. Change is uncomfortable, but only for a little while. Change is inevitable and not always a bad thing. We hold on so tight to stuff that we can?t see that if we loosen our grip just a lil bit we might actually get a bigger return.

What?s Obama?s slogan?

Carry on?:swink:

 

[s phi s]

wwooo ya'll are funny to me...I?m really laughing at how extreme some of you are taking these examples?this is quite funny. I mean ya?ll have gone so far as to talk about proven facts with regards to enrollment all because someone says you can only play 8 minutes and only during certain times of the game. But I should have known that most of you only see the ?band? side and if it weren?t for the band, blah, blah blah. Ok. Yes, I know this is real sensitive spot for those of you who are former band members because this is your identity we?re talking about and God forbid we change what you did when you were in school.

This mentality is exactly why we don?t have lucrative tv contracts or million-dollar marketing deals?we aren?t willing to be flexible, we don?t like change and don?t plan on changing and ?we like things the way they?ve always been because that?s the way they?ve always been?. :smh:

The first time someone says you need to do things differently for the betterment of the organization as a whole, we balk because it?s uncomfortable and it's unheard of so we not trying to do it. Never mind that there?s a bigger picture and it?s not all about the band all the time and just maybe if we meet half way we might actually get more than what we had before. Change is uncomfortable, but only for a little while. Change is inevitable and not always a bad thing. We hold on so tight to stuff that we can?t see that if we loosen our grip just a lil bit we might actually get a bigger return.

What?s Obama?s slogan?

Carry on?:swink:

I understand everything you say. And I agree with you to an extent. I am a band person at heart, but having worked for athletic departments for the last several years, I also see the other side. I understand the spirit and intent of the rules, and agree with them to that extent. The premise of the rules is fair, but the heavy handed implementation of them is not.

I'm not a fan of those short show, but I truly understand why they are what they are and can accept that. Otherwise, there would be very little TV opportunities. But the example above is a good one. My team scores, yet the other band is rocking the stadium because it's their turn to play. That's just flat out wrong, no matter HOW you look at it.

Anyone that knows me knows that I am a band-head with a realistic mentality. I don't live in a band fantasy world. I reserved my judgment until after I saw these rules in action at a game. It sucked the life right out of the game. Now I do know that a game can go on without the bands, and am not insinuating that the band is the main draw. That is an age-old debate that I will not get into.

What gets me is how you can look down your nose at someone for having a differing opinion on the matter. You talk about being able to see the other side, but do YOU see the other side? Bands are there to support the football team. What incentive would I, as a band member, have to go to practice 4 days out of a week for 3 to 4 hours, miss a day of class (occasionally) to travel with the band, only to sit there and listen to another band play after my team has scored?

 

[ZNSPR8502]

wwooo ya'll are funny to me...I?m really laughing at how extreme some of you are taking these examples?this is quite funny. I mean ya?ll have gone so far as to talk about proven facts with regards to enrollment all because someone says you can only play 8 minutes and only during certain times of the game. But I should have known that most of you only see the ?band? side and if it weren?t for the band, blah, blah blah. Ok. Yes, I know this is real sensitive spot for those of you who are former band members because this is your identity we?re talking about and God forbid we change what you did when you were in school.

This mentality is exactly why we don?t have lucrative tv contracts or million-dollar marketing deals?we aren?t willing to be flexible, we don?t like change and don?t plan on changing and ?we like things the way they?ve always been because that?s the way they?ve always been?. :smh:

The first time someone says you need to do things differently for the betterment of the organization as a whole, we balk because it?s uncomfortable and it's unheard of so we not trying to do it. Never mind that there?s a bigger picture and it?s not all about the band all the time and just maybe if we meet half way we might actually get more than what we had before. Change is uncomfortable, but only for a little while. Change is inevitable and not always a bad thing. We hold on so tight to stuff that we can?t see that if we loosen our grip just a lil bit we might actually get a bigger return.

What?s Obama?s slogan?

Carry on?:swink:

Your response is way off base and misdirected. The examples of a ?quality? band?s relevance to a football game with a ?quality? team were not a point base on 8 minutes. If you read that point again, without the prejudged opinion, you will realize that it is referencing the relevance of the band along with the team and I left out the cheerleaders in bringing an environment that is unmatched in any other venue of sports and that brings value to the participants (students and fans), the school and marketers.

As for change, most of the people that I know on this board have all dealt with and handle plenty of change. To imply what you have would indicate that we don't understand that life is full of change and is the only that is consistent in this life that is not promised to us each day.

Now, one must understand that all change is not good. One must also understand that those the intent of some change is meant well that they can be totally off base and in some case completely ruin what was valuable before applying that bad change.

Both he that hears wise council and he that doesn't will receive the results of their decision.

Peace...

 

[Jag-Tig]

What gets me is how you can look down your nose at someone for having a differing opinion on the matter. You talk about being able to see the other side, but do YOU see the other side? Bands are there to support the football team. What incentive would I, as a band member, have to go to practice 4 days out of a week for 3 to 4 hours, miss a day of class (occasionally) to travel with the band, only to sit there and listen to another band play after my team has scored?

FROM ZNSPR8502
Your response is way off base and misdirected. The examples of a ?quality? band?s relevance to a football game with a ?quality? team were not a point base on 8 minutes. If you read that point again, without the prejudged opinion, you will realize that it is referencing the relevance of the band along with the team and I left out the cheerleaders in bringing an environment that is unmatched in any other venue of sports and that brings value to the participants (students and fans), the school and marketers.



whoaaa nellie...

And you assumed I was ?looking down my nose? because of what comments? I never said anyone was in the wrong for their opinion. In all honesty, I wasn?t taking it all that serious because trust me, my entire career has been made up of making decisions that affect student-athletes, fans, alumni, sponsors, parents, etc. I make those decisions EVERY single day.

So, please let?s not go there because I can go down the list of the number of times I had to make very hard decisions that affected student-athletes and fans and no one was a winner in the end, but the hard decision had to be made. And sometimes that decision may or may not have been communicated in the most effective manner.

At the end of the day we sometimes lose sight of our purpose and reason for developing and maintaining an athletic department and what it means and the level of responsibility that?s involved in keeping everyone happy. And in the end not everyone will be happy. That?s life.

Having said all of that, let?s be mindful of the fact that we can have our opinions and agree to disagree, but to form an opinion about my intention has nothing to do with the matter at hand.

Now we can continue to debate the ISSUE of the enforcement of the rule or we can accept it and find something else to complain about. Either way, the games will still be played.

And NOW you can say that I?m looking down my nose? :swink:

 

[s phi s]

FROM ZNSPR8502


And you assumed I was ?looking down my nose? because of what comments?

wwooo ya'll are funny to me...But I should have known that most of you only see the ?band? side and if it weren?t for the band, blah, blah blah. Ok. Yes, I know this is real sensitive spot for those of you who are former band members because this is your identity we?re talking about and God forbid we change what you did when you were in school.

You may not have meant it as it came off, but it reads as if all band members are oblivious to the football game going on. Granted, I do believe that bands are a huge draw in the BCF experience, but without the band, a game will still be played. I was in the PV band that sat out homecoming in 98. I was at the game when there was a visiting band and no home band last week in PV. In both cases, the game continued.

That being said, I am not necessarily against the intent of the rules. They line up very closely with standard NCAA regulations regarding artificial noise, which were largely ignored by the SWAC until this decade. My problem is with the rigid implementation of them. No way in Hades would I want the opposing band to play after my team scores a TD just because it's "their turn to play".

I am attempting to debate this issue with you, but you zero'ed in on what you didn't like in my response and skipped the real question. What incentive would I, as a band member, have to sacrifice 3 to 4 hours every day for practice, miss an occasional day of school to travel, to perform an 8 minute show and play 5 songs in the stands? Better yet, as a school administrator, what incentive do I have to spend $30,000 to move my band 2 states over for the aforementioned 8 minutes and 5 songs? It ain't like we rolling in money when dealing with HBCU bands.

I'm not trying to make this a personal issue with you. I agree that the intent of the rules put in place were needed. Bands shouldn't be playing when the ball is ready for play. But the way I see it, if your band wants to play, they should be paying attention and ready to hop up and play as soon as the next opportunity (dead ball, timeout, etc) presents itself. That rotation crap is for the birds.

What bands also have to be mindful of is that they can't play the B-sides of a song anymore. Save those long, drawn out, intricate arrangements for the times when you will be able to play it from start to finish (pre/post-game). When bands figure out THAT aspect of it, they will be much happier.

 

[the band fan]

since Jag-Tig has been on both sides.....does the SEC or any other BCS conference have band rules in place? If so, please post them as I can compare them to the SWAC's

 

[MightyDog]

I have watched bands in the SWAC over the last ten years and it appears to me and I don't know for sure, but it seems some bands have a game day program. They know how to take advantage of the other band by being ready to play in every situation. If a band know how to get into the game without drowning out the QB, I believe this will work. It is not that difficult if band stay within the ballgame and not get in competition with each other during the game.

 

[Fiyah]

since Jag-Tig has been on both sides.....does the SEC or any other BCS conference have band rules in place? If so, please post them as I can compare them to the SWAC's

Only in the Swac........

No more

 

[DAHILL]

since Jag-Tig has been on both sides.....does the SEC or any other BCS conference have band rules in place? If so, please post them as I can compare them to the SWAC's

Ive been to an SEC game and plenty CUSA game... they dont have ANYTHING even remotely close to this bs.