SWAC to require all schools to play each other?


Jag Voice

Jag Voice

Well-Known Member
From the latest BVQ ... The SWAC will require all conference teams to play each other every year starting in 2003? This was in the article about the SU/FAMU series

Is this true?
 
They can't do that. It would basically eliminate the possibility of anyone playing out of conference games. That is why the SWAC went to the rotational system two years ago, and that is why when some SWAC teams play each other, it doesn't count in the standings. It is considered a non conference game. Maybe the article is right, but is so, then the SWAC needs to take a hard look at why it has sucha large roster and examine if it relly wanst to take on new memebers under this format.

But considering this is the SU/FAMU debate, it could be just another excuse that the two teams have come up with to try and cover all the heat they are getting for cancelling this game!
 

I missed it when you said it, but I read it in BVQ too. This is ridiculous. What's the reasoning behind it?? To me, if this does happen then it would render the SCG moot. What's the purpose of having a championship game if the champion may already be decided? Why have divisions?
 
First, let me say that I think requiring all teams to play each other is a bad idea but, I think you guys may be missing the point.

Just because all SWAC teams are required to "play" each other doesn't mean that all of those games will "count". Furthermore, this decision will have no effect on the SCG. Remember all teams played each other the first year of the SCG, but only four games counted. Also some teams , A&M for example, are playing all other SWAC schools already.

We had a good discussion on this topic on the "other" SWAC bulletin board. I pointed out that the SWAC may want to keep more of its money and attendance in-house. Their logic may be, why send 15,000 fans and $$$ from Southern to Tallahassee every other year when those 15,000 fans and $$$ could be sent to another SWAC school/city? That's not my opinion, I'm just trying to figure out their logic.

Again, I think it is a bad idea, and I hope it doesn't happen. It would defeat one of the purposes of splitting into divisions, and that was to save money on travel. Bama State, for instance, would either have to travel to Texas every year, or travel there twice every other year. We would have less flexibility to schedule games that are much closer like Mo Brown and Tenn. St.

Let's hope that the powers that be, do not make this change.
 
Sorry folks, but this has already been voted on and it will begin in 2003.... Carried a unanimous vote.......
 
Will a new Commish have the power to overturn that decision? Does the SWAC ever publish decisions that affect the conference with an explanation? Just asking.
 
I think that maybe this is an issue that we need to write in on. This only leaves us with two non-conference games and his really ties our hands with being able to chose those because the conference games would come first.
 
Of all the bad decisions this conference has made in the past couple years (and there have been some horrible) ones in that time frame), this has to be the worst.

Why would any school want to play 9 games against conference members?
 
Originally posted by Blu Panther


by coaches? and/or ... athletic directors?
Click to expand...

Most likely that presidents council, tey have no clue about whats actually going on. Look what Rudy did to them before they found out.

But even before there were 2 divisions, you never had to play all the schools in the conferance in football.

How does this affect schools that have contracts w/ non conferance schools to play home-home series for a few years. And yes it will make the SCG moot, because nothing will really be on the line. How do you get peole to go to the SCG every year when the 2 schools involved have played eachother.
 

This decision is even worse for schools who have standing nonconference classics (eg., JSU and Bama St.) because it only leaves 1 date on our schedules for any variety. (I'm assuming the case of a traditional 11-game schedule, of course.)

The quality of play in the conference won't get any better as a whole if all we play are ourselves.
 
I think this is a good decision if and only if we are allowed to play twelve games a year. This would allow three non-conference games.

I think we should do away with the SCG. If we no longer have an east and west division, what's the point of having a SCG?

The fans on this board can't have their cake and eat it too. I lot of fans on this board was okay with schools in the East and west playing each other when it wasn't mandated by the conference. I for one was always against it.
 
Now we got to play ASU, Aamu and Valley in 1 year. Yuck......

Keeping some East games off the schedule kept us from traveling way out there for nothing.

Why is there a SWAC-rotating 10-year schedule then? Is that useless all of a sudden?

I want to get paid big bucks to make dumb decisions. How can I get in the loop?
 
ALL THIS GRIPE

MOST SCHOOLS PLAY EVERYBODY IN THE SWAC NOW MAYBE EXCEPT FOR JACKSON, AND SU..... DO CRY ABOUT IT DO SOMETHING TO FIX IT
 
As Tigerpride alluded too. I really would like to hear or read the reasoning and rationale behind those in the SWAC that made this decision.

HBCUs,

I suppose the conference leaders gave some thought to the fact that several conference member schools will only have the opportunity for variation of one non-conference game during the normal 11 game season schedules.

Olde Hornet & Texas Southern Fan,

It is my understanding that the SWAC Championship Game is here to stay for awhile and the conference will stay with the Eastern & Western Divisional format.

NCAA only allows NCAA Division I A & AA to play 12 game seasons during certain years. After next season, 2003, they next 12 game season opportunity will not be available until about 2008.

It is my understanding the SWAC leaders are under the assumption that this will allow the money generated by conference members to stay within the conference while it will also reduced the cost of the conference members athletic budgets by reducing the need to pay non-conference members the fee to schedule those non-conference games. It is also my understanding that the leaders believe that this move will also help them in their effort to lure certain HBCU by forcing the hand of those non-conference members.
 
Originally posted by Fiyah

How do you get peole to go to the SCG every year when the 2 schools involved have played eachother.
Click to expand...

Fiyah,

Every SCG played thus far was a re-match! So your point is moot.

This new conference format (although I don't like it) will not affect the SCG ! ! !
 
It is very interesting to see all the negative comments about
SWAC schools paying each other. Maybe we should look at it from
a business point of view. First 1-AA football is really black college
football -- we have led the attendance from the beginning of the
1-AA division. As a member of the JAGUAR NATION, I would rather
travel to Alcorn and fill their stadium, than McNeese, ULL, Northwestern. Most SWAC schools athletic budgets are funded
by moneys generated during football season. We cannot afford to let our egos interferr with the big picture. The major reason
the Heritage Bowl failed was due to our MEAC friends putting
more importance on the 1-AA championship than providing a black
1-AA champion on the field. You see they would send their
second or third place team to the HB. Let us keep our money in
our communities. Think about it -- how many people do they (PWC's) bring to our campuses. The MEAC felt that they were on
a higher mission and help destroy the HB. Since we are really out
here on an island WE MUST SUPPORT EACH OTHER.
 
I can understand the concern since we have grown to 10 teams. That only leaves 2 games to play non conference; but, I don't see how this will kill the SCG. So far, we have learned that we have to play everybody but we don't know if we will still be in divisions and if only divisional games will count. If we are still in divisions and only divisional games count, this shouldn't kill the SCG.

I think some of our current scheduling nightmares came about with this rotation business. We had existing contracts and had to try and manage the contracts along with the SWAC's mandated games (like last year's game with Alabama State - we had a contract with ASU but they were supposed to roll off based on the new SWAC scheduling rules...they were off the schedule and then back on the schedule to fulfill the contract).

Let's not panic about the SCG until we know all of the details. It would be nice if we heard about these things via press releases or the SWAC website. :mad:
 
The only thing I can't figure out is, there is no other conferance that have 9 members or more that mandate they play every member in the conferance. All of them have rotating schedules that rotate certain teams in and out every 2-3 years. Playing the maximum 11 game schedule would only let you play 2 non conferance games at the max. Most schools have at least 1-2 non conferance money games that supplant their dept budget. Just like in basketball we get to get slammed or even play a good game for the almighty dollar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top