SWAC to require all schools to play each other?


UAPB has been playing each team each year in the SWAC. We have 2 non-conference (or may I say 2 non-SWAC) games a year. One being the HOMECOMING and the other the Gateway Classic. It is to our advantage to play SWAC opponents for non-conference games each year because of MONEY and competition.

I think it would be better for schools to find 2 non-conference games a year that would give them a good payday, and the rest of the games should be played against SWAC opponents.

I think a couple years ago, Valley coach said it best. They were hurt financially by not getting a home game with Southern, since they bring so many fans.

Why would we want to take our fan based outside of the SWAC knowing we have programs struggling?

As for the SCG, it could stay, but I hope someday they are looking to rotate the location.

Again, I think it is a good thing. Two non-conference games a year should be enough.
 
That mandate may be good for you schools that can't draw good crowds, but this sucks for JSU, as I see it. If this is truly the plan, then I hope all games count. Unless PVU and TSU count, there is no benefit to JSU to travel way to Houston for a game. Especially since they ain't gonna bring nothing to Jackson when they come. That's why we only play them when the schedule mandates it.

If the games don't count, then the conference should get out of the business of scheduling non-conference games for the schools. That's what ADs are for. Furthermore, if everybody plays everybody and the games count, there is NO NEED for the SCG because it will already have been decided on the field. That's much different than rematches in that everybody didn't play everybody when it counted.
 

This idea ws brought to the table by our head coaches, lobbied for by the coaches and then voted in.....:cool:
 
This is not a good idea at all. It will make it hard to schedule big non-conference games. Good thing we got USM and A&T before this came into effect.
 
Anonymous,

Did the measure about the top four teams in the regular season only qualify to play in Birmingham, Alabama for the Basketall SWAC Tournament Championship pass, removing the eight team format with the 4 team satelite sites?
 
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.
Click to expand...

Fiyah,

That's not exactly true. With the addition of Benedict this year, the SIAC now has 9 football playing members. We have to play each of the other 8 members and all games count in the standings. That only leaves us with the ability to play 3 non conference games
 
Shelt, 3 is still better than two.

Anonymous, I e-mailed some people in the SWAC office about this and from what I understand, this is not yet official. The person to really talk to is Jim Martin at AAMU-he is the President of the Athletic Directors. The AD's have approved this but the measure must still go before the Presidents.

My question is why would the head coaches want this?? Like Robber says, JSU greatly benefits from the current setup because teams want to play us. SU benefits because they are good at pimping smalltime schools. This must be the doing of the smalltime schools. Next year JSU is supposed to play FAMU, Northwestern State and NCAT along with TNState. If they pass this mandate, one of those games won't happen. I know that most teams are not as fortunate but we should not allow this to hamper the schools who can pull it off. Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be such a bad idea for JSU, Gram and SU to join the Southland. The SWAC way of doing things simply sucks.

I really think that we need to talk to our AD's and see what the rationale is.
 
This is a bad idea because this will eliminate the SWAC from playing other colleges nationwide. By playing teams nation wide it gives the SWAC exposure.
 
Yeah I agree with TP, Robber, and Dr. Sweetnupe on this one. I can't believe our coaches would rather just play each other. Especially Hughes, Doug and Pete. I know Pete is not happy we don't play as many home games sometimes, because the road can eat your team up with all that traveling. But that doesn't mean you can't have home and home out conference games scheduled. This will mess up our plans to bring McNeese and TnState on to the schedule. SE La is starting up their program with a former 1-A coach down the road. I think SU should have an opportunity to play home and home with them. I want FAMU back on the schedule. But if all this is true, then we will ish out of luck. Hell it will be impossible to play the TnState's and FAMUs because GSU and JSU will be trying to schedule them to if we only have 2 out conference games. You know the Big 3 will be after the best draws. But with us having to play everybody in the SWAC. Your scheduling flexibility is going to be limited.:mad:
 
This is a bad idea because this will eliminate the SWAC from playing other colleges nationwide. By playing teams nation wide it gives the SWAC exposure.
Click to expand...

It sounds like this decision prevents SWAC schools from qualifying for any I-AA ranking and national exposure.

It also will look like on paper that the MEAC is the better conference. What quality football player doesn't want to play the best opponents. Is the Sheridan Poll all that matters or the USA Today and Sportsnetwork?
 
Originally posted by Tigerpride
Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be such a bad idea for JSU, Gram and SU to join the Southland. The SWAC way of doing things simply sucks.

[/B]
Click to expand...

I often wonder the same thing... If not the Southland, some conference with forward thinking. I understand our Presidents (the guys running the SWAC) don't have a clue but some of these decisions don't make any sense.

This decision (if official) is like the old crab in the bucket syndrome.... Let's hold back all the programs in the SWAC because the weaker ones cannot maintain a decent schedule.
 
It is disturbing that several of the Grambling State, Southern, and Jackson State posters on this board make such statements that their athletic program should seriously consider leaving the SWAC for another conference.

It would be different if these members institutions presidents, athletic directors, and coaches were outvoted on measures such as the above, but that is often not the case in fact these leaders are the one that have the tenure, alumni, and attendance to lead the directions of th conference. They are often times the one that come up with ideas and lead he charge such that they will pass, "Unanimous" among the other coaches.

So, it would be different if the poster actually believe that their respective programs have out grown the conference. But, the problem with the idea of Grambling State, Southern, and Jackson State leaving the conference is the fact that they will still have the same presidents, athletic directors, and coaches they have now suggesting the the same conference scenarios and suggestions or even worse yet not taking the time to take part in the their respective conference decisions.
 
Blue, I know where my AD's mind is and it is not on SWAC policy. I never see a post that says that a vote was not unanimous so I figure that they seem to all an all or none mentality. That is what gets to me.
 
I like the idea of SWAC schools playing each other and every game should count. ........ Only if we play 12 games a year.

The current set up is not fair. JSU has to play SU and Gramto get to the SCG. The other top teams in the SWAC do not. Next year we dont have to play SU and Gram, but the others do. The rotating schedule is really unfair. But win the one you play.

If we can play 12 games, Im down with a mandate to play every team in the SWAC.
 

I will do some checking on that basketball info... from football though, each school will still have two dates for non-conference match-ups (9 SWAC, 2 NON-SWAC) in 11 game years and (9 SWAC, 3 NON-SWAC) in 12 game years...

So you still have those dates to schedule out-of-conf. gameds or money games, if you wish.

I truly think this was brought about, because although only a couple of shcools did it publicly, alot of our schools are having problems scheduling each other... That roll-on roll-off was not sitting well with some.
 
I think the SWAC under Rudy Washington's leadership expanded
too fast. All Rudy wanted was 10 teams in the SWAC so he could have a SWAC Championship game. The two schools added during his leadership hasn't made the SWAC stronger. If the SWAC had remained at 8 schools, playing each other would not be a problem.
 
One possible reason for the Coach's desire to play each other is to possibly eliminate the championship game so that several teams could possibly make an appearance in the playoffs. With the existence of the SCG, there in no way our two divisional champions could participate in the D1AA playoffs.

Under the proposed scenario, the NCAA can now re-consider it's stance on starting the playoffs a week later. Don't laugh at this possibility. The D1AA playoff committees are aware of the attendance numbers of the SWAC. When a conference leads the nation in overall attendance, you want/need them in the playoffs.

I'm not surprised by the coach's stance on this. In addition to the regular season payday it generates from the attendance increase
(especially when GSU, JSU, or SU is the opponent), our coaches really want to take their chances in the playoffs. I bet a lot of recruits have mentioned their desire to win an overall national championship!
 
ASU,

I think the SWAC under Rudy Washington's leadership expanded too fast. All Rudy wanted was 10 teams in the SWAC so he could have a SWAC Championship game. The two schools added during his leadership hasn't made the SWAC stronger. If the SWAC had remained at 8 schools, playing each other would not be a problem.
Click to expand...

I am affraid your information is incorrect. The two schools that join the SWAC; Arkansas-Pine Bluff rejoined the SWAC on July 1, 1997, regaining full-member status one year later, while Alabama A & M University became the conference's 10th member when it became a full member in September 1999 after a one-year period as an affiliate SWAC members.

Dr. James Franks (1983-1998 - 1st term & April 25, 2001-Present - 2nd term) during his first term as commissioner of the SWAC is credited with the two expansion members of the conference per the request of the current presidents to seek potential expansion member insitutions.

Although it is true that Mr. Rudy Washington was credited with initiating the SWAC Championship Game with the divisional format. Mr. Rudy Washington (May 21, 1998 - 2001), during his short tenure, was not successful in his attempts to expand the SWAC to 12 and/or 14 members with such programs as Morris Brown College, Clark-Atlanta University, Florida A & M University, and Tennessee State University.
 
Anonymous,

I will do some checking on that basketball info...
Click to expand...

Cool!

...
from football though, each school will still have two dates for non-conference match-ups (9 SWAC, 2 NON-SWAC) in 11 game years and (9 SWAC, 3 NON-SWAC) in 12 game years... So you still have those dates to schedule out-of-conf. gameds or money games, if you wish.
Click to expand...

This is what I asumed.

I truly think this was brought about, because although only a couple of shcools did it publicly, alot of our schools are having problems scheduling each other... That roll-on roll-off was not sitting well with some.
Click to expand...
...

I am not suprised by this assumption. It reads about right.
 
MikeBigg, One possible reason for the Coach's desire to play each other is to possibly eliminate the championship game so that several teams could possibly make an appearance in the playoffs. With the existence of the SCG, there in no way our two divisional champions could participate in the D1AA playoffs.
Click to expand...

This is not very logical thinking and a bit of reach. The only program that would be eligible for the play-offs without the SWAC Championship Game would be *Jackson State University & *Alabama A & M University. Other so-called top programs in *Alabama State University, *Grambling State University, & Southern University are not eligible for the NCAA Division I AA Play-offs because of the Turkey Day Classic & Bayou Classic.

*(At least one SWAC Championship Game appearance)

Under the proposed scenario, the NCAA can now re-consider it's stance on starting the playoffs a week later. Don't laugh at this possibility. The D1AA playoff committees are aware of the attendance numbers of the SWAC. When a conference leads the nation in overall attendance, you want/need them in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

I am not laughing, because it is true that the NCAA is very aware of the SWAC attendance number. But, all NCAA reports and those that provide literature on the NCAA continually suggest that the NCAA is in no way interested in moving the NCAA Division I AA Play-offs back, because of the lack of desire to push the game any closer to the Christmas Holidays.

I'm not surprised by the coach's stance on this. In addition to the regular season payday it generates from the attendance increase (especially when GSU, JSU, or SU is the opponent), our coaches really want to take their chances in the playoffs. I bet a lot of recruits have mentioned their desire to win an overall national championship!
Click to expand...

Although it has been reported in several publications about Southern's Coach Richardson desire to participate in the NCAA Division I AA play-offs, as well as Alabama State's Coach Cole.

Grambling State's Coach Williams reported in several publications that he supported the SWAC Championship Game and was not very interested in participating in the NCAA Division I AA play-offs based on the unpopular seedings and travel destinations as well as the understanding of Grambling's need to generate additional revenue for athletics.

All three of the programs' coaches above would have to either have their adminstrations to buy into moving their respective "Classic" dates or have their adminstrations to buy into lobbying the NCAA Football Committee to change the dates of the NCAA Division I AA Play-offs.

I have not heard or read a stance from Jackson State's Coach Hughes on the SWAC Championship Game versus the NCAA Division I AA Play-offs.

I am laughing at this...

This is a huge assumption and a great leap to sale us on the premise that these coaches got together and conspired to come up with a plan to get rid of the SWAC Championship Game, by requesting the athletic directors and then the presidents to except the proposal for all SWAC members to a play a round-robin schedule. Based on the fact that many of them want to participate in the NCAA Division I AA play-offs as well as them having recruits mentioned their desire to win an overall national championship!

Such that the coaches assumed that the round-robin format would render the SWAC Championship Game moot and force the cancelation of the game. Afterwards the NCAA will move the NCAA Division I AA play-offs back a week because the SWAC Championship Game has been cancelled, because the NCAA interest in gaining the attendance numbers of the SWAC.
 
Blu,

I said "possible" reason. Also, re-read and notice that I alluded to the fact that it would open the door for the NCAA to move the playoffs back a week (following the BC and TDC) if there was no
SCG.

I believe Doug's comments were made last year. It's feasible that after discussing the pros and cons of participating in the playoffs with the other coaches around the league, he could have changed his opinion.

It's all speculation on my part, just tossed something out there to consider. I'm cool with the SCG remaining or I could be cool with participating in the playoffs. One thing about it is, we have the NCAA's attention (due to our attendance numbers). Perhaps our office needs to approach the NCAA and have dialogue about possibly moving the championship back one week. This would allow either AlState, GSU or SU to be considered for the playoffs if they fail to make the SCG.
 
I like the idea of having 2 division winners play for the championship, but then again I don't like the idea of 1 division game being the deciding factor on who plays in the SCG. I'd like it much more if we kept the current format but each division was about 2 teams bigger. Forcing you to play every SWAC team would only work if the 12 game season is made standard.
 
If we do away with the SCG, I can see playing 9 conference games. I really don't care either way. But if we have to play 9 games, there is no sense in playing the SCG. Also, why are all of these decisions and things being made without a commishioner in place? It appears to me that they are trying to set things up the way the want them before hiring a commishioner. They can somehow find time to review applications for 3 or more positions but they can't do the same to hire a commishioner. What is the Commish wants to bring in his own staff?? At this point, he can't do it and anything that he wants passed will have to go through these SWAC cronies.

This SWAC way of thinking is so disgusting to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top