Could some SWAC teams drop football? (long)

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Some interesting stuff from the following press release:

SWAC Facing Problems With Image, Location (http://www.2theadvocate.com/stories/053005/sou_swac001.shtml)

It primarily deals with the fan violence at the SWAC baseball championships in Birmingham, Alabama. But there are some interesting football-related pieces to the article:


[Since T]he first [SWAC Championship] game -- between Jackson State and Southern with their considerable fan bases -- stands as the biggest draw with 47,621, attendance has fallen steadily. Southern and Alabama State drew 22,327 in December.

...

Vowels said the contract to play [the SWAC Championship] at Legion Field extends to 2007.

Bad weather, always a factor in black-college football attendance, has hurt the last few title games.

Although most I-AA (or MAC, for that matter) schools would give up a lot of scholarships to pack in 22,000 in a postseason game, it's still interesting that the attendance has decreased from year to year. It's got to really be concerning to the SWAC that Southern (with its large fan base) and Alabama St. (basically in the backyard of the championship venue) only put in 22,000.

(If I hear anyone else give the excuse for bad weather for bad attendance... what a cop-out.)

Here's the biggie though:


The conference is exploring the possibility of allowing schools to drop sports.

This school year, Arkansas-Pine Bluff did not participate in men's track and field (though the Golden Lions did field women's teams in both indoors and outdoors).

"Several of the other presidents indicated money was getting really, really tight," said Southern Chancellor Edward Jackson, whose two-year term as the chairman of the Council of Presidents concluded Friday. "This would be a safety valve."

Jackson said the SWAC may have a telephone conference in July to adopt formally the measure.

"I'm pretty sure it's going to happen," Jackson said.

According to Jackson, the measure would allow schools to have the flexibility to drop one or two sports for up to two years.

"One of the things we're looking at -- we have not made a decision -- is giving conference schools some flexibility in terms of not playing one or two sports, because of the financial situation," Jackson said. "Some other conferences do that. The (Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference, the other historically black Division I conference) does that.

"We asked the commissioner's office to develop the data, let us look at it. The consensus around the table was we wanted to have that flexibility. So I'm relatively certain we're going to adapt that. We just need to refine it and put it on paper."

Now... here's where there's some really interesting problems. Title IX enters into this discussion, with that percentage of men's and women's schollies. With this rule change, it would make it very easy to make SWAC teams drop football. No more Title IX problems, could fix some really bad financial problems with member schools in the conference...

Let's assume that this is part of what is to happen. I can think of 3 schools that could make an excellent case for dropping football - Prarie View A&M, Arkansas-PB, and Mississippi Valley St. (It doesn't have to be these 3, but let's just say it's 3). This rips apart the 2-division structure of the SWAC in football, and as a result get rid of their SWAC championship game!

I guess the questions are:
1. How bad is the SWAC off financially?
2. Are there 3 schools that could drop football as a result of this move by the SWAC commisioner?
3. The attendance to the SWAC championship last year was still great. But it's been down. How much would the SWAC want to cling to this game?
4. Would this open up the SWAC to possibly compete in the I-AA playoffs?

[mikebigg]

I don't know if any teams will drop sports or not...definitely not football. However, I can't say that with certainty. I recall being surprised years ago when Lamar and UT-Arlington did away with football. Both were competitive in the old Southland Conference. It happens in D1 programs as well... Last week on a Sports call in show, I heard that one of the Oregon schools didn't field a baseball team and the other didn't have some other sport. I guess it happens.

As far the SWAC participating in the playoffs...it's possible. However, my objection to it has to do with how the schools are required to pay such a huge percentage to the NCAA for the game. Why? The NCAA doesn't put this demand on D1 teams for their bowl games. I don't think that's right!

[Rob]

the bowl games aren't sponsored by the NCAA.

[89Hen]

mike, if you had to guess and without saying you think they'd actually do it, who would be the most likely to drop in your opinion?

[TexasTerror]

Didn't PV A&M drop football for awhile? Came back and got slaughtered for all those years? Or did they drop some other sports? I can't remember...

[arkstfan]

UAPB has a reasonably new football field and its pretty nice.

The Golden Lions have been pretty mediocre the last five years, coming on the heels of 7 pretty good years post-death penalty. Naturally the down swing ties to joining the NCAA.

UAPB has a small enrollment and the closest state-supported schools to them are all being very aggressive in marketing. Minority enrollments are starting to climb at other state schools. They don't appear to have an agressive night class program to attract non-traditional students. They are really struggling across the board.

I think that if it came down to cutting football that they would find enough money around to patch it up and keep it running but with such a small enrollment they will never have the student fees or alumni base to have a top budget in the SWAC.

[arkstfan]

Didn't PV A&M drop football for awhile? Came back and got slaughtered for all those years? Or did they drop some other sports? I can't remember...

I remember them going non-scholie or virtually non-scholie for a time.

[813Jag]

I'm new to the board this is an interesting discussion. I think PV didn't play football for a year (I was really young when this happened). Then they went non-scholly until I think 2001 or 2002. UAPB is going thru transition after changing coaches and Valley seems to be coming up with some key transfers. As for the playoffs I doubt SU/GSU or AlaSU are going to part with the chance to make money in their classics. As an SU fan I always wanted to see our better teams compete with everyone else. You can't really get better if you don't play better competition.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I think that if it came down to cutting football that [UA-PB] would find enough money around to patch it up and keep it running but with such a small enrollment they will never have the student fees or alumni base to have a top budget in the SWAC.

This is kind of what I'm getting at. If you start dropping SWAC teams, the justification seems thin for keeping an "east" and "west" conference. It then becomes untenable to have a championship game.

Let's say UA-PB and PV are interested in dropping football to cut costs. Would the SWAC powers-that-be do "whatever it takes" to have them keep football, in order to keep the championship game?

The fact that SWAC teams have the classic big-money rivalries may mean that they're willing to abandon the SWAC championship.

Another somewhat related question is - if there's no championship, perhaps the SWAC are willing to move GSU/SU (and other HBCU rivalry games) back a week and include the SWAC champion in the I-AA playoffs? This would allow SWAC teams to "get better by playing better competition".

[813Jag]

When the SWAC was an 8 team like up until 1999, SU/GSU and AlaSU/Tuskeegee were around the time of the 1-AA play-offs. The big spenders are not gonna move that game from that time slot.

[mikebigg]

mike, if you had to guess and without saying you think they'd actually do it, who would be the most likely to drop in your opinion?

At the risk of pissing off some of my SWAC brethren, I would guess maybe PVU, UAPB, MSVU, and TxSU would be the most likely (in that order) to drop their football program. PVU because they were non-scholly before and since the 80's have not emphasized football. UAPB would be next simply because they have eliminated football in the past (though it was due to probation). MSVU doesn't have the immediate fan base but they have hung around for a while... But they have had some success in basketball and could conceivably put their emphasis on that sport. TxSU has a good following and with their location, the SWAC would hate to see them drop out. Because I wanted to get the top four (in my opinion), I added them as the final possibility.

Personally, I hope all of them remain viable and field a team. The PVU game is one of Grambling's oldest rivalries and a game that's heavily attended. The State Fair Classic game in Dallas each year usually has 50K attendance.

The playoffs ain't gonna happen for Grambling and Southern...noway we're gonna pass on the Bayou Classic in order to eligible for the playoffs.

[89Hen]

What happened in 1985 that allowed Grambling to play in the playoffs? I-AA.org shows the date for that game as 11/30/1985 which was Thanksgiving Day weekend. Was the Bayou a different week?

[Catmendue2]

Another somewhat related question is - if there's no championship, perhaps the SWAC are willing to move GSU/SU (and other HBCU rivalry games) back a week and include the SWAC champion in the I-AA playoffs? This would allow SWAC teams to "get better by playing better competition".


The answer is NO, Nada never :rolleyes:

[Catmendue2]

:)
It was played 11/23/1985, the last day of the regular season. The playoffs started that year 11/30/85.


It was played that date to accomodate Tulane and LSU, that will never occur again. The Saturday after Thanksgiving belongs to the Bayou Classic signed and sealed by the City of New Orleans and the State of Louisiana.

[arkstfan]

Saying UAPB eliminated football in 1991 and 1992 is like saying SMU dropped football in 1987 (technically they did in 1988 since they opted to not play the limited schedule the NCAA was going to impose).

UAPB would find a way to survive. They would play 20 scholie ball before dropping football and there are some folks that don't give them any significant money who would bail them out if the jam were big enough.

Their leadership is shall we say interesting though.

Arkansas State has offered them games on several occasions and they've always said no despite being offered what we will pay I-AA's that have traveled much longer distances. About 2 or 3 years ago they got some press by challenging ASU to a game in Little Rock. Naturally the papers never bothered to point out that the deal they were promoting was total fantasy. They told the media at their press conference that each team would take home $300,000 but ASU was afraid to come down. It would have required a complete sellout of 53,000 with everyone (including the bands and students) to pay $12 each to get in, no student tickets, no comps, etc.

The last time the two talked back in the early spring UAPB was wanting a 2 game series in Little Rock with a guarantee of $210,000 for each game. :eek:

[Catmendue2]

I think the point was it has been moved before. I hope this good thread does not deteriorate into another SWAC in the playoffs thread...

I think my statement makes it clear as to :) why it was changed and why it won't be changed again. I agree with you about the thread, the SWAC is available for the playoffs, Grambling and Southern aren't.

[813Jag]

I don't want to get in to any anti-playoff talk. Going back to an 8 team league would be good for teams like Alcorn, Jackson St or Alabama A&M. But I would hope that there could be some sort of conclusion reach so noone has to drop football.

[89Hen]

the SWAC is available for the playoffs, Grambling and Southern aren't.
The team in the SWAC Championship Game are not available either.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

The team in the SWAC Championship Game are not available either.

Sooooo no SWAC championship, more SWAC teams in the I-AA playoffs. The championship has had the effect of making the SWAC a non-bid conference.

With no championship, that would open up the gates for (say) an Alabama St. to be in the I-AA playoffs. Unfortunately it would be as an at-large.

[89Hen]

The SWAC and the playoffs are oil and water.

[TexasTerror]

Texas Southern and PV A&M refuse to play SHSU. It wouldn't cost them much to make the trip. It'd probably be a great gate and the media would cover it in Houston with two I-AA teams. Oh well...

[TheValleyRaider]

This talk of dropping teams and possibly the Champ. Game leads me to a slightly unrelated point/question. Before last season, after picking up Miami and VT, the ACC had to petition the NCAA to have a championship game because they didn't have the required number of teams (12) to automatically qualify like the SEC, Big 12 and MAC. With BC joining, they're having one. Since the SWAC only has 10 teams, how then are they able to have a championship game? Is this only a I-A rule or was the SWAC grandfathered into a new rule?

[mikebigg]

Unlike most of my SWAC Brethren, I support the 9 game SWAC mandate. I think at this point, our teams need to play each other for the scheduling security of the conference. Without it a some teams wouldn't have many home games of significance.

I think 1AA did itself and the SWAC a disservice by voting against the 12 game schedule. I realize that with playoffs these are a lot of games for those conferences that participate in the playoffs. However the "extra" game would have allowed the SWAC schools to play an additional ooc opponent. For instance next year, Grambling could play both Northwestern and McNeese. Talk about a serious schedule... Grambling could play the SWAC schools, Northwestern (Shreveport, a neutral site), McNeese home and home, and a "Classic" against a MEAC school or Tn. State.

Wondering if Grambling and McNeese coaches would object to playing in late November (before BC and McNeese vs Northwestern).

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I think 1AA did itself and the SWAC a disservice by voting against the 12 game schedule. I realize that with playoffs these are a lot of games for those conferences that participate in the playoffs. However the "extra" game would have allowed the SWAC schools to play an additional ooc opponent. For instance next year, Grambling could play both Northwestern and McNeese. Talk about a serious schedule... Grambling could play the SWAC schools, Northwestern (Shreveport, a neutral site), McNeese home and home, and a "Classic" against a MEAC school or Tn. State.

The I-AA reps out of playoff conferences end up dominating the vote since they will vote in their own self-interest. A majority are from playoff (or want-to-be-playoff) conferences.

As a Grambling fan, I see you like the 9 conference games. What is more important to you? Playing an extra game against Miss. Valley St.? Or playing a top OOC game (like, in your example, McNeese or a MEAC team)? I think that's the choice you have to make since you're split into divisions.

How do you feel about the east/west format and the championship game? Is it important to you? To someone like me, who likes the I-AA playoffs, it's unnecessary and prevents SWAC teams from realisitically playing in the playoffs. Most folks can accept GSU/SU and ASU opting out, but the championship game in essence eliminates the top #1 and #2 SWAC teams from the playoffs.

Of course, if GSU played in the playoffs, they could be matched up against a MEAC school too... ;)

[89Hen]

Unlike most of my SWAC Brethren, I support the 9 game SWAC mandate. I think at this point, our teams need to play each other for the scheduling security of the conference. Without it a some teams wouldn't have many home games of significance.
I really didn't like when the A10 had a 9 game conference schedule. Not enough opportunity for OOC games IMO. Of course, Delaware has taken to actually scheduling A10 teams for OOC games, which few Hen fans like. As for home games of significance, I don't see that as being a priority in general in the SWAC. If it were, there wouldn't be so many Classics at neutral sites.

[mikebigg]

The 9 game mandate helps some of the lower attendance members of the conference. Let's be honest...JSU and SU leads D1AA in attendance. Our lower attendance teams in the opposite division would never get a home game. Two out of conference games are enuff with strategic scheduling. We can use these two extra games either as a money game against a D1 mid-major or play other D1AA's in the general area of each team.

I think the SWAC is geographically situated so that the Western most teams can play at least one Southland as a home and home...the Eastern teams could play one OVC. We still have one more game that could either be a classic (depending on the teams) or a home and home against another D1AA.

Oh, yeah...I could do without the SCG since all teams are playing each other anyway. Not so much to be available for the playoffs but because it serves no financial benefit.

[txstman]

The SWAC is a detriment to D-IAA, especially when the postseason rolls around. They are much better off as a NAIA league.

The SWAC would be smart to start treating their football as actually D-IAA football.

[HensRock]

I've always thought it would be best for all concerned if the I-AA playoffs started a week later and there was a week off for Christmas before the Championship game which would be played during bowl season. This would give much better exposure to I-AA football.

This year it would look like this:
11/19 Last Saturday of regular season
11/24-26 Thanksgiving Weekend (Bayou Classic / Assorted Conference Champ games)
12/3 - I-AA Playoffs Round 1
12/10 - I-AA Playoffs Quarterfinals
12/17 - I-AA Playoffs Semifinals
12/24 - Christmas (NO games)
12/31 or 1/1/06 - I-AA Championship Game

This gives folks time to make travel arrangements for the NC game too, which would help attendance!

[mikebigg]

I've always thought it would be best for all concerned if the I-AA playoffs started a week later and there was a week off for Christmas before the Championship game which would be played during bowl season. This would give much better exposure to I-AA football.

This year it would look like this:
11/19 Last Saturday of regular season
11/24-26 Thanksgiving Weekend (Bayou Classic / Assorted Conference Champ games)
12/3 - I-AA Playoffs Round 1
12/10 - I-AA Playoffs Quarterfinals
12/17 - I-AA Playoffs Semifinals
12/24 - Christmas (NO games)
12/31 or 1/1/06 - I-AA Championship Game

This gives folks time to make travel arrangements for the NC game too, which would help attendance!

I think that this would cause the SWAC to reconsider it's SCG... In the event that the BC loser has an attractive ranking and record, they could receive an at large bid. I think D1AA would like to see either Grambling or Southern in the playoffs due to the fan support. BUT, the fact remains that the NCAA's bid policy and gate percentage needs to be revisited.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

11/19 Last Saturday of regular season
11/24-26 Thanksgiving Weekend (Bayou Classic / Assorted Conference Champ games)
12/3 - I-AA Playoffs Round 1
12/10 - I-AA Playoffs Quarterfinals
12/17 - I-AA Playoffs Semifinals
12/24 - Christmas (NO games)
12/31 or 1/1/06 - I-AA Championship Game


1/1/06 ain't happenin'. I could, however, see it in "Bowl Week". Why not get rid of (say) the Silicon Valley Bowl and just go right into that time slot? Should get no worse a TV rating than the SVB last year...

I do like 12/17 being the semi's, then 10+ days off for the final. It would really help freshen up the troops.

[SUjagTILLiDIE]

I've always thought it would be best for all concerned if the I-AA playoffs started a week later and there was a week off for Christmas before the Championship game which would be played during bowl season. This would give much better exposure to I-AA football.

This year it would look like this:
11/19 Last Saturday of regular season
11/24-26 Thanksgiving Weekend (Bayou Classic / Assorted Conference Champ games)
12/3 - I-AA Playoffs Round 1
12/10 - I-AA Playoffs Quarterfinals
12/17 - I-AA Playoffs Semifinals
12/24 - Christmas (NO games)
12/31 or 1/1/06 - I-AA Championship Game

This gives folks time to make travel arrangements for the NC game too, which would help attendance!
Excellent idea. Now we need to fix the playoff payout. :D

[th0m]

A problem with having the NC during bowl season, instead of just before it, is that it won't get as much national attention as it does now.

[arkstfan]

The playoff finance issue is on the agenda for the August NCAA meeting.

I still think that the best solution for the playoff situation is to privatize it.

Let the NCAA pay a private group the normal budget for the playoffs as long as the field remains at least 16 teams and auto bids are given in accordance with the NCAA procedure.

The group that ought to be running it is the commissioners of the playoff leagues.

I have always believed that the NCAA does not invest a lot of effort in obtaining TV coverage or sponsorships because they aren't willing to chase small dollars. The basketball tournament generates around $550 million a year from CBS and nearly every major company is interested in being the official something of the Tournament. The football playoff can't generate that sort of money so they put their efforts into the big return efforts.

Let the playoff leagues chase the money in a combined effort or create a company owned by those leagues to present the playoffs and hire a couple people to go chase those dollars.

[HensRock]

A problem with having the NC during bowl season, instead of just before it, is that it won't get as much national attention as it does now.

I disagree. No one is channel-surfing for football games in mid December!
It will get MUCH more attention in January - especially if we give it a "Bowl" name. Hmmmm....

[NoCoDanny]

I disagree. No one is channel-surfing for football games in mid December!
It will get MUCH more attention in January - especially if we give it a "Bowl" name. Hmmmm....

With the Ralph Bowl being the obvious choice. ;)

[Catmendue2]

I disagree. No one is channel-surfing for football games in mid December!
It will get MUCH more attention in January - especially if we give it a "Bowl" name. Hmmmm....


I agree!