ACC wisely continues to schedule FCS games

[Lehigh Football Nation]

http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/55655/acc-plans-on-continuing-fcs-games


The Big Ten has mandated it would no longer play FCS competition as a way to boost its strength of scheduling.

There is no such mandate in the ACC, where league coaches and athletic directors said during spring meetings they have no issues with playing one FCS game per season. Georgia Tech athletic director Mike Bobinski said discussions about eliminating all FCS games went nowhere during the meetings.

"Geographically the Big Ten has a different set up. They have a relationship with the Mid-American Conference, which works philosophically, geographically, competitively on a lot of levels. We live in an area where there’s an awful lot of FCS football. We have some responsibility, and I think the SEC will do the same thing. I don’t think they’re going to do what the Big Ten has done, either. We feel like we have a responsibility to the sport in our region to continue to play some of those games."

Because if these games go away, many of these FCS programs will not have the money to support themselves. Payouts from these guarantee games support the entire athletic department.

"I just think it’s not something we would feel good about as a league," Bobinski said. "There’s a lot of FCS teams that are important to the sport of college football and we don’t necessarily want to cut them out."

Like I said, expect the Big 10 "ban" on FCS games to last a couple of years, if that.

Oh yeah, that sound you heard was Karl Benson tearing up his Sun Belt Conference business plan... xlolx

[DFW HOYA]

"I just think it’s not something we would feel good about as a league," Bobinski said. "There’s a lot of FCS teams that are important to the sport of college football and we don’t necessarily want to cut them out."

Now, if they're in the AAC, that's another story.

[MplsBison]

On the other hand, if the Big Ten consistently gets three teams in the top 12 and perhaps two teams in the top 4 in the first few years due to having a better schedule ---- guaranteed the other elite conferences will be falling over themselves, pushing down small children in sprinting over to the "end FCS scheduling" sign up sheet.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

On the other hand, if the Big Ten consistently gets three teams in the top 12 and perhaps two teams in the top 4 in the first few years due to having a better schedule ---- guaranteed the other elite conferences will be falling over themselves, pushing down small children in sprinting over to the "end FCS scheduling" sign up sheet.

Because that's happened so, so often in the last two decades. xrolleyesx

[DoWe]

This is certainly good news for FCS and I am glad to hear it, but why would this affect the Sun Belt more than any other "Other 5" conference?

[MplsBison]

Because that's happened so, so often in the last two decades. xrolleyesx

That's a very lucid argument to make, considering that strength of schedule was a zero factor in the computer formula (BCS).


So good - you guys go ahead and assume that strength of schedule will be an insignificant factor in the *human* selection committee's judgement.

That sounds like exactly what the B1G is hoping for. :)

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Good - you go ahead and assume that strength of schedule will be an insignificant factor in the *human* selection committee's judgement.

That sounds like exactly what the B1G is hoping for. :)

I am not worried in the slightest that Alabama, with a win over Western Carolina, will be bypassed in favor of Ohio State simply because they beat Western Michigan.

[MplsBison]

I am not worried in the slightest that Alabama, with a win over Western Carolina, will be bypassed in favor of Ohio State simply because they beat Western Michigan.

Like I said - good. That's exactly what the B1G wants.

That FCS game is going to cost someone big time here in a couple years and that will be the end of it.

[asumike83]

http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/55655/acc-plans-on-continuing-fcs-games



Like I said, expect the Big 10 "ban" on FCS games to last a couple of years, if that.

Oh yeah, that sound you heard was Karl Benson tearing up his Sun Belt Conference business plan... xlolx

This will have no effect on the Big Ten's decision. The Big Ten will continue to do whatever the hell Michigan and Ohio State say and they will certainly not be taking their cues from the ACC.

It also has minimal impact on the Sun Belt. The ACC will also continue to play non-AQ FBS programs and when they do, they will pay more than they do to FCS schools. Does every thread just have to be some reason to bash the Sun Belt?

[bluehenbillk]

Keep in mind the ACC is a distant 5th in the big conferences & will need an undefeated team most likely make the Final 4.

[Apphole]

Oh yeah, that sound you heard was Karl Benson tearing up his Sun Belt Conference business plan... xlolx

I really don't see how this affects the SBC at all. Just another ignorant pot shot at the Belt from you once again.

Did you ever find your head when you were pulling that sentence out of your ass?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I really don't see how this affects the SBC at all. Just another ignorant pot shot at the Belt from you once again.

Did you ever find your head when you were pulling that sentence out of your ass?

B1G proposes stopping scheduling of FCS games: AHole: The sky is falling! FCS is collapsing! Run for your lives!

ACC continues scheduling of FCS games (and strongly suggests SEC will do same): AHole: Doesn't affect the SBC at all. We'll still be able to charge seven figures for guarantee games, even though we'll be in direct competition for guarantee games with Furman and the Citadel that will charge half the money and won't be able to schedule a home game in return.

Don't stop believing, AHole, that this won't affect the Sun Belt.

[Apphole]

B1G proposes stopping scheduling of FCS games: AHole: The sky is falling! FCS is collapsing! Run for your lives!

ACC continues scheduling of FCS games (and strongly suggests SEC will do same): AHole: Doesn't affect the SBC at all. We'll still be able to charge seven figures for guarantee games, even though we'll be in direct competition for guarantee games with Furman and the Citadel that will charge half the money and won't be able to schedule a home game in return.

Don't stop believing, AHole, that this won't affect the Sun Belt.

If you think the ACC schedules non conference FBS teams as "gimme" games just like they do FCS games you really don't know a damn thing about FBS football. If they want higher SOS, a BCS team will schedule an FBS team. If they want to make some gate money with a guaranteed W, they schedule an FCS team. Apples and oranges and the rate of SBC vs ACC games will not change as a result of this policy, no matter how much your twisted mind desires.

The "FCS sky is falling" talk is related to certain programs that depend on a check from the B1G to make ends meet.

Nice work pulling that indirect BS out of thin air since there was nothing about it at all in the article, by the way. Your fabrication skills are unparalleled.

[MplsBison]

Keep in mind the ACC is a distant 5th in the big conferences & will need an undefeated team most likely make the Final 4.

The Big XII and ACC are equally behind the B1G and SEC as far as the central and eastern time zones are concerned. Save a few programs like Texas, Oklahoma and maybe Florida State, Clemson and Viginia Tech. And back in the day Miami, but no longer.

[The Eagle's Cliff]

http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/55655/acc-plans-on-continuing-fcs-games



Like I said, expect the Big 10 "ban" on FCS games to last a couple of years, if that.

Oh yeah, that sound you heard was Karl Benson tearing up his Sun Belt Conference business plan... xlolx

What plan would that be? I hope it's not similar to Lehigh's plan to average 6K attendance and still play in a glorified club football conference after 130 years. Worry about trying beat the schools in NEC, Ivy, Patriot, and Pioneer before you go throwing stones.

10-1 in 2012 and left out of a 20 team playoff ought to tell you all you need to know about the reputation of Lehigh Football.xwhistlex

[bluehenbillk]

The Big XII and ACC are equally behind the B1G and SEC as far as the central and eastern time zones are concerned. Save a few programs like Texas, Oklahoma and maybe Florida State, Clemson and Viginia Tech. And back in the day Miami, but no longer.

Quick..rattle off for me the last ACC team that was a BCS title game contender in the month of November.....

After a few minutes of thought and you find you can't come up with a recent answer....

Rattle off the last year a Big XII team wasn't in the mix for the BCS title game in the month of November....

There you have it, to say the BIg XII & ACC are equal as laughable.

[walliver]

Clemson actually plays 2 FCS teams this year. The Tiggers, as well as the Chickens in Columbia, are under significant legislative pressure to play in-state FCS teams every year. South Carolina at one time had a four year rotation with The Citadel, SC State, Wofford and Furman. CCU has been added to the list recently.

There is no expectation that will change anytime soon.

Strength of Schedule will not be an issue. If it were important, the big boys would drop all FCS, MAC, SBC, AAC, MWC, and C-USA games. If pressure develops to drop those games, it will probably come from ESPN, not the playoff committee.

The SEC is more than happy to play weak OOC schedules. It is better to go undefeated or have one conference loss with a weak OOC schedule, than lose 2 or more games. The typical SEC team will play an FCS and one or two SBC teams every year.

[GlassOnion]

Just wondering why anyone from the ACC speculating what the SEC will do carries any weight...

Is Gtech sitting in on SEC meetings or what?

One day, probably in the near future, the #2 SEC team may be passed over for a Big 10 team with a better OOC schedule. All it takes is a percieved "good" year for the Big 10, and an average year for the SEC. Then, the argument will be revisited.

[MplsBison]

Quick..rattle off for me the last ACC team that was a BCS title game contender in the month of November.....

After a few minutes of thought and you find you can't come up with a recent answer....

Rattle off the last year a Big XII team wasn't in the mix for the BCS title game in the month of November....

There you have it, to say the BIg XII & ACC are equal as laughable.

Florida State last season.

To judge an entire conference by only its best team is what's laughable. Carry on, sir.

[MplsBison]

Clemson actually plays 2 FCS teams this year. The Tiggers, as well as the Chickens in Columbia, are under significant legislative pressure to play in-state FCS teams every year. South Carolina at one time had a four year rotation with The Citadel, SC State, Wofford and Furman. CCU has been added to the list recently.

There is no expectation that will change anytime soon.

Strength of Schedule will not be an issue. If it were important, the big boys would drop all FCS, MAC, SBC, AAC, MWC, and C-USA games. If pressure develops to drop those games, it will probably come from ESPN, not the playoff committee.

The SEC is more than happy to play weak OOC schedules. It is better to go undefeated or have one conference loss with a weak OOC schedule, than lose 2 or more games. The typical SEC team will play an FCS and one or two SBC teams every year.

An optimistic opinion from someone with something to lose (SC and Clemson games against South Carolina FCS teams).

I don't believe you that "significant" legislative pressure exists forcing those games. Not in the slightest.

[MplsBison]

Just wondering why anyone from the ACC speculating what the SEC will do carries any weight...

Is Gtech sitting in on SEC meetings or what?

One day, probably in the near future, the #2 SEC team may be passed over for a Big 10 team with a better OOC schedule. All it takes is a percieved "good" year for the Big 10, and an average year for the SEC. Then, the argument will be revisited.

It won't simply be revisited -- that will be the end of the discussion. The thing will be done.

Literally it will just take one season where the B1G is ranked ahead of the SEC and it's over. The ACC and Big XII may choose to continue playing FCS games, but the B1G and SEC will be out.

[813Jag]

Quick..rattle off for me the last ACC team that was a BCS title game contender in the month of November.....

After a few minutes of thought and you find you can't come up with a recent answer....

Rattle off the last year a Big XII team wasn't in the mix for the BCS title game in the month of November....

There you have it, to say the BIg XII & ACC are equal as laughable.
it would have taken some moves for it to happen but Florida St was #7 or #8 heading into a matchup against Florida last year.

[GlassOnion]

Legislature or not, if the conference passes a rule, the school will comply. The legislature isnt going to legislate Clemson out of a conference.

[walliver]

An optimistic opinion from someone with something to lose (SC and Clemson games against South Carolina FCS teams).

I don't believe you that "significant" legislative pressure exists forcing those games. Not in the slightest.

You don't know South Carolina politics.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Literally it will just take one season where the B1G is ranked ahead of the SEC and it's over.

Again, good luck with that.

[MplsBison]

You don't know South Carolina politics.

I know of Lindsey Graham. That's enough to judge the entire state.

[DFW HOYA]

Legislature or not, if the conference passes a rule, the school will comply. The legislature isnt going to legislate Clemson out of a conference.

ACC legislation drove South Carolina out 40 years ago.

[MplsBison]

Again, good luck with that.

Cheap talk.

Come see me in a couple years.

[Go Green]

That FCS game is going to cost someone big time here in a couple years and that will be the end of it.

Already happened.

http://www.anygivensaturday.com/archive/index.php/t-11900.html

The world went on.

[MplsBison]

Legislature or not, if the conference passes a rule, the school will comply. The legislature isnt going to legislate Clemson out of a conference.

Indeed.

Nor are any of the South Carolina FCS teams going to fold up shop because they can't get their $300k check from Clemson or USC. Let alone the entire athletic departments.

What a crock statement.

[MplsBison]

Already happened.

http://www.anygivensaturday.com/archive/index.php/t-11900.html

The world went on.

I'm not reading all of that. State what you have to state.

Actually, it doesn't matter because whatever happened in the past is irrelevant. Why is it so hard to understand that 15 humans (HUMANS) now directly control the top 12 ranking???

Any kind of formula published in the past has literally no bearing on the future.

[GlassOnion]

ACC legislation drove South Carolina out 40 years ago.

There is a big difference between now, and 40 years ago. A 40 year difference. Any move like that now would be amplified in todays media.

[MplsBison]

There is a big difference between now, and 40 years ago. A 40 year difference. Any move like that now would be amplified in todays media.

He played a little word trick anyway.

ACC legislation is not South Carolina legislation. It was a red herring.

[GlassOnion]

He played a little word trick anyway.

ACC legislation is not South Carolina legislation. It was a red herring.

Should have read that better. Suggesting that the ACC would drive Clemson away is nuts.

[Go Green]

I'm not reading all of that. State what you have to state.

Actually, it doesn't matter because whatever happened in the past is irrelevant. Why is it so hard to understand that 15 humans (HUMANS) now directly control the top 12 ranking???

Any kind of formula published in the past has literally no bearing on the future.

Ok. Auburn was left out of the 2005 BCS championship game because (in part) it played I-AA Citadel.

Sure, there was nashing of teeth and cursing of heavens. But the SEC continued to schedule I-AA/FCS teams. Auburn may have gotten shy about playing FCS teams for a few years, but they, too resumed eventually.

[GlassOnion]

Ok. Auburn was left out of the 2005 BCS championship game because (in part) it played I-AA Citadel.

Sure, there was nashing of teeth and cursing of heavens. But the SEC continued to schedule I-AA/FCS teams. Auburn may have gotten shy about playing FCS teams for a few years, but they, too resumed eventually.

Thats because it was Auburn. IF/when it happens to the Gators, LSU, Georgia, or Alabama, the SEC will change its tune.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Thats because it was Auburn. IF/when it happens to the Gators, LSU, Georgia, or Alabama, the SEC will change its tune.

If.

[MplsBison]

Ok. Auburn was left out of the 2005 BCS championship game because (in part) it played I-AA Citadel.

Sure, there was nashing of teeth and cursing of heavens. But the SEC continued to schedule I-AA/FCS teams. Auburn may have gotten shy about playing FCS teams for a few years, but they, too resumed eventually.

Unless you can show that the 2005 BCS final ranking (the one that put Auburn at #3) was directly influenced by strength of schedule, your argument doesn't hold water.

And it's irrelevant anyway, for the reason I explained before.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Unless you can show that the 2005 BCS final ranking (the one that put Auburn at #3) was directly influenced by strength of schedule, your argument doesn't hold water.

And it's irrelevant anyway, for the reason I explained before.

By definition it would have because the BCS formula used an index that undoubtedly had "schedule strength" built in.

The new system won't have that. Just a dozen old white millionaires in a room with a job nobody wants to have.

[GlassOnion]

Just a dozen old white millionaires in a room with a job nobody wants to have.

Should have known race would be to blame. Wonderful.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

By definition it would have because the BCS formula used an index that undoubtedly had "schedule strength" built in.

The new system won't have that. Just a dozen old white millionaires in a room with a job nobody wants to have.


Should have known race would be to blame. Wonderful.

Wait - it's not going to be a dozen old white millionaires?

[GlassOnion]

Wait - it's not going to be a dozen old white millionaires?

What difference does their color make?

[Apphole]

Wow. LFN just changed his avatar to an ACC logo.

He's devoted. I'll give him that.

[cmaxwellgsu]

Neither of the big conferences in the South are going to be dropping the FCS games. There's no need to. For the SEC to be left out of the top four spots, it's probably going to take three losses. The ACC hasn't been a big enough player for the games to affect them. Since the top teams are all that matter in this (the other bowl tie-ins are iron clad), there might be a little fuss but nothing will change. The Sun Belt is not going to suffer one bit from this either. With an eight game schedule for both conferences, there's room for an FCS and a SBC team. One will be cheap with the abundance of FCS teams down here. The SBC games will still have a good gate for them, and will count for SOS. I think we're in a better position to get those games by moving up, in the event those conferences go to nine games. We've gotten a game with NC State for next year, so LFN's latest wet dream just isn't coming true....

[bluehenbillk]

Florida State last season.

To judge an entire conference by only its best team is what's laughable. Carry on, sir.

Incorrect!!!

[ElCid]

Ok. Auburn was left out of the 2005 BCS championship game because (in part) it played I-AA Citadel.

Sure, there was nashing of teeth and cursing of heavens. But the SEC continued to schedule I-AA/FCS teams. Auburn may have gotten shy about playing FCS teams for a few years, but they, too resumed eventually.

"In Part" is correct. Even without the Citadel on their schedule, their SOS that year was much lower than OK and USC who were also undefeated. Auburn also had a couple "Louisiana whatever" schools on the schedule that did not help. Auburn started the year ranking in the 20s, not in the top 5 like the eventual BCS champ game participants. If anything, they did not take care of business on the field. 33-3 over a mediocre 2004 Citadel team was poor. There was excuse nashing and excuse cursing, but most realized that the Cid game was a non event in the final pairings. Auburn did not play an FCS in 05 or 06 but started again in 07. They had a MAC stand in. Other SEC/FCS games continued.

But back to the main topic at hand, the real problem is that some BCS schools are scared to schecule good FCS schools. As a result, the mediocre BCS schools avoid scheduling the top of the FCS just to make sure they can't possibly lose. Definitely hurts the SOS. They have to be thinking twice after the loses and close calls the Big Ten has had the last few years to the SOCON and Missouri Valley. I would be scared also. So the choices for the BCS conferences are improve SOS by playing good FCS teams, and risk losing. Or they get lower SOS by playing bad MAC, SB, etc. teams but they get the win and even if they lose, at least it was to an FBS team.

I have to admit that it is a hard choice.

[cmaxwellgsu]

"In Part" is correct. Even without the Citadel on their schedule, their SOS that year was much lower than OK and USC who were also undefeated. Auburn also had a couple "Louisiana whatever" schools on the schedule that did not help. Auburn started the year ranking in the 20s, not in the top 5 like the eventual BCS champ game participants. If anything, they did not take care of business on the field. 33-3 over a mediocre 2004 Citadel team was poor. There was excuse nashing and excuse cursing, but most realized that the Cid game was a non event in the final pairings. Auburn did not play an FCS in 05 or 06 but started again in 07. They had a MAC stand in. Other SEC/FCS games continued.

But back to the main topic at hand, the real problem is that some BCS schools are scared to schecule good FCS schools. As a result, the mediocre BCS schools avoid scheduling the top of the FCS just to make sure they can't possibly lose. Definitely hurts the SOS. They have to be thinking twice after the loses and close calls the Big Ten has had the last few years to the SOCON and Missouri Valley. I would be scared also. So the choices for the BCS conferences are improve SOS by playing good FCS teams, and risk losing. Or they get lower SOS by playing bad MAC, SB, etc. teams but they get the win and even if they lose, at least it was to an FBS team.

I have to admit that it is a hard choice.


Let's not forget the 09 SEC CG where Auburn didn't impress anybody against a much weaker Tennessee team. They had their chance to close the gap with a good showing, and didn't capitalize on it. They were also the only one of the three to get that extra game to boost their BCS ranking.

[IBleedYellow]

All of you guys that keep talking about the "mighty B1G" don't realize the irony of such a big and powerful conference getting rid of "easy" games that WOULD STILL QUALIFY AS WINS because they see themselves as a huge conference.

The Big TEN sucks. Plain and simple. If you aren't Wisconsin, Nebraska or Michigan and you're in the Big Ten, you are irrelevent.

[Go Green]

If you aren't Wisconsin, Nebraska or Michigan and you're in the Big Ten, you are irrelevent.

You probably won't get out of the state of Ohio alive if you said that. :)

[IBleedYellow]

You probably won't get out of the state of Ohio alive if you said that. :)

Oh right, THEM. The cheaters.

[MplsBison]

You probably won't get out of the state of Ohio alive if you said that. :)

Or Penn Sr. Or Mich St. Or Iowa....

You're probably ok in some parts of MN, IL and IN though.

[MplsBison]

By definition it would have because the BCS formula used an index that undoubtedly had "schedule strength" built in.

The new system won't have that. Just a dozen old white millionaires in a room with a job nobody wants to have.

"By definition it would have because the BCS formula used an index that undoubtedly had "schedule strength" built in."

Because you say so??


The new system has it because humans care about those things and therefore will factor that into their judgement.

The old system did not have it.

[ElCid]

All of you guys that keep talking about the "mighty B1G" don't realize the irony of such a big and powerful conference getting rid of "easy" games that WOULD STILL QUALIFY AS WINS because they see themselves as a huge conference.

The Big TEN sucks. Plain and simple. If you aren't Wisconsin, Nebraska or Michigan and you're in the Big Ten, you are irrelevent.

I think it is hilarious. The mighty conference is not as mighty as they once were. I think this whole thing is nothing more than damage control. If they keep FCS off the schedule for a few years, expect them to trot out their image consultants to lambast the ACC, SEC and BIG12 for playing the occasional FCS in an attempt to sway poll voters. It obviously can't work every time because even they have to play a game eventually and the truth will show, but it might sway some vote here or there.

[cmaxwellgsu]

"By definition it would have because the BCS formula used an index that undoubtedly had "schedule strength" built in."

Because you say so??


The new system has it because humans care about those things and therefore will factor that into their judgement.

The old system did not have it.


Couldn't agree more on the human element!

[Professor Chaos]

"By definition it would have because the BCS formula used an index that undoubtedly had "schedule strength" built in."

Because you say so??


The new system has it because humans care about those things and therefore will factor that into their judgement.

The old system did not have it.
You do realize that two thirds of the BCS formula (Harris Poll and Coaches Poll) are voted on by humans correct?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Unless you can show that the 2005 BCS final ranking (the one that put Auburn at #3) was directly influenced by strength of schedule, your argument doesn't hold water.

And it's irrelevant anyway, for the reason I explained before.

http://www.bcsknowhow.com/bcs-formula


The third and final part of the BCS calculations is derived from six computer rankings posted weekly. The six computer polls, managed by people, newspapers and the BCS itself are: Anderson & Hester, Richard Billingsley, Colley Matrix, Kenneth Massey, Jeff Sagarin’s USA Today and Peter Wolfe.

http://www.bcsknowhow.com/better-know-a-bcs-computer-colley-matrix


Colley relies heavily on strength of schedule to rank his teams. However, the Matrix disregards home-field advantage in any matchup, meaning that all games are weighed equally irrespective of their location.

Plenty of the others like Massey and Sags have strength-of-schedule baked in.

Gee, that's much worse than the "rich millionaires" gathering in a room to decide who's schedule is stronger... xrolleyesx

[tourguide]

Like I said - good. That's exactly what the B1G wants.

That FCS game is going to cost someone big time here in a couple years and that will be the end of it.

xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx xrotatehx

[tourguide]

"By definition it would have because the BCS formula used an index that undoubtedly had "schedule strength" built in."

Because you say so??


The new system has it because humans care about those things and therefore will factor that into their judgement.

The old system did not have it.

Because you say so?

I wonder how many of these humans know which teams are FCS and which are not? I wonder if they do know the difference, wouldnt they then also know the difference between a horrible FBS team and a good FCS team?
There is zero proof that a win over Tulane is more impressive then a win over Wofford

[GlassOnion]

Because you say so?

I wonder how many of these humans know which teams are FCS and which are not? I wonder if they do know the difference, wouldnt they then also know the difference between a horrible FBS team and a good FCS team?
There is zero proof that a win over Tulane is more impressive then a win over Wofford

xeyebrowx Except, since no one has ever heard of Wofford, Tulane automatically gets the nod.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

xeyebrowx Except, since no one has ever heard of Wofford, Tulane automatically gets the nod.

Probably not. If they already don't know enough to have not heard of Wofford then they probably think Tulane is FCS anyway.

[darell1976]

Probably not. If they already don't know enough to have not heard of Wofford then they probably think Tulane is FCS anyway.

You mean Tulane is in the FBS? Lol!!

[heath]

With the ACC adding 3 full members and Notre Dame agreeing to play 4-5 games in football, the opportunity to play FCS schools will disappear.We will see

[Seawolf97]

Going forward our next three FBS games are all against what was once the Big East- 2014 @ Cincy, 2015@ UConn, 2017 @ USF. I heard Temple in 2016 but no verification. They must need wins also.

[catamount man]

WCU will always play these games since our inept leadership, going back to the Chancellor Robinson days of the 80s, failed to promote football as most normal schools would. We lose them, but the sound of that check depositing makes all of Cullowhee smile. We got three I-A games this year, two in 2014, so far and we go to Arkansas in 2015.

GO CATS!

[Southern Bison]

I know of Lindsey Graham. That's enough to judge the entire state.

You really are a POS...I will never claim you as a fellow Bison fan ever!! Lindsey Graham is a god-damn RINO in the simplest terms. The junior senator from SC, the Honorable Tim Scott has already surpassed Graham as a true Constitutionalist and more upstanding than Graham will ever be! As a fellow Carolinian, about 10 years ago, the NC General Assembly (Democrat-controlled) required NC State & UNC to play East Carolina U on a regular basis through legislation. The South Carolina has required the same as Walliver stated.