Is this the end of the 9 game mandate?


Status
Not open for further replies.
mighty hornet said:
If there is a 7 game mandate, there shouldn't be any special consideration given to any school (or group of schools) any more than any others. Schedule those 7 games and beyond that, the SWAC should have no say in how you schedule the remaining 4 (or 5 in some years).
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is out of those 4 remaining games, go ahead and schedule a SWAC team that is NOT one of your conference games. If that is what you are saying and that is the mindset of the SWAC, go ahead and stick a fork in the SWAC, its dead!

EX. SWAC says to JSU. JSU, you must play 4 division and your 3 non-division games are (UAPB, PVU, and TxSU). Schedule who you want. JSU then gets GSU and SU on their non-conference.

Well, why not stick to the 9 game mandate? You are playing 9 SWAC teams, you are STILL making the same amount of money and still scheduling the same number of non-SWAC schools as you are today.

What's going to happen the day that GSU or SU steps it up and tangle with the majors and it is more beneficial for them to go on the road to Texas Tech than JSU or Alcorn. Believe me, the day is coming.
 



Da_Sperm said:
What's going to happen the day that GSU or SU steps it up and tangle with the majors and it is more beneficial for them to go on the road to Texas Tech than JSU or Alcorn. Believe me, the day is coming.
Click to expand...
Then when that day gets here and it is more beneficial to them, then by all means, they should schedule accordingly. Nobody has EVER forced any 2 teams to play a non-conference game (and that would still be true with TP's so-called big 3 (and sometimes Alcorn).
 
Da_Sperm said:
Well, why not stick to the 9 game mandate? You are playing 9 SWAC teams, you are STILL making the same amount of money and still scheduling the same number of non-SWAC schools as you are today.
Click to expand...

That is not the problem. If we HAVE to play TxSO and PV, but making us play them every year is not fair when we have other offers on the table. We know that there will be years that we will have to play them and years where we may play all nine games but that will only be a two year ordeal, not a permanent one like this 9-game mandate.

What's going to happen the day that GSU or SU steps it up and tangle with the majors and it is more beneficial for them to go on the road to Texas Tech than JSU or Alcorn. Believe me, the day is coming.
Click to expand...

Why hold them back by making them play teams they don't want/have to play. The better they get and more exposure they get, helps us. Being a crab in a barrel never helped anyone.
 
mighty hornet said:
why are you in a conference then? Leave and you could schedule whoever you want.

Seriously, EVERY school has rivals and games that always draw more than others. Stop thinking that your so-called big 3 (and sometimes Alcorn) are any different. And, for me, this whole argument is bigger than any specific teams.

If there is a 7 game mandate, there shouldn't be any special consideration given to any school (or group of schools) any more than any others. Schedule those 7 games and beyond that, the SWAC should have no say in how you schedule the remaining 4 (or 5 in some years).
Click to expand...

Dang mh,

You had me to right here (in the bold) It was gonna be twice I agreed with you (in the same thread, what are the odds :D) But, IMO if you let the schools schedule the other 2 schools as "nonconference' games you still have the 9 game mandate. I see what you're saying, trying to exercise yo independence & all, but either it should be a straight 7 period or I feel you're gonna come up with the "haves' and the "have nots" Man it's gonna be some creative scheduling like a mug!!!
 
Tigerpride said:
We can live two years without SU and they can live 2 years without us.
Click to expand...
Actually, it would be every four years if using a two year rotation. One of the two years they are on the schedule would be a road game therefore you would only see the revenue once every four years.
 
Tigerpride said:
Dude, you just joined the stupid crew...LOL

You CAN'T have permanent rivals. It is unfair for a reason that if JSU-SU-Alcon-GSU push this, we will have deal with. That reason is that for JSU and Alcorn, the EAST is stronger than the WEST. We would be forced to play the top 2 WEST teams every year while the BAMA's and Valley get to play TxSo and PV. Now if we want this we are stupid!! For SU and GSU, the East teams are all about an equal threat. However, the MAIN reason this won't fly is that the BAMA's and Texan's will have to be plain ole DUMB to let GSU and SU have Alcorn and JSU as permanent rivals and d*mn them the fate of PV-TxSo and AAMU/AAMU permanent rivals. Why would they agree with that. The permanent rival thing just does not work for the SWAC and all discussions of that need to be tossed out. If you want the four core/central schools to play each other, you are asking for option 3b. :D
Click to expand...
Let me type it out for you. lol

JSU
-----------
SU(Permanent rival)
GSU(PR)

Bama St.(division)
AAMU
Valley
Alcorn

TSU(rotating)
PB(rotating)

*****PVU(rotating) not on schedule

___________________________________

Alcorn
-----------
SU(PR)
GSU(PR)

Bama St.(division)
AAMU(division)
Valley(division)
ALcorn(division)

PVU(rotating)
PB(rotating)

****TSU(rotating) not on schedule

_______________________

AAMU
-------------
PB(PR)
TSU(PR)

JSU(division)
Alcorn
Bama St.
Valley

SU(rotating)
PVU(rotating)

****Gram(rotating) not on schedule

_______________________________

ASU
---------------
PVU(pr)
TSU(Pr)

JSU(division)
Alcorn
Valley
AAMU

GSU(rotating)
PB(rotating)

*****SU(rotating) not on schedule


Some years those teams will play SU and Gram and some years they won't. They will always play one.
 
mighty hornet said:
but according to you, which schools did that mandate help? which did it hurt?

:lol:
Click to expand...

The mandate was created for more than reason!! The reason was NOT for the 4 core schools to play each other because we could have done that if we wanted to.

Well, the 7-game mandate got Hughes fired....LOL (reason #1)

That is why he wanted it changed. He could not coach but he could add. If not for that mandate, he would have been in Bham in 1999, 2000, and 2002 and he would still have a job.

The other main reason was because some coaches were cowards and did not like losing to PWC's by 50 points when they could have at least lost to a HBCU by 50 points and the SU System was trying to make Petey play the top Southland schools plus FAMU. He did not want that many azz whoopins when all he had to do was kick a BAMA's azz.

The only person with a valid point/reason was Hughes. It was not right for you BAMA's to backdoor your way into Bham only to get your azzez waxed once you got there.


*** Was that exerpt from the article the only thing said about this matter?
 
Bengal E said:
Dang mh,

You had me to right here (in the bold) It was gonna be twice I agreed with you (in the same thread, what are the odds :D) But, IMO if you let the schools schedule the other 2 schools as "nonconference' games you still have the 9 game mandate.
Click to expand...
I disagree. That's not a mandate. That would be a choice made by those 2 schools. They would be scheduling games that they deem "beneficial" (piggybacking on Sperm's word) to them.
Why should the SWAC say no to that?????
 
Da_Sperm said:
What's going to happen the day that GSU or SU steps it up and tangle with the majors and it is more beneficial for them to go on the road to Texas Tech than JSU or Alcorn. Believe me, the day is coming.
Click to expand...

Or the other side, when it's more beneficial to have a home game with Miles rather than go on the road and travel to Valley, A&M or Montgomery?
 
SUjagTILLiDIE said:
Some years those teams will play SU and Gram and some years they won't. They will always play one.
Click to expand...


Yeah but every year, a BAMA will have to travel to Texas while JSU just takes a short ride over to Ruston of Baton Rouge. Do you think the BAMA's are dumb enough to vote for that. The rotation could work in theory but the AD's will not ASK for a long road trip every year when they don't have to spend that kind of money.
 
GRAM4LIFE said:
Actually, it would be every four years if using a two year rotation. One of the two years they are on the schedule would be a road game therefore you would only see the revenue once every four years.
Click to expand...

Same difference. You can't miss what you were not gonna have in the first place. Each team is still only missing one home game. They would not have had the second home game anyway.
 
Tigerpride said:
It was not right for you BAMA's to backdoor your way into Bham only to get your azzez waxed once you got there.
Click to expand...
No backdooring by Bama State. (or A&M for that matter) The years we went, we played by the rules in place, and won the games needed to get us there.
As for an azz waxing once in Bham, I know yall aint been since the 1900s, but don't act like jsue didn't get a waxing too. (with 2 first rounders to boot)
:snicker:
 
Tigerpride said:
Yeah but every year, a BAMA will have to travel to Texas while JSU just takes a short ride over to Ruston of Baton Rouge. Do you think the BAMA's are dumb enough to vote for that. The rotation could work in theory but the AD's will not ASK for a long road trip every year when they don't have to spend that kind of money.
Click to expand...
The pemanent rival could be tampered with. Say 1 Bama and 1 Texas school for the permanent rival and the other bama and other texas could rotate.
 
SUjagTILLiDIE said:
The pemanent rival could be tampered with. Say 1 Bama and 1 Texas school for the permanent rival and the other bama and other texas could rotate.
Click to expand...

The AD would STILL not agree with that.

Look at it like this. If SU was in a conference with WEST: GSU, JSU, AAMU, TNState and EAST: AlaState, Tuskegee, Miles, NCCU, Savannah State

Would your AD be okay with letting AlaState and Tuskegee be permanent rivals with AAMU and TNState while leaving SU to travel past them EVERY year to play Savannah State and NCCU??? You don't think your AD would rather play AlaState and save money? Not only are you traveling across country and spending a lot of money, but your fans don't care for the games either. That is what you are asking for when introducing permanent rivals.
 



Tigerpride said:
The AD would STILL not agree with that.

Look at it like this. If SU was in a conference with WEST: GSU, JSU, AAMU, TNState and EAST: AlaState, Tuskegee, Miles, NCCU, Savannah State

Would your AD be okay with letting AlaState and Tuskegee be permanent rivals with AAMU and TNState while leaving SU to travel past them EVERY year to play Savannah State and NCCU??? You don't think your AD would rather play AlaState and save money? Not only are you traveling across country and spending a lot of money, but your fans don't care for the games either. That is what you are asking for when introducing permanent rivals.
Click to expand...
Anyway you look at it your still going to have to travel with the exception of the 1 team that rotates off of your schedule. You are making this more complex than it is. Re-evaluate the schedule I posted.:lol:
 
SUjagTILLiDIE said:
Anyway you look at it your still going to have to travel with the exception of the 1 team that rotates off of your schedule. You are making this more complex than it is. Re-evaluate the schedule I posted.:lol:
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the Texans could get a two year reprieve from traveling to BAMA and vice versa. Making them permanent never gives them a break. I just can't see them agreeing to be permanent partners considering the money involved.
 
All this because some folks are to [dumb, close-minded, stubborn, etc. ] to understand that when 2 teams play, it may not count in the conference standings. It's that simple. For example, in basketball, if 2 Big, SEC, Big 12 teams meet in one of the early season tourney's (NIT, Mau, Alaska Shootout,etc) that game does not count in the conference standings.
 
SUjagTILLiDIE said:
OK lets do the math.
SU vs JSU
50,000 * $25=$1,250,000

JSU in CCC=$250,000

Minus expenses.
Even with them people robbing J-State with no grease, its not even close.
Click to expand...

Your math is off. Everyone is paying $25 for a ticket??? And Jackson State has to pay expenses on the SU-JSU game and no expenses on classics. And the CCC is every year so JSU is getting $500,000 or more in a two-year span and maybe $750,000 after expenses for ONE Southern game every two years. And if Jackson State gets better, the CCC attendance will get better and that means more money every year. So where is the loss? And the CCC is televised.
 
mighty hornet said:
using your JSU and SU example, what is the team that JSU can readily get to replace that game



:lol:
Click to expand...

Jackson State could play a Division I-A school on the road that year, a classic against a MEAC school or another Division I-AA school that year. There are many options now that Division I-A schools can schedule I-AA schools with more freedom. A promoter of one of the existing classics or a new one could alternate Jackson State as an opponent in those years. Jackson State could play another non-HBCU that travels well like McNeese State in those years or play Tuskegee in a classic. Comegy vs his old program. There are so many possible matchups. And again if our AD can't find one with all of the Division I programs in America and classic games played each year, then we need a new AD.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top