Started By
Message
re: Big Ten to stop schdlng FCS opponents, SEC (and everyone else) should do it too
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:38 am to mwade91383
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:38 am to mwade91383
I don't really care much about the fate of FCS schools but I do care about what is best for A&M. All this policy would do is have negative consequences.
First off, it will be a boon to lower level FBS teams. Essentially you just made the Arkie State's and North Texas' of the world a lot of money. If there are fewer and fewer schools that major programs can choose from to schedule patsies the FBS patsies can charge double what they do now for a "buyout" game or even force a 2 for 1 or 1 for 1.
Second, it will reduce the number of home games. If buyout games are fewer and harder to come by that means more 1 for 1's which means more road games. So instead of your season ticket options paying for 7 or 8 games they pay for 6 or 7, maybe even 5 in a bad year or if you have neutral site games.
Third, it makes big time college football less accessible to fans. A lot of people can't afford to buy season tickets or pay to go for a big game but these lesser games allow them to go, take their families, and get a chance to enjoy The Swamp or Bryant Denny or Kyle Field because the tickets are often discounted or more readily available through season ticket holders giving them away or selling them on the cheap. These games are also the ones that schools often invite various groups or underprivileged kids to attend. The more people that can experience a big time college football environment the better. I know of a lot of stories of kids that didn't have great mentors but went to a big college game on campus and realized, "Wow, I really need to study and work hard so I can do this someday!"
Finally, there really isn't much difference between a lower tier FBS team and an upper tier FCS team. Many FCS teams regularly beat FBS teams every year. Part of this is the rules are different for transfers. For instance when A&M played Sam Houston last year (the FCS Runner up) they had 3 or 4 former A&M players on their team that had transferred because they wouldn't have to sit out. The competition level doesn't necessarily increase just because a school is FBS.
First off, it will be a boon to lower level FBS teams. Essentially you just made the Arkie State's and North Texas' of the world a lot of money. If there are fewer and fewer schools that major programs can choose from to schedule patsies the FBS patsies can charge double what they do now for a "buyout" game or even force a 2 for 1 or 1 for 1.
Second, it will reduce the number of home games. If buyout games are fewer and harder to come by that means more 1 for 1's which means more road games. So instead of your season ticket options paying for 7 or 8 games they pay for 6 or 7, maybe even 5 in a bad year or if you have neutral site games.
Third, it makes big time college football less accessible to fans. A lot of people can't afford to buy season tickets or pay to go for a big game but these lesser games allow them to go, take their families, and get a chance to enjoy The Swamp or Bryant Denny or Kyle Field because the tickets are often discounted or more readily available through season ticket holders giving them away or selling them on the cheap. These games are also the ones that schools often invite various groups or underprivileged kids to attend. The more people that can experience a big time college football environment the better. I know of a lot of stories of kids that didn't have great mentors but went to a big college game on campus and realized, "Wow, I really need to study and work hard so I can do this someday!"
Finally, there really isn't much difference between a lower tier FBS team and an upper tier FCS team. Many FCS teams regularly beat FBS teams every year. Part of this is the rules are different for transfers. For instance when A&M played Sam Houston last year (the FCS Runner up) they had 3 or 4 former A&M players on their team that had transferred because they wouldn't have to sit out. The competition level doesn't necessarily increase just because a school is FBS.
2
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:41 am to mwade91383
quote:
You'll never convince me to care about an FCSs team budget, it's that simple.
Their survival should not be in any way a factor in the SEC and all BCS conferences banning FCS non-conference games. It's not their responsibility.
Can't afford to play football? Drop it.
I guess when you're a fan of a big school... it's easy to say screw the little guys.
It isn't like playing Western Kentucky or Florida Atlantic is any more exciting than Appy State.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:43 am to mwade91383
quote:
Big Ten to stop schdlng FCS opponents, SEC (and everyone else) should do it too
:kige:
No reason for an SEC team to be playing an FCS team. It's embarrassing.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:44 am to mwade91383
The Big Tem has finally come to the realization that their shitty schedules were not adequately preparing them for the big game.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:45 am to mwade91383
The B1G also likes to rape little boys.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:45 am to arwicklu
quote:
I guess when you're a fan of a big school... it's easy to say screw the little guys.
FCS schools could operate without the paycheck from the FBS schools. Would it take longer for upgrades to facilities and the perks they get from those big gate paychecks? Sure. But they're not going to die out by any means.
That said, I still wouldn't want the SEC to do it. Because what the SEC is doing is clearly working because of the wear and tear of conference play. You obviously don't see it much at the top of the conference where recruiting allows incredible depth. But I could certainly see where it would hamper more than help Kentucky who doesn't have that depth.
This post was edited on 2/13/13 at 11:46 am
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:45 am to arwicklu
there's nothing wrong with 1 and 1 deals. 6 home games and 6 road games for everyone is a great notion if everyone does it.
How am i supposed to feel? They are not our responsibility.
quote:
I guess when you're a fan of a big school... it's easy to say screw the little guys.
How am i supposed to feel? They are not our responsibility.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:53 am to aggressor
quote:
First off, it will be a boon to lower level FBS teams. Essentially you just made the Arkie State's and North Texas' of the world a lot of money. If there are fewer and fewer schools that major programs can choose from to schedule patsies the FBS patsies can charge double what they do now for a "buyout" game or even force a 2 for 1 or 1 for 1.
I'm a season ticket holder and I wouldn't mind keeping up the home and home series A&M has going with SMU.
Two games in Dallas every other year (w/Arky @JerryWorld again in '14) would really help recruiting up here.
I just wish we could somehow get Jerry and Arkansas to turn the game at JerryWorld into an OOC double header where A&M and Arkansas both play schools like TCU, Okie Light, Texas Tech etc.
This post was edited on 2/13/13 at 11:57 am
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:54 am to BluegrassBelle
As I said, I think the "save the FCS schools" argument is a weak one but there is no question it helps them. It's actually a major reason why many schools are eventually able to make the FBS jump. They get money from the "buyout" games and they also are able to prepare for the level of competition. An FBS win has a huge impact on an FCS school in terms of donations and support as well.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:56 am to aggressor
I guess Conference USA and the Big East just got a huge scheduling bump.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:58 am to Al Bundy Bulldog
quote:
What's wrong with a FCS opponent for homecoming every year?
Nothing, Maine.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 11:59 am to iglass
quote:
I guess Conference USA and the Big East just got a huge scheduling bump.
Nope, they are also going to go to a 9 or 10 game conference schedule.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 12:00 pm to DaleDenton
quote:
Nothing, Maine.
The Citadel is available,too.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 12:00 pm to iglass
quote:
I guess Conference USA and the Big East just got a huge scheduling bump.
Exactly what I was thinking. Ok, we'll save hundreds of thousands of dollars by playing UConn and Memphis every year. Fine.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 12:01 pm to therick711
Big 10 should be afraid of FCS opponents, they've had some pretty historic upsets and have played some teams pretty evenly.
SEC will do what it wants without any input from the Big 10
I don't see any changes from the SEC unless it costs them a spot in the playoff and that will fall more on individual schools than the entire conference
SEC will do what it wants without any input from the Big 10
I don't see any changes from the SEC unless it costs them a spot in the playoff and that will fall more on individual schools than the entire conference
Posted on 2/13/13 at 12:11 pm to mwade91383
Unless teams start playing major or middle tier teams for OOC it doesn't really matter. Idaho Vandals is just an easy win like Towson. So why not give those FCS team a payday?
This post was edited on 2/13/13 at 12:22 pm
Posted on 2/13/13 at 12:23 pm to mwade91383
quote:
Real match ups, every week. What a concept!
In the B1G this is impossible, regardless of non-con. But as long as you have a premiere blue blood of college football without a conference, Notre Dame, there is going to be an issue. Like I'm all for the SEC going to a 9 game schedule. Even more than that. Honestly I want a 13 game regular season, 11 SEC games, and two non-con games.
I mean until there is an 8 team playoff, with the 5 major conference champs getting an autobid, the remaining little five taking the best of theirs, and 2 at large bids, I'm not for this. The SEC is the toughest conference in the land. 2 losses in the SEC is equal to one or less in another. Until the SEC isn't penalized for that, and the SEC Champ gets an auto-bid... I don't want to do this, even though from a fan experience it is better.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 12:25 pm to TxTiger82
quote:I'm all for FCS that aren't profitable to drop football altogether, but only IF the NCAA will increase the number of scholarship players that other programs can sign for football. Where the hell will these football athletes go if bunch of FCS drop football and the rest of the schools have limited scholarships to offer?
Nope. Make FCS drop football. Too expensive. Focus on basketball where you are on equal ground to the big boys. More and more schools are doing it.
FCS football loses money anyways, and the more successful the program, the more money they lose (playoffs end up costing them).
Posted on 2/13/13 at 12:29 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
In the B1G this is impossible, regardless of non-con
I agree, but again, my point is EVERYBODY (bcs conferences) doing it. Not just us and/or the Big Ten, but the ACC, Big12,pac12, and big east as well.
The mid majors can keep the fcs teams on their payroll if they want as far as I'm concerned.
Posted on 2/13/13 at 12:32 pm to JordonfortheJ
quote:
Unless teams start playing major or middle tier teams from conferences it doesn't really matter. Idaho Vandals is just an easy win like Towson. So why not give those FCS team a payday?
True.
I keep seeing comments like "Good, about time teams started playing real top 25 competition OOC" on the ESPN article but in reality those Big 10 schools are going to fill the FCS slots with games against schools like Ohio, UMass, and Mid Tenn St.
Of course it wouldn't bother me too much if the SEC adopted this b/c A&M would end up with regional schools like SMU, Houston, Rice, UTSA, North Texas, UTEP, Texas State, La Tech, ULM, ULL, Tulane, and Tulsa. I'd much rather play those schools than Lamar and Sam Houston.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News