Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Time to disband this conference.. sweet jesus.

Coupled with this..

Probably doesn't help when you have facilities like this...



and this...



Just a terrible, underfunded conference.

MrTitleist wrote:Time to disband this conference.. sweet jesus.

How about remove ppl in positions of authority nothing wrong with the conference just the folks that are making decisions.

keydet21 wrote:Probably doesn't help when you have facilities like this...



and this...



Just a terrible, underfunded conference.

This song when it comes to finances describe the SWAC http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKXOlKb_ ... ata_player" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

dal4018 wrote:

MrTitleist wrote:Time to disband this conference.. sweet jesus.

How about remove ppl in positions of authority nothing wrong with the conference just the folks that are making decisions.

Yeah, I'm sure SWAC schools really attract the best and brightest young minds.

Oh no! St. Francis (PA) can't make the playoffs! My preseason predictions are shot now.

dal4018 wrote:

MrTitleist wrote:Time to disband this conference.. sweet jesus.

How about remove ppl in positions of authority nothing wrong with the conference just the folks that are making decisions.

The conference is a joke. A f*cking joke.

dal4018 wrote:

MrTitleist wrote:Time to disband this conference.. sweet jesus.

How about remove ppl in positions of authority nothing wrong with the conference just the folks that are making decisions.

I had a shitty day...thanks for the huge laugh!

dal4018 wrote:

MrTitleist wrote:Time to disband this conference.. sweet jesus.

How about remove ppl in positions of authority nothing wrong with the conference just the folks that are making decisions.

When 6 of the 12 schools in ALL of D1 facing bans are HBCUs it says a lot about the entire conference, from top to bottom...and HBCUs in general.

Jackson State is as 931...cut off for a ban is 930

Oh...wait...JSU is SWAC

Their cut off is 910....because the SWAC is so bad at doing anything right the NCAA made an exception for them. Also, 20 points is a HUGE difference in the APR

Oh no, a conference that doesn't participate in the playoffs has a bunch of the teams that can't participate in post-season play. Would the ban affect the conference championship game?

GrizFan5 wrote:Would the ban affect the conference championship game?

That is a sad and kind of hilarious proposition. The 2014 SWAC Championship Game will now be between #5 vs #8 due to post-season bans.

Cluck U wrote:

dal4018 wrote:How about remove ppl in positions of authority nothing wrong with the conference just the folks that are making decisions.

The conference is a joke. A f*cking joke.

because of decisions made by those in charge of said conference

MrTitleist wrote:Time to disband this conference.. sweet jesus.

And do what with their membership? I highly doubt that any of these schools will be able to find membership in the Southland, or OVC.

bobwoodshed wrote:

GrizFan5 wrote:Would the ban affect the conference championship game?

That is a sad and kind of hilarious proposition. The 2014 SWAC Championship Game will now be between #5 vs #8 due to post-season bans.

I asked this on AGS a while back.

It would have no impact on the SWAC title game. That is put on by the conference and not the NCAA...it's not "post season".

The ban has no impact on that. The conference can chose to hold them out but apparently that's only happened once.

clenz wrote:

bobwoodshed wrote:
That is a sad and kind of hilarious proposition. The 2014 SWAC Championship Game will now be between #5 vs #8 due to post-season bans.

I asked this on AGS a while back.

It would have no impact on the SWAC title game. That is put on by the conference and not the NCAA...it's not "post season".

The ban has no impact on that. The conference can chose to hold them out but apparently that's only happened once.

Would there not be a problem with the restriction on the number of games in a season and the period in which those games can occur? Just asking. Don't know.

I'm not down on the SWAC about this sort of thing. I'm down on the NCAA. That APR thing is horrible. It holds athletes to a higher standard than the general student population. If they're going to hold athletic programs accountable for athletes' graduation rates what they ought to be doing is comparing the graduation rate of athletes at each school to the graduation rate of the general student population at the same school. Then if the graduation rate of athletes is "significantly" lower there might be an issue. What the NCAA is doing now is ridiculous.

It makes no sense to say that athletes have to do better than the general student body. If anything one would expect that they would not do as well as the general student body because most of the general student body is there because they want to go to college while there are many athletes that would not be going to college if they weren't there to play sports.

The only thing the apr requires is the athletes are eligible. If they area eligible they have zero negative impact on apr

Student athletes generally have access to better resources than the average student population, I would think they should be held to a higher standard.

MrTitleist wrote:Student athletes generally have access to better resources than the average student population, I would think they should be held to a higher standard.

If they are on scholarship, getting a free ride, they should be held to a higher standard.

Someone else, someone who cared about their grades, could be in their place getting an education for free.

The extra help scholarship athletes get is designed to make it more likely that they will graduate. But that just means schools are already working hard to help them graduate.

And as far as I can tell it works. For the most part, at each given school, scholarship athletes do graduate at a higher rate than the general student population does.

And think about it. Say you're a scholarship football player. You have to go to practice. You have to travel during the fall semester. The "typical" student doesn't have to deal with that. Think about being in college. Think about having to go every afternoon during the fall semester busting your ass to the point of exhaustion for several hours every day then having to study. Then many times you're traveling Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and/or Sunday.

Add to that the fact that, at least with some sports, you're talking about people who are, on average, of lower IQ than the general student population to begin with. Sorry to be so blunt about that. But it's true for some sports. It may not be true about women's tennis. But it probably IS true about football and basketball. Again: A substantial proportion of athletes in those sports would not be in college if they weren't good football or basketball players.

All things considered, holding athletes to a higher standard academically just isn't rational.