(06-14-2017 12:20 PM)MemTGRS Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 06:17 AM)GreenHornet33 Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 10:33 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Would you be willing join the Big South/Atlantic Sun football, to stay in FCS?

To be honest, no. The OVC and MEAC are the only two conferences that we would leave the SWAC for and the MEAC deal for us is pretty much already in place.

I attend several b'ball games each year for Norfolk State and Hampton. I don't know, however, if the MEAC provides that much of an upgrade. That would be a tremendous increase in travel just to those two. And that is ignoring going all the way to DC (Howard), Baltimore (Coppin State and Morgan State) along with Delaware and MD-Eastern Shore (that last one will be a tough trip).

Seems like a lot of burden to abandon long time rivalries. But ... you all know the in's & out's much more and I guess certain schools (PV A&M?) are just not committed like Alabama State?

PV just built a new stadium, let alone it having access to numerous other facilities throughout Houston and its suburbs. Considering what level of D-I it's at, the Baby Dome is a great basketball/volleyball facility. It even partially has chairback seating. Damn shame a better team hasn't played there over the years.

Even TSU, who I've called on to close or get taken over by a bigger university system, has some of the better facilities at the lower D-I level. It doesn't hurt that they're in a city where they can use public facilities instead of just their own.

(06-14-2017 04:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 08:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  This won't happen, so please don't get too upset, but ...

... I think the SWAC and MEAC should drop down to DII, while any teams that want to be serious about spending to be competitive in DI transfer to other conferences. Tenn St is in the OVC, for example.

You realize that among FCS conferences, the SWAC is #1 in attendance almost every year, including this past year, and by a wide margin. The MEAC was the #5 conference, out of 13 FCS conferences.

While it is true that HBCU fan support is better than most non-FBS entities, I wonder how much of that high average is due to the classics.

(06-14-2017 05:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If attendance for the games isn't tied in any manner to being DI -- and my intuition says they'd draw exactly the same if they were DII -- then I don't see that as justification for being DI.

Being DI shouldn't really have anything to do with attendance, IMO.

There are better reasons to bag on SWAC schools for dropping out of D-I than attendance. Yes, some are merely D-I for publicity and NCAA Tournament money but some fill their niche just fine.

(06-14-2017 08:11 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 04:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 08:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  This won't happen, so please don't get too upset, but ...

... I think the SWAC and MEAC should drop down to DII, while any teams that want to be serious about spending to be competitive in DI transfer to other conferences. Tenn St is in the OVC, for example.

You realize that among FCS conferences, the SWAC is #1 in attendance almost every year, including this past year, and by a wide margin. The MEAC was the #5 conference, out of 13 FCS conferences.

While it is true that HBCU fan support is better than most non-FBS entities, I wonder how much of that high average is due to the classics.

Neutral site Classics aren't factored into the home attendance averages and the SWAC is well represented in FCS as far as home attendance rankings with 5 schools in the top 20.

Here is a link to attendance reports issued by the NCAA for each year they have available: http://www.ncaa.org/championships/statis...attendance

And specifically for 2016: http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...e/2016.pdf


When only specifically home game attendance is calculated, here are the top HBCU in FCS:
Florida A&M (MEAC) - 4 home games - 19.71k avg
Jackson (Miss) St (SWAC) - 5 home games - 19.66k avg
Grambling (SWAC) - 2 home games - 16.33k avg
NC A&T (MEAC) - 5 home games - 14.47k avg
Alcorn (SWAC) - 5 home games - 14.34k avg
Tenn St (OVC) - 4 home games - 13.77k avg
Southern (SWAC) - 4 home games - 13.67k avg
PV A&M (SWAC) - 4 home games - 12.19k avg
SC St (MEAC) - 4 home games - 10.14k avg
Norfolk St (MEAC) - 5 home games - 9.74k avg


So does that really speak highly of HBCU attendance .... or does that just show how low, relative to all of college football, FCS attendance is??

(06-14-2017 08:21 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  There are better reasons to bag on SWAC schools for dropping out of D-I than attendance. Yes, some are merely D-I for publicity and NCAA Tournament money but some fill their niche just fine.

And as I already wrote, those schools who really want to be DI and make that investment in their athletic depts -- which perhaps could be up to the top half of the SWAC and MEAC -- should be able to do so in other conferences.

(06-14-2017 07:18 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 12:20 PM)MemTGRS Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 06:17 AM)GreenHornet33 Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 10:33 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Would you be willing join the Big South/Atlantic Sun football, to stay in FCS?

To be honest, no. The OVC and MEAC are the only two conferences that we would leave the SWAC for and the MEAC deal for us is pretty much already in place.

I attend several b'ball games each year for Norfolk State and Hampton. I don't know, however, if the MEAC provides that much of an upgrade. That would be a tremendous increase in travel just to those two. And that is ignoring going all the way to DC (Howard), Baltimore (Coppin State and Morgan State) along with Delaware and MD-Eastern Shore (that last one will be a tough trip).

Seems like a lot of burden to abandon long time rivalries. But ... you all know the in's & out's much more and I guess certain schools (PV A&M?) are just not committed like Alabama State?

The MEAC wins Round of 64 games every once in a while. The SWAC never wins NCAA Tournament games or gets anything higher than a 16-seed. Mike Davis did produce a 15-seed Texas Southern team recently though they had the misfortune of facing one of the five best teams in the field.

In the past 35 years, the SWAC and MEAC have each had two teams win regular round of 64 games.

And Texas Southern isn't one of those.

(06-14-2017 05:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Being DI shouldn't really have anything to do with attendance, IMO.

Seriously, what should it be based on then?

Attendance is highly correlated with the prestige and standing of a program. It's really almost one to one, the exceptions, like Miami, are few and stand out like sore thumbs.

(06-15-2017 06:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Seriously, what should it be based on then?

Attendance is highly correlated with the prestige and standing of a program. It's really almost one to one, the exceptions, like Miami, are few and stand out like sore thumbs.

How much money you're willing to spend on athletics.

(06-15-2017 06:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 07:18 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 12:20 PM)MemTGRS Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 06:17 AM)GreenHornet33 Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 10:33 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Would you be willing join the Big South/Atlantic Sun football, to stay in FCS?

To be honest, no. The OVC and MEAC are the only two conferences that we would leave the SWAC for and the MEAC deal for us is pretty much already in place.

I attend several b'ball games each year for Norfolk State and Hampton. I don't know, however, if the MEAC provides that much of an upgrade. That would be a tremendous increase in travel just to those two. And that is ignoring going all the way to DC (Howard), Baltimore (Coppin State and Morgan State) along with Delaware and MD-Eastern Shore (that last one will be a tough trip).

Seems like a lot of burden to abandon long time rivalries. But ... you all know the in's & out's much more and I guess certain schools (PV A&M?) are just not committed like Alabama State?

The MEAC wins Round of 64 games every once in a while. The SWAC never wins NCAA Tournament games or gets anything higher than a 16-seed. Mike Davis did produce a 15-seed Texas Southern team recently though they had the misfortune of facing one of the five best teams in the field.

Actually, in the past 35 years, the SWAC and MEAC have each had two teams win regular round of 64 games.

And Texas Southern isn't one of those.

The MEAC has 3 alone, Coppin State 97, Hampton 2001, and Norfolk State 2012

(06-15-2017 07:29 PM)GreenHornet33 Wrote:  

(06-15-2017 06:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 07:18 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 12:20 PM)MemTGRS Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 06:17 AM)GreenHornet33 Wrote:  To be honest, no. The OVC and MEAC are the only two conferences that we would leave the SWAC for and the MEAC deal for us is pretty much already in place.

I attend several b'ball games each year for Norfolk State and Hampton. I don't know, however, if the MEAC provides that much of an upgrade. That would be a tremendous increase in travel just to those two. And that is ignoring going all the way to DC (Howard), Baltimore (Coppin State and Morgan State) along with Delaware and MD-Eastern Shore (that last one will be a tough trip).

Seems like a lot of burden to abandon long time rivalries. But ... you all know the in's & out's much more and I guess certain schools (PV A&M?) are just not committed like Alabama State?

The MEAC wins Round of 64 games every once in a while. The SWAC never wins NCAA Tournament games or gets anything higher than a 16-seed. Mike Davis did produce a 15-seed Texas Southern team recently though they had the misfortune of facing one of the five best teams in the field.

Actually, in the past 35 years, the SWAC and MEAC have each had two teams win regular round of 64 games.

And Texas Southern isn't one of those.

The MEAC has 3 alone, Coppin State 97, Hampton 2001, and Norfolk State 2012

Thanks, I stand corrected, forgot about Hampton in 2001.

(06-15-2017 06:50 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(06-15-2017 06:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Seriously, what should it be based on then?

Attendance is highly correlated with the prestige and standing of a program. It's really almost one to one, the exceptions, like Miami, are few and stand out like sore thumbs.

How much money you're willing to spend on athletics.

IMO, that's not a good criterion. It rewards "strivers" rather than achievers, and it leads to dysfunctional behaviors. You end up with a bunch of directional schools with unrealistic dreams of being Alabama or Florida spending gobs of money they don't have, often by soaking their students with big fees, to chase that dream.

The HBCU schools in the SWAC and the MEAC, despite tight budgets and historical disadvantages, have achieved, they put up the attendance numbers and have built programs with long histories and legacies. Let the egoistic bantam roosters at North Carolina Ashville Metro, who dream that their Mudhen mascot will one day have pride of place in the firmament next to the Tarheel, with admins willing to go into debt (with other people's money) or soak their students (again other people's money) in the vain hope of becoming North Carolina earn, via fans in the stands, their place in FBS.

(06-15-2017 06:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 07:18 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 12:20 PM)MemTGRS Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 06:17 AM)GreenHornet33 Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 10:33 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Would you be willing join the Big South/Atlantic Sun football, to stay in FCS?

To be honest, no. The OVC and MEAC are the only two conferences that we would leave the SWAC for and the MEAC deal for us is pretty much already in place.

I attend several b'ball games each year for Norfolk State and Hampton. I don't know, however, if the MEAC provides that much of an upgrade. That would be a tremendous increase in travel just to those two. And that is ignoring going all the way to DC (Howard), Baltimore (Coppin State and Morgan State) along with Delaware and MD-Eastern Shore (that last one will be a tough trip).

Seems like a lot of burden to abandon long time rivalries. But ... you all know the in's & out's much more and I guess certain schools (PV A&M?) are just not committed like Alabama State?

The MEAC wins Round of 64 games every once in a while. The SWAC never wins NCAA Tournament games or gets anything higher than a 16-seed. Mike Davis did produce a 15-seed Texas Southern team recently though they had the misfortune of facing one of the five best teams in the field.

In the past 35 years, the SWAC and MEAC have each had two teams win regular round of 64 games.

And Texas Southern isn't one of those.

The MEAC has had three teams win non-opening round games since 1997, the SWAC with none since then or since 1994. There's been a clear gap for a while. Rarely does a SWAC school even not play in the opening round, let alone having a team as high as a 15-seed.

They achieve via attendance but not in competition on the whole against Div 1 competition (assuming that the conversation is correct in that they are generally not competitive in most sports).

Then you will have a school like Kent State where the attendance at football is not very high but has done on the whole pretty well in most sports and somehow that is not achieving.

The importance of attendance is that it is one marker (of which there are many) that shows that the school has enough support to survive and hopefully thrive as an academic and athletic program. To really determine whether a school should stay div 1 attendance can be one thing to look at but there are other aspects, some of which are more important, that you should look at before deciding whether they should stay at a certain level.

HBCU games often thrive as social events rather than people actually being there to see good competition. That's actually something they get right as opposed to people wasting their life away watching a bad MLB team 162 times a year or the like.

As a matter of fact, football in general is like that.

(06-16-2017 02:38 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  HBCU games often thrive as social events rather than people actually being there to see good competition. That's actually something they get right as opposed to people wasting their life away watching a bad MLB team 162 times a year or the like.

As a matter of fact, football in general is like that.

Yes and No. In my experience, yes HBCU games often do thrive as social events. The Bayou Classic (Grambling vs Southern) is very much like that. But, that doesn't mean the fans don't care about seeing "good competition", to the contrary, the rivalry and desire to win is as great as you'll find at Alabama vs Auburn or Michigan vs Ohio State.

What *is* different is that for the most part, the nature of the feelings surrounding the rivalry are positive. The cheering is for your team not so much against the other team, and the bragging and boasting by the winners is good-natured. IOW's, there is respect and affection for the other school despite the burning desire to whip them.

In contrast, and sadly, in many of the "big time" rivalry games, the atmosphere seems to be poisonous, characterized by lots of animus towards the other school, lots of "you suck!" bitterness/ugliness at the fan level.

I went to an HBCU (I've just always been a Houston fan) and attended many-a-game. Trust me when I say few people were there for games themselves. They either came to interact with people or cheer their friends/family. I do agree that elements of rivalry are there.

(06-15-2017 09:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, that's not a good criterion. It rewards "strivers" rather than achievers, and it leads to dysfunctional behaviors. You end up with a bunch of directional schools with unrealistic dreams of being Alabama or Florida spending gobs of money they don't have, often by soaking their students with big fees, to chase that dream.

First of all, I respect your opinion. I hope you know that, and I hope you don't think I'm dismissing your opinion. I just respectfully disagree with parts of it.

I understand your definition of a "striver". What I don't understand is: 1) what is the "reward" you're talking about (getting to be in DI, as opposed to DII, DIII, or NAIA?), and 2) what is the achievement that makes an achiever (just attendance?) and what achievements have the SWAC and MEAC schools achieved other than relatively strong attendance in FCS football?


With regards to money:

- it's fine if you have the opinion that a school borrowing money to build athletic facilities and/or subsidizing the athletics budget with general operating budget money is wrong. But my opinion is that is each school's decision to make, and no one else's. No one should be able to prevent a school from doing those things, if it chooses to do that. The "market" will decide, if you will, because competition in higher education is very intense.

- students get to vote on paying school fees for athletics. If they vote yes, then that's that. There's really nothing more that can be said about that, though again I think it's fine for you to have the opinion that they should have voted no. But if they voted yes, then it's done. Again, let the "market" decide.

- lastly, you might feel that because federal tax dollars (via federal tuition assistance programs), as well as state tax dollars for public schools within a state, go to support schools, then as a taxpayer you do have a right to say that your tax money shouldn't be spent on athletics. My response to this is simple: I would be perfectly fine requiring any school that receives any such public money to maintain two separate accounts for incoming dollars, one from public money sources and the other from all other sources (donations, normal tuition payments, etc.), and then forbidding the school from using any of the money in the public money account to be spent directly or indirectly on athletics. If a school wants to use its "own" money (from the other sources account) for athletics, that's its business.

(06-16-2017 05:28 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes and No. In my experience, yes HBCU games often do thrive as social events. The Bayou Classic (Grambling vs Southern) is very much like that. But, that doesn't mean the fans don't care about seeing "good competition", to the contrary, the rivalry and desire to win is as great as you'll find at Alabama vs Auburn or Michigan vs Ohio State.

But the key here is just that the teams be relatively competitive with respect to each other. That makes a competitive game, which is fun to watch. NOT that the competition on the field is competitive with the best in the nation. Those are two different things ...

(06-16-2017 05:28 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  What *is* different is that for the most part, the nature of the feelings surrounding the rivalry are positive. The cheering is for your team not so much against the other team, and the bragging and boasting by the winners is good-natured. IOW's, there is respect and affection for the other school despite the burning desire to whip them.

In contrast, and sadly, in many of the "big time" rivalry games, the atmosphere seems to be poisonous, characterized by lots of animus towards the other school, lots of "you suck!" bitterness/ugliness at the fan level.

I agree with this. More rivalries should be good-natured, rather than hateful/bitter. But on the other hand, it's tough to replicate the kind of passion that comes from a close/controversial loss ...

(06-16-2017 08:20 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(06-15-2017 09:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, that's not a good criterion. It rewards "strivers" rather than achievers, and it leads to dysfunctional behaviors. You end up with a bunch of directional schools with unrealistic dreams of being Alabama or Florida spending gobs of money they don't have, often by soaking their students with big fees, to chase that dream.

First of all, I respect your opinion. I hope you know that, and I hope you don't think I'm dismissing your opinion. I just respectfully disagree with parts of it.

Fair enough, and likewise.

I understand your definition of a "striver". What I don't understand is: 1) what is the "reward" you're talking about (getting to be in DI, as opposed to DII, DIII, or NAIA?), and 2) what is the achievement that makes an achiever (just attendance?) and what achievements have the SWAC and MEAC schools achieved other than relatively strong attendance in FCS football?

As I said, IMO, attendance is to me the gold standard for achievement, as it is very highly correlated with the stature of a program. Isn't that what an NCAA "division" is supposed to reflect? To me, it is. The SWAC and MEAC schools have good attendance relative to the rest of FCS, and long and established histories as well. That counts too, as college football is perhaps the most tradition-steeped major sport, along with major league baseball. I'm far more impressed with a MEAC team with a long tradition and 14k attendance than a newbie North Carolina Mountain Slopes with high student fees (and yet 8k attendance) to hire a better coach and field a team that can upset an FBS every few years as part of their 15 year Master Plan to get promoted to the Sun Belt Conference.


With regards to money:

- it's fine if you have the opinion that a school borrowing money to build athletic facilities and/or subsidizing the athletics budget with general operating budget money is wrong. But my opinion is that is each school's decision to make, and no one else's. No one should be able to prevent a school from doing those things, if it chooses to do that. The "market" will decide, if you will, because competition in higher education is very intense.

- students get to vote on paying school fees for athletics. If they vote yes, then that's that. There's really nothing more that can be said about that, though again I think it's fine for you to have the opinion that they should have voted no. But if they voted yes, then it's done. Again, let the "market" decide.

We both know that these fees aren't always decided democratically nor are they necessarily ground-up, grassroots student efforts, often they are top-down agendas pushed by administrators, and also they persist over time. E.g., a vote may have occurred at one time, but now it's 5 years later and the fee is still there even though the current students never voted for it. Many aren't even aware of it, it's just rolled in to all the other things they pay for.

That said, I'm not advocating that a school be prevented from doing these things, freedom means the discretion to do foolish things. I'm just saying the NCAA shouldn't incentivize and reward it by making division membership contingent on dollar investments.

(06-16-2017 05:28 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes and No. In my experience, yes HBCU games often do thrive as social events. The Bayou Classic (Grambling vs Southern) is very much like that. But, that doesn't mean the fans don't care about seeing "good competition", to the contrary, the rivalry and desire to win is as great as you'll find at Alabama vs Auburn or Michigan vs Ohio State.

But the key here is just that the teams be relatively competitive with respect to each other. That makes a competitive game, which is fun to watch. NOT that the competition on the field is competitive with the best in the nation. Those are two different things ...

Yes they are. But "best in the nation" is a relative term. We're talking FCS here. None of the FCS schools are any good in an objective sense, save for maybe North Dakota State.

(06-16-2017 05:28 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  What *is* different is that for the most part, the nature of the feelings surrounding the rivalry are positive. The cheering is for your team not so much against the other team, and the bragging and boasting by the winners is good-natured. IOW's, there is respect and affection for the other school despite the burning desire to whip them.

In contrast, and sadly, in many of the "big time" rivalry games, the atmosphere seems to be poisonous, characterized by lots of animus towards the other school, lots of "you suck!" bitterness/ugliness at the fan level.

I agree with this. More rivalries should be good-natured, rather than hateful/bitter. But on the other hand, it's tough to replicate the kind of passion that comes from a close/controversial loss ...

I've been to a few Bayou Classics that were very close, heartbreakers, etc. and sure emotions run high. but somehow most fans keep things in perspective without getting nasty about the other school. The sportsmanship level is just a lot higher than you see at FSU vs Florida, Texas vs Oklahoma, OSU vs Michigan, etc. Too much bile involved in many big-time rivalry games.

(06-16-2017 09:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  As I said, IMO, attendance is to me the gold standard for achievement, as it is very highly correlated with the stature of a program. Isn't that what an NCAA "division" is supposed to reflect? To me, it is. The SWAC and MEAC schools have good attendance relative to the rest of FCS, and long and established histories as well. That counts too, as college football is perhaps the most tradition-steeped major sport, along with major league baseball.

Let me ask this. If we pretended for a second that the NCAA allowed every school to have a separate classification for football than the rest of sports, would you be supportive of SWAC and MEAC schools keeping football in FCS while moving the rest to DII?

(06-16-2017 09:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I'm far more impressed with a MEAC team with a long tradition and 14k attendance than a newbie North Carolina Mountain Slopes with high student fees (and yet 8k attendance) to hire a better coach and field a team that can upset an FBS every few years as part of their 15 year Master Plan to get promoted to the Sun Belt Conference.

I understand this. I may not fully agree, but I get it.

(06-16-2017 09:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  We both know that these fees aren't always decided democratically nor are they necessarily ground-up, grassroots student efforts, often they are top-down agendas pushed by administrators, and also they persist over time. E.g., a vote may have occurred at one time, but now it's 5 years later and the fee is still there even though the current students never voted for it. Many aren't even aware of it, it's just rolled in to all the other things they pay for.

Heard this argument before, and I do have some sympathy for it. Perhaps in a perfect world, there would be some reasonable way to allow a revote every year or every few years on whether to continue the fee for athletics.

Thing is, if the fees were abolished, then I feel like the school would just raise tuition and use the raise in tuition the same as they were using the fee ... so in a sense a bit of a shell game anyway. But ....

(06-16-2017 09:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  That said, I'm not advocating that a school be prevented from doing these things, freedom means the discretion to do foolish things. I'm just saying the NCAA shouldn't incentivize and reward it by making division membership contingent on dollar investments.

OK, fair enough.

Would you be OK with it if the division rules also included specific requirements about needing the "subsidy" to be less than X% of the athletic dept revenues?

(06-16-2017 09:24 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes they are. But "best in the nation" is a relative term. We're talking FCS here. None of the FCS schools are any good in an objective sense, save for maybe North Dakota State.

What I was trying to get it is the idea that fans would be less interested in a competitive game between two HBCU rivals because of a perception that overall quality on the field was down, from some historical point in time, with some respect to a known high level. Of course, none are even near the FBS, let alone the NFL.

I still think enjoyment can be had watching even DIII level football, with a competitive game when the fans are into it.




Say, it looks there was one point missing from the "money" section, that I was hoping you would address. It might have been in an edit after you replied. Mind addressing that below?

"- lastly, you might feel that because federal tax dollars (via federal tuition assistance programs), as well as state tax dollars for public schools within a state, go to support schools, then as a taxpayer you do have a right to say that your tax money shouldn't be spent on athletics. My response to this is simple: I would be perfectly fine requiring any school that receives any such public money to maintain two separate accounts for incoming dollars, one from public money sources and the other from all other sources (donations, normal tuition payments, etc.), and then forbidding the school from using any of the money in the public money account to be spent directly or indirectly on athletics. If a school wants to use its "own" money (from the other sources account) for athletics, that's its business."