(06-13-2018 07:10 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  It makes a lot of dollars and cents

(06-13-2018 08:40 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  South Alabama was able to find a replacement game in 2016. Not a big money game, but they scheduled Presbyterian at home..

(06-13-2018 09:01 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 08:40 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  South Alabama was able to find a replacement game in 2016. Not a big money game, but they scheduled Presbyterian at home..

Presbyterian was the team that was supposed to play Florida that week. It was either play them or no game altogether. Sun Belt rules prohibit members from playing road games against FCS teams, so once Presbyterian agreed, the game would have had to be in Mobile.

(06-14-2018 07:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  That's a strange rule, I wonder what the rationale is?

(06-13-2018 07:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 07:10 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  It makes a lot of dollars and cents

It could possibly have a bearing on issues like Miami vs Arkansas State. IIRC, Miami offered to make up their 2017 canceled game with ARKST in 2024 or thereabouts, but ARKST said no, on the grounds that this was unreasonably far into the future. Miami claimed that to the contrary, it isn't uncommon for games to be scheduled that far out.

(06-14-2018 02:37 PM)TexasTerror Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 07:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  That's a strange rule, I wonder what the rationale is?

Credibility.

For a league in its infancy at the time with many "new to I-A" programs, this was a move to give them credibility and to also have their schools avoid traveling on the road to I-AA/FCS schools in order to fill a schedule. Probably was more difficult for some than others.

(06-14-2018 03:15 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 07:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 07:10 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  It makes a lot of dollars and cents

It could possibly have a bearing on issues like Miami vs Arkansas State. IIRC, Miami offered to make up their 2017 canceled game with ARKST in 2024 or thereabouts, but ARKST said no, on the grounds that this was unreasonably far into the future. Miami claimed that to the contrary, it isn't uncommon for games to be scheduled that far out.

Difference is that the Miami vs Arkansas State was a return game of a 1 for 1 and not a payday game. Also can anyone say that LSU refused to pay South Alabama the $1.5m cancellation fee as called for in the contract. Miami refused to pay the cancellation fee to Arkansas State.

(06-14-2018 03:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 02:37 PM)TexasTerror Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 07:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  That's a strange rule, I wonder what the rationale is?

Credibility.

For a league in its infancy at the time with many "new to I-A" programs, this was a move to give them credibility and to also have their schools avoid traveling on the road to I-AA/FCS schools in order to fill a schedule. Probably was more difficult for some than others.

I sense some hypocrisy here. E.g., aren't G5 schools often complaining that P5 won't visit their stadiums? But then they have a rule like this regarding FCS?

(06-14-2018 04:28 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 03:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 02:37 PM)TexasTerror Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 07:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  That's a strange rule, I wonder what the rationale is?

Credibility.

For a league in its infancy at the time with many "new to I-A" programs, this was a move to give them credibility and to also have their schools avoid traveling on the road to I-AA/FCS schools in order to fill a schedule. Probably was more difficult for some than others.

I sense some hypocrisy here. E.g., aren't G5 schools often complaining that P5 won't visit their stadiums? But then they have a rule like this regarding FCS?

Apples and oranges. Sun Belt schools are FBS just like schools in the SEC, Big Ten, etc. are FBS. Theoretically that means we both have access to the same championship. Practically it is likely to never be the case without playoff expansion. But FCS is a different division altogether with different scholarship levels and their own championship. Besides, how many other FBS conferences travel to FCS teams? It would be akin to a DI basketball team traveling to play at a DII or NAIA team.

(06-14-2018 04:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 04:28 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 03:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 02:37 PM)TexasTerror Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 07:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  That's a strange rule, I wonder what the rationale is?

Credibility.

For a league in its infancy at the time with many "new to I-A" programs, this was a move to give them credibility and to also have their schools avoid traveling on the road to I-AA/FCS schools in order to fill a schedule. Probably was more difficult for some than others.

I sense some hypocrisy here. E.g., aren't G5 schools often complaining that P5 won't visit their stadiums? But then they have a rule like this regarding FCS?

Apples and oranges. Sun Belt schools are FBS just like schools in the SEC, Big Ten, etc. are FBS. Theoretically that means we both have access to the same championship. Practically it is likely to never be the case without playoff expansion. But FCS is a different division altogether with different scholarship levels and their own championship. Besides, how many other FBS conferences travel to FCS teams? It would be akin to a DI basketball team traveling to play at a DII or NAIA team.

Not really. FBS and FCS are both in the same division - Division I. They are subdivisions, not divisions. Similar to how Autonomy and non-Autonomy are subdivisions.

The real difference here is the SB having a rule against visiting FCS, while I don't know of any P5 that have a rule against visiting G5, or even visiting FCS for that matter.

I understand why G5 schools don't want to travel to FCS, just as I understand why P5 schools don't want to travel to G5.

But it's hypocritical to complain about the group above you not wanting to visit you when you have an actual rule against visiting the group below you.

(06-14-2018 05:05 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 04:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 04:28 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 03:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 02:37 PM)TexasTerror Wrote:  Credibility.

For a league in its infancy at the time with many "new to I-A" programs, this was a move to give them credibility and to also have their schools avoid traveling on the road to I-AA/FCS schools in order to fill a schedule. Probably was more difficult for some than others.

I sense some hypocrisy here. E.g., aren't G5 schools often complaining that P5 won't visit their stadiums? But then they have a rule like this regarding FCS?

Apples and oranges. Sun Belt schools are FBS just like schools in the SEC, Big Ten, etc. are FBS. Theoretically that means we both have access to the same championship. Practically it is likely to never be the case without playoff expansion. But FCS is a different division altogether with different scholarship levels and their own championship. Besides, how many other FBS conferences travel to FCS teams? It would be akin to a DI basketball team traveling to play at a DII or NAIA team.

Not really. FBS and FCS are both in the same division - Division I. They are subdivisions, not divisions. Similar to how Autonomy and non-Autonomy are subdivisions.

The real difference here is the SB having a rule against visiting FCS, while I don't know of any P5 that have a rule against visiting G5, or even visiting FCS for that matter.

I understand why G5 schools don't want to travel to FCS, just as I understand why P5 schools don't want to travel to G5.

But it's hypocritical to complain about the group above you not wanting to visit you when you have an actual rule against visiting the group below you.

The comparison you are making between P5 to G5 and FBS to FCS is not the same. FBS teams can't play in the FCS playoffs, nor can they play in ours. P5 and G5 teams can both (theoretically) make the FBS playoffs. That in essence makes the comparison apples and oranges. And you are arguing a point in a thread about South Alabama playing @ LSU when that argument doesn't exist in this thread.

(06-13-2018 06:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  LSU and South Alabama will play a football game in Baton Rouge on September 28, 2024.

Is this fallout from 2016? LSU and USA were supposed to play in BR on November 19th that year, but when LSU at Florida was canceled because of hurricane Matthew, LSU canceled the USA game so as to make up the game vs Florida in Baton Rouge that same date.

At the time of the cancellation, it was universally reported that LSU would pay USA the $1.5m cancellation fee as called for in the contract. But maybe a deal was cut that eliminated or reduced that payment in exchange for scheduling a new game? I don't know.

In a press release, the USA coach didn't seem to mind that, like the 2016 game, this is a one-fer, with no return trip by LSU to USA:

"It will be great to play a team that is perennially in the top 10-15 in the country, one that is an SEC power and has been among the best in the region for the longest time," South Alabama coach Steve Campbell said in a press release. "It also gives us an opportunity to play a big game in an area that we recruit. It's always fun to play in those environments, that's why you sign up to come to South Alabama, to play in big games like that."

https://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2018/06/south_alabama_football_adds_20.html

(06-18-2018 09:34 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 06:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  LSU and South Alabama will play a football game in Baton Rouge on September 28, 2024.

Is this fallout from 2016? LSU and USA were supposed to play in BR on November 19th that year, but when LSU at Florida was canceled because of hurricane Matthew, LSU canceled the USA game so as to make up the game vs Florida in Baton Rouge that same date.

At the time of the cancellation, it was universally reported that LSU would pay USA the $1.5m cancellation fee as called for in the contract. But maybe a deal was cut that eliminated or reduced that payment in exchange for scheduling a new game? I don't know.

In a press release, the USA coach didn't seem to mind that, like the 2016 game, this is a one-fer, with no return trip by LSU to USA:

"It will be great to play a team that is perennially in the top 10-15 in the country, one that is an SEC power and has been among the best in the region for the longest time," South Alabama coach Steve Campbell said in a press release. "It also gives us an opportunity to play a big game in an area that we recruit. It's always fun to play in those environments, that's why you sign up to come to South Alabama, to play in big games like that."

https://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2018/06/south_alabama_football_adds_20.html

No, LSU cut the check to USA for the game. As they should have. This is a new deal.

Granted, it was really Florida's fault, and USA had a real cause of action against them for intentional interference with a contract, but USA decided to just cash the check from LSU at the time.

(06-18-2018 04:33 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  A bodybag game at LSU isn't compensation for USA in any way, shape, or form.

If any FBS school in the country called up LSU and said, "We'll play 1 game against you in Baton Rouge with no return game and a modest payout," LSU would probably accept the offer and try to fit them in the schedule.

(06-18-2018 05:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 04:33 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  A bodybag game at LSU isn't compensation for USA in any way, shape, or form.

If any FBS school in the country called up LSU and said, "We'll play 1 game against you in Baton Rouge with no return game and a modest payout," LSU would probably accept the offer and try to fit them in the schedule.

Well, compensation for what? Originally, USA and LSU were supposed to play a game in November, 2016. LSU canceled that game when the Florida situation arose, so .... playing that game at a later date does restore the status quo ante in a way. USA lost a game at LSU, now they will play a game at LSU.