Brought by this article in the WD. I love how all of sudden, the rivalry is in jeopardy, like it hasn't been since March 27th.

http://www2.wataugademocrat.com/Sports/ ... -id-013244

So what say you? Do we continue scheduling SoCon schools as our FCS? Or do we not?

I personally say we schedule ETSU to a money game once a year for a while. Everyone else can wait a generation.

I am personally against playing ANY FCS teams unless we have no choice.

From what I'm reading they receive no benefit from playing us, nor do we. Thus, I say "see ya"

I don't think we can afford them, at least at the onset.

I don't see a problem with that as one of our token FCS schools.They can see how it's done in the BIG LEAGUES

I don't think any of them want to play us as most are bitter about us leaving.

We are just about guaranteed to have at least one FCS opponent every year if we intend to keep playing six home games. I say offer the game to the SoCon schools and if they don't want it, then there are lots of other FCS schools in the region that will take it. ETSU, Gardner-Webb, Coastal Carolina, NC A&T, NCCU, SC State; I think any of those would take the game.

appst89 wrote:We are just about guaranteed to have at least one FCS opponent every year if we intend to keep playing six home games. I say offer the game to the SoCon schools and if they don't want it, then there are lots of other FCS schools in the region that will take it. ETSU, Gardner-Webb, Coastal Carolina, NC A&T, NCCU, SC State; I think any of those would take the game.

I wouldn't mind William (aka Bill) and Mary, or Richmond either.

Maybe years down the road, we could schedule a game or two with Chatty or Furple, but for now, so long.
While some resentful SoCon schools try to get in a backhanded dig by saying they don't want to play us because they can make better money playing a big program like an Auburn or Florida, they need to realize that other FBS schools may follow the Big 10's lead and stop playing them altogether. Then they'd really be screwed.
I am glad that I support a football program that doesn't just play teams like Michigan, Georgia, and LSU to take a beating and collect a big check, but actually to COMPETE to the best of our ability, and on any given Saturday, to WIN! Our worst team in many years, with seemingly little to play for, battled Georgia to a 14-6 first half, and then never quit, even as the dawgs tried to run up the score at the end. I'm not saying we consistently challenge these top tier teams, but our mindset in playing them just isn't the same as some current SoCon schools. Maybe that's why we are moving up, and they are standing still.

appst89 wrote:We are just about guaranteed to have at least one FCS opponent every year if we intend to keep playing six home games. I say offer the game to the SoCon schools and if they don't want it, then there are lots of other FCS schools in the region that will take it. ETSU, Gardner-Webb, Coastal Carolina, NC A&T, NCCU, SC State; I think any of those would take the game.

That's my thoughts as well, it's not "if" we play an FCS school it's just which one. I think Western is always going to generate more $ and interest than any other FCS so they would be top on my list, but another SoCon would work better than several other random schools that no one really cares about.

It's a sad comment on Speir's that he didn't mention anything but money (i.e. competition) as a factor in scheduling (I know it's pretty obvious anyway but). I've never heard anyone say so completely that they were just whoring themselves out with the possibility of winning never entering the picture.

MAD Doctor wrote:I'm not saying we consistently challenge these top tier teams, but our mindset in playing them just isn't the same as some current SoCon schools. Maybe that's why we are moving up, and they are standing still.

This is true.

We will continue to schedule 1 FCS home game a year.

We should schedule the FCS team that we can get up here the cheapest that will bring the most fans.

The candidates will be A&T, ETSU, and G-Webb. CCU would be a good one on the years they don't play USC or Clemson.

WCU needs money and if their travel to App is less expensive than it would be to some other higher paying FBS opponents. With the relationship of our leaders and coaches and theirs the WCU fans may be disappointed that a future game if more likely to occur than they wish.

We must schedule SoCon teams in baseball and basketball as well.

appst89 wrote:We are just about guaranteed to have at least one FCS opponent every year if we intend to keep playing six home games. I say offer the game to the SoCon schools and if they don't want it, then there are lots of other FCS schools in the region that will take it. ETSU, Gardner-Webb, Coastal Carolina, NC A&T, NCCU, SC State; I think any of those would take the game.

+1

Since the athletic department has already stated that we will schedule one FCS team each year I think a SoCon team should be the first option. Having a team our fans are familiar with will be important to keep interest up for the game which obviously mean more revenue. At first it may be tough do to the current payouts teams are getting from P5 schools, but there is a lot of reason to believe that money will dry up. Citadel just signed on to play at GSU so I don't see why we wouldn't be able to do the same.

ASU-FTW wrote:I don't think any of them want to play us as most are bitter about us leaving.

Citadel has already signed on to play GSU. How is our situation any different?

I have no problem scheduling one FCS team per year. Not only does it get us another home game, it gets us what should be an easy win, which we'll need to try and get bowl-eligible.

However, the idea of preserving a "rivalry" with any FCS teams - let alone WCU - is laughable. Obviously maintaining such a rivalry would only be harmful to App in terms of establishing ourselves at the FBS level.

Beyond that, WCU has basically been a rivalry in name only for years anyway. They're fun to beat up on, but that's about it.

I think Speirs really expressed what the overriding problem WCU has, and that is lack of funds. They just cant afford to play mid majors, they must play as many big money games as possible, just to survive. I don't think its anything personal against App, its just what they have to do. Hopefully, someday when their program grows, and they are making more money, they can afford to start playing us again, but I don't see that day coming for a long, long time. It looks like this might be the end of one of the nation's longest active rivalries.

moehler wrote:I think Speirs really expressed what the overriding problem WCU has, and that is lack of funds. They just cant afford to play mid majors, they must play as many big money games as possible, just to survive. I don't think its anything personal against App, its just what they have to do. Hopefully, someday when their program grows, and they are making more money, they can afford to start playing us again, but I don't see that day coming for a long, long time. It looks like this might be the end of one of the nation's longest active rivalries.

I think you're right, it's nothing against App as much as it is that football is "THE" revenue sport and "hooking" is the only way WCU football can make revenue right now.

I've just never heard it as clearly stated or frankly admitted before.

To me it's kind of like telling the team "the ref's don't like us", after his statement I don't see why any kid on the team would give 100%, after all "we're just paid to be here to show up".

Maddog1956 wrote:

moehler wrote:I think Speirs really expressed what the overriding problem WCU has, and that is lack of funds. They just cant afford to play mid majors, they must play as many big money games as possible, just to survive. I don't think its anything personal against App, its just what they have to do. Hopefully, someday when their program grows, and they are making more money, they can afford to start playing us again, but I don't see that day coming for a long, long time. It looks like this might be the end of one of the nation's longest active rivalries.

I think you're right, it's nothing against App as much as it is that football is "THE" revenue sport and "hooking" is the only way WCU football can make revenue right now.

I've just never heard it as clearly stated or frankly admitted before.

To me it's kind of like telling the team "the ref's don't like us", after his statement I don't see why any kid on the team would give 100%, after all "we're just paid to be here to show up".

Please keep in mind what a coach says to the press can and usually is totally different than what is discussed within the confines of a team meeting ---

After reading over the two WCU boards as well as AGS, it surprises me that Can't fans are almost unanimous in their opinion that, if the WCU administration ever consents to a unilateral football game between App and Western in the future, they will stop donating to the school, burn all their purple and cut ties with their alma mater forever.

Seems a little dramatic.