2021 Spring Season

[apaladin]

My opinion here, but I think this is the bigger risk to a spring season -- playing two "seasons" in the same calendar year.

Indiana State, for instance, opts out for that reason.

nah

Agree, total BS. You can play up to 16 in a regular season in 4 months. 19 in 9 months is a problem? So 3-4 game with an extra 5 months is a problem, remembering you’re goung to be practicing or training if you’re not playing? I will go with what CCH said when asked about it. “I don’t see it being a problem”. If I were an ISU player I would be heading straight for the transfer portal.

[gofurman]

23 teams out huh/? didn't realize it was that many. Any local southern teams not playing in the spring?

[apaladin]

23 teams out huh/? didn't realize it was that many. Any local southern teams not playing in the spring?

All 13 conferences participating in the spring except the Ivy League. 104 out of 127 teams are playing. Some teams played in the fall and will not play or for other reasons. Below is a breakdown by conference of teams not playing.
Big Sky- Sacramento St.
Big South- Campbell, Hampton, N. Alabama
CAA- Towson
Ivy- 8 teams
MEAC- Bethune-Cookman, Fka. A&M
MVC- Indiana St.
NEC- St. Francis
Ohio Valley- E. Kentucky
Patriot- Georgetown
Southlsnd- Abilene Christian, Central Arkansas, Houston Baptist, S.F. Austin

[apaladin]

Channel 4 tonight had a segment on WC foo5ball, they start practice next week. Said the would talk to CCH later in the week.

[The Jackal]

I have not seen anything from the SoCon, but here is how the CAA proposes to handle tiebreakers. Again, with only, I think, 5 at large bids available for the post season, winning the conference autobid is going to be a big deal.

As the post notes, the CAA's football set up is way more complicated than the SoCon's even before you consider the potential for game cancellations and postponements.

[FUBeAR]

Flyers flinch

[The Jackal]

My opinion here, but I think this is the bigger risk to a spring season -- playing two "seasons" in the same calendar year.

Indiana State, for instance, opts out for that reason.

nah

Agree, total BS. You can play up to 16 in a regular season in 4 months. 19 in 9 months is a problem? So 3-4 game with an extra 5 months is a problem, remembering you’re goung to be practicing or training if you’re not playing? I will go with what CCH said when asked about it. “I don’t see it being a problem”. If I were an ISU player I would be heading straight for the transfer portal.

You don't have to agree with the proposition, but let's not pretend like it isn't a consideration for FCS schools.

This from the Citadel's AD

″(Spring football) is not something we were in favor of,” Capaccio told the board. “I think everybody knows that. I just didn’t see a way to play all our sports, and particularly football, in the spring. And then going on to play a fall schedule, you are looking at 18, 19, 21 games over a period of eight or nine months, which is not realistic. When you talk about student-athlete health and safety, that does not fall in line.

“We are planning on playing, but I would not be surprised if that changes in two weeks.”

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/c ... 17618.html

[Furmanoid]

Why would their plans change in 2 weeks? What happens in 2 weeks?

[Roundball]

Why would their plans change in 2 weeks? What happens in 2 weeks?

Forget thinking that far ahead. Heck, plans could change today.

[FUBeAR]

My opinion here, but I think this is the bigger risk to a spring season -- playing two "seasons" in the same calendar year.

Indiana State, for instance, opts out for that reason.

nah

Agree, total BS. You can play up to 16 in a regular season in 4 months. 19 in 9 months is a problem? So 3-4 game with an extra 5 months is a problem, remembering you’re goung to be practicing or training if you’re not playing? I will go with what CCH said when asked about it. “I don’t see it being a problem”. If I were an ISU player I would be heading straight for the transfer portal.

You don't have to agree with the proposition, but let's not pretend like it isn't a consideration for FCS schools.

This from the Citadel's AD

″(Spring football) is not something we were in favor of,” Capaccio told the board. “I think everybody knows that. I just didn’t see a way to play all our sports, and particularly football, in the spring. And then going on to play a fall schedule, you are looking at 18, 19, 21 games over a period of eight or nine months, which is not realistic. When you talk about student-athlete health and safety, that does not fall in line.

“We are planning on playing, but I would not be surprised if that changes in two weeks.”

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/c ... 17618.html

Having played Football for 14 years & Coached for about the same number, I don’t believe the concern over the number of games is a valid consideration. It is definitely a consideration that will be expressed by Administrators, AD’s & some Coaches, but that doesn’t make it valid. As the NFL & FBS proved, Football can be done in ‘the midst of a pandemic’ - so the only valid reason for FCS Schools not playing this spring is financial...and there’s nothing wrong with that. Schools should be good stewards of their finances and if it doesn’t make sense, financially, to play...then they shouldn’t play. FUBeAR wishes they would be transparent about their reasons, but transparency is not real popular these days, is it?

[Furmanoid]

FUBeAR, I think you meant that transparency isn’t popular EXCEPT in Congress and the incoming administration, right? You need to be clear about stuff like that.

As I was saying in the summer, aside from travel expenses, which shouldn’t be all that much, the money is already spent. Playing games could generate at least a trickle of revenue (or more if we want) so I don’t even get the financial argument. Of course I said this in August when I said other stupid stuff like that the pandemic would prolly get worse after football season.

[The Jackal]

My opinion here, but I think this is the bigger risk to a spring season -- playing two "seasons" in the same calendar year.

Indiana State, for instance, opts out for that reason.

nah

Agree, total BS. You can play up to 16 in a regular season in 4 months. 19 in 9 months is a problem? So 3-4 game with an extra 5 months is a problem, remembering you’re goung to be practicing or training if you’re not playing? I will go with what CCH said when asked about it. “I don’t see it being a problem”. If I were an ISU player I would be heading straight for the transfer portal.

You don't have to agree with the proposition, but let's not pretend like it isn't a consideration for FCS schools.

This from the Citadel's AD

″(Spring football) is not something we were in favor of,” Capaccio told the board. “I think everybody knows that. I just didn’t see a way to play all our sports, and particularly football, in the spring. And then going on to play a fall schedule, you are looking at 18, 19, 21 games over a period of eight or nine months, which is not realistic. When you talk about student-athlete health and safety, that does not fall in line.

“We are planning on playing, but I would not be surprised if that changes in two weeks.”

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/c ... 17618.html

Having played Football for 14 years & Coached for about the same number, I don’t believe the concern over the number of games is a valid consideration. It is definitely a consideration that will be expressed by Administrators, AD’s & some Coaches, but that doesn’t make it valid. As the NFL & FBS proved, Football can be done in ‘the midst of a pandemic’ - so the only valid reason for FCS Schools not playing this spring is financial...and there’s nothing wrong with that. Schools should be good stewards of their finances and if it doesn’t make sense, financially, to play...then they shouldn’t play. FUBeAR wishes they would be transparent about their reasons, but transparency is not real popular these days, is it?

Sure, but that's just, like, your opinion, man.

[FUBeAR]

As I was saying in the summer, aside from travel expenses, which shouldn’t be all that much, the money is already spent. Playing games could generate at least a trickle of revenue (or more if we want) so I don’t even get the financial argument. Of course I said this in August when I said other stupid stuff like that the pandemic would prolly get worse after football season.

Delta is cost of testing to play 8 GAMES in a Spring Season vs. cost of Testing just to have Spring Practice +/- net loss/net profit of hosting 4 home games +/- net loss/net profit of 4 away games.

[FUBeAR]

My opinion here, but I think this is the bigger risk to a spring season -- playing two "seasons" in the same calendar year.

Indiana State, for instance, opts out for that reason.

nah

Agree, total BS. You can play up to 16 in a regular season in 4 months. 19 in 9 months is a problem? So 3-4 game with an extra 5 months is a problem, remembering you’re goung to be practicing or training if you’re not playing? I will go with what CCH said when asked about it. “I don’t see it being a problem”. If I were an ISU player I would be heading straight for the transfer portal.

You don't have to agree with the proposition, but let's not pretend like it isn't a consideration for FCS schools.

This from the Citadel's AD

″(Spring football) is not something we were in favor of,” Capaccio told the board. “I think everybody knows that. I just didn’t see a way to play all our sports, and particularly football, in the spring. And then going on to play a fall schedule, you are looking at 18, 19, 21 games over a period of eight or nine months, which is not realistic. When you talk about student-athlete health and safety, that does not fall in line.

“We are planning on playing, but I would not be surprised if that changes in two weeks.”

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/c ... 17618.html

Having played Football for 14 years & Coached for about the same number, I don’t believe the concern over the number of games is a valid consideration. It is definitely a consideration that will be expressed by Administrators, AD’s & some Coaches, but that doesn’t make it valid. As the NFL & FBS proved, Football can be done in ‘the midst of a pandemic’ - so the only valid reason for FCS Schools not playing this spring is financial...and there’s nothing wrong with that. Schools should be good stewards of their finances and if it doesn’t make sense, financially, to play...then they shouldn’t play. FUBeAR wishes they would be transparent about their reasons, but transparency is not real popular these days, is it?

Sure, but that's just, like, your opinion, man.

yep...an opinion informed by experience.

[Furmanoid]

As I was saying in the summer, aside from travel expenses, which shouldn’t be all that much, the money is already spent. Playing games could generate at least a trickle of revenue (or more if we want) so I don’t even get the financial argument. Of course I said this in August when I said other stupid stuff like that the pandemic would prolly get worse after football season.

Delta is cost of testing to play 8 GAMES in a Spring Season vs. cost of Testing just to have Spring Practice +/- net loss/net profit of hosting 4 home games +/- net loss/net profit of 4 away games.

I guess the key is how much testing they choose to do for a season vs. practice. Not sure I understand why it would be different but I’m sure it is. I also wonder what sort of testing costs they’ve been able to negotiate. Seems like cost per test would be pretty low by now.