http://www.postandcourier.com/article/2 ... -of-league

Q: What are your thoughts on Elon and Davidson being eligible for SoCon championships in 2013-14, their last year in the league? Other leagues have made departing members ineligible.

A: That topic is on our agenda. My approach is, we should allow them to compete for championships, but I don’t think we should allow them to host conference championships. I know allowing them to compete is not a feeling shared by all of our core seven, but that’s my recommendation.

App isn't scheduled to host any SoCon Championships in 2013-14 anyway so that's not a big deal. However voting on departing members being eligible for conference titles is a big deal. I seriously doubt it'll happen, but the fact that's it's being discussed is cause for pause.

Also, read the parts where Iamaniro talks about "Linear TV" and other forms of video for a good laugh.

The CAA had that written into their bylaws, the SoCon does not.

If they don't honor the championship eligibility while we are members, I say we don't honor the exit fee we all agreed to.

Changing the rules mid-way through a game is what 5 year olds do.

Saint3333 wrote:The CAA had that written into their bylaws, the SoCon does not.

If they don't honor the championship eligibility while we are members, I say we don't honor the exit fee we all agreed to.

Changing the rules mid-way through a game is what 5 year olds do.

I agree, but we've seen Iamaniro broach childishness before.

Saint3333 wrote:The CAA had that written into their bylaws, the SoCon does not.

If they don't honor the championship eligibility while we are members, I say we don't honor the exit fee we all agreed to.

Changing the rules mid-way through a game is what 5 year olds do.

This is the conference that had a TV with PBS. Nothing would surprise me at this point.

Saint3333 wrote:The CAA had that written into their bylaws, the SoCon does not.

If they don't honor the championship eligibility while we are members, I say we don't honor the exit fee we all agreed to.

Changing the rules mid-way through a game is what 5 year olds do.

If it's not in the bylaws and they vote to make us ineligible then all four schools should file suit against the SoCon. It might be the only time ever that ASU, GSU, Davidson and Elon could find common ground.

Imamoron is really showing his true colors.

I love the spin job of the term "core members." How about, "those with no place better to go."

Before any member of the CAA jumped ship they knew they were forfeiting eligibility in any CAA championship when they made their decision. Much like App knew they would not be eligible for the autobid or at-large spots for the FCS playoffs and thus the official SoCon football championship.

I have no issue in playing by the rules, but when start changing the rules in the middle of a season, transition period etc. I get a little fired up.

Gonzo wrote:I love the spin job of the term "core members." How about, "those with no place better to go."

My guess is that most of those folks are happy where they are and have no interest in moving. That doesn't mean they are necessarily happy about all the departures. But then again...

Furman, Citadel and Wofford have no desire to leave, likely ever. Samford just left the OVC, so I doubt they want to bolt either. I'd imagine UTC is very happy with the conference bringing in ETSU and with Davidson gone, they've got a real shot to contend for NCAA tournament berths every year.

However, I think Western/UNCG would be out the door in a heartbeat if they had a better alternative.

So where did the rumor start that we were not eligible for the conference championship this year? Sounds to me like it is not decided yet. Did I miss something?

The non-eligibility that's been discussed is regarding football only. In theory, we are supposed to be business as usual in all other sports.

I like what somebody said about if they vote us inelegible in the rest of the stuff, we should withhold the exit fee. That would be a petty, bush league thing for the SoCon to do to the departing schools. But then again, many people think SoCon is synonymous with bush-league.

bcoach wrote:So where did the rumor start that we were not eligible for the conference championship this year? Sounds to me like it is not decided yet. Did I miss something?

There is no rumor, just Imamoron's quote in the first post that some SoCon schools may not be in favor of allowing the departing schools to compete for championships in their last year. Everything after that is conjecture and speculation.

bcoach wrote:So where did the rumor start that we were not eligible for the conference championship this year? Sounds to me like it is not decided yet. Did I miss something?

No you're right, it has not been decided. Still, it is a little alarming when the commissioner himself says "I know allowing them to compete is not a feeling shared by all of our core seven."

Hopefully they don't try to pull the rug out from under us like that but we'll have to see. I just don't like the idea that it's even an option to change the rules. Voting on future policy is one thing but when we've been up front with the SoCon about our intention for years, it would be very unfair to vote all of our student-athletes out of championship contention now, after the fact. Shouldn't even be a question.

HeffnerIV wrote:

Saint3333 wrote:The CAA had that written into their bylaws, the SoCon does not.

If they don't honor the championship eligibility while we are members, I say we don't honor the exit fee we all agreed to.

Changing the rules mid-way through a game is what 5 year olds do.

I agree, but we've seen Iamaniro broach childishness before.

In all fairness, Iamamoron clearly states that his preference is to allow the teams to compete for championships, but the presidents & chancellors have the final say.

And what the hell is "Linear TV? We don't have any "inventory?" What is this, K-Mart? Why don't these people speak like normal people?

So is there a different rule for football? I have been led to believe that we CAN NOT compete for a conference championship in football. I have even heard that Cobb said he would buy the team rings if they won enough games that they would have won.

AppinATL wrote:

HeffnerIV wrote:

Saint3333 wrote:The CAA had that written into their bylaws, the SoCon does not.

If they don't honor the championship eligibility while we are members, I say we don't honor the exit fee we all agreed to.

Changing the rules mid-way through a game is what 5 year olds do.

I agree, but we've seen Iamaniro broach childishness before.

In all fairness, Iamamoron clearly states that his preference is to allow the teams to compete for championships, but the presidents & chancellors have the final say.

And what the hell is "Linear TV? We don't have any "inventory?" What is this, K-Mart? Why don't these people speak like normal people?

In K-Mart's defense, I think they are speaking like normal people.

bcoach wrote:So is there a different rule for football? I have been led to believe that we CAN NOT compete for a conference championship in football. I have even heard that Cobb said he would buy the team rings if they won enough games that they would have won.

Since we will be adding scholarships over the next two years, football is ineligible while they transition from FCS to FBS classifications. Since all other sports will remain classified DI, they are eligible unless the conference decides to declare otherwise on their own.

bcoach wrote:So is there a different rule for football? I have been led to believe that we CAN NOT compete for a conference championship in football. I have even heard that Cobb said he would buy the team rings if they won enough games that they would have won.

We are ineligible for football because we will be competing with more scholarships. All the other sports in the SoCon can play at the same level of scholarships that we do.

hapapp wrote:

bcoach wrote:So is there a different rule for football? I have been led to believe that we CAN NOT compete for a conference championship in football. I have even heard that Cobb said he would buy the team rings if they won enough games that they would have won.

We are ineligible for football because we will be competing with more scholarships. All the other sports in the SoCon can play at the same level of scholarships that we do.

OK so we were able to play more scholarship players this year. That makes sense. Thanks

asumike83 wrote:

bcoach wrote:So is there a different rule for football? I have been led to believe that we CAN NOT compete for a conference championship in football. I have even heard that Cobb said he would buy the team rings if they won enough games that they would have won.

Since we will be adding scholarships over the next two years, football is ineligible while they transition from FCS to FBS classifications. Since all other sports will remain classified DI, they are eligible unless the conference decides to declare otherwise on their own.

It is my understanding that, for football, we can't get the conference autobid to the playoffs and we can't get an at-large to the playoffs, but we can technically win the conference. There's just no reward from the conference for doing so. It is my understanding that if we or GSU win the conference, we'll still get commish's cup points.