Jump to content
sr1

Big 8 will be down to 6 teams.

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, Miner_Pride said:

Sorry if this has been addressed.. But is it safe to say Linton's game with Boonville in 2019 is a one year thing?   I don't really know.. haven't seen any of the Miner folks to ask.  It replaced our series with Cardinal Ritter. 

It’s possible that another PAC school may take over this contract. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SWFootballfan said:

I would think it would be a two year deal for the 2019 and 2020 season. The possible start date that I heard was 2021 for the new schedules to start if the merger gets finalized. With this game being week 5 I don't see these two teams playing each other past the 2020 season. Unless the game is moved to week 1/2. 

I wouldn't see this being a long term series... course I didn't see Providence being more than 2 years either...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Titan32 said:

Still a lot of unanswered questions.  I think this one will linger on for a while.

PAC meeting is today. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SWFootballfan said:

I would think it would be a two year deal for the 2019 and 2020 season. The possible start date that I heard was 2021 for the new schedules to start if the merger gets finalized. With this game being week 5 I don't see these two teams playing each other past the 2020 season. Unless the game is moved to week 1/2. 

I thought the start date was 2020.  More than likely one of the reasons Mt. Carmel was asked to leave a year before they had to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2019 at 3:31 PM, sr1 said:

PAC meeting is today. 

News, decisions, explanations............................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2019 at 5:46 AM, Bulldoggit said:

News, decisions, explanations............................

I haven't heard of any decisions or "votes" coming out of it.  I think more spit balling than anything else.  I am sure there are guys here that know more than me.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2019 at 1:33 PM, Miner_Pride said:

Sorry if this has been addressed.. But is it safe to say Linton's game with Boonville in 2019 is a one year thing?   I don't really know.. haven't seen any of the Miner folks to ask.  It replaced our series with Cardinal Ritter. 

This makes me curious too. North Knox is set to begin playing Boonville this season also. It's supposed to be a four year deal. Could make things interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So apparently... VL and Jasper are still entertaining offers from the SIAC.  Whether this is for all sports, or just football I'm not sure. It'll be interesting to see where this goes. Vincennes already plays all SIAC schools in basketball (minus Castle) and would like to add more Eville opponents on their football schedule. Jasper is probably pushing harder for this because of the sectional competition they face in both sports.

Obviously, this would split the remaining Big 8 teams permanently. I could see VL wanting to keep these schools together in a Big PAC division.

Jasper could care less based on what I've heard...shocker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a few schools are making sure they have other options in case the Big8/PAC thing falls through, always a wise move in a situation like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SEAL_63 said:

So apparently... VL and Jasper are still entertaining offers from the SIAC.  Whether this is for all sports, or just football I'm not sure. It'll be interesting to see where this goes. Vincennes already plays all SIAC schools in basketball (minus Castle) and would like to add more Eville opponents on their football schedule. Jasper is probably pushing harder for this because of the sectional competition they face in both sports.

Obviously, this would split the remaining Big 8 teams permanently. I could see VL wanting to keep these schools together in a Big PAC division.

Jasper could care less based on what I've heard...shocker.

It surprises me somewhat that Vincennes would want to add the likes of Reitz, Central, Memorial, Castle to their schedule..   No question it would stiffen up their schedule pretty intently! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SEAL_63 said:

So apparently... VL and Jasper are still entertaining offers from the SIAC.  Whether this is for all sports, or just football I'm not sure. It'll be interesting to see where this goes. Vincennes already plays all SIAC schools in basketball (minus Castle) and would like to add more Eville opponents on their football schedule. Jasper is probably pushing harder for this because of the sectional competition they face in both sports.

Obviously, this would split the remaining Big 8 teams permanently. I could see VL wanting to keep these schools together in a Big PAC division.

Jasper could care less based on what I've heard...shocker.

I'm just a guy with no real inside knowledge, but I would be very surprised if the SIAC did anything that pertained to only one sport.  The main reason is there is just no need.  The conference is very stable across schools and sports.  I would be shocked if the SIAC ever expanded beyond 8 teams bc with 8 schools, the SIAC vote will always be controlled by the 5 EVSC public schools, and the ADs of those 5 schools all report to 1 head AD at the main HQ.  So, in essence, the vote is controlled by 1 person.  Add 2 more schools and the balance of power could be disrupted.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2019 at 10:57 AM, SEAL_63 said:

So apparently... VL and Jasper are still entertaining offers from the SIAC.  Whether this is for all sports, or just football I'm not sure. It'll be interesting to see where this goes. Vincennes already plays all SIAC schools in basketball (minus Castle) and would like to add more Eville opponents on their football schedule. Jasper is probably pushing harder for this because of the sectional competition they face in both sports.

Obviously, this would split the remaining Big 8 teams permanently. I could see VL wanting to keep these schools together in a Big PAC division.

Jasper could care less based on what I've heard...shocker.

I was told the Jasper, Boonville, and Vincennes are all together on making the football conference happen with the PAC. I haven't heard anything about them talking to the SIAC at all. I think Tango laid out the reasons why the SIAC would really have no reason or interest to add Vincennes and Jasper. Adding them just doesn't make sense to the SIAC. I did hear that Tecumseh is acting like they don't want to be in the PAC small school division. Without them, this would make the division 7 and 7 without them. Still, a lot of details to work out. It will be interesting to what schools they propose to be in the Big school division. Does Mt. Vernon go to the Big division or does HH. Both schools enrollments are very close. Most people would think HH would want to move to the Big division. I have heard mixed options on this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SWFootballfan said:

I was told the Jasper, Boonville, and Vincennes are all together on making the football conference happen with the PAC. I haven't heard anything about them talking to the SIAC at all. I think Tango laid out the reasons why the SIAC would really have no reason or interest to add Vincennes and Jasper. Adding them just doesn't make sense to the SIAC. I did hear that Tecumseh is acting like they don't want to be in the PAC small school division. Without them, this would make the division 7 and 7 without them. Still, a lot of details to work out. It will be interesting to what schools they propose to be in the Big school division. Does Mt. Vernon go to the Big division or does HH. Both schools enrollments are very close. Most people would think HH would want to move to the Big division. I have heard mixed options on this. 

Tecumseh doesn’t want to play Southridge is what I’ve been told.

Small School: SR, NP, TC, PC, FP, SS, Tec

Big School: Jas, BV, VL, GS, HH, Wa, PR, MTV 

I have heard Washington wants in small school division so maybe that happens if Tecumseh gets out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally feel like the best option is without tecumseh. 

 

Put mt Vernon in the small school division and each team now has 6 division games and 3 non conference games. Lots of flexibility for teams to play teams they would like to keep on their schedule and keep some good rivalries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SWFootballfan said:

I was told the Jasper, Boonville, and Vincennes are all together on making the football conference happen with the PAC. I haven't heard anything about them talking to the SIAC at all. I think Tango laid out the reasons why the SIAC would really have no reason or interest to add Vincennes and Jasper. Adding them just doesn't make sense to the SIAC. I did hear that Tecumseh is acting like they don't want to be in the PAC small school division. Without them, this would make the division 7 and 7 without them. Still, a lot of details to work out. It will be interesting to what schools they propose to be in the Big school division. Does Mt. Vernon go to the Big division or does HH. Both schools enrollments are very close. Most people would think HH would want to move to the Big division. I have heard mixed options on this. 

The talk is HH wants to be in the big division but isn't crazy about Jasper being in there since they play them anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

The talk is HH wants to be in the big division but isn't crazy about Jasper being in there since they play them anyway.

I also could see how they would think some of the games like Forest Park and South Spencer might drive more gate than  Mt. Vernon and Princeton or Washington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just putting this back out there for reference.

Enrollment:

1. Jasper 1105

2. Boonville 914

3. Washington 746

4. Vincennes Lincoln 735

5. Gibson Southern 703

6. Princeton 617

7. Mt. Vernon 603

8. Heritage Hills 601

9. Pike Central 563

10. Southridge 520

11. North Posey 450

12. Tell City 430

13. South Spencer 421

14. Forest Park 387

15. Tecumseh 302

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2019 at 1:11 PM, Titan32 said:

I also could see how they would think some of the games like Forest Park and South Spencer might drive more gate than  Mt. Vernon and Princeton or Washington.

If the divisions ended up 7 and 7 (leaving out Tecumseh), then there would still be 3 games for non-conference play.  Perhaps the setup would provide for a "cross-over" week and give schools the option of playing a natural rival or a rotating opponent.

For example - HH/SS, Jasper/SR, and NP/MtV would allow for natural rivalries. (Like PU/IU football is a protected rivalry.)  If a school didn't have  traditional rivalry, then there would be a rotation of other division opponent for that spot.

I think I would prefer that as a player/coach/AD - knowing who that opponent would be rather than waiting until week 8 to see who the opponent is based on record like the WIC and EIAC currently do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, oldtimeqb said:

If the divisions ended up 7 and 7 (leaving out Tecumseh), then there would still be 3 games for non-conference play.  Perhaps the setup would provide for a "cross-over" week and give schools the option of playing a natural rival or a rotating opponent.

For example - HH/SS, Jasper/SR, and NP/MtV would allow for natural rivalries. (Like PU/IU football is a protected rivalry.)  If a school didn't have  traditional rivalry, then there would be a rotation of other division opponent for that spot.

I think I would prefer that as a player/coach/AD - knowing who that opponent would be rather than waiting until week 8 to see who the opponent is based on record like the WIC and EIAC currently do.

I could see this as a potential scenario.  I could see GS paired up in the watermelon bowl with NP.  Perhaps they could set it up such that if you are paired with a cross-division rivalry, if both teams agree on a given season, they could both opt out to play a 3rd non-conference game instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

I could see this as a potential scenario.  I could see GS paired up in the watermelon bowl with NP.  Perhaps they could set it up such that if you are paired with a cross-division rivalry, if both teams agree on a given season, they could both opt out to play a 3rd non-conference game instead.

I had GS/NP as the protected rivalry for Watermelon Bowl purposes, but then changed it.  A lot would depend on the dividing line.  If MtV played in the smaller division, then that's exactly what I would suggest.

Large - JAS, BV, WAS, VL, GS, PT, HH

Small - MTV, PC, SR, FP, SS, NP, TC

That would produce the ability to have JAS/SR, GS/NP, and HH/SS as neighbor school-district rivalries.   The other 8 could be matched up on a rotating basis.  Hopefully a competitive slate of games would result in some new rivalries and larger ticket gates for schools that traditionally haven't had success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the bottom line for if Tecumseh stays out of this is that Mt Vernon has to be in the smaller school even though HH is the next smallest....otherwise all that has been done is Gs joins the big 8 under the banner of the PAC 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion- Tecumseh has absolutely NO leverage to say what they want/don’t want. How they’ve been allowed to operate as a member of the PAC for this long with basically dropping out of football is beyond me. They are either in this merger, or OUT all together in every sport. 

Every time I read this thread I just get ticked off...wrong message to send to kids/program- but I’ve been down that road. 

 

Carry on

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jets said:

In my opinion- Tecumseh has absolutely NO leverage to say what they want/don’t want. How they’ve been allowed to operate as a member of the PAC for this long with basically dropping out of football is beyond me. They are either in this merger, or OUT all together in every sport. 

Every time I read this thread I just get ticked off...wrong message to send to kids/program- but I’ve been down that road. 

 

Carry on

I know back in the Southwest Seven days.... there were attempts to get Tecumseh involved... seems logical on all levels of competition.. other than the long haul.  But back then we had Wood Memorial in that mix too.  Never happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just realized at our coaches meeting last night...we(NK)will probably have to find 3 new teams if this goes through...we have booneville, Vincennes, and Washington on the schedule...yikes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...