Agreed Nicky. Lacking that "inside knowledge", we all have our opinions and it is fun to hash them out in these threads. My only issue is when posters confuse opinion for fact, then double down on the assertion of fact despite data that would infer otherwise.
Discouraging, But you Never Can Tell...
- Thread starter Limbo Land
- Start date
- Status
Agreed Nicky. Lacking that "inside knowledge", we all have our opinions and it is fun to hash them out in these threads. My only issue is when posters confuse opinion for fact, then double down on the assertion of fact despite data that would infer otherwise.
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2012
- Messages
- 1,228
- Reaction Score
- 368
BC1978,
Your article suggests that Maryland may have violated Maryland Law and did not conform to the requirements of the Open Meetings Act. You can be more definitive. The Maryland Board that oversees this has conclusively determined that Maryland did violate the Open Meetings Act. It has ruled on the case.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...6f2380-81c3-11e2-a350-49866afab584_story.html
It is in fact a fact. But the poster you are working with is so far in fantasy land teaching moments are beyond value. You're dealing with way too much density. But I thought I'd let you know that what you are suggesting is actually fact.
Leave it to Maryland, however, to pass a toothless law. It's par for the course in Maryland. There is no penalty for violating the Maryland Open Meetings Act.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2014
- Messages
- 297
- Reaction Score
- 722
BC1978, as my avatar indicates, I'm a Maryland fan (and grad alum). But I'm not particularly partisan to any conference. Frankly, I can find good and bad about all the P5 conferences, including the ACC. They have excellent schools and have stayed, for the most part, geographically the east coast, to keep good rivalries, and has a variety of excellent athletics. On the downside, Mr. Swofford gets my vote as the biggest, hypocritical megalomaniac of the P5 commissioners. And I find the Notre Dame partial membership rather distasteful.
Further, we can debate which state and it's universities are somehow more upstanding and who can smugly fingerproint. With respect to Maryland, they may very well have violated rules or laws when they accepted the invitation to the Big Ten. Pres. Loh and others may still ultimately pay for what happened. However, it's completely irrelevant to the lawsuit. It's like my former employer claiming I didn't follow rules established between my spouse and me when I accepted employment elsewhere. In fact, I don't think that Swofford has made it an issue. I understand that you aren't taking issue with this, but wanted to put this in perspective.
Thanks btstimpy. This is very helpful. Pretty much answers the question. I agree with you re: this poster. Teaching moments are probably of little value with this poster.
Pat:
Just want to make sure you understand my reason for discussing this. I am not offering an opinion on UMD's action. In fact, I take no position on it. My only reason for discussing it here was that the poster on several occasions stated as fact that UMD's departure was completely transparent. I think we can all agree, based on what has been published as well as the findings of the MD oversight board, this poster's claim of transparency appears to be absurd.
IMO, this poster has a core problem in confusing fact and opinion. His UMD transparency comments offered "low-hanging fruit" in demonstrating this point to him. Unfortunately, I agree with btstimpy. IMO, I don't think the poster has the capability to understand this point.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2014
- Messages
- 134
- Reaction Score
- 18
Once again the ACC posters fail to comprehend. You are linking articles that further detail UMD's situation.
It isn't a secret that they were found to have violated MD secrecy laws--it's already been dealt with. It has no bearing on the ACC and isn't something Swofford is contending in his lawsuit or anything he can do anything about.
Conversely, the ACC hasn't been forthcoming about anything. Why did they need to rush through an extremely exorbitant increase in their buyout for the second time in a year? What determined this excessive amount? Why was it necessary to disregard their own bylaws in doing so? Why did they send a death blow to the Big East conference and who worked with them in deciding this and accomplishing this? If they ripped another conference apart, how can they turn around and have a problem with schools leaving their conference and try to block them from doing so? Why did they start withholding monies from UMD when they did-against their own bylaws? Why have they withheld NCAA money owed to Maryland? Why did they go after Big Ten schools after Maryland announced they were going to move to that conference and who advised them on that move? What meetings and measures have taken place in the ACC in order to block schools from leaving, take teams from other conferences, etc.etc.
There are many unanswered questions from the ACC that discovery will provide evidence for in a court of law. Maryland has no such hidden agendas or secrets. They have been open about what they've done, even regarded skirting around Maryland in making the move in the first place.
None of that info is damaging to the Big Ten or Maryland. Everything not yet revealed about what the ACC and its partners have done can be extremely damaging. They may also be forced by courts to pay Maryland $157 million.
You are living in a fantasyland if you believe none of this matters.
It isn't a secret that they were found to have violated MD secrecy laws--it's already been dealt with. It has no bearing on the ACC and isn't something Swofford is contending in his lawsuit or anything he can do anything about.
Conversely, the ACC hasn't been forthcoming about anything. Why did they need to rush through an extremely exorbitant increase in their buyout for the second time in a year? What determined this excessive amount? Why was it necessary to disregard their own bylaws in doing so? Why did they send a death blow to the Big East conference and who worked with them in deciding this and accomplishing this? If they ripped another conference apart, how can they turn around and have a problem with schools leaving their conference and try to block them from doing so? Why did they start withholding monies from UMD when they did-against their own bylaws? Why have they withheld NCAA money owed to Maryland? Why did they go after Big Ten schools after Maryland announced they were going to move to that conference and who advised them on that move? What meetings and measures have taken place in the ACC in order to block schools from leaving, take teams from other conferences, etc.etc.
There are many unanswered questions from the ACC that discovery will provide evidence for in a court of law. Maryland has no such hidden agendas or secrets. They have been open about what they've done, even regarded skirting around Maryland in making the move in the first place.
None of that info is damaging to the Big Ten or Maryland. Everything not yet revealed about what the ACC and its partners have done can be extremely damaging. They may also be forced by courts to pay Maryland $157 million.
You are living in a fantasyland if you believe none of this matters.
.-.
buckaineer post:
"UMD has been extremely transparent about what transpired and the reasons behind the moves."
buckaineer follow-up post:
"It isn't a secret that that they were found to have violated MD secrecy laws."
Thank you for proving my point! Do you understand that these statements directly contradict one another??
My only comments were on your UMD transparency claims which, IMO, and you clearly now agree with me based on your second comment, are BS. I wasn't commenting on the rest of your diatribe, although I disagree with all of it. Have that discussion with someone who cares to indulge your conspiratorial fantasies. I don't care to.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2014
- Messages
- 134
- Reaction Score
- 18
Once again, what part of this can you not comprehend.
Maryland has openly discussed all aspects of their move to the Big Ten. the whys, the wheres , the whens , and the who withs. they have been transparent about it. There isnt anything harmful to them about it. Everyone knows. It doesnt mean they rushed to tell Swofford about it before they did it. It means they've discussed everything and explained everything there is to be explained from their side of things.
The ACC on the other hand has kept secret many things that can be damaging if revealed.
Instead of dealing with this reality some are still trying to play games with meaningless information that did not and does not affect the ACC in any way and the ACC isnt even bringing up. Information as. I said UMD has openly discussed as of this date.
on the other hand the things that can be brought up from the ACC may have affected many schools and conferences including some of their own.
Maryland has openly discussed all aspects of their move to the Big Ten. the whys, the wheres , the whens , and the who withs. they have been transparent about it. There isnt anything harmful to them about it. Everyone knows. It doesnt mean they rushed to tell Swofford about it before they did it. It means they've discussed everything and explained everything there is to be explained from their side of things.
The ACC on the other hand has kept secret many things that can be damaging if revealed.
Instead of dealing with this reality some are still trying to play games with meaningless information that did not and does not affect the ACC in any way and the ACC isnt even bringing up. Information as. I said UMD has openly discussed as of this date.
on the other hand the things that can be brought up from the ACC may have affected many schools and conferences including some of their own.
Do we have a reading comprehension issue here?
I don't care about your comments on the ACC. Have that discussion with someone who cares. Why do you keep bringing it up??? I only want to discuss your comments regarding UMD's transparency during the process. Are you even capable of limiting yourself to just this discussion???
It is pretty clear, IMO, that UMD's decisions re: the BiG move were made in secret. That is not the definition of transparency. Sure, after the decisions were made and locked in they discussed what happened; but that isn't what most would consider transparency. Transparency, IMO, would have meant being more open DURING the process - as MD law required - so that all stakeholders would have a chance to provide input. To your point about tipping their hand to the ACC, guess what? the ACC is not the only stakeholder. UMD is a state institution and there are a lot of other stakeholders.
I am not dumping on MD as, IMO, pretty much all of these moves have gone down with little or no transparency. I get that. What I am disputing here is what I believe to be your BS comments that the UMD process was somehow different and transparent vs. the other realignment moves.
Fishy
Elite Premium Poster
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 19,357
- Reaction Score
- 180,076
The two of you are having a perfectly pointless argument.
Maryland has been very transparent about the process behind their move to the Big Ten. Every school that has changed conferences has been relatively transparent about their moves - it's part of the Jurich-style victory lap they all take. It's part of taking credit.
So, yes, they were transparent.
But no, they were not transparent before the fact - no one announces that they're in talks with the Big Ten. You keep it quiet and then you go. (Although A&M and Missouri seemed to negotiate with the SEC in real-time.)
The ACC, to the best of my knowledge, has not laid out their process behind their persistent raiding of the Big East. I would not expect them to - the victory lap for conference commissioners is the press conference where you introduce the new schools.
You keep the fear/anxiety/greed or whatever prompted the moves well-hidden. Those details are embarrassing and probably wouldn't paint a pretty picture, but I doubt there's any real fear of them becoming public. (If they wanted to bury those details, just settle with Maryland.)
Maryland has been very transparent about the process behind their move to the Big Ten. Every school that has changed conferences has been relatively transparent about their moves - it's part of the Jurich-style victory lap they all take. It's part of taking credit.
So, yes, they were transparent.
But no, they were not transparent before the fact - no one announces that they're in talks with the Big Ten. You keep it quiet and then you go. (Although A&M and Missouri seemed to negotiate with the SEC in real-time.)
The ACC, to the best of my knowledge, has not laid out their process behind their persistent raiding of the Big East. I would not expect them to - the victory lap for conference commissioners is the press conference where you introduce the new schools.
You keep the fear/anxiety/greed or whatever prompted the moves well-hidden. Those details are embarrassing and probably wouldn't paint a pretty picture, but I doubt there's any real fear of them becoming public. (If they wanted to bury those details, just settle with Maryland.)
- Status