Non-Key Tweets | Page 1070 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

Kolumbo said:
This must be more CR craziness. Fairfield CT played in the Metro Region instead of in Bristol, CT with the New England Region. I'm not even sure what is happening here but I was never a fan of trick plays in little league. Or whatever this was.

Expand ...

I thought same thing. Apparently CT and RI are in metro region with NY and NJ.

Both NE and Metro regions held tourney in Bristol, CT
 
uconnyankee said:
I thought same thing. Apparently CT and RI are in metro region with NY and NJ.

Both NE and Metro regions held tourney in Bristol, CT
Expand ...
Little League tries to balance the regions by Little League participants. For example, the number of LL players in Massachusetts is greater than the total number of LL participants in CT and Rhode Island. And, in various parts of the country, there are a number of other youth baseball leagues including Cal Ripken, Dixie, ... and there is the impact of club baseball as well. So, participation in Little League can be less than in other states.
 
WrenchFan69 said:
It appears he's correct. Is it finally our time?!
Expand ...
I don't think the ACC would add another school until after 2030/2031 when the exit fee drops and schools could possibly leave. If they did add a school in the short run, I would think they would take the Memphis offer that they made to the Big 12.

Another alternative for the ACC to get to 9 conference games would be to count the Notre Dame games as conference games (they play 5 ACC schools per year) and have the remaining 12 schools play an extra game against each other.
 
UConnJim said:
I don't think the ACC would add another school until after 2030/2031 when the exit fee drops and schools could possibly leave. If they did add a school in the short run, I would think they would take the Memphis offer that they made to the Big 12.

Another alternative for the ACC to get to 9 conference games would be to count the Notre Dame games as conference games (they play 5 ACC schools per year) and have the remaining 12 schools play an extra game against each other.
Expand ...
That's what McMurphy is reporting here: ACC discussing adding 9th league game, but how?

I'm betting the ACC would rather do that than invite anyone
 
WrenchFan69 said:
It appears he's correct. Is it finally our time?!
Expand ...
scared season 3 GIF
 
Well, our profile couldn’t be higher for a diminished basketball conference that knows it’s football powers are leaving ASAP.
 
Whilr not a total veto...the ability to say yay or nay on any future distributions, in effect limits some adds.
 
billybud said:
Parts of the settlement essentially give Clemson veto power over some ACC decisions, McKenzie said, which creates a “two-tier membership structure where Clemson has greater rights than others” on some fundamental matters.

Read more at: https://www.thestate.com/sports/college/acc/clemson-university/article309947815.html#storylink=cpy
Expand ...
Clemson and FSU literally just holding a gun to the head of everyone else in the conference. Insane. I’m sure that will work out fantastic for them
 
billybud said:
Parts of the settlement essentially give Clemson veto power over some ACC decisions, McKenzie said, which creates a “two-tier membership structure where Clemson has greater rights than others” on some fundamental matters.

Read more at: https://www.thestate.com/sports/college/acc/clemson-university/article309947815.html#storylink=cpy
Expand ...
According to that article:

"The ACC agreed to make four amendments to its constitution and bylaws regarding its exit fee and grant of rights and also established a new Multi-Media Revenue Policy (for the aforementioned brand initiative rewarding schools with higher TV viewership). The ACC cannot alter any of those changes without Clemson’s consent.

McKenzie said the section about the ACC needing written consent or a “yes” vote from Clemson in order to alter policies regarding its withdrawal fees, revenue distribution and “brand initiative” policies essentially gives Clemson “veto power.”

Here is McKenzie's tweet:



Note that he does not say that Clemson and FSU have veto power over any schools that are to be added.

You have stated several times on this board that Clemson and FSU must approve the addition of any school. I don't think that is correct.
 
jostar1 said:
According to that article:

"The ACC agreed to make four amendments to its constitution and bylaws regarding its exit fee and grant of rights and also established a new Multi-Media Revenue Policy (for the aforementioned brand initiative rewarding schools with higher TV viewership). The ACC cannot alter any of those changes without Clemson’s consent.

McKenzie said the section about the ACC needing written consent or a “yes” vote from Clemson in order to alter policies regarding its withdrawal fees, revenue distribution and “brand initiative” policies essentially gives Clemson “veto power.”

Here is McKenzie's tweet:



Note that he does not say that Clemson and FSU have veto power over any schools that are to be added.

You have stated several times on this board that Clemson and FSU must approve the addition of any school. I don't think that is correct.
Expand ...

I think that you are nominally right...now, if conference revenue distribution is determined to be changed due to adding another piece of pie, that could be debatable...if revenue distribution is just the formula, than anyone could be added....I could see FSU-Clemson more interested in not adding a high viewership football program to split that pot.

Of course, I do believe that ESPN whispers in a sotto voice regarding their wants.
 

Online statistics

Members online
319
Guests online
2,830
Total visitors
3,149
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,173
Messages
4,385,729
Members
10,194
Latest member
ArtTheFan


.
..
Top Bottom