Non-Key Tweets | Page 52 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

The one time the NCAA would be justified hanging onto their old rules, and they cave in a second.

I wish nothing but the worst for Emmert's career.
 
CL82 said:
While retaining the concepts that were included in the “actionable” category, the board decided that the process it had identified as “actionable” - requiring the conferences other than the highest-profile five to take a separate vote – would not be included in the proposal.

but also continues a separation of the next five conferences (the American Athletic Conference, Conference-USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West Conference and Sun Belt Conference) from the remaining 22.
Expand ...
These two nuggets mean that we will be able to survive and play by p5 rules in the short-term.
 
jostar1 said:
Frank the Tank‏@frankthetank111 1h
Interesting puff piece RT @PaJosKo "@alex_prewitt: ACC market analysis, submitted by Maryland, can be found here: http://Post original url/QBhbYl ”
Expand ...
Boy, that's a pice of junk. If I got that from one of my consultants, or really a junior employee, I'd send it back with many many red circles. Though from Maryland's perspective, it looks like the ACC is saying it is going to do well so why do they care about losing the Terps?
 
freescooter said:
Boy, that's a pice of junk. If I got that from one of my consultants, or really a junior employee, I'd send it back with many many red circles. Though from Maryland's perspective, it looks like the ACC is saying it is going to do well so why do they care about losing the Terps?
Expand ...
exactly. It's so bush league. I tweeted the same as soon as I read it. Love how they quantify the b1g TV deal with just dollar signs But yes, this is perfect for Maryland to illustrate that the ACC has not been damaged
 
.-.
UConn Dan said:
These two nuggets mean that we will be able to survive and play by p5 rules in the short-term.
Expand ...

Dan - I don't read it that way. I read it as saying the P5 will be their own group and the G5 may possibly be allowed to do some things that separate them from the remaining 22 conferences. It doesn't say the G5 will be allowed to decide if they want to adhere to P5 policies.

This will create a clear separation between the P5 & the G5 which is no good for us
 
bobbyinaz said:
Dan - I don't read it that way. I read it as saying the P5 will be their own group and the G5 may possibly be allowed to do some things that separate them from the remaining 22 conferences. It doesn't say the G5 will be allowed to decide if they want to adhere to P5 policies. This will create a clear separation between the P5 & the G5 which is no good for us
Expand ...
the fact that the term "actionable" is removed from the final prop means that all P5 legislation will be permissible to be adopted by all other conferences without a full NCAA vote
 
.-.
bobbyinaz said:
Dan - I don't read it that way. I read it as saying the P5 will be their own group and the G5 may possibly be allowed to do some things that separate them from the remaining 22 conferences. It doesn't say the G5 will be allowed to decide if they want to adhere to P5 policies.

This will create a clear separation between the P5 & the G5 which is no good for us
Expand ...
I read it as allowing the G5 to continue current things that separate them from the rest. It is bad, unless we can get into the P5 pronto.
 
Under the proposal, the division would still be led by a Board of Directors composed primarily of university presidents. However, new voices would be added: the chair of the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee; the chair of a new group tentatively called the Council; and the most senior Division I member of the Faculty Athletics Representatives Association’s executive committee. The council chair would always be an athletics director, giving that constituency an automatic spot on the board.
The Board would focus chiefly on oversight and strategic issues, while leaving much of the day-to-day policy and legislative responsibility to the council.
The council, composed of at least 60 percent athletics directors, would have 38 members: one from each conference plus two voting student-athletes and four commissioners (one from the five highest profile Football Bowl Subdivision conferences, one from the remaining FBS conferences, one from the Football Championship Subdivision conferences and one from the remaining conferences). The council would be the final voice on shared-governance rule-making decisions.
Expand ...

How bad would this be? The board will still be primarily composed of academics and the council will have plenty of non P5 representation. Granted, the P5 schools will have more "flexibility to help the student athlete" but it does not preclude non P5 schools from doing the same.
 
If G5 conferences can also make their own rules, they can simply adopt whatever rules the P5 agree to.
 
.-.
The Funster said:
How bad would this be? The board will still be primarily composed of academics and the council will have plenty of non P5 representation. Granted, the P5 schools will have more "flexibility to help the student athlete" but it does not preclude non P5 schools from doing the same.
Expand ...
Here's what should happen if anyone had any integrity:
the D1 presidents would say, "Cut the crap. We'll give you cost of attendance but the res t of it is BS. And we don't believe your bluster about breaking away because it doesn't work for you. if you break away, no more NCAA tournaments...for anyone because you're no longer members. So Duke, UNC, Kansas, UCLA we wish you well in the Top12 or whatever you choose to call you basketball tourney. BC, might's well petition to join the Big for hockey, because that's where you're going to have to play. How many folks are going to go to see you play Penn State for the 5th or 6th time do you think? South Carolina, maybe you can work a deal to play half your baseball schedule against the South Atlantic league...then again,maybe not..." Call their bluff but make it clear that if they leave the NCAA for football, they are out for everything else, too. My guess, though is that most of the presidents are of the opinion that they are best to be rid of the big football schools, so if they want their own rules, fine. Just don't keep bothering us.
 
freescooter said:
Here's what should happen if anyone had any integrity:
the D1 presidents would say, "Cut the crap. We'll give you cost of attendance but the res t of it is BS. And we don't believe your bluster about breaking away because it doesn't work for you. if you break away, no more NCAA tournaments...for anyone because you're no longer members. So Duke, UNC, Kansas, UCLA we wish you well in the Top12 or whatever you choose to call you basketball tourney. BC, might's well petition to join the Big for hockey, because that's where you're going to have to play. How many folks are going to go to see you play Penn State for the 5th or 6th time do you think? South Carolina, maybe you can work a deal to play half your baseball schedule against the South Atlantic league...then again,maybe not..." Call their bluff but make it clear that if they leave the NCAA for football, they are out for everything else, too. My guess, though is that most of the presidents are of the opinion that they are best to be rid of the big football schools, so if they want their own rules, fine. Just don't keep bothering us.
Expand ...
They can have a 16 team BB tourney. That's exciting.
Football will get boring over time with no Boise State or NIU type stories.
Frankly except for their top teams the lower end of there membership is no better than the the next group.

If they leave , the NCAA adopts a football playoff system and crown their own National Champion. You can put that Champion down but like the old AFL champs you can't ignore them.If that system provides entertainment value the old guard will find themselves on a island of their own creation.
 
The gap between the top, call them aspiring, programs in the G5 and the rest of the G5 is greater than the gap between the top of the P5 and the top of the G5. IOW, the G5 can't as a group adopt P5 rules, so programs like UConn have the be able to play in the P5 sandbox whether a member or not.
 
jostar1 said:
Tuxedo Yoda‏@TuxedoYoda 8h
B12 to 14 w/ UCF, UConn, Cinci & BYU (fball only). It makes so much sense. Only reason for it not to happen is if Texas and/or OU wants out.
Expand ...
I think this would be a more realistic landing spot for UConn in the near term. B1G hopes are just too many years away to salvage UConn.
 
buddy said:
I think this would be a more realistic landing spot for UConn in the near term. B1G hopes are just too many years away to salvage UConn.
Expand ...
I have felt his way since the shifting started or at least back to when RU to Big Ten was announced.

Big12, could use a BBall power to tandem with Kansas, that's for sure.
 
.-.
noeynox said:
I have felt his way since the shifting started or at least back to when RU to Big Ten was announced.

Big12, could use a BBall power to tandem with Kansas, that's for sure.
Expand ...
That scenario is acceptable to the B1G and ACC as it pretty much makes NYC a DMZ.
It's not great for UConn or the Big 12 but it's a compromise you have to make.
 
Tuxedo Yoda? SMH. Dude is just grouping together the most obvious current omissions from The P5 Conferences and tacking them on to the smallest current one. Who's making up the difference in dollars that the current 10 members of The Big 12 would see by taking on 4 new mouths to feed? ESPN? FOX? Is UT or OU really interested in a long term arrangement that has them heading from as far as Provo to Orlando? I know you are all looking for something better, but this is not it. The other thread that highlights UCONN's Academic Goals is the key to your long term security.
 
The key to our long term security is the first P5 conference that opens the door. We'll worry about the neighbors after we unpack and put the trophies on the mantel.

Our academics prospects are heading where they're heading independent of whether any of these hayseeds running athletic conferences decide to favor us or not.
 
Ldandy said:
Tuxedo Yoda? SMH. Dude is just grouping together the most obvious current omissions from The P5 Conferences and tacking them on to the smallest current one. Who's making up the difference in dollars that the current 10 members of The Big 12 would see by taking on 4 new mouths to feed? ESPN? FOX? Is UT or OU really interested in a long term arrangement that has them heading from as far as Provo to Orlando? I know you are all looking for something better, but this is not it. The other thread that highlights UCONN's Academic Goals is the key to your long term security.
Expand ...

I agree with you Ldandy. I don't think UCONN has much in common with the culture of the B12. But at this point, unless someone in a very high place at UCONN knows something we don't about our prospects for the B1G or ACC, UCONN needs to accept the first P5 conference offer it gets. We want in the P5 model before it slams shut and if that means the B12, then ride 'em cowboy!
 
Forgot how bad our football got beat last year in the beginning of the season. You have to believe that with Coach P gone, a new energy guy in, and a team that was obviously out of shape prior to this year we should be able to win 3 to 4 more games then last year. Schools will see how much the team is improving under Coach D and that will prove to be the catalyst that gets us out of the AAC.
 
Ldandy said:
Who's making up the difference in dollars that the current 10 members of The Big 12 would see by taking on 4 new mouths to feed? ESPN? FOX?
Expand ...

FOX is paying $4.16M for DePaul basketball. Odds are they're the frontrunner. . .
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,349
Messages
4,566,519
Members
10,469
Latest member
xxBlueChips


Top Bottom