ADVERTISEMENT

Dan Patrick: Big Ten doesn’t have enough votes to play

kaz36

Nebraska Legend
Staff
May 2, 2005
30,369
27,480
113
I’ve heard that before they had an official re-vote to play that they were going to see what kind of support they had behind the scenes. It looks like they don’t have the support to start playing again. That’s unfortunate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: John_J_Rambo
These school presidents have way too much power.

Each school should be given the right to play or not - it makes ZERO sense to penalize the schools who want to play just because a few others don't want to. This is where KW needs to grow a pair and make the call that teams can choose their own fate vs. having that option stripped away from them.
 
Don’t they need 7 no’s? I wonder which was the seventh school to vote no... Minnesota?
 
Well, it's incorrect to say the teams don't want to play, it's the Presidents/Chancellors that won't let them play.

I'm especially surprised about the President at Michigan. I know he's got political pressure from above BUT he's also facing a firestorm from below. And the people below are the voters.
 
Well, it's incorrect to say the teams don't want to play, it's the Presidents/Chancellors that won't let them play.

I'm especially surprised about the President at Michigan. I know he's got political pressure from above BUT he's also facing a firestorm from below. And the people below are the voters.

high school football is a go in Michigan beginning sept 17 per order of the governor
 
These school presidents have way too much power.

Each school should be given the right to play or not - it makes ZERO sense to penalize the schools who want to play just because a few others don't want to. This is where KW needs to grow a pair and make the call that teams can choose their own fate vs. having that option stripped away from them.
I was especially thinking about this over the weekend-just how completely bizarre and nonsensical it is for university presidents in some states to have veto power over whether teams in other states play football this fall. The president, chancellor, athletic director, coach, governor in Nebraska are all on board for playing, yet university presidents in Michigan and Illinois declare that we can't. In what world does that make one shred of sense?
 
I’ve heard that before they had an official re-vote to play that they were going to see what kind of support they had behind the scenes. It looks like they don’t have the support to start playing again. That’s unfortunate.
So they needed 9 votes to NOT play is what we heard before. Yet we found out there was not a vote. So why is it not 9 to NOT play now given no official vote before. They would not have the votes for that. So it’s changed to 9 to play? This f’n thing needs a rule book to follow. It’s like big 10 refs and holding- no clarity
 
The president, chancellor, athletic director, coach, governor in Nebraska are all on board for playing, yet university presidents in Michigan and Illinois declare that we can't. In what world does that make one shred of sense?

In a world in which you belong to a conference that collectively makes these decisions
 
So if there are 8 schools that want to play and then go ahead and play anyway, will the BiG TeN kick them all out?

I think they have to ask Desmond Howard.

School by school, he will make a determination.

tenor.gif
 
Duh. Because it is a statistical certainty that covid will be under control by then. We know for a FACT that by next spring covid will be a thing of the past.

So how does that help the 2021 season when your playing meaningless games in the spring just so you can have a trophy game against the Pac12.o_O
 
These school presidents have way too much power.

Each school should be given the right to play or not - it makes ZERO sense to penalize the schools who want to play just because a few others don't want to. This is where KW needs to grow a pair and make the call that teams can choose their own fate vs. having that option stripped away from them.
What came first, the college president or the college football team? I'm guessing the college president and they still believe they are the creator of college football, coaches and AD's.
 
Well, it's incorrect to say the teams don't want to play, it's the Presidents/Chancellors that won't let them play.

I'm especially surprised about the President at Michigan. I know he's got political pressure from above BUT he's also facing a firestorm from below. And the people below are the voters.
He hates Trump. Somebody posted quotes from the guy on here yesterday. He's also an Ivy League educated, Berkeley and Johns Hopkins trained M.D. Johns Hopkins has been extremely critical of Trump and very political in their portrayal of states who didn't force residents to wear masks etc. What was funny was their criticism of governor Noem in South Dakota when if fact she was following the CDC's guidelines for businesses and schools to a T. South Dakota's case numbers were in line with CDC guidelines with every move she made. In South Dakota unlike some blue states, the governor respects their constitution and laws.
 
Who are these medical advisors within the conference that Patrick is referencing?? Name these anonymous advisors
This should be public information
I loathe all of the cloaked decision making going on and the guy that has the big picture, no pun intended, Warren, he’s gone silent, again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dinglefritz
I’ve heard that before they had an official re-vote to play that they were going to see what kind of support they had behind the scenes. It looks like they don’t have the support to start playing again. That’s unfortunate.
Can someone explain why those who want to play can't/ don't just go around the B1G and play? Seriously what is legally stopping them from doing it? Yes they would be breaking contract but what can the B1G do? Kick them out of the B1G? Sure they can but lets say Nebraska, Ohio St, Wisc, Iowa, Purdue, Penn St say we don't care that the B1G said no we are going to play anyways. Is the B1G really going to kick all those teams out? Really? I doubt it. There would be a stern disapproval speech and that it. You kick them out and you are left with a conf that looks slightly better than the MAC. The B1G would be slitting their own throat.
 
Who are these medical advisors within the conference that Patrick is referencing?? Name these anonymous advisors
This should be public information
I loathe all of the cloaked decision making going on and the guy that has the big picture, no pun intended, Warren, he’s gone silent, again.

linked is the big ten medical task force- note the home institution of the chair of this task force

https://bigten.org/news/2020/4/20/g...k-force-for-emerging-infectious-diseases.aspx
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red I 73
Can someone explain why those who want to play can't/ don't just go around the B1G and play? Seriously what is legally stopping them from doing it? Yes they would be breaking contract but what can the B1G do? Kick them out of the B1G? Sure they can but lets say Nebraska, Ohio St, Wisc, Iowa, Purdue, Penn St say we don't care that the B1G said no we are going to play anyways. Is the B1G really going to kick all those teams out? Really? I doubt it. There would be a stern disapproval speech and that it. You kick them out and you are left with a conf that looks slightly better than the MAC. The B1G would be slitting their own throat.
Its a media rights issue, which is actually a legit argument against letting individual schools play. Doing so could lead to all kinds of litigation.
 
So how does that help the 2021 season when your playing meaningless games in the spring just so you can have a trophy game against the Pac12.o_O
Its just common sense. I say, come spring if it still isn't safe to play we delay the 2020 season indefinitely. If that means playing the 2021 or 2022 seasons concurrently with the 2020 season so be it. Safety first.
 
Its just common sense. I say, come spring if it still isn't safe to play we delay the 2020 season indefinitely. If that means playing the 2021 or 2022 seasons concurrently with the 2020 season so be it. Safety first.

I don’t think this conference has common sense, if they did they wouldn’t have put a schedule out and then 5 days later cancel it...
Common sense would have been wait till the end of September..
 
Its a media rights issue, which is actually a legit argument against letting individual schools play. Doing so could lead to all kinds of litigation.

100% this, media dollars and the grant of media rights is what stops Nebraska from playing.

Too bad the schools who want to play don’t host alumni games or something similar this fall.
 
I don’t think this conference has common sense, if they did they wouldn’t have put a schedule out and then 5 days later cancel it...
Common sense would have been wait till the end of September..
Its not just the conference, it's pervasive all over the country. Like the Parade of Roses being canceled 6 months in advance. Common sense would say take things a few weeks at a time and then reassess because things can change quickly. The conference leaders are a bunch of idiots as is evidenced by their "plan". Thank God they arent in charge of the military.
 
Its not just the conference, it's pervasive all over the country. Like the Parade of Roses being canceled 6 months in advance. Common sense would say take things a few weeks at a time and then reassess because things can change quickly. The conference leaders are a bunch of idiots as is evidenced by their "plan". Thank God they arent in charge of the military.

Having been involved in making a float for the tournament of roses parade, that is a huge undertaking that takes months and huge amounts of money and manpower to create those floats. Let alone the fundraising to get bands and other performers to get to Pasadena. I can actually see why they had to make a decision a little bit earlier than cancelling fall sports, where most of those travel arrangements are made and can be cancelled at the last minute
 
Its not just the conference, it's pervasive all over the country. Like the Parade of Roses being canceled 6 months in advance. Common sense would say take things a few weeks at a time and then reassess because things can change quickly. The conference leaders are a bunch of idiots as is evidenced by their "plan". Thank God they arent in charge of the military.

That's for damn sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dailybuck777
Its a media rights issue, which is actually a legit argument against letting individual schools play. Doing so could lead to all kinds of litigation.
Should be easy to work out. Currently, the networks are getting 0. If 8 teams play, the networks will make a lot more money this fall than they are currently making. No reason for networks and Big Ten playing schools can't negotiate a new agreement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBurns05
No. Not by order of the governor. She's finally ALLOWING them to play. She' worried about re-election. She grabbed power that she wasn't granted by their constitution.
If you're talking about the Michigan governor. That's not correct. She isn't worried about her own re-election until 2022 when this will all have been long forgotten - so she feels pretty secure herself. Her big concern is delivering Michigan to Biden in November. That would be a big feather in her cap and she has higher political ambitions in the party (like running for president herself someday).

Yes, she did grab emergency powers but whether we like it or not (and I don't) the state laws passed many years ago grant the governor those powers in emergencies and thus the state supreme court has backed this recent grab as being legal.

She only recently allowed football to be played in the fall but after it's already basically too late for many of the high schools and the colleges she thinks so it's a shrewd political move to escape any personal blame that might be levied down the road - ie. "I said they could play and they choose not to play so it wasn't my fault".

The governor is extremely smart politically.
 
Last edited:
Having been involved in making a float for the tournament of roses parade, that is a huge undertaking that takes months and huge amounts of money and manpower to create those floats. Let alone the fundraising to get bands and other performers to get to Pasadena. I can actually see why they had to make a decision a little bit earlier than cancelling fall sports, where most of those travel arrangements are made and can be cancelled at the last minute
I get that, but I really have a hard time believing that the cut-off date for putting it together is that far in advance. Its not like we are talking about traveling to the Moon, its a parade. If we cant possibly have any semblance of a parade without 6 months of preparation so we have to cancel it I guess I had more faith in the American people than I should have.
 
Should be easy to work out. Currently, the networks are getting 0. If 8 teams play, the networks will make a lot more money this fall than they are currently making. No reason for networks and Big Ten playing schools can't negotiate a new agreement.
So if you are Rutgers and by joining the conference have brought 20 million TVs into the equation but don't play, are you still entitled to a share of the media revenue? I would say no, but they would probably argue that because of them other members are reaping the benefit of their membership so they should get a cut.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT