Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Interesting that it needs to be 9-5 to Play. Why? Why not the flip, those not wanting to play need 9-5 vote.
Interesting that it needs to be 9-5 to Play. Why? Why not the flip, those not wanting to play need 9-5 vote.
They ‘needed 60% to post-pone’ so presidents should call it a re-vote on post-posing. If so, just need 6 votes to play.Yeah that’s a good point.
They ‘needed 60% to post-pone’ so presidents should call it a re-vote on post-posing. If so, just need 6 votes to play.
Should have done that before they canceled all non-conference games and tanked almost every mid major conference.How about let the teams that want to play let them play.. The rest can resume playing in 2021
Supermajority?Interesting that it needs to be 9-5 to Play. Why? Why not the flip, those not wanting to play need 9-5 vote.
I’m going with Wisconsin, Indiana, Maryland, Illinois, Purdue and Michigan being the wildcard.
Have you not been paying attention?
What I was getting at.....Why a supermajority to play, why isn’t it a supermajority to NOT play?Supermajority?
Universities are going to become more and more irrelevant as we move forwardAnd don't count on Northwestern for anything.
This is ridiculous. This country needs to wake up from the "woke".
They already did that, allegedly. 11-3 vote to not play.What I was getting at.....Why a supermajority to play, why isn’t it a supermajority to NOT play?
Purdue, trying to save face...
As you have seen, 28 of the 34 Division 1 conferences... were coming to the same discouraging conclusion.
How about let the teams that want to play let them play.. The rest can resume playing in 2021
I don’t agree with the University of Michigan president’s position, but at least he finally stepped up and owned his vote. Daniels is being a chickenshit by acting as if his vote was forced upon him, by forces beyond his control.
The spin here is interesting, especially this line:
I find that to be a bit disingenuous. First of all, where does that number come from? There are 11 conferences in FBS and 15 in FCS, and that's counting Independents as it's own conference in each level. That's 26 conferences in Division 1, so where does the 34 number come from? I suspect he must be counting Division 1 conferences that don't sponsor football in that number, which is a little misleading, since this discussion is mostly about football.
Second of all, I presume some of the conferences included in that are ones that decided to cancel their fall seasons, but allow their members to pursue some non-conference games. For instance, all FCS teams have had their seasons cancelled/postponed in large part due to the fact that there will be no NCAA FCS championship this year. However, a quick search I found at least 5 of those conferences that will allow their members to play non-conference games. As for FBS level, you have 3 of the 5 Power 5 conferences making a go of it, and 3 of the 5 Group of 5 conferences trying to play. That means at the FBS level, a majority of conferences are going to try and play.
Third, there is a big difference between what FBS and FCS level schools decide to do. In my mind, it's a bigger deal that 6 of 10 FBS conferences (not including Independents) are going to try and play; than that only 5 of 14 FCS conferences (not including Independents) are allowing non-conference play. Money is a big factor here, many of these smaller conferences, especially the FCS ones, may not be able to afford the testing and stuff required, especially when there's less opportunity for money making non-conference games against FBS schools.
Also, the line about "unique health risks to athletes" is funny to include, considering most of that aspect has been shot down; including by a cardiologist who has researched sudden death in young athletes.
Sounds to me like a lot of spin to try and justify a bad decision.