Need 6 teams to flip
- Thread starter CatColumbia
- Start date
Threaten the dissenters with soup
Start with cream of mushroom and if they refuse to comply up the ante to clam chowder.
Start with cream of mushroom and if they refuse to comply up the ante to clam chowder.
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.
so go back to scratch and re-vote.
maybe in the original vote the university presidents simply choked - like missing a 3 foot putt.
completely understandable - it’s not like this is life and death.
I bet 7 votes would swing to a let’s play in rapid fire - bang bang bang bang bang bang bang - 7 shots across the bow of the big ten - the process cant be so paralyzed to not allow reconsideration - come on university presidents - pull the trigger and protect the pigskin
Last edited:
Should have done that before they canceled all non-conference games and tanked almost every mid major conference.
And don't count on Northwestern for anything.
This is ridiculous. This country needs to wake up from the "woke".
What I was getting at.....Why a supermajority to play, why isn’t it a supermajority to NOT play?
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.
that’s what I’m saying. I do not get why they dont let the teams opt for or opt out. Let it be their choices. Stop making the choices for them. It’s obvious there are a few to several BIG teams that want to. Doing it that way is literally a win/win scenario over the option they are taking.
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.