An excellent example of the phrase figures don't lie, but liar's figure. Very selective categories coupled with an expansive inclusion of teams were not members of the conference to bump up numbers.Kevin McNamara@KevinMcNamara33 1h
ACC counting its $....Maryland submits ACC-conducted market analysis http://wapo.st/1ptAK4u
I'm not a huge fan of litigating but unless we put a stop to this we've effectively become a Div. 2 school. See below.ESPN Big Ten@ESPN_BigTen 14m
NCAA D1 board endorses plan to give big leagues autonomy w/ scholarship value, insurance, more. Final vote in August. http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-board-directors-endorses-restructuring-process-seeks-feedback…
I couldn't even write about the condiment made by Grey Poupon that you put on hotdogs at the game because of the filter. It appeared as "mus"I can't even write Dan Le Be T a r d 's name because of the filter. Crazy.
These two nuggets mean that we will be able to survive and play by p5 rules in the short-term.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.
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?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 ”
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?
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 damagedfreescooter 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?
and got an A-upstater said:Someone at UNC wrote it.
Not true. He wouldn't have bothered actually writing anything at North Carolina. They'd just give him the A- for signing up.and got an A-
These two nuggets mean that we will be able to survive and play by p5 rules in the short-term.
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 votebobbyinaz 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
Someone at UNC wrote it.
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.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
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.
Here's what should happen if anyone had any integrity: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.