Normally I would be in full swing of summer prep reading and studying about all the teams and games, strengths and weaknesses, win totals, division and conference odds, game of year lines, camp reports.
Just recently I have been paying a little more attention. Here are some updates:
This is as of 8/7
AAC - Games will begin 9/19 with teams playing their 8 scheduled conference games on originally scheduled dates. Teams may schedule as many nonconference games as they want (up to 4 although 4 nonconference games seems unlikely). League title game will be played either 12/5, 12/12 or 12/19 at the home stadium of the regular season champion.
ACC - Games will begin 9/10 with teams playing 10 conference games (2 more than originally scheduled) with 1 allowed nonconference game vs an instate school. The 1 nonconference game vs instate school allowance was believed to keep ACC vs SEC rivalries like Clemson vs South Carolina, Florida vs Florida State, Georgia Tech vs Georgia, Kentucky vs Louisville. After the ACC made their announcement, the SEC went conference only so those games will not happen, but I had read the singular nonconference opponent must be an instate of the ACC school, but Pitt may be keeping their game vs Mia(Oh) after moving it back a week. Divisions are abolished for this year, all 14 teams, plus Notre Dame, will compete in one division essentially for the league championship of which Notre Dame is eligible (ND will play an ACC 10 game schedule). League title game will be played either 12/12 or 12/19 in Charlotte.
Big Ten - Games will begin 9/3 with teams playing 10 games vs only conference opponents. Games will be vs the original scheduled 9 opponents, plus one other cross division team, although previous dates have been substantially changed (Michigan - Ohio State is now 10/24 for instance rather than the original Saturday after Thanksgiving). It has been said that as many as 41 of the 70 can be rescheduled if necessary without effecting the other games. League title game will be played either 12/5, 12/12 or 12/19 in Indianapolis.
Big Xll - It has not been announced when week 1 will be, speculated to be mid to late September with teams playing all 9 conference teams plus 1 nonconference opponent. League Title game will be played either 12/5, 12/12 or 12/19 at Cowboy Stadium (Jerry World).
Conference USA - No official statement. It is believed their games will start in early September against the 8 regularly scheduled conference opponents. Teams may schedule as many nonconference games as they want (up to 4 although 4 nonconference games seems unlikely). One example, Middle Tennessee State may play a home-and-home with out of conference opponent Troy. I am not aware of CUSA's leage title game plans at the moment.
Mid American Conference - No agreement as school Presidents met on Thursday and plan to meet again Saturday. The MAC had 11 games scheduled vs Big Ten this year and combined, the total payout the MAC is losing is $10.5 million. The MAC filed a lawsuit related to those cancellations and the economic losses as part of it. 80-85% of MAC school athletic department funding comes from football.
Mountain West - Games will begin 9/26 with teams playing 8 conference games and an option of up to 2 nonconference games. Some have reported this model was put in place to allow Air Force to compete against their Commander-in-Chief Trophy rivals to still play. League title game will be played either 12/5, 12/12 or 12/19.
PAC-12 - Games will begin 9/26 with teams playing 10 games only vs conference opponents. League title game will be played either 12/18 or 12/19 at the home stadium of a league team (had formerly been planned at Las Vegas Raiders new stadium).
SEC - Games will begin 9/26 with teams playing a 10 game schedule only vs conference opponents while retaining the two division East West model. As of this morning, the full 10 game schedule for each team was not announced. League title game to be played 12/19 in Atlanta.
Sun Belt - Games will begin 9/3 with teams playing an 8 game schedule vs conference opponents and scheduling as many nonconference games as they want up to 4 (although having 4 seems unlikely). League title game is still slated for 12/5, but can be adjusted if necessary.
In other news:
The NCAA board of directors announced each division would make their own decision regarding fall sports. Division ll and lll canceled. Division l (IA/FBS and lAA/FCS) set a 8/21 deadline for their decision.
Some PAC12 players put forth a "We Are United" campaign for 50% revenue sharing, pay cuts for staff and administrators, name image and likeness control and health and safety protocols. Some players from the Big Ten and Mountain West have done something similar, except their requests focus on health and safety rather than revenue sharing and compensation.
Players are able to opt out of the 2020 season due to health concerns and still retain their eligibility and scholarships. Some high profile names have done so in the Big Ten with comments on plans to return next season or prepare for the NFL draft. The NFL gave a deadline for their players to opt out, which was yesterday. I am unsure if and when there is a deadline for college athletes to do the same. College football teams have 85 scholarship players and up to 125 total members of the team that include walk-ons and scout team players.
And last, but not least, Jim Harbaugh...during a Big Ten coaches group phone/video call showed a photo of an Ohio State assistance coach appearing to engage in on-field instruction with a player before the date the NCAA says coach-player interaction is allowed upon which OSU HC Ryan Day says "how about you worry about your team and I'll worry about mine". Later that day it was reported that Day in a team meeting said "they better hope for mercy rule because we are going to hang 100 on them". Jim Harbaugh is 0-5 vs Ohio State. OSU has scored 62 and 57 vs Michigan the last two years.
Nobody knows if they will play this season, but atleast we have a plan if they can green light this thing.
Highly skeptical that there will be a season. And even if they start I don't see how it gets finished.
I did laugh pretty hard a couple of weeks ago when the State of New Jersey announced that 500 fans would be allowed to attend Rutgers' games and then someone tweeted out asking why they'd consider doubling attendance during a pandemic. 😛
"My friends say I'm ugly I got a masculine face." Tom Waits
I've heard some schools talk about attendance and potential for fans, like in the MAC, or your Rutgers example. Some of these places can socially distance the seating chart and still have their average 2019 attendance.
I don't know what is going to happen so I'm not going to spend any time trying to figure it out. I am going to take a look at some of the early matchups so I can better pick a side for wagering. Damn sure I'll be finding some games to bet on!
Will be searching out some odds and lines this weekend just in case we actually get some games.
The MAC announced today they are canceling fall football with potential of playing it in the spring.
My life won't be the same without MACtion that is for sure.
Reports are that other school Presidents are concerned about long-term impacts of COVID on student athletes who might contract the disease and their potential liability issues. The NCAA said this week that schools were not permitted to issue liability waivers to their athletes regarding covid.
Don't consider myself much of a Hockey or NBA fan so I have no frame of reference there but, assuming there is a fall season and based on what we've seen with MLB, I don't think we'll get through all P5 w/out some major break out among a program causing cancellations (games or remainder of season) or rescheduling.
What I haven't been able to get right about is what is/was the rush to start the season in September for P5? I guess it was bowing down to the almighty we have to have championship game and it has to be on this date because that's when the network wants it.
And on another somewhat related note, what's the take here on #WeAreUnited movement?
Can't say I really have a strong opinion for/against. And I wonder what the bigger threat to actually playing is- COVID or this. But I can say I am going to grab a bag of popcorn and watch how the NCAA and some of the AD & Conference Commish pinheads deal with this. This will be interesting.
Hey Chris.
I think the biggest threat to the season is what the players would be doing when they are not at the football facility. It is the nightlife or the friends and people they interact with that poses a threat of infection and then potential spread to other teammates. A bubble for college student athletes is not practical...and these are kids, who might not always make the best decisions. For professional athletes it is different, although their decision making can still be suspect - I just find it really hard to see that even with the best attempts and efforts by the schools and athletic departments to uphold protocols, something else is going to undermine it.
As for the rush, do you mean the rush to get games started in early September vs late September or do you mean starting say mid October as opposed to September or do you mean just push it off til the spring? My understanding on the Big Ten wanting to start as early as possible in September is so they have some flexibility throughout the season to reschedule games as needed. I think the SEC and PAC12 staring in late September somewhat limits their ability to find open windows to reschedule. As for getting it started in the fall vs the spring...I don't know the details of the TV contracts, but do know these athletic departments need some revenue. 2020 without college sports has been referred to as an "ice age" for athletic departments and some may not be able to fully recover (Stanford for one has already eliminated some scholarship sports beyond 2020). No NCAA basketball tournament and no NCAA football for athletic departments that heavily rely on that income makes for a dark picture considering the coaching contracts and the debt payments they have on facility upgrades. So they are probably just hungry to get the facet turned back on and get some money coming in.
The We Are United movement in the PAC12 and what the Big Ten did are pretty different. In the PAC12 it had more to do with compensation and funding other sports, which I don't think the students involved there completely understand how sports at their schools gets funded. I'm not saying I do necessarily, but I do think I know that if you want every student athlete to share in 50% of the revenue of their sport, you essentially kill all the sports at the school. Because many sports do not make money and secondly, football subsidizes those other sports and if you take 50% of the football money and give it to the student athletes then there is less money for the other sports. So that to me was a misguided attempt on their part. If you dig down though, I think everyone can say that how the money has gotten used in terms of coaching compensation and lavish facilities (excessive) certainly could be used better in a different system. That different system just isn't going be what the We Are United PAC12 kids want.
So that is probably the biggest thing with the PAC12. I don't know how many of those kids would actually boycott the season. If they do they would lose their scholarship. Opting out because of health and family concerns is a protected reason to maintain the scholarship with respect to covid. But not participating because you aren't going to be compensated or the administration's payroll isn't getting cut isn't something the athlete is entitled to do and keep their athletic scholarship.
In the Big Ten, their We Are United group focused on health and covid concerns. And the Big Ten had already had a plan to have third party conduct the testing, which was one of their requests. I don't see We Are United being any kind of problem in the Big Ten. In the PAC12? It probably won't there either. If there was no covid and some PAC12 players put that message out and the PAC12 did nothing, there would still be a season and I don't know if the players would boycott or not. There are like 100 names I think on that. Most would probably just play. But this year with covid, the movement, suspension or cancellation of the season being more likely combined with the We Are United PAC12 movement does complicate things. I know one thing for sure, the compensation demands of the PAC12 movement are just a no-go nonstarter. I'm not saying there isn't ever any possibility of further player compensation, but not as they envision it.
Just read on one of the UCLA sites that it's looking very likely the season is getting moved to spring.
[Edited on 8/10/2020 by StratDal]
P5 top brass reportedly discussing moving the football season to the Spring. You have to be concerned about student health. This isn't the pros where it's the players' sole focus, this is extracurricular even though it's huge money for schools. No school or conference wants to make it a liability.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29629669/power-5-talking-no-fall-football
Several sources have told ESPN over the past 48 hours that the postponement or cancellation of the football season seems inevitable. Many of those sources believed it ultimately will take a Power 5 conference to move things in that direction and that either the Big Ten or Pac-12 would probably be the first league to do it.
"Nobody wanted to be the first to do it," a Power 5 coach told ESPN, "and now nobody will want to be the last."
There is a moral liability for the athlete's health. And there is the financial liability for it. The school Presidents don't want to be on the hook for either. The Trevor Lawrence led #WeWantToPlay movement from yesterday seems to keep the hope of playing on life support, but the decision makers look at everything involved and the risk is enormous.
Pac12 reportedly looking to secure loans for member schools in the event of no football.
The NCAA controls little beyond eligibility, so it's like states rights, it's all up to the conferences to figure out what they want to do with football. A latest point of speculation, would Iowa and Nebraska play football on their own vs whomever if the Big Ten cancels?
A latest point of speculation, would Iowa and Nebraska play football on their own vs whomever if the Big Ten cancels?
They probably could, but the B1G could also probably make sure it's not on TV as the TV rights are negotiated at the conference level.
The financial impact of no college football on merchandise, food and beverage vendors is staggering. Heck, there's hundreds of college towns where folks who live close to the stadium make money on charging people to park on driveways and lawns. The far-reaching implications are massive.
It certainly has been an interesting day in the world of college football. Rumors and speculation rules the day. And some coaches speaking out:
Mountain West Postpones 2020 Fall Sports
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. – The Mountain West has announced the indefinite postponement of all scheduled fall sports contests and MW championship events in response to ongoing challenges with the effective mitigation and management of the COVID-19 virus in conjunction with athletic competition. The MW Board of Directors prioritized the physical and mental health and well-being of the Conference’s student-athletes and overall campus communities in its decision – as it has done throughout the course of the pandemic.
The fall sports affected by today’s decision include men’s and women’s cross country, football, women’s soccer and women’s volleyball (with the exception of the unique circumstances involved with the military service academies). Last week, the league announced that all fall competition in the sports of men’s and women’s golf, men’s and women’s tennis, women’s swimming and diving, men’s and women’s indoor track and field, softball and baseball was canceled. At this time, there are ongoing discussions regarding the status of winter sports.
The Mountain West will begin to explore the feasibility of rescheduling fall sports competition, including the possibility of those sports competing in the spring, and develop options for consideration. Athletically-related activities and training opportunities for enrolled student-athletes will also be evaluated consistent with NCAA legislation and guidance, as well as state, local and campus parameters.
“Nothing is more important than the health and well-being of our students, student-athletes, coaches, faculty, staff and overall communities,” said Dr. Mary Papazian, President at San José State University and Chair of the MW Board of Directors. “Through the hard work of many over the past several months, the Conference made every effort to create an opportunity for our student-athletes to compete, and we empathize with the disappointment this creates for everyone associated with our programs. The best interests of our students and student-athletes remain our focus and we will persist in our efforts to forge a viable and responsible path forward.”
“Since the start of the pandemic, our membership and staff have been working diligently to prepare for a fall sports season,” said MW Commissioner Craig Thompson. “We were hopeful we could carefully and responsibly conduct competition as originally scheduled with essential protocols in place. However, numerous external factors and unknowns outside our control made this difficult decision necessary. I fully understand the impact of this outcome on our student- athletes, coaches, administrators and staff who work so hard daily to play the sports we all love, and I share in their disappointment. We will continue to navigate this pandemic together, overcome the obstacles and return to intercollegiate athletics at the earliest opportunity.”
"The MW Board of Directors prioritized the physical and mental health and well-being of the Conference’s student-athletes and overall campus communities in its decision – as it has done throughout the course of the pandemic."
Not contracting covid is better than contracting covid, but the idea of canceling football to protect the physical and mental health of the student athletes has been questioned and debated today. Not sure if anyone here has thoughts?
I do think many of these students are safer and better off in their football facilities than in their own homes and communities (if they are going to do remote instruction rather than on-campus).
And...if you are going to have on-campus instruction, then doesn't that pose a risk to all students? It would seem to follow to me if you cancel fall sports, you cancel on-campus instruction as well.
Reading and hearing a lot of this type stuff, from Louisville WR Dez Fitzpatrick:
Dez Fitzpatrick
@dezfitz8
We have protocols and procedures we go through on a daily basis that will WILL NOT happen while we are at home.... @Matt_t_Summers
and our medical staff have done a wonderful job keeping us safe!! #WeWantToPlay LETS COME UP WITH A SAFE PLAN TO BENEFIT ALL OF US
If the vast majority of the P5 schools plan on moving the season to the Spring, it's just stubborn to go alone in the Fall. How far will teams have to travel to find another school to play? What kind of money is there? If Nebraska wants to play in the Fall while the rest of the BIG10 plays in the Spring, that's fine since they aren't even really a BIG10 school anyways 😉 (take Maryland and Rutgers with you!)
Also, everyone knows [EDIT] Jim Harbaugh is a huge douche and not a health expert, not the guy we need to hear from.
I do think many of these students are safer and better off in their football facilities than in their own homes and communities (if they are going to do remote instruction rather than on-campus).
P5 aren't commuter schools, Penn State has kids coming from Belle Glade FL, they would have to be put up in a dorm. Upperclassmen might have off-campus housing, but it's not like they can stay with Mom and Dad at home anyways. But it all depends on how the schools choose to proceed with their classes, and I can't imagine it will be consistent within each conference. Even in a normal semester, dorms can be breeding grounds for viruses and disease - how often do we see measles and mumps quickly spread among tightly-packed 19 years olds? And again, these are kids being put at risk because there is money involved. With all of the logistics and factors at play, I think waiting to see if cases recede by the Spring is the responsible move.
[Edited on 8/11/2020 by porkchopbob]
Well fellas, what do you think?
Everything in Moderation. Including Moderation.
Well fellas, what do you think?
BIG10 is the first to push it to Spring. Sucks, but the reality is student health is always going to come first.
If the vast majority of the P5 schools plan on moving the season to the Spring, it's just stubborn to go alone in the Fall. How far will teams have to travel to find another school to play? What kind of money is there? If Nebraska wants to play in the Fall while the rest of the BIG10 plays in the Spring, that's fine since they aren't even really a BIG10 school anyways 😉 (take Maryland and Rutgers with you!)
Also, everyone knows John Harbaugh is a huge douche and not a health expert, not the guy we need to hear from.
I do think many of these students are safer and better off in their football facilities than in their own homes and communities (if they are going to do remote instruction rather than on-campus).
P5 aren't commuter schools, Penn State has kids coming from Belle Glade FL, they would have to be put up in a dorm. Upperclassmen might have off-campus housing, but it's not like they can stay with Mom and Dad at home anyways. But it all depends on how the schools choose to proceed with their classes, and I can't imagine it will be consistent within each conference. Even in a normal semester, dorms can be breeding grounds for viruses and disease - how often do we see measles and mumps quickly spread among tightly-packed 19 years olds? And again, these are kids being put at risk because there is money involved. With all of the logistics and factors at play, I think waiting to see if cases recede by the Spring is the responsible move.
So do you dislike the University of Michigan or the Baltimore Ravens? Heh Heh...
Everything in Moderation. Including Moderation.
So do you dislike the University of Michigan or the Baltimore Ravens? Heh Heh...
Ha, whoops. Meant Jim Harbaugh.
John Harbaugh seems like an ok dude. And, for the record, no opinion either way on either UM or the Ravens.
[Edited on 8/11/2020 by porkchopbob]
Well fellas, what do you think?
BIG10 is the first to push it to Spring. Sucks, but the reality is student health is always going to come first.
Edited - missed the point. wide to the left ...
[Edited on 8/11/2020 by Rusty]
So do you dislike the University of Michigan or the Baltimore Ravens? Heh Heh...
Ha, whoops. Meant Jim Harbaugh.
John Harbaugh seems like an ok dude. And, for the record, no opinion either way on either UM or the Ravens.
[Edited on 8/11/2020 by porkchopbob]
As you might know I am a huge UM fan and I wasn't happy when they hired him a handful of years ago. And I kind of agree on your take of him.
Everything in Moderation. Including Moderation.
As you might know I am a huge UM fan and I wasn't happy when they hired him a handful of years ago. And I kind of agree on your take of him.
I can imagine. I graduated a Badger but Wisco never had much of a rivalry with UM.
And as a Packers fan, Harbaugh has been a pissy thorn in our side as a player and a coach (more so coach) but I'd still dislike him for being a constant blowhard.
There are many different points to get into on this.
All I can say right now, for me, I knew long ago this was doubtful. Still I feel like when you know a family member is dying and it is just a matter of time. Then when they go I fully realize just how hard it is going to be without them and what they meant. Actually in some ways this is more difficult. Nobody here really knows me so I'm sure that comparison is going to be off putting to some. That's fine. I don't care. Still some chance we get some games. If not get over it and move on. There are a lot more people out there that this hurts more than me.
There are a lot more people out there that this hurts more than me.
For sure, and I get your comparison. I think we've all been crushed by this in some way. It sucks for the kids, especially the seniors. It sucks for student trainers, sports med students. It sucks for the people who work at the stadium. It sucks for the TV crews who work the games. It sucks for the restaurants that did their business on game day. Sucks for the people who made money parking cars on their front lawn.
But that's basically 2020 for everyone who doesn't make hand sanitizer. NCAA tourney and other college sports already went dark, hopefully things change by Spring. It could still happen.
I think I can safely count myself among the biggest NCAA football fans in the world. IMO - the decision to play should be made by the NCAA and should be an "all or nothing" decision. I don't think that a "partial season" played by only a few conferences should be allowed. A situation where (for example) the SEC and ACC play a conference-only schedule in the fall - followed by a spring season (all other conferences) will only produce chaos.
I touched on (and then punted) earlier on the fact that these football players share classrooms with everyday Jills and Joes. These folks deserve consideration, too.
The NCAA can not cancel or postpone any games or season. All they can do as far as I know is make every player ineligible for some reason I assume would be health and well-being or something.
Many football players do not actually go to class, they have been doing remote learning before became a thing with cornoavirus on these campuses. As far as mingling on campus and in the bars, the house parties, one could make the case that the football players would be safer in and around campus if the rest of the student body learned remotely...although that sets kind of a bad image.
And speaking of image, I think that is really what it comes down to for the university presidents who have voted to cancel fall sports. Nobody wants to be on the wrong end of a bad coronavirus story. Nobody wants one of their student athletes to be victim of a serious fight and hospitalization from contracting covid - they don't want to have to live with that burden for one, but for two, they don't want their university in the headlines and the subject of bad PR on the chance one of their athletes becomes one of the very small minority of cases that ends badly (either with long-term post-covid issues, or the smaller chance of death). Football brings in a ton, a ton of money for the Power 5 conference athletic departments, but these Presidents have much larger budgets on their plate for the entire university in which athletics is just one part. They have the big picture to worry about and the risk, the downside potentially, is just not worth it to them. Somebody gets coronavirus in a biology class at University of Indiana, nobody hears about that, or very few people. The left tackle at Indiana gets coronavirus after the decision was made to attempt at playing a fall football season and it is headline news with interview requests begging questions like "are you putting profits ahead of safety", "are your students at risk of serious illness and death because of your decision", etc. No President wants to have that happen.
So it is partially out of safety concerns of the student athletes, but it is also a self-serving decision to protect the university. Throw in the fact that the NCAA revoked the hold harmless and liability waivers some schools were having athletes sign and it gets much more risky financially for the schools (Cory Booker and Richard Blumenthal pressured the NCAA in June to revoke such waivers and the NCAA did so August 6th).
ACC medical "experts" think football can be played safely (Dr. Cameron Wolfe Duke infection disease specialist chairs the ACC medical advisory board). PAC12 medical "experts" think football is unsafe to play. Sound familiar? Nobody agrees on this stuff and how to live with it, what is ok, what isn't ok. The struggles and disagreements taking place related to college football are the very same ones that have been taking place in this country for months. Different opinions are leading to different decisions. Is one opinion better or more right than the other?
The Myocarditis heart condition has been in the news a lot related to college athletes and the how it could effect football players who might get covid. Reportedly the Presidents just learned about it after Friday and has influenced them to cancel. But this heart condition has been known since the 1990s. Covid is not the only condition that causes it. Athletes have died from heart disease similar to that caused by myocarditis (Hank Gathers, Reggie Lewis). The condition of myocarditis possibly effecting student athletes is not new, but coronavirus is new. If one of these kids were to die from myocarditis caused by a positive covid case resulting in the athlete playing football in a university sanctioned sport, that would just be devastating for the university to deal with. This could happen without covid, a player could've died from myocarditis in 2019, but now with the spot light and microscope on every decision as it relates to coronavirus it's different.
So the ACC knows about this risk, they all have known about this risk of scared heart tissue and heart disease. That is not new, but apparently to these school presidents it is new.
Check out this tweet by this medical expert:
Michael J. Ackerman MD,PhD
@MJAckermanMDPhD
·
19h
If #medical experts for the Pac-12 and Big 10 #CollegeFootball conferences are using the very good @JAMACardio
paper on cardiac MRI findings in #COVID19 patients as compelling for cancellation, that is a big FOUL. The data does NOT support this at all! #WeWantToPlay #RefuseToFear
More themes of, who actually agrees on this stuff!
Interesting story about Fresno State, and I image could apply to other California universities...nobody has been on campus since March with zero organized team activities. How Fresno going to play football? I can get MWC (Fresno, San Jose, San Diego State) and the PAC12 (Cal, Stanford, UCLA, USC) having to cancel if their teams can't play. But I do find it more troubling that other Presidents and conferences seem to be influenced by a sudden realization of heart disease that yes, covid can cause, but existed in athletes long before corona and is caused by other viruses in certain people. Sure, the Presidents are out to protect the athletes, but they are also out to protect themselves, which one played a bigger role in their decision? We'll never know, so they can go on saying it is about health and safety of the students all while they know it is about the health and safety of their own university. Not that it is wrong necessarily, but the full story isn't being reported so it looks like they take the moral high ground when their motives are more self serving.
Anyway...ACC, Big Xll and SEC still moving forward with playing. Some schools from the Big Ten appear to still want to play without the Big Ten. We'll see when these school presidents get cold feet and realize the risk to their brand and balance sheet isn't worth the TV money.
I think I can safely count myself among the biggest NCAA football fans in the world. IMO - the decision to play should be made by the NCAA and should be an "all or nothing" decision. I don't think that a "partial season" played by only a few conferences should be allowed. A situation where (for example) the SEC and ACC play a conference-only schedule in the fall - followed by a spring season (all other conferences) will only produce chaos.
I touched on (and then punted) earlier on the fact that these football players share classrooms with everyday Jills and Joes. These folks deserve consideration, too.
Rusty, regarding the NCAA making an overarching decision (which I agree would be nice), they just can't seem to do that. The conferences have too much power for something like that to happen IMO. Can you imagine if say, leagues or divisions in pro sports could basically do what they wanted? And yes, I know pro and college are different but I think the analogy somewhat applies.
Everything in Moderation. Including Moderation.
The NCAA can not cancel or postpone any games or season. All they can do as far as I know is make every player ineligible for some reason I assume would be health and well-being or something. ...
The NCAA is the governing body of college sports. They're the body that makes the rules and regulations - including imposing fines, scholarship restrictions and even "death penalties" to programs who run too far afoul of said rules and reg's. I've been involved in amateur athletics for most of my life. I might be wrong here, but I do believe that they have the power to cancel a season if they deem it a good idea. I'm not trying to be obstinate or anything, but if you can show me where the NCAA doesn't have this jurisdiction I'd certainly appreciate it.
Conferences essentially control the show now, the NCAA has little power over them:
I should add too, that I do not envy the decision these presidents have made. I'm not even saying it is the wrong decision because they are looking at all the variables that effect them and they must ultimately live with. It is their show and outcome good bad or indifferent. I just think that we aren't being told the full story on their decision and the fact that some presidents vote one way and others vote the other way tells us not all the data and evidence points in one clear direction.
