B1G Officially Cancels 2020 Season, What’s Next For NU?

krc1995 said:
Was there a vote? 
 

What if the heavy hitters- Ohio state, Michigan voted to okay (along with mediocre us). 
Click to expand...


https://s3.amazonaws.com/sidearm.sites/iuhoosiers.com/documents/2017/2/6/Big_Ten_2016_17_Handbook.pdf

I'm pretty sure there had to have been a vote.  According to this 2016-17 copy of the B1G Handbook, which I "found on a Google" (Thanks, Bo!) : 

Rule 4.1.3 Duties and Responsibilities: Matters Reserved to the Council.  

        D. Enforcing any of the Conference's Rules, Agreements, Appendices or Bylaws which would (i) reduce the amount of revenue to be received by a member; (ii) terminate personnel at a member university; (iii) reduce the number of sporting events in a member's schedule; or (iv) deprive participation of a member's team in either a post-season sporting event or in a telecast of a sporting event;

I'm guessing this decision would reduce the amount of revenue to be received by a member....or all members.  

 
krc1995 said:
Maybe, but he’s not entirely wrong. Maybe in delivery. Just because you lose a vote, you can’t stomp off. 
 

im confused why teams that were reported to vote no, are now stating they want to play . Something’s going on. 

And pac-12 made their reasoning transparent 
Click to expand...


Could be blow back from regents/politicians over cancelling a season making them change their mind. Maybe their realizing there is a way for them to play without the B1G so they are positioning themselves to do that. Who knows, but I agree something is up. The PAC12 voted and no one is saying anything. Some of the B1G members don't seem content.

 
WyoHusker56 said:
Could be blow back from regents/politicians over cancelling a season making them change their mind. Maybe their realizing there is a way for them to play without the B1G so they are positioning themselves to do that. Who knows, but I agree something is up. The PAC12 voted and no one is saying anything. Some of the B1G members don't seem content.
Click to expand...


Could be the arrogance of some Big Ten brass who figured the ACC, SEC and Big 12 would follow their lead and call the season off now. Instead, those three appear to have provided a thorough plan with protocols and guidance that shows their intentions of playing a season. Things can change but sitting idle is not going to help get football back any sooner so I commend Ohio State for at least giving it a shot. 

 
WyoHusker56 said:
Could be blow back from regents/politicians over cancelling a season making them change their mind. Maybe their realizing there is a way for them to play without the B1G so they are positioning themselves to do that. Who knows, but I agree something is up. The PAC12 voted and no one is saying anything. Some of the B1G members don't seem content.
Click to expand...
I wonder if this is about how to best protect against later lawsuits. The B1G conference is a private entity, but UNL and tOSU are government entities. The government entities might be able to claim sovereign immunity from later civil claims that the B1G might not be able to do. So my half-serious conspiracy: this whole song and dance is about making it very clear that it was the schools and not the conference that made the decision to play.

 
krc1995 said:
Maybe, but he’s not entirely wrong. Maybe in delivery. Just because you lose a vote, you can’t stomp off. 
 

im confused why teams that were reported to vote no, are now stating they want to play . Something’s going on. 

And pac-12 made their reasoning transparent 
Click to expand...


Right, and he had to be pressed before he would answer it. It's not like he just said "we're not playing, and we'll kick Nebraska out if they do." He tried to dodge whether or not any big ten teams could play outside the conference and then eventually caved and said no. I think that's a stupid line to draw, but it's not like he went out of his way to threaten our status. 

Also super confused on if a vote happened, and if all the "hey, we wanted to play too!" statements are just coaches and ADs trying to save face with their players. Easy to say you would have played when somebody definitively says you can't. Appeasing the general public requires a No vote, but players and fans would be hoping they voted Yes. Just seems like teams wanting to have their cake and eat it too, unless the 13-1/12-2 reports are total BS - which is also very possible.

 
Here’s the thing with this. Warren is getting slaughtered over this decision. 
 

But, it was the Presidents that voted to do this. 
 

They need to be raking their fair share of the heat. 
 


 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver said:
I wonder if this is about how to best protect against later lawsuits. The B1G conference is a private entity, but UNL and tOSU are government entities. The government entities might be able to claim sovereign immunity from later civil claims that the B1G might not be able to do. So my half-serious conspiracy: this whole song and dance is about making it very clear that it was the schools and not the conference that made the decision to play.
Click to expand...




that would not surprise me at all. lets everyone blame the big10. donors will still donate. 

 
So the ACC, Big12, and SEC are going to try and play football? I understand the CFP is not a NCAA sponsored event, but if multiple teams from the ACC, Big12 and SEC start testing positive and they have to sit out games, it is going to look really bad. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top