šŸˆ Welcome to the SEC...from SEC shorts. "Woah, that's a lot of baggage."

I think you're barking up the wrong tree...

I did say if you don't want Yale to have influence... you have to remove Yale. If the SEC and other programs want to make their own league, so be it... but as it stands now I have no issue for Yale having influence. BTW, influence isn't the same thing a control, which they do not have.
If you have these smaller conferences and schools with the majority of the vote how can you say the majority doesn't have control? Why do we see the majority of P5 schools wanting to break away from the NCAA? (Knight commission survey within the last year said such.) They have that control which is the reason Sankey mentioned "other schools making rules for the SEC."

Why should an FCS school dictate how many scholarships a school can provide? Or, why should they limit how many programs a school can, or should, have?

You're right if we don't want a school like Yale dictating SEC policy it's time to get rid of Yale. That would also include 75% of the rules committee.

I'm all for getting rid of FCS schools on the schedules and allowing them to have their own "league." If we as a fan base want those games gone we also have to demand those schools have no say in how CFB is ran.
 
Different prices for each game, but for instance here is the Ole Miss game. I can't roll with that big package alone with the Direct TV unfortunately, but the other two I can find a way.

View attachment 18266
They think a lot of their tents. I’ll throw in a couple of hundos. Is there a deal with not a ā€œpremium reserved locationā€? I’m not a cheap seats guy, but not a ring side guy either.
 
First of all, why would a school like Yale have any input on what happens at this level? Or a head coach at Texas State? A head coach from the Pennsylvania Athletic conference?

Look at the percentage of schools on the rules committee which from schools who, quite frankly, aren't in the same universe as Texas, Bama, Ohio State, USC, et. al.. And they should have the majority on a rules committee setting rules and procedures for schools and conference that are a far cry from being in their "peer group."

My analogy was spot on from my point of view. A smaller city telling larger cities "these are the rules you have to live by" when comparing the two is akin to comparing apples to oranges.

We only need to look back at 2020 to see a lot of these folks don't have the best interest of college football in mind. How many of these guys actually saw a football season in 2020? Hell, the B1G didn't in reality: the others just quit.

DIII making rules for Power 5 schools/conferences. That makes no sense, at all. to me. It never has.

DivisionTitleName & InstitutionConferenceTerm
Expiration
FBS​
Coordinator of Officiating William 'Bill' Carollo
Big Ten Conference
Big Ten Conference
AUG 2022​
FBS​
Head Football Coach David Shaw
Stanford University
Pac-12 Conference
AUG 2022​
FBS​
Head Football Coach Jacob Spavital
Texas State University
Sun Belt Conference
AUG 2021*​
FBS​
Senior Associate AD- Development & Administration Zac Selmon
University of Oklahoma
Big 12 Conference
AUG 2023​
FCS​
Head Coach - Football Anthony Reno
Yale University
The Ivy League
AUG 2021​
FCS​
Head Football Coach Demario Warren
Southern Utah University
Big Sky Conference
AUG 2024​
II​
AD, Director of Athletics Josh Looney
Missouri Western State University
Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association
AUG 2022​
II​
Head Football Coach Bill Zwaan
West Chester University of Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania State Athletic Conference
AUG 2022​
II​
SWA, Assistant Commissioner Kirsten Ford
Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference
Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference
AUG 2023​
III​
AD Douglas Zipp
Ohio Wesleyan University
North Coast Athletic Conference
AUG 2022​
III​
Assistant Football Coach - Offensive Coordinator Stan Hodgin
Shenandoah University
Old Dominion Athletic Conf.
AUG 2024​
III​
Head Coach John Pearce
Sul Ross State University
American Southwest Conference
AUG 2024​
You’re absolutely spot on concerning this aspect of needed change. I just don’t understand why the separation from the NCAA couldn’t have happened without blowing the conferences up. That’s all … I don’t like the idea of super conferences where you might play a team in the other division once every 5 or 6 years. To me, 14 teams were two too many. And 8 conference games were one too few.
 
Read some history... America has been bitching and fighting about the same stuff every since it because a country... maybe even before it was a country... What we see now is no different than what we saw over a standing army, over a treasury, the election of 1876... and on and on.

My point is that in 55 years the "Fans" of college football will be bitching about some other change in the game that will "destroy" the game "they've loved and played".
As an FYI, in my early life, I was a historian by training/education (BA and MA) but I also possess a layman’s passion for history as it marks man’s journey through time. Sadly (for me), I didn’t pursue it as my vocation. At the time, there simply wasn’t much money to be made in that profession without a doctorate and in my mind, law school couldn’t wait. I say that to say, thoughtful dissent isn’t bitching in my way of thinking … but I freely admit those who share my belief on that particular subject are now in the minority. It’s funny you mentioned the 1876 election. My undergraduate H thesis centered on the Rutherford B Hayes administration and there’s no way to talk about his political life in the White House without addressing what became known as the ā€œCorrupt Bargainā€. And the Americans who ā€œbitchedā€ about the processes used to put him in office, forced Congress to address several of the election issues that truly needed to be addressed. Those issues had to be remedied in order to help preserve the still fragile Civil War damaged Republic and the contentious Reconstruction period that followed. OK … I’m hopping off my soapbox. Anyway, you and I will just have to agree to disagree on this subject as neither of us sees dissent in the same light. We do agree on at least one important subject though … RTR! And on this site, that’s what really matters.
 
As an FYI, in my early life, I was a historian by training/education (BA and MA) but I also possess a layman’s passion for history as it marks man’s journey through time. Sadly (for me), I didn’t pursue it as my vocation. At the time, there simply wasn’t much money to be made in that profession without a doctorate and in my mind, law school couldn’t wait. I say that to say, thoughtful dissent isn’t bitching in my way of thinking … but I freely admit those who share my belief on that particular subject are now in the minority. It’s funny you mentioned the 1876 election. My undergraduate H thesis centered on the Rutherford B Hayes administration and there’s no way to talk about his political life in the White House without addressing what became known as the ā€œCorrupt Bargainā€. And the Americans who ā€œbitchedā€ about the processes used to put him in office, forced Congress to address several of the election issues that truly needed to be addressed. Those issues had to be remedied in order to help preserve the still fragile Civil War damaged Republic and the contentious Reconstruction period that followed. OK … I’m hopping off my soapbox. Anyway, you and I will just have to agree to disagree on this subject as neither of us sees dissent in the same light. We do agree on at least one important subject though … RTR! And on this site, that’s what really matters.
Agree…

And I’d love to read your thesis is you still have it around and would like to share. I don’t run across many people the know or understand the 1876 election in the normal walk of life.
 
Back
Top Bottom