1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

College football 2020 offseason thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by micropolitan guy, Apr 1, 2020.

  1. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    You seem like a nice man, so I don’t want to go too over the top here. That said ... with respect to this-or-that news item, where so-and-so took his/her undergraduate degree has got to be one of the silliest things that sports journalism types trot out there. Just from my small circle of colleagues (long, long ago) I can give you former APSE presidents, big-time beat writers, and major-award-winning columnists, nary a one of which went to a big-time (or even especially prominent small-time) school.
     
  2. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    If the Big Ten’s decision was really rooted in pure safety, it would.

    Something else is afoot here. Some of these schools are willing to test 3,4 times a week, do whatever is needed. An unusual level of protocol that would be acceptable to just about anyone.

    The commissioner doesn’t want a season to happen. He may be right, BTW, as right can be. And at least some of the presidents want to send a message to America.

    The key pushback today was Michigan and Ohio State coaches. That’s why Harbaugh’s letter solely focused on the testing safety and cited Michigan’s own medical officer.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2020
  3. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    I went to a Division III school that has already canceled fall sports and in fact in-person attendance. And that has nothing to do with my opinions on this issue, as it shouldn't since I graduated 50 years ago.
     
  4. maumann

    maumann Well-Known Member

    I apologize profusely for the insinuation that the comment was directed at Marty's school. I have the utmost respect for an education from Radford.

    I was MartDawg's editor at NASCAR.com from 2001 through 2007, and he'd always talk smack about Virginia Tech college football. I'd tease him about why he didn't seem to bring up his own college's football team, knowing that Radford didn't play the sport.

    Obviously, I didn't edit myself clearly enough to make the correct point.

    Again, I am sorry.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2020
  5. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Or the presidents are being told by their bosses that the college's insurer has threatened to drop their policy if the season happens.

    But, yeah, sending a message to America is probably it.
     
    SFIND likes this.
  6. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Oh, for heavens’ sake, it’s not that big a deal. Go forth and peccadillo no more!
     
    maumann likes this.
  7. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    Know what's really interesting about this? Coaches are pushing back against their presidents. And they may be winning. At least for now.
    It's somewhat difficult to figure this all out, but the Freep story earlier in the day sure seemed definitive. "It's done," one unnamed person told them. Said it was a 12-2 vote with only Iowa and Nebraska, from two states comparatively unscathed by the Trumpandemic, voting to play on. Said the announcement was coming later in the day.
    Jack Palance's Curly once said, "Day ain't over yet," but it's close, and there's no announcement.
    In other words, it's possible that the following timeline developed:
    * Presidents vote 12-2 to bail on the fall.
    * Somebody -- perhaps from one of the dissident factions -- leaks word that the end is near.
    * Coaches get enraged, thump their chests and decree, "We Want To Play."
    * Presidents either re-convene and back down or don't meet again.

    This isn't shaping up to be a good look from the presidents, who seem to have begun the day in firm conviction that playing was medically unwise but cowered in fear when their coaches took to the pulpit. Or are they simply waiting to draft a precise statement enumerating everything?
     
    SFIND likes this.
  8. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    The Presidents are not going to back down because Scott Frost says he wants to play.
     
  9. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    The presidents want to play. Contrary to some thinking, they do not want to be known as the people who killed college football.

    But this is big business at work. And the lawyers are deeply involved.
     
  10. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    Totally agree. The people who are going to force the call to shut it down have a hell of a lot more pull than a coach.
     
  11. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    I hope you're right. The leaders of R1 and R2 universities should not listen to any football coach. In particular, the president of a Big Ten university should be hacked off that his coach, who hasn't achieved anything, is mouthing off about playing "outside the Big Ten" if necessary. Good Tebow. The Big Ten had this policy for decades that it wouldn't admit anybody who wasn't a member of the AAU. It suddenly rescinded the policy when it wanted to add another football brand name, thereby giving the University of Nebraska an affiliation it hadn't earned on academic and research merit.
     
  12. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page