In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 358
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Park Ridge, Ill. — The Big Ten Football Coaches and Athletic Directors met today in Park Ridge for a regularly scheduled meeting and subsequently issued the following statement with regard to pending NCAA DI legislation impacting college football:
We reviewed the 26 Rules Working Group proposals acted upon by the NCAA Board of Directors in January, some of which will become effective as early as July 1, 2013. While we applaud the work that has been done to date, we are very concerned that the timeline proposed for implementation of the proposals does not allow sufficient time for the Football Recruiting Subcommittee of the NCAA Leadership Council to thoughtfully consider the impact of the proposals.
We are specifically concerned with the following three proposals and ask that they be tabled along with Proposal 13-2:
Proposal 11-2: Athletics Personnel – Limitations on the Number and Duties of Coaches – Elimination of Recruiting Coordination Functions
Proposal 13-3: Recruiting – Deregulation of Modes and Numerical Limitations on Communication
Proposal 13-5-A: Recruiting – Elimination of Printed Recruiting Materials and Video/Audio Legislation
We have serious concerns whether these proposals, as currently written, are in the best interest of high school student-athletes, their families and their coaches. We are also concerned about the adverse effect they would have on college coaches, administrators and university resources.
We look forward to working with the NCAA toward improving the game, the recruiting process and the overall college football experience for all student-athletes.
B1G thinking of the students first like always. The way it should be.
Pretty typical move of the NCAA on this one -- "reform" that pretty much everybody agrees isn't good.
Never can act affectively.
Teein' Off on Links
Exactly. Who thinks this is positive for the student athletes? May be easy to for the NCAA since they essentially have no rules to keep track of and they have shown they will turn a blind eye to $$$ being passed around. In my mind the NCAA is a joke. Individuals trying to keep their pockets full.
NCAA is being pretty selfish....Only interested in their situation. I'm very happy to see the B1G sticking up for the student athletes and their families.
its a very real possibility that the NCAA will have nothing to do with College football in the future (4 super conferences do there own thing). They better get there act together and quickly
Jim Delany told the Chicago Tribune: "Status quo of 8 conf games "not even on the table" now. It'll be either 9 or 10. Decision in spring."
The way I see it is that the NCAA pretty much doesn't enforce any minor violations so why not deregulate in these areas so that those who keep their noses clean can keep up with the joneses. I feel bad for the kids certainly. In a best case scenario we would have an NCAA that actually enforced things regularly rather than smashing a school every once in a while to make an attempt to set an example.
When would that take effect?
Goal in life is to make the Huskers Illustrated Hall Of Fame
I would presume after Rutgers, Maryland and whomever else joins the Big Ten.
With another two teams to get to 16 and 10 conference games it will mean no more home and away series with better teams. We would fall short of the needed 7 home games. That is if we limit our games to 12 regular season games.
This post was edited by Huskers Forever 14 months ago
10 conference games is absolutely asinine unless they move to 13 game regular seasons IMO.
I agree Klein. You add a B1G championship game and a bowl game, with a 13 game season and suddenly we play 15 games a season. That's a load for student athletes to deal with.
Did either of you think it would actually cut into our OOC play?
We'd still play 12 regular season games, heck maybe even 11.
This move to 9 or 10 conference games, plus 14 teams and likely to grow conferences all leads to one thing.....
4 or 5 power conferences moving on to their own division. They each hold a conference championship game, and we have a natural final four.
That's why the Big 14 is for it. Pretty much everything it does is asinine.
And the SEC will soon follow suit.
It would be a shame if we actually had to replace our sterling contests with Wyoming, Southern Miss, and South Dakota State this year with an actual Big 10 conference game.
Having 10 conference games, 2 OOC conference games in which one of them was against a legit quality opponent, would be a huge step forward for all of college football.
But no, let us keep scheduling OOC schedules like we have put together the past 2 years. Games against Wyoming, Idaho State, Arkansas State, and South Dakota State are what college football is all about.
Yet it everything it does practically prints money.
You say your last sentence mockingly, but it's true.
College football has always been about games like that. It wouldn't be the same without them.
And we are hardly the only one who puts together schedules like that.
While I personally agree with the coaches release on the recruiting impacts (I think the rule changes are terrible) they better not waste too much time expressing their concern. The gap is only getting wider between the Pac12 and SEC right now and the longer they take to complain about the rule changes, the further ahead those 2 conferences get.
The 'old' way was to schedule these games to make money by guaranteeing home games for the big boys of college football.
The 'new' way will keep the money inside our own conference ranks. The B1G and Delany wouldn't make this move if it involved less cash coming into the fold for its conference members.
These are bad rules that are worth fighting for.
Will they actually get voted down? Maybe. Maybe not.
It is actually nice to see someone take a stand for the good of the student-athlete instead of always pushing forward to a big business model like that of corporate America. I'd still like to hold on to some belief that college athletics is somehow a benefit for the kids that actually participate in these sports.
If they want to fight them....that's fine...but they better all be getting their ducks in a row behind the scene for when they lose.
As I said, I don't like them. I don't like conference realignment. I don't like alot of things in college football these days. You and I share the same belief. I think I've just accepted the reality of the situation a little sooner. Unfortunately, the benefit anymore, is not for the kids and the dollar is the only important thing.
Actually, it has only been the last 25 or so years that college football powerhouse teams have leaned towards these powder puff scheduling tactics.
Take a look at Nebraska's schedules from the 60s, 70s and 80s. We played some very tough OOC schedules. Take a look at our 1981 OOC schedule: @ Iowa, Florida State, Penn State, Auburn. We started out 2-2 and were still playing for a National Championship on January 1st in the Orange Bowl that year.
The problem is that teams aren't being penalized for playing poor teams in their OOC schedule. The new way of scheduling 1 legit opponent and 3 near guaranteed wins is the norm as opposed to the exception. Alabama won a National Championship this past year and played Western Kentucky, Florida Atlantic, and Western Carolina in their OOC schedule. And nobody questioned the validity of how tough of a schedule that they played.
My hope is the new committee that will select the 4 teams in a Final 4 playoff format will reward teams for playing tough schedules. Particularly schools that schedule tough OOC. Not sure if it will be true, but I'll hold on to that pipe dream. (At least for now).
I wouldn't hold out much hope on that pipe dream. Until the SEC changes their ways, no one else will. And I don't see the SEC being punished anytime soon
Of course everybody is going to take a negative attitude towards change. It is the chic and popular thing to do.
While everybody mocks the status quo of college football, they are also spiteful towards any change.
I think the committee will actually do a good job of selecting the teams as long as the committee is made up of sensible and football intelligent people. Way better than the patheticHarris and Coaches polls that have decided the final 2 teams and better than the pre-BCS era of deciding champions.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports