ssckelley
Well-Known Member
I wonder if there are 4 other schools besides PSU that would vote against it. Does anybody know the process to get this one the table? Is it as simple as one of the Presidents makes the motion and it gets a second?
Delaney - Firing Coaches
- Thread starter HawkForce
- Start date
I wonder if there are 4 other schools besides PSU that would vote against it. Does anybody know the process to get this one the table? Is it as simple as one of the Presidents makes the motion and it gets a second?
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
No doubt. I wouldn't be surprised at all if at least 8 members of the conference would be in favor of giving PSU the boot.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
I believe the article said that 70% was required - so 8 out of 11 would come out to about 72%. 7 out of 11 is 63%. Assuming PSU is not allowed to vote on its own fate? Not sure how that would work, but it's obvious that PSU would not vote against itself.
If PSU is allowed to vote, then 8/12 is only 67% and you'd need 9 votes to break 70%.
According to the conference handbook, expulsion requires a vote of not less than 60 percent of the full council (a Big Ten spokesman said that figure is actually 70 percent, or eight members, which will be reflected in the 2012-13 handbook).
Last edited:
What league has the power to fire a coach? Even Roger Goodell, the most powerful commissioner in sports, can't fire a coach. He can suspend indefinately, which in affect is the same thing but the NCAA already has that same power.
I would be shocked. You think a school like Iowa or Minnesota wants to establish a precedent for removing schools from the conference? Those schools bring a lot less to the table than Penn St, don't think you want to open up the possibility of your school ending up on the chopping block some day.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
why are you asking the question if you already realize that the power to supend indefinitely is the same as the power to fire...
teachercoach
Well-Known Member
Statements, articles. 'unnamed sources' ... these are all ways for the conference to put the ball in PSU's court and for PSU to have the chance to do something first to themselves - if PSU doesn't - then the hammer is coming down from Delaney or NCAA
hawkeyeguy85
Well-Known Member
Legally, the league is amateur. And that's all that matters. Cute semantics, well, don't.
Plus, states aren't going to let third parties control hiring/firing at state institutions.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
lol at the guy thinking d1 college football is an amature endevor. iowa made more profit than any team in the NFL.
hawkeyeguy85
Well-Known Member
How much tax did the Iowa AD pay on that profit?
kmajhawk
Well-Known Member
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Iowa/Wisconsin ???
While there is a good deal of justifiable outrage over the lack of control Penn State exhibited over Joe Paterno and the way he managed to discourage reporting what he and others had been told, those five schools generate millions from their football programs and Penn State is a big part of that value. Would the ADs and presidents have the courage to actually remove Penn State from that equation? While I would hope so, I have my doubts.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
none. it all went to fund other programs, does that mean the money doesnt count or dissapear? delany is responsible for maximizing ad profits for member schools. hes absolutely within his right to take care of anything that jeprodizes that?
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
numbers for what?
hawkeyeguy85
Well-Known Member
So, then, if as you contested, college athletics is not legally a non-profit, amateur league, how do they get away with not paying taxes?
I'll hang up an listen, thanks.
I would want to see a lot more detail about Delany and the termination of coaches' contracts before I would even consider voicing an opinion on this issue.
However, the language in the Big Ten documents clearly states that PSU could be in danger of being thrown out on their ears. I hope they are listening as they move forward in determination of their course of action.
For those who stated so adamantly on this and other boards that this is only a legal matter and that the PSU football program is or should be immune from penalty, you might want to reconsider your position.
And, like it or not, the NCAA has a clause about institutional control that could be applied to PSU's circumstances.
Anybody think Big Ten recruiting won't be affected by comments from other conferences about the scandal? And, or, do you think influence, at least,will be attempted by recruiters from other conferences?
In short, PSU better be severely punished for this sickening transgression. This was truly a football program totally out of control, one that placed its own well-being ahead of human decency.
However, the language in the Big Ten documents clearly states that PSU could be in danger of being thrown out on their ears. I hope they are listening as they move forward in determination of their course of action.
For those who stated so adamantly on this and other boards that this is only a legal matter and that the PSU football program is or should be immune from penalty, you might want to reconsider your position.
And, like it or not, the NCAA has a clause about institutional control that could be applied to PSU's circumstances.
Anybody think Big Ten recruiting won't be affected by comments from other conferences about the scandal? And, or, do you think influence, at least,will be attempted by recruiters from other conferences?
In short, PSU better be severely punished for this sickening transgression. This was truly a football program totally out of control, one that placed its own well-being ahead of human decency.
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
This is a TERRIBLE idea. Then again, perhaps the league should have done a better job "vetting" PSU. I certainly hope they vetted Nebraska closely. And I am pretty sure that, though Nebby has had their "issues", i.e., Lawrence Phillips, it's hard to believe they--or ANY B1G school--has PSU-sized issues. But giving Delaney and a "committee" control? Good luck with that.
I think it's pretty clear: the conference folks need to bring PSU to the table and ask who THEY think a suitable replacement would be for them. THEN they can ask PSU WHY they should be allowed to remain in the conference. In other words, let PSU know that if a vote were held TODAY, it's assumed they would be out.
I think it's pretty clear: the conference folks need to bring PSU to the table and ask who THEY think a suitable replacement would be for them. THEN they can ask PSU WHY they should be allowed to remain in the conference. In other words, let PSU know that if a vote were held TODAY, it's assumed they would be out.
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
I'd say 8 votes is a given. The question, in my mind, is whether it would be unanimous or not...
