Case closed. No fall sports. Time to move on. For those who said they were done with Big Ten football, please keep your word for the rest of us.
Kevin Warren and the open letter
- Thread starter GeorgeFostersBat
- Start date
What a douchebag. He needs to be fired ASAP. His son is playing football in another conference that is actually going to play football. The B1G is an embarrassment
If these other conferences have a season that's going to Set the big 10 back in recruiting by 4 to 5 years. This guy son plays in a conference that's playing sounds like a set up for the big 10 to me. This guy is running the big 10 and as heart is in a different conference. Need to get rid of him now .
It was ironic of him talking about the health risks to the BT student athletes, but it is not that big a risk to his own son’s life. Like I said in another thread, the petition should not have been to play this year. It should have been a petition for him to be let go.
Total BS letter.......Not surprising though, way to many Liberal run Big schools now! What a shame that players had no say in the matter! Its their lives!! But of course concussions torn knees and broken bones aren't dangerous, but a virus that has over 98% chance of not effecting them is...................
In all reality we really don't know that the other conferences will play football or how far into the season they may go. But at least they are trying.
I wonder how many times Kevin Warren will have to address questions about his son playing both in public and private?
Far be it for me to come to Kevin Warren's defense, but has he actually made any comments in support of his son playing football this fall? It is possible that Powers wants to play, the SEC is allowing it, and there isn't a darn thing pops can do to stop him. The dude is 21 years old.
If Kevin Warren wants to be politically correct, his son (Powers Warren) should not play to be safe as B1G and Pac-12 have stated. If son plays, then Kevin should resign or be fired as there seems to be a conflict of interest. Yes, the son is 21 years old and is an adult, but "optically" as I've heard from the P.C. crowd, it is bad image and does not reflect well on Kevin's future administrative decisions that would be called into question due to inconsistency.
I don't care about PC or optics. And I disagree with the decision to postpone/cancel the B1G season, but this is a reach. Powers chose to play for an SEC team long before any of this and he is of legal age to make his own decisions. Why should he be punished? Sons do not bear the sins of the father and vice versa. Also, he is a backup TE on a mediocre SEC team that is going to get crushed in a conference only schedule. Whether the B1G is playing football or not isn't going to affect him one bit. There is no conflict of interest.
Last edited:
I think the guys needs to be fired, but he actually did have a good response to this yesterday. He said his family 'had many difficult decisions' about his son playing, and that he was going to play, but that his decision as a BT Commish was a "macro" decision involving thousands of families......
Best comment on all this that I've seen is that 'the SEC looked for reasons to play, and the BT looked for reasons not to play'. Sums it up perfectly. And w/o saying one side is right or wrong, how can it be otherwise when both parties had access to all the same info?
I'm not a P.C. person by any means. However, I've seen enough Conflict of Interest clauses thru work that I had to sign as part of training annually every year. I'm not a lawyer either. This is the gray area.
https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-is-a-conflict-of-interest-give-me-some-examples-398192
Look at the public sector quadrant of the link. That discusses someone not recusing themselves if there is a relationship with a party in the case. In this instance, there is no profiting (instead a substantial loss) and the head of the organization didn't recuse himself. If it were disclosed and B1G Legal agreed he could proceed, that is acceptable. If not, it comes back to a conflict of interest.
That would be for an Ombudsman to determine. Not you or I to determine.
Editted to add last comment: Where the hell is Mark Emmert is all this chaos?!
Last edited:
I mean you can twist this in all sorts of ways you want it to be viewed.
For example:
- People say the Big Ten, Pac 12, etc. did it to save themselves from paying out lawsuits.
- Well, the Big Ten is also potentially sacrificing large amounts of revenue that the schools desperately need in order to make a safe decision.
- You can make a point that the SEC/ACC/Big 12 are trying to identify the ways to be able to play football vs. not to.
- Well, you can also say the SEC is willing to overlook concerns in order to earn the football revenue that is even more important to them financially.
- From the ACC's or Big 12's perspective, they desperately want to make certain schools happy because they're afraid they could leave their conference (ACC: Clemson/FSU; Big 12: Texas/Oklahoma). So they're doing it to make those schools happy and willing to overlook concerns for it.
Good Luck Randy Wade! I doubt if it moves the needle, but you never know till you face the administration directly.
https://abc6onyourside.com/sports/b...t-a-dad-who-sees-something-worth-fighting-for
No surprise here. Nebraska, Iowa, and Ohio State are upset. Some are taking legal action. Look at the quote below regarding lack of confidence in the decision now and future decisions. Pressure is mounting. and other B1G breathren might be feeling the same.
https://omaha.com/sports/college/hu...cle_db9f0f71-bfa1-5ef6-933b-4790ab4888c6.html
“the lack of transparency, hypocrisy and failure of leadership gives us no confidence in this decision, or future decisions.”
https://omaha.com/sports/college/hu...cle_db9f0f71-bfa1-5ef6-933b-4790ab4888c6.html
“the lack of transparency, hypocrisy and failure of leadership gives us no confidence in this decision, or future decisions.”
Aren't you the pillock who was claiming that you could agree to anything in a contract last week but now arguing that a contract that provides for majority control can be overridden? Not that I'm surprised that you cannot develop a coherent argument based on the quality of your other posts. BTW, Chief, you might want to look up the concepts of standing and third party beneficiary.
Last edited:
A bully from a pulpit of a forum calling me Pillock and Chief. That sounds so familiar to what Libs cry foul when Trump does this. Are you a Trumpster? 
A few other key observations:
buckeyeswire.usatoday.com/2020/08/23/every-big-ten-athletic-director-wanted-fall-football-kevin-Warren/
Looks like Kevin has lost the confidence of AD’s in B1G. That doesn’t bode well.
Still have yet to see NCAA President Mark Emmert’s make any comment regarding the mess he presides over.
A few other key observations:
buckeyeswire.usatoday.com/2020/08/23/every-big-ten-athletic-director-wanted-fall-football-kevin-Warren/
Looks like Kevin has lost the confidence of AD’s in B1G. That doesn’t bode well.
Still have yet to see NCAA President Mark Emmert’s make any comment regarding the mess he presides over.
Last edited:
Thanks for posting this informative link, MBF.
While a number of these threads speak to the fact that teams from other conferences have already begun using the "you can play football in our conference and we'll get you to the league sooner" angle when recruiting or trying to flip high school players, a potentially overlooked element is the fact that many/most B1G/Pac-10 coaches will be taking salary reductions as schools attempt to close the cost/revenue gap.
If I am a good coach -- HC or assistant -- I want to 1) play football, and 2) earn what I am worth. I expect that it is only a matter of time before we see some big name coaches move from the B1G and Pac-10 conferences to schools in the three other Power 5 conferences. ADs at those schools will play the same "we play football" and you won't be asked for salary reductions if you come to our school and conference card.
The B1G's decision to not play fall football will have a very long tail. If conferences that are choosing to play football are successful in doing so, the B1G will have damaged its reputation and competitiveness for a decade or more. If conferences that are playing fall football experience significant illnesses -- or, heaven forbid, deaths of players or coaches -- or end up cancelling their seasons after just a few games, then the B1G's and Pac-10's decision to postpone/cancel the 2020 season will be a good recruiting angle for those schools.
I personally would have liked to see the B1G at least start the season and adjust as needed week-to-week. High schools are playing, other conferences are playing, most schools in the B1G are conducting in-person classes. Playing football in an environment that can be somewhat more controlled than what is possible in high schools and classrooms has a better chance of success. Give me a "can do" attitude every day v. a "can't do" attitude.
I believe that it was Abraham Lincoln who said "Whether you believe that you can or that you can't, you are right." I agree!
What do others think?
Boiler Up!
I think at this point it's mostly arguing semantics about 1 season. If this is a long-term subject, then it's a whole other conversation.
At the end of the day, no program is playing a normal college football season - fall or winter/spring. They're all abbreviated, limited opponents, limited or no fans, etc. -- with definitely no clarity on postseason (even before Big 10/Pac 12's decision).
It's not going to result in the ACC suddenly becoming a football power cause people are skittish about the Big Ten's commitment to football. The Big Ten is still the richest conference in the country -- if you want to talk long term effects, it's going to be who recovers from an athletics financial crisis. The Big Ten schools are in a much better space than the Big 12 or ACC, for example.
To play devil's advocate, What If the B1G does play in the winter/spring, and plays in front of packed stadiums? Meanwhile the SEC, ACC, and BIG 12 fail to get a full season in. Would look pretty genius then. Long shot of happening. But what if?
Were in a better space. Every angle from recruiting athletes, to coaches, to AD’s and Presidents or Chancellors will be used against the B1G. If they play a full and successful season, those conferences and universities will have a leg up and use every tactic possible to negative recruit any head to head battles.
I appreciate your zealousness to stick to your position, but the Big Ten is still set up better financially because the Big Ten is still the richest conference in the US. The Big Ten pays out $54 million per school. The ACC pays out $28 million - half as much. Every school, whether fall football or not, is taking a big financial hit - testing is expensive, mostly empty stadiums, mostly empty parking lots, etc. But when things are back to normal, the Big Ten schools are going to be back to normal twice as fast given conference revenues.
And regardless of fans in the stands, if the Big Ten plays a winter/spring season which they are currently planning - they'll still get TV money.
And if you read my whole post, this shouldn't be a long term challenge if COVID gets cleaned up. In 5 years, this will be a blip on the radar. This doom and gloom that suddenly ACC football is going to be out recruiting the Big Ten because of this is silly.
Again, nobody is playing a REAL, normal season. Nobody.
If I'm Kevin Warren, I am shifting my attention to recouping lost revenue. Bring the network partners to the table and discuss the value of having THE marquee winter/spring football league with good matchups every week and no NFL to compete with. You could pick up where the NFL leaves off and have prime time B1G games 4 days a week with very little competition.
Latest posts
-
380,000 ballot images missing for 2020 election- Latest: BuilderBob6
-
-
-
-