Bruce Feldman and Tim Brando criticize the SEC's handling of LSU/Florida

[508mikey]

Wasn't ESPN outlet supplying the world with false information on Friday? I didn't read the article but I can see the title.

LSU has no choice, its can't schedule on its own and as far as I know Florida rejected all changes last week to the schedule, and right now it doesn't look like any party has come to LSU this week with any proposals.

Either way, LSU already has a virtual L, not sure if it really matters if its a forfeit, but I don't see how that is even possible as the SEC really hasn't been involved.... and neither one is going to give up their non-conference pay days for a problem the SEC created.

Would be hilarious if South Alabama beats LSU ... maybe then the dimwitted AD gets his walking papers

 

[LSU-SIU]

Would be hilarious if South Alabama beats LSU ... maybe then the dimwitted AD gets his walking papers

Actually, SA beating LSU is a possibility, they beat Mississippi State, its not a give me. Not sure I am understanding the direct connection with what that has to do with the AD though. I think he has done a great job of managing this so far, of course, there was nothing he could do, if Florida didn't want to play. If he caves, well, any support he got for getting rid of Les will vaporize in an instance. Little doubt there.

BTW, as of yesterday, there is no other option on the table that I know of to play anyone else on that date.

 

[lawgator1]

Been reading a lot of stuff on this in this thread and others--but this is the best answer to the issue YET!!!

IF--IF--IF.... Florida would've wanted to play the game it could've been played last night with a major TV audience and had the entire nation as the audience.

NO reason this could not have been done.....

COWARDS at Fla and POOR SEC LEADERSHIP by SANKEY! :salute:

1) Play the game on 11/19 in Gainesville.

2) Pay off Presbyterian and S Alabama contracts.

3) Florida gives LSU 40 % of the gate for the game, to help offset the lost revenue from the S.Ala. game.

4) Insurers agree to pay half of what they would have owed had the game stayed cancelled, and all that money goes to LSU, to compensate itself or to distribute to local businesses, as they see fit.

5) Florida loses 40 % of its gate, and all of the insurance money. LSU loses some of its gate, but not nearly all of it, because it is replacing money for which it has to make no expenditure now, i.e. no game day costs at all.

6) Gainesville businesses recoup their losses.

7) LSU has millions to give out to local businesses that can make a legitimate claim that they were going to get rich of of S. Alabama coming to town (come on, its not AS big a deal as if it was Alabama, or someone like that).

So everyone is made partly whole, but not fully. Everyone shares the pain, but not fully.

 

[jakez4ut]

1) Play the game on 11/19 in Gainesville.

2) Pay off Presbyterian and S Alabama contracts.

3) Florida gives LSU 40 % of the gate for the game, to help offset the lost revenue from the S.Ala. game.

4) Insurers agree to pay half of what they would have owed had the game stayed cancelled, and all that money goes to LSU, to compensate itself or to distribute to local businesses, as they see fit.

5) Florida loses 40 % of its gate, and all of the insurance money. LSU loses some of its gate, but not nearly all of it, because it is replacing money for which it has to make no expenditure now, i.e. no game day costs at all.

6) Gainesville businesses recoup their losses.

7) LSU has millions to give out to local businesses that can make a legitimate claim that they were going to get rich of of S. Alabama coming to town (come on, its not AS big a deal as if it was Alabama, or someone like that).

So everyone is made partly whole, but not fully. Everyone shares the pain, but not fully.

or once it was established that Gainesville wasn't going to be hit hard, play it Sunday or Monday.

there's should have been 2 or 3 options already on the table, depending on how bad the storm actually was. in this light, the fact that everyone else rescheduled and played, matters.

instead, we get Foley and Aleiva having a D**k measuring contest, with Sankey holding the ruler.

 

[The Ron Mexico]

Thanks for all the speculating, but here's what will actually happen in real life:

They're not going to play the game.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Do you know how these insurance policies are structured?
I don't but in a very rough way. Depending on the terms, I'm not sure I would even file a claim for Saturday's game if I were the Gators.

 

[onevol74]

Thanks for all the speculating, but here's what will actually happen in real life:

They're not going to play the game.

Should be a forfeit for both teams. That will take care of the records.

 

[GoBigOrangeVols]

1) Play the game on 11/19 in Gainesville.

2) Pay off Presbyterian and S Alabama contracts.

3) Florida gives LSU 40 % of the gate for the game, to help offset the lost revenue from the S.Ala. game.

4) Insurers agree to pay half of what they would have owed had the game stayed cancelled, and all that money goes to LSU, to compensate itself or to distribute to local businesses, as they see fit.

5) Florida loses 40 % of its gate, and all of the insurance money. LSU loses some of its gate, but not nearly all of it, because it is replacing money for which it has to make no expenditure now, i.e. no game day costs at all.

6) Gainesville businesses recoup their losses.

7) LSU has millions to give out to local businesses that can make a legitimate claim that they were going to get rich of of S. Alabama coming to town (come on, its not AS big a deal as if it was Alabama, or someone like that).

So everyone is made partly whole, but not fully. Everyone shares the pain, but not fully.

There is a really strong chance the insurance carriers are going to fight UF hard on having to pay on this one. UF didn't mitigate their damages. Likely that UF is only entitled to the difference between what they hoped to make on a typical Saturday game vs. what they are estimated to have made had the game been played on Sunday/Monday as it should have been. Highly doubt the carrier would pay anything towards the buyout of the Presbyterian game, as that whole situation was avoidable.

If I was advising UF's carrier I'd fight this one hard. The fact that every other impacted school came up with a contingency arrangement besides UF also weighs heavily in the favor of the insurance carrier. Wouldn't be surprised if UF ends up with next to nothing from the carriers on this one.

Similar to a scenario where your detached garage has a small fire start and you are holding a fire extinguisher and a cell phone and could easily put it out yourself or call the authorities to do the same thing, and instead of calling 911 and/or using the estinguisher, you wait until the fire spreads out of control and your house is fully engulfed with flames and then expect your insurance carrier to compensate you for a whole new house.

 

[allvol123]

Thanks for all the speculating, but here's what will actually happen in real life:

They're not going to play the game.

This. Sankey and Foley have made the possible, impossible.

 

[The Ron Mexico]

Should be a forfeit for both teams. That will take care of the records.

What "should" happen and what "will" happen are two very different things.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Thanks for all the speculating, but here's what will actually happen in real life:

They're not going to play the game.

And that is a perfectly fine outcome as long as those two teams are removed from consideration of the SECCG.

If they retain consideration they have to play that game. It has to be decided on the field. Even a one team forfeit doesn't decide it on the field it's an adminstrative outcome.

If they play the game and UF wins and they win out from here then we don't have a damn thing to say. BUT the process would have worked. Without playing the game the process isn't even allowed a chance.

The integrity of the SECCG is the only real thing that matters outside of these two teams pointing at each other and crying. I could care less what they do as long as their own biased decision is not allowed to impact the rest of the conference and, yes, specifically UT.

 

[05_never_again]

The SEC would get eaten alive by the media (except ESPN and CBS) if Florida/LSU didn't play this game and it impacted the standings. Perhaps that pressure will force them to play, because it doesn't look like Sankey is going to show some leadership and hold a forfeit over both their heads if they don't play.

 

[LSU-SIU]

What "should" happen and what "will" happen are two very different things.

Agree there.

1. What should have happened is the Commissioner giving UF some options, included in those options could have been a variety of options including LSU's options. Based on those options if the parties did not complete the obligation set by the Commissioner... a forfeit in theory could be set.

2. Because the Commissioner failed to mitigate as in #1 the impact and damages last week, the Commissioner is no longer able to threaten a forfeit as this could be easily argued that it was avoidable or even caused by the Commissioner.

btw, gobigorangevols excellent post, exactly what I was thinking. I wouldn't be destroying any e-mails if I were Florida.

 

[jakez4ut]

The SEC would get eaten alive by the media (except ESPN and CBS) if Florida/LSU didn't play this game and it impacted the standings. Perhaps that pressure will force them to play, because it doesn't look like Sankey is going to show some leadership and hold a forfeit over both their heads if they don't play.

i'm to the point now where i don't care if they play. hang another # in the L column for both and move on.

 

[508mikey]

Actually, SA beating LSU is a possibility, they beat Mississippi State, its not a give me. Not sure I am understanding the direct connection with what that has to do with the AD though. I think he has done a great job of managing this so far, of course, there was nothing he could do, if Florida didn't want to play. If he caves, well, any support he got for getting rid of Les will vaporize in an instance. Little doubt there.

BTW, as of yesterday, there is no other option on the table that I know of to play anyone else on that date.

What about his little charade with Miles last season ? Cost LSU a couple top QB recruits --- so he fires Miles this year after 1 SEC loss really ? He is LSUs Mike Hamilton

 

[jakez4ut]

Agree there.

1. What should have happened is the Commissioner giving UF some options, included in those options could have been a variety of options including LSU's options. Based on those options if the parties did not complete the obligation set by the Commissioner... a forfeit in theory could be set.

2. Because the Commissioner failed to mitigate as in #1 the impact and damages last week, the Commissioner is no longer able to threaten a forfeit as this could be easily argued that it was avoidable or even caused by the Commissioner.

btw, gobigorangevols excellent post, exactly what I was thinking. I wouldn't be destroying any e-mails if I were Florida.

which is why it should be up to the conference members. submit it, vote, and hang a loss on 'em both. move on.

 

[LSU-SIU]

What about his little sharade with Miles last season ? Cost LSU a couple top QB recruits --- so he fires Miles this year after 1 SEC loss really ? He LSUs Mike Hamilton

Well, without having to write a whole 2 page thing on it... it was never as simple as that. Louisiana politics got involved and Jimbo kind of took advantage of the situation, in part. I would say his mistake is that he trusted Jimbo a little too much and he didn't move swiftly. He corrected the lack of swiftness part for sure. Unless a legacy coach drops dead, most of the time... there is no easy way. Look, I can't say I like him, I feel like he has been on top of this fiasco, not sure anyone could have done better.... at least till this point.

Just my take, no doubt he has pressure, but that comes with the paycheck.

 

[NorthDallas40]

which is why it should be up to the conference members. submit it, vote, and hang a loss on 'em both. move on.

Actually the bylaws give the commissioner authority to do just about any damn thing he wants if he chooses to do so with regard to game postponement or cancellation. He just has to choose to do it.

 

[jakez4ut]

Actually the bylaws give the commissioner authority to do just about any damn thing he wants if he chooses to do so with regard to game postponement or cancellation. He just has to choose to do it.

i didn't see that, the thing that's gotten me is that there is a section regarding the regualr season schedule conflicts, that any failure to resolve the conflict would be submitted to the chancellors and presidents of the member institution for said resolution.

so whether it be by a democratic vote, or by a dictator, just get it done.

 

[LSU-SIU]

which is why it should be up to the conference members. submit it, vote, and hang a loss on 'em both. move on.

I'm not sure you can do that, as the Commissioner had the responsibilities to mitigate for the SEC. Basically, you want the members to punish other members for the lack of the Commissioner doing his job. The SEC had a responsibility to mitigate the damages and impact.

 

[lawgator1]

Look, its undoubtedly a mess, and everyone is going to have to be willing to give a bit to get it done. I just really resent the implication that the original decision to postpone the game was motivated by something other than legitimate concerns at the time that the storm was going to prevent it.

 

[jakez4ut]

I'm not sure you can do that, as the Commissioner had the responsibilities to mitigate for the SEC. Basically, you want the members to punish other members for the lack of the Commissioner doing his job.

im just going on what the "schedule conflict" by law said...and it says any conflicts that the institutions fail to resolve will be submitted to the conference presidents and chancellors for resolution.

that's all.

i don't care how it gets resolved....just that it does get resolved.

 

[jakez4ut]

Look, its undoubtedly a mess, and everyone is going to have to be willing to give a bit to get it done. I just really resent the implication that the original decision to postpone the game was motivated by something other than legitimate concerns at the time that the storm was going to prevent it.

i don't think that. and i think most rational people don't think that.

that said....the longer this goes on, it allows for the notion to grow and to be explored.

and if it wasn't intended to be an outcome of cancelling the game,, and it's not intended to be a "pleasant surprise" as a byproduct of cancelling the game, and the integrity of the championship is important, and you want to remove all doubt.....then FL and LSU could both come out and forfeit the game themselves and take everyone's concerns, and flush them down the toilet.

but they're not going to do that. if it works out, FL would definitely head to ATL. and so would LSU.

 

[LSU-SIU]

im just going on what the "schedule conflict" by law said...and it says any conflicts that the institutions fail to resolve will be submitted to the conference presidents and chancellors for resolution.

that's all.

i don't care how it gets resolved....just that it does get resolved.

And the Commissioner is responsible for ensuring that the SEC mitigates the potential damages. The Commissioner didn't do that, matter of fact, the Commissioner doubled down. You only have one party, you can't tango.

As much as I don't care for what Florida did, there is no way you can hang a L on them now.

 

[NorthDallas40]

i didn't see that, the thing that's gotten me is that there is a section regarding the regualr season schedule conflicts, that any failure to resolve the conflict would be submitted to the chancellors and presidents of the member institution for said resolution.

so whether it be by a democratic vote, or by a dictator, just get it done.

I have a post earlier in thread. I looked it up yesterday. The authority for game postponement or cancellation of a contest lies only with the commissioner or his designee. If the institutions do not comply with his decree on rescheduling they are in violation of the bylaws and then subject to whatever remediation process allowed by the bylaws (read that sanctions). I looked the bylaws and commissioners regulations up yesterday.

Sankey can fix this all by himself. He just has to chose to do so. Slive would have already had the game in the books. Just like UT LSU