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

[jakez4ut]

No, I don't think there's a master plan at work. I think it's just difficult to work out how best to reschedule it given all of the factors involved. Why people think it's easy just to reschedule a game involving literally 100,000 people and tens of millions of dollars overall is beyond me. This is going to take more than a few conference calls.

The problem for this is everybody else remotely affected, rescheduled.

Why is it then impossible for FL and LSU?

Legit question.

 

[LA Vol]

It's almost impossible to reschedule this game now. Every option presented assumes a domino effect of rescheduling that creates major inconveniences and financial repercussions for other schools, other conferences and the entire CFB community. The SEC comes off as totally arrogant asking other programs to shuffle their schedules, upsetting their fans and creating unwarranted distractions for their teams because the SEC couldn't handle its own business.

We expect UGA to rearrange their schedule to accommodate UF and LSU-- when UGA was faced with the same predicament and quickly found an amicable resolution with SCAR? We expect three schools from other conferences to play musical schedules so two SEC teams can play one game that should have been immediately rescheduled? We expect the playoff and bowl selection committees to move back their decision process, affecting every conference in CFB, because the SEC commissioner can't figure out how to solve a problem that has been successfully solved dozens of times in the past?

The SEC looks incompetent, elitist and foolish. If Sankey can't find a viable solution ASAP, he needs to be removed to make way for someone who can.

 

[MockingVol]

Your spelling is also in need of work.

My spelling?? If you are talking about me, you might need to think about finally completing that G.E.D.

And my reading comprehension is perfectly fine. I gave you two alternatives for the given situation. As you said event 1 is not true, event 2 must be. Pretty simple.

Edit: I'm really curious to see what word you think I misspelled so that I can laugh at you.

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

Really dude? You think playing the grammar card helps here LG?

Yes he does!

lawgator1 (45,727)
10:43 PM 09-01-2016 ( Report! )
Originally Posted by golfballs:
Who is the best player today for us???

They're kicker

lol: :crazy:

 

[CobbVol]

Really dude? You think playing the grammar card helps here LG?

That is code for I have lost the argument.

 

[IluvdoubleD's]

Ban florida from bowl games this year and next. It's the only sensible solution.

 

[VolunteerHillbilly]

Ban florida from bowl games this year and next. It's the only sensible solution.

First reasonable solution I've heard for this boondoggle.

 

[The Ron Mexico]

I don't know why you are arguing with LG. He is simply showing he has the same values as the team he supports.

McElwain/the Florida AD found a way to game the system to help themselves. Greg Sankey allowed it to happen. Sportswriters all over America that have no affiliation with any of the affected parties see that.

"If anyone calls us on it Jeremy we'll just play the victim card. That will make them feel bad for making fun of us."

-Jim McElwain, 2016

 

[VolunteerHillbilly]

I don't know why you are arguing with LG. He is simply showing he has the same values as the team he supports.

McElwain/the Florida AD found a way to game the system to help themselves. Greg Sankey allowed it to happen. Sportswriters all over America that have no affiliation with any of the affected parties see that.

"If anyone calls us on it Jeremy we'll just play the victim card. That will make them feel bad for making fun of us."

-Jim McElwain, 2016

Is it possible that McElwain drove to Volusia County and electrocuted that old man just to juice up the sympathy card?

 

[The Ron Mexico]

Is it possible that McElwain drove to Volusia County and electrocuted that old man just to juice up the sympathy card?

I'm not saying Mcelwain did that, but ...

Someone did report seeing a chubby yellow toothed donkey faced individual in a blue polo shirt running from the scene. I'm just sayin'.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Regardless the schools don't have the final say. That is a given. I'm looking at the regulations again right now. Last sentence in the paragraph defining the conference schedule:

Any conflicts that result in this schedule that cannot be resolved by the institutions will be submitted to the SEC Presidents and Chancellors for final resolution

And the very first sentence:

Each Conference team shall play eight Conference games each year.

Within present day contract law the terms shall and will are absolutes for compliance.

 

[Tin Man]

So, failure to reschedule and play the game will result in LSU & UF being in breach of their commitment as conference members. Surely, such a state would preclude them from participation in the SEC CG.

 

[bamawriter]

So, failure to reschedule and play the game will result in LSU & UF being in breach of their commitment as conference members. Surely, such a state would preclude them from participation in the SEC CG.

Like I've said previously, I don't believe it's possible to enforce such a rule. It's easy to argue for it in a situation like this where there are so many easily identifiable solutions, but what if something happens that causes a game to get cancelled during the last week of the season? What if there simply is no way to reschedule a game prior to the SECCG?

Again, that's different from the current situation, but it presents a problem with saying "play 8 games or you're disqualified."

 

[LSU-SIU]

So, failure to reschedule and play the game will result in LSU & UF being in breach of their commitment as conference members. Surely, such a state would preclude them from participation in the SEC CG.

That is not how all this works, which has been explained over and over in this thread. Not only is the game unlikely (I am not saying impossible) to be played, but changes will have to be made so said teams are not damaged for the missing game, if in fact they are damaged. Right now they are probably trying to find the most equitable solution to solve that issue.

 

[onevol74]

It's not an opinion. All Florida did was... nothing.

If Florida did anything more than nothing, I would love to see it. ( they sent out a press release saying the game was sit set for Saturday) lol:

Florida scammed Tennessee by doing.... nothing.

No he is not getting it, the plan worked flawlessly and he still doesn't know how. lol:

LSU benefits just as much as Florida. They avoided a tough game to get their team physically better too. LSU showed no effort to play this game just as much as Florida. What is hypocrisy is either team blaming the other.

Both are in violation of their SEC agreement to play 8 games and should be penalized and sanctioned unless the game is played. End of story.

 

[LSU-SIU]

LSU benefits just as much as Florida. They avoided a tough game to get their team physically better too. LSU showed no effort to play this game just as much as Florida. What is hypocrisy is either team blaming the other.

Both are in violation of their SEC agreement to play 8 games and should be penalized and sanctioned unless the game is played. End of story.

Whatever floats your boat. lol:

Both are in violation of their SEC agreement to play 8 games and should be penalized and sanctioned unless the game is played. End of story.

When do you project the penalty and sanctions to be imposed?

Most probably once they found their equitable solution, they will cancel the game so it can't be played or the equitable solution will have to incorporate the event if the game is played in the future.

This is the reason LSU said last week the game was unlikely to be rescheduled, and I think they might have even hinted at it as early as Wednesday of last week. LSU probably already warned the SEC, my guess, but the SEC wasn't listening. I'm speculating but I think chances are high this is what happened.

Now what I find humorous is it appears the media and people think Florida and LSU are at war or something, that's just not the case. It became the SEC's problem around Thursday. (generally speaking) It wouldn't surprise me to find out Foley and Alleva haven't spoken in nearly a week. (again speculation, I don't know what they would talk about, the hurricane I guess)

I really hope this helps. Good luck guys, sincerely.

 

[LA Vol]

Sankey can't force either school to reschedule the game on a specific date, but the SEC can find a fair and equitable solution if the schools fail to find a mutually agreeable date, time and place for the game to be played. IMO, this is what will happen. Logistically, the schools are unlikely to find a compromise; legally, the schools involved can't benefit from their refusal to play. If Sankey is smart, he'll resolve this before the UT-Bama and UF-UM games this weekend.

 

[jakez4ut]

Like I've said previously, I don't believe it's possible to enforce such a rule. It's easy to argue for it in a situation like this where there are so many easily identifiable solutions, but what if something happens that causes a game to get cancelled during the last week of the season? What if there simply is no way to reschedule a game prior to the SECCG?

Again, that's different from the current situation, but it presents a problem with saying "play 8 games or you're disqualified."

there's always a solution, if the intended purpose is to reschedule the game.

the problem is there's no consequence for not rescheduling.

they could have contingency lists for all kinds of solutions, depending on the impact of the storm. up to and including playing it at a neutral site on Monday night. i don't know the availability, but you got the Titans stadium in Nashville, is Legion Field still in B'ham?, and i'm sure several others that could be alternatives.

what's happened is both sides made "offers", both said respective no's, and here we are. not all solutions were explored, at least as truly viable options. both floated the options that were most desireable to them, and that's it. the conference probably has the rules as stated because no one wants to be painted in to a corner, forced to do something they don't want to do.

but once it's established the storm doesn't impact the playability of the game, even if there are still extenuating circumstances as a result of a hurricane (people, resources, logistical issues...) a neutral site solution solves many of those problems. then you just have to worry about travel, and your ticket holders.

long story short, it's completely enforceable. but the conference will likely never agree to doing so.

 

[jakez4ut]

Sankey can't force either school to reschedule the game on a specific date, but the SEC can find a fair and equitable solution if the schools fail to find a mutually agreeable date, time and place for the game to be played. IMO, this is what will happen. Logistically, the schools are unlikely to find a compromise; legally, the schools involved can't benefit from their refusal to play. If Sankey is smart, he'll resolve this before the UT-Bama and UF-UM games this weekend.

maybe not. but slive got LSU to play the 05 game on Monday night once TN said they'd forfeit it if the only options were Saturday or Sunday.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Sankey can't force either school to reschedule the game on a specific date, but the SEC can find a fair and equitable solution if the schools fail to find a mutually agreeable date, time and place for the game to be played. IMO, this is what will happen. Logistically, the schools are unlikely to find a compromise; legally, the schools involved can't benefit from their refusal to play. If Sankey is smart, he'll resolve this before the UT-Bama and UF-UM games this weekend.

It would seem going backwards might be a waste of time and impossibility caused by the SEC. imo I think is unlikely the game is played.

- Remove the 8-game clause
- Decide between percentage or divisional record

1. Percentage helps Florida, hurts LSU.
2. Divisional record brings LSU to neutral, and hurts Florida from its current position.

I would think #2 would make LSU and Vol fans happier.

I think. Seriously, I would have rather LSU just got the forfeit last week and been done with all this.

 

[bamawriter]

there's always a solution, if the intended purpose is to reschedule the game.

Not always. Let's say, UT beat UF earlier in the season, and then goes into the Vandy game at 6-1, while UF is already finished in the SEC at 7-1. At the risk of being morbid, what if a massive tornado reigns destruction down upon Nashville the morning of the game, and several Vandy players and staff are injured by the storm and the stadium is damaged? Now it's not even an issue of being able to play the game on the day it was scheduled, it's completely unreasonable to expect Vandy to play the game at all. Now UT is at 6-1 and would have the tiebreaker over UF were they to play the eighth game, but that's not possible. What do you do then?

Again, extreme scenario, but I'm just trying to show that the solution is not as black-and-white as one might think.

But, in the case of UF and LSU, that game has to get played. They had, and still have, options for playing the game. They need to do it or both forfeit.

 

[NorthDallas40]

That is not how all this works, which has been explained over and over in this thread. Not only is the game unlikely (I am not saying impossible) to be played, but changes will have to be made so said teams are not damaged for the missing game, if in fact they are damaged. Right now they are probably trying to find the most equitable solution to solve that issue.

Wrong again cupcake. I put it about 5 posts up.

UF and LSU shall play 8 conference games. If they do not the issue will be put to the Presidents and Chancellors for resolution. No way either party gets to the SECCG without resolving playing this game. Even if they choose NOT to play this game.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Wrong again cupcake. I put it about 5 posts up.

UF and LSU shall play 8 conference games. If they do not the issue will be put to the Presidents and Chancellors for resolution. No way either party gets to the SECCG without resolving playing this game. Even if they choose NOT to play this game.

Did you say before the Commissioner just sets the date of the game? What happened to that?

I'm still confused why you appear to be hurt.

 

[jakez4ut]

Not always. Let's say, UT beat UF earlier in the season, and then goes into the Vandy game at 6-1, while UF is already finished in the SEC at 7-1. At the risk of being morbid, what if a massive tornado reigns destruction down upon Nashville the morning of the game, and several Vandy players and staff are injured by the storm and the stadium is damaged? Now it's not even an issue of being able to play the game on the day it was scheduled, it's completely unreasonable to expect Vandy to play the game at all. Now UT is at 6-1 and would have the tiebreaker over UF were they to play the eighth game, but that's not possible. What do you do then?

Again, extreme scenario, but I'm just trying to show that the solution is not as black-and-white as one might think.

But, in the case of UF and LSU, that game has to get played. They had, and still have, options for playing the game. They need to do it or both forfeit.

it's still managing by the exception. in that scenario, i'd expect TN to raise cain if disallowed. but the spirit of the rule would be to ensure there be no impropriety on either side to take an advantage over the rest of it's division members.

easy way to do that, convene the other AD's, chancellors or presidents, and vote on it. give them the options available, vote and live with it.

the point is you shouldn't penalize the team that was deemed unable to play (Vandy in your scenario), and not playing it shouldn't penalize another division member that did play 8 (Tennessee in the current situation).

there's a way to make that work. i don't want to over simplify it, i do realize there's more to it than placing the ball, blowing a whistle and kick off....

 

[NorthDallas40]

Did you say before the Commissioner just sets the date of the game? What happened to that?

I'm still confused why you appear to be hurt.

I also believe that is completely within his authority. That is clear. Sankey can specify a date. He cannot force them to play. If they don't play then it goes to the league officers. My two statements are not mutually exclusive and can in fact exist within the current process. Try to keep up.