Jump to content
sr1

Big 8 will be down to 6 teams.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Titan32 said:

Great point...even if there is a desire to push 2 of the non conference games to the front...it might take a few years for EVERYONE to get there.

Then again...aren't most contracts written in such a manner that an out is provided for in situations such as this?  I mean certainly one could opt to stay in a contract in good faith, but my guess is a school could get out of one pretty easily should they so desire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

Then again...aren't most contracts written in such a manner that an out is provided for in situations such as this?  I mean certainly one could opt to stay in a contract in good faith, but my guess is a school could get out of one pretty easily should they so desire.

I don’t think it would be in good taste for the conference to void all contracts with outside schools. It may happen in certain situations but I’m sure they will try to minimize damaging relationships.

I know one AD in particular who has worked really hard to make this work. I’m pretty confident he will take the blame for whatever people don’t like but I think he is ok with that if this works out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Cappy said:

I don’t think it would be in good taste for the conference to void all contracts with outside schools. It may happen in certain situations but I’m sure they will try to minimize damaging relationships.

I know one AD in particular who has worked really hard to make this work. I’m pretty confident he will take the blame for whatever people don’t like but I think he is ok with that if this works out.

Understand, but I didn't suggest that the conference "void all contracts".  I think it will be a school by school decision.  My only point is that most contracts can be gotten rid of if necessary...hopefully in a way that doesn't harm relationships.  Hoping some SIAC matchups can come out of all of this in weeks 1 and 2.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Titan32 said:

Understand, but I didn't suggest that the conference "void all contracts".  I think it will be a school by school decision.  My only point is that most contracts can be gotten rid of if necessary...hopefully in a way that doesn't harm relationships.  Hoping some SIAC matchups can come out of all of this in weeks 1 and 2.

 

I understand most of the time you can buyout a contract. If I remember correctly Princeton had to pay North Posey $300 to get out of a contract so they could play Wood Memorial about 10 years ago.

I think, never been told this, but I think the goal was to honor all current contracts. If situation occurred and it was not possible to honor one or more of these contracts then so be it. 

Personally I hate that Tecumseh is staying independent, and personally I wish they would either be in or be out of the conference all together. I don’t like that the PAC is giving them special partial membership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cappy said:

I understand most of the time you can buyout a contract. If I remember correctly Princeton had to pay North Posey $300 to get out of a contract so they could play Wood Memorial about 10 years ago.

I think, never been told this, but I think the goal was to honor all current contracts. If situation occurred and it was not possible to honor one or more of these contracts then so be it. 

Personally I hate that Tecumseh is staying independent, and personally I wish they would either be in or be out of the conference all together. I don’t like that the PAC is giving them special partial membership. 

I see where you're coming from with Tecumseh but at the time they voted to allow it the PAC wanted Forest Park in the conference and doubt they wanted 9 teams in football so at the time it benefited all parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DaveMosbey said:

I see where you're coming from with Tecumseh but at the time they voted to allow it the PAC wanted Forest Park in the conference and doubt they wanted 9 teams in football so at the time it benefited all parties.

I understand and because of the bylaws it is not as easy as I suggested. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tabled for now.  A couple Big 8 schools would like some clarification on a couple things in the PAC proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

Tabled for now.  A couple Big 8 schools would like some clarification on a couple things in the PAC proposal.

June Vote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine if we lived in a world where you could have meetings from a variety of different places and have everyone else’s face on a tv screen to ask any question you would like.

 

its a bummer that we live in a world that lacks a means to communicate to the point the only way you could possibly be well informed on anything would be to wait until just before a meeting to tell everyone you need clarifications on things. 

 

🙄🙄🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be surprised if the Big 8 screws this up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

Don't be surprised if the Big 8 screws this up.

I have a feeling most teams want this to happen. I think the proposal is a big win for all teams involved at this point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thank Jasper 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long can they keep delaying this and still have 2020 date ?? cant be easy task for 14 schools to rearrange their schedules especially Mount Vernon who needs to add 5 PAC schools and Gibson Southern and Heritage Hills who need to add 4 Big Eight schools.  

 

If it passes I wonder how this will affect all-conference teams and the PAC conference all-sport standings ?? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, D3dream said:

thank Jasper 

Being a stubborn German from Jasper myself, I do not disagree with this statement, but is there some evidence that it is Jasper holding this up?  Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn’t new that Jasper and Lincoln are talking with the SIAC. (See attachments) And regardless of what happens each school must make the decision which is best for them. 

6374067D-9A55-44F1-AC9A-46703BCF3057.jpeg

1FE87C38-0BB9-4ECA-9063-ECD043A31ADC.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Coach_K said:

This isn’t new that Jasper and Lincoln are talking with the SIAC. (See attachments) And regardless of what happens each school must make the decision which is best for them. 

6374067D-9A55-44F1-AC9A-46703BCF3057.jpeg

1FE87C38-0BB9-4ECA-9063-ECD043A31ADC.png

All this stuff is so stale....a lot of water has went under the bridge as schools contemplate where they want to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

All this stuff is so stale....a lot of water has went under the bridge as schools contemplate where they want to be.

I didn't realize a couple of statements from a month ago was stale.  I understand a lot has happened, but I'm sure the Big 8 schools were having these discussions internally when news broke out of Illinois.

Your statement about Washington and Lincoln getting new ADs is probably a huge factor.  Do these schools want to be in separate conferences for football and the rest of their sports?

Question here though (pardon me if this was covered): What happens if the proposal is accepted, but one schools opts out of the Big 8 or wants to leave the New PAC?  Tell City joining the PLAC would make logical sense if they feel they can't compete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Coach_K said:

I didn't realize a couple of statements from a month ago was stale.  I understand a lot has happened, but I'm sure the Big 8 schools were having these discussions internally when news broke out of Illinois.

Your statement about Washington and Lincoln getting new ADs is probably a huge factor.  Do these schools want to be in separate conferences for football and the rest of their sports?

Question here though (pardon me if this was covered): What happens if the proposal is accepted, but one schools opts out of the Big 8 or wants to leave the New PAC?  Tell City joining the PLAC would make logical sense if they feel they can't compete.

Tell City applied for the PLAC a few years back then withdrew their application. I think it centered around the PLAC not having swimming or tennis or something not being a conference sport. Tell City parents wanted the opportunity for their kids to be all-conference in their sport and wouldn't have it had they joined the PLAC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DaveMosbey said:

How long can they keep delaying this and still have 2020 date ?? cant be easy task for 14 schools to rearrange their schedules especially Mount Vernon who needs to add 5 PAC schools and Gibson Southern and Heritage Hills who need to add 4 Big Eight schools.  

 

If it passes I wonder how this will affect all-conference teams and the PAC conference all-sport standings ?? 

The schedules are complete and are part of the proposal.

 

6 minutes ago, JQWL said:

Tell City applied for the PLAC a few years back then withdrew their application. I think it centered around the PLAC not having swimming or tennis or something not being a conference sport. Tell City parents wanted the opportunity for their kids to be all-conference in their sport and wouldn't have it had they joined the PLAC.

Tell City is one of the schools who really supported this proposal 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Cappy said:

The schedules are complete and are part of the proposal.

 

Tell City is one of the schools who really supported this proposal 

Not really as much as North Posey 😕

Knowing what I do about how this all came together, very surprised this didn't pass with little fuss at the Big 8 meeting. Wonder who/what changed from the beginning?? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me this deal would be good for not only the schools directly involved but the whole area.  It would be a shame if there were one school putting this thing into the ditch.  BUT, as I stated very early in this thread....in terms on conference decisions a school has to look out for #1, hard to expect anything different than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An off the wall idea, but if Jasper wants to join the SIAC but needs another school to make it happen....what about GS going with them? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Titan20 said:

An off the wall idea, but if Jasper wants to join the SIAC but needs another school to make it happen....what about GS going with them? 

I think there is a much greater chance of the SIAC adding 1 school than adding 2.  Adding 2 would mean the 5 EVSC schools would no longer have majority control of the conference.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...