http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com ... lite-camps
My particular favorite...
Build series of Dave and Buster's-style restaurants in Texas, California, Florida, and other fertile recruiting hotbeds. Oh look a forty yard dash machine--
Build series of Dave and Buster's-style restaurants in Texas, California, Florida, and other fertile recruiting hotbeds. Oh look a forty yard dash machine--
Be like what our baseball team did back in the day. I believe they went to Arizona for a large chunk of the year.Wyovanian wrote:Just designate a kicking practice and training facility in Oklahoma, etc., and it's a "regular" practice facility. Let the NCAA try to prove that case and push the subject to the top of the page. They'll lose that PR battle pretty quickly...
No, this rule is for high school camps hosted/ran by colleges, the golf tournament is a college competition.cali2wyo wrote:I was just thinking... is this for all sports? For example, our golf team hosts a tournament in Arizona every year during the season since spring in Laramie is a bit too unpredictable. Is that now against the rules?
But this ban also applies to college athletes as well, like Michigan's spring practices in Florida this year, right?WestWYOPoke wrote:No, this rule is for high school camps hosted/ran by colleges, the golf tournament is a college competition.cali2wyo wrote:I was just thinking... is this for all sports? For example, our golf team hosts a tournament in Arizona every year during the season since spring in Laramie is a bit too unpredictable. Is that now against the rules?
I think so but we still had a practice/scrimmage in Cheyenne so maybe it just means camps.cali2wyo wrote:But this ban also applies to college athletes as well, like Michigan's spring practices in Florida this year, right?WestWYOPoke wrote:No, this rule is for high school camps hosted/ran by colleges, the golf tournament is a college competition.cali2wyo wrote:I was just thinking... is this for all sports? For example, our golf team hosts a tournament in Arizona every year during the season since spring in Laramie is a bit too unpredictable. Is that now against the rules?
It's within 50 miles of campus I believe...so maybe campus to East is like 48?TSpoke wrote:I think so but we still had a practice/scrimmage in Cheyenne so maybe it just means camps.cali2wyo wrote:But this ban also applies to college athletes as well, like Michigan's spring practices in Florida this year, right?WestWYOPoke wrote:No, this rule is for high school camps hosted/ran by colleges, the golf tournament is a college competition.cali2wyo wrote:I was just thinking... is this for all sports? For example, our golf team hosts a tournament in Arizona every year during the season since spring in Laramie is a bit too unpredictable. Is that now against the rules?
No. Those aren't satellite camps. Those are spring practices.cali2wyo wrote:But this ban also applies to college athletes as well, like Michigan's spring practices in Florida this year, right?
WestWYOPoke wrote:No, as far as I understand, this is ONLY for high school camps, schools can still have spring ball, fall camp, practices, scrimmages, etc. wherever they want.
Huh. Interesting. Especially because it seems like this conversation started because the SEC was upset that Michigan took it's team into SEC country. I figured that would be included in the ban since it seemed to be the spark that ignited this fire.joshvanklomp wrote:No. Those aren't satellite camps. Those are spring practices.cali2wyo wrote:But this ban also applies to college athletes as well, like Michigan's spring practices in Florida this year, right?
Nope, this was also included in the NCAA verdict.ragtimejoe1 wrote:I wonder if there is any way to structure a coach's contract such that he/she is an employee of the University at all times other than x month or x times when that coach is conducting a satellite camp? I imagine insurance and retirement could be sticky, but the idea is to basically make coaching "seasonal" and their salary is paid over 11 months. In the 12 month, they are laid off for a month and coincidentally that month is when they host satellite camps?
Additionally, FBS coaches and noncoaching staff members with responsibilities specific to football may be employed only at their school’s camps or clinics.
I read that, but under my proposal, the coaches would technically be employed or have responsibilities specific to football for that month so they wouldn't have a school. A month later, they would.WestWYOPoke wrote: Nope, this was also included in the NCAA verdict.
Additionally, FBS coaches and noncoaching staff members with responsibilities specific to football may be employed only at their school’s camps or clinics.
On the ESPN sidebar.MWC commish Craig Thompson told me his league voted 7-4 in favor of satellite ban, but yesterday he sent a memo to the league asking them to make sure of their stance. "I don't think the vote is going to change or the position is going to change," he said. He said Paul Krebs from NM voted on their behalf and did what he was expected. "I was sitting next to him," Thompson said. "He said what are we supposed to do? I said, "they said - they being you the membership, 7-4 ban satellite camps. Vote to ban satellite camps."
Pac-12 vote in question...I have zero problem with the ACC and SEC seeking a ban. Entities are supposed to act in their own best interests. My problem is with the Big 12, Pac-12, Sun Belt and Mountain West, which did not. Usually, people who vote opposite their own interests are stupid, corrupt or a combination of the two.
The Big 12 and Pac-12 also voted to ban satellite camps even though it didn’t appear to be in their best interests, and one Pac-12 coach wondered aloud Monday how that could happen.
Washington State coach Mike Leach said most schools in the Pac-12 were for satellite camps. ESPN’s Brett McMurphy previously reported that the Pac-12 voted in favor of the ban, and Leach isn’t sure how that could have happened. Common sense dictates that only UCLA, USC and maybe Arizona State would want to ban such camps to protect their recruiting turf. The Pac-12’s representative on the Division I management council is UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero.
Guerrero [UCLA AD]—the Pac-12’s representative on the council—then had to tell his colleagues why he voted against the wishes of 11 of the league’s 12 schools.
Texas State’s athletic director, Larry Teis, was the Sun Belt representative on the council. He cast a vote for the ban—against the wishes of the majority of the league’s schools.
To quote some old, kinda famous guy "something is rotten in the state of Denmark..."Because Power Five conference votes count double, the result of the vote was 10–5 for the ban. Had Guerrero and Teis voted in accordance with the wishes of the majority of their respective conferences’ schools, the result would have been 8–7 against the ban.