Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
Author Message
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #41
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-29-2013 11:18 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  
(04-29-2013 10:19 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I think that the NFL and the NBA should establish minor leagues like major league baseball. They could sign kids right out of high school who would rather be paid right now instead of going to college.

The current college football setup would be for the other kids who would rather forego the NFL minor league and play college football under scholarship.

It would be a lot like the current college baseball setup.

Exactly my thoughts.

Let the Cam Newtons and OJ Mayos of the world go pro or semi pro right away and instead use those scholarships for guys who really want a degree they can use once they graduate.

That way most schools would run clean programs and cheating would be minimized. When was the last time a baseball program got on probation by the NCAA? I'm sure there's been some but few compared to football and basketball.

Then less people would pay attention, the Networks make less money and then they pay the Universities less.

Yeah, good luck with this idealistic campaign you guys.
04-30-2013 06:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,881
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 898
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #42
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-29-2013 11:04 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  
(04-29-2013 10:44 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-29-2013 10:27 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  
(04-29-2013 10:19 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I think that the NFL and the NBA should establish minor leagues like major league baseball. They could sign kids right out of high school who would rather be paid right now instead of going to college.

The current college football setup would be for the other kids who would rather forego the NFL minor league and play college football under scholarship.

It would be a lot like the current college baseball setup.

Arent they re-launching the USFL next year?

The original USFL idea/concept by David Dixon (franchises in non-NFL cities, spring game schedule only, keep costs down, don't directly compete with the NFL) was a good one.

Jackwads like Donald Trump ruined any chance the USFL had to survive.

Are you proposing that a new USFL act as a minor league?

The original one was not, it had players who had used up their college eligibility.

The league expects to field eight teams and play a 14-game regular season from March to June with a four-team playoff system and championship starting in the spring of 2014. The league is a professional league, but will operate as a developmental minor league which will afford players and personnel the opportunity to advance their level of play to other leagues like the National Football League, Arena Football League or Canadian Football League. The league rules will mirror those of the NFL.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stat...ue_(2013-)
[edit]


Then, yes, something like that.

I watched the original (1983, I think) season of the USFL. It had promise, but was hijacked by greed.

I will have to check out this new league.
04-30-2013 06:33 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WinOrLoseEAGLE Offline
Banned

Posts: 820
Joined: Nov 2003
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-29-2013 05:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(04-29-2013 04:58 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I think it's a bad idea long term. It just raises the costs for everyone. The schools will be even more money-hungry, and will need E$PN and other networds even more, and will sacrifice more (ethics, etc) to get that money. Tickets will go up to pay for it. Schools like Texas can afford it, but what about many other schools even in the P5?

All they are doing is making the rules similar to what they do for kids on academic scholarships.

Umm - no. Most kids on academic scholarships don't get cash handed over. Some do, yes, but not all. Those who do it's typically from endowed scholarship funding and not from university (athletic) department funding.

That said, I'm all for it. If Slive and the p5 conferences want to do this because "it's the right thing", then at 350 student athletes that's $700,000 per student per year. Make that distribution from the annual $475,000,000 playoff cache and call it a day. I'm betting they'd garner more "Yay" votes if it was paid for by the playoff money. After all, it's not the money; it's not an opportunity to further distance yourself by forcing a segregation; it IS completely and thoroughly about being the right thing to do.

That'd be about 100,000,000 off the top...say approximately 21% based on the 475m. Reduce across the board by current payouts by 21% and call it a day. (and yes, I know the p5 would not concur with this as it'd be costing them money to do so).

($700,000 as it has to go to all, not just the football team....swimmers get it too - supposedly to help defray the cost of carrots)
(This post was last modified: 04-30-2013 07:21 AM by WinOrLoseEAGLE.)
04-30-2013 07:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 9,478
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 766
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #44
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-29-2013 04:14 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/...out_sports

Mike Slive was interviewed about the athlete stipend issue and had this informative nugget to say:

Quote:"When there are certain things that many of us would like to come into play, it's our hope that those things can all occur in the current system," Slive said today during an Associated Press Sports Editors meeting at the Alabama Sports Hall of Fame. "Obviously, if things like that don't get accomplished, then it may be appropriate to talk about some alternative or division or something like that. But that's not our desire. That's not our goal and that's not something we're trying to get to."

Is he drawing a line in the sand? Do this or FBS (or maybe even only the P5) split away?


I agree that he's testing the waters for a split. The Big 10 will not support pay-for-play under any circumstances, and the Pac-12 will be in lockstep with them. The SEC would lead the other side.

If it came to a split, I think the Big 12 would side with the SEC, and so would the MWC (if for no other reason than to get a leg up on the PAC). I think the ACC, MAC, and most of the AAC schools would stick with the Big 10/Pac-12. The Sun Belt and C-USA seems to be full of schools determined to compete at the highest level no matter the cost, so I bet most of them back pay-for play, too.

In other words, I think it will be a pretty even split.
04-30-2013 07:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PaulDel2 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 605
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Sothern Miss
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-29-2013 05:35 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Just wait until they find out they have to give the same amount to the women's teams too. Hello Title 9.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

BINGO. Even the SEC can't pay everyone equal benefits. Title IX will cripple them.
04-30-2013 07:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TitanTopper Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 294
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 23
I Root For: WKU
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
I do not pretend to keep up with all of this and I'm certainly NO lawyer, but aren't they suggesting a defection much like the old CFA of the late 1970s? I think it's about segmenting JUST football off in their own division and making their own rules. Can they not form their own association or "club" with a select few to belong?
BTW, I am absolutely against anything remotely like it!! I think it would be the end to what's good in collegiate athletics.
04-30-2013 07:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-30-2013 07:04 AM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  
(04-29-2013 05:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(04-29-2013 04:58 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I think it's a bad idea long term. It just raises the costs for everyone. The schools will be even more money-hungry, and will need E$PN and other networds even more, and will sacrifice more (ethics, etc) to get that money. Tickets will go up to pay for it. Schools like Texas can afford it, but what about many other schools even in the P5?

All they are doing is making the rules similar to what they do for kids on academic scholarships.

Umm - no. Most kids on academic scholarships don't get cash handed over. Some do, yes, but not all. Those who do it's typically from endowed scholarship funding and not from university (athletic) department funding.

That said, I'm all for it. If Slive and the p5 conferences want to do this because "it's the right thing", then at 350 student athletes that's $700,000 per student per year. Make that distribution from the annual $475,000,000 playoff cache and call it a day. I'm betting they'd garner more "Yay" votes if it was paid for by the playoff money. After all, it's not the money; it's not an opportunity to further distance yourself by forcing a segregation; it IS completely and thoroughly about being the right thing to do.

That'd be about 100,000,000 off the top...say approximately 21% based on the 475m. Reduce across the board by current payouts by 21% and call it a day. (and yes, I know the p5 would not concur with this as it'd be costing them money to do so).

($700,000 as it has to go to all, not just the football team....swimmers get it too - supposedly to help defray the cost of carrots)

Most kids don't get full scholarships, but they have the capability of providing the "full cost" of attendance. They don't for athletes. And athletes don't have time to work because of practice requirements even if they were allowed to. Universities provide for graduate students and some undergraduates with job opportunities such as teaching assistants, tutors and researchers. So, yes, it is putting their offers on a similar basis to what they can do on academic scholarships.
04-30-2013 08:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-29-2013 09:42 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Scholarships do not cover the full costs associated with attendance. The Federal Government has a formula that is used in financial aid calculations for the amount that exceeds tuition, fees, room, and board.

The P5 are never going to vote to exceed that calculation of full cost of attendance because it raises the risk of triggering worker's comp, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and numerous other issues.

While the stipend does not have universal support within FBS, it has a majority. As noted in another post, the Sun Belt was the first conference to authorize its members to implement the stipend rule.

The rule that was adopted (and then repealed) had a lot of problems, most notably it was very unclear how it would be implemented in sports where grants can be split.

I'm not sure why people cling to the idea the P5 would split over football, the revenue sharing there is negligible and the pool of potential FBS opponents is so small it has caused rapid inflation in game guarantees.

If a split happens it will be about power, having control over the rules, right now the FBS leagues hold the power on the Board but the ability to refer votes to the membership triggers a one-school, one-vote system where the FBS are out-numbered 2 to 1 and the P5 outnumbered 4 to 1.

The next biggest risk is NCAA enforcement, it's been proven crooked in the Miami case and it appears the USC investigation was crooked as well.

Third on the risk list is the sharing model for basketball.

Football is the lowest risk of triggering a split.

Good points, but the risk in football is the fear of what happened in basketball.
04-30-2013 08:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #49
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-29-2013 10:19 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I think that the NFL and the NBA should establish minor leagues like major league baseball. They could sign kids right out of high school who would rather be paid right now instead of going to college.

The current college football setup would be for the other kids who would rather forego the NFL minor league and play college football under scholarship.

It would be a lot like the current college baseball setup.

And hockey and soccer.
04-30-2013 08:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
Minor League Football is exactly what I want, but we'll probably not get (since its not profitable). All that would have to happen to make it happen though would be one small thing: The draft would have to allow in any 18 year old or ups. Sure you probably aren't going to get any 18 year old in the first round, but some of the most promising ones aren't going to be completely ignored because of possible future impact which means the team would want them in a minor league and that would spurn minor league teams (with several undrafted kids filling out their roosters).

Right now, the double standard is what bothers me to no end. They say these are student-athletes with an emphasis on student, but they build bigger and bigger stadiums (with higher and higher ticket prices and donations required for tickets), sell naming rights for money, realign conference and break tradition for money, increase the number of games (10 to 11 to 12) for more money, change the traditional bowl structure for money (old bowl system to Bowl Alliance to BCS to CFP), add conference championship games for money, etc.

At the same time we do all that, the players are told a) they can't join the professional leagues in this country and b) they can't accept any benefits that anyone else freely wants to give them. One of those 2 should change. The best would be for the NFL to open up a minor league so then anyone going to college is freely choosing it and thus is agreeing to forego any added benefits for more reason than the system doesn't give them a choice. Absent that though, booster donations should be brought above table. If a player is a big deal in getting a school to the national championship, let someone buy him a car provided its all above table. It would hurt the game, but when the schools have done everything possible to increase their own budgets, they've lost the right to complain.
04-30-2013 09:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #51
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-30-2013 07:45 AM)TitanTopper Wrote:  I do not pretend to keep up with all of this and I'm certainly NO lawyer, but aren't they suggesting a defection much like the old CFA of the late 1970s? I think it's about segmenting JUST football off in their own division and making their own rules. Can they not form their own association or "club" with a select few to belong?
BTW, I am absolutely against anything remotely like it!! I think it would be the end to what's good in collegiate athletics.

Some involved with the CFA hoped it would be the foundation for either an NCAA departure or the creation of what was being called Division IV.

That just never really got traction in large part because there are so many sports where there simply aren't enough schools sponsoring the sport to make it work as fully independent division or association as well as the fact some of the great programs in those sports wouldn't be part of it.

There has been some thought of sport-by-sport governship (ie. USA Basketball or AAU runs basketball, USA Football runs football, USA Soccer runs soccer, etc.) and eliminate the Divisional set-up as an institutional membership thing and rather have classifications by sport. So you might play non-scholarship men's soccer but 85 scholarship football.

With the recent (January) decision of the Department of Education that schools must offer similar varsity opportunities to disabled athletes, I don't believe that the stipend is going to see the light of day any time soon. Athletic directors may not have noticed the mandate but university counsel is going to take notice.

We may be moving into a new world where schools wishing to receive Federal grants and have their students be eligible for Federal Financial Aid are going to end up sponsoring disabled athlete sports and that cost will more than likely drive some of the lower 100 Division I schools that are just there out if they are having to sponsor 14 "regular" sports to be Division I and another 14 "accessible" sports to provide equal opportunities.
04-30-2013 09:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-30-2013 07:32 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(04-29-2013 04:14 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/...out_sports

Mike Slive was interviewed about the athlete stipend issue and had this informative nugget to say:

Quote:"When there are certain things that many of us would like to come into play, it's our hope that those things can all occur in the current system," Slive said today during an Associated Press Sports Editors meeting at the Alabama Sports Hall of Fame. "Obviously, if things like that don't get accomplished, then it may be appropriate to talk about some alternative or division or something like that. But that's not our desire. That's not our goal and that's not something we're trying to get to."

Is he drawing a line in the sand? Do this or FBS (or maybe even only the P5) split away?


I agree that he's testing the waters for a split. The Big 10 will not support pay-for-play under any circumstances, and the Pac-12 will be in lockstep with them. The SEC would lead the other side.

If it came to a split, I think the Big 12 would side with the SEC, and so would the MWC (if for no other reason than to get a leg up on the PAC). I think the ACC, MAC, and most of the AAC schools would stick with the Big 10/Pac-12. The Sun Belt and C-USA seems to be full of schools determined to compete at the highest level no matter the cost, so I bet most of them back pay-for play, too.

In other words, I think it will be a pretty even split.

Interesting exercise. Maybe even useful if O'Bannon gets a full victory.

My knee jerk reaction of where schools would fall.
No-Pay / De-emphasis (need based or academic aid only, withdraw from the current TV model into a PBS model or free web stream model)
Big 10
Pac-12

Pay / Emphasis (ability based aid up to full cost of attendance, a revenue distribution model that compensates for use of likeness)
SEC
Big XII

The rest. I'd guess that this more than anything else could split the ACC. I would think Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Georgia Tech sharing states with SEC schools would feel a lot of alumni fan pressure to join the Pay/Emphasis group. Va.Tech would likely consider that sort of move as well, much of the remainder of the membership would line up with Big10 and Pac-12 on the issue. On the flip side, Texas sees the Big 10 and Pac-12 as being their peers, there would be strong internal pressure there to join the No-Pay group, TAMU being in the pay group would be the counter-weight.

New Big East would cast their lot with the non-pay group.

AAC would be strongly divided with Tulane and Navy probably locks to join no-pay and Tulsa probably leaning that direction. SMU would probably go that direction on principle after their legacy. The remainder probably go Pay, and East Carolina likely issues their release of intention to go Pay a few minutes before Houston sends their version of that release out.

MAC would quickly affiliate with the no-pay.

CUSA would go with the pay group though Rice might balk. Sun Belt would go with the pay group as well.

I disagree that MWC would be a lock to go to the pay group. You make your decisions based on who you want to affiliate with. Most everyone in MWC has at the back of their head that someday Pac-12 will be Pac-14 or Pac-16 and if they cast their lot with the Pay group they've sealed their fate and will not be considered. Any and every MWC with any hopes of joining Pac-12 goes with the No-Pay group.
04-30-2013 09:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PirateMarv Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,508
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 191
I Root For: ECU
Location: Chicago and Memphis
Post: #53
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
It is time for the IRS to make these collegiate enterprises taxable. Either they are a professional league or they are not. If they are a professional league, then they need to be taxed like all of the other professional leagues.
04-30-2013 09:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #54
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-30-2013 09:56 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  It is time for the IRS to make these collegiate enterprises taxable. Either they are a professional league or they are not. If they are a professional league, then they need to be taxed like all of the other professional leagues.
It won't happen. That would effect our Congressmen's job security, since they depend on those people for votes...
04-30-2013 10:08 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bull_In_Exile Offline
Eternal Pessimist
*

Posts: 21,809
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 461
I Root For: The Underdog
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-30-2013 09:52 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  MAC would quickly affiliate with the no-pay.

Actually a lot of MAC presidents voted for the stipend the last time around.
04-30-2013 10:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-30-2013 10:11 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(04-30-2013 09:52 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  MAC would quickly affiliate with the no-pay.

Actually a lot of MAC presidents voted for the stipend the last time around.

I know but I think if the Big 10 goes a different direction, they go that direction.
04-30-2013 10:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mufanatehc Offline
Hmm...
*

Posts: 6,530
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation: 169
I Root For: BSU, EHC, & MU
Location: Nashville
Post: #57
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-30-2013 10:11 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(04-30-2013 09:52 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  MAC would quickly affiliate with the no-pay.

Actually a lot of MAC presidents voted for the stipend the last time around.

I think he was saying if the B1G goes non-pay, and there is a legitimate split within FBS, the MAC will follow the B1G.
04-30-2013 10:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-30-2013 09:56 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  It is time for the IRS to make these collegiate enterprises taxable. Either they are a professional league or they are not. If they are a professional league, then they need to be taxed like all of the other professional leagues.

Making it taxable wouldn't have an immediate impact on the schools because most spend everything they bring in.

The impact would be on the donors.

Currently I am allowed to deduct $1,200 of my athletic donation (donation is $1500 but part of that has a value to me for ticket and parking priority). Losing deductibility would have a big impact.

I've said for years, pick a number for athletic spending. Either a total dollar amount or a scale based on an amount per grant awarded (more sports, you can spend more). Stay under that number and it is status quo.

Exceed that number and donations are no longer tax deductible, and however many total dollars you exceed the cap, the school loses that much in Federal funds. Imagine athletic departments pouring over their excess revenue into scholarship funds, research funding, more part-time jobs for students, raises for faculty.
04-30-2013 10:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #59
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-30-2013 10:27 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(04-30-2013 09:56 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  It is time for the IRS to make these collegiate enterprises taxable. Either they are a professional league or they are not. If they are a professional league, then they need to be taxed like all of the other professional leagues.

Making it taxable wouldn't have an immediate impact on the schools because most spend everything they bring in.

The impact would be on the donors.

Currently I am allowed to deduct $1,200 of my athletic donation (donation is $1500 but part of that has a value to me for ticket and parking priority). Losing deductibility would have a big impact.

I've said for years, pick a number for athletic spending. Either a total dollar amount or a scale based on an amount per grant awarded (more sports, you can spend more). Stay under that number and it is status quo.

Exceed that number and donations are no longer tax deductible, and however many total dollars you exceed the cap, the school loses that much in Federal funds. Imagine athletic departments pouring over their excess revenue into scholarship funds, research funding, more part-time jobs for students, raises for faculty.

Some schools already do that. Most lose money on athletics.
04-30-2013 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Slive: Athlete Stipend Issue Could Cause Split
(04-29-2013 07:08 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Funny how these guys all of a sudden care about helping out the student-athletes. Its just a way to squeeze out the little conference under the cover of trying to look like nice guys. "Lets give them all $1 million in the new playoff system and then we'll raise the ante $1 million and take it all back"

I'm sure they are really primarily looking at some really poor student-athletes who are brought to the school, but can't work and have no money to do anything.

Now they probably do see your conspiracy thoughts as a beneficial side effect, but not everything these people do is to drive out the competition.
04-30-2013 10:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.