https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/06...l-ban.html

Keep this non-political.

Looks like the way the ban has been mooted is as follows

1) Coaches not being paid by taxpayers are exempt.
2) Does NOT cover already scheduled games
3) Does cover any future scheduled games

This could cause some chaos.

States covered under the California ban

Texas, South Dakota, Alabama, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Tennessee. It is possible that Ohio will be added. It is possible that Idaho has some laws that could cause the AGs order to apply. That would complicate things a LOT more.

California D1 schools covered by the order.

Fresno State, San Jose State, San Diego State (MWC). California, UCLA (Pac 12). UC-Davis, UCSD, Cal Poly, UC-Irvine, Long Beach, Cal State Fullerton, Cal State Northridge (Big West). Cal State Sacramento (Big Sky).

And a potential huge problem for one school. Cal State Bakersfield (WAC).

----

If the AG order is held up, then the ramifications are pretty interesting

Pac 12 - no member institutions are covered by the ban and none are likely to be covered by it. But it does mean that any UT or Oklahoma to the Pac discussions are moot at this point. As well as any discussion of a raid by the Big XII into California (unlikely anyway)

MWC - no member institutions covered by the ban. But it means that any thoughts that UTEP might have of moving back are probably dead at this point. And any thoughts of an AAC raid on SDSU, however unlikely, aren't happening either

Big Sky and Big West, no member institutions covered by the ban.

The West Coast Conference has no public schools. Exempt.

---

But Cal State - Bakersfield and the WAC have a potential problem. UT-RGV is also a WAC member. Two Texas schools also participate in the WAC as affiliate members in men's soccer

---

Interesting to see how this will play out. Or if any other states will follow California and the other states that have rules like this.

My guess is that this will be sorted out in about 5 years or so. But not before then.

Is this a huge glass of ice water on a bunch of realignment scenarios?