Football schedule vote

[Predatory Primates]

I wonder if a change in the GAC would change UCO's mind? I'll bet it would.They could wrack up wins against a couple OK schools each year and help themselves in recruiting.

[Predatory Primates]

I'm just certain I read that Lincoln has been one of the schools pushing for noncons. If so, the lack of an allowable proxy or postponement of the vote is suspect at best.

[Predatory Primates]

No: Central Missouri, Central Oklahoma, Northwest Missouri State, Washburn, Fort Hays State


Fans and alumni of these schools should wake up mad at themselves every day..

[MIAAWeekly]

The conference bylaws require a presence to vote. The conference rules do not allow for proxy votes.

Two things about this:

1.) I'm told that it isn't unprecedented for the league to suspend these by-laws... I don't know that it happens *often* and nobody has given me a specific instance where those by-laws were suspended but, I've been told by more than one person that it's happened before.

2.) I have also been told by a couple of people that this is going to make the league take a hard look at that particular by-law. One person said to me they were somewhat surprised that they didn't make a motion to change that rule right there on the spot.

[MIAAWeekly]

Do you know which schools voted yes, no and which two were absent?

Yes: Pitt State, Missouri Southern, Missouri Western, Emporia State, Northeastern State

No: Central Missouri, Central Oklahoma, Northwest Missouri State, Washburn, Fort Hays State

Abstain: Lincoln, Nebraska-Kearney

Without going into specifics out of respect for privacy, at least one of the abstaining presidents was unable to travel to the NCAA Convention for reasons beyond their control.

[GrifFan]

I believe one of the absent presidents had a health issue.

[GorillaBred]

Why would they have 2 votes that required presidential presence at the same time?

I'm interpreting the comments to be that only one of the meetings was an MIAA meeting... University Presidents have lots of meetings with lots of entities. The real question is why isn't the conference meeting arranged to meet the schedules of the only 12 people who really have to be there. If they aren't going to accommodate, they need to allow for proxy voting from other University staff (AD, VP, etc).

Then again, all of this may just be two UPs deciding they have more important business to attend to.

[Brandon]

The conference bylaws require a presence to vote. The conference rules do not allow for proxy votes.

[Predatory Primates]

Also, will there be a revote since it was a tie?

[Predatory Primates]

Why would they have 2 votes that required presidential presence at the same time?

[Brandon]

Nope

[Taxman]

Final vote was 5-5 with two abstaining. The two who abstained had to because the presidents were not present. MIAA by-laws dictate that the president has to be there to vote.

It is believed (though we can't know for sure) that the two abstains would have voted 'yes'

I would like to think the 2 president's that no showed were at another meeting that required their presence for a vote as well and that is why they were unable to attend. Also, odd that a yes vote would no show as well. I could see a no show from a no vote as things would remain the status quo. Personal opinion, they weren't 100% behind a change.

[Shanghai Mule]

Final vote was 5-5 with two abstaining. The two who abstained had to because the presidents were not present. MIAA by-laws dictate that the president has to be there to vote.

It is believed (though we can't know for sure) that the two abstains would have voted 'yes'

Do you know which schools voted yes, no and which two were absent?

[MIAAWeekly]

Final vote was 5-5 with two abstaining. The two who abstained had to because the presidents were not present. MIAA by-laws dictate that the president has to be there to vote.

It is believed (though we can't know for sure) that the two abstains would have voted 'yes'

[Predatory Primates]

I hope the MIAA's butthole grows shut!