I wish this was a joke but this involves the NCAA. I can't believe its someone's job to decide whether "cake icing" is considered "decorative items" under NCAA bylaw 220.127.116.11.
TomVH Article: Cookie Cake Icing Not an NCAA Violation
When I saw the title for this post, I thought TomVH had come back to mgoblog (especially with the news that Brandon Brown has left).
I'm sad now.
Bad timing title changed
No worries, Marley. Overly wishful thinking on my part.
Where did BB go?
1 thread down, he joined the Rivals staff.
I wish Espn hadn't ruined him. He was once plugged into Michigan recruiting but now he gets watered down to cover all of the Big10.
I'm glad we cleared that issue up.
But the next question must be - what if it is cream cheese icing?
I am just trying to imagine how a school would - in the worst case scenario - demand that they should be compensated for icing, Funfetti and possibly a few chocolate chips in a manner which would satisfy the requirements of other bylaws. I will say, however, that I admire South Carolina for at least making sure that awesome desserts were OK with Mark Emmert.
Since it is also usefull as an exfoliant, the NCAA needed time to deliberate/
That's right up his alley, football and sweets. He had to be stoked to be covering that story. I wonder if he got any cookie cake. That's ridiculous that that could even be thought of as a rules violation.
"Cookie cakes have been popular among recruits visiting college campuses across the country. The prospects have tweeted out pictures of various cookie cakes and the sweets have become a favorite part of the visits, so this is a win for all sweet-toothed prospects in the future."
This is a serious article, people.
Cookie cake > normal cake. And if it had my head on it with a UM helmet on that would be even better.
(Sorry for the neck issues that may follow...)
Thank Divinity of Your Choice! Democracy and Freedom are saved!