It’s the day before the Harker tournament and there is an awful lot going on. I’m still busy trying to unravel the email issues from last night and Mr. Wunn has posted a long explanation at PFDebate.com of his view of the Public Forum sponsorship situation. I wanted to take a moment to respond to his latest statement.

I’m thrilled that our shared, persistent objections to the current process continue to motivate Mr. Wunn to reflect on the status quo. I disagree with his characterization of some of the facts and believe that the source of the misunderstanding he cites is a continued lack of transparency from Ripon. His explanation of the sponsorship process concedes that sponsors have control over topic areas. His description of the role of the NFL office staff’s role in shaping topics demands an answer to an entirely new question: why does Mr. Wunn prefer the judgement of his handful of closest staff members to representatives of the coaching community at-large on the Wording “advisory” Committee? What are his thoughts on further reform of the Public Forum topic selection process to include a substantially greater voice for the membership at-large? It is because I believe many of you continue to find the answers to these questions unsatisfactory that I will continue to press for greater reform and openness.

Though I’ll continue my advocacy of these positions privately as a member of the Wording Committee, I don’t want this to become the only issue at play in this campaign. There are many ways that the services offered by the NFL to its membership could be drastically improved and I’m interested in discourse on all of these subjects. Be sure to check out the platform to see the wide range of goals presented by our campaign.