Jump to content

Al_4_ISU

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    10951
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Al_4_ISU

  1. On 4/19/2024 at 2:18 PM, 4th&Five said:

    best since avocado for me but nowhere close to binaural and riot act.

    Binaural has some really good songs that translate excellent to the live show, but that actual album is a sonic mess.

  2. On 4/19/2024 at 2:01 PM, Rip76 said:

    Just finished the new PJ album.  (twice)

    Easily their best effort since Yield.
     

    Bravo

    I just posted this exact same thought on another board.

    I really like Riot Act and Avocado, but this tops both of them.

    McCready just slapped his dong all over this one.

    • Haha 1
  3. 6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

    Nah, the XII as is or with a few ACC leftovers will always have a few spots in the CFP. Only way the programs are left out is if the top 16-20 break off which will also leave the bottom halves of the BIG and SEC behind. 

    You’re arguing with what I’m pretty sure is a burner/alt devoted to trolling the remaining Big 12 fans.

  4. 6 minutes ago, BlueGreySky said:

    How could you possibly fuck up as much as the broncos?  Just use the throwbacks and be done with it.  Only using them once per year is more confounded, idiotic thinking, "yeah, we know you like the throwback ones, but you're gonna love these new-new ones!"

    Let's Ride! 

    The obtuseness of sports marketing folks blows me away sometimes.

  5. Yes.  I absollutely cannot stand what I've heard on the radio, and I've heard a bunch.  I'm definitely not paying money to see him.  Maybe if he opens for my daughter's band?  (I crack myself up, that would be a genre mismatch regardless of my feelings about his music.)
    As always, opinions, assholes.

    I saw him open for Turnpike years ago knowing nothing of him and really liked it. Sold me on him
    • Hook 'Em 1
  6. 1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

    I've already gotten the middle finger on the spring game thread . . . what do people see in this guy?  He's terrible.

    Are you referencing Charley?  See him live before settling on an opinion would be my suggestion 

    53 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

    I’ve tried to get into him but he sings from the top of his throat and I can’t get past that. He’s like cowboy Randy Newman.

    You say that last sentence like it’s not an incredible compliment 

  7. 3 hours ago, nnm said:

    Because I grew up in NM, with green chile served with almost every meal, I think bell peppers are completely useless. Chile peppers are supposed to have taste and heat. Bell peppers have neither. 

    Red and yellow bells have a sweet flavor that works as a compliment to certain things.  They're solid on a veggie dip tray, and roasted red bells are pretty tasty.

    I'm with you on green.

    • Like 1
  8. 3 hours ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

    unless you are doing louisiana stuff, green bell peppers serve no purpose.

    Absolutely.  They have no flavor and no heat.  They're just there.

    I guess stuffed green bell peppers can be good, but that's just because they absorb flavor from whatever you stuffed them with.

  9. 14 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

    16-18 is too small. You could cut schools like Vandy and Northwestern sure, but those schools serve a purpose of providing wins and great travel destinations to population centers in the middle of the conference. You could still cut a school like Mississippi State or Purdue who doesn’t check many boxes but there is not a lot of fat in the SEC/B1G that the presidents want to unanimously reject as it sets a bad president for those historically less successful teams.

    I think 40-48 schools is as close as you’ll get to your “big brands breakaway league”. The SEC/B1G it sits at 34 so an easy jump to 40 would be ND, FSU, Clemson, UNC, UVA and then a wildcard school like Miami or Stanford. If they go to 48 you’d likely see some others from the B12/ACC as well, but I doubt it gets that big without a true league forming which could collectively agree that they need representation in the Four Corner states for viewership and political cover.

    Why?  We've been told over and over how the haves shouldn't be subsidizing lesser programs, and how boring those games are.  This eliminates all of that.  Every member would be a major financial contributor, and every division/conference game is against a helmet school.  Need to have some breathers?  Do it in the non-conference.

    It almost seems like you're just trying to advocate for the shittiest possible version of college football as it would relate to my interests, as ISU would either be one of the first schools out or one of the last in, and frankly both of those outcomes would be worse than what we have today (for me).  I doubt that's your intent, but 40-48 schools going their own way would suck.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  10. On 4/18/2024 at 6:33 AM, Murfdogg21 said:

    What’s that different from 2007 to today? Smartphones? 2% of cars being fully electric? Gender pronouns?

    That's a pretty massive fucking difference.

  11. Just now, hook me said:

    I'd gladly give you those 3 in exchange for absolutely nothing. OU fans may have a different opinion on NU & Mizzou, I don't think anyone cares about Iowa other than ISU.

    You're correct.  Minnesota sort of does, but they belong on our level too.

    There's a certain poster that I won't @ that will definitely bitch about my saying this for the millionth time, but if continued consolidation is the way this is going, I'd much prefer that the top 16-18 brands break away in their own association/conference/whatever you want to call it.  Kick 2/3rds of the Big 10 and the bottom half of the SEC to play in a division with current Big 12 and ACC schools.

    I think a lot of people would eventually be happy with that.  The blue bloods get their buffet of marquee meaningful games and massive paychecks.  The rest of us get regional college football mostly the way we fell in love with it, and a chance to play for a championship.  The appetite for live sports will keep that division in a good TV spot and well paid (good enough anyways).  The schools left behind from the current Big 10 and SEC might be upset for minute, but they'd likely be the most competitive in their divisions in this set up.  

    I think that would be interesting and fun.  No one outside of the top 16 brands is ever winning a natty anyhow.

    The thing that chaps my ass, personally, is having these nearby schools like Minnesota, Mizzou, Iowa, etc that are riding the gravy train, contributing little, and meanwhile we're always getting threatened with something and playing games all over the fucking country.  I have 0 resentment for schools that command big bucks and big eyeballs wanting to play games against other similar schools.  I strongly resent having to listen to Iowa fans brag about a conference they add dick to.

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Like 1
  12. 20 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

    Riiiight. I'm sure Washington fans would rather play Oregon State than Michigan or Ohio State. I'm sure Rutgers fans (if there are any) are pining for the days when they played UCONN and Temple instead of Penn State and Wisconsin.

    And hello? A&M is a regional school. Oklahoma is a regional school. Arkansas is a regional school. We are all for playing those regional schools. There's just little upside to playing Baylor, TCU, Cougar High, etc. 

    I think Oregon and Rutgers FANS kinda would prefer that, but they know it’s untenable in the current environment.

  13. 24 minutes ago, hook me said:

    I don't know that I ENJOY it, what I enjoy is meaningful college football &, take all the offense you'd like, most of the teams on that list aren't meaningful to UT nor its fans on the football field. Having to play UH, BU, SMU, & TTU every year would be a gigantic step backwards for us. No one in the plains division comes even close to being relevant, the Northeast is a bore, the pacific is semi-interesting along with the southeast, & the South along with the Texas divisions are compelling. Even then, the Texas division is only compelling because I'm a UT fan. If I were a USC fan the Texas division looks exactly like the midwest with UT/OU being OSU/UM. I don't personally care about the money, when I say "support" I'm not typically talking money coming to UT. UT has plenty of money & always will. What I want is to get away from the programs that extend their coaches simply because they beat UT on a down year & play more schools that have more banners hanging than "we beat _____ in 20xx".

    You don't give a fuck about it because you're not one of them. If you don't care about UT & OSU then you should feel very good about the direction that things are headed. Y'all can get together with KSU & all the others, make your own division with conferences of teams within driving distance, interact & mingle with all of their fanbases, watch the away games on ESPN 8, & play for your own championship. Everyone would be much happier that way.

    Kick Mizzou, Iowa, and Nebraska out of the tree fort and that sounds awesome.

    That Plains pod is very close to my ideal schedule.

  14. 6 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

    The Texas conference would absolutely lead to lower attendance, excitement etc. 

    This isn’t the 70s, regional ties are meaningless as is travel for football. 
     

    SMH at the mids trying to bring back the SWC 

     

    It’s dead Jim, prime names bring prime matchups and exponentially more viewers. 

    To be fair, I think you guys and maybe USC and OU are the only fanbases that don’t want to play regional schools.

    And the TV execs.  Can’t forget them.

  15. I don't give a fuck about playing name schools.  There really aren't any in the division proposed for ISU.  But it's loaded with local teams.  Teams my school has history with.  Teams whose fans I interact with.  I don't give a shit if Ohio State and Texas have unlimited NIL.  I don't care if they get a better TV slot.

    I want two things:  opponents that makes sense, and a theoretical shot to play for a championship.  That's it, and this gives us that.

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 1
  16. 4 minutes ago, oSuJeff97 said:

    Bummer dude.

    Have you ever been to a show at Cain's?

    Yeah, saw the Damn Quails there when there were still some Covid precautions.  You had to buy a whole table, so we did.  Not the full experience, but still a great show and a great time.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  17. On the one hand, it exemplifies what makes this thread great.  On the other hand, it's ketchup on a choice cut of beef.

    But this thread isn't about the fucking rules.  Play on, player.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  18. 4 minutes ago, oSuJeff97 said:

    She's playing her first show ever at Cain's on May 8. I'm so bummed I'm gonna miss it because I'm gonna be in Houston for work.. ugg. 

    I was in Tulsa 3-4 weeks ago (the day it came out, actually) and my cousin was trying to get me to come back for it.  Dead ass middle of planting season, so there's absolutely no chance.

  19. 25 minutes ago, hook me said:

    So your understanding is that games like UT vs. Bama, which have legitimate playoff ramifications at the moment, are MORE likely to be played when they don't mean anything other than potential for injury? That sounds exactly backwards to me. They would be treated like NFL preseason games with starters playing limited reps in preparation for the "real" season that has actual ramifications. I'm also not sure what joy fans from schools like SMU, Vandy, Purdue, etc. would take from a season that has little to no chance of being meaningful other than potentially upsetting the big dog in their division on their way to a perennial 4-10 season. I know we make fun of all the stupid bowls around here, but I'm assuming fan bases for schools like yours & KU are actually pretty happy when they go 6-6 or 7-5 or even 8-4 and make one of those bowls more years than not. What incentive does Northwestern ever have for investing in their football program if there's little to no chance of ever making the playoffs with UM & OSU in their division, no bowl game to celebrate on the few years they're not complete dogshit, & no chance of being left out because they suck?

    If it's a GAIN for ALMOST every school in the country, what schools is it NOT a gain for? I'm going to guess it's BEST for all the lower & mid-level schools that see the writing on the wall & will soon be begging to be inside the bunker when the door gets closed & the nuke goes off. This is in no way a gain for the schools that are already fed up with having to support their little brothers & cousins because they happen to be in close proximity to them geographically speaking & shared a conference 40 years ago.

    This is exactly where those schools are now.  They have no chance at being competitive going forward.  All they have is being able to brag about being in the Big 10 or SEC.  They will live vicariously off the wins of the blue bloods and act like they contributed something.  It's a super Aggy existence.  In this new model, they'd actually have a chance to win the division in a good year and get to the playoffs, because the blue bloods have been spread around and a blue blood can slip up from time to time.

    But they are also the EXACT schools who stand to lose financially in this arrangement.  Right now they get paid for their association with the blue bloods.  That wouldn't happen here.  The blue bloods would make more money than they do currently, because they aren't sharing equally with schools that generate so much less.  The schools in the Big 12 and ACC probably go sideways financially, but we get rid of these stupid fucking nationwide conferences and have road games you can mostly drive to against schools who's fans you interact with daily.  The G5 probably aren't making much more money either.  But they have guaranteed access, which is the most important thing to them.  They at least have an objective path towards having a shot.

    I get it.  You like being able to say "get the fuck out of my treehouse".  This definitely eliminates that aspect of college sports, and truthfully, that's probably the biggest hang up.  No one really acknowledges it, but that's a huge motivator for a lot of the people making these decisions.  But if this was structured properly you could achieve giving the blue bloods the money they crave (and truthfully generate), you can give the middle programs sensible geography for their scheduling, and you can give the lower programs access.

    • Like 1
  20. 7 minutes ago, hook me said:

    The problem with that is you're talking about double the amount of teams in this scenario vs. the NFL, NFL teams have more games outside of their division than inside of it on a yearly basis which makes other divisions somewhat more interesting, & the parity in the NFL driven by the draft & front offices keep the NFL interesting by teams going through natural peaks and valleys. 

    No matter how many teams would have said "yes" to this setup 50 years ago, the moment satellite/cable became widespread we would see a similar progression as we have now. When Nebraska vs. OU was only one of 3 games you could watch on a given Saturday it was the shit & kids wanted to go to those schools to play on TV in that game (or fill in any other rivalry game) which helped keep the dominant programs dominant. With streaming and 20 different games on that you can flip back-and-forth between there is no scarcity driven interest to make me want to watch Cincy vs Indy (or any other game featuring completely meh programs that UT will never play) so the only drive to watch a game would be if it's your team, a rival you want to lose, or a good matchup. 

     In the proposed set up I think you would see far more interesting out of division match ups than you see today, and that's one thing that would likely raise the value of this product.

    The games you're describing will have a baked in audience consisting of those fanbases and probably no one else.  Not any different than today.  What would be different is that in a set up that completely removes the narrative driven subjectivity that has pushed college football to it's current insanity, there is no incentive for the heavy hitters in different divisions to avoid each other outside of divisional play. 

    Right now basically every team in the country plays 1 (many play 3) boring-ass tune up games.  This is all because average programs are trying to squirrel away wins for bowl eligibility and the major programs are trying to avoid non-conference blemishes to their playoff resume.  When those games don't matter towards who makes the playoffs, you open the door for better early season games.  You could even make it a rule that teams can't schedule outside the 80 (or whatever).

    There's an opportunity and way to structure this that makes it a gain for almost every program in the country if it's done right.

×
×
  • Create New...