Jump to content

Texas Wahoo

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1683
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Texas Wahoo

  1. If you wanted to make it a little more equally distributed, you could do something like this, which is mostly geographical except for LSU. West: Texas, OU, A&M, Arkansas East: Florida, UGA, South Carolina, Vandy North: LSU, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mizzou South: Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss State
  2. If Aiden's dad says it, it must be true.
  3. I'm pretty sure both LSU and Florida's ADs have expressed interest in ending cross-division rivalries. It's Bama/Tenn and Auburn/Georgia that keep them going.
  4. First we need a billboard...
  5. Assuming they keep the same divisional format, I assume Bama and Auburn will move east and Mizzou will join UT and OU in the West.
  6. It doesn't apply here, but would an NLI really prevent someone from going pro? I know an NLI would prevent them from playing for another NCAA school, but I can't imagine it would keep them from playing in Australia.
  7. Seemingly, no.
  8. They are really going out on a limb there, given that we came pretty darn close to winning an NC in baseball this year.
  9. Didn't they try to implement a system where you cannot throw the next pitch until the last one landed a couple of years ago and the guys that did the best had pitchers that were willing to cheat? Here is a reference to it: https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/there-are-home-run-derby-truthers-accusing-bryce-harpers-dad-of-cheating/
  10. I’m not trying to snark, just honestly feel like I’m missing something. When the 9.95 people seem to have been wrong about everything so far, why do we believe the story about Sexton being told “no thanks”?
  11. It's the dissociation constant. He's asking if Banks is likely to separate into smaller bodies.
  12. Didn't Under Armour have to pull out of a couple of school deals (UCLA and at least one other) because they couldn't afford them? I'm not sure they are much competition at this point.
  13. My guess is no one is getting unseemly amounts right now. Likely, they are being promised Nike money and endorsements if they come to Oregon and are successful. If I had to guess, they're probably dangling the possibility of tens of thousands in Nike money for doing some ads - not millions.
  14. There is no way a shareholder is going to get past the business judgement rule by claiming that Nike should be paying other schools' players instead of Oregon's players to advertise for them unless they are paying unseemly amounts of money to unknown players.
  15. But the key is "without any real business purpose for Nike." It would be easy to pay them to wear Nike outside of school and do online Ads or even local commercials. I cannot imagine that anyone is going to investigate the "market rate" requirement for these things. As long as they are doing something for Nike and not getting paid $1 million a year or something outrageous, my guess is it is just fine.
  16. Why would Nike endorsements be illegal under the current rules?
  17. I have absolutely no inside information, but... yes?
×
×
  • Create New...