Jump to content

Al_4_ISU

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    12188
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Al_4_ISU

  1. I think Klatt's missing the mark here.  I think the committee will frequently screw over the Big 12 with odes to "eye test" and "good losses", but at least they (the Big 12) aren't publicly saying "we're signing up for a guaranteed less".  They're also planting a bit of a strategic flag in saying "we know we'll get less than we want some times, but it's the right thing for the good of the sport".  I think at this point most Big 12 officials are more interested in staying in the game than maximizing revenue in the short term.  Especially when the playoff gets reformed every single year.

    The Big 12 isn't super likely to get more bids this way, but I don't think that's what they're after in this negotiation.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. 19 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

    Noted, but Comancheria went up to Colorado and New Mexico, so I’ll let it slide. 

    I could be wrong here, but didn't it basically end at the mountains?  My understanding (from about 8 audiobook listens of Empire during planting and harvest) is that they were relatives of the Shoshones who left the mountains for the south plains, and never really returned to the mountains in any significant capacity.

    Plenty of scrub plains in CO and NM.

  3. Iowa and Nebraska aren't really Rust Belt, but I don't blame you for not wanting to play those games.  Iowa fans throw beer and urine at you.  Nebraska fans condescend and hide it behind "aw shucks" Midwest Nice.

    And if there's a scheduling deal, all either conference will really care about is creating marquee matchups.  Texas/Bama/UGA/etc will not be going to the Big 10 West.  That will be Mizzou, Kentucky, Arkansas, Miss St.  They'll make all the "lucky to be here" schools play each other.  And they might not even care enough to do that because games like the Palmetto Bowl and CyHawk generate better ratings than Iowa vs South Carolina would.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  4. I really think it’s about not acquiescing to codified next level status.

    The reality is that the SEC has been the best conference for a long time, but the Big 10 is closer in actual on-field quality to the Big 12 and ACC.  The Big 12 and ACC don’t went to formally concede anything even if everyone knows they’ll probably get fewer bids in this system.  At least there will be a semblance of earning things.  There are plenty of years when the 3rd and 4th Big 10 teams could easily lose to the 2nd and 3rd ACC or Big 12 teams.

    The Big 10 doesn’t deserve a formal advantage just because they have the biggest fanbases.  Most people in the SEC know deep down that they’ll probably get more than 4 teams in a lot of years too.

    The 4-4-2-2 system is just anti-competitive at the end of the day.  It was a vehicle to generate more content in the form of play in games.  Like there isn’t enough $ already.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  5. On 5/31/2025 at 5:28 PM, Iceman said:

    Wife has an uncle, retired, owner of about a $1mm property in Texas. 
     

    Miller Lite is the only thing you'll ever find in his icebox, until we bring stuff and corrupt it. He never drinks the other beer.  Only Miller Lite. 

    Funny enough, my aunt (said uncle’s wife) only drinks Miller Lite too.

    It’s literally the only form of alcohol I’ve ever seen this woman consume.

    • Like 1
  6. The Big 10 is 3 programs that could win a natty and 5-6 programs that would compete for ACC or Big 12 titles in good years.  The remainder struggle with bowl eligibility in any non-G5 league.

    They have money because they’re the more popular universities in large population areas.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  7. Fuck this stupid fucking shit.  These fucking twats are just bashing everything I love about college sports to death. 

    The opening weekend of the NCAA tournament is the best 4 days of sports in America.  Period.  Anyone who wants to change it should be drug in the street and shot.

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 1
  8. 52 minutes ago, 'stache said:

    Why would SEC be against 5-11? SEC would get the majority of those 11 every year. Big 10 is probably against it because they want the 4 guaranteed spots, there will likely be years they get less than 4 if everything is at large. I’m surprised Yormark favors it because the other proposal gives them 2 guaranteed spots and there will likely be years that only the champ gets in if everything is at large. Am I missing something? Also nobody is “telling SEC what to do,” these are negotiations leading to agreement and SEC will probably get its way eventually because they’ll have support of the networks. Maybe he’s referring to Big 10 saying they wanted to see SEC play 9 game conference schedule? I think there are plenty of others in favor of that including the networks paying for all of this stuff.

    Sankey’s just lying to establish his justification to blow everything up and act like he had no choice.

    By the time the actual financial fallout of alienating a large chunk of college sports fans hits, he’ll be retired.

    Squeeze max profits for next quarter, who gives a fuck about 10 years from now, fuck you you poor loser who has less say than me.  The American way.

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Rage+1 1
  9. 2 hours ago, troph said:

    That looks  awful lot like some of our rivers too.

    The Driftless Area is basically a northern version of the Hill Country, geologically speaking.

    Both are dissected plateaus.  Flora/climate is the main difference 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  10. Got out on the classic Upper Iowa run for the first time in a couple years. Damn near perfect except for recent rains muddying things up a1bf2da8b1d7d8624f90919aecc5dbc6.jpg
    edd170b8a9d471a7b0fbeb90161a9710.jpg
    b9ac7b686282540299a7b17a14e74edc.jpg
    4ac5254fa82e51f05dd034b7a593a1a4.jpg

    • Hook 'Em 2
  11. 8 hours ago, Sgt Hulk said:

    Nope. Enjoy you big 12 loser conference. BDF ahahhaahhaha

    Micro-penis energy notwithstanding, this is simply a weird response to a post about the logical extension of devaluing CCGs.

    • Hook 'Em 6
    • Haha 2
  12. 12 hours ago, bullet said:

    Boise has had far more success than any G school and is a better TV draw.  Yet they really didn't get serious consideration either time.  And they weren't taken seriously because of academics.

    I think if Boise was that valuable of a TV draw, the Big 12 would have jumped all over them.

    My guess is that the value they added to the TV contract was basically the same as the schools that added, and the geography was farther (more expensive travel) with less opportunity to recruit local talent.

    I realize that Boise's academics are a problem for a lot of people, but I don't think they're the reason the Big 12 post UT/OU passed them over.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...