Jump to content

TKthunder2

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    3888
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TKthunder2

  1. 59 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

    I for one support the idea of a deeper lake that never gets to the water level it might have otherwise achieved.  I bet all those marinas and waterfront homeowners would be thrilled with permanent rocks and random grass for their lakefront view & use.

    About 5 years ago when last flooded, they left the flood gates open for FOUR WEEKS. We absolutely could have used more capacity.

  2. 6 hours ago, 'stache said:

    Are you seriously suggesting that Baylor and Tech should be required to allot half their stadium for UT fans? That's not how it works, the closest thing is to move those games to neutral NFL sites. If those schools don't sell out to their own fans, UT fans can eat them up. The University of Tulsa doesn't have to allot OSU fans 25,000 seats for their stadium to be 3/4 orange when we play there. I know you have some serious hatred for everyone who isn't UT, but there are more legitimate gripes than "they should give us more tickets." That one is super weird.

    How about you just not ban our fans from buying tickets on the open market?

    https://kslsports.com/500666/big-12-tcu-byu-tickets-single-game-keep-it-purple/

    Quote

    One Big 12 ticket office has concerns about BYU fans’ potential to overtake a road venue.

    That would be the TCU Horned Frogs. TCU finished last season with a No. 2 ranking in the final AP Top 25.

    Within TCU’s ticket options for the 2023 season, they offer a “Football Mini Plan” that they call a “Keep It Purple Plan.” The Keep It Purple Plan will be the only way to purchase tickets to the TCU game against BYU on October 14 at Amon G. Carter Stadium in Ft. Worth, Texas.

    TCU is looking to keep the BYU game “purple”

    As the name would suggest, the focus is to have TCU fans in the stands on that mid-October day.

    The only other team TCU has this arrangement for is the University of Texas. TCU hosts Texas on November 11 in Ft. Worth one final time before the Longhorns go to the SEC.

    TCU, Baylor, and Houston pull this type of bush league bullshit regularly (Tech too to a different extent but since nobody wants to travel to Lubbock they don’t do this). This happens regularly to Texas fans that I couldn’t easily find a UT site complaining about this since it’s fairly normal for us.

    Just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it ain’t real.

    • Haha 1
  3. 9 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    You collectively bargain, and then pay out based on ratings.  Better ratings = more money.  That's how you sell the blue bloods on it.  Financial reward becomes merit based, not about being lucky as to who you hooked up with 150 years ago.

    Isn’t this similar to how the Big 12 was setup before everybody cried about mean old Texas back in 2010 and the unequal revenue sharing?

    Back then you guys wanted equal revenue sharing because you thought you could run the same “lucky” scam as Vandy and Northwestern but it backfired spectacularly and now you want to try and put all the toothpaste back in the tube?

    Shortsighted greed appears to have caused long term consequences.

  4. 6 hours ago, JFKFC said:

    I agree, but I think both leagues need to be at 24 teams each.

    20.

    SEC adds FSU, Clemson, UNC, UVA = 20 (if you go to 24 that’s likely Kansas, Duke, VA Tech, and WVU which isn’t very appealing for football/expansion)

    B1G adds ND and Miami (or Stanford)= 20

    From the B12 point of view, if they take the best ACC leftovers in Pitt, Louisville, NCSU, and VA Tech they will clearly have the best fb brands remaining at 20, and if they overextend to 24 (which they probably would if those+Miami is available and if the rumor that BY is already talking with Duke are true) to get the stretch/basketball brands like Duke, Syracuse, GA Tech and maybe UConn or in their dream scenario ND’s nonfb sports then that’s really all they need.

    Why add in SMU and their 30k seat stadium who you already turned down and when you have 4 schools in TX? Why add Cal/Stanford who have never wanted to join and were too prideful and overbearing when in the PAC? Why add legacy leeches like Wake or BC (it’s not like they extended that olive branch to WSU/OrSU)?

  5. Oakland plays in the Horizon League

    Princeton plays in the Ivy League

    Both conferences would not be in the bottom 10 that get cut.

    Why do we have divisions? DII schools can beat DI schools (Chaminade says hello). It doesn’t cost a lot to field a basketball team. What does the number/amount of scholarships, size of arena, or number of other sports matter when you can only have 5 guys on the hardwood at any given time. Let’s have one big tournament for all divisions.

    We have divided before and we WILL divide again. Fighting for a conference to keep its bid because Fairleigh Dickinson pulled off an upset that one time is ridiculous. 99% of people reading this don’t have any idea what conference they play in or who else is in their conference without pulling it up on Wikipedia. If a conference falls out of DI and nobody notices does it really matter? There will still be plenty of Cinderellas around AND the games will be better and more profitable.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  6. 49 minutes ago, 'stache said:

     

    First, he didn't mention TV ratings, he's talking about competitiveness, and is so very wrong. A lower level conference tournament champion is more intriguing than the 8th or 9th place finisher in the Big 12/ACC/SEC. Also, the tuning in late only if it's an upset alert would be true regardless. The 1/16, 2/15, 3/14, etc. games are usually blowouts, so tuning in late only for upset alert would be true either way, doesn't make any difference if the lower seed is conference champ Stetson or 9th place Kansas State. An upset would be just as rare, but there is a ton of attention when its an Oral Roberts or St. Peters. Regardless, it was a dumb thing to say, especially when the SEC did so poorly in the first round. If you want to argue that there are too many D1 conferences, I'm open to that discussion, but I doubt there is a viable solution, especially if it requires excluding certain conferences. 

    This is where we disagree completely. Last year Oklahoma (who missed the tournament) literally beat Alabama (who was a #1 seed). The tournament would have been better if you could include more at large teams and fewer AQs.

    Based on Bullet’s list above this would/should be an easy compromise.

    Take all 10 FBS conference and add in any conference who has made a Sweet16 in the last 40 years: Big East, A10, WCC, Horizon, Ivy, MAAC, Patriot, Southern, and the Summit League.

    That would free up 11 AQ spots. If you get rid of the First Four that removes 4 teams which means we could go back to the basic 64 team setup and still have 7 additional at large bids for Oklahoma, Indiana St, Seton Hall, Pitt, St John’s, Providence, and Wake Forest.

    Yes, I think that would have been a better product and the average fan wouldn’t know any better since there would still be more than enough non traditional brands in the tournament to satisfy their Cinderella dreams.

    I’m very knowledgeable on most conferences in Division I and was only able to name 8 of the 11 conferences that were left out without looking it up. We have too many conferences in Division I which is the problem here.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  7. 7 hours ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

    I don't doubt this but you're citing this stat about the final minute - what is the source on that?  Asking honestly, not as a gotcha.  Yes, I did google first, and most of what I found was ratings in the aggregate, not minute-by-minute.

    I didn’t cite an actual statistic but many times you’ll hear/read when the media will says “2 million people across the world watched the buzzer beater last night”, only to find that when the rating are released it’s calculated with less than a quarter of that.

    As far as I’m aware the minute by minute  Nielsen ratings are not publicly available. But close games and big names draws viewers, I’m sure I could source that if you’d like.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. 1 hour ago, notre dame joe said:

    It draws clicks to tournament and local news coverage even far from those 'power teams.'   Only hard bball fans would care that UK was upset but when it was done by the other Oakland, it was on the local news all over the country. 

    Again, sportswriters and common fans like to romanticize underdog upsets but the cold hard fact are that no one watches those games outside the final minute or two.

    Oakland like St Peters and Fairleigh Dickinson, Abilene Christian, or insert random school here…are fun to talk about after the fact but the next game they play also has horrible viewership too because those casual fans despite talking about the tournament and the bracket socially…don’t watch.

    They see the final shot/miss on sportscenter or YouTube/tictok or twitter/fb but none of that brings in any money to the NCAA or P4+BigEast. The data doesn’t lie.

  9. 4 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

    I'm not upset by it, but I would rather watch the tiny schools pull off upsets and make runs than see a mediocre power school do that. So I think he's dead wrong in terms of what drives viewership.

    Take a look at the ratings because they agree with him. Nobody watches the small school until the final two minutes. While that fun for fans and sport writers to romanticize these games have lower rating than your standard 8/9 matchup which means advertisers don’t pay for them. What is memorable and what makes money aren’t always the same thing.

    I don’t think they need to fully split from all of DI, but I think you could drop 10 historically one bid leagues and the tournament would be far more interesting and profitable.

    We have divisions for a reason. DII schools can upset DI schools, it doesn’t mean we should include them in the tournament. Shrinking the number of DI leagues is likely healthy for the NCAA.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  10. 1 hour ago, 'stache said:

    "That just tells you that the bandwidth inside the top 50 is highly competitive," Sankey said. "We are giving away highly competitive opportunities for automatic qualifiers [from smaller leagues], and I think that pressure is going to rise as we have more competitive basketball leagues at the top end because of expansion."

    https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/college/SEC/2024/03/22/sec-greg-sankey-ncaa-tournament-basketball-automatic-qualifier-march-madness-record/73074108007/

     

    Okay thought it would be more inflammatory…but I agree with this and I figured the Big 12/ACC/Big East would too with quality bubble teams all being in the outside looking in. The SEC, notably, didn’t have a real quality team miss out this year (17 win LSU or #90 NET Ole Miss).

    We have too many DI conferences which means too many AQs. DI is too big need to be split in half like the NCAA president was trying to propose.

    Is anyone actually upset by this, or is it just fun to point and laugh at the SEC’s shitty basketball?

    • Hook 'Em 1
  11. 3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

    Imagine thinking CBB isn't going to be part of the future.....that's what his comments were about...bringing CBB with where CFB is heading.

    Can someone post his comments please?

  12. 4 hours ago, DanTheHorn said:

    If I were the SEC I would take Duke, Kansas, UNC plus FSU. That way with Kentucky, Duke, Kansas and UNC the SEC would have many of the the most storied football programs and most of the most storied basketball programs.

    I’ve had these same thoughts. All those programs could be options if they go to 24, but if they go to 20 it’s FSU, Clemson, UNC, and one of UNC’s buddies (UVA, Duke, NCSU).

    UNC’s less lucky pals plus Kansas, West Virginia, and Virginia Tech would be in the next set if they go to 24.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  13. 12 hours ago, 'stache said:

    They're probably still better off with the ACC leftovers than with the American, but woof at foregoing tv revenues if it continues to apply once the biggest brands are gone.

    True.

    I know if won’t happen due for a myriad of reasons (including the difference in TV dollars) but if FSU/Clemson land in the SEC and UNC/UVA are locked down due to in state politics, which means the B1G/SEC are both at 18…it would make so much sense for the ACC/B12 to swap SMU/Cal/Stanford for WVU/Cincy/UCF. Logic and reality need to get their shit together.

  14. I’m fine with the 2025 schedule.

    I didn’t like that we were playing Arkansas and aggy both away in 2024, because not only did were the last times we play each of them both away (at aggy in 2011, at Arkansas 2021) but if we switched to a 9 game 3-6-6 schedule in 2025 one of those would have likely got to host us again meaning 3 straight home games in the series. I didn’t care all that much about playing two in a row away in the series (that happens when schedules change, we hosted Okie State in Austin in back to back year during the previous realignment in 2011) but 3 times would have been outlandish.

    Now when/if they go to 3-6-6 in 2026 we’ll get to host one of either Arkansas or aggy two times in a row and I can only imagine how upset it will make them.

  15. 2 hours ago, bullet said:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/clemson-sues-acc-over-unconscionable-fees-to-exit-conference/ar-BB1kbLsY

    The story on Clemson's lawsuit.  They take a different tack than FSU.  FSU went the fraud angle.  Clemson is taking a legal misinterpretation angle.

    They said the same thing about the exit fee being exorbitant as FSU, but the twist is Clemson is saying that the GOR was only enforceable while they are conference members and once they leave the conference the GOR is no longer applicable.

    So they want to pay a reasonable exit fee and leave with their rights as free agents. If the court rules their way expect many others to follow quickly.

  16. 19 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

    I just want one side (whether it is the ACC or the unsatisfied institutions) to have a lopsided, humiliating loss. Either GORs are eviscerated or FSU & Clemson get tagged with a huge exit fee. I also want Stanford to have to be in a conference with Texas Tech. While I have your attention, I'd like to date an Asian college girl from California and some inside info on the next big crypto investment. I'm not asking for the world here. It just boils down to who among (or whom amongst) you will step up and deliver on all of this. I'm not getting any younger, so someone needs to get motivated and get to work. I'm counting on you. 

    Where do I sign?

  17. 15 minutes ago, PTINS said:

    Are all current season ticket holders guaranteed of getting tickets this year, before any waitlist person?

    Yes. That is a perk of being a season ticket holder. Once you have them they are yours as long as you always renew and assuming they don’t get have to reassign your seating due to construction (even then they’ll give you new seats for the same price).

×
×
  • Create New...