Jump to content

TKthunder2

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    3888
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TKthunder2

  1. 28 minutes ago, royiv said:

    The same chorus of idiots would be moaning if the Big 12 told the schools to drop the previously scheduled noncon games. With noncon games scheduled so far in advance the only thing that they would have been able to fill the holes with would have been an FCS opponent. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Some people just have a weird obsession with bitching about a conference that they're leaving. 

    Washington State and Oregon St were available to play and are playing more MWC schools than agreed to because they were already scheduled as out of conference matchups. It would have been that difficult to arrange that if everyone involved was competent.

    These were the OOC game before the changes:

    K State v Arizona, Baylor v Utah
    Oregon St v SDSU, Washington St v SJSU (these could have been MW conference games)

    cancel and schedule each other it’s ain’t too difficult 

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

    Wasn't the Longhorn Network the reason why UT couldn't switch conferences until it expired? I thought every other conference was against individual networks for schools. Kind of like Notre Dame, nobody will take them as a full member with many of their games tied up in that NBC contract, but they were unwilling to let that go. 

    If anything, A&M is lucky they moved when they did, because they certainly wouldn't be first choice to add for the SEC or B1G right now. More likely they get left behind in the Big 12 with Ok State and Texas Tech. Then it comes down to which is better: being a 7-10 win team in a bad conference, or being a 5-9 win team in a great conference? 

    We could leave the LHN at any time if we changed conferences. That had nothing to do with it, because the LHN still had another 7 years left on the contract.

    The only thing keeping us in the Big12 was the GOR.

    As much as we enjoy to shit on aggy, they absolutely would be the first choice in realignment for the Big Ten.

    Adding a Texas school that can draw 100k to a game and even more in eyeballs sandwiched between Houston, DFW, Austin, and San Antonio would be the equivalent of adding Rutgers and NYC’s 9 million tv sets for FOX and the BTN, but with better fan support.

    The main reason aggy is valuable is because the Big Ten/FOX want OhioSt/Michigan/Pedo/USC to play games and get more fan in the state of Texas and that’s the same reason the SEC wants to hold on to them as well just to keep them out.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  3. 7 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

    Psssst.  It's because Bibi doesn't intend on their being a "Gaza" when this is over.  He's making that more and more clear every day.  "Gaza" will just be "the part of Israel that's on the sea, with no arabs in it."

    You’re probably correct except the no Arabs part. I doubt they can move that many people out without significant international pressure. I see them likely just taking control and occupying Gaza like everyone has accused them of doing for years. We can argue whether they should morally or ethically but I think it’s the most likely action at this point for Israel no matter how one feels about it.

    Allowing foreign aid in unchecked has not helped anyone other than Hamas. If they can control Gaza and distribute that aid to those truly in need then maybe thing might actually get better for everyone even if it’s clearly not an idealistic solution.

  4. 9 hours ago, statsman said:

    It’s clear that they are trying to put their most attractive games (and BU-TCU) on dates without significant competition. See Oct. 12. 
     
    The B12 knows what they are, and are trying to get the most out of it. 
     
    I suspect this is why they are last with the schedule. There is one time slot they have a shot at (Fox mid afternoon Saturday) and they want to get it. Future revenue will be based on ratings and they don’t want to do something stupid like counter program the RRS with a TT-OSU game. 

    Agree think it’s a smart strategy. Play around the P2 conferences, avoid playing your best games in head to head competition with their blockbusters and do your best to capitalize where you can. If Texas isn’t playing (like in Nov2nd) put up a Baylor/TCU game and see if you can get any of that audience to watch an in state match up. Do the same with Okie St, UCF, and any others you can.

  5. Big 12 gets a pity mention in ESPN’s “must watch” cfb games of 2024. (The ACC games are weak also).

    https://athlonsports.com/college-football/espn-names-eight-cant-miss-college-football-games-for-2024-season-georgia-alabama-texas-michigan
     

    Miami at Florida (which coach is going to get fired first game)
    Texas at Michigan
    Georgia at Alabama
    Ohio St at Oregon
    Georgia at Texas
    Florida St at Notre Dame
    Michigan at Ohio St
    Utah at Oklahoma St

    • Haha 2
  6. 9 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

    https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/3438030

    I present one of the dumbest takes in sports history

    Unpopular opinion re: Bama

    They're not that great a program, it's not a destination job, and with Saban leaving they will fall into relative mediocrity for the next decade.

    Pre-NIL, Saban could have taken a lot of programs to the success he has brought Bama. He was arguably on his way at LSU before bolting to the NFL. He just so happened to land at a school in Bama who had historically been great a few generations before he got there, but if he had ended up at Georgia or Tennessee or Texas or even here he could have replicated the success he's had for the past 16 years.

    Now Bama has to compete with everyone else having the same advantages and opportunities that they do, and without their legendary coach. Meanwhile, Smart has Georgia on their way to becoming the next dynasty and they've already shown they can adapt to the new landscape in college football.

    I think Bama's run at the top is over, and the rise of the next era of college greatness will be achieved by schools who have not traditionally been the blue bloods and perennial favorites.

    I just was having a similar talk with one of my neighbors yesterday, but it was more along the lines of Bama is a top ten job but maybe not a top five job due to NIL, smaller state population, lack of nearby metro areas, and increased competition. 

    Program success doesn’t necessarily correspond to job desirability, for example Clemson has been a top 10 program for a decade but is clearly not a top ten job.

    However, to say that they are not a great program or not a destination job is just asinine. Bama could turn into 2000-2020 Tennessee for the next 20 years and they’d still likely be a top ten job.

  7. 53 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    Those ratings are shit when they're the Final 4.  When you have a St Peter's vs Purdue in the Sweet 16 I feel like people are fucking glued to it.

    I don't see any world where removing the Cinderellas makes the tournament more compelling and profitable.

    The ideal tournament ratings wise would be a situation where you have some major upsets, but the bulk of the Final Four are name programs.

    Cinderella can get some attention when they make a deep run from casual fans but the opening round of 64 and round of 32 games are trash for broadcasters/advertisers outside of the final minutes if it’s close. Even the slightly elevated ratings that Cinderella gets when on a great run, doesn’t offset the potential revenue loss for all the rest of the blow out games. There is a reason the 8/9 games are on CBS while the 16/1 games are on Tru TV. I’m going to go try and find the article about this where I saw the analysis but I’m having no luck at the moment in between work calls.

  8. 6 hours ago, royiv said:

    This particular discussion should move to the basketball board, but  curious here. Is your thesis that only including P5 (no longer exists) or P4/3/2 teams in a 68 team tournament will increase ratings?

    Point me to the thread, happy to join in the talk but I think in the basketball tournament is applicable in the realignment thread, we commonly talk about the Big 12 adding Gonzaga in here…

    Again, to reiterate, I love the current tournament setup, but the data shows it’s not as profitable as a P4/5 only tournaments see recent changes to NIT and the new FOX tournament (https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2023/09/11/college-basketball-las-vegas-fox-postseason-tournament-replacing-nit.aspx)

    IIRC only about 1/3rd of the tournament revenue goes to the men’s DI basketball programs, much more of it goes to pay for non revenue sports and championships for DII and DIII.

    If you exclude all except the P4, G5, Big East (or whatever combo they decide) and remove it from under the NCAA, while the overall tournament may be less profitable, the shares of profit going to the schools would increase since they would keep more of the money (100% of $500mil > 30% of $1bil). Again, I’m not advocating for this change, but logically see this as the next step. Once major fb realignment is settled and the CFP has been renegotiated, I can easily imagine the SEC/B1G/B12/ACC looking deciding a bigger split should be in the works.

    The NCAA itself has already laid out a plan for larger schools to pay players and breakaway from the fringe DI schools that are barely funding their athletic departments.

    I think the P4 schools see the tournament as a money maker and great advertising that they can run. An easy miscount solution is breakaway from the NCAA and run it themselves and allow any conference that wants to participate with them to do so with an entry fee of (making up a number here) $20 million a year. Each round of participation gets the conference a return of $8 million. Meaning you either need 3 bids to the tournament to not lose money without winning a game, or a single bid and 2 wins. Something like that would make some of the fringe one bid league drop out and allow more participation from P4 teams on the bubble.

  9. 9 hours ago, royiv said:

    That would suuuuuck. One of the best parts of college basketball is the fact that it's a sport that smaller schools can compete and win on a big time stage. Having teams like Gonzaga, Butler, FGCU, Loyola Chicago, etc being in the mix is what makes the NCAA tournament great.

    The problem is that nobody watches. People talk about loving Cinderella but nobody watches those games until the last minutes if it’s close and despite those upsets being memorable moments, they are NOT profitable. Low ranked schools lead to low viewership. When you had FAU, UConn, and San Diego State in the final four, nobody watched and it was the lowest rated final four in many years.

    Having a only P5 teams would increase the total watch time for the early round games and would purposefully exclude the lesser brands from their bigger games that attract bigger audiences.

    Writers and casual fans love to romanticize Cinderella, but most real fans want to watch Kansas, Kentucky, UNC, Duke, UCLA, Indiana, Ohio St, Florida, LSU, Arizona, Texas, and so on…in the S16/E8/F4 and that is what sells ads which is what drives the market rate for the entire tournament.

    It’s not a popular idea, but it’s factual. The P5 schools don’t want to be upset/embarrassed by the Ivy League or MAAC teams, and to rub salt in the wound, most of the times when that happens it tanks the ratings as well which takes even more money out of the pocket of the P5.

    While the loss of big brackets and Cinderella will likely hurt in the short terms, but in the long term it would be more profitable.

    You can argue that this shouldn’t be about profitability, but then you likely haven’t been paying attention to the last 30 years.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  10. 2 hours ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

    The thing about Clemson is that they were competing for national titles annually for most of that time period. Lots of eyeballs in the playoffs. I do wonder how much they move the needle if Dabo continues to slowly drive them into a ditch. Will people tune in if they aren't one of the top teams in the country? I guess Jesus will still watch. Teams that have struggled over that time (e.g., Texas, USC, TN, Auburn, Florida) and still show up in that graphic seems more indicative of true drawing power. 

    Also... anybody notice the premier SEC team in Texas notably missing from that graphic?

    Everyone in that list, except Oregon, has a stadium in the top 23 capacity. Stadium capacity tends to correlate well to TV ratings (more people want to go to your games is similar to the number of people that watch on TV).

    The other 6 in the top 23 not on this list: aggy, UCLA(not on campus), Nebraska, South Carolina, Arkansas, Michigan St

  11. 1 hour ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

    I don't know exactly where this goes, but seems relevant here.

     

    Also this:

     

    I wonder how the Big 10 is going to draw on CBS vs. the old SEC games going forward.

     

    Can we finally put to bed the dumb argument that Clemson is going to get left out…

  12. On 8/11/2018 at 1:57 PM, williemackgarza said:

    FYI- I found the detailer from my original post. Got me fixed up. My truck looked brand new.
    If anyone needs a rec pm me and Ill send his info

    Necro bump

    My detail service closed up shop (owner moved out of the area) anyone have a good recommendation on a mobile detail guy in North Austin?

  13. 11 hours ago, CustersDoctor said:

    UA Just let their AD go. 1. He Had an opportunity to lock up their head FB coach or at least put a big buyout on his contract, but he didn't. 2. The athletic department had to borrow fifty million dollars from the university during covid. The athletic department doesn't really have the means to ever pay this back. Arizona like most universities has a loss in enrollment and could really use that fifty million dollars now. 3. The AD was Part of the PAC12 executive committee that A. Turned down  35mill a year media rights offer claiming that they were worth 50mill a year. B. Was A loud voice in the "everything is fine nothing to see here" final days of the PAC12. C. Allowed or didn't notice that the PAC12 office was feeding inflated data to Comcast. D. Didn't have tight enough control over the underperforming PAC12 network. This allowed Larry Scott ro run up huge expenses on Bay Area rental space and then outrageous expenses to move the network offices to a cheaper place.

    https://www.azdesertswarm.com/2024/1/22/24047465/arizona-wildcats-athletic-director-dave-heeke-mike-candrea-interim-robert-ribbuns-budget-2024

    I think you’re confusing Arizona with Arizona State in parts of the above. The Arizona president/AD was show me the money, the ASU President/AD was all this is fine.

    • Like 1
  14. On 1/18/2024 at 10:22 AM, YGIFS said:

    i think the Randall's there is under initial permitting for demolition at least.  It will eventually be enveloped by the medical complex.  But it's gonna take a damn long while.  

    That’s a logical assumption, but that neighborhood fought like caged pit bulls against the hospital expansion on the existing lot. I don’t think they’ll just allow more to medical buildings to pop up there very willingly. A little birdie told me that the Shoal Creek psych hospital isn’t long for this world either so that whole area that includes Randall’s and Burger King could be very attractive for a developer.

  15. 9 hours ago, troph said:

    So do Indiana, Purdue, Vanderbilt, Mississippi state, northwestern, and other dog shit programs that are just historically lucky get to stay? I’d much rather see Miami in the mix over shittier programs.

    Vandy has been covered and Northwestern is the same for the Big Ten minus the good baseball part. Indiana ain’t going anywhere, large enough state to support them, good academics and basketball royalty.

    I’d trade Mississippi State or Purdue for Kansas in a heartbeat if I was either leagues. Those two schools are the luckiest in the P2.

    Still, it sets a bad precedent for the Big Ten/Sec have nots if they start cutting the fat, so it will never happen. The only way would be for a new league to be created where Ohio St, Michigan, Penn St, USC, Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, LSU, and Texas form a new league a start from scratch where all team are viewed critically before being invited in

  16. 1 hour ago, statsman said:

    Argument for the SEC or B1G taking in FSU, Clemson, Miami and maybe a few others: these teams are major programs and can compete at the highest levels, given the chance. They are definitely stronger programs than the SEC and B1G bottom dwellers. 
     
    Argument against: Have to share money and they don’t increase the relative shares with their additions. 
     
    Hmmmmm, wonder which argument wins out. 
     
    Argument for the SEC or B1G (who are we kidding; it’s the B1G) taking in Notre Dame: It’s Notre Dame. 

    FSU, Clemson and obviously ND bring eye balls, regularly sell out their 70k+ seat stadium, and have the appropriate fan/institutional support.

    Miami is different, they could be included but they aren’t the same as the above.

  17. 8 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

    They letting Bowman start again?  If so, I doubt they are winning much.  They had ridiculous luck last year, and I doubt that repeats.

    They may not do as well but their schedule isn’t anything ridiculous. Arkansas and Tulsa OOC and they avoid Kansas, Iowa St, UCF, Arizona and obviously UT/OU. The only hard addition for them is Utah.

  18. 2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

    Not a bad prediction if Rising is healthy and stays healthy.

    I think Utah, UCF and TCU should be the favorites in the Big 12. You can never rule out K-State and Arizona losing their coach to Washington takes them out of that conversation. 

    Oklahoma State will be up there as well.

×
×
  • Create New...