Jump to content

Uncle Nate

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2344
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Uncle Nate

  1. The Michael Block storyline and the harder-than-US Open conditions has made this the most entertaining PGA Championship that I can remember. 

    Wasn’t it just a few years ago we were mocking the PGA Championship for the ridiculously easy course setups?

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  2. 13 minutes ago, elguapo said:

    Derka's excellent thread and our impending departure from the big 12 got me thinking about who the freakiest players from the conference have been.

    I'll start with the 10 that first came to mind for me:

    VY

    Ricky

    Bijan

    Mahomes

    Adrian Peterson

    Evil Roy Williams

    Suh

    Terrell Owens

    RG3

    Von Miller

     

    Who you got?

     

     

     

    Terrell Owens?   Didn't he go to like Tennessee-Chattanooga or something like that?

    I would add to your list:

    1. Dez Bryant

    2. Seneca Wallace

    3. Justin Blackmon

    4. Earl Thomas

    5. Nathan Vasher

    6. Michael Crabtree

    7. Dat Nguyen

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  3. 8 minutes ago, mdmost said:

     

    I believe I read somewhere it only takes 8 votes of the 15 members to dissolve the ACC.  Would Duke join the 7 to dissolve the ACC?  

    I'm a little surprised to see NC State in that group.  I don't see them, nor Va Tech for that matter, finding homes in the BIG or SEC.  

  4. 2 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

    pretty sure this is the answer.

    Depends on the TV deal.  If the deal is as crappy as some are predicting, Arizona is bolting regardless of what the others do.  I think AU leaving then forces ASU and CU to think long and hard on doing the same.

  5. 13 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

    Seriously.  It's one very short step from standing up there and chanting "SEC!SEC!SEC!"

    And the lack of self-awareness is just so typically aggy.

    He and those losers deserve one another.

    No kidding.

    Jimbo has to have some aggy DNA in him.  An outsider can't assimilate that quickly, can he?

  6. 7 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

    Not sure how much wishful thinking it is, it doesn't seem far off.   If you look at the top 20 non USC/UCLA games two thirds involve Oregon, only a handful involve Washington.   They have the "great school" cache, but there is zero national buzz around the Huskies.  If the Big Ten takes three, would they pick the Huskies or Colorado, or would they fuck them both and take Stanford, Utah and Colorado to make a stepping stone to Cali, since both are also AAU?    I'm with @Vertigo on "betting on yourself" but Missouri will tell you there is no guarantees Uncle B1G will rescue you.

    Both OU and Washington would be advantaged by playing a more national schedule, no matter how difficult the travel is.   So you're stuck with:

    1. Play in a depleted PAC and put all your eggs on the 12 team playoff or
    2. Join the B12 for a more national schedule and more exposure, but the B12 will likely lock everyone up for 20+ years to kill wandering eyes.

    At some point it may become a knife fight for who goes down with the ship and who gets off and it may not be who we assume.

    No one is doing a 20+ contract of any kind after seeing the situation that the ACC is in.  If OUW joins the Big 12, is for whatever this recent contract is signed for (5-6 years I think?)

    But to your point, I think OUW would view 5-6 years as an eternity, so it might as well be 20+.

  7. 56 minutes ago, thunderlounge said:

    Here’s what’s between the lines on that one:

     

    “Nobody’s asked us”, is true. They haven’t been asked. That doesn’t mean they don’t know they have a place.

    The “committed to the PAC” part almost has a vote of confidence feel, yeah?

    Hmmmm. Interesting to watch the dance and careful wording when such things get asked.

    You left out, in my opinion, the most interesting thing he said:  "...I shouldn't even say that."

    That's the part I'm scratching my head on.  "Nobody's asked us...I shouldn't even say that."  Why shouldn't you?  Did he catch himself providing too much info?  It's just an odd thing to say in this context.

    • Hook 'Em 4
  8. 4 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

     Go to the NFL way of challenges. The fact every single play can be reviewed is ridiculous. And there's no time limit on these reviews.
     

    It should start and end here.  No need to tweak the actual playing rules...just fix the damn replay rules and you will shave a half hour off of the games.

    • Like 1
  9. 7 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

    We all would have said the same thing about Rutgers before they were added.

    It wouldn't be about TCU's fan support.  I know they're a drop in the bucket vs UT/OU/aggy/Tech in that regard.

    Think Rutgers and MD.  Neither has any real fan support, but getting BTN in-market rates in those DMAs has been a gold mine.

    BIG fans don't like the additions, but the BIG admins love cashing those checks.  

    Getting in-market rates in DFW alone would be a big increase in $$$, but if BTN got in-market rates throughout all of TX, the money would be truly massive.  It's all in the contracts, and if adding RU got BTN in-market in all of NY state, I would think BIG/FOX could do the same in TX.

    I'll defer to @Hurtlocker on his take here.  I know the MSOs would push back, but it seems like FOX would have the leverage to make it happen, as they did in NY.

    //

    Also- the only scenario where this would make sense is if the BIG is at an odd number after adding ND, Stanford and ACC teams.

    Someone else would need to be added as a warm body for scheduling purposes, just like Mizzou was added to the SEC.

    The candidates for that final slot will all have warts.  But realignment has always been driven by money, and if BTN got in-market rates throughout TX by adding a school in the state, that's going to bring more $$$ than anyone else that would be vying for that slot.

    And with TCU, as opposed to Rutgers and MD, if they continue building their program, they would slot into the middle tier of the BIG competitively, instead of the bottom.

    As an outsider to Texas, and specifically the DFW market, you don't realize that TCU really doesn't deliver the DFW market.  Just like UH doesn't really deliver the Houston market. And the television market dynamics from when Rutgers and Maryland were added to the BIG are no longer the reality in 2023.  Cable packages have changed...it's no longer about tv sets in the MSA.  So you can't use the Rutgers comparison to TCU.

    And this guy is dead on point.  This team just played in the NC game, and yet they still have to do squirrely shit like this:

     

     

    • Hook 'Em 2
  10. 49 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

    Good stuff bullet.  Thanks for posting.  

    What TCU has accomplished over the last 15 years is really impressive.  

    If the BIG had ND and Stanford in the fold, and was able to add UNC, UVA, Duke, GT and Miami, they'd be at 23.  (FSU, Clemson, VT, NC St to the SEC).

    For the 24th BIG team, I think TCU would have a real shot vs UW, UO, CU, etc.  The massive BTN $$$, recruiting access and alum engagement in the metroplex, plus ease of travel for BIG schools would be a tough combination for the schools further West to beat.  And if BTN got in-market rates in all of TX by adding TCU, that feels like a slam dunk.

     @Hurtlocker  , given what we know of BTN in NY state via Rutgers, do you think adding TCU would get BTN in-state throughout TX ?

     

    //

    Adding the above schools would give the BIG the top 6 media markets, and 8 of the top 10, with Houston (#7) and Boston (#9) being the exceptions.

    UW fits the BIG institutional profile perfectly, but their location and lack of recruiting works against them, and the positives of getting into DFW for BTN, recruiting, etc, seem hard to pass up., esp if TCU continues to have success on the field.  Their trendline has been headed up more sharply than anyone else's over the last 15 years.

    spacer.png

     

    TCU, for all its success, has shit for fan support.  Even last year when they were winning the conference they didn't sell out their stadium.  The only time they sell out their basketball arena is if Tech or UT is playing (and they tried to limit the tickets Tech fans could buy even if it meant empty seats).  They are a small private school with a small alumni following whose success on the field has not resulted in a large fanbase.  They don't bring anything to the BIG except for an occasional game in the metroplex for the visiting team.

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Like 1
  11. Just now, Plorant said:

    7i724q.jpg

    Yeah, I meant to go back and edit that, but I waited too late.  I left out the line that was in my head..."The Big 12 has chosen to have a championship game to determine it's champion, and in the future..."

    I know I'm getting old...I think I type the stuff that's in my head, and then I go back and see that I didn't.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  12. 56 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

    I'm simply saying that look at TCU. They won absolutely nothing this year.

    But you know why they're doing so well? They won a playoff game.

    Years ago we were outraged McCaffrey sat out a bowl game. Why would players, coaches, administrators,  or even fans at a certain point care about an outdated Seeding game?

    Well, you're kind of making our point as well and I don't think you realize it.

    TCU won a playoff game...that's it.  They brought home no hardware.  Now, if their coaches hadn't gotten stupid, they could've won the Big 12 championship game.  Don't you think they wish they had won that game?  Big 12 Championship trophy in the case, Big 12 champs billboards all over DFW, put it on the stadium, etc.?  Do you think they really wish there hadn't been a Big 12 championship game??  That game didn't prevent them from winning their semi-final playoff game, and it sure as heck had no bearing on them getting their asses whooped by Georgia.  

    You could make the case that the Big 12 championship game screwed them because they went undefeated...and in the past (SWC), doing that would win you the conference.  But when you get to 12 teams, you have to have a championship game, and there will always need to be one going forward.  

  13. 11 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

    Would the BoR be involved in that type of problem? Most AD's have an NCAA compliance person on staff, right?

    Well, my comment may have been a bit too flippant for the context.  I'm just saying it could be any number of things related to athletic contracts and legal issues.  Odds are it's probably conference realignment, but when you have a high profile coach like Sanders who may tend to act first and think later, who knows?

×
×
  • Create New...