Jump to content

Uncle Nate

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2295
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Uncle Nate

  1. 1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    Because that bomb got dropped on us '21, it forced us to take action, add schools, and ushered Bowlsby to the finish line while we started finding a better replacement.  Meanwhile, the Pac sat around laughing, puffing their chest about the Alliance, and punting on an opportunity to add all those public schools with more passionate fanbases than what they had because of culture and politics.  When the Pac got their rug pulled out last year, we had closed in on Yormark, added 4 schools, and had a pretty damn good TV deal in place before they had even figured out what happened.

     

    I still get the schadenfreude thinking about how that all worked out...

    "But, but...we had an alliance!  AN ALLIANCE!!"

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  2. 1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

    In the list of embarrassing things the Aggies have done their tantrum over this is legitimately top 3 all time right? From their chancellor, to president to ad were crying 

    They were squeezing their nuts hoping the SEC would change their mind.

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  3. 16 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

    Apple just dropped their nuts on the table and said take our deal and we are done fucking around while you use us for your games of internal politics.

    Pretty similar to what ESPN and Fox did last year when the Pac decided to roll the dice and take it to market.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  4. 15 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    I mean, at this point it's pretty obvious that they're never going to see a deal.  They could set an actual dead line and hold George to it, but they don't.

    They know what they'll get for $ and exposure in the Big 12, and they're fine getting less of both so they don't have to say they play sports in places with Republican governors.

    It's an interesting thing to watch play out.  I think Cal and Stanford are leaning to just being the West Coast version of the Ivy League, and CU is having an identity crisis on that front because they want to be in a Cal-Stanford Ivy League but at the same time they aren't willing to throw in the towel on the money sports.  UU is delusional in thinking they can have both.  Oregon and Udub just want to bide their time until a Big 10 invite comes along.  ASU has a bit of CU identity crisis happening, but to a lesser degree.  I honestly think Arizona knows what's best but is hesitant to make the move, and OSU and WSU are just praying it stays together because they literally have no other options other than to be relegated to G5.

    I never thought I would see the day where there was a more dysfunctional athletic conference than that of the Big 12 back when Beebe was in charge, but here we are.  

    • Hook 'Em 2
  5. 3 minutes ago, FartingDreamer said:

    Yes it is wise, because doing so would either deal a death blow to the Pac12 or relegate them to G6 status, thus serving as a boost to the Big 12 and contributing to conference stability as #3.

    But would it?

    These "leaders" have overseen misstep after misstep by the Pac 12/10.  They have been a part of it.  Now we bring in a couple of them or more and we expect them to change their ways?  It's akin to locker room culture.  Coaches these days when evaluating transfer portal prospects not only have to consider the athlete's abilities, but also the impact that person may have on the culture and cohesiveness of the team.

    Maybe I'm treating them unfairly due to guilt by association, but at the end of the day, the commissioner reports to the presidents.  Pac 12 failure is on the presidents, and I'm seeing 10 university presidents who seem completely incapable of making decisions, much less smart ones.  Maybe it's by design and a couple of these presidents are playing 4D chess, but I doubt it.

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  6. I'm starting to wonder if bringing in a couple of these mensa schools is a wise move for the Big 12.  Either these university presidents are in the loop and are indecisive making really poor decisions, or they are out of the loop and completely ineffectual in overseeing and participating in the business of the conference.  Either way...are these  ineffectual and indecisive leaders the type of partners the Big 12 would want to have as it's trying to be more innovative and nimble in promoting its brand and the brands of its members?

    I'm seriously thinking bringing in a CU, AZ, Ute, or whoever would be like tying an anchor to the conference just as its trying to establish and promote its innovative and creative approach to modern collegiate athletics.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  7. 16 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

    I don't think it's ego with regards to being associated with Cal/Stanford but rather ego of having to come back to big 12 with their tail tucked.

    Good point. 
    Could be a combination of both. 

  8. 1 hour ago, billfromlaketravis said:

    Is it a money thing with Colorado? They had to give Deion an IOU. It feels like they're gone, but there's something tying them down.

    Ego. They think there is more prestige associating with Cal and Stanford. 

  9. 9 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

    Klownkoff: We are not announcing our media rights deal on purpose today because we want the focus to be on football.

    Reporter: To be clear, that would imply that the deal is done and codified, and you're just waiting until after today.

    Klownkoff: I think you're reading too much into that.

     

    😂😂😂

    What an idiot.  He had eight months to get ready for this press conference, and he manages to expose himself yet again as a total fraud/empty suit in less than 10 minutes.

    You couldn't script this level of stupidity if you tried- you just can't make this up!!!  🤣

    I am truly amazed at how people who have no business running a collegiate athletic conference are able to ascend to the role of commissioner (GK, L. Scott, D. Beebee, etc.)

    The Peter Principle is alive and well in college athletics.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  10. 38 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

    And Oregon is telling every 2024 recruit they’ll play in the Big Ten. Probably telling recruits that Matt Damon and Ben Affleck will make a movie about them too. Because when they start lying, why stop? 

    spacer.png

    • Hook 'Em 2
  11. 19 minutes ago, Evil Bill Obrien said:

    The school had plenty to do with that situation and they keep crowing about Leach and posting stuff like this looking for clicks on social media and it's pretty gross when all things are considered like how and why they ran his ass out of Lubbock. McGuire catching strays because of it is unfortunate. 

    Please point to the spot on the doll where Texas Tech touched you.

    • Haha 1
  12. 6 minutes ago, Crockett said:

    Other than no Sunday play, what are you talking about? You're "answers" remain vague.

    We demonstrably have all the markers of a P5 program (we enter the B12 (minus UT & OU) with the biggest stadium; we have a national following, our record against P5 programs is even or a little better than even; we have a national championship, heisman winner, doak walker winner, NPOY in hoops all in living memory; we have a consistently high ranking in the Director's Cup rankings (for 2022 we were #3, ahead of Ohio State, Texas, and Alabama); and I could go on. So, yeah we feel like we deserve to be in the P5 realm and do operate at a higher level than the teams in the MWC, WCC, and WAC. 

    Like what? You double counting no Sunday play?

    We're accredited and our grads are well recruited by top companies, so almost everyone else disagrees with this take. My BYU transcript was accepted when I went to grad school elsewhere. 

    You seem bitter about something lol.

    He's got to be a Yute.  They are the only ones I see this vitriolic towards BYU.  

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Fuck You 1
  13. 57 minutes ago, royiv said:

    Uh, why the neg? You have a problem with diversity?

    Get out of here with that bullshit. Take it to the Cloak Room. 

    Just now, royiv said:

    I should know better than to post on the football board. The biggest group of pussies and snowflakes on this site.

    Why? Because we only want to talk football and not get dragged down into your political bullshit?  

    • Hook 'Em 9
    • Fuck You 1
  14. Maybe the worst thing the UA and CU presidents could have said is that they won't consider leaving until after they see the deal.  Kilavkoff is taking them at their word on that.

    If it is true that they won't be presented the specifics of the deal for another month and it won't be ready to be signed until Labor Day, and if it's also true that a school has to give notice to leave by the end of July, then that means they either have to make the decision to jump without seeing the deal, or roll the dice and stay without knowing what their TV/GOR future will hold.

    I just can't see UA and CU being content with that situation.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  15. 35 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

    On today's episode of the Marchand and Ourand podcast, with guest Paul Finebaum, John Ourand stated that he believes the Pac 12 presidents will not know anything solid about their new media deal for another month, and that an announcement of the deal will probably not be made until around Labor Day. He said this was all "informed speculation."

    George Kliavkoff really is playing the Costanza "she can't break up with me if she can't find me" card (see meme earlier in this thread).  What I can't believe is how patient the Pac10 schools are being about this.  He's basically stringing them along to a point where they wouldn't be able to leave due to contractural timing, in an odd way just like what he did to SDSU but in reverse.

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Like 2
  16. 7 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

    Who the fuck would buy PacNet? Apple?

    That would seem to go against the way Apple does things. They are smart and calculating. I don’t see how PacNet could be viewed as a good idea within Apple. But what do I know? (Hint: Not a damn thing).

  17. 13 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

    bf04f47bfcde8ab69d0bab77a90c2f05.png

    So this is an interesting one that I am not sure about.   Brian is pretty good with media numbers, but the B12 just signed an additional data deal a little bit ago.  I basically monetizes targeted ads.    The NFL's is like a quarter or a half bill, so I'd be shocked if the B12 was getting $84m a year, but this could be a part of where basketball has more value due to the shear number of games.    Not really my wheelhouse, but interesting if true.

    Thats kind of how I'd measure it, like a Q-score.   When Nebraska sucks balls, they're still pulling in similar numbers to Oregon when at their best.

     

    I think it goes way beyond just targeted ads.  When it was first announced, they were talking about how this data could be used by advanced analytic sites for gambling sites and the like?  I admit I don't know much more than that, but it was interesting to hear all the ramifications that could result from a data deal like this.

    • Hook 'Em 2
×
×
  • Create New...