Jump to content

bullet

Full Members
  • Posts

    3183
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by bullet

  1. I just don't see how going beyond 20 makes sense for the SEC or Big 10 at current contract rates.  Only ND, FSU, Clemson and maybe Miami bring in high enough ratings to justify expansion financially.   And it makes no sense to go to 24 for any reason other than financial.  But clearly people are talking about it.  4X18 or 2X20, 2X16 just makes more sense than 3X24.

  2. https://sports.yahoo.com/how-the-new-college-football-playoff-format-came-to-be-and-what-it-means-for-the-sports-future-165149801.html

     

    Good article on why Sankey became Cranky and became the Grinch that stole CFP $$s for the G5 and M2.  And what comes next???!

     

    "...During a meeting of CFP commissioners in November, well before the revenue negotiations began, a discussion point emerged about the CFP’s future.

    “There was a belief that all of us had to stay together as is,” Sankey recalled. “I never viewed it that way.”

    Sankey’s honest and stunning admission may indicate the future course of the SEC and perhaps the Big Ten too. It casts doubt on the glue that binds the nine leagues together.

    Schwarz believes the future is not necessarily two 20-team conferences that create a separate entity, as so many predict. Instead, he sees two 24-team conferences plus a third, possibly three 20-team leagues. “They’d all love to rip one of the four apart and make it a Big Three,” he said.

    Said one high-placed college athletics insider: “Five power leagues could not survive. Neither can four....""

  3. On 4/18/2024 at 6:42 PM, TKthunder2 said:

    16-18 is too small. You could cut schools like Vandy and Northwestern sure, but those schools serve a purpose of providing wins and great travel destinations to population centers in the middle of the conference. You could still cut a school like Mississippi State or Purdue who doesn’t check many boxes but there is not a lot of fat in the SEC/B1G that the presidents want to unanimously reject as it sets a bad president for those historically less successful teams.

    I think 40-48 schools is as close as you’ll get to your “big brands breakaway league”. The SEC/B1G it sits at 34 so an easy jump to 40 would be ND, FSU, Clemson, UNC, UVA and then a wildcard school like Miami or Stanford. If they go to 48 you’d likely see some others from the B12/ACC as well, but I doubt it gets that big without a true league forming which could collectively agree that they need representation in the Four Corner states for viewership and political cover.

    16-18 is Prestige Worldwide.  The rest will still be around for ooc wins.

  4. On 4/13/2024 at 9:39 AM, Longboard Horn said:

     

    You give him way too much credit.  It was not really a police chase.  More of a parade.  A boring parade.  And whoever at NBC switched from game 5 of the NBA finals for that earned his ticket to hell!

  5. He's baaaack!  Actually the Dude of WV never left, after all, he's immortal, but just changed to his real name, Christopher Lambert.  And his FSU and Clemson talk just won't go away.

    So from others who do subscribe to his twitter, ESPN is brokering a deal whereby the ACC lets FSU and Clemson go to the SEC, sublicenses their rights to ESPN to use in the SEC and takes a cut.  Meanwhile, ESPN agrees to exercise their option to renew the ACC contract from 2027-2036.  That option expires in 2025.

    Its just way too complicated for the Dude to have thought of it himself, so someone did tell him this.  And it really does make sense, even if the source is the Dude.  Its a win for FSU and Clemson, who get to go to the SEC and make more money.  Its a win for the ACC who get rid of a couple of whiners, get their contract renewed and cash in on part of FSU/Clemson's FMV.  Its a win for ESPN who keeps FSU and Clemson and gets even better matchups in the SEC, although they do pay a little more.  Its a win for the SEC who seal up the southeast and get a couple more national brands.

     

    • Haha 1
  6. 19 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

    He was the initial aggressor and got himself. It wasn’t that much of a sucker punch. Quit carrying water for this guy. He has clear issues and needs help. 

    Quit carrying water for the pussy who sucker punched him.  I can't believe so many of you are defending that piece of shit.  It would have been one thing if one of those two guys in front of him had done it.

     

    • Fuck You 1
  7. On 3/26/2024 at 5:43 PM, shadow_operative said:

    i didn’t read anything vic said after his first few sentences of his first internet tough guy post, because you couldn’t pay me to read the ramblings of an internet tough guy whose mind frame is stuck in middle school. 

    adults who get into fist fights at bars are losers. adults who sucker punch people are even bigger losers. adults who go on the internet to talk about how it ain’t no rules in the street like they’re some gangster tough guy and not some dorky ass internet poster the biggest losers imaginable.

    Yeah.  When I was growing up someone who sucker punched was a total pussy and coward.  I lived in Vince's neighborhood, long before Vince.  Our Junior High was rated one of the 10 most dangerous school in the nation.  And the only junior high on the list.  We were a little overrated--but there were lots of fights and they were always fair fights.  And when somebody lost, it was over.  They didn't bang their head into the concrete.  Nobody used weapons.  They didn't gang up 2 on 1.   Only pieces of shit like the sucker punch guy would do that.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. On 3/26/2024 at 3:44 PM, HRSchenker said:

    Never ever hold someone back in a fight if you're not willing to become a target yourself by the guy you're holding. Nothing noble about being in that position. Either separate them or get the hell out. Hate to see this happen to one of my idols growing up but damn Vince why are you at a place like that? 

    He didn't get hit by the two guys he was holding.  It was a loser guy on the side.

  9. On 3/26/2024 at 10:40 AM, BurntOrange&White said:

    Bro should really enroll in AA but that was kind of a sucker punch. 

    Absolutely a sucker punch.  Vince looked like he was trying to keep things from getting out of hand.  The two who weren't tangled up with him were fighting.

    On 3/26/2024 at 10:49 AM, Vic Mackey said:

    Sucker punch? Sure. But why do people act like there are rules when it comes to fights? This isn't boxing or some controlled setting. Your head needs to be on a swivel at all times

    That guy wasn't even involved with Vince.  It was the two guys in front of him.

  10. 12 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.  The whole conference model goes away completely in this system.  There is no Big 10 or SEC, there is just the 70 schools that were part of the major conferences, and they all have varying levels of value in this equation.

    This model we've been heading towards where Purdue and Northwestern get to make as much money as Ohio State and Michigan while Oklahoma State and West Virginia don't even get to participate is so mind-numbingly stupid, and this model would end that immediately.

    Schools are going to want something more certain than year to year ratings.

  11. On 3/30/2024 at 1:03 PM, utee94 said:

    SEC scheduling has always been wonky.  As I recall, back before the expansion to 12 teams in 1991/92, there were years when LSU might only play 6 or 7 of the other 9 teams.

    It was 7 games in the 80s.  Prior to that, some schools (notably LSU) might play only 5 conference games and others might play 8.  Below is 1965 before Tulane left but after Georgia Tech.  Looked up 1966 and Ole Miss played the most-7 games, while Georgia, Tennessee and Vandy played 5.  LSU was the 1970 champ at 5-0.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:1965_Southeastern_Conference_football_standings

    Team W   L   T     W   L   T
    No. 1 Alabama $ 6 1 1     9 1 1
    Auburn 4 1 1     5 5 1
    Florida 4 2 0     7 4 0
    No. 7 Tennessee 2 1 2     8 1 2
    Ole Miss 5 3 0     7 4 0
    No. 8 LSU 3 3 0     8 3 0
    Kentucky 3 3 0     6 4 0
    Georgia 2 3 0     6 4 0
    Vanderbilt 1 5 0     2 7 1
    Tulane 1 5 0     2 8 0
    Mississippi State 1 5 0     4 6 0
    • Hook 'Em 1
  12. 5 hours ago, thunderlounge said:

    It has potential, but hinges on alignments, IMO. 

    It has zero potential.  It puts the SEC and Big 10 on a par with the M2.

    Now if you could set something up where the SEC and Big 10 are 3 twelve team conferences or 4 ten team conferences and the M2 realign into 3 twelve team or 3 ten team, then you might get someone to listen.

    Wouldn't be pretty for the 3rd conference, but you could have the 2005 Big 10 (11) + Rutgers, the 2005 SEC minus Arkansas + Maryland for  twelve and a 3rd conference with UT, aggy, OU, Arkansas Mizzou, Nebraska, UCLA, USC, UW, Oregon, FSU and Clemson.  Then the other 3 would be WSU/Or St./Cal/Stanford/BYU/Utah/AZ/ASU/CU/ISU/KU/KSU + BC/SU/Pitt/UVA/VT/UNC/NCSU/Wake/Duke/GT/Miami/ND + WVU/Cincy/Louisville/UH/SMU/TCU/TT/Baylor/Okie St./UCF/USF/UConn

    If you stick with 7 of 10, then you add FSU, Clemson, ND, Miami, UNC, UVA to the P2.  #1 1990 Big 10, #2 1990 SEC, #3 FSU, Clemson, ND, Miami, UNC, UVA, S. Carolina, Penn St., Rutgers, Maryland, #4 UT, aggy, OU, Arkansas, Mizzou, Nebraska, UCLA, USC, UW, Oregon.  The other 3 are #5 BC, SU, Pitt, VT, NCSU, Wake, Duke, GT, UL, UCF; #6 WVU, Cincy, UH, TT, TCU, Baylor, Okie St., KU, KSU, ISU; #7 Stanford, Cal, SMU, Utah, BYU, ASU, Arizona, CU, WSU, Or St.

     

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  13. On 3/23/2024 at 6:36 PM, 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. 

    The same would happen if it was Indiana St. of the MVC or Duqesne of the A10.

  14. On 3/23/2024 at 12:09 AM, TKthunder2 said:

    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?

    On another board someone calculated the Sweet 16s by conference since 1985.  Here is BePcr07's calculations, which seem reasonable, based on 2025 conference membership:

    ACC-140

    Big 10-123

    SEC-104

    Big 12-95

    Big East-69

    Next tier:

    AAC-20

    WCC-18

    A10-15

    MWC-13

    Bottom tier:

    MAC-7

    MVC-6

    CUSA-5

    the rest:

    Horizon-2

    Ivy-2

    ASun, MAAC, Patriot, Southern, Summit-1

    12 conferences with 5 or more.  14 conferences with more than 1.  19 conferences with at least one.  12 conferences with zero in 40 years.  I've said you could drop the bottom 10 conferences and nobody would notice and probably the bottom 15.

  15. On 3/21/2024 at 5:57 PM, 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.

    Before people start making the football argument I happen two agree with Chris Fowler that says the next step after all this realignment will be the Super 2 trimming the dead weight like Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Rutgers, etc. So in a two tier system you have the BIG football schools bring in the FB money and get tier one money and the BIG BB school bring in the basketball money and get a part of the FB money. The BB schools then serve as the schools one beats up on during football season yet they will be the ones with all the eyes during BB season.

    I really don't think there will be any trimming.  Now maybe at some point there is Prestige Worldwide with 16-20 schools.  But that league will need other weaker leagues around to pad the ooc win totals.

  16. https://www.yahoo.com/news/um-disinclined-clemson-fsu-waging-141736577.html

    Miami AD-Miami solid with ACC!  i.e. they don't have an invitation to another party-yet.

     

    :,,,A UM source said the school is evaluating the situation and could respond differently if FSU and Clemson are somehow able to bolt the conference.

    At the moment, UM does not have an invitation to join the Southeastern Conference or Big 10, according to a source with knowledge of the matter. The source said UM would listen if either conference called, but its hands are tied at this point.,,,"

  17. https://sports.yahoo.com/will-sec-big-ten-greed-ruin-college-sports-as-we-know-it-202735432.html

     

    Dan Wetzel suggests the Big 10 and SEC extreme demands may well be an effort to destabilize the Big 12 and ACC and lead to more raids.

    "...If the Big Ten and SEC are able to set a playoff up in direct contrast to how college sports have always operated — codifying more guaranteed access, more guaranteed on-field competitive advantages (including a bye) and more guaranteed money — then the operation may be passing the point of no return.

    This isn’t just about hoarding power — although that’s part of it. It’s about eliminating other teams and leagues from being able to compete on the field, therefore further destabilizing other conferences. We just saw the century-plus-old Pac-12 perish for no particularly good reason. The ACC and Big 12 might be next.

    “Automatic first-round byes for the Big Ten and SEC is like the NFL saying the [Dallas] Cowboys get a first-round bye since they have more fans than the [Cincinnati] Bengals,” TCU coach Sonny Dykes noted. “How preposterous is that?”

    So preposterous that the cutthroat, bottomline, chase-every-nickle NFL wouldn’t even try it. And Dykes' point extends to uneven revenue sharing and multiple automatic bids.

    It’s particularly preposterous because based on the competitive strength and historic success of Big Ten and SEC teams, they would likely be able to earn those bids, byes and even money via competition. If so, good for them.

    By putting it in writing though, this becomes a play to break apart other conferences and pick off a few more of the most valuable brands...."

  18. On 2/23/2024 at 12:06 PM, Al_4_ISU said:

    The Big 10 and SEC would all but be guaranteed 2-3 bids here.  Codify it, I guess, but that’s not an at large.

    If the past decade has taught us anything it’s that the committee values brand Uber alles.  If the Big 10 or SEC failed to get multiple bids in this scenario, it’s because the leagues were truly putrid that year.

    But now that we have 12 it’s never going to 8.  That’s just a thought experiment on what I think the best product looks like.

    No.  Giving the SEC and Big 10 more access is a Scarlet letter on every ACC and Big 12 team.  It will be used against them in recruiting by the Purdues  and Mississippi States.

    Plus, it damages the CCGs which are big money makers.

  19. On 2/22/2024 at 10:17 AM, Huckleberry said:

    I'm the same pedant I've always been. If you want to have a playoff then have a playoff. 

    And the end game in that is to split them off, not for me to watch Coastal Carolina and New Mexico in the CFP playoff.

    Only a little more than half of the G5 has even been in FBS for 30 years.  They really don't belong.  And other than Boise (6 times from 2004-2011), only 5 G5 teams have made the top 12 or even top 14.

  20. On 2/23/2024 at 10:57 AM, statsman said:

    I don’t think it will be coercion. Here is what I think will happen:

    The 12 team CFP will make a lot of money. The non-CFP bowls will make less and less, as they lose significance (it’s ridiculous that they still factor in final rankings). 
     
    The CFP will expand to 16, with 11 at large. The SEC and B1G will consistently get ten teams combined in. They will get most of the money. 
     
    The networks will ask for an expanded playoff, to 24 or 32 teams. The main beneficiaries would be the ACC and B12, who will be all in favor. I think the SEC and B1G would balk- why expand to add teams that don’t make more money for the P2?

    The networks suggest an alternate playoff to the non-P2 world, a playoff where the non-P2 world gets all the money. They accept. 
     
    Thats how I think it goes down. Maybe there’s even a final game between the winner of the two playoffs. 

    Beyond 16 and you gut the regular season.  4 losses will get you in.  There is a lot of money made by schools on Saturdays.

  21. On 3/4/2024 at 3:07 PM, thunderlounge said:


    While true, what college teams around them don’t totally suck shit through a straw?

    That’s probably the bigger contributor to their reasoning. 

    Minnesota used to be a national power.  They have 4 MNCs.  But then the Vikings arrived.  SMU and Rice were solid before the Cowboys and Oilers.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  22. https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/39625514/wsu-president-urges-member-schools-reform-not-replace-ncaa

    https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/39625392/new-pac-12-commissioner-teresa-gould-considering-all-options

    2nd article-new Pac 12 president considering ALL options.  Sounds like OSU/WSU are still hoping to get invited somewhere in the next two years.  Haven't had formal discussions on absorbing MWC.  Talking to people about TV deal for the two.

    1st article follows on the ESPN site.  Talks about NCAA reform, but there is an interesting quote near the bottom.

     

    "...New Pac-12 commissioner Teresa Gould, who now represents the conference on the CFP management committee, said the commissioners are "aligned" in their desire to develop a plan that has "adaptability."

    "I think none of us would have ever anticipated the amount of change that is going on right now," she said in her introductory press conference. "Yesterday looks different than today. And who knows what the headline is going to be tomorrow. So our job collectively as the leadership of the CFP is to make sure that whatever plan it is that we have a plan that is adaptable and nimble to the changing times that we're in. And that is one of the conversations that I want to make sure we continue to have in that room....""

×
×
  • Create New...