Jump to content

redswingline

Full Members
  • Posts

    1075
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by redswingline

  1. If we look at on-the-field results, Stanford was 1-8 last year, tied with Colorado for last place in the PAC. Historically, they are bottom half. Historically, TCU is average in the Big 12. With OU gone, the Big 12 is going to be a tossup going forward. I will enjoy watching over the next 7-10 years to see if a couple of programs can consistently stay a the top.
  2. No one cares about the debate team at Stanford or Oregon State's rowing team. USC's value has dropped considerably since 2007, due to lack of success. In some ways Oregon, UW and Stanford pick up that slack and increased their values. However, the PAC 10/12 would always have the most value if it's best team won MNC's and that best team was USC. Partly due to the history of the program and partly due to the fact it is in the #2 media market in the US. Not saying that having MNC's from other programs would not increase the PAC 12 media negotiation leverage, but the peak value would be with USC.
  3. I didn't know Dallas still had a team?
  4. 12 years? Aside from the Aaron Rogers / Beastmode era, Cal sucked prior to 12 years ago, too. Keeping Shaw didn't make Stanford irrelevant. Having an administration that prioritizes education over football + the new transfer portal rules, made Stanford irrelevant. They have had exactly 1 undergrad transfer during the Transfer Portal era and 4 or 5 total transfers since 2015. That makes it nearly impossible to compete with schools than can just plug in guys from other schools. Plus, they don't bend the academic rules like 95% of the football programs out there. If you can ball, having a 900 SAT and majoring in finger painting can get you into USC. Not Stanford. Stanford and Cal were minor players at best. The PAC failed because its' most valuable program, USC, had not won an MNC in nearly 2 decades, which devalued the appeal of the PAC. Oregon, while better on the field, is worth far less from a media rights standpoint and they couldn't get it done either. Another way to say that, is that since USC has sucked for +14 years, they devalued the PAC and ended up leaving because of it. Kind of like shitting in your own bed and then finding somewhere else to lay down.
  5. Absolutely. It makes zero sense for them to equal shares. It's all conjecture though, we really don't know what the motivation(s) are behind this lawsuit. I won't be thinking about it again until the lawsuit is resolved and that resolution hits the media.
  6. Yeah its all hard to figure out. My two guesses 1. For some reason he saw the gross earnings of the movie and figured he was getting screwed by someone 2. He got pissed about how the family 'cut' the proceeds from the movie. I have yet to see what the total is for that. If we say 9k per member per year on average, for 12 years, that is $540k.
  7. I don't think oher was portrayed to be dumb so much as the actor cast to play him was dumb. To be fair, how many giant high school-age kids (or early 20s) are you going to find for a role like this?
  8. Perhaps. Those types of details can only be known by oher and his attorney. The only other possibility I see here is oher is aggravated the royalties split 5 ways. If each member gets between 7k-14k a year, that's 5x that amount (5 family members) per year, x 12-13 years, if those payments continued that whole time, that's not chump change. I question why anything from a book or movie about him would get split by the family in such a way. That is very odd.
  9. Here is my guess about this lawsuit: Oher sees the movie making +$300 million and thinks he is getting screwed over because he is getting peanuts from it. Well, that may be the case but its not by the Tuoys doing it. It was the result of the negotiations for the book / movie rights. Just because the movie made a killing vs. a low budget, doesn't mean the studio then turns around and gives everyone involved bonuses or something. You get what you signed up for.
  10. To answer my own question - it has been reported that everyone in the family got an equal share. So the proceeds were divided by 5. Apparently those proceeds aren't all that much money. Perhaps something else led to a falling out between the family members. I can't help but think that oher is pissed that better terms weren't negotiated for the book and rights for the film. The film grossed +$300 million but the way things were signed and agreed to, it appears the family made very little from it. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38204108/faq-sorting-blind-side-claims-oher-tuohys
  11. TCU based on what, having never won a Big 12 title? They didn't win one last year and you can forget the "title" from 2013 or 2014. They finished with the same record as ISU or baylor or whomever it was that year but lost to that team That is some aggy type shit calling oneself a champ in that situation. Plus the big 12 fixed that problem shortly after by changing the tie break rules. Utah is a 'wait and see'. They won a couple conference titles in the weakest conference in the country. We'll see how that turns out when they move over. KSU. Not sure what to think about these guys. Was last year the peak of the 5 year up swing? Or, is that coach really the guy. I'm not sure who will be the consistently best teams. I think close to all of them will have the 5 year up/down swings as none of the 16 teams are head and shoulders above anyone else in regards to facilities or money. Don't count OSU out. Gundy seems to consistently be in the top half.
  12. The mindset goes back to at least the reconstruction period. Systemic, baked in oppression in the former confederate states. You should check out some of the old textbooks used by public schools in Alabama from the 1920s-1970s. Tons of confederate propaganda. This is a good article on an old public school book, "Know Alabama". It can certainly be assumed the same bs was taught in Mississippi. https://birminghamwatch.org/know-alabama-justified-slavery-praised-confederacy-schoolchildren/
  13. That one caught my eye too. 1 at a time here.
  14. The link above has more info in it, compared to the story put up by espn https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38199104/tuohy-family-disputes-michael-oher-claims-alleges-shakedown-blind-side-subject Several parts of this (mostly from the UK version) caught my eye "The notion that a couple worth hundreds of millions of dollars would connive to withhold a few thousand dollars in profit participation payments from anyone -- let alone from someone they loved as a son -- defies belief,' Singer said." "'Over the years, the Tuohys have given Mr. Oher an equal cut of every penny received from The Blind Side,' Singer said. " "Singer did acknowledge that the Tuohys 'received a small advance from the production company and a tiny percentage of net profits' from the film, which they either shared with Oher or tried to share with him, according to the attorney." "Oher is asking for the public to respect his privacy during his legal battle" "For his career, Oher earned $34.5 million." Some things come to mind: - I wonder who leaked this filing to the media? - What does "tried to share with him" mean, exactly? - If you wanted privacy, why would you write a book on your life and file a lawsuit when that book is released? - If he earned +$34 million in his NFL career, does this lawsuit mean he blew it all? -What does "an equal cut" mean, exactly? Does each person in the family (so, 5 people including Michael) get a cut? Or is it Tuhys get half and Michael gets half? That aside, why wouldn't Michael get most if not all of it? He was the main subject of this film. I don't get why they would take any of it to be honest. In closing, I love big naturals
  15. Wait a minute. They claim a conference championship in 1997? Didn't they get railroaded by Nebraska in the Big 12 CCG that year? What am I missing here?
  16. So pretend that a woman is someone completely different? Being married, I have been doing that for years.
  17. That's not Sandra Bullock. She never had breast implants / augmentation. This is a recent picture of Sandra
  18. Comes across like he was blindsided by all of this.
  19. She is very pretty to look at, but too thin. Nailing her would be like humping a skeleton.
  20. He didn't say it was a girl with a strap on, did he?
  21. Tell that to my phone's autocorrect feature.
  22. Fox, CBS and NBC did not sign huge contracts with the Big 10 because of it's students SAT scores.
×
×
  • Create New...