Jump to content

rickyspub

Full Members
  • Posts

    1162
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by rickyspub

  1. 1 minute ago, texifornia said:

    D8UGlqmU0AUGk8z.jpg

     

    The campers and coaches are going to need those lead underwear from Chernobyl to prevent any unwanted contact

    She probably wants to know if she should double up her shot of HGH as the competition for dicks to suck will be intense.

    • Haha 1
  2. 9 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

    We If they do go to 8, and the pressure is probably increasing the more certain conferences (markets) are left out in the existing 4-team situation (not just the PAC as a whole), then the P5s are best served by remaining where they are at.   Everybody gets their conference champ in, and three will get a second team in (occasionally a non-P5 will creep in, but let’s not kid ourselves).  

    If you are a top-tier school football-wise, you want the easiest path to the playoffs that you can get, because it’s more money, boosts your brand, boosts your alumni engagement (read:donations), etc.

    PAC?  It’s a dumpster fire.  We can schedule Oregon and Stanford OOC, and toss in Wazzou once in a a while, and we get the best of the PAC without the shitty teams.

    UT and OU to the SEC?  That makes it harder for the two of them to get in the playoffs. UT and OU also like being the big dogs in the conference, and Bama would not allow that.  It’s a moot point since aggy, and probably LSU would vote against them joining.  Possibly Missouri and Arky as well, since that group of four stands to take a slight hit in recruiting.  Bama is tough to call - it’s rare that both UT and OU have a truly down year, so Bama picks up at least one more potential hurdle to winning the conference and getting in the playoffs. SEC got exactly what they wanted with aggy - an easy win, and an in on recruiting Texas.  UT and OU don’t add to that   

    ACC?  Take Clemson out of the equation and they are shit.  We can schedule Clemson, boost our SOS, and not be saddled with their sisters of the poor.  

    B1G? I don’t want to be in a conference with Ped State - Baylor is bad enough.  It’s a moot point - we’ve not shown real interest, and it’s a similar SEC situation - we’d make it harder on ourselves to get in the playoffs.  

    If we want to boost our profile, make our package more expensive to the networks, make it harder to run the table, and Improve our SOS, then start scheduling two of these OOC every year: Ohio State, Stanford, Oregon, Bama, and Clemson.  

    But it isn't just about making the playoffs. The Pac and ACC could soon be making less than half of what the Big 10 and SEC bring in. What happens if the Big 12 slides down into that range? The current playoff contract pays out the bulk of the money to each P5 conference regardless of their participation, so making the playoffs isn't even necessary to get most of the payout. The teams that actually make the playoffs don't get that much individually. I doubt the intangible returns (branding, alumni engagement, etc.) for just making the playoffs are all that great. You actually have to win the title to reap real benefits. 

    In an expanded playoff the need to run the table to have a chance at the playoffs is practically eliminated, so adding some good teams isn't necessarily going to make getting into the expanded playoffs any more difficult than it is to get into the 4 team version. While a conference that can boast having OU and Texas along with other reliable national powers, is going to have a huge SOS advantage and can count on a reliable media presence to make the case that the conference deserves more playoff slots than any other conference. Getting rid of the Big 12 as a power conference also makes it easier to just leave the current model in place for the expanded playoffs. The 4 remaining power conferences can assume at least one member will be in the Top 8 and they can avoid potential lawsuits from the G5 by only giving P5 champs autobids. Committee selection leaves out the G5 in most years maximizing not only the ability to keep the title among the power teams but increasing the value of the media deal by avoiding participation by less valuable media properties.

    Lastly, Texas adding a second high profile OOC game isn't going to move the financial needle enough to support 9 needy conference mates. If the Big 12 gets a big deal again, it will be because of the value of the interconference games. It is also likely going to be impossible to regularly schedule 2 high-quality OOC opponents unless those schools are also forced into increasing their SOS. Those teams want to maximize home games by having patsies for the majority of their OOC schedules. The TV contract is going to be largely based on games that are already scheduled and Texas probably isn't going to have much time or room to work in a bunch of high profile deals to fill out such a robust schedule during the time we are negotiating the conference media contract.

  3. 12 minutes ago, KYHorn said:

    Technically, I think a comma splice is when two independent clauses are joined with a comma and without a conjunction. He has a conjunction but because it's followed by a dependent clause, he doesn't need a comma. Yet this isn't a comma splice, just an unnecessary comma. Maybe we should make a sentence diagram followed by a comma decision tree.

    Yep, it's not a comma splice. The comma isn't grammatically necessary (comma could be used here as a pause) but its use is to indicate a pause for effect. Author discretion here allows for either. The fact that CTJ is taking a swipe at his detractors, I think makes the comma necessary.

  4. 1 minute ago, Katfid54 said:

    Kind of answered the question for yourself, there, didn't you, buddy?

    Do you think the average 18-year-old really believes it when the Harvard coach tells him he won't likely get anything worse than a 'C'? Especially when a guy knows Western Michigan is easier just by counting the eye candy on campus.

     

     

  5. A lot of it may have to do with not wanting to have to work in the classroom. Get free degree at Western Michigan with a tutor doing most of the heavy lifting or go to an Ivy and have to really work. Though with grade inflation that I understand is rampant at the Ivies a guy could probably get by with their tutors and come away with a much more valuable degree on similar effort. But those schools' reputation may be hard to overcome for a kid who just wants to play football and party.

  6. 1 hour ago, notre dame joe said:

    You'd want to ditch the Big12  ccg in that scenario.  If there was only one RRS game then both UT and OU can finish in the top 8 and both  get playoff  berths.  Forget about it if you double the losses by playing twice.

    Or add 2 teams like joeycovers says and keep the CCG. The problem, as always, is money. Unless OU's new admins are OK with them likely remaining behind us and over time behind not only the Big 10 but also the SEC, then they might stay under some scenario like this, but I doubt it. Adding teams that aren't already better than average P5 teams will reduce the payout as would dropping the CCG. OU has signaled their desire to leave at almost every opportunity, so I think the Big 12 survives only if the conference gets a payday that is enough to keep OU among the top media earners. I am also not sure we stay in a Big 12 that requires us to pool our T3 rights short of the conference getting paid in the same tier as the Big 10 and SEC, which seems highly unlikely.

  7. 2 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

    The fact that all the other options suck shit.

    I mean it from the AD/admin POV. If there is much bigger money elsewhere, our admins will have to consider what additional millions in media money might mean to the overall university. Or if the Big 12 gets rejected financially on the next TV deal, OU is definitely gone and I am pretty certain we aren't going to stay in that version of the Big 12. I am generally inclined to stay with the Big 12, but there are scenarios where we don't control the Big 12's future.

  8. I wonder what will happen when the playoffs inevitably expand and whether the timing will be early enough to affect any changes when the Pac, Big 12, and Big 10 contracts go up.

    I initially thought that playoff expansion would make leaving the Big 12 a more or less moot point for Texas and OU. An expanded playoff either codifies a spot for the Big 12 champ or at least all but guarantees the Big 12 a spot, short of the conference being mediocre, headed by a weak 9- or 10-win team. If the set up guarantees a spot for each P5 champ, then it might be better to stay, as wildcard spots will be limited. However, if they keep the committee approach and pick a Top 8, what really holds us back from leaving for another conference? In that scenario several conferences are getting in at least 2 teams every year and perhaps more if the rules don't limit each conference to 2 teams. The fear of getting left out by being in a bigger conference with more top-level competition is somewhat lessened, while the dollars earned would be huge. 

  9. ACC paid out an average of $29.5M per school. The end of the article lists the Big 10 at the top with an average distribution of $54M to everyone but Maryland and Rutgers. SEC comes in with a $43.7M per school average, Pac is at $31.5M (or $29.5M if you take out the 'actual cash distributions' claimed by Larry Scott). Of course, it should be noted that these distributions include all T3 media unlike the Big 12.

    Texas probably still tops everyone and the average Big 12 earnings per team is likely in line with the SEC. 

  10. 49 minutes ago, lemonandaturd said:

    Manziel was a "sleeper" pick too.  He slept through his online classes.at aggy.  He slept through the Manning Quarterback camp.  He slept through Browns gameday with a Las Vegas induced hangover. 

     

    But he didn't sleep through that blowout with Luicci though.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  11. 52 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

    While that is a fine program I am not sure why Texas A&M is a good place to do it. Especially since they would probably have to move to College Station and away from employment opportunities to participate. It seems to be me it makes sense to have them in the communities those students live. Seems unnecessarily expensive for the families to do that, to put them up in a college dorm.

    But if they aren't students at aggy for at least one term they can't be 'Former Students' and won't be a part of the vaunted aggy network.

  12. 1 hour ago, Jhawk said:

    You steal a 4 time championship coach (at the time), now arguably the best coach of all time, the year after he wins a championship for one of the top schools in the history of college football....

    Yeah.  That would be a money whip, unless you didn't pay him more, then its a change of scenery.  You would have paid him much more because he had bama rolling and UT was in the shit.  He was making $6.9M that year.  I know this won't get much love here but bama football is more historic than UT football.  Saban himself has more titles than UT.  The big 12 is not as prestigious as the SECSECSEC if anything for the mere fact that the big 12 has only be around a couple of decades.  It might have taken $9-10M to get saban that year and Bama would have likely matched it.  But there were no rumors that a "make him say no" offer was thrown out.  Aggie would have definitely thrown that out and they would have made it public if there were even hints of blood in the water for Saban to move.

    Even though I mention aggie, I don't mean to compare them to UT so that isn't the point.  The point is that people around here always talk about how UT can get any coach UT wants because UT will pay more money than others can afford for the best coach.  The fact is, that hasn't happened yet and UT has quite the opposite strategy when you look at the history of hires (once again with the exception of baseball and softball).  UT has made some damn good hires based on value and track record.  If UT could have arguably the best coach of all time then why don't they get him?  You can't tell me that the bureaucrats at the tower would rather have 1 title in 17 years Mack Brown (who had lost 5 games in 3 of his final 4 season) over 3 national titles in the last 4 years.  Even sally's cookies aren't that good.

    Point is, the money whip talk around here and on TOS is probably the most ridiculous talk on this board and that's saying something given that I contribute here.

    I'll agree that talking about money whipping a coach is hardly worth discussing until it is about to happen and that may be never. However, the point is that we could spend whatever ridiculous sum we wanted if the wherewithal were there in the AD, among the big time donors, and with the BOR. We could have Jimbo'ed Saban if he really wanted to leave Bama. That said, I am not sure the BOR would ever get behind us paying a Top 1 or 2 salary in any major sport for a new coach. A rogue BOR member trying to engineer backroom deals with Saban doesn't mean that a deal would have ever actually been approved. At any given time, there would also have to be an agreed upon target that would get the big donors in line to pay up. I am not sure if even Beard would be a name that would open up every checkbook necessary to make it happen. It also has to be the AD pulling all the strings to make it happen, which means he too has to be all in on the hire. There is a reason Jimbo's A&M deal is rare, even minus the aggiotic contract that seems entirely written by Jimbo's agent. Even a second-tier, diploma mill run by corrupt, small peened charlatans has a hard time pulling a deal like that together on a regular basis.

  13. 27 minutes ago, Jhawk said:

    100% true.  But it is also true that there has almost never been this mythical "money whip" that UT can use to get high profile coaches.  Barnes and Mack were both great hires.  But it wasn't stealing any coach UT wanted for any price.  Like I said, if UT ever had that in them (dodds or CDC) then Dabo, Saban, Urban, or some other championship game competing coach (a coach that has gotten to the finals of their sport) would likely already be coaching at UT in football or basketball.  Shaka would have never been hired and the same goes for strong.  Women's softball is great, but that isn't where the money is or where the money/success/viewership matters.

    I need to add that if UT alum were so willing to throw around the money then they would have never let patterson hire the guys he did.  They would have served up a top 5 coach in the country on a silver platter with a check that made it work.

    Well there are the rumors that UT alums, including a member of the BOR, approached Saban about taking over in 2013. Mack got word and made threats and Saban was never really considered again, even with fans clamoring for him in 2014. Supposedly Dodds was on board as his final legacy to the program, but Mack didn't want someone so likely to overshadow his achievements and exited about as petulantly as possible. If there is any truth to the rumors, would it have been a 'money whip' or was Saban ready to make a more lateral move moneywise for a change in scenery?

    Patterson seemed to avoid anything above 'market rate' for our programs, including hiring assistants and other program positions. Was he held back by the BOR or his own hubris? Ultimately he overpaid for the up-and-comer in both revenue sports. Perrin seemed to follow suit with Herman, but that was likely a move to please his big money cohorts in Houston, mitigating the need to even consider money whipping a coach.

    Different decision makers are going to make different decisions. The UT AD has only been this flush with money for barely a decade. The big money can pay off the buyouts and agree to donate to cover the salary but the AD still has to pitch it to the BOR and bring in the cash to pay the salary. UT is in a different league now than they were even when Dodds left, but CDC still has to share his vision with the donors and the BOR to make things happen. We don't know what his plan will be until he has to hire a coach. 

  14. On ‎4‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 10:01 AM, Jhawk said:

    Jimbo Fisher is one more coach than UT has ever money whipped.  A post was made saying that if UT wants someone the big money will get him.  UT must have not wanted Saban, or any other championship contending coach because UT has never once gone out there and gotten a coach that has previously taken another P5 school to a championship.  Augie Garrido was at Cal State Fullerton but his money whip was $1.7M over 6 years.  Not exactly throwing a blank check at someone saying name your price, and that's in a sport where texas has more history than basketball.

    I am not sure what role history will play in this. We did technically money whip Oregon's softball coach. We have limited information to go on with Del Conte, would he go after big fish in the revenue sports? Patterson wasn't going to pay anything extra to anyone, but Dodds chased guys with solid resumes. Comparing money when we hired Mack, Barnes, or Augie paints a different picture than the figures being tossed around today.

  15. 2 hours ago, BigHorn'13 said:

     

    Yes carries, my bad. 

    The point being is that I think everyone can agree Ingram is going to be special, but he's also been the workhorse throughout his h.s career and didn't come in last summer 100% iirc. If the coaches have this much faith in Whittington, which by all accounts they do, we should do the right thing by Ingram and limit his carries to something very reasonable, like 15 carries or so, a game. 

    It's not that inconceivable either. You put Whittington on the same count, get maybe 10 designed runs for Sam (this number you know will fluctuate with off schedule plays, ZR, etc.) and you've already got your running game for the most part. Now sprinkle Young in for a few carries, some motions from the slot, maybe even a Kirko appearance and we're cooking with gas. 

    I want to see everyone healthy throughout the year (hot take, I know) and we've got the ability to do it. Plus a schedule that sets up favorably on byes. No reason to grind down Ingram. 

    I'm hoping Young racks up a decent number of carries coming in to wrap up the 4th quarter of all our many blowouts. 

    • Like 1
  16. How many fucking aggy's were drafted from a team that was a few plays and some timely ref calls away from barely being bowl eligible. The NFL sucks donkey dick and part of the reason is because they can't see their tiny peens from behind all that 'tradition'. A league that keeps Jeff Fisher around for decades can't be filled with too many sharp minds. It will take us winning big or another Poona or two coming out of this year's UDFA class to wag the dog back in favor of our guys.

    • Like 4
×
×
  • Create New...