Jump to content

hook me

Full Members
  • Posts

    715
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by hook me

  1. 9 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    Kick Mizzou, Iowa, and Nebraska out of the tree fort and that sounds awesome.

    That Plains pod is very close to my ideal schedule.

    I'd gladly give you those 3 in exchange for absolutely nothing. OU fans may have a different opinion on NU & Mizzou, I don't think anyone cares about Iowa other than ISU.

  2. 25 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    This is exactly where those schools are now.  They have no chance at being competitive going forward.  All they have is being able to brag about being in the Big 10 or SEC.  They will live vicariously off the wins of the blue bloods and act like they contributed something.  It's a super Aggy existence.  In this new model, they'd actually have a chance to win the division in a good year and get to the playoffs, because the blue bloods have been spread around and a blue blood can slip up from time to time.

    But they are also the EXACT schools who stand to lose financially in this arrangement.  Right now they get paid for their association with the blue bloods.  That wouldn't happen here.  The blue bloods would make more money than they do currently, because they aren't sharing equally with schools that generate so much less.  The schools in the Big 12 and ACC probably go sideways financially, but we get rid of these stupid fucking nationwide conferences and have road games you can mostly drive to against schools who's fans you interact with daily.  The G5 probably aren't making much more money either.  But they have guaranteed access, which is the most important thing to them.  They at least have an objective path towards having a shot.

    I get it.  You like being able to say "get the fuck out of my treehouse".  This definitely eliminates that aspect of college sports, and truthfully, that's probably the biggest hang up.  No one really acknowledges it, but that's a huge motivator for a lot of the people making these decisions.  But if this was structured properly you could achieve giving the blue bloods the money they crave (and truthfully generate), you can give the middle programs sensible geography for their scheduling, and you can give the lower programs access.

    I don't know that I ENJOY it, what I enjoy is meaningful college football &, take all the offense you'd like, most of the teams on that list aren't meaningful to UT nor its fans on the football field. Having to play UH, BU, SMU, & TTU every year would be a gigantic step backwards for us. No one in the plains division comes even close to being relevant, the Northeast is a bore, the pacific is semi-interesting along with the southeast, & the South along with the Texas divisions are compelling. Even then, the Texas division is only compelling because I'm a UT fan. If I were a USC fan the Texas division looks exactly like the midwest with UT/OU being OSU/UM. I don't personally care about the money, when I say "support" I'm not typically talking money coming to UT. UT has plenty of money & always will. What I want is to get away from the programs that extend their coaches simply because they beat UT on a down year & play more schools that have more banners hanging than "we beat _____ in 20xx".

    16 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    I don't give a fuck about playing name schools.  There really aren't any in the division proposed for ISU.  But it's loaded with local teams.  Teams my school has history with.  Teams whose fans I interact with.  I don't give a shit if Ohio State and Texas have unlimited NIL.  I don't care if they get a better TV slot.

    I want two things:  opponents that makes sense, and a theoretical shot to play for a championship.  That's it, and this gives us that.

    You don't give a fuck about it because you're not one of them. If you don't care about UT & OSU then you should feel very good about the direction that things are headed. Y'all can get together with KSU & all the others, make your own division with conferences of teams within driving distance, interact & mingle with all of their fanbases, watch the away games on ESPN 8, & play for your own championship. Everyone would be much happier that way.

  3. 1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

     In the proposed set up I think you would see far more interesting out of division match ups than you see today, and that's one thing that would likely raise the value of this product.

    The games you're describing will have a baked in audience consisting of those fanbases and probably no one else.  Not any different than today.  What would be different is that in a set up that completely removes the narrative driven subjectivity that has pushed college football to it's current insanity, there is no incentive for the heavy hitters in different divisions to avoid each other outside of divisional play. 

    Right now basically every team in the country plays 1 (many play 3) boring-ass tune up games.  This is all because average programs are trying to squirrel away wins for bowl eligibility and the major programs are trying to avoid non-conference blemishes to their playoff resume.  When those games don't matter towards who makes the playoffs, you open the door for better early season games.  You could even make it a rule that teams can't schedule outside the 80 (or whatever).

    There's an opportunity and way to structure this that makes it a gain for almost every program in the country if it's done right.

    So your understanding is that games like UT vs. Bama, which have legitimate playoff ramifications at the moment, are MORE likely to be played when they don't mean anything other than potential for injury? That sounds exactly backwards to me. They would be treated like NFL preseason games with starters playing limited reps in preparation for the "real" season that has actual ramifications. I'm also not sure what joy fans from schools like SMU, Vandy, Purdue, etc. would take from a season that has little to no chance of being meaningful other than potentially upsetting the big dog in their division on their way to a perennial 4-10 season. I know we make fun of all the stupid bowls around here, but I'm assuming fan bases for schools like yours & KU are actually pretty happy when they go 6-6 or 7-5 or even 8-4 and make one of those bowls more years than not. What incentive does Northwestern ever have for investing in their football program if there's little to no chance of ever making the playoffs with UM & OSU in their division, no bowl game to celebrate on the few years they're not complete dogshit, & no chance of being left out because they suck?

    If it's a GAIN for ALMOST every school in the country, what schools is it NOT a gain for? I'm going to guess it's BEST for all the lower & mid-level schools that see the writing on the wall & will soon be begging to be inside the bunker when the door gets closed & the nuke goes off. This is in no way a gain for the schools that are already fed up with having to support their little brothers & cousins because they happen to be in close proximity to them geographically speaking & shared a conference 40 years ago.

  4. 12 hours ago, 'stache said:

    I like it but it’s 50 years too late. This is what it should have been from the start (with some variations). A bunch of those programs would say no.

    6 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    When there's a playoff that all these leagues feed into, instead of provincial bowl games, I think that would go away.  Because all of these divisions feed into the same national playoff, every game has theoretical relevance in relation to every other game.  NFL fans on the east coast don't ignore the games on the west coast because at the end of the day those are all teams that their team could have to play, and the big brands would draw eyeballs from everywhere in this arrangement.

    These aren't conferences that are little clubs of like-mindedness and camaraderie.  They are divisions that constitute a larger league.  Because every D1 fanbase in America has a stake in this final outcome, there will be nationwide interest.

    If the SEC and Big 10 wall themselves off, no one outside is going to care all that much.  There are enough people "inside" that circle to be financially viable, but maxing out financially tends to come from having the most people invested and watching.  The NFL has never outright attempted to alienate potential viewers.

    The problem with that is you're talking about double the amount of teams in this scenario vs. the NFL, NFL teams have more games outside of their division than inside of it on a yearly basis which makes other divisions somewhat more interesting, & the parity in the NFL driven by the draft & front offices keep the NFL interesting by teams going through natural peaks and valleys. 

    No matter how many teams would have said "yes" to this setup 50 years ago, the moment satellite/cable became widespread we would see a similar progression as we have now. When Nebraska vs. OU was only one of 3 games you could watch on a given Saturday it was the shit & kids wanted to go to those schools to play on TV in that game (or fill in any other rivalry game) which helped keep the dominant programs dominant. With streaming and 20 different games on that you can flip back-and-forth between there is no scarcity driven interest to make me want to watch Cincy vs Indy (or any other game featuring completely meh programs that UT will never play) so the only drive to watch a game would be if it's your team, a rival you want to lose, or a good matchup. 

  5. 1 hour ago, markstanco said:

    But it would still be an overall bad look if he transferred to aggy

    54 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

    Why?  How is having guys who can't see the field at Texas transfer to aggy a bad look?  

    A starter transferring is a bad look...a 3rd/4th stringer, not so much, IMO.

     

    33 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

    I thought we were part of the SEC for transfer purposes, so he wouldn't be eligible to play immediately if he went to aggy?

    I was close to responding to this as well.. luckily my sarcasm meter kicked back on just in time...

     

     

    • Haha 1
  6. 19 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

    From Aggie 247 and my thoughts:

    Carter Karels continues to attempt subtle messages to his aggie readers that their roster is dogshit and they're going to need to do a lot of work in the portal. He's also hinting at soon to be exits as well. I'm not sure if any of it is getting through. 

    Here's an article in which he talks about the offense and their portal needs. Spoilered so the folks that just come to this thread to crack the ever-hilarious sheepfucking jokes don't have too long of a scroll:

      Hide contents

    Earlier this offseason, Texas A&M hammered the NCAA Transfer Portal to fill several holes on its roster. Look for the Aggies to remain active during the spring window for the transfer portal, which begins Tuesday and ends April 30.

    During the winter transfer portal window (Dec. 4, 2023-Jan. 2, 2024), A&M lost 18 scholarship players. 247Sports previously reported that two other scholarship players, safety Jacoby Mathews and Sam McCall, are expected to transfer out of the program during the spring portal window.

    The Aggies have replaced those departures with 24 scholarship transfers so far: four cornerbacks, three safeties, three defensive ends, three offensive linemen, two linebackers, one defensive tackle, two wide receivers, two tight ends, one nickel cornerback, one running back, one punter and a kicker. Their 24-player transfer class ranks second nationally, per 247Sports.

    Those subtractions and additions have brought them to a projected scholarship count of 90 players for the fall. Per NCAA rules, A&M will not need to satisfy the 85-scholarship limit until the first day of its fall semester.

    Ahead of the upcoming transfer window, here is the start of a two-part series assessing which positions the Aggies should address through the portal. Every unit will be examined by their level of need, receiving a grade of very low, low, medium, high or very high.

    Here is a look at the offense.

    QUARTERBACK

    Position inventory: Redshirt junior Jaylen Henderson, redshirt sophomore Conner Weigman, redshirt freshman Marcel Reed and true freshman Miles O'Neill.

    How big of a need: Very low.

    Analysis: With NIL and the portal, a solid backup quarterback can be tough to keep. Following last season, A&M managed to retain two backup quarterbacks – Henderson and Reed – who impressed in game settings. O'Neill will join the Aggies in June as well.

    Now, if Henderson or Reed enters the portal this month, A&M will certainly need to improve its depth at quarterback. But if they stay, the Aggies would have to feel good about their quarterback group going into the 2024 season.

     

    RUNNING BACK/FULLBACK

    Position inventory: Sixth-year senior Jerry Johnson II, fifth-year senior EJ Smith, redshirt junior Amari Daniels, junior Le'Veon Moss and sophomore Rueben Owens II.

    How big of a need: Medium.

    Analysis: All four A&M running backs bring experience and have proven themselves to be at least serviceable. Whether any of them could flourish in a featured role this season, though, remains to be seen. None of them have reached 600 rushing yards in a season.

    If the Aggies continue to use a committee approach, Smith, Daniels, Moss and Owens should form a nice group. But if a stellar 1,000-yard rusher suddenly became available, A&M would be foolish to pass on him.

     

    WIDE RECEIVER

    Position inventory: Fifth-year seniors Moose Muhammad III and Jabre Barber, senior Jahdae Walker, juniors Noah Thomas and Cyrus Allen, sophomore Micah Tease, and true freshmen Izaiah Williams, Ernest Campbell and Ashton Bethel-Roman.

    How big of a need: High.

    Analysis: Like their running back unit, the Aggies have a solid group of receivers but might lack a true No. 1 option. No A&M receiver has produced a 1,000-yard season in college. None of the four returning receivers for the Aggies have reached 700 receiving yards in a season.

    Additionally, A&M is somewhat thin on numbers with its receiver group. Per source, Barber recently underwent surgery on a foot injury and could miss the beginning of the 2024 season (his injury timetable remains fluid). Without him, the Aggies would have only four receivers who have played a significant number of high-leverage reps in college.

     

    TIGHT END

    Position inventory: Sixth-year senior Garrett Miller, senior Tre Watson, redshirt sophomores Donovan Green and Theo Melin Öhrström, redshirt freshman Jaden Platt and true freshman Eric Karner.

    How big of a need: Low.

    Analysis: The Aggie tight end group, like their running back and receiver units, lacks a player with proven elite production. None of their tight ends have reached 400 receiving yards in a season, and only Watson has surpassed 250. However, lacking an elite tight end is not nearly as tough to overcome as not having a true No. 1 running back or receiver. 

    And even if none of its tight ends produce at an elite level, A&M should still receive plenty of meaningful contributions from the unit. Before suffering a season-ending torn ACL in practice last August, Green showed a lot of promise. The two transfer additions for the Aggies, Miller and Watson, should be impactful as well. Miller is thought to be more of a blocking tight end, while Watson has impressed as a receiving threat.

     

    INTERIOR OFFENSIVE LINE

    Position inventory: Sixth-year senior Dorian Hinton, fifth-year seniors Aki Ogunbiyi and Ar'maj Reed-Adams, redshirt junior Bryce Foster, junior Kam Dewberry, redshirt sophomore Mark Nabou Jr., sophomore Chase Bisontis, redshirt freshman TJ Shanahan and true freshman Isendre Ahfua.

    How big of a need: Medium.

    Analysis: This unit is loaded with depth and experience. Of the nine players listed above, seven of them have started multiple games in college. The two exceptions, Shanahan and Ahfua, were both four-star recruits. 

    Should a quality center enter the portal, though, A&M might be interested. Foster, the incumbent starter for the Aggies, left a lot to be desired with his play last season. He also has spent this spring with the track and field team, missing all 11 football practices so far. Perhaps Nabou will ultimately surpass Foster on the depth chart and show improvement. Either way, A&M could use an upgrade at center.

     

    OFFENSIVE TACKLE

    Position inventory: Fifth-year senior Derrick Graham, redshirt juniors Trey Zuhn III, Reuben Fatheree II and Dametrious Crownover, redshirt sophomore Hunter Erb, redshirt freshman Colton Thomasson, and true freshman Blake Ivy, Ashton Funk and Robert Bourdon.

    How big of a need: Low.

    Analysis: Do not be surprised if the Aggies add an offensive tackle transfer during the spring window. From what we have heard, they will be looking. However, an argument could be made that this group does not need a transfer addition. 

    Zuhn is coming off the best season of his career and seems like a lock to start at left tackle. Fatheree, who started at right tackle for the Aggies in the 2021 and 2022 seasons, is finally healthy again. He missed most of last fall with a lower-body injury. 

    A&M has adequate depth at offensive tackle, too. Crownover could push for the starting right tackle job and has the versatility to play left tackle. Bisontis started at right tackle last season and could slide to the position again if needed. Graham started 24 games at Troy and spent time at both offensive tackle positions.

    So it appears that they're planning on losing a QB.

    The staff isn't happy at OT and will be in the portal fishing for one of those ever present starting OTs who can start on day one. 

    They think they're losing at least one TB. They also don't think they have RB1 on campus so, again, they'll be all over one of those awesome starting TBs that no one else is bidding for to step right in the lineup. 

    They just lost a WR to foot surgery who had transferred in from Troy and was an immediate starter. He won't be back for the first part of the season, if any of it. They also lack a WR1 on campus and need one of those to magically drop in for them as well.

    They don't think they need help at TE but the staff also doesn't see a TE1 on the roster. 

    They don't have a functioning C and will be begging someone to join them at that spot, otherwise they're reliant on a completely disengaged Bryce Foster or someone worse. They're "loaded" with guys on the IOL, but Karels seems to be unaware that quantity is completely irrelevant if quality is non-existent.

    That offensive depth chart is just an embarrassment of riches.

    • Haha 4
  7. 25 minutes ago, ousux said:
    27 minutes ago, closetojumping said:
    They don't have a vague shot at the CFP. If you feel better than that about it, we should place a bet. I will take all comers for any bet size that Texas A&M isn't making the fucking playoffs in the 2024 season. Window's open.
    Also, the SEC will get 4 or 5 teams into this cycle and most others.

    You quoted before I edited, I think Mizzery or OU have a better chance than aggy. Even if something crazy happens and they do get in, the no depth thing will bite them in the ass.

    Mizzou with a chance for sure given what they return on offense & what looks like an absolutely cake walk of a schedule complete with Umass, Murray St., BC, Vandy, & Buffalo. Their SEC schedule looks pretty weak as well so, if they can split @Bama & vs. OU they should be in. They may get in even if they lose both of those games and finish 10-2 depending on what else happens. OU would be shocking given their schedule & my complete lack of faith in their roster & coaches. I will bet any amount of @closetojumping 's money that a&m isn't in the playoff conversation & are as likely to start 3-3 & finish struggling to make a bowl game as they are finishing with 8+ wins.

  8. 8 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

    Do you think they are in a position to be big portal shoppers in the second window? I have heard that this one is going to be very active with some quality guys out there. Hell, guys like Austin Jordan and Tapp would be huge lifts for them. 

    The SEC transfer rules will be enforced with UT & OU included this year, so they would have to sit a year unless they manage to get an NCAA exemption.

  9. 29 minutes ago, South Austin said:

    Someone tell Elko that's not how the roller coaster works.

    The aggy roller coaster is the only roller coaster strong enough to get that tub of lard off the ground.

    • Haha 1
  10. 24 minutes ago, Park Gothic said:

    He's good enough to start until we get someone better. 

    This whole conversation is like two guys on a desert island arguing about the nutritional value of coconuts. There's nothing else to eat, so what difference does it make?

    If there are 2 people it seems like there's something different to eat for one of them...

    • Haha 1
    • Prepare your anus 1
  11. 23 hours ago, TrashMaster G said:

    Question for the Techsters: Who would be Tech's Top 5 All-Time players, giving ZERO consideration to what they may have done in the NFL?

    For football I'd say Thomas, Crabtree, Anderson, Rivera, & Welker.

    Hanspard would be an honorable mention 

  12. 12 minutes ago, Red Five said:

    It was amazing how fast it came crashing down, too. It wasn't like we played for the NC, then went 9-3 for a couple of years, and then 6-6 or something. Nope. Play for the NC (which we should have won), then absolute dogshit eight months later. 

    Someone change the subject. 

    No no. Now that it's been started it must be completed. We must punish ourselves by posting/reading about how bad we were from 2010-2022. This is Surly's Law & there is no escape.

    • Haha 1
    • Rage+1 1
  13. 31 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

    If Tyler Owens runs the fastest 40 at this year's combine, someone is going to lose their mind and draft him 3 rounds too high. That type of size/speed ratio is unheard of. He isn't a particularly good football player, but he is a freak athlete. 

    Which is the exact reason 247 ranked him a 5 star and a better prospect than Garrett Wilson. The aggy tears when that ranking was released were glorious. Of course, if he is drafted relatively high, it will only serve to reinforce that line of thinking for people ranking recruits. "Hey this guy sucks at all things football but he's big and fast so he'll get drafted."

  14. That was a dangerous play by Brock & completely intentional. That probably doesn't get a second glance in the 80's but there's no need for it in todays game, especially on the road and up 25. Tech fans being trashy is nothing new & letting the football coach that just got his ass reamed a few months ago give the pregame speech to hype up the crowd right before getting your ass reamed again was just *chef's kiss*. See you on the diamond next week where we'll go for the scoreboard triple crown.

  15. 3 hours ago, closetojumping said:

    1) That isn't even close to being statistically relevant. Your idiotic certitude is unwarranted.

    2) Why is there a comparison between these two sports on this subject matter? MLB teams play 6 out of every 7 days. CFB plays once a week, at most, and is fundamentally brutal sport, something entirely germane to the topic of the value of byes.

    Anyone continuing the MLB comparison should be taken out back and unceremoniously flogged with reeds. If that's too much, they should be forced to receive a lapdance from a stripped down Helobious at a minimum.

    image.gif.8397c9d7835bd1f34c79988519abd648.gif

  16. 45 minutes ago, Js1 said:

    I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when people think having a bye is bad? 

    I don't think the bye is a bad thing, but I don't think it's going to be as big of an advantage in this set up as it is in the NFL. Those without a bye will be playing 1 game in a 3 week period, including 10ish days before the quarter finals which will be played at a neutral site. I'd rather have the bye than not, but as long as you're getting the home field advantage over the ACC/BIG 12 runner up or the Champion of whatever non-P4 makes it then it's no big deal. Ian Boyd's take is idiotic, as usual, because there's no guarantee of an easy matchup & there's no guarantee of the Selection committee slotting you 5th instead of 6, 7, or 8. I'd much rather have the bye than have to play an extra game against an Ole Miss, PSU, or Mizzou.

×
×
  • Create New...