Jump to content

Sandbagging Steve

Full Members
  • Posts

    586
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Sandbagging Steve

  1. So we could be very close to the ACC exit number, if the SEC is willing to take a second public in North Carolina State and VT. Would the SEC, B1G, Big 12 make these deals behind closed doors with the intentions of then breaking away from the rest of the NCAA in football?

     

    1. UVA - SEC/B1G

    2. VT - SEC

    3. NC - SEC/B1G

    4. NC St - SEC

    5. Clemson - SEC

    6. FSU - SEC

    7. Georgia Tech - B1G

    8. Miami - B1G

    9. Notre Dame - B1G

    *10. Louisville - Big 12

    *11. Pitt - Big 12

    *(the money would be just as good in the Big 12 as the ACC)

    One more and the ACC no longer exists. Duke? Syracuse to the Big 12?

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. 1 hour ago, Jabberwocky said:

     

    Why does Williams right like a third grader? Why do I see the same prose from Williams, Apple, conference executive or anyone else interviewed by Williams?

     When are we going to establish an enforceable code of ethics on our media? And, for  the matter, our politicians, educators, religious orgs, corporate executives and their lobbyists, etc, etc...

  3. In a 3 guard lineup, Weaver would come off the bench. He'll get plenty of minutes and it's his team after everyone departs in 2023. UTEP forward is undoubtedly coming off the bench, so there's room for one starting 4 needed in the portal.

    G Hunter

    G Abmas

    G Sellers

    F Rodman

    C Disu

    Plus a solid bench.

    Now that roster is as good as last year's team, which could have won the tournament.

    ** That's if Rodman plays bigger than his size, like his father.

     

     

    • Hook 'Em 2
  4. NYC has 8.5 million people

    NYC  is not a huge college football town per capita

    But NYC is a college football town when looking at raw numbers compared to other cities and even states

    The vast majority of NYC fans come from the B1G, especially tOSU, Michigan, and Penn State.

    Rutgers gives the B1G members a game close to NYC, which assisted in pulling in the entire DMA

    Rutgers alone gives the B1GN nothing

    Rutgers also gives the B1G games played in a solid recruiting territory, although I'm not sure they've actually capitalized on that any more than before adding Rutgers

    I think it's easy to see how a huge flagship university (Maryland) in a populated but small land area could pull in some solid numbers for the B1GN

    TCU does not have these advantages

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  5. 4 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

    You nailed it- this doesn't get talked about enough.  The lower and mid-tier BIG schools don't want to lose relevance and are afraid their games will end up on streaming if too many teams are added.

    Along with money, lack of recruiting and distance, this was a major reason that the PNW weren't invited to join, and why I don't think they ever will be.

    The non-FL ACC schools aren't as threatening in FB, and bring more to the table in terms of money and recruiting, so I think they'll have support.

    FSU and possibly Miami would knock the non-top tier BIG teams down a notch, but the benefits of having more strong FB brands and being in FL would be worth it for the entire conference.

    I don't see that 

    Iowa, Rutgers, Purdue, Indiana, etc. will have very little say in the future of the B1G. They will do as they're told. The days of the smaller schools ruling conferences are over. They will do what is best for the conference or the Bluebloods will break away and make their own league.

  6. 2 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

    Yes, once Fox had USC and UCLA in the BIG, they clearly had no desire for PAC content.  No doubt about that.

    I agree that it's the networks that are ultimately driving this, but Yormark is doing his part.  He's skillfully ridden the wave and is working hand in glove with them (especially ESPN).  

    Once ESPN got the SEC 3:30ET game for 2024, with the LA schools joining the BIG that year, it was clear that ESPN would be motivated to overpay the B12 by some amount on the new deal that would make the B12 agree to let UT and OU leave with a reasonable settlement.  It's just good business, and Yormark is smart enough to see the bigger picture.

    But if you flip things around and Klownkoff was running the B12, I have my doubts about things working out so smoothly  He's shown himself to be nothing but an empty suit at every step of the way- a deadly mix of stupidity and arrogance- just like his predecessor.  His dealings with ESPN for the PAC rights show a guy who simply doesn't have a clue, which fits right in with everything else he's done since day one.  So I do think conference leadership matters.

    My bet is that Yormark is the media's source for the propaganda, but that he's the frontman working in lockstep with ESPN and Fox.  This is straight out of ESPN's playbook after the Big East opted to take their rights to market instead of re-upping with ESPN.  ESPN lowballed them and eventually caused an exodus of football schools.  

    ESPN always wants plausible deniability whenever realignment is discussed, so I agree with you that they're doing it through a third party, and Yormark/B12 is the third party that makes the most sense.  They're the most motivated to make this happen, and it's easy for Yormmark/B12 ADs to talk to guys like Dodds and McMurphy as part of the normal course of business.

    How many clicks has Dodds been generating for the last year with his stories ?  This has been a gold mine for his business, and having Yormmark/B12 ADs as his sources give him credible cover.

     

     

    Dodds and McMurphy have not been busted reporting half-truths and manipulated statistics like the reporters out West. Actual half-truths that can be looked up and proven wrong. Over and over again for a year. That should tell you who has more reliability. Left Coast sports media has covered this the same way as a certain news station that made a settlement the other day. People on message boards all across America are rolling in laughter, They are the butt of the joke.

  7. 3 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

    I don't think anyone is concerned about playing Oregon, Washington nor any ACC teams.   I think their concern is having less opportunities to be on the receiving end of the three massive exposure slots the Big Ten has going forward.   Michigan, Ohio State, USC and Penn State will dominate those slots, but they need opponents.   The more opponents in the conference, the less chances there are for Indiana and Purdue and Iowa to be on those games.

    Absolutely true, but they will eventually cave in or watch the Bluebloods leave the conference and start one big league. Some of the small schools are in this spot because of THEIR greed. They refused to do what was best for the sport for many decades and the Bluebloods are tired of dealing with it. From revenue distribution to some of the absolutely ridiculous rules and regulations put in the place by the small schools that refused to budge for decades.

  8. 4 minutes ago, bullet said:

    Now here is post OU/UGA vs. NCAA and post BYU fluke championship, 1985-2022.  I listed the same 31.

    Top 20 have all 38 MNCs, 33 of 38 2nd places and 34 of 38 3rd places.

          1 2 3 4 5 places points
    1 AL   7 3 0 1 3 14 52
    2 OSU   2 4 3 4 4 17 47
    3 FSU   3 2 5 4 1 15 47
    4 Miami   4 4 2 0 1 11 43
    5 OU   2 0 5 1 4 12 31
    6 FL   3 1 2 1 3 10 30
    7 USC   2 1 3 2 0 8 27
    8 GA   2 2 1 1 1 7 24
    9 Clemson   2 2 1 1 0 6 23
    10 LSU   2 2 1 0 1 6 22
    11 NE   2 1 2 0 1 6 21
    12 ND   1 2 0 2 2 7 19
    13 UM   1 1 2 1 2 7 19
    14 OR   0 3 1 1 1 6 18
    15 PSU   1 1 3 0 0 5 18
    16 AU   1 2 0 1 0 4 15
    17 TX   1 1 0 1 2 5 13
    18 TN   1 0 1 2 1 5 13
    19 CO   1   1 1 1 4 11
    20 WA   0 1 1 1 1 4 10
                       
    21 TCU   0 2 1 0 0 3 11
    22 Utah   0 1 0 1 0 2 6
    23 Stanford   0 0 1 1 0 2 5
    24 Mich St.   0 0 1 0 1 2 4
    25 VT   0 1 0 0 0 1 4
    26 GT   0 1 0 0 0 1 4
    27 AZ St.   0 0 0 2 0 2 4
    39 Arkansas   0 0 0 0 1 1 1
    39 BYU   0 0 0 0 1 1 1
      Pitt   0 0 0 0 0 0 0
      SMU   0 0 0 0 0 0

    0

     

    All others 0-0-0-9-6-16-27

    This is the one that means the most for competitiveness moving forward in this era.

     

    1 minute ago, bullet said:

    The point is that there are only a few schools who are a threat to win an MNC on more than a rare fluke occasion.  The P2 has all of them but ND, Miami, FSU, Clemson, Oregon and Washington (and Colorado who has declined).    

    Yep, and then you add a big state school like UNC and it's done. But there will be more than 16 teams in each conference and more than 9 conference games.

    The third conference will still be involved and fun to watch. And they may continue to get a shot at the playoffs. It's a win-win situation for all.

  9. 1 minute ago, Trojan Man said:

    I understand not every game in the B1G will be against Ohio State, Michigan or Penn State.  That's fine.  I'll gladly trade crap Pac 12 games for crap B1G games in exchange for huge B1G games that aren't possible in the Pac 12.  Makes zero difference to me if USC's middling and bottom tier conference opponents are Arizona, Colorado and Washington State or Indiana, Rutgers and Minnesota.  Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State are all bigger games than any Pac 12 opponent USC could ever play and most years in the B1G USC will host one of them while traveling to one of them.  I can live with games against Maryland and Illinois in between the games I look forward to just like you can live with games against Mississippi State and Vanderbilt in between the games you look forward to against Alabama and LSU.  There are years when USC gets zero Pac 12 home games I give a fuck about, like 2022.  That won't ever happen in the B1G.

    You can't say "The B1G is desperate for Oregon" and "The B1G is looking for recruiting territory" in the same post.  Those two points are at odds with each other.  Oregon offers fuck all in terms of recruiting territory.  You won't get a single pipeline from their backyard but they'll happily use P2 prestige and money to take players from your fertile recruiting territories.  Washington is better from that perspective because Seattle produces some talent but nobody is looking at the state of Oregon when they are building their class.

    This is half the reason USC fans want nothing to do with Oregon joining the B1G.  In a lifetime of Pac membership alongside Oregon they benefited massively from being affiliated with USC/LA while USC gets absolutely nothing from being affiliated with Oregon.  They want yearly games in LA, USC and UCLA are happy to never play another game in Oregon after 2023.  They don't bring academic prestige.  They aren't a basketball powerhouse.  They don't have a huge market, and like I already said they are a net negative in recruiting territory.  There is nothing valuable about Oregon beyond the heaps of money Phil Knight and Nike have dumped into their football program, and that value relies on having good players.  Why let them continue to recruit good players you also want when you could just cut them out and get those players yourself?  It should be easy in the near future for B1G programs (not just USC and UCLA) to win recruiting battles against Oregon once the reality of the B1G being on a totally different level than Oregon's league sink in.  One of Oregon's recruiting pitches in California was "Come here and play against the LA schools," which was pretty effective.  They no longer have that pitch and now B1G teams do.

    All the benefits of this relationship flow one way and it's time to put a stop to that.  If they ever once acknowledged how much they relied on USC and LA and showed a little gratitude I wouldn't feel so strongly about this, but for many years they fucked over USC and UCLA with policies to help themselves all while claiming everyone in the conference was an equal.  Fuck 'em, Oregon can have fun seeing just how equal they are without being able to leech off LA anymore.

    Why? I never said you had to have recruiting territory to get in the B1G. I did not say they were taking Oregon because of recruiting territory. I said they are #1 looking for competitive teams. Oregon is one of the most competitive teams in all of America. 

    Very few schools meet all requirements. Oregon's recruiting prowess trumps the need for recruiting territory; not to mention its revenue, TV ratings, social media presence, AAU standing, relationship with the B1G (PAC/B1G), and consistency on the field. It doesn't get much better than that.

    Much of your own reasoning is proof they're going to take them. You've said teams are basically scared of the competition that Oregon brings to the table but wouldn't mind UNC, UVA, and Georgia Tech because no one is threatened by the competition on the field. That makes no sense. Conference realignment is not based on wanting to add the least competitive teams. It's never been based on that. That's not to say UNC, UVA, and GT aren't going to the B1G, but it won't be based on wanting a cupcake schedule. B1G already plays a cupcake schedule and they are trying to fix that.  

  10. 6 minutes ago, CustersDoctor said:

    There is a lot of credence to the idea that the eastern block wants to see how the west coast travel stress affects their teams, especially in the non revenue sports and the sports with 30 or more games in a season like softball, baseball and basketball. If the BIG stands pat with two Interstate 5 schools then only NINE BIG football teams will travel out west every year. How do you decide who those nine schools will be? Of course USC can't wait to host UM, OST, MST, WIS, PENNST. Just imagine the disappointment when two or three of the 5 BIG games that you host are Northwestern, Rutgers, Illinois, Minnisota or Maryland or even the moderately successful or previously successful schools like Purdue, Indiana, Iowa & Nebraska. The reality is that the BIG will have to send some real crappy football teams to Cali every year. Teams that you have ZERO history with, teams that are NOT your rivals. And in turn USC & UCLA will each make 4-5 trips east every season. And some of those trips will be to play the lower two thirds of the conference.

    Good point.

    B1G has been on a 30-year expansion plan for two primary reasons (excluding the money-driven reasons by TV/Bluebloods):

    1. B1G is desperate for brands and competitive teams to fill their league. This is why they will not bypass Oregon and Washington long-term.

    2. They're looking for recruiting territory and growing economies to help the middle-of-the-pack and lower-tier programs in their conference and keep their league viable.

    B1G understands their league would not have survived as a top dog for another 50 years without expansion. They are a few behemoth programs, a few rabid fan bases with average success, and some deadweight. The time was right to take advantage of their huge audience before it started to erode and tOSU, Michigan, and PSU eventually left to play with like-minded programs.

    • Like 1
  11. 3 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

    They've had 9 months to get the lower and mid tier BIG schools on board.  If the PNW schools were worth what you think they are, they'd be in by now.

    And that's even assuming OSU, UM, PSU want to travel to the PNW every other year, which is highly doubtful.

    The money's not there.  That's what Thamel, Auerbach, Olson, etc have all reported.  

    There are too many teams whining about travel, recruiting territory, and competition. I also stated they are currently worth on the low end at $55 million. This means it isn't an immediate revenue boost when they enter. It will be once they start playing all the other brands in the B1G every year.  It takes time. None of these moves have added a bunch of teams at once. There are too many cooks in the room for things to happen swiftly or with any kind of normalcy. It took a year to add a blueblood like USC.

    3 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

    The guy you trust the most (McMurphy) had no inclination that USC and UCLA were going to the BIG.  No legacy media people knew.

    The BIG added USC and UCLA in complete silence, just like they did Nebraska, RU and MD, - 100% stealth.

    But a month after USC was added, all of a sudden McMurphy has sources letting him know minute details of the BIG's deliberations about UW/UO ? 

    Yes- every source has an agenda, so the question is always "Who benefits from this leak ?"  The answer is the B12.

    Ever notice that McMurphy and Dodds are the media guys who have promoted "BIG talking to UW/UO" consistently ? They're both B12 guys.

    Yormark has skillfully used the media as a disinformation tool to destabilize the PAC by keeping the Four Corners schools nervous about UW/UO leaving.

     

    //

    I knew the B1G was expanding waaay before they added those teams. I'm not sure what you mean. It was well known the B1G was expanding. There was no stealth move whatsoever. McMurphy's reputation was built before this realignment. I trust him more because he's the only one who proves he's unbiased with his reporting over of a number of years in the business. He does not post for the sake of posting. But I also said I don't trust him or anyone on conference realignment. I know where this is going because it has played out for nearly 40 years and I've followed it since the 80s. Did you notice how Oregon was a top 15 to top 20ish power (as a program) by nearly every financial metric from revenue to TV ratings to Facebook shares, etc. until Bob Thompson's fake report? Yep, that happened.

    3 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

     

    I agree that most of this stuff you can see coming for miles, and that UT and USC were either going to team up in a conference or go SEC/BIG respectively.

    Also agree that UNC and UVA are going to be a battle between SEC and BIG.  The two biggest states that don't have an SEC or a BIG team currently.

     

    Yep! Notre Dame is going to feel the squeeze and then it's up to those 2. I do think UNC would be a lock to the SEC, but there's always the possibility that there is some ego-driven, authoritarian-style president who could go against what the alumni, fan base and the entire state prefer, which is the SEC. It could have happened to Texas as well. Different situations but with some similarities (UNC/Texas)

    • Hook 'Em 1
  12. 1 hour ago, Hurtlocker said:

    Yeah man, the sweet spot is 16.   The math hasn't changed much, you need like 30-40% of your total to be big brands to max the regular season contract.   So at 16 that means you need 5; Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska, USC, and maybe Wisconsin.   Or, Bama, Georgia, Texas, Oklahoma, LSU, Florida and maybe Tennessee.   That means they don't have to play each other, but they all can at least get two together and you fill your T1 with love.   

    At 18, you almost need seven brands to do that math.    There is only one of those left on the board and they're located on the corner of Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan.

    Outside that, the only expansion that makes any sense or increase current payouts any longer is the B12's 13-16.   It won't hit B1G/SEC levels, but they could likely get to $40m with Oregon, Washington, Colorado and Arizona (maybe $35-37m if its ASU/someone else if OU/UW aren't in).   Its kind of the only place left with growth opportunities.

    This isn't the reason for expansion. The networks and bluebloods (listening to the fans) want more conference games against like-minded competition. They're tired of seeing OOC games scheduled against glorified high schools. There will be more than a 9 game conference schedule in the future of this sport. We aren't stopping at 16. We aren't stopping at 18 either. It's going to take time because everyone is greedy and selfish and only looking out for themselves. We are nowhere close to the financial ceiling of college football. 

    The 3 biggest brands left on the board:

    Notre Dame (who may insist on saving Stanford)

     

     

     

    Florida State

    Oregon

    And then it's filling in state flagships like UW, UNC, etc as well as Clemson and Miami.

    They will all end up at the Big Boy's table.

  13. 1 minute ago, USC Traveler said:

    Actually, I didn't know that you had read it.  Canzano isn't exactly must-read for most of the country.

    Considering the fact that Thompson is an Oregon grad, and was talking to Canzano, who is a massive PNW homer, don't you think he'd put as positive of a spin as possible on Oregon's merits ?  The fact that he didn't speaks volumes.

    Thamel and some of the Athletic folks have all reported that UW and OU would be dilutive for revenue in the BIG, and that the smaller schools don't want their games pushed onto streaming.

    So I have three questions for you:

    1. If the PNW schools are worth as much as you think, why haven't they been added already ?

    2. Which schools in the BIG are voting to add the PNW schools ?

    3. However much BTN will make from being in Seattle, they'll make much more money by being in VA, NC, GA and FL.  There is an opportunity cost to filling up slots with other schools before the BIG gets their shot at the ACC, so why would the BIG add PNW schools before they see who they can get from the ACC ?  

    I'll hang up and listen.

     

    Who is voting them in? Money is voting them in! It takes time to get all the selfish, jealous competition on board, but they eventually have no choice. Following realignment, you should know that by now.

    Canzano wants UO and UW in the PAC; therefore, he doesn't want them to be worth it for the B1G. Thompson worked at FOX, which has all the leverage right now. PAC is toast and FOX can get Oregon and Washington at a discount for the first contract (whenever that is)

    I trust Murphy before anyone else in expansion, but even he will fall for some propaganda. Everyone's source in media (not just sports) has an agenda.

    You can simply look at the numbers in Seattle and the price of the B1G Network and see they are worth more than $30 million. You can look at Oregon's TV ratings when they play teams similar to B1G teams and see they are worth quite a bit. And it's been going on for a long time now, through many different coaches. They also recruit at a high level, which brings prestige to the conference. Oregon and UW give the PAC more late games (and the West Coast schools more prime-time games), which will allow the B1G to add another TV package. That's extremely valuable to the league. It will probably be a streaming package and added late games on ESPN, so it will take time to get all whiny programs on board and to figure out the best way to approach the TV packages.

    Anyway, I'm too busy to keep going back and forth. It will happen within the next 10 years. Could be any day or it could take a bit to get all the babies in line to vote.

    There's nothing in realignment that has been all that surprising. This stuff could easily have been predicted 30 years ago. The only somewhat surprise is Missouri to the SEC, but the B1G turned them down.

    Texas and USC were always either starting their league together or going exactly where they ended up. 

    The only thing up for grabs right now is where Virginia and UNC end up.

     

    • Fuck You 1
  14. 7 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

    According to Bob Thompson, former President of Fox Sports and Oregon grad, he placed Oregon's tv value at $30m/year, and Stanford at $45m/year.

     

     

    Do you really think I haven't read that article??? He worked at FOX, which should tell you all you need to know about his reliability in this matter. 

    And John Skipper said the ACC and PAC would make so much money by joining together! It's like magic! It just happens!

    Look at the hard numbers, B1G and B1G Network. Look at what Oregon vs. Wisconsin/Iowa/Nebraska is going to bring to the network. Look at how many people live in Seattle and how the B1G Network leverages these situations. It's not hard, but just like politics, you can't just believe whatever you want to believe.

  15. I looked into this at the end of last year. Oregon and UW are worth at least $55 to $70 million a piece. If you factor in additional late-night inventory, which should lead to another TV package, both teams are worth more than that. Then you factor in the fact that both teams will be playing teams with bigger fan bases than in the PAC and their TV numbers will go up significantly. Then there's the fact that the B1G desperately needs more competitive teams that recruit well nationally. It's a no-brainer and will happen at some point in time.

    When USC first left the PAC, everyone said UW and UO would follow until they were influenced by reports saying those teams weren't worth much. The story doesn't add up. It is nothing but a leverage play from the B1G and certain B1G teams that don't want the added competition.

     

    Oregon and Washington will be added to the B1G sometime in the next 10 years. They may have to take a slightly smaller cut for the first contract simply because the B1G has all the leverage, but they will both carry their own financial weight in that conference.

    Anything else is sour grapes by competing fan bases and teams. At the end of the day, money talks.

    • Like 1
  16. 19 minutes ago, RGBIII said:

    Of course, I don’t disagree with your initial surprise whatsoever, I don’t “think” that’s what’s happening without myself or CTJ knowing in some fashion. But my premise was not about this specific commitment only, I mean in general the opportunities here are more abundant even for lesser known players, I think guys like Broughton even have corporate NIL that we can point to which helps offset straight dollar for dollar. 
     

    Ohio state: here is 200k and an f150 lease 

    Texas: we won’t give you 200k but we can do 100k plus a Porsche and how much do you like mustard? 

    Bo Davis knows how to play the game and he doesn't give a rat's ass whether the admin likes it or not. It can't overcome systematic ventures from other programs fighting for legit 5 stars, but it can easily win a recruitment like this. He's fighting with a hand tied behind his back. We aren't in contention with the difference-makers and winning recruitments like this and Sydir is his only hope to field a solid unit in the future.

    No applicant is turning down double the money.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  17. B1G is weak in football, basketball, and baseball. tOSU is the only B1G football team over the past 10 to 15 years that competes against the national elites.  UM has its moments but doesn't really recruit enough speed and runs a prehistoric offense. PSU has a mediocre coach. USC should bring speed and pedigree. That's a good start, but the B1G needs more, especially with the new SEC schedule.

    1. B1G needs to kick out some of the weak programs.

    2. It needs to add some competitive programs with speed on the roster. There are a couple of teams in the PNW waiting to fill part of that void.

    3. It needs to hire more innovative offensive coaches. Wisconsin and Iowa need to come out of the stone age. I'm interested to see the changes this year in Madison.

    4. Even with Oregon and UW, B1G probably needs a 10-game conference schedule to even start making up for the lack of competition.

    I wish the B1G would add UO, UW, Notre Dame, and Miami while demoting two of Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern, or Rutgers. 

    Honestly, there shouldn't be out-of-conference games for anyone. Line up and play each other. I'm tired of watching conferences duck competition. tOSU has been a very average team the past few years, and still wins nearly every game because of the lack of competition. 

×
×
  • Create New...