Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

Media deal would have still expired when it did and Texas would have still left for the SEC, IMO.  

I think the PAC 16 media deal would have been competitive with the BIG and SEC and everyone would have been happy. The ACC would have been far more likely to collapse. But who knows, we're all just speculating. 

Edited by 'stache
Posted
7 minutes ago, LTbear said:

It's ok. You have your safe space here. 

It cracks me up that you think the “Left Behind…” thread is for treating former conference members with respect. That it upsets you when we don’t. 
 
Here is a fun thought- how do you think the BU AD office conversations go when they discuss trying to set up a home and home with UT?😂

  • Haha 3
Posted
3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I think the PAC 16 media deal would have been competitive with the BIG and SEC and everyone would have been happy. But who knows, we're all just speculating. 

Yeah, at the end of the day, major consolidation is coming and even current members of the B1G and SEC will be left out. The fact is that once schools and boosters were allowed to pay players directly, this was always going to be the end result.  Too bad for you guys T Boone kicked it already or you could be competitive. Oregon will get left at the roadside as soon as Uncle Phil dies.

Posted
Just now, Chewbacca said:

Yeah, at the end of the day, major consolidation is coming and even current members of the B1G and SEC will be left out. The fact is that once schools and boosters were allowed to pay players directly, this was always going to be the end result.  Too bad for you guys T Boone kicked it already or you could be competitive. Oregon will get left at the roadside as soon as Uncle Phil dies.

We did pretty well in the portal so there's still some money coming from our richers. Not Cody Campbell money but I think we'll be decent this season. Would be nice for one of them to step up even more. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

That field goal was good and fuck you for reminding me of that game.  

My take when I saw the game on live TV- if the official on the field called it bad, it wouldn’t have been reversed under review (it wasn’t) and if it had been called good on the field, it wouldn’t have been reversed under review. A crazy call that really could have legitimately gone either way. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Chewbacca said:

What Pac 12 deal?

The Pac deal where ESPN flashed their titties to UT and Texas creamed their pants.

It wasn't inherently wrong, by any means.  Cash is king.  Texas did what was right for Texas.  At that point the Pac discussion was a moot point.

Edited by Iceman
Posted
4 minutes ago, statsman said:

My take when I saw the game on live TV- if the official on the field called it bad, it wouldn’t have been reversed under review (it wasn’t) and if it had been called good on the field, it wouldn’t have been reversed under review. A crazy call that really could have legitimately gone either way. 

Correct. It definitely looked like it went directly over the upright which by rule is considered good. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, statsman said:

It cracks me up that you think the “Left Behind…” thread is for treating former conference members with respect. That it upsets you when we don’t. 
 
Here is a fun thought- how do you think the BU AD office conversations go when they discuss trying to set up a home and home with UT?😂

It cracks me up when you repeatedly show you're too dense to read what is right in front of your face. I'm making fun of you for being a butthurt little snowflake who got his feefees. I don't give a shit how much "respect" you have for any school. Jeebus kid, learn to read. 

  • Haha 1
Posted

Whatever bad things Larry Scott and the PAC thought might happen if they worked with Texas re the LHN and whatever else don't seem so bad in hindsight, now do they? Texas is probably the winner in that deal's breaking down. There was a culture of screwing the golden goose in that conference as well. USC got tired of being the school the envious little siblings pissed on and left for greener pastures.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Magus Ossis said:

Whatever bad things Larry Scott and the PAC thought might happen if they worked with Texas re the LHN and whatever else don't seem so bad in hindsight, now do they? Texas is probably the winner in that deal's breaking down. There was a culture of screwing the golden goose in that conference as well. USC got tired of being the school the envious little siblings pissed on and left for greener pastures.

That's my whole point.  Even if UT had joined the PAC, they still would have left for the SEC $$. CFB is now just like MLB.  There are a handful of haves and a bunch of have nots. 

Posted
5 hours ago, statsman said:

The thing is- y’all couldn’t win NCs before. In the BCS era, NCs were won by teams in the SEC, B1G and a couple of ACC teams that might get into the SEC or B1G. 
 
Of B12 teams, the only ones to win MNCs were Colorado (1990) and TCU (1935, 1938). 
 
What you could do, and you hate that these days might be over, is beat a blue blood and screw up their season. Those were games that delighted IR8 schools and they hate that they’re diminished 

Ahem

79443349007-19-3646586500487762622_img_6

Posted
3 hours ago, ztejas said:

Are the results bearing this out, though? In the first year of the 12-team playoff Indiana, SMU, ASU and Boise State all made the dance. 

I don't know where it ultimately winds up but so far the NIL era has created more parity than we had in the BCS/SEC bag-game era.

Yeah, I agree with this and wonder the same thing. There is at least more access to the path to a championship game. For BYU, we have always wanted to have access and be able to control our destiny. And there are some schools that have boosters that are willing to spend to give that school a chance and may make things very interesting in the next years. TTU, SMU, BYU, ASU and others are trying to elevate and NIL has leveled the playing field somewhat for us. It seems like the bluebloods and the hungry plus moneyed non bluebloods will fare the best going forward. If there really is another round of consolidation and some of the Big 4 are left behind, who should worry more -- TTU, ASU, BYU, SMU who may have more success than ever before in the coming years or the Purdues and Mississippi States who have been riding coattails for a long time?

 

Posted
11 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

On a totally different tangent, on top of Farmageddon being protected, I always thought it would be cool for ISU/KSU/OK State to have had a Commander In Chief style trophy for the old Big 8 ag schools.

IMG_7900.jpeg.1c0907a20ec5c4d8d983e94070d4743a.jpeg

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, statsman said:

I’m talking about real NCs. 

Haha haters gonna hate. The hardware is real and it's spectacular. It's as real as any championship in the pre-BCS era. 

Edited by Crockett
Posted
1 hour ago, NorthLoop said:

Saw this today on fb. Figured this thread was a good place for it. 

This is pure aggy level pathetic. 

 

Screenshot_20250822_183917_Facebook.thumb.jpg.b7eba7ea4f4b7b24effede0bcf3bf9e8.jpg

We had calls go against us.  Including the refs ignoring the asu lineman pulling the running back into the end zone. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Crockett said:

Yeah, I agree with this and wonder the same thing. There is at least more access to the path to a championship game. For BYU, we have always wanted to have access and be able to control our destiny. And there are some schools that have boosters that are willing to spend to give that school a chance and may make things very interesting in the next years. TTU, SMU, BYU, ASU and others are trying to elevate and NIL has leveled the playing field somewhat for us. It seems like the bluebloods and the hungry plus moneyed non bluebloods will fare the best going forward. If there really is another round of consolidation and some of the Big 4 are left behind, who should worry more -- TTU, ASU, BYU, SMU who may have more success than ever before in the coming years or the Purdues and Mississippi States who have been riding coattails for a long time?

 

While I don’t think the structure cuts inside of 65, I do agree that the chaff being separated from the wheat at that point should include Purdue, Miss State, Vanderbilt, and a few others of that ilk. Wake, Rutgers, a few others. Has Purdue ever won anything in any sport? Or Rutgers? 

11 hours ago, statsman said:

I’m talking about real NCs. 

Don’t be a troll. They were awarded it just the same as any other. 

Edited by closetojumping
Posted
1 hour ago, closetojumping said:

Has Purdue ever one anything in any sport? 

In all seriousness, the Tyler Trent game was one of the best things I've ever seen in sports. 

Posted
21 hours ago, closetojumping said:

 

Don’t be a troll. They were awarded it just the same as any other. 

Yeah. In a way, it was the MNC that exposed all the flaws in “loss column bias”, setting the stage for Alkiance Bowls, BCS and CFP. 
 
The egregious ones are those claimed by Auburn and SMU (among others) for years where we all remember nobody thought they were champs. 

Posted
21 hours ago, closetojumping said:

While I don’t think the structure cuts inside of 65, I do agree that the chaff being separated from the wheat at that point should include Purdue, Miss State, Vanderbilt, and a few others of that ilk. Wake, Rutgers, a few others. Has Purdue ever won anything in any sport? Or Rutgers? 

Don’t be a troll. They were awarded it just the same as any other. 

According to Google, Purdue has won a men's national title in golf (1961), women's basketball in 1999, and women's golf in 2010,  Mississippi State has been competing in intercollegiate athletics for 130 years and when I asked Google AI that question I got LOL as an answer, Vandy has one in women's tennis, two in baseball, and three in bowling,  Wake has 11 national titles in women's golf, men's golf, field hockey, men's tennis, and baseball, and finally Rutgers last name team title I think is from 1949 and they claim multiple times from the  1800's.  

Heck, if winning obscure national titles make you worthy of being in a power conference I believe TCU has 12-13 national titles.  

Posted
On 8/22/2025 at 6:42 PM, NorthLoop said:

Saw this today on fb. Figured this thread was a good place for it. 

This is pure aggy level pathetic. 

 

Screenshot_20250822_183917_Facebook.thumb.jpg.b7eba7ea4f4b7b24effede0bcf3bf9e8.jpg

Where can one buy the equivalent Longhorn shirt pointing out the many calls and non-calls that went against us?

Oh, there isn't one?

Cool.

Posted
1 minute ago, TrashMaster G said:

Where can one buy the equivalent Longhorn shirt pointing out the many calls and non-calls that went against us?

Oh, there isn't one?

Cool.

I don't think you're allowed to bitch about one call when the other team misses multiple game-winning field goals.

Posted
1 hour ago, PGFrog said:

Mississippi State has been competing in intercollegiate athletics for 130 years and when I asked Google AI that question I got LOL as an answer

That’s a problem with Google then because Miss State has a baseball college World Series championship in ‘21

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, randomhorn said:

That’s a problem with Google then because Miss State has a baseball college World Series championship in ‘21

Why we can't trust AI.

Give them 1 which means they have been killing it for those 130 years.  

Posted
46 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I don't think you're allowed to bitch about one call when the other team misses multiple game-winning field goals.

My favorite was the illegal touchdown.  Skattebo pulled into end zone by lineman.  You can push into end zone.  Can’t pull.  

Posted
51 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

Where can one buy the equivalent Longhorn shirt pointing out the many calls and non-calls that went against us?

Oh, there isn't one?

Cool.

Simply tell any Sun Devil to try play defense on 4th down next time.  

They can bitch all they want, but bottom line is make a fucking play on that one 4th down and none of it matters. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

For those upset about the direction of college football, bemoaning the loss of parity between institutions, check out this 50 year old Texas Monthly article:

https://www.texasmonthly.com/arts-entertainment/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-southwest-conference/
 
To set the stage, in the mid ‘70s, like today, the main sources of AD revenue were ticket sales and media payouts. There were three major TV networks, and they contracted with the NCAA for games. The NCAA, being a democracy, placed limits on how many games per season any team could have (max of three per season and five every two years). There was also radio, but although appreciated, the income was much smaller. 
 
Ticket sales were the biggest source, and the programs we lovingly call the IR8 struggled there, to the point they weren’t competitive. 
 
(Fun aside- check out the OOC slates that the SWC smaller schools had in the ‘60s and ‘70s. They almost exclusively played P4 teams, and usually on the road, because 40% of an East Lansing gate was greater than 60% of a Waco gate). 
 
1984: UGA and OU win lawsuit against NCAA over media rights. There are now more networks, and the conferences do the negotiating. Being in a conference with Texas is now more valuable than before. Teams can follow the KSU example and schedule patsies OOC without it hurting the bottom line. 
 
The point of all this- current trends are just the next step in a constantly evolving competitive landscape. The big universities with large, enthusiastic (and hopefully well heeled) fanbases have always had an advantage and probably always will. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Quote

One Longhorn athletic official puts it bluntly: “We’re subsidizing the confer­ence,” he says, and he reels off the fig­ures. Every time a conference team goes to a bowl game, each conference school reaps more than $30,000. Every time a conference team appears on tele­vision the entire conference shares in the proceeds. The private schools haven’t gone to many bowl games re­cently, nor is the NCAA arranging its television schedule to get them more exposure on the tube—but they receive bowl and TV income nevertheless.

Whether it's the SWC or the Big 12, some things never change. Frankly, I'm surprised UT stuck around as long as it did. Yet the freeloaders want to bad-mouth their meal ticket.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
On 8/25/2025 at 12:03 PM, statsman said:

For those upset about the direction of college football, bemoaning the loss of parity between institutions, check out this 50 year old Texas Monthly article:

https://www.texasmonthly.com/arts-entertainment/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-southwest-conference/
 
To set the stage, in the mid ‘70s, like today, the main sources of AD revenue were ticket sales and media payouts. There were three major TV networks, and they contracted with the NCAA for games. The NCAA, being a democracy, placed limits on how many games per season any team could have (max of three per season and five every two years). There was also radio, but although appreciated, the income was much smaller. 
 
Ticket sales were the biggest source, and the programs we lovingly call the IR8 struggled there, to the point they weren’t competitive. 
 
(Fun aside- check out the OOC slates that the SWC smaller schools had in the ‘60s and ‘70s. They almost exclusively played P4 teams, and usually on the road, because 40% of an East Lansing gate was greater than 60% of a Waco gate). 
 
1984: UGA and OU win lawsuit against NCAA over media rights. There are now more networks, and the conferences do the negotiating. Being in a conference with Texas is now more valuable than before. Teams can follow the KSU example and schedule patsies OOC without it hurting the bottom line. 
 
The point of all this- current trends are just the next step in a constantly evolving competitive landscape. The big universities with large, enthusiastic (and hopefully well heeled) fanbases have always had an advantage and probably always will. 

I think you are right to a point and I am not sure that even the officials at Texas where aware of the changes that were about to happen with court ruling in favor of OU and UGA.  

Among the things that killed the SWC were geography,  backward thinking, and then the members turning on each other with the cheating scandals in which over half the conference on probation.

Leadership in the SWC offices did not see the potential impact of television with the conferences now having control of the tv contracts and the wiling partner in ESPN which had begun in 1979 and pretty much was lumber jack games, strong men contests, and college basketball.

Florida State and Miami were two schools who benefited from the ability to use television as a marketing tools and it seemed like FSU would play anyone, anytime, anywhere, as long as that game was broadcast on national television, often on ESPN.

MIami was a small private with no real history of success who used the exposure for winning a surprise NC that was a byproduct of the poll's deciding the title and a bad Osborne decision to garner attention and they used the media coverage to create a brand out of basically nothing. Their facilities were shit, they played in a dump, they didn't always draw or have huge budget, but TV built a brand.

The SWC was run by idiot who couldn't changed partnered with the Cotton Bowl run by Hoss Brock who was dumber and more resistant to change.  Remember that the the big 4 January 1 bowl games were Sugar, Orange, Rose and Cotton. The Fiesta was bowl played around Christmas with no history and no big conference tie in until that lawsuit and some ambitious progressive thinking people while the Cotton Bowl didn't change and the SWC went to shit. 

Baylor and SMU were trying at football, TCU didn't try until Wacker and then he blew it all up with the NCAA. Rice, well Rice is Rice so to say the privates were being dead weight isn't completely true. 

The SWC was going to fail and I don't blame for Texas or anyone else looking for a way out.  The one that should have made it was the Big 12 and I will let people debate that one as we were wandering through various conferences during those days.  I do suspect the same problem that plagued the SWC killed the Big 12 and that was a lack of future vision.   

 

Posted
45 minutes ago, PGFrog said:

I do suspect the same problem that plagued the SWC killed the Big 12 and that was a lack of future vision.   

You're right - the Big 12 should've made it.

But, the same internal jealousy, bickering (Prop 48 eligibility?), and lack of foresight killed it. C'est la vie. Once aggy, CO, and Corn left it was over.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
On 8/22/2025 at 1:46 PM, 'stache said:

The original PAC 16 proposal was before the LHN existed. That contract was given by ESPN to prevent Texas from moving to the PAC whose contract was with Fox. The proposal came back up after the LHN contract was signed and it worked as the poison pill. I'm not sure if the move was even still possible after the LHN contract but if it was fuck Larry Scott for not letting UT keep it and finding a way to make it work. It would have presented some short term difficulties but his conference would have survived and been competitive with the BIG and SEC. Yes I'm still bitter because OKST was going to be a part of it and secured its safety at a time where we were all facing an ORST/WSU type demise. 

But lets also remember the schools who voted alongside Texas in 3rd party media rights being able to be handled the way they were, ya know schools who left the conference like A&M, Nebraska, Colorado. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

But lets also remember the schools who voted alongside Texas in 3rd party media rights being able to be handled the way they were, ya know schools who left the conference like A&M, Nebraska, Colorado. 

Au contraire. Sure, those schools all voted for unequal revenue shares in the B12, while they were members. Each one claimed to be for equal revenue on the way out. 

Posted
1 minute ago, statsman said:

Au contraire. Sure, those schools all voted for unequal revenue shares in the B12, while they were members. Each one claimed to be for equal revenue on the way out. 

Yes, this is what makes all 3 deceitful, lying scumbags.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...