Jump to content

Texas Wahoo

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1744
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Texas Wahoo

  1. SDSU got a lot of flack for how they handled this, but I think both sides of the MW issue have handled it about as well as they could have. SDSU thinks that they are leaving and wants to avoid paying 17 million extra, so they sent a somewhat ambiguous notice that they plan to withdraw in the future. I can see them hoping that either (1) they will be able to argue later that this letter was their notice of withdrawal and thus they should only have to pay the 17 million or (2) this will make it clear that the Pac 12 is at fault and maybe the Pac 12 will be more likely to help them out with the extra money (e.g., loaning them the money and taking it out of their payments over the next several years). The Mountain West did the right thing in treating it as a current withdrawal, thus forcing SDSU to clarify whether it is a withdrawal. This clarification makes it much harder for SDSU to claim it was the necessary withdrawal before July 1 required by the bylaws. Finally, SDSU had to clarify that it was not a withdrawal because they do not yet have the Pac 12 invite and cannot risk being left without a conference. Both sides are dealing with a shitty situation that is outside of their control.
  2. I think it’s more about recruiting students - not football players. CU makes a lot of their money by charging huge amounts for out of state students, a big chunk of which are from California.
  3. Not sure why the Mountain West would agree to let them pay $17 million less than the buyout if they leave in July. I guess it cannot hurt to ask. My guess is they are hoping this pushing the Pac 12 to make a decision by the end of the month. "We're just asking questions..."
  4. I agree with this - I cannot see them going to different conferences. UVA to the Big Ten and UNC to the SEC makes a certain amount of sense, until I think it through. If UVA gets the Big Ten offer, I think UNC chooses the Big Ten over the SEC. Plus, it just makes too much sense for the SEC's map:
  5. You obviously know more about it than I do, but I question their decision to move from more local beat reporting to national general interest reporting. I got it for free for a year from T-mobile and the Texas sports and Cubs material was not particularly noteworthy, so I did not renew.
  6. That was definitely the stated plan when the athletic started. It will be interesting to see how getting rid of a lot of the local beats will affect them moving forward.
  7. Sounds like Nebraska.
  8. Some analysis:
  9. The suggestion is that the IRS is likely rethinking such status.
  10. I’m assuming that was a joke, although neither of them are the wealthiest openly gay man.
  11. It’s only for the tournament, but the NCAA site works pretty well for the tournament. https://www.ncaa.com/scoreboard/baseball/d1/2023/06/04
  12. So, 2034 then? I do not see why anyone would assume that ESPN would pay the SEC more for 9 games in 2025-2033 if they were not willing to pay more in 2024. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30492065/sec-espn-strike-10-year-deal-college-football-basketball-starting-2024
  13. LOL - What on earth. I'm pretty sure Iowa State and Kansas State don't have medical schools. UT-Austin didn't have a medical school until recently (although there are obviously medical schools in the system).
  14. When it rains...
  15. NBC not exactly getting great games...
  16. I’m not sure your math is adding up.
  17. The last Tech game I went to was a few years ago on Thanksgiving and the stadium was not even close to full.
×
×
  • Create New...