TKthunder2

That's a joke son, I say, that's a joke. Because peep means in your context “a feeble shrill sound : cheep” but it also means “to look slyly, pryingly, or furtively” like many rapists often do in Waco. https://wacotrib.com/news/baylor-throws-a-block-to-stop-texas-a-m-leaving-big-12/article_b2297edd-bcc1-5f51-b6cc-5be142836a9a.html

I think Baylor peeped

Losing Colorado and Mizzou hurt the big TVs numbers when viewing through a lens of markets/demographics. Corn/aggy hurt from a competition/general interest standpoint. They also all hurt academically but that’s not all that important. Getting Colorado and ASU back helps with markets, Utah and Colorado with Deon helps with general interest, Arizona helps with basketball, and all except ASU helps with academics.

Many convention locations are selected in locations where there is easy access. I’ve seen convention proposal reviews that have bypassed Austin due to our lack of rail. To say rail has no impact is foolish and is overstating its impact. As with many issues, its benefits fall somewhere in the middle and it should not be a pure black/white topic.

Why do we spent $1.2 billion on the convention center expansion? Cities want tourists, conventions, festivals, concerts. We subsidize things because politicians are vain and want big business and celebrities to want to come to Austin. Is that worthy of the tax dollars? That is another argument (some facts say yes though it’s hard/impossible to prove causation in the larger economic picture). By the way, I’m pro rail, but anti project connect (if that’s not obvious). Mass transit won’t alleviate traffic anytime soon. Neither will bike lanes or toll lanes or buses. But it can help tourists, give college kids a cheap form of transportation that reduces drunk driving, make getting to events like SXSW, ACL, UT sporting events/concerts, more convenient for locals which reduces peak traffic during events and reduces buses within the central corridor all of which can help, but none of which will “solve” Austin’s traffic problem. The only thing that can significantly help is expanding I35 through downtown/UT (which is happening) building a true free bypass (which I agree should have happened a long time ago) to divert i35 through traffic. They can complete the 45 South “loop” (which I think is in the early stages of planning approval) reduce the lights on 360 (which is happening) but other than that there is not much more you can do with Mopac/183/290 than the expansions/tolls which is already done/in process. Focusing on density and linking the cheaper areas of Austin (eventually) to a robust downtown/UT/business corridor would likely be the best thing you can do for future growth and success…but it’s dumb to do that before the Central network has been established as no one is going to ride a train to downtown to walk 2 miles to work or wait 30 minutes a a bus in the Texas heat. They need more stations closer together where it’s convenient to skip driving/parking and you don’t show up to work half drenched in sweat. Until that is done, no one will use these long North/South/East routes (that they did for political reasons) and that will only serve to give the rail haters more ammo.

Do you know why? Because right now WITHOUT ANY REAL TRAFFIC it takes 2 hours to take mass transit from the domain. That’s 4x as long as Ubering there. Plenty of people would take a train especially when there is traffic. I just got back from a business trip and my ride home was $100. If you could get me a majority of my way home by rail for $10 and just have me Uber the last few miles that would be a huge win. You know how basically it works in almost every other major city. If you don’t believe it go to the Taxi/Ride share pickup at the airport and see how busy it is. I can pretty much guarantee you that if you simply connected the red line to the airport you’d cut that line in half. It’s also a lot easier to get someone to drive you to the nearest rail station than all the way to the airport. Also “small number of tourists”? Compared to San Antonio and Arlington maybe but Austin has far more than a small number. It was embarrassing when they banned Uber/Lyft.

Connect the red line to the airport with the bridge over the lake by Rainey so tourists can get from the airport to downtown (and people near the red line can get to the airport). That will be used. Then go to the next phase and expand to downtown/UT/ACC/student housing areas (you know, places where people will actually use it) slowly and build out little by little in loops (loop around downtown, loop around UT, the domain) and high impact runs that connect those loops, no need to buy a shit ton of land that will just sit there unused for years. 3 major routes all at the same time was never going to happen, this city can’t walk and chew gum at the same time. Focus on high impact lines (not building rails to Elgin)..or gondolas. https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/high-tech-gondolas-could-be-coming-to-a-north-texas-city/ar-AA18CHJ5

Zeihan is pretty vanilla and doesn’t get into politics himself. If he’s wrong he typically admits it. This website looks to slant completely pro democrat anti republican. They quote Harvard guy who after getting pressured by liberals and China (since Trump was using his report as a talking point) recants. That’s not super convincing. I don’t like Trump, never voted for him, but if you’re using this “source” you’re not going to convince anyone who actually reviews how slanted the publication. It like my in laws sending me Fox News articles as “proof”.

Not all scouts/scouting departments are created equal. I don’t personally know a ton about NFL scouting (so if I’m wrong, I’m wrong) but I do have some knowledge about MLB scouting and I can guarantee you 1000% that there are lazy scouts living off a few great/lucky finds in their hay day and lazy organizations that don’t spend the money on prospecting that are well known.

UT/OU/aggy/Mizzou/Arkansas no, because like Neb/Maryland/Penn St/Rutgers in the B1G there is a close enough geographic fit that makes sense. I do think there is a feeling that USC/UCLA is going to realize the grass 2000 miles away isn’t always greener. But yeah if USC/UCLA decided the Big Ten wasn’t all it was made out to be (highly unlikely) they still wouldn’t go back to the PAC. They’d make a new Western conference and set their own rules/bylaws set it up the way they want and then invite only the schools that commit to their vision (where LA is recognized as above all others). But again, it likely ain’t going to happen.

The problem is the PAC12 generally only has 1 single game worth a damn each week and that’s WITH USC/UCLA included. Both ESPN and Amazon want that game if they are going to be in business with the PAC12, but most don’t see it as all that valuable. Amazon could sub license an ACC game from ESPN for far cheaper than $30 million a year per school, but they want a “big” game each week. Excluding USCvUCLA (since that will be a Big Ten game) here was where the top PAC12 conference games landed starting week 13 back to week 4 (the * denote games that included USC or UCLA, BOLD denotes game was on FOX, Underlined denotes game was on ESPN) 8 on ABC,8,4,8*,9*,7*,4*,7*,9*,9 So ESPN had some PAC12 last year and only put 1 game on ABC, all other were in the ESPN late window. FOX had the best inventory but despite the huge advantage of being OTA they only landed 2 top 5 games (USC/Utah, UO/UW) and the others lucky enough to get on FOX ended up being the lowest rated OTA college football games of the week losing out to games on cable. So yeah, ESPN wants the top game of the PAC. Which means 2-3 times a year they’ll get a game worthy of prime time ABC but most of the time it will go to ESPN main in the late window. Getting 2 football games a week for ESPN is worth about $200 million a year or $20 million per school which is about what their rumored offer was. So just to recap: the PAC12’s benefit of the LA schools pumping up their numbers has transferred to the Big Ten, and the benefit of being OTA on FOX pumping up their numbers has fully transferred to the Big12 (since B1G negotiated exclusive OTA agreements with CBS/NBC), and their exclusive P5 late night window that boosted rating is being targeted by the Big12. With those advantages the PAC12 averages around the 8th best game on any given week. Take away those advantages and the PAC12 likely won’t have many top 10 games, much less top 5. I just don’t see how staying in the PAC12 is a good long term option, because the next contract will be worse than this one once you take away everything that was inflating the PAC12’s house of cards.

True, but a SEC pro day wouldn’t hurt. Let’s anyone who had a bad showing at their local pro day get a second look by scout who were in attendance, and likely seen by more scouts overall simply because it’s more efficient. With the increase in non-NFL leagues this is also a great bang for your buck event for those types of leagues (XFL, USFL, CFL) which generally have less expandable income for scouting too. While I still expect school based pro days to continue, for the Big 12 and the non helmet schools of the SEC and Big Ten a conference based pro days is a great idea. I think lauding this conference event as TV inventory is dumb as it will not be widely watched so it’s basically just more filler and not a revenue driver. The genius of this event is recognizing that players for these 2nd/3rd class brands will not be given the benefit of the doubt (like similar players in the SEC/B1G) which is what we’ve complained about for years. The conference will benefit significantly by having more players in the NFL, from a respect/status standpoint and it also can help recruiting (not a ton but some). Removing barriers to making the Big 12 athletes successful is a great idea. Scouts are lazy and many Big 12 schools are not easy to get to, or don’t have a lot of great prospects that make the efforts worth wild. They rather visit the major helmet schools (Bama, Michigan, Clemson, USC) and fill out their practice squads and scout teams with UDFA from those programs that may be less deserving than one from K State simply because they never saw the K State player. Now with a Big 12 pro day, they have an easy visit to see these players live/in person which can pay dividends down the road and increase the status of the league in respect to the PAC/ACC as they solidify themselves into that #3 position.

USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Utah, and Colorado are AAU LA schools are gone which raises that number to 30%. SDSU and SMU join that number jumps to more than 40%. They add 4 including Colorado State and that number goes to 50%. UW/UO have openly been talking/begging for a B1G invite. Odds that they are committed long term to the PAC12 is even on the board. And even Cal/Stanford have been rumored as B1G targets but long shots. So yeah hitch your wagon to WSU and OSU and the future MWC/AAC call ups.

I think you underestimate the how much March Madness makes ($1.2b) and how much the P5 gets ($150m) and how much room basketball has to grow. You take every FBS conference and plus the Big East and have a little extra realignment (like Gonzaga joins PAC/MWC) and you’d likely get every top 11 seed in the tournament outside of 5 seed St Mary’s. If the SEC/B1G lead to way you can see them taking over management of the tournament, under the same organization as the CFP. Likely a very easy way to double their post season revenue that is too quick to be dismissed by people who simply too infatuated with the current tournament format. On Kansas and geography, the graphic linked below was about Mizzou, but it also shows that Kansas is no way shape or form “too distant” from the SEC. They’d better tie Oklahoma/Mizzou into the conference, solidify KC as a SEC city (OU/KU/MU > ISU/KSU/OSU), and bring a bonafide basketball blueblood into the conference. Yes football is poor but when UT/OU are added with no tagalongs, the SEC could be use a lackluster fb school to boost other areas and give the kid Teri SEC teams some fodder. https://www.columbiamissourian.com/sports/map-distance-from-columbia-to-sec-big-12-schools/image_d4ef5261-c9d0-5761-ac3d-0202a83fd568.html Again this is only under the scenario that the SEC is going to 24 (18 or 20 and Kansas likely isn’t in the conversation) but gaining 3 new SEC states (NC, VA, KA), 2 adding 2 FB powers (FSU, Clemson), claiming all 4 basketball bluebloods (UK, KU, UNC, Duke) and making pair of defensive plays (protecting markets/recruiting territory from the B1G in Miami and VT) seem logical to me. The only other realistic candidates remaining (assuming the SEC isn’t moving any further West than Texas and isn’t poaching B1G members or going after their footprint) are: Georgia Tech, NC State, West Virginia, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State. You can argue that they won’t go to 24 and that may be true, but IF they did, I think Kansas would make the cut.

If the SEC goes to 24 then basketball will be a focus and FSU and Clemson are crucial as they’d give you 10 major brands that have BCS/CFP championships and will offset the other adds. Fb adds - FSU, Clemson Market/bb adds - UNC, UVA Bb adds - Kansas, Duke Wildcards - 2 (assuming Miami would make the cut if not already in the B1G to keep them out of Florida, and maybe VT for the same reason)

Useless word vomit is useless. Talk about of rumors we already know (don’t even get all of them) and then discuss things like relegation?!? Pointless. A better article would be about potential NIL limitations/legislation, or about codifying a ‘SEC/B1G Super League’ (is it just expanding and cooperating with these two leagues or are Texas, Alabama, Michigan, Ohio St, USC, OU and ND getting together and forming a new league) and what antitrust concerns may be looming, do they only do this in football and do they also breakaway for basketball too?

I miss Huts

No one schedules two FCS teams (unless they have to due to last minute cancellations) because only 1 can count towards bowl eligibility. Yes the SEC TV deal renegotiation in 2025 will be for the additional inventory. The SEC is adding 8 conference games with UT/OU and if they go to 9 conference games that’s an additional 8 games which are replacing trash OOC games and significantly increasing their value. If the SEC bans FCS games and requires each team play a P5 opponent each years that would also increase the value of their deal. Also the SEC effectively gets to negotiate last so whatever the top deal is they can say they should get more.

Since we’re talking about the PAC https://gostanford.com/news/2023/3/9/mens-tennis-beaten-by-longhorns.aspx

Does immamac still require noobs to post their pay stubs? Or what that just an old blacklab rule on the shag?

I agree with the exposure issue, but as you said, outside of the player awards the beauty pageant is over with a 12 team playoff. I disagree with the above. The B1G has 3 exclusive broadcast windows on FOX/CBS/NBC for 3 games and 3 games on BTN. That leaves 2 games (picks #4 & #5 of the week) to FS1. The #4 B1G game of the week is likely good to go on FS1 in the afternoon or primetime windows, game #5 not so much. A solid way to increase the value of game #5 is to utilize the dreaded Late Kick which increases the ratings for lesser content since there isn’t much competition. Getting a #5 game with USC/UCLA at home (when possible) and slotting it into the late window helps FOX/FS1 draw far more viewers than running the #5 game during afternoon/prime kicks. I think USC/UCLA are going to see why the Big Ten makes money soon. Yes Ohio State or Michigan or Pedo (the ones that were excluded from the failed streaming deal) AT USC will be Afternoon/Prime but how about when you guys host the bottom dwellers that make up the other half or your new conference? Rutgers Maryland Indiana Purdue Northwestern Illinois Minnesota Iowa Assuming you don’t pull one of these as a rival (and they aren’t ranked) you’re still looking at three home games a year (two of these plus a weak OOC game) automatically relegated to the Late window and UCLA will see the same. BUT that’s only 6 games a year in a 13 week season. Without adding UO/UW you’ll likely see occasional games against Michigan State, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and possibly even the UCLA game pinned to that late window depending on how bad they are. Adding UW/UO give you 4-5 more games (since OOC play overlaps) which rounds out 10-11 games versus the dregs of the B1G before FS1 even gets to the Big12 (which likely pulls the 4corner schools) or B1G West Coast v B1G West Coast games. Taking these 2 schools will have a ripple effect which allows FS1 to increase the Late kick P5 candidates from 3 (USC/UCLA/BYU) to 9 which significantly decreases their demand on USC. So as is, I see USC playing in the Late window around 4 times per year regularly, with UO/UW that decreases to 3 and if they go full academia orgasm with Stanford/Cal too you’re probably looking at just 2 a year even if the BTN decides to add a Late window game with the additions since those would be regularly filled by the other West Coast teams.

Noon- SEC/B12/ACC on ABC/ESPN, B1G on FOX 230/3- SEC on ABC, B12 on FOX, ACC on ESPN, B1G on CBS, and ND on NBC (6-7 times a season) Prime - SEC/ACC/B12 on ESPN/ABC, B12 on FOX (after the MLB ends), B1G on NBC Late - B12 on ESPN Unless they can convince NBC to carry a package of games on weekends when they don’t have ND home games, the PAC12 is basically signing up for a heavy load of late night games (which their fans bitch about for some stupid reason) and a very crowded Primetime on ABC/ESPN that already has 3 P5 conferences to chose from, and a single slot on ESPN where they have a 50/50 chance against the ACC. The Big 12 won. Unanimous decision. They have what appears to be a guaranteed spot on FOX at 230 for the 1st/2nd game of the week and opportunities on ABC/ESPN at noon and ABC/ESPN and some FOX at Prime Time. If the PAC gets similar or even slightly more money from a deal with NBC/Disney and a streamer like Amazon/Apple (a deal which would be amazing, all things considered) they won’t be better than the Big12. Even if they survive, the lack of exposure and interest from the losing the LA schools will cause them to wither and fade while the new Big 12 will surge.

That’s just the store you stop at when you need and 1 to 2 items, not a full cart of shit. It’s just a real small store. Most of us in the area drive past it on our way to the Lakeline or Parmer/McNeil stores.

I mean Saban is not wrong. They are the only school playing 3 opponents with national championships in the BCS/CFP era. That being said, Alabama benefited every year since Saban got their by playing a weak ass Tennessee game while the other helmet schools that won titles played each other LSU/UF UGA/Auburn. It’s pussyshit to benefit from that arrangement for over a decade and then now bitch about it because Tennessee is suddenly good for the first time ever since you’ve been there. At the end of the day this is all about money and I don’t think Bama is going to get out of playing LSU annually (which is what they are really trying to accomplish here).

https://www.yahoo.com/now/college-football-attendance-rankings-2023-043844848.html Not game by game but this is an aggregate. https://www.yahoo.com/now/college-football-attendance-rankings-2023-043844848.html