Jump to content

bullet

Full Members
  • Posts

    3254
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by bullet

  1. 18 hours ago, closetohumping said:

    So the two alphas of the new big 12 lost today. One to an fcs tram as a 28 point favorite. The other to a pac 12 team that won 1 game last year. 

    You're behind.  Texas St. is in the Sun Belt and has been FBS for a decade.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  2. On 9/1/2023 at 8:54 PM, Doc Sam Beckett said:

    Lol I know you hate the ACC, but what a load of shit. Average strength? 

    College basketball championships:

    Big 12: 2022, 2021, 2008

    ACC: 2019, 2017, 2015, 2010, 2009 etc etc

    College football championships:

    Big 12: 2005, 2000 (UT, OU) both leaving 

    ACC: 2018, 2016, 2013, 2001, 1999...

     

    You can hang your hat on "average strength," which I'm not sure I even agree with, but who gives a shit if KSU beats Pitt in week 3. One thing nobody is talking about is whether the Big 12 can even maintain decent  recruiting without bellcows Texas and Oklahoma. I don't think we're going to see any Big 12 teams in the top 15 of recruiting rankings anytime soon moving forward. I also don't see any team in the new Big 12 that's going to win a national championship in football any time soon. I do see that in the ACC. As far as basketball, I'd call it a wash at best. 

    I know you hate the R8, but you didn't address my points.

    2022 Massey composite:

    1 SEC 32.65

    2 Big 12 39.09

    3 Big 10 47.67

    4 Pac 12 49.85

    5 ACC 53.94

    Take out UT 17, OU 43 and add Cincy 39, UCF 42, UH 57 and BYU 59 and the Big 12 average is 44.  Still in 2nd.  Throw in Utah 11, Arizona 71, ASU 95 and CU 119 lowers it to 51.5, but ACC is adding SMU 63, Cal 79 and Stanford 92 lowering theirs to 58.2, still well below.  Except for KU, the bottom half of the Big 12 can beat you on a given day.  Same isn't true of the ACC.  Clemson being really good doesn't change the bottom half of the ACC being bad.  Kentucky and Florida making several trips to the final 4 doesn't make the SEC 14 a good basketball conference.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  3. 1 hour ago, nnm said:

    The notion that SMU money is vast and untapped (and exponentially more than TCU) is laughable. If these daddy warbucks guys had wanted to fund a resurgent program, they could have at any time. They haven’t. They don’t care. There’s not a big war chest just waiting to be unleashed on the world. It’s an apathetic (at best) alumni base. 

    As a proxy for the money that the alumni are willing to throw to their school, look at their endowments. TCU’s endowment is 2.1B.  SMU’s is 1.9B. (UT System is 31B).  If SMU alumni were exponentially more wealthy than TCU, don’t you think those would look different? SMU has shown no ability to get athletic funding. TCU has.
     

    SMU has about 100 fans that care, total. Apparently two or three of them are in this thread. 
    This isn’t 1983. Dickerson isn’t driving through that door in his Trans-Am. 

    Go home SMU fan.  You’re coked to the gills. 

    For at least the last 5 years, SMU has been spending more than any G5 program but UConn and sometimes BYU.  In 2019-20 they were #68 just behind WSU and ahead of Houston and $7.5 million ahead of #70 Memphis.

    Hasn't translated into great success, but they have been spending.

  4. 4 hours ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

    Why wouldn't that alone put them above the Big 12? Which conference do you think will win a national championship first, or have better success in the playoffs? And I think you're under selling the give a shit with the rest of the conference. Hell, I'd bet Miami wins a national championship before anyone in the Big 12 after Texas/OU leave. 

    The ACC has pretty consistently been well behind the Big 12 in average strength in both football and basketball for a number of years.  The additions probably balance OU and UT in basketball in the short run as both of us have been down.  So basketball stays the same.  The Big 12 will drop in football strength, but its not clear it will drop below the ACC.   While Clemson has been great, despite UT's struggles, we do have a better record than the Seminoles, Canes  and Hokies over the last 6 years.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  5. 7 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

    What happens to stuff like NCAA Tournament credits when a conference folds? 

    They go to the team that earned them.

    5 or 6 years ago, if you lost half your members it went to the team that earned them, but apparently they changed that rule (at least I've seen it stated lots of times that WSU/OSU can keep them).  Seems like as long as you have a member, reload members and don't dissolve, you keep the credits.  With the Big East they had to reach an agreement on where the credits went (to the remaining 3).  At that point I remember the rule would have sent it back to the schools that earned them without that agreement.

    The NCAA bb money gets distributed over 6 years, so you've got a good chunk still due the conference.

  6. 1 hour ago, Dutch said:

    One worth taking, though.  They get to play P5 football for around a decade and, if they stop 30+ years of being dogshit and actually start winning, can use it to try and get a seat at the "Best of The Rest" conference behind the SEC and B1G. SMU did paying players with the best of them, and, with NIL removing any stigma about doing so, they'll ramp up the payroll quickly. Any school in their position would take the gamble.

    I may be one of the few who looks back on the SWC with fondness*, so a former SWC mate getting better landing spot isn't a bad thing.  Not to mention, a someone else said up thread (too lazy to go back and check), Texas HS players will benefit from one more school playing CFB at the Power 5 or 4 or Whatever level.

    *Totally understand why it went away but childhood memories are often sepia-hued.

    No.  I was saddened by the end of  the SWC.  I still have the cup from the last SWC game.  After watching UT finish off A&M on TV I went over to Rice Stadium to watch the last half of the UH-Rice game in 1995.   I was happy when TCU and UH made it back to the big time.  I wish the best for Rice, although they really need to stay out of the big time.  They are in a good place now.  Don't have any sympathy for SMU.  Their death penalty hastened the end of the SWC and created a scandal plagued 80s in the conference.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  7. 36 minutes ago, LTbear said:

    No, but there's been a lot of speculation it was ASU. Doubt we'll ever know. 

    Someone said there was a Stanford professor who proclaimed himself a media expert, so that is a possibility (president said a professor told him they should be worth $50 million was the story).

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. 1 hour ago, 'stache said:

    I don't think I've ever seen a school publicly discuss or acknowledge a no vote in conference realignment. I can't imagine UNC is that pissed about travel costs, gotta be something else they dislike about the conference. I always thought they'd be the anchor that keeps the ACC together, but seems they will probably leave when FSU and Clemson do as well, and NCST president realized that they'll be left behind and want the best possible ACC after the departures. 

    UNC has never met an expansion they liked.  Duke hadn't previously.

  9. 1 hour ago, Saint Austin said:

    How is the 2024 AAC more attractive to WSU/OSU than the Mountain West?

    Well AAC announced they aren't looking west.  So unless WSU/OSU can peel off some AAC schools for a non-existent TV contract, their choices are:

    1) Join MWC; or

    2) Invite MWC to join you.

  10. 7 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

    You seem like you know everything about what Cal/Stanford did to try to survive.  Tell us more.

    Its been pretty unanimously reported that Stanford and Cal had no real interest in the Big 12.  One report a few days ago made a comment that the Stanford president had ticked off everyone in the Big 12, including Yormack.  They looked down on the Big 12 schools.

  11. 1 hour ago, LTbear said:

    Well,

    1) I'm glad to see Cal get in, and

    2) I'm glad to see Cal and Stanford can continue playing as conference foes, but

    3) Seriously, this is so stupid

    I figured this would happen.  But if it dragged on another 2-3 weeks common sense would set in.  The UNC board of trustees and a Raleigh paper had it right.  This is minimal extra revenue--and maybe negative when the contract gets renewed.  Its just not worth it.  Certainly not the Cal/Stanford part.

    Final vote was 12-3.  NCSU flipped.  The way Clemson was talking I though they might flip also.

    It also made no sense from the Cal/Stanford viewpoint.  They really should have been begging the Big 12 and pointing out to ESPN that they would have to pay for 100%, not just 67% in the Big 12, if they went to the ACC.

    Its official now.  Realignment has copied Fonzi.

  12. 11 minutes ago, LTbear said:

    I'm sure this has been discussed at length somewhere on Surly/ Shaggy, but I really liked Applewhite. My dad was a longhorn fan, so I grew up seeing a lot of UT games via him. Correct me if I'm wrong but y'all had some bowl game where either Simms started and was pulled or Simms had just been the starter for several games beforehand, but Applewhite came in and engineered some epic fucking comeback. Fuzzy but I recall it being incredible at the time. Maybe memory is lying to me. 

    Well Simms gave CU the 2001 ccg.  Applewhite came in way too far behind but got within 2 points, 39-37.  Not sure who started the first game against CU that year, but UT won 41-7.  Had UT won, we would have gotten stomped by Miami in the title game instead of Nebraska.  Only time I didn't mind not getting in the title game.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  13. 3 hours ago, LTbear said:

    Ya fair enough but at some point the right coaching hire will be made. From the outside it seems UT has suffered from 1) always recruiting the highest stars and not necessarily the best fits, and 2) gameday coaching errors from multiple coaches. 

     

    For some reason we got great QB recruits, but didn't have a really good college QB (not counting James Street who was wishbone and was not the planned starter) from Bobby Layne in the 50s until the Applewhite/Simms duo.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  14. 3 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

    They keep talking about the recruiting hit when Aggy joined the SEC, but Texas has been reeling in Top 10 classes the whole time, right?

    Texas football the last 15 years seems like more of a case study in the importance of coaching than anything.  It doesn't matter who you are, if you don't have a good coach, it don't make a shit.

    Not all the time.  Mack's last class fell apart when Charley came in.  Charlie had a top 10 class based on 4 highly rated Florida players.  Only one made it to the first game and he was a backup receiver.  Without them its probably mid 20s.  His last class was horrible.  He only had 6 or 7 commits and Hermann had to scramble.  And Mack's classes were pretty highly rated, but it seems like he didn't look closely into the people.  I think he may have admitted he got complacent in evaluations.  Didn't have many high impact players recruited after that 2005 class.  And Charley ran off quite a few.  Charley's last teams were very average in talent for the Big 12.  Hermann had no depth when he arrived.  And everyone knew he was gone so Hermann's last class was 20 something rated.

  15. 4 hours ago, LTbear said:

    I didn't have too much of a point - this convo started a page or so back, I commented that UT had underperformed relative to its resources and as compared to its peer programs, and a couple of people got hyper-offended by it. Yes, y'all should have won a couple more. Since Royal UT has seemed to often win games but not capture the big stuff. 2005 and obvious and awesome exception. Anyways, I was only talking facts of UT football, not trying to offend a few people. 

    If that was all you said you wouldn't have gotten pushback.

  16. 8 minutes ago, LTbear said:

    Can you explain how your post here relates to UT's number of Big XII titles? I'm failing to make that connection. Thanks in advance. 

    Again, try not to get so easily offended and defensive. It's very aggy-esque. 

    You are comparing us to Baylor.  That is just asinine.  Now you are aggyesque changing the topic because you realize you were being stupid.

     

  17. 6 minutes ago, LTbear said:

    Don't get so easily offended and defensive - that really sounds like Aggy. As I said in my later post you replied to, UT underperforms historically in NCs and Heismans relative to the other mega-brands. Conference titles they've done really well historically, though obviously the last 20 years has been slow. 

    No.  You just made an incredibly stupid comment.  So I threw back facts against your nonsense.

    I have a low tolerance for total bs like you posted.  And then one about Baylor's conference titles was even more stupid.  Your comment quoted above wouldn't have gotten that reaction.

     

  18. 2 hours ago, statsman said:

    Yes, Texas has underperformed. 
     
    Why? Coaching and recruiting. Texas has to dominate regional recruiting in order to be successful. Texas isn’t Baylor, TCU or Okie State; it doesn’t get to have a multi year cycle to develop competitive teams. It needs to be ready for all comers every year. 
     
    Texas’ recruiting took a hit when the Ags joined the SEC. The top recruits want to play in the SEC. Also, that opened the gates for other SEC schools to recruit the state. 
     
    Now, Texas is joining the SEC. Now, Texas gets to pay players. We’ll see if that works as well as I think it will. 

    Texas recruiting took a hit when Mack got complacent after winning the title and then drove off a cliff when Charley Strong took over coupled with the CFP elevating Ohio St., Alabama, UGA and Clemson so they could pick off players anywhere in the country.  It wasn't so much the whole SEC.

  19. 7 hours ago, Zhorn96 said:

    Despite all the headlines the past couple days saying there has been a shift, Cal peeps say nothing has changed and a vote is expected today or no later than tomorrow on formal acceptance of Cal, Furd and SMU into the ACC under the terms previously discussed.  Headlines the past couple days are allegedly click bait bullshit.  Now we’ll see if Cal insiders are full of shit or not

    The UNC shooting seems to have put everything on ice for the time being.  Now its hard to get the presidents together.

×
×
  • Create New...